Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
Svenn

Eternal Kingdoms as Campaign Marketplaces

Recommended Posts

The interesting thing is, that this suggestion has caused two pages of discussion within one day. Not many got this far.

I love the kingdoms (they were my biggest reason to join crowfall during kickstarter), i will provide at least one community kingdom, so generally having more people joining the EK's should be in my interest. Nevertheless, my first thought regading this idea was 'NO - just doesn't sound right for the crowfall vision'.

However, asking about the reason why players should enter EK's and how to connect EK's and CW's in the best possible way are solid questions. Beeing creative about possible solutions regarding possible problems is a great thing that has to be supported. This suggestion IS very creative and out-of-the-box. I have to applaude to the general type of thinking that lies behind it. Quiet frankly, i don't know what to think about it right now, but i will give it a thought. At least some parts have some potential to be a great addition to the game.


2W1ZHpA.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think in the campaign worlds that there needs to be some sort of semi-safe storage.  Maybe just chests inside our forts that can't be looted but they can be destroyed if the fort is destroyed.  Because otherwise what is stopping people from simply using mules to safely store stuff?  Nobody wants to play a game that becomes a battle of who has the most accounts so they have to discourage that somehow.

In regards to EK's feeding campaigns, well they will for some with less strict import rules.  But they also feed themselves.  Sure a lot of people might use their EK as a trophy room or something and that's about it.  But there will also be very big public EK's, some with PvP and maybe even very competitive PvP.  Each EK can set their own rules in that regard. So there will be a couple of different economies for the EK crafters to support.  Overall, I don't see a lot of people hanging out in EK's all the time but maybe like a once a week social or PvP event type thing and most of the play will be in the campaign worlds.


Legend Gaming

Kendogg - Member

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Discussion on the topic, and not necessarily my original idea in the first post (there are definitely flaws in the original idea), is what I was going for... so this is good. :) I do think there are a few issues both with EKs and Campaigns that need to be considered as potential issues. As mentioned previously, the lack of reasons to ever use the EK other than for the couple minutes of campaign prep before a new campaign is kind of disappointing.

It was while trying to find a way to make those relevant that I started to realize that there were issues in how an economy in a full open world PvP in a campaign with a winner would work. It feels like there are some competing aspects there that will likely lead to the optimal play being things that are not really fun or that actively discourage a functioning economy. It's possible that they've already thought of these things and the systems will account for it. However, it did start to worry me.

So, the real questions here are how do you make EKs relevant so they aren't empty 99% of the time? How do you create a functioning economy when players can just kill/loot each other any time, any place, including by someone that is offering to trade with them? What incentives do players have to trade worthwhile items to other players who could potentially beat them in a campaign, lessening their rewards? How do you make being a solo crafter without a guild actually rewarding in a campaign with a win condition?


Guild Leader of Seeds of War

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Svenn said:

 

So, the real questions here are how do you make EKs relevant so they aren't empty 99% of the time? 

One thing I have noticed is that during testing, half the population is on the Sanctuary server at any given time, the EK equivalent we have now, and about half on the dregs equivalent servers. 

So maybe a start for some insight to the question on how to have a decent EK population, would be to ask, why are so many on the Sanctuary server now?

 

 

 


The%20Crowfall%20Economist%20Official%20

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Ironmike said:

One thing I have noticed is that during testing, half the population is on the Sanctuary server at any given time, the EK equivalent we have now, and about half on the dregs equivalent servers. 

So maybe a start for some insight to the question on how to have a decent EK population, would be to ask, why are so many on the Sanctuary server now?

 

 

 

That's easy. Two reasons. 1) There is nothing to fight over in the other worlds and 2) you can freely transfer your resources from one to another. It's really not relevant to what release will be like.


Guild Leader of Seeds of War

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Ironmike said:

One thing I have noticed is that during testing, half the population is on the Sanctuary server at any given time, the EK equivalent we have now, and about half on the dregs equivalent servers. 

So maybe a start for some insight to the question on how to have a decent EK population, would be to ask, why are so many on the Sanctuary server now?

Most of those players are new, and didn't want to start on a PvP server, and would rather get a handle on the mechanics in a PvE environment. Which is smart, because people will gank you right outside the temple. They also probably don't know that PvP servers have different item spawns, since this is explained nowhere in game. Besides, there's no reason to do crafting in PvP areas because you can teleport materials between PvE and PvP without any cost or danger.

Edited by ringhloth

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They keep claiming EKs are going to be "permanent" but I have a hard time believing that they'll be 24/7. Keeping thousands of medium sized worlds up and running 24/7, some if not most of which will be empty, is a huge resource hog and financial burden. I have a feeling the "permanence" will be that everything you do inside of them will persist, but that the owner will have to actually "boot up" the EK - it won't be online 24/7. They might have some kind of requirement where a certain number of players will have to be on the EK otherwise it shuts down.

EKs are going to be more like wildstar housing and less like the sandbox people think it will be.

Edited by Helix

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Helix said:

They keep claiming EKs are going to be "permanent" but I have a hard time believing that they'll be 24/7. Keeping thousands of medium sized worlds up and running 24/7, some if not most of which will be empty, is a huge resource hog and financial burden. I have a feeling the "permanence" will be that everything you do inside of them will persist, but that the owner will have to actually "boot up" the EK - it won't be online 24/7. They might have some kind of requirement where a certain number of players will have to be on the EK otherwise it shuts down.

EKs are going to be more like wildstar housing and less like the sandbox people think it will be.

Wildstar Housing is exactly what I'm expecting, except a lot larger and with player run shops.

If they aren't available 24/7 I'd be pretty disappointed. EKs aren't going to be THAT large to be a big deal. And they'll likely be on demand... so when someone wants to join it spins up that EK and after x amount of time with no players there it will close that instance until someone joins it again. Unless people spread out like crazy across EKs it won't really be much of an issue (and even if they do, I'd be surprised if it became an issue).


Guild Leader of Seeds of War

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

EKs will develop slowly behind the Campaigns ending.  The economy of the larger and more successful EKs as trading hubs will be more feast and famine early on getting a small flood of materials as a world ends and then going stagnant as another opens...   With the player base growing and the # of worlds starting and ending at varying intervals the EK economies should stabilize and become more robust over time...   as the saying goes "Rome wasn't built in a day."

 


6FUI4Mk.jpg

                                                        Sugoi - Senpai

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, Frykka said:

EKs will develop slowly behind the Campaigns ending.  The economy of the larger and more successful EKs as trading hubs will be more feast and famine early on getting a small flood of materials as a world ends and then going stagnant as another opens...   With the player base growing and the # of worlds starting and ending at varying intervals the EK economies should stabilize and become more robust over time...   as the saying goes "Rome wasn't built in a day."

 

Theoretically, with a large enough playerbase we'll have campaign worlds starting and ending regularly. Realistically, we'll be lucky to have more than 3-5 campaigns ever running at a time and it's likely we'll easily go 1-3+ months without a new campaign starting/ending on a regular basis.

Even so, people will spend a very brief period between campaigns in the EKs to prepare for the next campaign and so the EKs will be pretty much dead most of the time. Even if a new campaign ended/started once a week you'd have maybe a day where people dump to the EK, prepare, and then jump into a new campaign. The rest of the time... no one will be there.

Also, early on there will be little to no resources until campaigns start ending. Over time... it depends on import/export rules and how those are balanced. If there are larger amounts of items being exported than imported over time then the EKs will have an overabundance of good items and prices will tank. If more items can be imported then good items will be super rare and very high priced in EKs.


Guild Leader of Seeds of War

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Regarding the premise of the thread, I think it's a fallacy to believe that the EK's necessarily must impact the campaign worlds in order to have value.  This assumes that the player's goal is to achieve victory in the campaign world.  But the EK's bring something independently to Crowfall that challenge this assumption:

User generated content.

There are going to be some people who value their EK just because it provides them with a tool set to create their own world and invite their friends to share in it with them.  For this artist class, the campaign world is going to be adjunct to their EK, their interest more in the resources that they can extract than the equipment they can import.  Their focus is going to be spending time in their EK, arranging and rearranging parcels and structures until they achieve their vision.

I also heard J Todd talk about the possibility of enabling EK's to be attached to create mini-campaigns.  Two guilds could set up a world with fortifications and NPC guards and then engage one another in a show of strength and prowess.  Heck, in the short term you could simulate this by having a neutral monarch assign two halves of an EK to two separate teams, separating them with an impassible wall until the start of the match.  These fights are a drain on resources since you can't recover anything above the first node tier but people will be willing to pay that premium for the fun of the experience.  Or maybe they'll pay it for the opportunity to train for specific conditions in a controlled environment as practice before they commit to a campaign.

Another thing I expect ACE to expand on in the future are monster nodes for the EKs; the ability to designate parcels that will house and spawn hostile npcs.  This would enable players to build something for Crowfall that ACE has no real intention of doing itself: PvE worlds.  Monarchs could construct a dungeon populated with hostiles, scatter chests around it with exotic or valuable items as loot, and then build a wall around the temple with a gate that requires payment to access.  Other players would then be invited to challenge themselves against the dungeon to collect loot, with a fee to be paid for each attempt made.  The creator could then use the fees collected to go buy artifacts from someone else's EK to repopulate the chests.  Not only have you established "dungeon mastering" as a valid profession that doesn't require stepping one foot in the campaign world but you've also addressed the criticism that Crowfall lacks PvE content without ACE having to invest time or money into it.

Once ACE opens the door to players adding their own content, the possibilities of Crowfall expand considerably.  As that happens. so will expand the motivations of the people who play it.  Thus the value of the EKs is intrinsic.  They don't need to influence the campaign worlds in order to contribute to gameplay (though I'm personally of the opinion that they should).

Edited by Bashar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, Helix said:

They keep claiming EKs are going to be "permanent" but I have a hard time believing that they'll be 24/7. Keeping thousands of medium sized worlds up and running 24/7, some if not most of which will be empty, is a huge resource hog and financial burden. I have a feeling the "permanence" will be that everything you do inside of them will persist, but that the owner will have to actually "boot up" the EK - it won't be online 24/7. They might have some kind of requirement where a certain number of players will have to be on the EK otherwise it shuts down.

EKs are going to be more like wildstar housing and less like the sandbox people think it will be.

Keeping you EK up for more than a specified limit is one of the VIP perks being tossed around in the "partners" forum.  They promised everyone an eternal kingdom, they did not promise that it would be available 24/7, or an unlimited amount during the day.  I don't mind at all that if you want a fully persistent EK, you have to pay for it to be that way. 

Even in testing they spin up and drop off based on you being in them, so that functionality already exists.

Edited by KrakkenSmacken

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Svenn said:

Theoretically, with a large enough playerbase we'll have campaign worlds starting and ending regularly. Realistically, we'll be lucky to have more than 3-5 campaigns ever running at a time and it's likely we'll easily go 1-3+ months without a new campaign starting/ending on a regular basis.

Even so, people will spend a very brief period between campaigns in the EKs to prepare for the next campaign and so the EKs will be pretty much dead most of the time. Even if a new campaign ended/started once a week you'd have maybe a day where people dump to the EK, prepare, and then jump into a new campaign. The rest of the time... no one will be there.

Also, early on there will be little to no resources until campaigns start ending. Over time... it depends on import/export rules and how those are balanced. If there are larger amounts of items being exported than imported over time then the EKs will have an overabundance of good items and prices will tank. If more items can be imported then good items will be super rare and very high priced in EKs.

This is entirely based on the population sweet spot, and just how much impact seasons have.

They have a partner, Travian games, that has a great deal of experience with "world's" spinning up and falling off. One of the things that happens, is worlds at a certain age won't get any new players, because those new players would be too far behind.  Now with guild twinking, persistent training, and the shallow power curve, maybe that won't happen as much, but I don't think new players should be expected to wait for old worlds to die off, in order to join a new one.

So maybe the sweet spot is only 3k total players per world.  With even just 36k of players, that's going to mean 1 new world per month.  I know everyone has wet panties over the idea of 10's of thousands of players in a single world, 2000 players on at a time, with epic scope and size, but that may not be as fun as everyone imagines. Bigger is not always better.

I just happen to believe that when the population gets too big, it stops being as much fun in direct relation to how much impact a single player (you) can have on the worlds direction. I suspect the real best number is somewhere between 3000-5000 players, but that's just my guess.

That's not even talking about server land mass limitations.  

Edited by KrakkenSmacken

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Bashar said:

Regarding the premise of the thread, I think it's a fallacy to believe that the EK's necessarily must impact the campaign worlds in order to have value.  This assumes that the player's goal is to achieve victory in the campaign world.  But the EK's bring something independently to Crowfall that challenge this assumption:

User generated content.

There are going to be some people who value their EK just because it provides them with a tool set to create their own world and invite their friends to share in it with them.  For this artist class, the campaign world is going to be adjunct to their EK, their interest more in the resources that they can extract than the equipment they can import.  Their focus is going to be spending time in their EK, arranging and rearranging parcels and structures until they achieve their vision.

I also heard J Todd talk about the possibility of enabling EK's to be attached to create mini-campaigns.  Two guilds could set up a world with fortifications and NPC guards and then engage one another in a show of strength and prowess.  Heck, in the short term you could simulate this by having a neutral monarch assign two halves of an EK to two separate teams, separating them with an impassible wall until the start of the match.  These fights are a drain on resources since you can't recover anything above the first node tier but people will be willing to pay that premium for the fun of the experience.  Or maybe they'll pay it for the opportunity to train for specific conditions in a controlled environment as practice before they commit to a campaign.

Another thing I expect ACE to expand on in the future are monster nodes for the EKs; the ability to designate parcels that will house and spawn hostile npcs.  This would enable players to build something for Crowfall that ACE has no real intention of doing itself: PvE worlds.  Monarchs could construct a dungeon populated with hostiles, scatter chests around it with exotic or valuable items as loot, and then build a wall around the temple with a gate that requires payment to access.  Other players would then be invited to challenge themselves against the dungeon to collect loot, with a fee to be paid for each attempt made.  The creator could then use the fees collected to go buy artifacts from someone else's EK to repopulate the chests.  Not only have you established "dungeon mastering" as a valid profession that doesn't require stepping one foot in the campaign world but you've also addressed the criticism that Crowfall lacks PvE content without ACE having to invest time or money into it.

Once ACE opens the door to players adding their own content, the possibilities of Crowfall expand considerably.  As that happens. so will expand the motivations of the people who play it.  Thus the value of the EKs is intrinsic.  They don't need to influence the campaign worlds in order to contribute to gameplay (though I'm personally of the opinion that they should).

I don't think it's necessarily the case that people believe the EKs must impact the Campaign Worlds to have value, more that connecting permanent EKs to transient Campaign Worlds increases the value of said worlds, by giving them a great overall strategic meaning than they have now. This is not to suggest neither EKs nor CWs have an ongoing, big picture impact, only that this can be improved upon, and that connecting the two is one clear way of doing that.

As I've said before, it is fairly clear that ACE are giving we players some tools and a general framework, and leaving it up to us to a degree to make use of or even create the content we will be playing with. This is obviously the case with EKs in a basic sense, and even so with the different CW rulesets which will no doubt be in part based on player feedback or suggestions. What I would like to see is more flexibility in these systems, more ways to create connections between them, so as to make sure all areas of gameplay are rich, dynamic and and meaningful. The EK is a big piece of the overall puzzle - I just think it would be good if it had more 'points of contact' with the result of the puzzle.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The idea of being able to bring back your items to a safe area and have them there risk free would take a lot away from the game. A huge part of Crowfall is the idea that your resources aren't safe and you need to be care full of where and when you craft etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Antellect said:

The idea of being able to bring back your items to a safe area and have them there risk free would take a lot away from the game. A huge part of Crowfall is the idea that your resources aren't safe and you need to be care full of where and when you craft etc.

Well, that depends... how do banks work? Can you ever loot someone else's bank? What about someone's vendors? Can you kill them and take their stuff? Steal it somehow? All of this stuff is already safe and protected.

Even if you could steal all of that stuff, you can use alternate accounts that just are used as storage and can log out, keeping items safe. Putting stuff in EKs is really no different than putting it on a vendor, in a bank, or on another character. There are a bunch of ways you can safeguard items already.

As I said in a later post, crafting in the EKs would be bad because there is no threat to it so I amended my idea that you couldn't craft in your EK.

What if your vendor in your campaign was linked to a vendor in your EK (I think someone else mentioned this earlier)? Then people could go to your vendor in your city in the campaign and buy your stuff, or they could go to your EK to buy your stuff. Again, things bought in an EK would still be tied to the campaign they are from and couldn't be used anywhere outside of that campaign.


Guild Leader of Seeds of War

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Svenn said:

Well, that depends... how do banks work? Can you ever loot someone else's bank? What about someone's vendors? Can you kill them and take their stuff? Steal it somehow? All of this stuff is already safe and protected.

Even if you could steal all of that stuff, you can use alternate accounts that just are used as storage and can log out, keeping items safe. Putting stuff in EKs is really no different than putting it on a vendor, in a bank, or on another character. There are a bunch of ways you can safeguard items already.

As I said in a later post, crafting in the EKs would be bad because there is no threat to it so I amended my idea that you couldn't craft in your EK.

What if your vendor in your campaign was linked to a vendor in your EK (I think someone else mentioned this earlier)? Then people could go to your vendor in your city in the campaign and buy your stuff, or they could go to your EK to buy your stuff. Again, things bought in an EK would still be tied to the campaign they are from and couldn't be used anywhere outside of that campaign.

Honestly at this point I really don't like EK's in general. Unless they find a way to integrate them into the campaigns in a use full way, I don't see the point in it. As far as the vendors being linked from campaigns to EK's, I don't understand why someone would make the extra effort to go to your EK to buy the same resources they could buy in the campaign world.

As far as the multiple account situation, I don't have much to say besides I really dislike it. I really don't like the idea of players having some sort of an advantage by using multiple accounts, weather it's safeguarding resources or being able to craft more efficiently or whatever. I hope the developers are able to create a system where using multiple accounts isn't a viable strategy to gain an advantage. 

I'm not completely against being able to safeguard resources either. If you can put them in a bank and have the bank in your keep I'm fine with that. I just don't want players hiding all of their resources in a place where no one can potentially get to them at all. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Antellect said:

Honestly at this point I really don't like EK's in general. Unless they find a way to integrate them into the campaigns in a use full way, I don't see the point in it.

Hence this thread. Trying to come up with a way to make EKs useful. ;)

1 minute ago, Antellect said:

As far as the vendors being linked from campaigns to EK's, I don't understand why someone would make the extra effort to go to your EK to buy the same resources they could buy in the campaign world.

 

Well, EK could have dozens of vendors versus running around trying to find that one vendor you need in the campaign. You hop into a marketplace and browse a bunch of shops. Also, it's safer shopping (whether this is good or bad is up for debate).

3 minutes ago, Antellect said:

As far as the multiple account situation, I don't have much to say besides I really dislike it. I really don't like the idea of players having some sort of an advantage by using multiple accounts, weather it's safeguarding resources or being able to craft more efficiently or whatever. I hope the developers are able to create a system where using multiple accounts isn't a viable strategy to gain an advantage. 

Multiple accounts is an advantage in every game. I can't think of a single one where there aren't benefits to it. That being said, I think there are plenty of drawbacks as well. Managing multiple accounts is really annoying. There really isn't much they can do that would stop people from creating multiple accounts. That's kind of outside the scope of this thread though.

4 minutes ago, Antellect said:

I'm not completely against being able to safeguard resources either. If you can put them in a bank and have the bank in your keep I'm fine with that. I just don't want players hiding all of their resources in a place where no one can potentially get to them at all. 

Do you think they are going to allow people to loot your bank? I'm not even sure how that would work, honestly. Same with vendors. If they let you just kill vendors and take the items then no one would buy anything. Of course, with the idea I just posed of having the EK/campaign Vendor using the same inventory... it wouldn't affect the safety of the items on your vendor anyway. If they could be looted from a vendor in your campaign, they still could be with this idea. Just a different way to shop that makes EKs able to be used as marketplaces.

The only difference I see is that shopping becomes safer. Other than that everything functions the same. I think that safer shopping is a good thing. Without it you have things like people camping vendors just waiting for someone to come buy stuff only to jump them as they are shopping (this is not a big issue for 3 faction worlds, but for other worlds could be a problem). Which leads to people only using their very small safe circles to shop and making for a very weak economy.

I see this similar to how griefers would camp newbie areas in other MMOs. While someone shopping isn't necessarily a new player... they are likely there because their gear broke or they only have very basic gear. This is speculation and it's hard to say exactly how it would play out, but I don't want a situation where people are driven away from the game because of something like griefers camping the shops or something.


Guild Leader of Seeds of War

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Antellect said:

Honestly at this point I really don't like EK's in general. Unless they find a way to integrate them into the campaigns in a use full way, I don't see the point in it.

There was this little game called mine craft, that basically started as what the EK's are going to be, a place to build houses and stuff like a giant lego kit. 

I seem to remember it being pretty popular.

I think allot of us killer types might be shocked to find out the most popular and profitable part of the game for the less hard core gamer population could be simply EK castle building and socializing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I get that you want a reason to spend more time in your EK, Svenn.  I really do.  But your proposal introduces a lot of complexity to replicate functionality that will already exist in the campaign world.  Even if the fan base reached a consensus on the forum that it was a desired feature, I don't see ACE spending the resources to implement it.  There are just so many other demands pressing for their attention.

In my opinion a better approach would be to limit the resources that you can collect from campaign victories to raw materials and some world exclusive items like relics.  This means that any equipment or other crafted goods that you import to a world are effectively spent once the campaign has concluded.  Since all equipment imported into campaign worlds would have to be crafted in the EKs, that would make the interim period between campaigns more important and increase the viability of an EK as a bazaar.  People would come together, exchange resources, and craft or buy the equipment and items that they want to take in to the next campaign.  You might even have some vessels who remain exclusively in their EK to produce goods to sell during those periods.

From a strategic standpoint, players entering a campaign would have to weigh the value of the items they're bringing in to a campaign versus what they can expect to get out of it.  It also means that during campaigns, players will have to weigh how worthwhile it is to craft an item versus the value of bringing back to their EK the raw materials it would consume.  Invest too much in equipment and you might not recoup your costs.  Invest too little and you might not have the wherewithal to complete objectives and protect the resources that you've earned.

I don't think ACE would quite implement that system either, though, since I expect people would complain about not being able to re-use their Vorpal Longsword +5.  And, frankly, I find that a valid argument since a part of the game is developing your reputation and a big part of reputation in fantasy lore is artifact quality equipment.  Maybe a compromise could be made where equipment exported to the EKs would have their durability reduced to zero or transformed into a 1X blueprint so that it had to be recrafted before they could be used again.

In any event, I think it's really too early to be having this discussion.  We don't have campaigns yet and the EKs are very rudimentary.  A lot of the systems aren't yet in play.  There are no victory conditions in the PvP maps, no craftable structures, no guild structure, minimal npcs.  While I'm all for building relationships between the two world spaces, I think the focus right now should be making sure that each is individually fun or interesting in their own right.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...