I can understand having it as a DLC and even paying for it. But I really wish The Isle of Siptah was instead an area you had to travel to via some portal or something, instead of separating it from the core game.
5 Likes
Now Funcom can try different pvp balances without destroying the entire game for lack of testing. The changes can be applied to one map and won’t have the error propagate to the others.
Good point, but it’s hilarious that all these PvE and RP servers are switching to Siptah like- You guys do know this is for PvP, right? You’re going to screw yourselves so hard when they start dropping PvP patches and balancing and all your stuff is getting screwed.
Nope, not how that works
Nope, not how that works
2 Likes
Depends on the attention and level of distraction (to get business done).
Also not how that works. All game settings, like food balance or pvp mechanics apply to both maps. The only map specific things are the map specific changes to the map itself
2 Likes
One huge issue my group has, is we are a small group, but now that there are 2 maps, we are completely split during play. Not everyone wants to get the map or start all over building.
If everything was accessible via the same map, we could all still be playing together, but some could travel over to the Isle and explore etc.
Not to mention, we would have to now rent 2 servers.
1 Like
This is pretty much the direction ARK took, and it’s not a bad one.
There are technical hurdles that FC can’t overcome to add a huge area to the existing map. Portals are a different story altogether, but from a balance standpoint, I understand why the “start over” point is added.
Siptah is frankly going to be a cluster for quite a while; it will show the broken thrall acquisition system (farm spots over and over until you get your T4), the broken legendary system (farm thralls over and over until you get that one legendary, but now gated behind a taming mechanic), and most likely have many issues with the sigil system until it comes out of EA.
This map does not support the number of players the old map does. I could see about 20 or so people, maybe 30, existing on this map without constant conflicts and resource issues. While I haven’t explored the whole map, ironstone locations alone tell me this will be a huge problem for a larger playerbase.
Realize that in Siptah, you can’t just farm NPCs for steel like you used to in Asagarth. There are only 2-3 small areas for brimstone farming (that I’ve found). The resource distribution and round nature of the map will limit key building areas.
I haven’t played enough on the map to know the exact problems large numbers of players will bring to Siptah, but I do suspect it will be sizeable, and you’ll want to host this for 8-10 friends rather than have an open server. Solo is already a terrible experience, with even the “easy beginnings” having northern wolf and smiliodon level enemies on you right at the outset in fiber armor.
Outside the core game being shared between maps?
P.S. And, I mean “maps” with all data that goes to those maps, not just the textures.
Cha-Ching!
Except they are not doing that so far the changes have been made to the other map as well. example healing changes.
The Isle of Siptah is very unique, and the mechanics over there would not blend well with the Exiled Lands, unless they completely redid it.
In Siptah, how you get thralls and even materials is completely different from the Exiled Lands. It makes perfect sense to not combine the two maps.
I will not post some of the details for not wanting to spoil the fun for anyone who may want to do Siptah, but I gotta say, I’m loving Siptah and am definitely happy it is not joined with the Exiled Lands.
IF Siptah was the same mechanics, then sure, I can be on board with combining the two. But they’re not.
What exactly is so dramatically different compared to the Exiles game?
This topic was automatically closed 7 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.