Cookies Disclaimer

I agree Our site saves small pieces of text information (cookies) on your device in order to authenticate logins, deliver better content and provide statistical analysis. You can adjust your browser settings to prevent our site from using cookies, but doing so will prevent some aspects of the site from functioning properly.

Hooking players on PFO

aerendhil
Hello smile

I've been curious about PFO for a some time now, cheking the blog every once in a while and finally gave in this week : i paid 30$ just to see the state of the game.
Now, I really like the open world and complexity of the game.

But I'm puzzled about that XP thing.
One of the thing that drive players is character advancement.
After a few days of playing, I feel that I have to wait in order to buy the next rank of some desired feat. So why would I log on ? What is the incentive to play ? I'm not achieving anything when playing, merely passing time, if not doing chores like grabing some iron. The danger is : the density of playing population could be affected by this, hence reducing social interraction. diminishing even more the desire to log on.
I understand that social interraction is the fuel of the game, but if it lacks players, how will you kindle it ?

The other thing is permanency. There are some escalation quest where I have to kill X someone and grab Y something. okay, standard MMO mechanic, but why do those counters reset without me doing anything ? (after I logged off for a few hours) I feel that I have actually no impact on the world - now, one could argue that the world does not revolve around me, and it would be right, but at this point the escalations are too fast to reset. I think the rate of growth of escalation should be linked to the population of the server. an empty hex could be an incentive to explore further, eventually forcing people to compete for monster resources ?

Anyway, GW is trying something new, and I encourage them to go on smile (yes, I'm voting with my money)
And sorry for the grammar mistakes if any, English is not my native language.
Brighthaven Leader
The main reason a lot of us play or get together is, in fact, the social interactions. People log in to gather every day for materials for crafting, killing off escalations for victory markers or clearing them for travel, to defend their areas against bandits, to role play one of their characters, or sometimes just to do something with another person. There are plenty of reasons to log in every day, especially when are in a larger group.

To your second issue every hour or couple of hours quests reset, essentially they have a timer. The problem is, to make an impact on those quests you have to usually have a party working with you. On the smallest escalations you might be able to beat it yourself, but for the most part you have to have a party.

Glad you voted with your money!
Brighthaven is a Neutral Good settlement focused on defending its citizens and its allies from negative fringe based PvP (Player Killing and Griefing) while striving to become a large and shining beacon for Good. Whether you wish to benefit from this protection or you love PvP and wish to assist in providing this protection, Brighthaven aims to be the home and support center for you!
Tyncale
Hi Aerendhil, welcome. smile About influencing the permanency: that part will come from the Playersettlements being built by players, areas being controlled (and contested) by players and Wars/Sieges wiping settlements off the map at some point. Holdings, Outposts, all of these will be attackable too and will get destroyed or change hands. On a larger scale, you will see alliances rise and fall, and an everchanging political climate. This is already happening to an extent and it's one of the reasons that I stay interested in this game.

The escalations are a cool PvE feature imo, but do indeed not provide this persistancy, nor are they meant to. However, some escalations have run so out of hand that it actually influences the settlements that are nearby. That again had an impact on the social aspects of the game, with players coming to their aid and such.

About your first point: I agree. I am totally for their method of paying for a set amount of XP per month: I think it is a great way to curb powerleveling and such. However I think the XP curves become too steep which means that 4 months into the game I am now waiting for up to 8 days to train a single attack.

Since this game already has a million skills and feats, and you are not locked into a Role but can train anything that you want, I would like to see flatter curves for the cost of training with smaller increments. Many, many more Roles, skills and feats will be added later on, so I think nobody will ever "max" out a character any time soon. Sure, you may see a level 20 fighter in a year then, but he can only use Longswords. That still leaves like 8 more fighter weapons he can train if not more. So even maxing out everything that somehow relates to a single role will take like 5 years.

I am not saying that it all has to become ultra-cheap: just flatter curves and maybe break up certain skills in smaller parts, like being able to buy 2 hitpoints at a time, isntead of the 10 that you buy now.
Regalo Harnoncourt, Leader of the River Kingdoms Trading Company, High Council of Callambea.
This is the character that I am playing almost 100% of the time. (Tyncale is my Sage/Mage)
Rynnik
Tyncale
Since this game already has a million skills and feats, and you are not locked into a Role but can train anything that you want, I would like to see flatter curves for the cost of training with smaller increments. Many, many more Roles, skills and feats will be added later on, so I think nobody will ever "max" out a character any time soon. Sure, you may see a level 20 fighter in a year then, but he can only use Longswords. That still leaves like 8 more fighter weapons he can train if not more. So even maxing out everything that somehow relates to a single role will take like 5 years.

I am not saying that it all has to become ultra-cheap: just flatter curves and maybe break up certain skills in smaller parts, like being able to buy 2 hitpoints at a time, isntead of the 10 that you buy now.
Personally I really strongly disagree with you on this Tyncale.

I prefer a system where getting fighter level 20 is always a bad decision in terms of time vs. character capability. Like training many of the skills to level 5 in EVE you are past the sweet spot of what you gain for what you invest which means only for those really dedicated to a single path and laser focused on one activity (and alts) will that ever be the right decision for. For everyone else their characters improve more and get more flexibility and capacity from hitting that level 15/16ish for as many different paths that interest them.

Certain player types will strive for that 'level 20' regardless of how inefficient it is. That is totally cool but the longer and tougher that is the better it is both for the game and for that player as it means their achievement in reaching that really is the exception.

Min/maxers have to balance all of the various classes around skills in the low end of tier 3 range in order to have the best possible builds with the least possible amount of exp. If 'level 20' is the answer to the formula GW has really missed the mark, imo.

Other players will have other paths and motivations through this character development system and some may hit level 20 in something through boredom, RP, or ANYTHING and that is awesome - you just don't want them driven by motivations of power for time.
Not a member, representative, or supporter of Brighthaven Alliance.
Daeglin
In regards to permanency, the world goes on without you when you aren't logged in. That is actually an incentive in that organised enemies (escalations) recover from your excursions if you don't keep up the pressure on them. You can lose territory if you let them get out of control. It doesn't take many to keep even T2 escalations in check if they are dedicated to that goal.

I find the xp issue a great test of willpower in trying to save up for my next big feat vs. side-branching into lower cost areas smile

The time required for high level progression takes me back to 1st edition D&D.
Good… Bad… I'm the guy with the bow.
Smitty
The only thing I will add to what others have said in the regards to actually playing and not just waiting to buy next level in your skill ..

In the upcoming weeks, our settlements are going to produce resources that we are going to use to build our settlements. Those resources will need protection as well as transportation. ( You will need to join one to train tier 2 skills eventually)

So while you could just save up xp and log on in x many days to spend it, if you/ your settlement has not protected or transported those resources, when you do log on you may not be able to spend the xp you gained on the skill you wanted.

As for the PvE- the quest that shows in the escalation window is a hex quest, not a personal quest if multiple groups are in the hex they all work on the same quest. (these quest have timers as well so you may be working on one only to have it fail halfway through it )
Tyncale
Rynnik
Tyncale
Since this game already has a million skills and feats, and you are not locked into a Role but can train anything that you want, I would like to see flatter curves for the cost of training with smaller increments. Many, many more Roles, skills and feats will be added later on, so I think nobody will ever "max" out a character any time soon. Sure, you may see a level 20 fighter in a year then, but he can only use Longswords. That still leaves like 8 more fighter weapons he can train if not more. So even maxing out everything that somehow relates to a single role will take like 5 years.

I am not saying that it all has to become ultra-cheap: just flatter curves and maybe break up certain skills in smaller parts, like being able to buy 2 hitpoints at a time, isntead of the 10 that you buy now.
Personally I really strongly disagree with you on this Tyncale.

I prefer a system where getting fighter level 20 is always a bad decision in terms of time vs. character capability. Like training many of the skills to level 5 in EVE you are past the sweet spot of what you gain for what you invest which means only for those really dedicated to a single path and laser focused on one activity (and alts) will that ever be the right decision for. For everyone else their characters improve more and get more flexibility and capacity from hitting that level 15/16ish for as many different paths that interest them.

Certain player types will strive for that 'level 20' regardless of how inefficient it is. That is totally cool but the longer and tougher that is the better it is both for the game and for that player as it means their achievement in reaching that really is the exception.

Min/maxers have to balance all of the various classes around skills in the low end of tier 3 range in order to have the best possible builds with the least possible amount of exp. If 'level 20' is the answer to the formula GW has really missed the mark, imo.

Other players will have other paths and motivations through this character development system and some may hit level 20 in something through boredom, RP, or ANYTHING and that is awesome - you just don't want them driven by motivations of power for time.

I hear you and I agree with the underlying premisse. I am not advocating totally flat curves and agree that if you want to train the last level of a Feat(14, 20 whatever the cap is for that feat) it should come at more or less dimishing returns.

I just think that GW has initially set the bar too high on the XP-requirements, especially considering the huge amount of skills that thye already are offering. So I feel they were *too* afraid for the "race to Max-level in anything" so that they could not monetize players anymore, and thus set the bar too high on reaching the top of the curve for a skill.

It takes 88 days of XP to max a single armor-feat. I want to highlight the fact that the returns of a particular armorfeat are actually not diminishing either, they are on a linear scale, so it's not really only an option for the hardcore min-maxer: most people will want to take that feat to level 14 since the returns are still tangible.

I simply think having to pay 88 days of XP for getting a single armorfeat to its max is too much. It takes too long and is not enough to satisy the need for constant character-progression. I think such a feat should take something like 30-40 days of XP. Smaller increments is not possible with a lot of feats, but some feats do lend themselves well for that.

It's basically a bang for your buck thing and keeping people interested in the pellet-dispenser: you can't expect a rat to keep interest in pushing that button if it only gives a reward in like once every week. smile
Regalo Harnoncourt, Leader of the River Kingdoms Trading Company, High Council of Callambea.
This is the character that I am playing almost 100% of the time. (Tyncale is my Sage/Mage)
Giorgio
Tyncale, in order to not thread jack the OP any more, how about taking this topic to a new thread so I can debate with you how wrong you are, this XP system is fine as is. (Grin)
First Elder Durin Steelforge; Leader of Forgeholm; Founder of Steelforge Engineering Company

PM Giorgo on Paizo Forums
PM Admin George on Commonwealth of the Free Highlands
Tyncale
Giorgio
Tyncale, in order to not thread jack the OP any more, how about taking this topic to a new thread so I can debate with you how wrong you are, this XP system is fine as is. (Grin)

Umm, what?

OP's first question:

But I'm puzzled about that XP thing.
One of the thing that drive players is character advancement.
After a few days of playing, I feel that I have to wait in order to buy the next rank of some desired feat. So why would I log on ? What is the incentive to play ? I'm not achieving anything when playing, merely passing time, if not doing chores like grabing some iron. The danger is : the density of playing population could be affected by this, hence reducing social interraction. diminishing even more the desire to log on.
I understand that social interraction is the fuel of the game, but if it lacks players, how will you kindle it ?

How are my posts a hyack on that? He is talking about the steep XP-curves, having to wait untill he can buy a new level and the incentives to log in. Feel free to disagree with me here. smile
Regalo Harnoncourt, Leader of the River Kingdoms Trading Company, High Council of Callambea.
This is the character that I am playing almost 100% of the time. (Tyncale is my Sage/Mage)
Rynnik
Tyncale
It takes 88 days of XP to max a single armor-feat. I want to highlight the fact that the returns of a particular armorfeat are actually not diminishing either, they are on a linear scale, so it's not really only an option for the hardcore min-maxer: most people will want to take that feat to level 14 since the returns are still tangible.

Armour feats are nowhere near a linear scale of returns. You get your last keyword match at level 10. Beyond that you get increased gear flexibility in how you can match those keywords and a slight bump to the passive but you have to be nuts or laser focused to go past level 10. Working as intended imo.
Not a member, representative, or supporter of Brighthaven Alliance.
 
You must be logged into an enrolled account to post