Proposed Portal System Revamp

[Velea]

One of the projects that we'll be undertaking next is a revamp of the portal system.

Our goals in this revamp are as follows:

• Help guide players through the world from one tier to the next by means of what portals are available to them when. This will be accomplished by adding quests that guide players to new destinations as they become ready for the content in that area, and also by requiring locations to have attunement quests completed before a destination is available.
  
• Arrange the portals into hubs around the major cities of the world.
  
• No location in Istaria will be any more than three ports from any other destination.

A few details:

• Major cities will all be connected to one another. A few destinations (Genevia for example) are being added as "major city" to make this possible.
  
• Porting between major cities will be free. Porting from a settlement to city, or city to settlement, will cost.
  
• A "miscellaneous destinations" portal will be added to Bristugo for those places with portal pads that are "one way only".
  
• Most locations other than major cities will require players to complete a quest in order to attune to the destination. Some quests will start at that destination, others will take the player to there from the hub and ask them to complete a task in that area.

The best way I've found to help understand what would be connected to what is to see an actual map of Istaria with locations labeled.

Portal Map Propsal

On the map the places with portals have been marked. All portal locations are "two way", though they do not connect to one another but in the case of the major cities.

Major cities are labelled in a larger font size than the destinations. Each portal hub set has a unique color/label combination. (For example, while both Aughundell and New Rachival use the same color, Aughundell's portal grouping is in white letters, and New Rachivals's portal grouping is in black letters with a box around them.) In order to fit the image onto one page, islands off the mainland are indicated on the sides of the map in their approximate location.

Your thoughts and feedback on these changes is appreciated. Once we feel that we have a solid proposal in place, we'll begin implementation, but please understand that we are not at this time releasing a date when we are planning to implement these changes.

(Edit: Map no longer should be cut off)

[Blue Hasia]

as of now I have no problem with the portal system. if this revamp will go through I will be frustrated that I will have to relearn what portal goes where.

and
"No location in Istaria will be any more than three ports from any other destination."

as of now most places are only 1 port away i can think of only 2 locations that are 2 ports away. those locations are dalagrath and tandalar since one can not port to them from bristgo.


I stand on please do to change the portal system.

[velveeta]

o man, please, whatever you do - do not take away already available ports...
what i mean is, when you rollout the revamp, please do not make peeps already attuned to some place have to do the quests again.
it would not make me a happy crafter to have to stop mining obsidian in char to do an attunement quest to dralk.....
also - it would prolly be a good idea not to require attunement to racial towns for members of that particular race - makes no sense to me in any way that a saris would need to attune to kion, for example, or a fiend to kira....

[Velea]

also - it would prolly be a good idea not to require attunement to racial towns for members of that particular race - makes no sense to me in any way that a saris would need to attune to kion, for example, or a fiend to kira....

Most locations other than major cities will require players to complete a quest in order to attune to the destination.

As for having characters that already exist be pre-attuned, I'm not sure there is any way to do that without having you have to complete the quest that adds the portal. I will ask, though.

[Holth]

Just my 2 cents.

I have no problem with the attuning, quests, etc. These are a good thing IMO because they help a new player understand the tiers and how to get around Istaria. They also give us old-timers a reason to visit areas we have not been to for ages and a beneficial way to interact with new players.

However, and this is a big HOWEVER. This game has a major memory leak based on porting. Usually after 4-5 ports I am forced to relog because everything grinds to a halt (read MAJOR LAG). I have a brand new top end gaming rig (Alienware, 9 gigs of RAM) and this only happens in Istaria. New folks to this game do not understand constant relogging because no other game forces you to do this. Old-timers don't understand it either but we have learned to live with it. This game is a crafting oriented game and porting is a way of life for us all, as is relogging.

Right now, if I want to get peppercorns from Valley of Repose it's one port for me from Aughundell and one port back. So I can do this twice and then have to relog. From what I am understanding from your new map proposal, I would have to port to Mahagra, then Valley of Repose, collect peppercorn, then back to Mah then to Augh. Then relog. Yeesh.

If you want to make this game more friendly and keep the new folks coming, here is my proposal:

Make every portal go EVERYWHERE.

Make every port cost coin based on tier and adjusted by player's level.

Make every portal list all destinations by tier, click on the tier for a drop down list and then show all the destinations alphabetically. This could also include drop downs for guild destinations, island destinations, etc. to keep scrolling to a minimum.

DO NOT include the city you are porting from on the list! Very annoying to port from the city you are in to the same city. (Yes, we all do this!)


Thaalia of Order

[Raptress]

Okay, so let me get this straight..

In order to collect mithril from Last Stand and take it to Saritova, starting from Saritova, the portal path would be:

Saritova -> Genevia -> Aughundell -> Last Stand -> collect mithril -> Last Stand -> Aughundell -> Genevia -> Saritova

This compared to:

Saritova -> Last Stand -> collect mithril -> Last Stand -> Saritova

That's.. significantly more ports. Doing a lot of portalling is always listed as a main cause of lag in this game. Is it really wise to increase the amount of porting players have to do? I can't really see how this is supposed to be an improvement.

And I really hope all major cities will NOT require attunement. Trying to tier the game is fine and all, but many players have reason to go places that are way outside of their tier. If a player needs to get to Dralk and they've just gotten to Kion.. that's one heck of a run. Having to attune to everywhere on Istaria without a good starting point like a major city nearby to where you want to attune would be.. really frustrating.

The current portal system is a tiny bit confusing at times if a destination does not go to Bristugo or vice versa, but couldn't that be more easily fixed by just adding those destinations to Bristugo and putting Bristugo as a destination on every portal?

I'm sorry, but I just don't understand how this change is going to make anything easier. It's even more confusing than simply having one portal hub that goes most anywhere, and it doesn't cut down on the number of ports; it increases it, at least if I'm looking at it correctly.

[Tarida]

I have to fully agree with Raptress here.

The current system is, at least to me, just fine. There are destinations one is forced to run - and other, like Drift Point for example, where one can simply go. And this works. I joined the game not very long ago, and I got along with the directions just fine. If I needed locations - I asked, and the manner was solved.

Honestly, this looks just confusing to me. Tier revamp or not - why change the current system? It's possible to go from Bristugo to almost each other direction. To my mind, this confuses new players, once they discovered this, not at all. They go to Bristugo, look for their Portal, done.

And think of the lairs, the plots. A change like that would make it impossible for newer characters visiting older plots or lairs, and heck, I have visted a lot people when I was new. Maybe I am just getting that point wrong, however.

Speaking of lairs and plots... imagine what building them would mean if these changed are made. You're already supposed to haul tons of resources, now you need to port five times to get to your lair? And then even fly for a good distance? COnsidering the port times? No, no. Please. No.

With a kind, 'Never change a running system',

Tarida

[Knossos]

At the time of “transition� to any such major revamp of the Portal System there will be pending construction at various plots and lairs. In many cases an ingredient in choosing a construction location is to consider the locations of resource nodes and of processing points to render these resources into construction pieces.


The revamp will in some cases (and for some players) inevitably seriously compromise the efficient pattern of movement between resources, processing and the locations of then pending construction.


Has this aspect been, or will it be, considered in the revamp plan? It seems that the prospect of negative player base reaction is substantial, even with efficient handling of trouble tickets with individually tailored solutions to each affected player plea.


Knossos

[Charys Stormchild]

Maybe I'm being dull but I can't follow how the map tells you what goes where

Please leave it as it is, we all know what too much porting does and when gathering alchemist or confectioner resources, my 2 main occupations, I have to go all over the place. I really don't need extra ports added in.

As for having to attune to places I've already ported to dozens of times, I almost lost the will to live by the time I did that following the T2 revamp.

[lightning claw]

No no no no no

If you want to do anything to the portals... how bout making them more stable during the porting possesses. I cant tell you the number of times i have crashed hard during porting.

Also there are much other things that need to be revamped first. Like continuing with the tire revamps, The satyr Islands spawns revamp, finding the time for an occasional raid or live event , how bout continuing that war with the blight? These are just a few things that can be improved and indeed are a much higher priority than messing with something that is not broken .

So in-case i was not blunt enough my vote for this is NO.

[Akrion]

After thinking about this for a while, I honestly think you guys could do with making an actual location to work as a real hub, as opposed to using a settlement like Bristugo as one. You could do some really neat things with this, and even make the area physically intuitive. This might help reorganize the port lists while at the same time, it should prevent making various trips longer than they need to be.

I spent some time putting togethor a simple representation of my idea. You can view it here.

With this you should be able to link every main city to a central portal. (Main cities linked to each other assumed.) But the main cities wouldn't link anywhere else except for the hub. This way it can be assumed that main cities take you to main cities, Settlements take you to settlements, etc. But in the end, they all come back to this one location.

You guys could do some really neat abstract representation with physical objects (like rocks, terrain lines, etc.) of where each portal links to in the hub. And ofcourse, make it very both intuitive for new players to know "Oh, I want to go to the settlement portal to go to settlements" and "I know I can reach any settlement pad from any other settlement" while at the same time, it should allow for quick transition from Saritova to Hub to Settlement to Hub..

There are other various things you could do if you wanted to get insane about it, like providing seperate landing pads for each sub section of the hub. (Main cities will port you to a pad in the middle of the hub, Settlements will port you to a pad near the settlement portal in the hub, etc.)

Anyway, some food for thought.

Edit: If I get the time, and can find the program I'd use for it, I'll try and throw together an actual 3D representation of what I mean, might make more sense.

[C`gan]

I'm going to have to disagree with this particular setup. Right now, most locations are under three teleports away from each other, much of which is free if you know what the main portals actually are to use. If I'm reading this right, each racial town would be the center for all the local outliers (much like Genevia Proper is now for the entire island). Yet only the major towns are interlinked. This means an AVERAGE of three teleports to get from one settlement to another.

What I'd envision is this. A new location be made where all routes converge, much like Bristugo is now. This new location is on it's own separate island, devoid of all structures except maybe a central tier 6 consigner, pawnbroker, and vault, since these items are needed from everywhere. At this new location, a portal is available for each portal ring: Genveia, Scorpion Island/Abandoned Island, Guilds 1, Guilds 2, Shepherd's Mountain, Trandalar, Racial Towns, Settlements. There would be an identifier "fiend" beside each portal ring. Clicking on him/her would bring up a "tech" window, listing which locations are on this portal. Also, the fiend would offer attunement quests to the locations based on current level. The current portal routes would remain relatively untouched, though Bristugo would no longer have the portal ring it does now. It would have a single portal to the settlements, as it did before. By extension, places like Draak and Drakul would be accessible only through Chiconis and Dralk, since these are quested locations for dragons. Once the hub is set up, each hub portal type would only service those within that hub (Bristugo to Last Stand to Tishlar, etc. or only the racial towns). All portals would have a link to Hub Island.

[Guaran]

... and also by requiring locations to have attunement quests completed before a destination is available.

Ok after reading the thread, I think that something of a revamp could be ok. The quests idea I think is fine, except for say the major cities. As some have pointed out there may be a need to get to dralk or chiconis for example, when a player is young. Having some difficult tier-based kill quest would be counter-productive for these places. So for major cities, the simple greet gatekeeper would work. For the guild lands like saritova island, sheperds mtn, The Three Sisters, the quests should be completable by lower tier players as well (we got alot of lowbie mules), so as long as the player at least makes the initial trip on foot (exception: Saritova island since there's no way to get there on foot, this quest could be something in Bristugo). Sheperd's mountain, The Three Sisters (Apia, Tavu, Sakon), Scorpion Island, Genevia Island, Falathien, Dikaina Island can all be reached by land on foot, including Trandalar via the portal in tower of sorcery, and Abandonded island via the cave on Scorpion island. Drakul, Aedan and Serenity already have quests in place which should be fine as-is.

I can't make heads or tails of the map, or what can portal where. Hence I'm not totally sure I understand why everyone is upset. She said a max of 3 ports to go from anywhere to anywhere which isn't THAT bad, but could be improved upon:

The idea of having all portals go everywhere actually sounds good, since this would alleviate the multi-port mess somewhat, making it so that all destinations are only 2 ports away. Or at least have all the major cities be the (goes anywhere) hubs, if not all portals everywhere (can go everywhere). This will make the Teleport scrolls MUCH more attractive. In addition I would recommend a lowering of the teleport scrolls' recycle. This way you can teleport scroll to city - teleport and be at any destination (2 ports).

The above suggestions all hover around the fact that lots of porting makes the client unstable. We aren't trying to make the game too easy to get around. Just minimize the crashing. And just because all destinations would be on all (or many) rings, doesn't mean the new player would be able to just go anywhere. They would have to progress, make the trips, attune and do quests. So the steering-the-player component is still in place.

[Aaelefein]

The idea of a central hub is nice, but then isn't that what Bristugo is? (Granted, would like to see a couple more placed added here, but that's a different point)

My main question and not touched upon by Velea but referenced by others is the performance issues (memory, crashes, relogs, etc) associated with porting.

As related in the opening post, this seems to be an attempt to fix something that isn't broken (per se) and haven't heard people clamoring for other than 'wouldn't it be nice if I could get to here...'

Or...is revamping the portal system, dressed up as it was in the opening post, a way to fix the problems inherent in porting? If this is the case and I can make 3, 5, 10 ports without a performance issue than I'm all for a portal revamp. If not...leave it alone. As someone else pointed out, there are more things worth fixing and or seeing to than this.

[Dracaena]

Right now things are as clear as Mississippi river water to me. Just for the sake of map destinations I see Harton Valley listed twice. Floating City is absent. Kir'Tis is labeled down south with Aedan when it is actually far north on Trandalar.

I am trying to wrap my brain around what is being said. Will it no longer be possible to port from one settlement/guild town to another, say from Aiya to Grayling, or Harton Valley to Kir'ignat as it does now? I prefer to maple treants to the lag wall at Feladan for making bright orbs. Is this going to force me to hit the lag wall at Feladan every time I need bright orbs?



Dracaena

[Akrion]

Alright well.. I spent a bit more time, if the revamp -must- happen, then I think a single central place will do you guys best.

I made a little chart to help better explain my main hub and sub hub idea, you can see that here.

Though I couldn't find the program I'd of used to make a good 3D representation, I quickly slapped one togethor in RCT3, which can be viewed here.

Anyway.. Hope to of at least given you guys -some- alternative ideas.

[Gengel]

So... I have been living (3 plots) in Selen and South Gate for years and enjoy the direct portal from Selen to South Gate. If the proposal is enacted, I lose direct access to my South Gate plot?

~< Gengel >~

[Velea]

A point of clarification because I missed it earlier and it's caused confusion.

From every "outlying" area you would be able to port to any of the major cities. So if you were on Trandalar somewhere you could go directly to Genevia and from Genevia to a guild town.

For those proposing the single central hub idea, please understand this is not feasible. Nor is changing the user-interface for porting. Such an undertaking would take this from a project that would require weeks to complete, test and get implemented, to one that would require months. In a way, though, there are 13 "hubs" under the proposed outline, with them sorted by geographic area. All hubs are interlinked, and you can get from anywhere in the world to one of these hubs in a single port.

As mentioned in my original post, not everywhere is listed on the map. There will still be some "odd destinations" (Balit's Island comes to mind) that would have special portals. Also, a few destinations are listed multiple times because they are on multiple portals (Draak, Serenity, etc) and aren't located on the map relative to where they are in the world, but to where the word would "fit".

The question has also been raised as to why this proposal in the first place. There are numerous threads on the forums, and we've had even more support tickets, from players requesting that we do a portal revamp. We've read that feedback, spent months discussing this internally and modifying ideas, firming up our goals and redesigning, etc, to try and take into account what from those suggestions is possible.

[Velea]

So... I have been living (3 plots) in Selen and South Gate for years and enjoy the direct portal from Selen to South Gate. If the proposal is enacted, I lose direct access to my South Gate plot?

No because they are on the same geographic hub. Everything of the same color is connected to everything else of that color.

[Luthen]

This entire proposal bodes one single question: Why?

What is the point? In whose mind does this change make things easier for anyone? Is it out of a lack of sheer ideas for other projects? Bristugo is already a travel hub and can take players places with fewer ports than in this proposed revamp. Leave things alone. In my mind, the portal system we have right now is fine and has been for as long as it has existed...which has been many years.

All this change will bring about is making traveling more of a harassment. I do not travel to be annoyed, I travel to get somewhere, and efficiently with as few ports as possible. Why change everything and make porting more complicated when you can change nothing and leave it as simple as it is now?

Not to mention the memory leak that accumulates after each port.

Please find something else to do and leave the portal system alone. After the first revamp (T2) I really am not looking forward to the second.

Also, I have to ask, why plan everything in the background for months and have it all set up to be done and then post a "proposal" on the forums? It is basically a statement saying, "We've invested time into it; we're going to do it." Why are these plans not proposed to the community when they are actual concepts instead of fledgling projects; when they are mere ideas and true proposals? Why not get the opinion of the community when changes aren't going to be forced upon us despite criticism?