You'll need to put in about 20 hours in Albion Online to become competitive in PvP

As Albion Online barrels toward a summer release, the crew took to Reddit yesterday for a marathon AMA session to tackle any pressing community questions.

Asked how much work an average player will need to put in before being of any use in PvP, the team responded, "A general principle of Albion Online -- as a game with a strong PvP focus -- is that the combat power curves for gear and character progress are very flat [...] When you start out a new character, you could expect at least 10 to 20 hours of gameplay before you could be considered competitive in PvP."

What about super-experienced and -geared players taking over the game's landscape and making it miserable for everyone else? "Of course, well-organized guilds will always have an advantage over more casual players - it would be weird if that was not the case. However, it is extremely unlikely -- and has never happened in any of our tests, two of which lasted around six months -- that a single faction will dominate the world."

The team also discussed the necessity of PvE safe zones, the shift in focus to timer-based PvP, the food system, activities for casual players, roleplaying potential, and a promised revamp of the market user interface.

Source: Reddit
SHARE THIS ARTICLE

LEAVE A COMMENT

34 Comments on "You'll need to put in about 20 hours in Albion Online to become competitive in PvP"

Subscribe to:
Sort by:   newest | oldest | most liked
Reader
Eboni

I don't think I like the game as much as I thought I would. I bought into the game after watching the "Everyone Matters" trailer. I've only played for a little while, thinking I could be a farmer/cook and I wish I read a little more into how it works exactly. Basically, you plant and come back in 22 hours. When I first read about it, I think a dev said it was ideal of casual players who only have a 30-45 minutes to play a day. I took it the complete wrong way.

I'm going to get my $30 worth, though. So, I started gathering and selling fiber/cloth. So just wanted to see how much money I can make exploring, gathering, selling cloth while occasionally checking in on my farm. Food is pretty important, apparently. So, hopefully I can make a decent amount to level my island and house.

Also, is there a MOP guild running around?

Reader
Esoteric Coyote

So I may have fallen for the whole peer pressure to get this, power guilds can easily control the market and progression of other players. In cities you can buy land for crafting stations and set the price or the use to anything. You can make the private, or charge people a 500% markup. I hit this already, I can't make tools without paying 500% markup past T4 and most Albion players just say "lawl get good". On top of that, players who bought an ox carry 8 times as many materials as on foot and run twice as fast. So their progression is miles ahead of me which means I'll never be competitive and it makes the grind long and annoying.

Getting an ox through the vendors requires you to have a level 3 island, which in total costs 100k and a single baby ox or horse is 12k for the lowest quality. On foot a foal costs two trips of tier 4 mats, for the isle that's just 18 runs or so... Through two to three zones.... With Ox you can get 4 foals in one run, or a level 3 isle in two runs.

Do not recommend unless you play with a large group to feed you mats, gear, or use their crafting stations.

Reader
Esoteric Coyote

I forgot buying an ox from another player at last wipe cost 200k, and dropped recently to 70k and is allegedly dropping more. So I guess just sit out and wait till they are 30k or less.

Reader
Jokerchyld

As a pet project I'll observe how fast this devolves and becomes toxic. I've never seen a positive PvP environment, but open to being wrong.

Reader
Schlag Sweetleaf

Reader
Schmidt.Capela

"""and has never happened in any of our tests"""

You are aware that GW2's WvW PvP was very balanced during Beta, with matches where comebacks were common and the winner was only known close to the end of the match, whereas after leaving Beta the matches became far less dynamic to the point whoever is ahead after a couple hours wins the week long match in nearly all cases, right?

Beta players tend to behave very differently than regular players, so using a Beta to predict how people will behave in PvP can result in the prediction being wildly off.

hurbster
Reader
hurbster

Oh well, another game off the list...

Reader
deekay_plus

so playing this as a result of sundial joining up with his tryhard zerball guild friends and we being interested.

game definitely favours those who know what they are doing from previous tests and have numbers. much to the penalty of less experienced and smaller population groups. maybe to excess.

the combat is maybe imo better than dota2 but not as good as hots while being clearly inspired by moba's.

the gearing system is interesting.

and to be quite clear here you CAN NOT be self sufficient and will rely on guildies to be viable at all.

velimirius
Reader
velimirius

Meh its p2w anyway, you got to buy the game and then if you dont want to fall behind you have to pay premium sub for exp boost and whatever else it gives you.

Reader
Arktouros

Albion is many different levels of terrible for a multitude of reasons but pay2win isn't one of them. Misusing words and labels simply devalues their meaning.

Reader
Esoteric Coyote

It is pay to win, leaving out the ox, you can buy gold, covert to silver and lock players out of the T4 crafting stations. It's already happening.

Reader
Robert Mann

They literally said "We offer payment for advantage." That's P2W, as far as many of us are concerned.

Reader
Arktouros

But, again, this is all part of the problem. When you throw around terms like pay2win without agreeing how they are defined then you end up with vague terminology that means something different to each person.

In this specific case, "advantage" is vague at best. For example in Albion lets say Player1 drops $100 on gold, sells gold for silver, then buys a full set of Tier 5 gear. Meanwhile Player2 spends 20 hours in game farming up resources, 100 hours farming up food (AMIRITE?!?! lol), then makes a full set of Tier 5 gear. When Player1 and Player2 fight each other neither has an inherent advantage over the other. If Player1 loses then that represents their real time being destroyed since they paid dollars for their gear.

Where a Pay2Win system would be is Player1 is able to get some sort of unique advantage that Player2 wouldn't have access to without paying. Now you might be quick to jump on bringing up the subscription but since Player2 can farm silver and convert that to Gold to buy a subscription they still have access to it through in game means without paying. This again creates equivalency.

The fundamental part of "pay2win" is showing the win part, and in Albion, again for all it's numerous and seemingly endless faults, this just isn't one of them.

velimirius
Reader
velimirius

It is p2w, games which offer only exp boost are considered p2w just for giving you faster leveling advantage, cuz any advantage you pay for that puts you over another player who dont is p2w.

And here in albion, you can get gear and what not for buying game currency which will put you straight ahead of every1 who wont spent a dime except just buying the game. After that to make sure you stay ahead you will pay a premium sub (like just buying the game wasnt enough) which will give you "The Premium Status provides that character with faster game progression, higher resource yields and much more." . Damn that leaves players who just buy the game back in the dust, and wouldnt be that bad if it was PVE game but open world PVP shiiiiiet so much p2w that it hurts.

Games are p2w even for less than all of this. No idea why are you all over defending the business system unless you are one of those who pay for the advantage in the games.

Reader
Johnny

The person who get's strongest first is harder to knock down from the top. The player who has Tier 5 earlier kills you while you are gathering. They also claim more land and more wanted areas. When you finally get Tier 5, they are already so setup they don't need to spend real cash if they have issues holding onto their gear. And again, they've got the best plots and you get nothing but crap.

So yeah, getting ahead of someone in a PvP game by using real world money is P2W.

Reader
Arktouros

This is actually also incorrect because of how Albion actually plays.

Early on the biggest advantages are those that buy into the massively multiplayer pyramid scheme model that Albion is based off of at a guild level. 20+ people on the bottom of the pyramid funneling resources towards the top players will end up with the early game advantage (especially when you consider things like the sheer amount of food it takes to create gear currently).

In this case playing the game in an organized fashion will actually put you into those strong top positions, not gold. This is because even if you have all the silver in the world (from selling gold) it doesn't somehow make the gear magically appear on the Auction House. By the time the gear does start to appear on the AH, it will be generated by those large guilds who will be ahead of the curve.

I mean don't take me wrong, Albion has A LOT of faults and a Development team with nothing but a track record of poor decisions but their business model just isn't one of them.

Reader
deekay_plus

if you consider archaeage gw2 and eve pay2win than so is this. starting with the $100 package which gives an ox which literally cuts your travel time while farming mats by 1/8 as well as makes selling mats far easier and other logistics. which oxes normally require t3 level progress and a whole lot of silver.

Reader
Esoteric Coyote

More than an 8th if you account for travel time...

Reader
BalsBigBrother

However, it is extremely unlikely -- and has never happened in any of our tests, two of which lasted around six months -- that a single faction will dominate the world."

So once the this game is released into the wild I will be counting the days until I see the single faction dominates the world story :-)

Reader
Arktouros

What actually ends up happening in most of the betas thus far is to start with there's many guilds/alliances owning a few territories. Then over time, as people get bored and quit around the 30 days point, it divides up into power blocs. Owning territory requires a stupid amount of logistics and food making so there's only so much a group of people can keep up with. So it's unlikely any one group would own the world because there'd be no way to feed the world's territories as a single group.

That said everything else they said is pretty much false. Much of the betas have been basically higher geared players dominating under geared opponents in most cases. The power curve isn't flat as much as it's a steady climb, which is better than the plateau it was, but a far cry from flat as well. With the resources being what they are the game basically turns into a massively multi-player pyramid scheme where the top PvPers who do the territory battles get fed all the rare resources/gear so they can compete with others in similar gear.

Vaeris
Reader
Vaeris

I wonder if their tests included all the members of some of the more aggressive and organized PVP guilds out there. Controlled environment is one thing, released to MMO gamerdom is another.

Reader
Arktouros

Yes, but the game has been a mess for a very long time so a lot of those larger guilds have come and gone in a few cases.

Reader
Nordavind

In my dream MMORPG, PvP is all about skill. When entering a PvP area/arena, you're stripped off all gear/stats you have earned in the game and given an default gear and equal pool of stats. Now fight. Win glory.

Reader
_

That would be my dream PVE game. All PVE in MMOs should contain no power progression. Only PVP should have power progression.

Reader
Robert Mann

This is why I like some of the slasher combat sandboxes coming out. They take stats off gear, remove the entire class meta, and weapons are just weapons with no auto-hit. In short, it takes all the aspects of PvP that are the most imbalanced and removes them.

Sure, there are still different weapons and character builds, but it is far less of a problem than all the stat inflation, gear inflation, class imbalance, etc.

Reader
Chris Walker

Isn't that what MOBAs are for?

In my dream MMORPG, meaningful progression exists for both PVE and PVP players.

Reader
Robert Mann

Mobas retain gear inflation among other problems, although you do start on a closer to even setup.

Reader
Nordavind

Sure, but they lack the MMORPG-part. I'd like both, in one game. Think of MMORPG like real life and the PvP is a match of paintball.

Reader
Chris Walker

Oh, I certainly understand what you're saying, I just don't think it's fair to PVP players if we rip away their MMORPG progression. Imagine doing that to PVE players (giving them all "default gear and equal pool of stats") and the outcry that would occur.

For example, in PVE, I kill a boss and loot a "Flaming God Sword of Ultimate Destruction +10", but when I join a group for a PVE encounter, that sword transforms into a "Steel Blade +1". Kinda takes away the sense of achievement and character progression, doesn't it? I don't think PVE players would like that one bit.

Reader
Nordavind

I don't want this for all games, just for the one I'm playing :)

Reader
Chris Walker

Let's hope we don't play the same games then lol. I depend on PVP to progress my character and taking away that option would ruin it for me.

Reader
Robert Mann

Actually I want gear to just be gear in games much more often. I'm over the grind for the next best newly released tier of items, with a bit of extra stats and all to make me feel like they are any better (but the new content is balanced roughly the same for those new 'improvements'.)

I'd much rather return to character progression, rather than everything being about gear. Even then, I'd like to see much flatter curves.

I know some people would hate that, and thus another case where I simply say "We need games for each type, rather than games that only focus on the status quo."

Reader
Chris Walker

I'm fine with character progression instead of, or in combination with, gear progression. I just want there to be meaningful progression in some form for *both* PVE and PVP players.

I'm cool with flatter curves as long as that flatness provides enough visible progression to keep players engaged.

Reader
Schmidt.Capela

Chalk me up as someone that really dislikes any kind of power progression in PvP.

Or, more specifically, I dislike power imbalance; I only find PvP fun if the playing field is as even as can be made, if my chance of winning is about the same as my chance of losing. Add any advantage, be it for me or for my opponent — including power progression — and the game ceases being enjoyable for me.

Which, BTW, is why in MMOs I tend to eschew PvP and be very much a carebear, despite playing more than a few PvP-only games on the side. The only MMOs that I'm aware of with PvP modes I enjoy are DCUO with its Legend PvP (you pick an iconic, prebuilt, non-customizable character) and GW2 arenas (everyone is set to the same level and has access to the same quality "gear").

wpDiscuz