COMMUNITY - FORUMS - GENERAL DISCUSSION
Limited Tribes at Launch
+32

Hey everyone,

as many of you already know, SBS announced, that continents most likely would range from 6~9 tribes present, depending on its geographical layout and presence of specific biomes.

With only one continent per server at launch we wont have all tribes available on every server. While I have to agree with its realism, it still poses a problem to me personally.

With you at SBS creating interesting, diverse tribes, with strong identity, different culture and history, gameplay and playstyle, who you are and can be is now partially defined by which tribe you belong to. This is absolutely fantastic to me, giving the world depth and life, but to me it also makes the choice of tribe meaningful. You don't just chose another identical human, different not via looks or background, but purely in a minor advantage or disadvantage -a choice depending only on the best bonus for what you want to do-, but instead a complete fantasy; A Brudvir hunter will have a completely different feel than a Neran one. The Brudvir might hunt to feed his den and at the same time to help his prey take another step on his way to life as Mann, while the Neran might be part of a guild, a fullblown professional, or maybe someone who just hunts for sport.

Now imagine I want to play that Brudvir hunter, but EU has no Brudvir. Ping to NA-E is 150-200ms, a frustrating delay and maybe even they don't have brudvir (slim chance, ik).

To me it appears to be a complete waste. I mean, the amount of players playing on multiple servers will be negligible, so there is no advantage in limiting the amount of tribes. The servers will be different enough just based on political situation and the involved players, there is no need to further differentiate by removing your own creation from the game for who knows how long. It really leads to the opposite : It limits the diversity of the servers, since many people can't be played.

It feels, like you first made us fall in love with the tribes, only to say: "Joke's on you, you can't be together."

I might be lucky and the tribe i want to play as is on my server, but this just means someone else was denied his wish.

I hope you don't understand this as whining on my side (which it might be q.q), but rather take it as feedback.

Now that I've made my point I'd like to discuss the pros and cons of the limitation (obviously besides points made, like the plus in realism).


...
6/9/2017 3:40:22 PM #1
+8

I was talking about this very same thing with my group of friends. I feel like it's a kick in the face for people who don't get their preferred tribe, and for people who are leaning towards the more... less desired tribes, they may end up getting the short end of the stick.

We've agreed to play on a server that has our preferred tribe now once they're announced. Kind of lame, but eh. Hopefully they do change it though.


6/9/2017 3:43:14 PM #2
+8

SBS's response to this question definitely surprised me. I’d amend the procedural generation to be certain the starting landmass includes all tribes on every server. You’re never going to make everyone happy, but having random tribes on a server is certain to make a multitude of folks upset.


Chronicles of Elyria Kickstarter backer #2!

6/9/2017 3:43:33 PM #3
+2

Yeah well, there surely are advantages though. It makes for a cool story to have undiscovered tribes on other continents, but still, it might be really hard to join them via marriage, especially with more xenophobic or unique tribes (i.e. kypiq / Yoru). And even then it might take years (q.q).


6/9/2017 3:47:22 PM #4
+3

Or just give the age old multiple continents solution at launch lol... I mean, it's one solution.


6/9/2017 3:49:37 PM #5
+5

Posted By Azima at 5:47 PM - Fri Jun 09 2017

Or just give the age old multiple continents solution at launch lol... I mean, it's one solution.

We wont have cross ocean travel at launch iirc, so it is not really much of an option, or rather has a lot of drawbacks.


6/9/2017 3:51:15 PM #6
+4

The only reason I could think of for this being done is because of not wanting to have all the biomes in one continent, so that it doesn't become a hodge-podge of identical area. But the continents are so big I can't see this being a problem. Using Breath of the Wild as an example, that had plenty of diversity, especially considering movement speed, and it's a fraction of the size of a continent. I think it would be fine to revist this plan and have all the biomes available.

Alternatively, something that could also be done is having "displaced" tribes. The Brudvir never made it to a taiga biome, but they still live near mountains, or something like that. Restricting the tribe choices just doesn't seem to make sense.


Death is just another path, one we all must take

Friend Code: C8DF9C

6/9/2017 3:51:23 PM #7
+0

Bump because I agree and want this noticed.


6/9/2017 3:52:24 PM #8
+7

I concur - we will fall in love with a tribe that may not be on our natural server.

A small thought to consider: Outlanders or Exiles. Any of the three or four tribes without a societal base on the first continent might still have some numbers interspersed among the launching 8 or 9 tribes. Think the Moors in Shakespeare's 'Othello' or Ahmad ibn Fadlan, the exiled ambassador from the desert peoples in '13th Warrior'.

This may be deemed a degree even more realistic than a perhaps complete non-appearance of certain tribes at launch. With the added benefit of using all the great design going into this effort (and Storylines) from the 'get go'. Respect.


Imgur

6/9/2017 3:55:17 PM #9
+3

For people on the EU/APAC server that would be soul crushing really. Not like we all live in the US and could just change to the other US server and take the 30ish ping hit.


6/9/2017 4:00:05 PM #10
+1

I was wondering this aswell. Is the fun of discovering a new tribe, that was available on another server all along, after waiting a year or two for ocean travel to be developed, really worth the disappointment of those who can't play the tribe they want?

There is a problem with having all tribes on one continent though. It might be difficult to fit all of them in 5 kingdoms, without having having a tribe share a kingdom with a hostile tribe, or having the same kingdoms on all servers.

An Example: From what we know there might only be three combinations for kingdoms that include Yoru: Yoru, Yoru/Brudvir and Yoru/Brudvir/Hrothi. With only 5 to 6 kingdoms present Yoru alone might not be feasible, so you are effectively left with two different setups for a northern kingdom.


The truth is born in argument

6/9/2017 4:09:47 PM #11
+1

What made me stop and think was that the reason the servers have different tribes was the location of each map; it's longitude.

So is each server map cut from the same cloth? Could they look into merging servers one day?


[EU] The Town of Farwatch Selene (Hrothi) - Kingdom/Duchy/County TBC Masonry, Scouting/Cartography Animal Husbandry, Agriculture Smithing, Tailoring. Light RP, Casual & PvP Welcome. 2100EP.

6/9/2017 4:10:30 PM #12
+3

Posted By Xarkfleur at 5:52 PM - Fri Jun 09 2017

I concur - we will fall in love with a tribe that may not be on our natural server.

A small thought to consider: Outlanders or Exiles. Any of the three or four tribes without a societal base on the first continent might still have some numbers interspersed among the launching 8 or 9 tribes. Think the Moors in Shakespeare's 'Othello' or Ahmad ibn Fadlan, the exiled ambassador from the desert peoples in '13th Warrior'.

This may be deemed a degree even more realistic than a perhaps complete non-appearance of certain tribes at launch. With the added benefit of using all the great design going into this effort (and Storylines) from the 'get go'. Respect.

I think this is a nice idea, it takes nothing away from the model without all tribes (except for not all tribes being available, duh), whilst giving us a chance to play the tribe we love.


6/9/2017 4:21:39 PM #13
+0

I agree with the Op that it seems a shame and a waist to make all the tribes and only use a fraction of them at launch on any one server. Another thing that is prohibiting to me is that they said that a Kingdom will only have two or three biomes within it at most. So my Duke has said he wants a forested area. I am going where he goes. Luckily I want a forested area too but what about the others that don't want one that are pledged to the same Duke? Reading the new Brudvir write up I am not in love with them because of the smaller settlements and how it seems their military will be dispersed. Depending on where my Duke picks I may have no choice but to play as one.


6/9/2017 4:23:36 PM #14
+0

Posted By Khytaria at 5:49 PM - Fri Jun 09 2017

Posted By Azima at 5:47 PM - Fri Jun 09 2017

Or just give the age old multiple continents solution at launch lol... I mean, it's one solution.

We wont have cross ocean travel at launch iirc, so it is not really much of an option, or rather has a lot of drawbacks.

They could add a small landmass connecting the 2 maybe? Like how the native americans crossed over from the asian continent in the old days?


"We're all connected;
To eachother, biologically; To the earth, chemically; To the rest of the universe, atomically." - Neil deGrasse Tyson

Friendcode: 205FC9

6/9/2017 4:28:29 PM #15
+0

Posted By Leeahna at 11:23 AM - Fri Jun 09 2017

They could add a small landmass connecting the 2 maybe? Like how the native americans crossed over from the asian continent in the old days?

PVP central... Could be interesting.


Chronicles of Elyria Kickstarter backer #2!

...
Log in to post