Unofficial Thievery Poll

How important is thievery to you?


  • Total voters
    54
  • Poll closed .

Emdash

Well-known member
Sep 22, 2021
3,046
967
113
eh, I am king vindication. It surprisingly does not feel good. Been saying shit for years, so what if it's probably right?

I dunno if the pop is gonna change with that, either. I dunno if anything is gonna change the pop or make the game better.

At its core, my point is simply why not add thievery?

____

un-relatedly, being able to zerg people is sandbox life. Trying to fix that gets the crap we have now. What they need is the ability to strike back. If a guild is a bully, they need to not be able to give out MCs so that small groups can punish them in off hours. Small groups also need to be able to grief structures. There need to be more 'strike back' mechanics. I don't see how, unless you add like TANKS or something, that you are gonna deal with giant number disadvantages.

The thing is that those groups require effort to get together and there isn't much that the small group with more time can do. That IMO isn't a combat issue, but a concept issue. Siege actually plays into that, although people have the idea people would just zerg and siege everyone out of the game. It wasn't like that. Then the fact that a guild can 10v1 you and then when you go out to strike back, give you MCs is just like hmm.

Again: my experience with zergs is that people can work up a zerg, but they are vulnerable other times. There need to be ways to exploit that. Having guard npcs and unsiegable stuff doesn't help.

When they come up with the one patch that fixes combat, then add thievery right after it, I guess everyone can be vindicated haha.
 

fartbox

Active member
Apr 29, 2023
130
90
28
eh, I am king vindication. It surprisingly does not feel good. Been saying shit for years, so what if it's probably right?

I dunno if the pop is gonna change with that, either. I dunno if anything is gonna change the pop or make the game better.

At its core, my point is simply why not add thievery?

____

un-relatedly, being able to zerg people is sandbox life. Trying to fix that gets the crap we have now. What they need is the ability to strike back. If a guild is a bully, they need to not be able to give out MCs so that small groups can punish them in off hours. Small groups also need to be able to grief structures. There need to be more 'strike back' mechanics. I don't see how, unless you add like TANKS or something, that you are gonna deal with giant number disadvantages.

The thing is that those groups require effort to get together and there isn't much that the small group with more time can do. That IMO isn't a combat issue, but a concept issue. Siege actually plays into that, although people have the idea people would just zerg and siege everyone out of the game. It wasn't like that. Then the fact that a guild can 10v1 you and then when you go out to strike back, give you MCs is just like hmm.

Again: my experience with zergs is that people can work up a zerg, but they are vulnerable other times. There need to be ways to exploit that. Having guard npcs and unsiegable stuff doesn't help.

When they come up with the one patch that fixes combat, then add thievery right after it, I guess everyone can be vindicated haha.
I can fix zerging with 3 footy abilities. All I need is 3 and a solo player can immediately become competitive.

Cleave: Channel for .70 seconds, while channeling you take 75% reduced damage. 20-45 damage in a 1.5x1.5 meter arc in front of you, hits all palyers, damage is not blockable. Damage scales on material used not weapon damage. 45 for oghmium, 20 for flake. 12 second cooldown

Battle rush: Instantly let out a roar around you, slowing all players by 25% within a 3 meter radius for 8 seconds. Increase your speed by 55% for 8 seconds. 40 second cooldown

Aura of blades: Encircle yourself with blades for 10 seconds dealing 5 damage per second to players within a 2 meter radius. At the end of this ability heal for 50% of the damage you dealt. 120 second cooldown. Requires 16kg of armor to activate.

These abilities could also be locked behind primary point trees.
 
Last edited:

fartbox

Active member
Apr 29, 2023
130
90
28
Thats some WoW level bullshit
Small AOE's is how you deal with zergs in unrestricted maps with high TTK. There are no MMORPGs or Survival games that are successful with a large population that do not allow solo players to be competitive.

Your other options without changing combat for getting the game into a more playable state for a larger demographic of players is:
1.Instancing and group size restrictions
2.Hard disengages like teleports or stealth available to every build
3.Lowering the TTK to Rust levels

But at the end of the day, I think changing the combat to ability based small AOEs is the best solution. No one in the Mortal community needs to approve of it... thats the great thing because there are so few of you that enjoy the current meta. Less then 5000 global players actually. There have been at least a six figure sum of gamers that have tried MO2 and quit, citing the combat as their chief concern.

If they updated the combat and everyone currently playing quit the game it would still be a win. But you wouldn't, you would still be here, if you're here when the game has 600 players, you'll still be here when the game has 10k players. You might consider leaving the game if the population goes much lower then it already is though. The alternative is; don't change anything and keep the abysmally low population that seems to only ever go down. Which would be a loss for everyone.

1706615566271.png
 
Last edited:

ElPerro

Well-known member
Jun 9, 2020
698
788
93
I can fix zerging with 3 footy abilities. All I need is 3 and a solo player can immediately become competitive.

Cleave: Channel for .70 seconds, while channeling you take 75% reduced damage. 20-45 damage in a 1.5x1.5 meter arc in front of you, hits all palyers, damage is not blockable. Damage scales on material used not weapon damage. 45 for oghmium, 20 for flake. 12 second cooldown

Battle rush: Instantly let out a roar around you, slowing all players by 25% within a 3 meter radius for 8 seconds. Increase your speed by 55% for 8 seconds. 40 second cooldown

Aura of blades: Encircle yourself with blades for 10 seconds dealing 5 damage per second to players within a 2 meter radius. At the end of this ability heal for 50% of the damage you dealt. 120 second cooldown. Requires 16kg of armor to activate.

These abilities could also be locked behind primary point trees.
That sounds terrible. Why not just give cleave to normal left/right attacks instead of some gimmicky moba esq abilities that dont fit the game at all?

Small AOE's is how you deal with zergs in unrestricted maps with high TTK. There are no MMORPGs or Survival games that are successful with a large population that do not allow solo players to be competitive.

Your other options without changing combat for getting the game into a more playable state for a larger demographic of players is:
1.Instancing and group size restrictions
2.Hard disengages like teleports or stealth available to every build
3.Lowering the TTK to Rust levels

But at the end of the day, I think changing the combat to ability based small AOEs is the best solution. No one in the Mortal community needs to approve of it... thats the great thing because there are so few of you that enjoy the current meta. Less then 5000 global players actually. There have been at least a six figure sum of gamers that have tried MO2 and quit, citing the combat as their chief concern.

If they updated the combat and everyone currently playing quit the game it would still be a win. But you wouldn't, you would still be here, if you're here when the game has 600 players, you'll still be here when the game has 10k players. You might consider leaving the game if the population goes much lower then it already is though. The alternative is; don't change anything and keep the abysmally low population that seems to only ever go down. Which would be a loss for everyone.

View attachment 6275
Hard disengages are bad but disengages could work if they are skillbased. For example the bunny hop meta in Darkfall 1, sure it was an unintended mechanic but served the purpose to reset fights against zergs in a skillfull way. Even MO1 had kite sprinting, where you would waste less stam outside combat mode so it would be better in longer distances, dunno why they removed that in MO2, it was at least somewhat skillbased in a tactical sense.

Always said the TTK should be lower, players just have too many lives with pots, blood kaua, etc. and oghmirs with towershields are even worse.
 

fartbox

Active member
Apr 29, 2023
130
90
28
That sounds terrible. Why not just give cleave to normal left/right attacks instead of some gimmicky moba esq abilities that dont fit the game at all?


Hard disengages are bad but disengages could work if they are skillbased. For example the bunny hop meta in Darkfall 1, sure it was an unintended mechanic but served the purpose to reset fights against zergs in a skillfull way. Even MO1 had kite sprinting, where you would waste less stam outside combat mode so it would be better in longer distances, dunno why they removed that in MO2, it was at least somewhat skillbased in a tactical sense.

Always said the TTK should be lower, players just have too many lives with pots, blood kaua, etc. and oghmirs with towershields are even worse.
They don't fit the game because it's a bad game. Players like abilities in combat. There's a reason why Mordhau, Chiv and Mortal2 combined have less then 10% of the population of 20 year old re-release Tibia engine game.

You've had it your way for 10+ years. The player demographic you are targeting do not like it. That player demographic is MMORPG players and Survival players, unfortunately for you those players also typically enjoy MOBA's.

People don't want to play chivalry with extra steps and no matchmaking, people barely want to play chivalry in the first place. I'd rather see Mortal transform into a game that people want to play, maybe not necessarily a game that you want to play, if its to still be here in another 10 years I believe its mandatory. You used Darkfall as an example. Darkfall was very close to being a melee FPS with abilties. It had a third/first person camera toggle. It had aimed basic attacks, it had abilities. That doesn't sound like a game you would of liked, too MOBA esq right? so why did you play it?
 

Doom and Gloom

Active member
Mar 12, 2022
166
141
43
I do have to say that I also think Mortal's combat is total ass. I never enjoyed it from minute one, thus I didn't have any interest in getting better and just became a mage tamer. But pet combat is also pretty ass, talk about magic pre-necromancy. Oh yeah, I don't wanna grind just to find out I don't actually enjoy spiritism either.

I like abilities based combat, played LoL for like 7 years back in the day, many other MOBAs etc. and all the MMOs I have tried for a bit longer than few minutes have abilities-based combat. Auto-attacking can exist, but it is almost never the fun part. And it sure isn't fun dragging mouse awkwardly around which moves your camera when you try to block, also trying to quick-read attack animations is not something I enjoy either in this game.

Auto attacks are so simple: more attack damage/str ---> more auto attack damage, or more atk speed/dex --> more attacks. Sure, there is some whole parry nonsense in this game which I never bothered to learn apart from the basic "time your attack with quick block" (which is btw rather similar to Witcher 3 (and 1 and 2) basic combat, which I also think is the literal worst part of the otherwise awesome game).

Auto-attack based combat is difficult to design well, I mean solely auto-attack based. It works really well in Dark Souls, but From Software is a team of Japanese experts, SV will never be anything near them designwise. And still, in DS weapons DO have abilities, there are more than one type of main attack, you got spin and jumping attacks, lot of control over where your attack will land, camera lock/unlock controlling, actually interesting parry system (very difficult though I'm not expert), poise system balancing lighter and heavier weapons, tons of variations in weapon types and styles. The only reason the PvP has issues is really the latency in their servers (or p2p), otherwise it is the most interesting and skill-based combat there is, without parry-spamming back and forth. They do the one thing that farbox talks though, you die quickly, you kill quickly. Thus, even in a potential 1v3 scenario, the invader could easily snatch all three of them. Sure, the combat doesn't explore zergs, but the magic in those games definitely could deal with that.

So yeah, I also think the combat should be completely redesigned from the ground up, but at the same time I see that it is some sort of unique non-selling point (and a selling point for some sweaty vets) of this game, that just changing it to abilities from Albion etc. would make it less unique, although not saying that is a bad thing.

The game should really focus on its strength in my opinion, the list being very short:

1. The only game with no instanced content: it is a crazy design choice for an MMO, but you wanted to make it, so actually try to even design the game around that instead of just building it like any other MMO which is instanced designwise. THINK about how the single instance affects things and design DIFFERENTLY. Don't just make dungeons like you would make instanced ones, when there are no instances. Literally have some creativity so that there is a single world, that is still accessible to everyone, similar to how an instance would be, but with the upside that there are no loading screens or individual timers for stuff.

2. There are no microtransactions in the game, no in-game cash shop. This is the biggest differentiating factor after 1, they really need to make this count, by letting players create cool stuff in the game, like the professions many ppl want. Selling art, or whatever, stuff which is usually monetized needs to accessible to the community. Right now the game is dull af, and I don't see a change.

3. I couldn't come up with any more strengths, only weaknesses rly. I guess the free roaming projectiles from ele are somewhat interesting, could really expand on that by having more moving stuff in the world that would impact everyone. Stuff that doesn't need to be instanced, like not enemies, but more like events, trees falling and killing ppl, walls crumbling and able to be rebuilt by players. A constantly changing world, instead of this static shit which makes you stuck. Let ppl climb, build paths on mountains which can break, simulate weight of things on stuff. Things that really don't exist in other games like this.

Also, full-loot is not a strength of this game, it is just a feature which other games have too, and here it is implemented rather poorly. Weird timers for loot despawning when you die, the system only incentivizes to use the cheapest gear always. I think the main issue is gear really and the way defense works in all cases:

MAIN ISSUE:

Defense values scale pretty badly in comparison to effort required for acquiring armors, and all armor is just flat values. They really should change the system to be %-based instead like most games already do. Right now they can't make armor that is super strong and affordable, as then some weaker weapons would just deal 0 damage, making them useless. Many weapons are already now quite useless against strong armor, but the time spent to get super strong armor just isn't worth it if you are not constantly in a group that protects you, and if you are, then you don't need that armor anyways. Additionally, the damage types are too few, and there is no magic resistance in armor, which both makes building against magic builds impossible, but also limits magic's damage abilities design, as they can't do more than X damage as there is no way for players to resist it. It is a lose-lose.

The main solution

is to make strong armor more accessible, like 10-30x lesser the grind for crafting them, and give them %-reductions, best armors could have like 90% blunt reduction for example, could be weaker to some other damage type, or just super heavy, or give a movement debuff if not those, anything really is possible. And add magical resistances to gear, ideally each school could have their own resistance, so gear and many of the mostly useless crafting materials in the world could become useful and we would have more gear variablity. Also lighter armor types could have strong defenses in cases, but could have debuffs, like magic damage decreased etc. THE GEAR NEEDS SOME DAMN VARIETY IN THIS GAME.

With these kind of solutions, which of course, people have talked about here for 2 years+ with no changes in the horizon (one new armor set yey), there would be ppl full looting something else than just the basic cheapest shit every time. If Oghmium armor cost 100 gold instead of like 10k or whatever it is, it would be healthier for the game. No one gives a shit about items in a game that are never used. NO ONE will use items that take months or years of farming if they can lose them permanently. But, FULL LOOT IS GOOD, so the only solution is to REDUCE THE GRIND. There are no other alternatives.

Also imho crafting etc. info shouldn't be hidden in shady Discord chats, every other game has a wiki for almost everything, it just happens, and if this game will every be popular, it will happen nevertheless, so get used to it and rather change it now. The secrets that almost no one bothers finding and in many cases are not even worth it won't make the game any more enjoyable or bring any new players. There can be secret areas etc. but for the love of games do not just make players RANDOMLY MIX AND MATCH everything for years until they stumbly upon the secret "receipe" that you could have just told was there in the first place. The ppl who enjoy that are like 0.000001% of players who want to play this game otherwise, which is already a low number.
 

ElPerro

Well-known member
Jun 9, 2020
698
788
93
They don't fit the game because it's a bad game. Players like abilities in combat. There's a reason why Mordhau, Chiv and Mortal2 combined have less then 10% of the population of 20 year old re-release Tibia engine game.

You've had it your way for 10+ years. The player demographic you are targeting do not like it. That player demographic is MMORPG players and Survival players, unfortunately for you those players also typically enjoy MOBA's.

People don't want to play chivalry with extra steps and no matchmaking, people barely want to play chivalry in the first place. I'd rather see Mortal transform into a game that people want to play, maybe not necessarily a game that you want to play, if its to still be here in another 10 years I believe its mandatory. You used Darkfall as an example. Darkfall was very close to being a melee FPS with abilties. It had a third/first person camera toggle. It had aimed basic attacks, it had abilities. That doesn't sound like a game you would of liked, too MOBA esq right? so why did you play it?
I can see mmorpg players liking MOBA combat as many of them are hybrids now of that with tab target, but survival gamers? Come on now.... does Rust have moba abilities? or Tarkov? They are straight up shooters with no bs abilities.

It seems you just hate melee slashers in general, yeah it might not be the most popular genre but theres tons of games with MOBA combat already, you can go play one of those. This one was made with first person view from the ground up, mixing it with MOBA combat is just dumb might as well just make the game third person view then.

I played Darkfall only because it had the best FPS magic system in any mmorpg, absolutely hated the melee aspect and would only use it when needed since all characters were 100% hybrids anyways.
 

Fox3

New member
Jan 31, 2024
1
0
1
Hi all. I am newbie. Glad to be here. Have a nice day everyone!)
 
Last edited:

Emdash

Well-known member
Sep 22, 2021
3,046
967
113
I can fix zerging with 3 footy abilities. All I need is 3 and a solo player can immediately become competitive.

Cleave: Channel for .70 seconds, while channeling you take 75% reduced damage. 20-45 damage in a 1.5x1.5 meter arc in front of you, hits all palyers, damage is not blockable. Damage scales on material used not weapon damage. 45 for oghmium, 20 for flake. 12 second cooldown

Battle rush: Instantly let out a roar around you, slowing all players by 25% within a 3 meter radius for 8 seconds. Increase your speed by 55% for 8 seconds. 40 second cooldown

Aura of blades: Encircle yourself with blades for 10 seconds dealing 5 damage per second to players within a 2 meter radius. At the end of this ability heal for 50% of the damage you dealt. 120 second cooldown. Requires 16kg of armor to activate.

These abilities could also be locked behind primary point trees.

Can't be mad at suggestions, but I really think zerging is just something people have to accept. Same with ninja siege. People will always take the easiest path, but once you realize the people who can break into smaller groups and do things will survive in the end, its gg.

Ninja and zerg are just unfortunate realities of games that are hardcore. Ninja-ing everything a guild has, yeah, that's a bit crazy, same with if a guild becomes such a giant nutcup that they zerg everyone, but those things can be fixed other ways.

Did you think about how your skills would affect every other aspect of the game? That's one thing SV and a lot of people seem to miss.

You also seem to think of a zerg being a low skill group just rushing and battering you. That doesn't always have to be the case. I'm not gonna pick apart your suggestions because like I said, I appreciate people suggesting things, but I will say that my opinion that zerg is nothing that can be fixed and balancing around it actually makes the game worse still hasn't changed.

Isn't it a bit weird that it seems MO2 is more zergy and cheesy than MO1 when their main goal going in was to fix that? Just an observation.

I've always been cool with typing some stuff in chat when people do weak stuff, like "soft."

When I started MO1, I was legit paranoid (and for good reason tbh, cuz I think it happened) to go outside of town with decent gear on, even with townies, because I thought they'd all just turn around and kill me. Haha. So I mean if you are dolo wear meh gear and just take the L. The more confident you are in your team, the more supplies / investment but you can always get that zerg instant death roll. It's not really a bad mechanic, but when it takes over a minute to kill someone, then it becomes an issue for people who want solo good fights, cuz in the same way, people can see you fighting and be like ah look at these nubs and just glomp you and take both of your stuff.
 

fartbox

Active member
Apr 29, 2023
130
90
28
Can't be mad at suggestions, but I really think zerging is just something people have to accept. Same with ninja siege. People will always take the easiest path, but once you realize the people who can break into smaller groups and do things will survive in the end, its gg.

Ninja and zerg are just unfortunate realities of games that are hardcore. Ninja-ing everything a guild has, yeah, that's a bit crazy, same with if a guild becomes such a giant nutcup that they zerg everyone, but those things can be fixed other ways.

Did you think about how your skills would affect every other aspect of the game? That's one thing SV and a lot of people seem to miss.

You also seem to think of a zerg being a low skill group just rushing and battering you. That doesn't always have to be the case. I'm not gonna pick apart your suggestions because like I said, I appreciate people suggesting things, but I will say that my opinion that zerg is nothing that can be fixed and balancing around it actually makes the game worse still hasn't changed.

Isn't it a bit weird that it seems MO2 is more zergy and cheesy than MO1 when their main goal going in was to fix that? Just an observation.

I've always been cool with typing some stuff in chat when people do weak stuff, like "soft."

When I started MO1, I was legit paranoid (and for good reason tbh, cuz I think it happened) to go outside of town with decent gear on, even with townies, because I thought they'd all just turn around and kill me. Haha. So I mean if you are dolo wear meh gear and just take the L. The more confident you are in your team, the more supplies / investment but you can always get that zerg instant death roll. It's not really a bad mechanic, but when it takes over a minute to kill someone, then it becomes an issue for people who want solo good fights, cuz in the same way, people can see you fighting and be like ah look at these nubs and just glomp you and take both of your stuff.


Bad argument, we don't have to accept it. In fact the population of the game is a direct reflection of not accepting it. MO2 is the only game in the specific genre that has neither disengage mechanics or group size restriction areas. MMOs with PVP that have full loot on player death is the specific genre.

Lets take a look at its competitors:
1. EVE
Heavy disengage mechanics: Warping, ECM, Dscan, cloaks, MJD, Local. Picking fights is the meta of the game. You have near complete authority over taking a fight or not unless you fail to utilize the tools the game provides.

Mild group size restriction areas: Faction warfare, Abysals

2. Albion
Moderate disengage mechanics: Mount mechanics, cloaks, invis pots, load areas

Moderate group size restriction areas: Mists, Hellgates, Corrupteds

3. OSRS
Heavy disengage mechanics: Teleports, Freeze logging, progression or item limited escape options

Heavy group size restriction areas: Half of the wilderness is 1v1 only.

Notable mention: Wilderness PVM'rs gets a distinct advantage in PVP in that they are allowed to protect three additional high value items.


It is any surprise that the game that has the most opportunity for solo players is also the most populated in both total population and population of PVP areas on the map?

Just so we're clear there are other areas of the game that are holding the game back, there are three "dealbreaker" issues the game faces right now that must be changed or the population will never grow in any meaningful way. Competitive solo players is just one of those issues.
 

Emdash

Well-known member
Sep 22, 2021
3,046
967
113
It's not an argument... I stated it is my opinion, but it may as well be a reality. You realize all of those mechanics would be damaging to the game? you can't take a mechanic from one game and add it to another.

They aren't deal breaker issues.

I refuse to accept those games as competitors because I've never entertained playing them lol. Sorry, but I mean... in the last decade, not one thought. Maybe that's a me thing, but, to me, it's clear looking at MO... like looking at a video, even, that the games are different. Attempts to make the game more forgiving (haven,) offering AAA mmo content (big bosses, soul bound buff items) have just squeezed more of the unique flavor out of it.

You weren't here in MO1. Your opinion is that MO1 was a failure and trashgam. Maybe that's true. Do you think you can more objectively draw the line between your opinion and reality than I can about those other games not being direct competitors to MO?

Life is Feudal was kinda like MO. It had its charm, too, except it was super no lifey and I think they blew the MMO. Even uhh Gloria Victis was more like MO to me than those games you listed.

People do like different games and different reasons drew people "here," but it's shortsighted to try to tie all of these things together when IMO you don't even truly understand why MO2 is unsuccessful. I don't even know if you understand what 'the vision' is. Maybe nobody does, fully, because it is flawed, but I think some people have a better idea.

The simple reason MO is stuck in limbo is because it doesn't let itself go all of the way. It has to go back to being an all in game. All of those things you list are also inhibitors. The game does not need things to inhibit it.

The reason why MO1 was a good game, to me, was because it worked as intended, minus the garbage. MO2 doesn't. I don't believe that what you say is any answer to fixing the single problem you highlighted, but I do think it's hard to be a solo. It's not impossible, tho, and it has its advantages. Lemme say this again forya: I WAS SOLO IN MO1. I wasn't like never talking to people, but I did my stuff solo. I was 'living in the world.'

Eve might have a similar level of 'world,' but as you stated in another thread, it's simply spread sheets. It's not comparable. It's also a much different audience, imo. I can't imagine RS or Albion have the level of world MO1 had.

The core flaw is there is no world. The number 1 positive of MO1 was world. You start there and build up. They actually had something moving, growing, etc, then they smushed it out with adjustments. This happens over time with games, but they tried to use the end state of MO1 to begin MO2 and ended up giving MO2 launch a kind of end game feel. They didn't realize that you add things to continue to give life to your game as time makes it stale. If you just add them in at the beginning, what else even is there? You got people farming trinkets for content in the first year, believing that's 'the best part' of MO (sauce: Reddit.)

That's hard fail. Sorry for the long post, was listening to someone play music and kinda got my mind wandering haha.
 

fartbox

Active member
Apr 29, 2023
130
90
28
I can't argue this thread any more. The community in Mortal is resistant to change. No amount of logic or reason or evidence will ever be enough. The great thing is, there aren't that many of you and at the end of the day you have no authority to illicit change in the game. Only SV does. They have to decide if they want more players or if catering to the current audience is enough to satisfy them. If they address the areas i've outlined they will get more players and if they don't then they will not.

MO2 will never be competitive in the market unless solo players are competitive in the game.
MO2 will never be competitive in the market unless the combat meta is competitive with the target demographic; MMO/Survival gamers
MO2 will never be competitive in the market unless the resurrection meta is more accessible.

All of these changes will ultimately make the average MMO/Survival gamer competitive in MO2 and if they feel they are not competitive in the game then will simply play another game. Even if that game is 20 years old, even if that game is spreadsheets in space, even that game is a mobile game. They would still rather play those then MO2 and that says alot about MO2.

1706853987519.png

1706853998639.png
 

Emdash

Well-known member
Sep 22, 2021
3,046
967
113
I can't argue this thread any more. The community in Mortal is resistant to change. No amount of logic or reason or evidence will ever be enough. The great thing is, there aren't that many of you and at the end of the day you have no authority to illicit change in the game. Only SV does. They have to decide if they want more players or if catering to the current audience is enough to satisfy them. If they address the areas i've outlined they will get more players and if they don't then they will not.

MO2 will never be competitive in the market unless solo players are competitive in the game.
MO2 will never be competitive in the market unless the combat meta is competitive with the target demographic; MMO/Survival gamers
MO2 will never be competitive in the market unless the resurrection meta is more accessible.

All of these changes will ultimately make the average MMO/Survival gamer competitive in MO2 and if they feel they are not competitive in the game then will simply play another game. Even if that game is 20 years old, even if that game is spreadsheets in space, even that game is a mobile game. They would still rather play those then MO2 and that says alot about MO2.

View attachment 6276

View attachment 6277

I was thinking of you as I fell asleep last night. Moreso Mortal, but the stuff you are saying, you became a good embodiment of it.

It crossed my mind that I could go through and outline, in multiple posts, what the differences were and where the failure lies. I could even draw little diagrams (shout out to @Jeff D .) Unironically, too. From the very core driving force of the game outward... but the thing is, would you read it? Would anyone who matters read it? Would you understand? I have my doubts. It seems like a fun project. It would not take too long, but it would be a bigpost.

I have accepted that MO2 is not going to be repaired. I will leave it up to you, tho. Cuz I, at times, like putting my energy into things. I have a different viewpoint of MO1-2 and their successes / failures cuz... wait for it... I am a solo player! Haha. I am the embodiment of your arguments flaw. The person resistant to change is you, in that aspect. You gotta roll a certain char and play a certain way if you wanna play solo. Just that simple. There are multiple options, but not the one you chose.

Again: the current audience is not its core audience, only the most (no offense to people who still find fun in MO, but gonna drop a TRUTHBOMB) starved people are still playing this shit.

A dynamic needs to be created in these kinds of games for them to function, and then it goes outward from there. I can show you what I mean, thru solo eyes, everything from world design to small flaws they overcorrected. At the core of a sandbox must be a friction to create inspiration for its players.

It says a lot about MO2 that most of us quit while it was still free. haha. And we already paid the b2p!

Lemme know if you wanna see that post, tho, I got you, baby, like Cher. But I've been trying to explain it for quite awhile, just without all the pieces.