Just a thought on class sigils; I'm guessing the reason for us not being able to refine them into other artifacts is because they are free and therefore using them as feeders would bypass the cost/effort of getting feeders?
A way around this would be to allow them to refine into other artifacts but never scale. A straight 80% of RP points that never multiplies would allow players to regain most of their investment without being able to abuse them.
this and only allowing the use as a feeder after blue level...
The costs of Stronghold are not going to be lowered? I thought that is what was mentioned in a livestream.... Influence is the worst, followed by Conqueror's Shards and Dungeoneering Shards.
I honestly thought so to, to the extent that I'm tempted to play the stream again to try to find the exact quote.
Also gems. They need to adjust gems to compensate for their anti-botting measures to the same magnitude they did the SH AD costs.
The costs of Stronghold are not going to be lowered? I thought that is what was mentioned in a livestream.... Influence is the worst, followed by Conqueror's Shards and Dungeoneering Shards.
I honestly thought so to, to the extent that I'm tempted to play the stream again to try to find the exact quote.
Also gems. They need to adjust gems to compensate for their anti-botting measures to the same magnitude they did the SH AD costs.
I think the Temp structures now on preview are what was meant. That really is a letdown.
I had a chance to re-listen to what I believe was the pertinent portion of the stream and yeah, if we were hoping for cost reductions, we were apparently hearing what we wanted to hear. "Making it easier for small guilds to come up faster" is a more direct paraphrase.
I haven't had a chance to really dig into the temp structures. But I did remember this video showing the bug with their duration:
If you pause during the selection, I'm actually ok with the cost structure, and the fact that the major relief resource producing structures last a week makes things far less frantic than they were with maximizing the Jubilee Trader. They only consume resources that are available in massive excess to slow-progressing guilds. I'll be curious how often they need to be tended to avoid waste, but also feel less bad about it due to the long-term availability.
I see there is also a temp structure to make gold for your guild, so @vida44 's concern about the gold cost of the Mysterious Merchant might be alleviated. You just need to do some planning. Build a Gemcutter for a week to pay for the Assayer, then get the Mysterious Merchant in later. You can do it all for no cost if you're patient.
We definitely need another boon plot space in the SH. Thanks
I have tons of sympathy for everyone who has already built all the cool stuff they can and hungers for more, but I expect they won't come out with a new boon plot until they also release a new boon structure to force yet another choice on you.
They purposely made more types of boon structures than there are plots to build them on in order to make you decide which ones you wouldn't make. I don't think it fits their intentions to eventually let you have it all... maybe more options, but never everything.
*The drawback is that we now have to find more room for the resources. I recommend that they offer a resource bag expansion through the zen market. This could be an entire bag or additional slots. I know I am personally running out of room with all the new crafting resources.
We will be increasing the number of inventory slots in the professions resources bag from 160 to 240 with this update.
FEEDBACK: I think I spoke with you during the live stream about moving the SH Boon on the top since that is the only one we change on the fly. Thank you for doing that.
Would it also be possible to add a Keybind option for that Window. Opening the Character Window and then choosing Boons is very tiresome for my mouse.
Please please please add another permanent boon plot. Several of our guild members would like to add the HP boon but that would require us to destroy a structure that is also highly used by our members. I see no reason with the new emphasis on variety and choice, that this should not be done.
If the plan is to extend guild ranks upwards (21+) then simply allowing guilds to build toward opening up all of the boon structures would be simple and effective, rather than creating new boons or giving more points to existing ones.
This would of course mean increasing the number of boon plots to equal the total number of boon structures.
Please Do Not Feed The Trolls
Xael De Armadeon: DC
Xane De Armadeon: CW
Zen De Armadeon: OP
Zohar De Armadeon: TR
Chrion De Armadeon: SW
Gosti Big Belly: GWF
Barney McRustbucket: GF
Lt. Thackeray: HR
Lucius De Armadeon: BD
While you are at it on the Stronghold, could a option to name the alliance become available? Some alliances don't want to take on their Helm's name,like ours. Our alliance works as a unity, the helm is merely a placeholder. Plus, why no fun names!
While you are at it on the Stronghold, could a option to name the alliance become available? Some alliances don't want to take on their Helm's name,like ours. Our alliance works as a unity, the helm is merely a placeholder. Plus, why no fun names!
Definitely - and I do find it funny that after 5 mods the name bug still exists where you cannot select the "use alliance name" option to turn it on or off and it often defaults you to the 'on' position so you run around with another guild's name...
Please Do Not Feed The Trolls
Xael De Armadeon: DC
Xane De Armadeon: CW
Zen De Armadeon: OP
Zohar De Armadeon: TR
Chrion De Armadeon: SW
Gosti Big Belly: GWF
Barney McRustbucket: GF
Lt. Thackeray: HR
Lucius De Armadeon: BD
The help to small guilds that was mentioned does not seem to have materialised building costs are exactly the same. The Temporary buildings will help(even though most of it is aimed at masterworks... at least there is a influence one) but not a lot and the new masterworks, though great, will introduce a massive gap between guilds and punish smaller guilds.
Please consider reducing building cost .... at least to the level of Masterworks. This will make it easier for guilds to grow.
I am fortunate to be in an amazing alliance that helps us out a lot but i can see the gigantic gap between big guilds and small or new guilds just getting bigger with this mini mod.
I don't even think it would be possible to start a new guild since no one will join a guild without MW after this mod.
Post edited by mynaam on
There are more than BIS players in this game RIP Real Tiamat, RIP Real Demogorgon RIP real Temple of the spider. Why remove non bis content to give to bis players ???? FORCING the majority of your player base to play 4 mod old dungeons and trial will have a bad result on player base Changes are getting so bad i would rather prefer no new changes (RIP ICE FISHING in winter fest)
2000 gold for the temp buildings? That is insane and takes the buildings away from being useful for the smaller guilds they SAY they are interested in helping. The only ones this helps would be large guilds, or subguilds of huge alliances. Do they realize what it takes to make 2000 gold? Especially when you're already trying to build your SH and outputting hundreds of gold on a regular basis.
Can it be built by a smaller guild, say 10 members? Sure, once. If you have players that are otherwise active in the game, switching enchants, fishing, and contributing to the coffers thats it. Running some daily dungeons, skirmishes and going through some dailies you can get a couple gold in a reasonable day. Previously most of this would go into the coffer, but lets take it all and see how far we get. 10 members * 2 gold a day = 20 gold per day = 140 gold per week = 560 gold per month. Lets really focus on it and double everyone's contribution that brings you to 120 gold for the coffer and 1 temp building per month. Thats really lame, and produces another resource bottleneck for SH buildings.
Its not sustainable except for -possibly- on a monthly basis. This takes a currency that was once nearly useless and throws the needle the other way, where demand will greatly outstrip our ability to produce. Unless of course you're in a much larger guild, which means you don't need the temp buildings in the first place, making them pointless.
Note: we're living in a post mod 11 world now where most players' bags are overflowing with RD drops to continue on with that content. That means not as much room as we used to have to card around items to sell for gold. (Admittedly made better w/ the stacking resources which I do appreciate, but its still a thing.) Which you can change, but then again you're asking your members to give up on campaign progress to keep up on building 1 temp structure. ..also, lame.
2
adinosiiMember, NW M9 PlaytestPosts: 4,294Arc User
A couple of masterwork-related issues.
The price to unlock Tier III Artificing is simply wrong. It is 30 lacquered ebony, but should be 30 dark lacquer to be consistent with ell the other professions, which require 30 of the lowest rank Mastercraft-created items. Artificing alone requires the second rank items.
I just realized that the temporary traders are a lot less useful that I thought initially. Consider the goldsmith trader for example. As you can see he sells gold nuggets, gold ingots and gold wire. You need those items to get Tier-II masterwork, but they don't unlock until after you have unlocked Tier-II.
So, what will happen is the following:
Players that already have unlocked Masterwork Tier-II will spend their guild marks on buying those items from the temporary trader, posting them on the AH and making a nice bit of profit. However, the increased supply should drive prices down, making it easier to unlock Masterwork-II (and in turn, Masterwork-III)
Also, people who need to unlock Masterwork-II will get friends or guild mates who already have done so to buy those items - providing them with raw materials and whatever is appropriate to compensate for the Guild mark expenses.
This will be a bit of hassle - I personally would have preferred being able to buy those items directly myself, but I just wanted to check if this is an oversight or working as intended
Hoping for improvements...
1
beckylunaticMember, NW M9 PlaytestPosts: 14,231Arc User
2000 gold for the temp buildings? That is insane and takes the buildings away from being useful for the smaller guilds they SAY they are interested in helping. The only ones this helps would be large guilds, or subguilds of huge alliances. Do they realize what it takes to make 2000 gold? Especially when you're already trying to build your SH and outputting hundreds of gold on a regular basis.
There is another temp structure to make SH gold. IIRC, it costs gems, but the structure to produce gems costs nothing but SH resources (wood, etc.). I may have some of the specifics wrong as all this info was drawn from watching a video that showed all the temp structures briefly, but I looked at it enough to establish that there's a path to produce all these resources using nothing but patience and time.
FEEDBACK: I think I spoke with you during the live stream about moving the SH Boon on the top since that is the only one we change on the fly. Thank you for doing that.
Would it also be possible to add a Keybind option for that Window. Opening the Character Window and then choosing Boons is very tiresome for my mouse.
Yes! I thought that was great feedback, thank you. I will also add the keybind request to a list of future fixes as well.
2000 gold for the temp buildings? That is insane...
Only the mysterious merchant costs gold. Each structure has a unique cost associated with it (though all 5 masterwork structures are similarly costed.) Some of the structures are designed to help out with areas that guilds may be struggling with, including gold. The mysterious merchant is not one of these structures and has no direct contribution to advancement.
0
adinosiiMember, NW M9 PlaytestPosts: 4,294Arc User
There needs to be a chance value added to the grey MW tools. Having 0% is what makes MWs so annoying and costly. Grey tools should give at least a total of 50% of success being used along with all epic tools.
Ok I decided to go ahead and look at the preview server first hand since I apparently misread what the cost of the temp buildings are. The temp buildings in the guild I found on preview has the merchant built and there doesn't appear to be a destroy option available so I can only look at costs of the other buildings for the moment. Then we can have some actual information to react to instead of limited bits.
Building - Resource - duration - amount of resource - Cost for building in k (as of 4/3 on the preview server)
Recruiter - influence - 1 week - 100/hr - 41.6 metal 35.66 stone 41.6 food 19.81 labor 39.62 wood Bloomery - masterwork items - 24hr - ? - 8.91 metal 8.91 stone 41.6 labor 5.94 wood Goldsmith - masterwork items - 24hr - ? - 8.91 metal 8.91 stone 5.94 food 5.94 wood Assayer - Gold - 3/hr - 1 week - 59.43 metal 59.43 stone 39.62 labor 79.24 gems Atlier - masterwork items - 24hr - ? - 5.94 metal 5.94 stone 8.91 food 8.91 wood Gemcutter - influence - 100/hr - 39.62 metal 59.43 stone 39.62 food 59.43 wood Tenterground - masterwork items - 24hr - ? - 5.94 metal 8.91 stone 8.91 food 5.94 wood Tannery - masterwork items - 24hr - ? - 8.91 metal 5.94 stone 5.94 food 8.91 wood
So costs have a distribution and are not as high as reported when the earlier comment reported 2000 gold for a 'temp building'. That may well be for the one that I am missing, but isn't generally true. Yay.
0
lazaroth666Member, NW M9 PlaytestPosts: 1,332Arc User
Several people have supported the fact that we need an additional plot for a boon structure. We do understand that it is expected that a guild must choose which ones to build, however, even with only 5 available plots, we still have to make a decision. Also, we are already in a point where most lv 20 guilds can't build or upgrade any structure since each one of them is already finished (excluding PvP buildings which are undesirable). Could you please let us know your position about both concerns? Thanks.
there doesn't appear to be a destroy option available so I can only look at costs of the other buildings for the moment.
I don't believe there was any particular misunderstanding on this topic, but just for sake of clarity since somethings are not final on preview—it is intentional that there is no destroy option for temporary structures. Once you've created a temporary structure you must wait for it to expire before you may use that slot again.
Several people have supported the fact that we need an additional plot for a boon structure. We do understand that it is expected that a guild must choose which ones to build, however, even with only 5 available plots, we still have to make a decision. Also, we are already in a point where most lv 20 guilds can't build or upgrade any structure since each one of them is already finished (excluding PvP buildings which are undesirable). Could you please let us know your position about both concerns? Thanks.
I can say that the current arrangement wherein you must choose a limited number of structures compared to the available slots was the intent of the original design as some have pointed out. It was intended to create some friction, deliberation and community back-and-forth. I can also say that we will not be adding additional boon structure slots in this module. The future is not set in stone though, so please continue to make your voices heard if this is something you feel strongly about.
If you were counting the fact that level 20 guilds no longer have any structures to upgrade as the second point, I would say that we are aware of this. Certainly temporary structures and guild alliances are intended to alleviate the issue so that your members can continue to earn guild marks. We do evaluate the possibility of adding new ranks against the number of guilds who have reached rank 20. However, there are other areas of concern such as the strength of guild boons and expectations surrounding those if new ranks were to be added, etc. Similarly to the first point, if you would really like to see new stronghold ranks be added, please continue to make your voice heard. We do hear you and your feedback is appreciated.
Personally I could care less about higher ranks at this stage of the game. Additional boon plots however, make perfect sense without causing any issues with game balance.
Comments
Also gems. They need to adjust gems to compensate for their anti-botting measures to the same magnitude they did the SH AD costs.
Neverwinter Census 2017
All posts pending disapproval by Cecilia
Escape the Ordinary GH 20
Lord Havok GWF
Lady Icethorn CW
Brother Heals DC
Lord Bubble OP
Sister Tetera GF
I haven't had a chance to really dig into the temp structures. But I did remember this video showing the bug with their duration:
If you pause during the selection, I'm actually ok with the cost structure, and the fact that the major relief resource producing structures last a week makes things far less frantic than they were with maximizing the Jubilee Trader. They only consume resources that are available in massive excess to slow-progressing guilds. I'll be curious how often they need to be tended to avoid waste, but also feel less bad about it due to the long-term availability.
I see there is also a temp structure to make gold for your guild, so @vida44 's concern about the gold cost of the Mysterious Merchant might be alleviated. You just need to do some planning. Build a Gemcutter for a week to pay for the Assayer, then get the Mysterious Merchant in later. You can do it all for no cost if you're patient.
Neverwinter Census 2017
All posts pending disapproval by Cecilia
They purposely made more types of boon structures than there are plots to build them on in order to make you decide which ones you wouldn't make. I don't think it fits their intentions to eventually let you have it all... maybe more options, but never everything.
Neverwinter Census 2017
All posts pending disapproval by Cecilia
Now I have to find something else to whine about
FEEDBACK:
I think I spoke with you during the live stream about moving the SH Boon on the top since that is the only one we change on the fly. Thank you for doing that.
Would it also be possible to add a Keybind option for that Window. Opening the Character Window and then choosing Boons is very tiresome for my mouse.
This would of course mean increasing the number of boon plots to equal the total number of boon structures.
Xael De Armadeon: DC
Xane De Armadeon: CW
Zen De Armadeon: OP
Zohar De Armadeon: TR
Chrion De Armadeon: SW
Gosti Big Belly: GWF
Barney McRustbucket: GF
Lt. Thackeray: HR
Lucius De Armadeon: BD
Member of Casual Dailies - XBox
Xael De Armadeon: DC
Xane De Armadeon: CW
Zen De Armadeon: OP
Zohar De Armadeon: TR
Chrion De Armadeon: SW
Gosti Big Belly: GWF
Barney McRustbucket: GF
Lt. Thackeray: HR
Lucius De Armadeon: BD
Member of Casual Dailies - XBox
Please consider reducing building cost .... at least to the level of Masterworks. This will make it easier for guilds to grow.
I am fortunate to be in an amazing alliance that helps us out a lot but i can see the gigantic gap between big guilds and small or new guilds just getting bigger with this mini mod.
I don't even think it would be possible to start a new guild since no one will join a guild without MW after this mod.
RIP Real Tiamat, RIP Real Demogorgon RIP real Temple of the spider. Why remove non bis content to give to bis players ????
FORCING the majority of your player base to play 4 mod old dungeons and trial will have a bad result on player base
Changes are getting so bad i would rather prefer no new changes (RIP ICE FISHING in winter fest)
Can it be built by a smaller guild, say 10 members? Sure, once. If you have players that are otherwise active in the game, switching enchants, fishing, and contributing to the coffers thats it. Running some daily dungeons, skirmishes and going through some dailies you can get a couple gold in a reasonable day. Previously most of this would go into the coffer, but lets take it all and see how far we get. 10 members * 2 gold a day = 20 gold per day = 140 gold per week = 560 gold per month. Lets really focus on it and double everyone's contribution that brings you to 120 gold for the coffer and 1 temp building per month. Thats really lame, and produces another resource bottleneck for SH buildings.
Its not sustainable except for -possibly- on a monthly basis. This takes a currency that was once nearly useless and throws the needle the other way, where demand will greatly outstrip our ability to produce. Unless of course you're in a much larger guild, which means you don't need the temp buildings in the first place, making them pointless.
Note: we're living in a post mod 11 world now where most players' bags are overflowing with RD drops to continue on with that content. That means not as much room as we used to have to card around items to sell for gold. (Admittedly made better w/ the stacking resources which I do appreciate, but its still a thing.) Which you can change, but then again you're asking your members to give up on campaign progress to keep up on building 1 temp structure. ..also, lame.
The price to unlock Tier III Artificing is simply wrong. It is 30 lacquered ebony, but should be 30 dark lacquer to be consistent with ell the other professions, which require 30 of the lowest rank Mastercraft-created items. Artificing alone requires the second rank items.
I just realized that the temporary traders are a lot less useful that I thought initially. Consider the goldsmith trader for example.
As you can see he sells gold nuggets, gold ingots and gold wire. You need those items to get Tier-II masterwork, but they don't unlock until after you have unlocked Tier-II.
So, what will happen is the following:
Players that already have unlocked Masterwork Tier-II will spend their guild marks on buying those items from the temporary trader, posting them on the AH and making a nice bit of profit. However, the increased supply should drive prices down, making it easier to unlock Masterwork-II (and in turn, Masterwork-III)
Also, people who need to unlock Masterwork-II will get friends or guild mates who already have done so to buy those items - providing them with raw materials and whatever is appropriate to compensate for the Guild mark expenses.
This will be a bit of hassle - I personally would have preferred being able to buy those items directly myself, but I just wanted to check if this is an oversight or working as intended
Neverwinter Census 2017
All posts pending disapproval by Cecilia
Building - Resource - duration - amount of resource - Cost for building in k (as of 4/3 on the preview server)
Recruiter - influence - 1 week - 100/hr - 41.6 metal 35.66 stone 41.6 food 19.81 labor 39.62 wood
Bloomery - masterwork items - 24hr - ? - 8.91 metal 8.91 stone 41.6 labor 5.94 wood
Goldsmith - masterwork items - 24hr - ? - 8.91 metal 8.91 stone 5.94 food 5.94 wood
Assayer - Gold - 3/hr - 1 week - 59.43 metal 59.43 stone 39.62 labor 79.24 gems
Atlier - masterwork items - 24hr - ? - 5.94 metal 5.94 stone 8.91 food 8.91 wood
Gemcutter - influence - 100/hr - 39.62 metal 59.43 stone 39.62 food 59.43 wood
Tenterground - masterwork items - 24hr - ? - 5.94 metal 8.91 stone 8.91 food 5.94 wood
Tannery - masterwork items - 24hr - ? - 8.91 metal 5.94 stone 5.94 food 8.91 wood
So costs have a distribution and are not as high as reported when the earlier comment reported 2000 gold for a 'temp building'. That may well be for the one that I am missing, but isn't generally true. Yay.
Several people have supported the fact that we need an additional plot for a boon structure. We do understand that it is expected that a guild must choose which ones to build, however, even with only 5 available plots, we still have to make a decision. Also, we are already in a point where most lv 20 guilds can't build or upgrade any structure since each one of them is already finished (excluding PvP buildings which are undesirable). Could you please let us know your position about both concerns? Thanks.
Or anything that demonstrates MAJOR AGREEMENT with above post.
If you were counting the fact that level 20 guilds no longer have any structures to upgrade as the second point, I would say that we are aware of this. Certainly temporary structures and guild alliances are intended to alleviate the issue so that your members can continue to earn guild marks. We do evaluate the possibility of adding new ranks against the number of guilds who have reached rank 20. However, there are other areas of concern such as the strength of guild boons and expectations surrounding those if new ranks were to be added, etc. Similarly to the first point, if you would really like to see new stronghold ranks be added, please continue to make your voice heard. We do hear you and your feedback is appreciated.