I'm wondering about the expandalone concept.

Exactly what makes it an expandalone, vs. a traditional expansion.

I understand that it is a significant branching of the game.

I also gather it would be "way way too expensive to just have in an update (several man months of work)" [quote seems to be from a SD representative writing in the steam community].

(grumble.. ok...)

So what does this mean, though?

Other games would normally do this as just an expansion that you could either purchase or not. 

For instance, in starcraft, they released wings of liberty (base game), and if you owned that, you could then purchase heart of the swarm (added stuff), and eventually legacy of the void (added more stuff).

That was just a normal progression of game expansions.  

So what is Ashes going to do differently?

Is this just a scenario where you could purchase the expansion and play it, without purchasing the previous?

If so, I don't see what the big deal is.

It sounds like SD is preparing to charge people who already own the game an equitable amount... just $9 for the additions, and not charge a second time for the whole code base.

That seems worth it... 

The only place I see this becoming a potential issue is if SD allows it to fracture the MP community. 

Otherwise, who cares???

What I don't grasp is why SD is claiming that it MUST be a whole standalone. 

The expandalone concept seems to make a great deal of sense for business reasons (new players can gain full access for just $39 vs. $47, which seems like a good way to attract more players, essentially giving the new players a discount, insofar as they won't need to pay the extra $9 to receive their full features). 

But it just seems like other games seem to accomplish this and still maintain some sort of unification of code base.

For instance, when lotv came out for starcraft, I had to DL a whole huge patch.

Same happened when I bought burning crusade for Wow.

And when I paid my money, the additional features were just turned on.

Why can't Ashes keep the same sort of unified codebase?

I don't get it.

Seems like it is really a best practice, so that you don't have to support dozens of different versions and permutations as time goes on.

For that matter, this is an RTS, and a very new one at that.

It is going to have balance issues.

Things will be fluid. Things will change.

Especially right now, when the game is still so new, and issues are still getting worked out.

(It still sometimes feels like I'm herding cats when I play)

So what will happen when SD decides that things need to change again.

More expandalones?

More fracturing of community?

I'm just not seeing a clear picture that makes me feel good. 

I just paid for the game about a month ago, and am worried.  

It feels like the dev team is about to go work on a separate product, and I'm still not 100% happy with what I have.

I want them to work on MY product. 

I just bought it!

Isn't it MOST cost effective to have a unified code base, so that all players can simultaneously benefit from efforts?

Isn't this better service to players, making updates ultimately cost the least amount possible?

I can't say I'm thrilled at the notion of paying more for extra manhours, because someone had to split attention between three versions, when there could have been just one version.

Just questions really.

I don't understand.