Unofficial Thievery Poll

[fartbox]

sounds like fireball or auw surge, so we already have that ingame.
Then yeah combat abilities is good.
You make it sound like we only want thievery then no update is ever needed again.
And your stupid argument blaming thievery for MO1 player count is just ridiculous.
Here they offer poisons and traps too and another task vendor ontop of thievery also its not just pickpocketing and lockpicking

No one blamed MO1's player count on thievery. I only said that we can't expect MO2 player counts to rise (that much) if we add thievery, given that MO1 had thievery and no one outside of your 500 man community cared. MO1 suffered from the same problems that MO2 suffers from. The combat was ass. You can't build a PVP MMO on a foundation of ass and the combat is the foundation.

If the combat is bad, nothing else will matter. All the bells and whistles in the world will not save the game. And the combat in both MO1 and MO2 are objectively bad.

If patches were coming out once a month and they could get thievery out with minimal investment that i'd say sure. But it's going to take them months to get it out; you know it, I know it. Thats months they could be spending on something that would have a greater impact; The combat.

 

[allut]

No one blamed MO1's player count on thievery. I only said that we can't expect MO2 player counts to rise (that much) if we add thievery, given that MO1 had thievery and no one outside of your 500 man community cared. MO1 suffered from the same problems that MO2 suffers from. The combat was ass. You can't build a PVP MMO on a foundation of ass and the combat is the foundation.

If the combat is bad, nothing else will matter. All the bells and whistles in the world will not save the game. And the combat in both MO1 and MO2 are objectively bad.

If patches were coming out once a month and they could get thievery out with minimal investment that i'd say sure. But it's going to take them months to get it out; you know it, I know it. Thats months they could be spending on something that would have a greater impact; The combat.

How can they change combat realistically for those people to be happy do you think?

 

[Sally]

Its a good write up but if any of this were true then MO1 wouldn't of had 500 players. There would functionally be little difference between thievery MO1 vs MO2.

If they did implement thievery in the near future (they wont) my argument would be vindicated in that that outside of the MO1 community, very few people would be excited about it and it wouldn't draw any additional new players or improve retention rates which should be the priority right now.

I just explained that there are other factors that could've lead to the downfall of MO1. You cannot solely pin the failure or success of a game on one system, when it includes one means of play.

Perhaps the magic was boring. Perhaps the melee was bad. Perhaps it was a bunch of things at once. There are so many factors that could be attributed to the failure of MO1. Maybe it was poorly advertised.

What if thievery was the reason there were any players at all? What if it was all the other systems that dragged the game down? I could easily make the same argument for any of the other systems in the game and say they were the reason MO1 failed, and pin it all on that.

Prove it was because of thievery, or you have no argument here.

 

[fartbox]

How can they change combat realistically for those people to be happy do you think?

For melee: They could keep their basic attack system with parrys in place but add in abilities that are aimed that primarily deal small radius friendly fire AOE damage that does not hit the caster. The ability itself doesn't have to be a targeted AOE but the damage result if it connects should be in most cases. This kills zergs quite literally and it isn't some meme solution like fireball that you have to cast while walking with no defensives.

For mages: Disengages and full speed casting are the obvious ones

For Archery: No idea but making a combat triangle where in general Melee>Archer>Mage>Melee or Archer>Melee>Mage>Archer is a good balance starting point.

For all: Mobility and counter abilities. Ways to move around the battlefield and mitigate damage with timed ability.

The game is heavily reliant on numbers and ping right now. Moving the game away from numbers and ping is a good direction.

Currently the combat is dull, clunky and slow. Moving the game into a fluid, fast and aesthetic meta is a good direction. At the highest levels 1v1's can last 10minutes or longer with multiple broken weapons which is comically bad for any competitive game. Imagine an e-sports shoutcaster broadcasting a 1v1 in mortal between two veterans.

"OMG HE PARRIED!, OMG HE PARRIED!, OMG HE PARRIED!...8 minutes later...OMG HE PARRIED!"

The combat is anything but exciting currently which is tragic because unreal is the engine you go with for excitement. The razzle dazzle, which MO2 severely lacks.

To put things in perspective, AOC, also built in Unreal, also open-world PVP in pre-alpha phase that costs 200-500$ to get into has a larger playerbase then MO2 has.

 

[Sally]

No one blamed MO1's player count on thievery. I only said that we can't expect MO2 player counts to rise (that much) if we add thievery, given that MO1 had thievery and no one outside of your 500 man community cared. MO1 suffered from the same problems that MO2 suffers from. The combat was ass. You can't build a PVP MMO on a foundation of ass and the combat is the foundation.

If the combat is bad, nothing else will matter. All the bells and whistles in the world will not save the game. And the combat in both MO1 and MO2 are objectively bad.

If patches were coming out once a month and they could get thievery out with minimal investment that i'd say sure. But it's going to take them months to get it out; you know it, I know it. Thats months they could be spending on something that would have a greater impact; The combat.

Okay, so you're saying no one cared.

Now you need to prove people didn't care, or didn't know.

I could easily say that people simply didn't know about the game. That the advertising campaign was bad. Why would i say that? Because i didn't know about MO1 at all. I never even heard of it.

Now i can't speak for everyone, but how can you prove no one cared over no one knowing? Did they have some extensive advertising campaign? I seriously doubt it. I don't think they have the money for it. Look at the janky website for MO1.. It looks like someone's pet project. Of course you're going to get low numbers if people don't even know the game exists.

Now you could say "why didn't the existing players stay?".

People get bored, you are going to lose people over time, that is normal. You can lure existing players back with new things, sure, but people have to actually KNOW the game exists before they can even begin to try it.

One of the main issues these games have is that people simply don't even know they exist.

You're trying to pin what is essentially a marketing issue on thievery.

There are MANY games that have mechanics like thievery that are a HUGE success. So you really think people don't care? Unlikely. Like me, they just didn't know the game existed.

 

[fartbox]

Okay, so you're saying no one cared.

Now you need to prove people didn't care, or didn't know.

I could easily say that people simply didn't know about the game. That the advertising campaign was bad. Why would i say that? Because i didn't know about MO1 at all. I never even heard of it.

Now i can't speak for everyone, but how can you prove no one cared over no one knowing? Did they have some extensive advertising campaign? I seriously doubt it. I don't think they have the money for it. Look at the janky website for MO1.. It looks like someone's pet project. Of course you're going to get low numbers if people don't even know the game exists.

Now you could say "why didn't the existing players stay?".

People get bored, you are going to lose people over time, that is normal. You can lure existing players back with new things, sure, but people have to actually KNOW the game exists before they can even begin to try it.

One of the main issues these games have is that people simply don't even know they exist.

You're trying to pin what is essentially a marketing issue on thievery.

You're being extremely disingenuous to imply people weren't aware of MO1. They were hyper aware of it. MO1 was a running joke in the PVP MMO's that people were actually playing; DAOC, Darkfall/UW, RS, EVE, RF, Warhammer. How do I know? Those were the MMO's I was playing circa MO1 era and awareness of the game was high in every community but opinions of it also very low.

Just like awareness isn't an issue with MO2. Everyone knows its there, no one wants to play it,despite being the most modern MMO in the lineup. Go post in any MMO community with a poll asking how many people have never heard of MO2. I'd be surprised if anything larger then 5% gets through.

 

[allut]

For melee: They could keep their basic attack system with parrys in place but add in abilities that are aimed that primarily deal small radius friendly fire AOE damage that does not hit the caster. The ability itself doesn't have to be a targeted AOE but the damage result if it connects should be in most cases. This kills zergs quite literally and it isn't some meme solution like fireball that you have to cast while walking with no defensives.

For mages: Disengages and full speed casting are the obvious ones

For Archery: No idea but making a combat triangle where in general Melee>Archer>Mage>Melee or Archer>Melee>Mage>Archer is a good balance starting point.

For all: Mobility and counter abilities. Ways to move around the battlefield and mitigate damage with timed ability.

The game is heavily reliant on numbers and ping right now. Moving the game away from numbers and ping is a good direction.

Currently the combat is dull, clunky and slow. Moving the game into a fluid, fast and aesthetic meta is a good direction. At the highest levels 1v1's can last 10minutes or longer with multiple broken weapons which is comically bad for any competitive game. Imagine an e-sports shoutcaster broadcasting a 1v1 in mortal between two veterans.

"OMG HE PARRIED!, OMG HE PARRIED!, OMG HE PARRIED!...8 minutes later...OMG HE PARRIED!"

The combat is anything but exciting currently which is tragic because unreal is the engine you go with for excitement. The razzle dazzle, which MO2 severely lacks.

To put things in perspective, AOC, also built in Unreal, also open-world PVP in pre-alpha phase that costs 200-500$ to get into has a larger playerbase then MO2 has.

you realize that the "anti zerg" mechanics are just as useful for zergs as they are for ppl who fight them.

otherwise you have some good points some bad ones.(getting off topic)
However none of those things is on the current roadmap and thats more what this thread is about.
We want thievery there as it was promised years ago and removed(should have came with ue5) because we think its a core part of the game and will benefit new and old players. solo and groups. people with little time to play games.
I see no reason why its not planned in the near future as it should have been in the game a long time ago

 

[Amadman]

No one blamed MO1's player count on thievery. I only said that we can't expect MO2 player counts to rise (that much) if we add thievery, given that MO1 had thievery and no one outside of your 500 man community cared. MO1 suffered from the same problems that MO2 suffers from. The combat was ass. You can't build a PVP MMO on a foundation of ass and the combat is the foundation.

If the combat is bad, nothing else will matter. All the bells and whistles in the world will not save the game. And the combat in both MO1 and MO2 are objectively bad.

If patches were coming out once a month and they could get thievery out with minimal investment that i'd say sure. But it's going to take them months to get it out; you know it, I know it. Thats months they could be spending on something that would have a greater impact; The combat.

The MO community was far more than 500.

Here is an MO pole from 2008 with 2900 voters.

Where are you from? - Mortal Online Forums

Ok, Pretty easy question, isn't it? So, where are you from?

web.archive.org

This is long before the game was even released on steam.


In the first game you did not have to actually use steam to access it.

So many players did not show up in the steam charts.

 

[Sally]

You're being extremely disingenuous to imply people weren't aware of MO1. They were hyper aware of it. MO1 was a running joke in the PVP MMO's that people were actually playing; DAOC, Darkfall/UW, RS, EVE, RF, Warhammer. How do I know? Those were the MMO's I was playing circa MO1 era and awareness of the game was high in every community but opinions of it also very low.

Just like awareness isn't an issue with MO2. Everyone knows its there, no one wants to play it,despite being the most modern MMO in the lineup. Go post in any MMO community with a poll asking how many people have never heard of MO2. I'd be surprised if anything larger then 5% gets through.

I'm being disingenuous?

So, i've never heard of it. That is just a fact. I know many other people who have also never heard of it. When i tell people what game i'm playing, nobody knows what game this is.

If i mentioned say, eve? People would know. Warhammer? They'll have heard of it. The others? Who knows, i don't know what they are; and i'd be willing to bet if i asked a lot of other people they wouldn't know what they are either. You've probably been in these types of games for a long time and perhaps don't realize how tiny and unpopular this sort of genre is compared to other games.

This is not some triple A game. Of course people don't know about it. Ask them about some mainstream garbage? They know.

 

[Xenom]

What thievery does: make the 20 or so of us using this forum discuss it back and worth, very likely the same number it would be for player rentation if added.
I really hope it gets added some day because you guys are really passionate about it but overall no matter who I talk about it the response is mostly the same: last thing that should be added in MO2 current state and will be broken anyway doing more harm that it brings.

I mean I personally have been playing full loot games since forever and tbh the rogue like gameplay in the wild is all that's going for it. This town thing with how thrilling it would be to watch your back on the way to the broker in reality is just pure annoying and will drive away way more than the few that yell for thievery just for that.

 

[korteks]

The fact is, people like you are not thinking about what is good for the game,

dude get a grip, you are literally the one who wants the devs to put your favorite class in the game instead of focusing on making the entire game better.

I get it, you believe thievery will make the game better for everyone but plenty of players disagree with you. And honestly, they are correct if you think about it. We don't even know how it will be implemented. I sure as hell am betting that it won't work at first and will break things. So more dev time to clean it up when it is released unfinished.

This person you are accusing of being "selfish" (lol) is quite rationally arguing for improvements to the core game, which is by any industry metric, the correct way to go with an unfinished game such as this one.

You don't add new systems until the existing systems are finished. Which they are clearly not. Which hasn't stopped them yet, of course, but imo the core of the game needs more polish and content, and the fact that they have ignored it in favor of new systems in the past doesn't mean that they should continue to do so. They should have done a polish sweep before adding elementalism tbh. Which btw is one of my favorite systems in the game, but I still would have preferred polishing of core mechanics and/or performance optimization over pretty visual effects.

This town thing with how thrilling it would be to watch your back on the way to the broker in reality is just pure annoying and will drive away way more than the few that yell for thievery just for that.

also this ^

i get that the more masochistic of us want the game to be a constant dripfeed of pain and suffering, but I have no problem admitting that I am not one of those people. pleasure and pain work best when they are delivered in equal amounts. Like, i get it, Thievery would bring new stuff to the game, and it definitely should be in there. I just don't see it as a priority given all the missing content/bugs/clunkiness.

 

[ThaBadMan]

You're being extremely disingenuous to imply people weren't aware of MO1. They were hyper aware of it. MO1 was a running joke in the PVP MMO's that people were actually playing; DAOC, Darkfall/UW, RS, EVE, RF, Warhammer. How do I know? Those were the MMO's I was playing circa MO1 era and awareness of the game was high in every community but opinions of it also very low.

Just like awareness isn't an issue with MO2. Everyone knows its there, no one wants to play it,despite being the most modern MMO in the lineup. Go post in any MMO community with a poll asking how many people have never heard of MO2. I'd be surprised if anything larger then 5% gets through.

This is true, alot of players knew about MO. From all those who knew about it 20000 players pre ordered it based on a powerpoint presentation and a features list.

Once it was obvious we would not get the game they promised through the powerpoint and features list and their whole going in circles development style they all left in 2010 after playing it for a year in beta and MOs bustling political scene of around 1-3k players I would assume based on guild and alliance sizes. MO wouldnt reach this population until Steam launch for maybe a month or two before the hype died off.

Most gave the game half a year to a year after launch but seeing as the game was progressing backwards and at that point was a unrecognizeable shell of what we where sold, the biggest part of the population left in 2010. The game has been in a state of undead ever since and only at points like steam launch would see a spike in temporary population increase but seeing the game being a place holder for the real game it could never keep players invested.
On top of this SV was riddled with corrupt GMs, Mods and other staff made from players. 5-10 members of my very small guild Myrmidon left due to corrupt GMs, but was also tired of SVs development hell.

Besides those factors you did have a few games to choose between as this niche of games compared to now.

 

[Xenom]

One thing I still want to add what thievery basically would add as proposed.

1. Townstealing from ppl in town which overall is bad as like mostly it will be like you steal some mats, an armor piece or weapon which yields the thief nothing and is just annoying for the one who got stolen from, like riding out after you were afk to find out damn no more mats for casting... in the end no fun and no gain for both parties.
When you might pull more it very likely was from a newer player that didn't know about thievery. Good chance to have 1 ppl less. I just don't see any benefit from this besides making towns grief places again after making them safer with towers on top of the long range and bank/ah griefer there already is.

2. In the wild looting well basically why bother, I bet 99% will just kill when they want to loot because why not

3. Poison and new combat moves? OK might be nice but still overall combat overhaul might just do it tbh.

So in conclusion there basically isn't that much new meaningfull stuff behind it and if you ask me this whole thievery stuff needs a decent pve loop on top like in ESO where you can steal from npcs in town, tresspass their houses, sneak raid bandit camps and what not.

But can or will SV do something this deep with it? I doubt it atm and before the whole world isn't way more interactive to support something like in ESO I just see no point for thievery

 

[Philocypher]

I don't think thievery will bring in any new players or improve the lives of existing players.

Some perpetual shitters will have another tool they can use to grief people, whoopie.

But, one thing we should all agree upon: item deletion should be removed from the game.

If you drop an item, it should go down into a bag for 5 minutes.

 

[Amadman]

One thing I still want to add what thievery basically would add as proposed.

1. Townstealing from ppl in town which overall is bad as like mostly it will be like you steal some mats, an armor piece or weapon which yields the thief nothing and is just annoying for the one who got stolen from, like riding out after you were afk to find out damn no more mats for casting... in the end no fun and no gain for both parties.
When you might pull more it very likely was from a newer player that didn't know about thievery. Good chance to have 1 ppl less. I just don't see any benefit from this besides making towns grief places again after making them safer with towers on top of the long range and bank/ah griefer there already is.

2. In the wild looting well basically why bother, I bet 99% will just kill when they want to loot because why not

3. Poison and new combat moves? OK might be nice but still overall combat overhaul might just do it tbh.

So in conclusion there basically isn't that much new meaningfull stuff behind it and if you ask me this whole thievery stuff needs a decent pve loop on top like in ESO where you can steal from npcs in town, tresspass their houses, sneak raid bandit camps and what not.

But can or will SV do something this deep with it? I doubt it atm and before the whole world isn't way more interactive to support something like in ESO I just see no point for thievery

I hope that they have lockpicking and things like that again. I found lockpicking chests to be a pretty decent solo activity in the first game. But it also could come in handy in group play as well. They could easily tie this in with the POI's for solos and small groups. And also have it in dungeons for larger groups.

Snooping had its merits as well. Players could identify who is and is not a worthy target. You are not going to stop deep red types of players from killing. But there will be some players that will not want to risk going red if they know there is little reward.

It also could be used in player events and such. For example checking if someone has potions in a tournament that don't allow healing.

The more tools in the chest the better.

 

[Emdash]

Just don't see the value in thievery. If it was a polished system ready to go already then sure i'd say throw it in. But the reality of the situation is it will eat 6months of dev time. I also don't know how to balance something like thievery. I assume it will be a primary point class so it will be relegated to >10% of the population. So we'll get a handful of players, a good portion of which will be alts, probably under 200 in total that run around naked in starter cities and steal things out of inventory's.

I know why you guys want it though, I completely understand even though you might not understand why you want it; In theory it is an amazing tool that allows you "win" as a solo player and it's unique in mortal because there is basically no other system that allows you to win like that as a solo player. But we can get there in other ways, ways that are more healthy to the game then thievery.

"winning" as a solo player is very important to the health of the game. To all games, even matchmade ones like LOL or D&D, because they ultimately employ matchmaking systems that try to get you to a 50% win rate. Think about every MMO that has over 10k concurrent players, now think about how much solo content those MMO's have and compare/contrast to Mortal.

I see more value in something like combat abilities and full run speed casting that will touch every player that loads in the game and could even the playing the field between solo players vs groups and allow the combat to be more accessible to the survival/MMO demographic.

A new player will never get to thievery. They'll still be quitting after a handful of hours into the game. It won't positively impact adoption rates in my opinion.

I also see more value in something like Hellgates or corrupted dungeons. That could apply to nearly everyone playing the game. They could even make it so that Rats have a playstyle in the hellgates, and that could be your de-facto thievery.

The game is suffering right now because there is so little content for solo/small group players. That and the combat meta is so unappealing to the average MMO/Survival player. Eve online has a higher approval rating of the combat meta then Mortal does by a country mile. Imagine that; the average player enjoys playing Microsoft excel in space more then playing Mortal. So lets look at changing that.

thievery is solo content haha.

Thievery is winning.

You're right on one level, though, the game has many other flaws, but slapping in thievery would be a nice thing to throw vets?

Since it's so far away from the game flaws, and such a core mechanic of the original, it would be win win. What else could they get like 50-100 subs by adding? You can say it'd take months of dev time, but the difference is, other things could and have taken months of dev time but were disappointing. People wanted and were promised this.

It doesn't matter cuz (stuff that gets me negativity warnings,) but it's true. You can't keep shitting on your core players. This is like the final shit. That last little turd that you push out before you wipe. Damn, now I'm gonna get banned loool, well it was worth it.

 

[Teknique]

Yea I already said it would be a powerful end-game tool for solo players to "win" on page 1 of this thread and while it sounds good in theory it won't translate into more then a handful of players who exclusively thieve or have alts to thieve. Unless they decide to make it profession points and just give it to everyone, which I have sincere doubts on.

I already said thievery could be a good update in the future, just not right now or anywhere near right now because there are so many other areas of the game that are struggling that the players we want to attract to the game will never get to thievery in the first place.

We have to assume based on SV's previous performance that any update is going to take 6months. I don't see the value in thievery right now. There are too many other critical areas that need addressing first.

PVP Games revolve around combat, when new players load in and they see what MO2 combat has to offer they quickly log out in *most* cases. Dont believe me? Go ahead and check out any of the hundreds of youtube review videos. You will find it is a chief complaint. When you have a PVP game with combat as bad as mortals is it's very hard to do anything else to convince someone to stick around.

Whatever updates you throw on top of a turd is still just covering the turd. Everyone can smell it, most people can still see it and no one wants to step in it.

In the interest of honesty and transparency the game has improved a lot, much more than I realized, by increasing xp and gold gains through the task system. I was able to direct a friend to do that as opposed to just saying idk farm walkers for 10s a head.

In regards to the combat I’ve called it dogshit terrible etc. this is based on how clunky the input delays are, how clunky the turn cap is, ping, terrible mouse blocking systems. These things are still mostly true however the truth is that the combat system is incredibly high skill cap difficult at least in 1v1s. Ttk on 1v2 is still bad

 

[Sally]

dude get a grip, you are literally the one who wants the devs to put your favorite class in the game instead of focusing on making the entire game better.

I get it, you believe thievery will make the game better for everyone but plenty of players disagree with you. And honestly, they are correct if you think about it. We don't even know how it will be implemented. I sure as hell am betting that it won't work at first and will break things. So more dev time to clean it up when it is released unfinished.

This person you are accusing of being "selfish" (lol) is quite rationally arguing for improvements to the core game, which is by any industry metric, the correct way to go with an unfinished game such as this one.

You don't add new systems until the existing systems are finished. Which they are clearly not. Which hasn't stopped them yet, of course, but imo the core of the game needs more polish and content, and the fact that they have ignored it in favor of new systems in the past doesn't mean that they should continue to do so. They should have done a polish sweep before adding elementalism tbh. Which btw is one of my favorite systems in the game, but I still would have preferred polishing of core mechanics and/or performance optimization over pretty visual effects.




also this ^

i get that the more masochistic of us want the game to be a constant dripfeed of pain and suffering, but I have no problem admitting that I am not one of those people. pleasure and pain work best when they are delivered in equal amounts. Like, i get it, Thievery would bring new stuff to the game, and it definitely should be in there. I just don't see it as a priority given all the missing content/bugs/clunkiness.

Nobody said "don't polish the game".

THAT IS A GIVEN.

Choosing thievery doesn't mean don't polish the game. The devs already make time for polish during development, look at the roadmap. They will polish the game, stop worrying about polish.

You're arguing against an argument that was never made. You're making the assumption that choosing thievery takes away from polish. No. It doesn'.t

Look at literally everything else on that list, that also takes away from "polish". EVERYTHING on that list takes away from some OTHER part of the game someone thinks is more important. So you're being a hypocrite.

You're saying "THE THING I WANT IS MORE IMPORTANT!!!"

What is wrong with the core game?? What is the "core game"? Melee combat? The core game is pretty much done. The only thing it really needs is the removal of spinning and some minor fine tuning. Other than that, it is done.

Dungeons? More of the same thing WE ALREADY HAVE. The only thing that needs fixing urgently is the freezing.. BUT THAT IS OBVIOUS. We all know that needs to be fixed.

We need a new dimension, a new way of playing, because the game lacks dimension. It lacks a KEY archtype which i would say IS core to the game.

It isn't just a "class". It is like if i took all magic skills away and said a class was taken out. It is an ENTIRELY different way of playing the game that you'd lose, not just a "class".

What is in the core game is SUFFICIENT for them to start building other systems, especially one that adds such a massively different way of playing. That taps into a HUGE audience.

Please stop with these bad arguments against things that were never said. And stop pretending you're arguing from a position that isn't just having to worry about having your little safe zone.

I know you're not so stupid as to think the core of the game is not sufficient as is. It needs minor adjustments at best.

They launched the subscription. The devs think the core game is good enough, and i think it pretty much is too. It just needs minor tweaks.

You just want to be able to afk in town without having to worry. Another soft carebear player wanting their little safe zone, spoiling the game with their weakness.

Also, saying "core game is the key to success". The core game is already here, do you think the average joe cares about some minor tweaks when he isn't even playing the game? No. That will not draw his attention. Thievery? An entirely new system? That will grab someone's attention.

Your core game is already here. It isn't going to massively change.

 

[CherryKush]

Nobody said "don't polish the game".

THAT IS A GIVEN.

Choosing thievery doesn't mean don't polish the game. The devs already make time for polish during development, look at the roadmap. They will polish the game, stop worrying about polish.

You're arguing against an argument that was never made. You're making the assumption that choosing thievery takes away from polish. No. It doesn'.t

Look at literally everything else on that list, that also takes away from "polish". EVERYTHING on that list takes away from some OTHER part of the game someone thinks is more important. So you're being a hypocrite.

You're saying "THE THING I WANT IS MORE IMPORTANT!!!"

What is wrong with the core game?? What is the "core game"? Melee combat? The core game is pretty much done. The only thing it really needs is the removal of spinning and some minor fine tuning. Other than that, it is done.

Dungeons? More of the same thing WE ALREADY HAVE. The only thing that needs fixing urgently is the freezing.. BUT THAT IS OBVIOUS. We all know that needs to be fixed.

We need a new dimension, a new way of playing, because the game lacks dimension. It lacks a KEY archtype which i would say IS core to the game.

It isn't just a "class". It is like if i took all magic skills away and said a class was taken out. It is an ENTIRELY different way of playing the game that you'd lose, not just a "class".

What is in the core game is SUFFICIENT for them to start building other systems, especially one that adds such a massively different way of playing. That taps into a HUGE audience.

Please stop with these bad arguments against things that were never said. And stop pretending you're arguing from a position that isn't just having to worry about having your little safe zone.

I know you're not so stupid as to think the core of the game is not sufficient as is. It needs minor adjustments at best.

They launched the subscription. The devs think the core game is good enough, and i think it pretty much is too. It just needs minor tweaks.

You just want to be able to afk in town without having to worry. Another soft carebear player wanting their little safe zone, spoiling the game with their weakness.

Also, saying "core game is the key to success". The core game is already here, do you think the average joe cares about some minor tweaks when he isn't even playing the game? No. That will not draw his attention. Thievery? An entirely new system? That will grab someone's attention.

Your core game is already here. It isn't going to massively change.

Well said and I agree, the introduction of Thievery will attract a whole other player group that enjoys the Rogue/Assassin playstyle to the game. Especially when those Thieves and Rogues start broadcasting their adventures on Twitch.

 

[fartbox]

thievery is solo content haha.

Thievery is winning.

You're right on one level, though, the game has many other flaws, but slapping in thievery would be a nice thing to throw vets?

Since it's so far away from the game flaws, and such a core mechanic of the original, it would be win win. What else could they get like 50-100 subs by adding? You can say it'd take months of dev time, but the difference is, other things could and have taken months of dev time but were disappointing. People wanted and were promised this.

It doesn't matter cuz (stuff that gets me negativity warnings,) but it's true. You can't keep shitting on your core players. This is like the final shit. That last little turd that you push out before you wipe. Damn, now I'm gonna get banned loool, well it was worth it.

That was my argument. Thievery only appeals to vets. This game cannot survive on its current population of vets. Even if every single person playing right now was a veteran and loving thieving and 100% would sub for it, it's not enough IMO. The game needs to convince people who aren't vets to play. Because the global population of players who agree that the game is good enough to play is not large enough to cater to them.

If we made Mortal into a game where everyone currently playing decided to quit but 10000 new players came in their absence that would be a massive win IMO. I'm an objective thinker and a result oriented person. It's easy for me to define a "good game", it's not a subjective experience to me, it's in the metrics. The game must fulfill some baseline requirements like; Loot on death, persistence, progression for me to consider it in the first place but a game that no one wants to play cannot by definition be a "good game".

Why I think no one wants to play Mortal outside of its current community is largely due to its combat. That is the problem i've identified, there is evidence to support my claim and I think it's a dealbreaker for so many people that doing any other updates will not produce a significant impact on the population. Raising the population is my only concern. Not the veterans.


Thievery later, combat now.