Post 1.20.4 thoughts on Wynncraft

This is a great response and all, but at times it feels incredibly vague as you claim that you ARE aware of certain issues and are working towards fixing them but don't really describe the direction you want to go. I'm sure that many people, including myself, would like to hear the ideas that you have for things such as

and

There's definitely plenty of people who'd be willing to give their own feedback.

 

But on a serious note, would the server be a carbon copy of the overworld except you can kill others at will, or are you guys going to reuse the Nether again
I kinda want the Nether to become a story area due to the importance it has in the lore so I'm hoping it's the former

 

​

OMFG PLEASE @_@

 

'we understand that the playerbase doesn't like the new system, but we think it's better and that's all that matters'

yeah, it would definitely be bad if there was one, overcentralizing way of efficiently making money in endgame - i'm glad that's not a thing

 

Something you've got to realize is there are often limitations that players don't realize on the surface.
There are also often changes or reasons for things to work in certain ways that players don't yet know.
I understand that makes it easy to be mad because you don't know these reasons, but he just disclosed some.
The ability to choose dialog options for example simply isn't possible without skippable dialog, and the reasons for it being the shift key were discussed in quite a bit of detail on his part. He even acknowledged there are some things that could change, like dialog history and the slowness effect.

I think it's pretty childish to ignore all the points he made, and instead try and misconstrue it as them simply saying 'We wanted to do something the players dislike.' In the end, this really just misrepresents what he actually said, in some attempt, as far as I can tell, to make it something you can easily argue against.

 

right, because this is definitely impossible to implement without changing everything else about the dialogue system

the justification for it being moved off right click was that it "would be awkward in combat" which is a very curious reason considering the new dialogue system does not allow you to engage in combat whatsoever

i never said their goal was to do something bad, just that they're being stubborn about it

you can have all sorts of internal justification for doing something, but if your users dislike it, you've done a bad job

 

All this is making me wanna cry I would love to see Hunted fixed and new challenge modes, thanks Hams!

 

Couldn't you attempt to connect Hunted players to the same world as other Hunted players when they join the server?
So if someone has a character with Hunted mod on, or with a hunted character, especially with auto-join, couldn't you connect them to the world with the most Hunted players? I realize this is a bit janky because it's hard to tell if someone is going to get on their hunted characters, but if you were really dedicated, I'm sure you could find a way to redirect players to the server once they log onto their hunted classes.

 

A hunted only server would probably be less work than that.

 

The issue that I’m starting to see that largely encompasses much of what’s discussed is the lack of time given to refine new content or content changes. Hams’s response talks a lot about the future directions for Wynncraft and the actual intentions of many of the changes, but unfortunately, that seems to not be reflected in the actual game.

What’s the point of talking about the potential of each change or new addition if said changes and new content do not get properly implemented?

I’m sure the people who work on new content/changes have a vision for what they want to do with it all in the long term, but that vision cannot be seen nor understood in game unless the idea was executed well from the start. Telling us about what you have in store for the future sounds more like putting things off for later instead of addressing them in the moment. I see a rather vicious cycle occurring, where the team wants to get an update out, but always seems to rush in the end, resulting in a lack of refinement for the new stuff that update. That ends up creating more work for the people who have to fix the bugs and what not in the new content, which widens the time gap between updates, again encouraging rushing an update.

Honestly what I’d want to see sometime is an update to address only bugs and quality of life changes, like what Mojang did with 1.15, rather than adding some big new piece of content. That, and taking the time to ensure everyone on the CT has the time to refine their ideas and execution. I’d rather see an update be delayed and pushed back so that more work could be done to make it good than an update that was rushed into bits.

If Dern is on the discussion table, and actually becomes a thing in just a few major updates, I would be scared to release it for the state the game’s in currently. I don’t see Dern going well unless it’s been executed to near perfection, just due to how much excitement it has the potential of generating.

 

Completely agree. The majority of issues in Wynncraft come from rushing out incomplete content. We can clearly examine at least the last three updates through this lens and see the problems.

 

The dialogue changes were unnecessary. I think that the dialogue changes should be toggleable and you can revert to the old system. However the profession changes are a good thing and reduce grind. I really dislike the guild changes, as barring points of progression behind guilds is frankly pretty stupid. I like most of the 1.20.4 QOL changes

 

Okay I was so tempted because there are a few upsetting things about the Guilds segment of "official" response. Quotes are only edited to make them one line instead of multiple lines if they had terrible formatting.

"Attacking vs Defending" is only really a perspective-based term, so this makes little to no sense. Being a "defender" doesn't necessarily mean having a territory. From the perspective of any Valhalla war monkey, a guild that others would typically assume is "defending" is an attacker. An "attacker" is just essentially anyone who attacks the alliance's status quo. Whenever I mention "attackers", just assume anyone who is not in Valhalla.

By far the bigger alliance that has the most firepower will always typically have control over the map, there is no doubt about this. While diplomacy and alliances are true, "power" is a bit of a stretch. There are particular guilds that keep their juicy SR social credit income from sitting and eating sand in the sandbox relying on the hope that attackers will not attack because of the state of wars and the SR system at the moment.

Agreed. There is absolutely no gain for absolutely anyone, particularly in attacking guilds, from warring and protecting claims for hours on end unless you are a chief in a guild.

Being a chief is semi-profitable (estimate over 15stx worth of emeralds gained over the course of 1.20), and depending on your guild, you may recieve a trickle of such a juicy reward if you're good enough at depositing your soul into the nearest trashcan and warring for hours on end. Definitely agree that personal rewards are needed.

Not sure what mentioning this is for, but this is honestly laughable. A guild sitting AFK with 30 territories (not sure of the exact numbers because 1.20.4 changed the scaling per territory so now it's a complete mess to get exact numbers for) can generate that 100 SR with absolutely no input required, compared to the small guild that struggles to get their 100 SR ration from the Alliance. These numbers mean nothing when the leaderboard is so imbalanced that you can pretty much summarise the leaderboard as:
#1-14: Valhalla Guilds
#15+: Everyone Else:

First part is just... what? The more big guilds get attacked, the smaller they will make their claims? What. Why on earth would you make your claim smaller because you get attacked more? There is a reason big guilds are not attacked, and that's because the more they get attacked, the higher they set their defenses. Bigger claims = more resources = higher defenses = higher treasury = higher defenses. There are only a number of attackers who can efficiently attack big guilds, and that's because of the very high skill floor of warring.

While it doesn't really take a genius to find a good war build (contrary to the people who think that because a guild created a super secret build™ that they are the only ones who can possibly ever make that build ever again) that doesn't require mythics, the limitations of needing a mythic is still there for the most part. Simply, make wars easier to learn and experience (for which there have been numerous suggestions in the glstaff that the

about). As for the last part, yes please make wars more enjoyable please god i am beggi-

This is where we dip into awesome levels of throwing fits of rage over virtual numbers. While saying "every guild is an attacking guild in a way" is a somewhat factual statement, that's also like saying every guild is a defending guild. From a purely OBJECTIVE standpoint, every guild could be considered an attacking guild, but from that same standpoint, every guild on the map could be considered a defending guild. Every guild that has been on the map at any point in time has been an attacking guild. Every guild that has been on the map at any point in time has been a defending guild. It makes no sense? There are plenty of ways to scale the SR given on attack based on pre-existing factors. Territory count, time held, resources in HQ, treasury, etc. Please keep in mind that the this statement implies that any guild that has Very High treasury (takes about a week of sitting afk to get)) is an attacking guild btw guys.

Only reason guilds only go for FFAs is simple: they are free for "all". You are much less likely to get instantly pummelled by the Alliance for attacking supreme alliance! (-20 SR! (不要挑战“瓦尔哈拉”联盟!)). Free for alls are typically breezed over by the average valhalla alliance fan (although you will probably not want to war in LF next to the average ERN enjoyer). Definitely agree that map state is more stale than toxo pvp (and again, there have been a number of suggestions on how to fix this), but doesn't look like anything has been done to rectify this much.

On the ally stuff, I kind of agree that it's a bit difficult to outright fix and probably better to just embrace, but I'm not sure what this whole discussion of sub-guilds is about. Subguilds aren't really used that much anymore (breezing over the fact that there are particular claims given to subguilds (skill issue)), so I can't really say much other than 1.20 is most certainly an improvement compared to 1.19 subguild hell (1.19 warrers on their way to check my pre-1.20 war stats!! (like 39 wars (opinion invalid))).

Semi-true, but definitely disagree with the first half. 1.20.3 was a pretty significant defender buff (or attacker nerf based on how you look at it), and many of the changes were and still are fairly widely debated today. I personally have not seen devs asking for explicit thoughts on changes, rather just posting an idea and seeing what we think. Keep in mind, devs want to keep everything fairly in the dark until the feature is thought through, and will only show off an idea when it has that "wynn polish" and is just more than a concept (which makes sense, but goes against what is said here). As for devs being in "direct" contact, the Wynn-satellites must have a bit of a delay, since it's been a fair while since there has been any major communication about anything being changed, and there isn't really "contact". Although we do appreciate when either Zeer or Salted descends from the heavens to recieve worship from the glstaff inhabitants, it sometimes feels like you're screaming into the abyss and get a few lines back before the deafening silence of glstaff debate begins once again.

As for what I'd do: add every single suggestion I have ever written because they are all flawless look at suggestions, talk about what you think works and doesn't work in a suggestion. Create a channel in glstaff where you can talk about ideas freely without the fear of the idea being "100% CONFIRMED WYNNCRAFT 1.20.6 UPDATE GUILD CHANGES!! (REAL (VALHALLA GONE!!))". Basically, communicate more, discuss concepts more, brainstorm more.

Thank you for reading my 15 page novel about Wynncraft guilds. To find out more about Guilds, please watch my helpful guide: (there was a rick roll here i failed so hard please)

If there are any formatting errors, I do not care cope seethe cope setthe cope

also on the other stuff, skill issue i guess lol

________________________________

cope and seethe

 

Average ERN enjoyer :)

 

“Average ERN Enjoyer” :eyes:

 

Lex said that it'd be extremely hard if not literally impossible to implement multiple-choice dialogues if they still kept the old dialogue system. Idk about you but I'm good with having dialogue choices for once, which might change quests a LOT, in exchange for the new dialogue system being a bit janky at times.

 

you are presenting a false dichotomy of 'old system with no choices' and 'bad system with choices'

 

The system's not even that bad. I will concede that it's buggy at times (case in point: Hero of Gavel), but they're always working on fixing bugs. Skipping dialogue is easier, people can read at their own pace, etc. The dialogue history is of course still pretty bad, and I don't know if the system still slows you when you're interacting with something like it did in the past cuz I haven't played Wynn in a while. If it allows dialogue choices, it goes from a "it does the job I guess" system to being actually good or acceptable

The old system had its flaws too. Some dialogues being unskippable, pressing a NPC would often trigger two lines of dialogue at once, some people might be reading too quickly or too slowly, the chat gets flooded, etc. So overall, I think the new dialogue system is an upgrade

 

Feedback and suggestions would be good!
I can't give details when we aren't actively doing something, because over time these things change a lot, they go through a lot of process and sometimes we can't do the thing that we want exactly either. Or at least not at first.

It's an idea that has floated around, making an update dedicated to just bugs, but we already do address bugs as much as we can, a lot of things get fixed or tweaked without you guys knowing, on quests and content, but also on the dev side of things, we have different teams and people working on creating and fixing things.
Just to give you an example, last week we changed the hitboxes for farming nodes because there was an issue, we made them larger in general.
We also intend on changing a bit how QA works so it's larger and more organized and efficient, but those plans are very early at this point in time.
The way I see it, we usually release something after working out the kinks as much as we possibly can and then want to have the opportunity to have a lot of players play it, then we work on it again. Sometimes it falls off the cycle for a bit once it's somewhat stable (tho we do have a few precedents of the opposite), so it feels like we abandoned it, but we are still heavily thinking about it until we can work on it again. Guilds for example, have come a long way, the questions and feedback we have on them now wouldn't have made any sense when we released them (remember when we had a guild master in troms or the guild island?), it was discussed a lot with community members heavily involved in guilds.

We tried with the old system and it wasn't viable at all, if you remember Aldorei part 1 (the old one) for example or the swamp quest with the golems (if i remember correctly), it wasn't really like what we have now with the spirits event, which is a lot better and we can do things that we definitely couldn't do before, your choices could actually impact things and we could make some quests a lot more complex and immersive (a long way down the line). Which we would never have been able to do without the new dialogue system and the features it brought us.
All this takes time though..

I can tell you, we definitely will take a really good look at HoG, i've been putting it aside a bit to focus on really urgent matters but it's been in my mind for a bit, there are issues with it we are definitely aware of.
I do also wish, in time, we can expand the dialogue history to be more user friendly and extensive.

 

Damn is An Iron Heart really that forgettable