Thread: Monthly Development Update: March 2012

  1. #261
    Maybe they'll reduce the price. Maybe there's so much money in AO that it doesn't matter that a few "orgs" go bankrupt?
    Thor Mastablasta Hammersmith - Level 220, AI 30, LE 70 Clan Atrox Nano Technician - Setup
    The Red Brotherhood

    I'm a Nano-Technician, don't ever expect me to fight unbuffed, alone or fair.

    Means: about f'ing time :P
    Satenia: heresy <3
    Znore: Mastablasta <3
    Kinkstaah: I have agro from many mobs ;(
    Madarab: we are aoe class, we are supose to use pistols
    Marxgorm: the NT toolset does not fit into my raiding tactics

  2. #262
    Quote Originally Posted by Aiken View Post
    Re player cities. I'm surprised that nobody has mentioned that the rents on a great many cities will be over DOUBLED when forced to go instanced. Some of use chose our cities wisely, for those kind of reasons. Any word on THAT little gem FC?
    Also some of them half...

    Maybe include realy small cities for those who which to have such.

    Small HQ, small Cloak, Radar and grid. Nothing else. Then medium with Large HQ and one medium sized building. And last the current big one.
    Ekarona 220/30 Female Solitus Engineer, long term member of Northern Star and proper "poor" gimp.
    Ekaslave 220/low Female Solitus Trader, FLAT(TM) pricing TS, almost all can do!
    Ekaros almost there/almost there too Male Solitus Martial-Artist.
    Ekadv gimp/gimp Female Opifex Adventurer

  3. #263
    Quote Originally Posted by Windguaerd View Post
    By removing the player cities, we get back the pre-AI Rubi-Ka landscape which I feel fits the game better.
    I agree. Never liked the look of the alien cities or the fact that they were built out in the middle of nowhere ruining the landscape.
    Starphoenix 220/30 Adventurer - Shesmine 220/30 Enforcer - Sgtcuddle 220/30 Soldier - Pervonen 220/27 Doctor - Startrade 218/30 Trader - Letter 200/30 Bureaucrat - Shiasurprise 199/20 Soldier - Envelope 150/17 Bureaucrat

  4. #264
    Quote Originally Posted by Starphoenix View Post
    I agree. Never liked the look of the alien cities or the fact that they were built out in the middle of nowhere ruining the landscape.
    Yeah, if somoene can make perfectly manicured lawns with concrete and tarmac in perfect shape around every zone in RK. Why do populated cities look like slums...
    Ekarona 220/30 Female Solitus Engineer, long term member of Northern Star and proper "poor" gimp.
    Ekaslave 220/low Female Solitus Trader, FLAT(TM) pricing TS, almost all can do!
    Ekaros almost there/almost there too Male Solitus Martial-Artist.
    Ekadv gimp/gimp Female Opifex Adventurer

  5. #265
    more tower fields, anyone?
    wtf happened to my avatars eyebrows?

    I used to listen to Dubstep in the 90's... every time I connected to the internet.

  6. #266
    Quote Originally Posted by SoapTarder View Post
    more tower fields, anyone?
    Oooh! Even tho I don't PvP, I think this is a great idea.
    Twitch Channel - Youtube Channel - Twitter - Facebook - Pinterest
    AO Universe - By Players, For Players! The #1 AO Fansite Worldwide - Site Founder (Retired). | AOSpeak - Unofficial AO Teamspeak 3 Server - Founder (Retired). | AO Recipebook - In-Game Recipe/Tradeskill Bot - Founder (Retired).
    Founding member of the Council of Truth Clerical Staff.
    Keep in mind: My posts are my own personal views and thoughts.

  7. #267
    Quote Originally Posted by Windguaerd View Post
    Oooh! Even tho I don't PvP
    you should!

  8. #268

    Org-Only Playershops

    I'd like to bring up another concern in regards to playershops eventually being removed (i.e. we're all going to instanced cities somepoint) as I haven't seen this brought up. What about the playershops that can only be used by orgmembers?

    Because AO lacks a true org item bank system, my org uses Org-only accessible playershops to distribute common items to members. Things such as crystals filled by the source, novictum, IS passes, symbiants, tier parts.. the list goes on and on.

    Removing playershops will essentially eliminate the only method that we have, as an org, to distribute items. We can't account share and have an org bank toon that is used between multiple accounts (i.e. the pres and gens) and no one can really be on 24/7 to handle distribution of items. So what are you going to give us to replace this functionality that was, at beast, really a shoddy work around to AO not having an org item bank?
    You can find me at:
    Battlenet @ Marilata#1680
    Steam @ http://steamcommunity.com/id/marilata

  9. #269
    Quote Originally Posted by Traderjill View Post
    I'd like to bring up another concern in regards to playershops eventually being removed (i.e. we're all going to instanced cities somepoint) as I haven't seen this brought up. What about the playershops that can only be used by orgmembers?

    Because AO lacks a true org item bank system, my org uses Org-only accessible playershops to distribute common items to members. Things such as crystals filled by the source, novictum, IS passes, symbiants, tier parts.. the list goes on and on.

    Removing playershops will essentially eliminate the only method that we have, as an org, to distribute items. We can't account share and have an org bank toon that is used between multiple accounts (i.e. the pres and gens) and no one can really be on 24/7 to handle distribution of items. So what are you going to give us to replace this functionality that was, at beast, really a shoddy work around to AO not having an org item bank?
    Bump for this to be answered. This will def. be a big issue.

  10. #270
    I see no point in removing org shops, just limit who can access them and remove GMS...
    Ekarona 220/30 Female Solitus Engineer, long term member of Northern Star and proper "poor" gimp.
    Ekaslave 220/low Female Solitus Trader, FLAT(TM) pricing TS, almost all can do!
    Ekaros almost there/almost there too Male Solitus Martial-Artist.
    Ekadv gimp/gimp Female Opifex Adventurer

  11. #271
    Quote Originally Posted by Ekarona View Post
    I see no point in removing org shops, just limit who can access them and remove GMS...
    It was already stated that at some point outdoor cities would be removed. Playershops do not exist in instanced cities thus, by default, that means that playershops are being removed as well.
    You can find me at:
    Battlenet @ Marilata#1680
    Steam @ http://steamcommunity.com/id/marilata

  12. #272
    Quote Originally Posted by Traderjill View Post
    I want to bump something I said early on in this thread and also provide some additional explanation why I feel the above makes sense.

    With a server merge, we will probably see a lot of changes in organizations. I would expect to see quite a few org mergers or at the very least a lot of restructuring (some orgs have multiple off shoots). I think that allowing people to easily make the choice of whether or not to setup a new org city (versus an easy 'cash out' option) would facilitate people doing something new on the new server versus falling into the trap of the same old thing. I really hope Funcom considers something similar to the above.
    Quote Originally Posted by plugszzz View Post
    as the leader of one of the older orgs on RK1, news that the player cities are being removed is a tad disheartening to say the least.
    Several years ago, our org bonded together and worked diligently to gather the funds necessary to purchase and build our city. this is something that drove our org together for a purpose and still rings as a fond memory to those of us that were part of it.

    anyway, since we have little input on this, I won't waste time in ranting, but I'd like to add a few suggestions though based on the notes shared

    1- City issue: simple. give each org an instanced city, rates the same as their current city, will all buildings and benefits

    2- Since we're losing a commodity, as in the city wompahs used by many in their travels, why not add strategically placed grid access points for accessing the grid, not exiting, to help compensate for this.

    3- loss of the player shop. the 2 week timeout should be nerfed. some players are not daily gamers and this could lead to them losing revenue they expected to earn while out of game.
    Quote Originally Posted by Aiken View Post
    Re player cities. I'm surprised that nobody has mentioned that the rents on a great many cities will be over DOUBLED when forced to go instanced. Some of use chose our cities wisely, for those kind of reasons. Any word on THAT little gem FC?

    I see it now on the last pages. Still a valid concern over rents tho.
    Quote Originally Posted by Traderjill View Post
    I'd like to bring up another concern in regards to playershops eventually being removed (i.e. we're all going to instanced cities somepoint) as I haven't seen this brought up. What about the playershops that can only be used by orgmembers?

    Because AO lacks a true org item bank system, my org uses Org-only accessible playershops to distribute common items to members. Things such as crystals filled by the source, novictum, IS passes, symbiants, tier parts.. the list goes on and on.

    Removing playershops will essentially eliminate the only method that we have, as an org, to distribute items. We can't account share and have an org bank toon that is used between multiple accounts (i.e. the pres and gens) and no one can really be on 24/7 to handle distribution of items. So what are you going to give us to replace this functionality that was, at beast, really a shoddy work around to AO not having an org item bank?
    Quote Originally Posted by Traderjill View Post
    It was already stated that at some point outdoor cities would be removed. Playershops do not exist in instanced cities thus, by default, that means that playershops are being removed as well.
    Jill: Perhaps FC will keep a small market in the new instanced cities for org only use ... the I-city where they allow orgs to choose a size and which bldgs they want ... not one size fits all?

    FC: I think these are all valid questions & concerns about the changes planned for player cities after the server merge and the currently planned changes to the marketing system.

    Also ... Where do these new market order placing fees go, both wts and wtb? Where does the tax on selling an item go? Also valid questions and concerns. See this thread for more ... http://forums.anarchy-online.com/sho...d.php?t=598308

    Kinnik

  13. #273
    Quote Originally Posted by Traderjill View Post
    It was already stated that at some point outdoor cities would be removed. Playershops do not exist in instanced cities thus, by default, that means that playershops are being removed as well.
    They should either add the shop building (thus expanding the city plots) or allow people to create market orders for specific players.
    ----------------------------
    Showing why AO forum is not to be trusted - on S10 inflation

    Quote Originally Posted by Raggy View Post
    Multiple players in my org can make 200-300m maybe even 400m depending on lucky drops in 2 hours of farming the place. If you cannot see this as being an issue, then I don't know how to help you.

  14. #274
    Why do i have to wait so long for next update I hate monthly updates, yet I love them.

  15. #275
    They could simply add a org-only flag to the items being offered and thus you could post them for 0 or 1 credit.

  16. #276
    Quote Originally Posted by Traderjill View Post
    I'd like to bring up another concern in regards to playershops eventually being removed (i.e. we're all going to instanced cities somepoint) as I haven't seen this brought up. What about the playershops that can only be used by orgmembers?

    Because AO lacks a true org item bank system, my org uses Org-only accessible playershops to distribute common items to members. Things such as crystals filled by the source, novictum, IS passes, symbiants, tier parts.. the list goes on and on.

    Removing playershops will essentially eliminate the only method that we have, as an org, to distribute items. We can't account share and have an org bank toon that is used between multiple accounts (i.e. the pres and gens) and no one can really be on 24/7 to handle distribution of items. So what are you going to give us to replace this functionality that was, at beast, really a shoddy work around to AO not having an org item bank?
    Now that there'll be a real marketplace, they need to just implement org banks. Org banks are most probably at the top of the list of things asked for over the last 11 years, and highly overdue for implementation.

  17. #277
    I always rather liked the player cities dotting the landscape (especially when running for my life, I'll admit), and in a civilization with teleporters and aircars the widespread placement made sense. If they have to go, I really like the idea of replacing them with multi-QL alien playfields after a huge in-game event. RECLAIM RUBI-KA!

  18. #278
    Quote Originally Posted by jarnoxe View Post
    I always rather liked the player cities dotting the landscape (especially when running for my life, I'll admit), and in a civilization with teleporters and aircars the widespread placement made sense. If they have to go, I really like the idea of replacing them with multi-QL alien playfields after a huge in-game event. RECLAIM RUBI-KA!
    They could also, say, place outpost-type camps on some of the plots which would justify whompas being there. Just work up some new whompa skins that make them look like they're portable/temporary so they blend in better. This way, there's still a decent system of whompas out there ( though not as many as now ) AND it gives the appearance of a planet at war.

  19. #279

    Funcom employee

    Quote Originally Posted by jarnoxe View Post
    I always rather liked the player cities dotting the landscape (especially when running for my life, I'll admit), and in a civilization with teleporters and aircars the widespread placement made sense. If they have to go, I really like the idea of replacing them with multi-QL alien playfields after a huge in-game event. RECLAIM RUBI-KA!
    We're going to do something with outdoor player cities. It just has to wait until at least after the new player experience is out for us to schedule any serious work there.

    Honestly, speaking as a gamer ever since I played UO if someone asked me "what's the coolest hypothetical feature in an MMO" my answer would be some variant on outdoor non-instanced player cities/housing. Something that players could build out in the wilderness, in order to feel ownership over a piece of the game-world. It's about taking what is otherwise some random piece of terrain and whatever mobs happen to spawn there, and building something that is yours and calling that place home.

    So I am extremely passionate about an outdoor city feature, and it's not something we're going to do away with. That being said, I think there are some deeper issues with the current implementation of outdoor cities. I feel in general that outdoor cities is feature that to be done properly should to serve some tangible purpose within the larger structure of the game, and also needs to have a high degree of customization and personalization. It also should probably not be strictly based on a first-come-first-serve basis, in the sense that for this feature to be successful you don't want a small number of land-barons controlling all the land. So you want mechanics that encourage participation and investment measured in something other than just having enough creds in the bank.

    For technical reasons, the server merge/server migration means we need to reset the outdoor cities. Any serious improvement to the outdoor cities feature would also require a wipe, for obvious reasons. Since we have to clear the outdoor cities anyway, it seemed logical that instead of turning them back on we improve the feature first. In the meantime, we have the instanced cities. And then it's about reimbursing orgs who have outdoor cities and making sure that the pricing for the instanced cities is right, and addressing any functionality that went missing.

  20. #280
    Quote Originally Posted by Ilaliya View Post
    We're going to do something with outdoor player cities. It just has to wait until at least after the new player experience is out for us to schedule any serious work there.

    Honestly, speaking as a gamer ever since I played UO if someone asked me "what's the coolest hypothetical feature in an MMO" my answer would be some variant on outdoor non-instanced player cities/housing. Something that players could build out in the wilderness, in order to feel ownership over a piece of the game-world. It's about taking what is otherwise some random piece of terrain and whatever mobs happen to spawn there, and building something that is yours and calling that place home.

    So I am extremely passionate about an outdoor city feature, and it's not something we're going to do away with. That being said, I think there are some deeper issues with the current implementation of outdoor cities. I feel in general that outdoor cities is feature that to be done properly should to serve some tangible purpose within the larger structure of the game, and also needs to have a high degree of customization and personalization. It also should probably not be strictly based on a first-come-first-serve basis, in the sense that for this feature to be successful you don't want a small number of land-barons controlling all the land. So you want mechanics that encourage participation and investment measured in something other than just having enough creds in the bank.

    For technical reasons, the server merge/server migration means we need to reset the outdoor cities. Any serious improvement to the outdoor cities feature would also require a wipe, for obvious reasons. Since we have to clear the outdoor cities anyway, it seemed logical that instead of turning them back on we improve the feature first. In the meantime, we have the instanced cities. And then it's about reimbursing orgs who have outdoor cities and making sure that the pricing for the instanced cities is right, and addressing any functionality that went missing.
    Expand the tower mechanic. It's superior to player cities as it concerns itself with internal game mechanics, does not require patches to make changes to what it represents in the world, does have an actual impact on gameplay instead of just random occurances once in a while (which was basically patched out anyway) and allows for player interaction that isn't screaming at you for not doing whatever it is they think you should do.
    Thor Mastablasta Hammersmith - Level 220, AI 30, LE 70 Clan Atrox Nano Technician - Setup
    The Red Brotherhood

    I'm a Nano-Technician, don't ever expect me to fight unbuffed, alone or fair.

    Means: about f'ing time :P
    Satenia: heresy <3
    Znore: Mastablasta <3
    Kinkstaah: I have agro from many mobs ;(
    Madarab: we are aoe class, we are supose to use pistols
    Marxgorm: the NT toolset does not fit into my raiding tactics

Page 14 of 30 FirstFirst 123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •