Greetings, glorious testers!
Check out Alpha Two Announcements here to see the latest news on Alpha Two.
Check out general Announcements here to see the latest news on Ashes of Creation & Intrepid Studios.
To get the quickest updates regarding Alpha Two, connect your Discord and Intrepid accounts here.
Check out Alpha Two Announcements here to see the latest news on Alpha Two.
Check out general Announcements here to see the latest news on Ashes of Creation & Intrepid Studios.
To get the quickest updates regarding Alpha Two, connect your Discord and Intrepid accounts here.
Best Of
Re: Player enemy visual Health Bar update on hit.
My prediction is that people will literally lose their mind during Alpha 2, because there will be a lot of PvP and PKs, including absolutely random PKs. Why? Because it's Alpha with wipes and people dgaf about the consequences.Ludullu_(NiKr) wrote: »While Ashes (and L2) gives you a choice at every interaction, which is much freer. I hope Chaliux gets to experience it to understand it better, but I doubt they'll like it, considering this entire discussion.
Low IQ carebears will immediately start screaming that system is bad/broken/trash without realizing that this is Alpha, and also that we need to have those interactions during Alpha as well.
High IQ carebears will understand the reason why Alpha 2 may be a mess and will use that time to understand how to counter it. Basically, if they survive Alpha 2, it means they will survive official launch, because the amount of chaos post-launch will be significantly lower (as people will actually care about the consequences of such behavior)
Flanker
1
Re: Player enemy visual Health Bar update on hit.
That thinking comes from pvp-toggle/server design, because under those designs you are either a perma-untouchable-pver or a perma-pvper. And you cannot just change your state at your whim."Non-combatant" means "hasn't taken part in an attack yet." That doesn't mean they can't be attacked. I feel like these misinterpretations of terminology are seriously screwing with your understanding of the game.
While Ashes (and L2) gives you a choice at every interaction, which is much freer. I hope Chaliux gets to experience it to understand it better, but I doubt they'll like it, considering this entire discussion.
Ludullu
2
Re: Well requested a refund on my Alpha 2 package
An open Alpha starts in 45 days. 45 days. Does that count as progress?
Everything is going to be ok.
Everything is going to be ok.
Diamaht
2
Re: Well requested a refund on my Alpha 2 package
scottstone7 wrote: »This post got me curious, as I haven’t investigated things since I backed the Kickstarter. I went ahead and did a basic dive into available information, again just a basic dive so I probably didn’t weed out all the skeletons. I didn’t find anything currently relevant or in process that would flag any serious concerns to me personally. Everything I found was just basic corporation loops and shenanigans. You will not find any corporation in the modern world that has not, is not, or will not deal with the same issues at some point. They do crop up more commonly with newer companies, doesn’t matter if it is a completely brand-new company, a new branch of a parent company, or a new company under someone that already has one or more other different companies. It’s part of the sorry state of the bureaucratic system.
“You have an awesome idea? You say it will make money? Here, fill out these forms in triplicate so I can use them to find ways that you will either owe me money or I’ll have some form of control over your idea.”
Case in point, and an amusing one at that. Looks like it took 3 years for them to get their trademark approved. I found out with a document from 2019, there are more but it’s the only one I read, in the document the “Trademark Trial and Appeal Board” a.k.a. bureaucratic system denied the Intrepid Studios logo a registration. It’s a fairly long winded 19-page debacle of legalese. I mean if the first thing at the top of the page is immediate denial of legitimacy and refusal to adhere to what is written within. That’s just….Wow… Gotta love that system. What a joke, here I’ll copy it over for you guys.
I can summarize the document for you, less than one page too.
“We(Trademark Trial And Appeal Board) feel that the stupid peasants cannot understand or comprehend without our guiding hand. As such we(Trademark Trial And Appeal Board) deny you(Intrepid Stuidos) the right to use your chosen name, Intrepid Stuidos, and your chosen original trademark on the grounds that Intrepid Pictures already exists. The names sound to similar and the text font on the logo’s are too similar, the stupid peasants will be too confused to know what they are purchasing."
What it boils down to is the asshats at TTAB wanted a kickback, or are getting a kickback from someone else, most likely Intrepid Pictures or an affiliate. Given that the exact logo that was declined in said document is indeed the current logo up on the site and pretty much everywhere else, I’d say that said asshats either got the kickback or stopped getting it from someone else. Typical day bureaucratic meat grinder.
thanks I was curious about this too but I was too lazy to look into it cause I figured if there were any real issues people would be all over it besides some random shitposting on the forums
Apok
1
Re: Ashes of Creation must dodge this bullet
You finally got it! Congratulations and welcome!I feel like you guys are arguing just to argue and this becomes ridiculous
Korela
2
Re: Player enemy visual Health Bar update on hit.
Already answered this before. He just will log in later and try to ged rid of his corruption (which will still be active) so nobody cares (and bounty hunters need time to get him) or at a time with less active players (Sunday morning 7:00, because all youngsters are sleeping at this time).1, logging out does not clear corruption, you need to log on and clear that corruption yourself so nothing really changes. If you are purposely getting corruption from pking that is not harassing that is part of the game. This game has pvp in it, that should be expected.
Getting corruption is only a consequence of killing (unfortunatley not attacking) non-combatant players that dont want to pvp - it's irrelevant whether they have to expect it or not. They are non-combatant for a reason. The game allows it to be non-combatants. So, from their point of view it is harassing them. Otherwise they would be combatants. But we had this already thousand times. You can repeat it, I will still dislike it and will bring in the perspective of the non-combatant, because I don't care about the harassing guy attacking and getting corrupted. This game has "pvp in it" should and must refer to pvp, where both parties commit to that. As this is not the case, it's criticize by me.This is good news. So corruption works account-wide, right? It has nothing to do with the specific character with whom you did it? Well that's really really fine then. More punishment. Good thing.2. If they have a alt account for pking lower players you gain reduced stats and the more kills you get the more corruption you gain life time on the account.It's also possible to play as different playertype and also solo. That's promised from intrepid everywhere. The killing argument "groups" and "hardcore 24/7 pvp" ist only one side of the coin so only half of the truth. We also reached this point thousand times and you will never convince me to change my opinion on that. But up to you if you want to try again. Attacking a non-combatant player is bad design, I know that it is "in the game", but it is still bad. It needs several workaround-systems afterwards just to get this wrong decision corrected somehow. Guys are than talking about "hp bars" and crazy stuff and it's all just becaue of the same two root causes over and over again:At the end of the day if they are choose to full pk that is not harassment and just part of the game. Its a lot of effort, and this game is mainly a group oriented one so sounds like they as wasting a lot of time of their own progress to hunt for solo players they can pk.
- Player got the attidue to disturb, harass, attack and kill other non-combatant players so players that dont want to play pvp at this certain moment
- Game allows this situation to happenHope for that. Really. Would appriciate it, if it is true and the majority of player types (like me, more time-casual players) will benefit from it, which leads to a healthy game overall.This is going to be a tiny faction of players and an extremely uncommon thing, most people aren't really going to be doing this let alone doing this effectively. So the way I see it, you are trying to make a argument for less than 1% of players that will be pvpers trying to make alts to kill very low levels and gain not much for it.Not, if that was a 1v1 skirmish. Perhaps not, if you have true stealth from rogues and the player is not seen anymore in the field - but still on the map, which is something different. A well experienced rogue will escape if he is only seen on the map but not on the field.3. Point being if you are corrupted someone will see you and kill you.Sure, lots of testing needed.Or groups will hunt you. in the alpha I'd say you should test the corruption kill people and see how long until you get attacked so you can understand.
We are talking about 60 critical seconds for logout. What if the player disables his internet - will he technically logout or will his avatar remain for some time on the field to get punished from other players?
Toxic players are abusing all the time. Perhaps due to a lack of experience you dont know that, but it still is true. We are not talking about regular situations, but nasty approaches only against non-combatants players.
You assume that on the entire realm within seconds there will be several groups and players around just for one reason: Hunting the corrupted guy. Well I don't share this opinion and assumption at all. I'm talking about the situations that are not crowed with 40 players, but small skirmishes or 1v1 situations (and they will happen very often)During this situations the context is different and clear. But I'm not talking about node wars, guild wars or caravans. I never did. You just dont understand that. I gave several examples with Jason and Kevin, read them. Moreover in this intended (!) pvp fights we are talking mainly about combatants fighthing each other. Why the hell should a player be non-combatant (so not attacking anyone!) during this structured fights and why the hell should a silly player attack a non-combatant during this situations? That assumption is just weird, it will not happen.AGAIN THIS GAME AS NODE AND GUILD WARS. That means you can be attacked without them getting any penalty and you could be pvped and camped all day along.
What I'm talking about wil happen somewhere else, beside the crowed spaces. In 1v1 situations and small skirmishes at fishing, at mining ore veins or whatsoever. So in the open world.
Please tell me that you can differentiate between the topics I'm talking about and the topics you are randomly throwing in.
You can't imagine the situations I described? But than you didn play MMOs for a long time. This happens frequently. And as long as it is allowed it will happen even more. Punishments are good - but wouldnt be needed, as aleady mentioned. And as it is like it is, unfortunately, corruption punishment should be as hard as possible. Account-wide. No logout within the next 60 minutes. Highest possible death penalties we can imagine. This attacks to harmless greens must be punished hard for that cowards naming themselve pvp players.Which is what I dislike in general and will dislike sometimes during my gameplay. And therefore I dont like the situation that I cant avoid it that other players control my gameplay by attacking me at any time, although I'm non-combatant so he sees that I'm by intention doing different stuff. And the game provides him permission, but no permission for me to avoid it. And this design is bad. It advantages players that want to harass and distrub other players, so griefing and ganking. I cant do anything against it, in that situation, I've no choice.If you are against non- consensual pvp so strongly its clear you prefer pve. But you need to realize AoC is going to have a ton of non consensual PVP.
The allowance of non-consensual pvp is the critism I have, bot ONLY in context of non-combatant being attacked and killed. Because it's stealing my time and disturbing my gameplay - whatever it is at this specific point of time.
Nothing new for you, hm? So why are you continuing asking and discussing? I will not change my mind. I dislike this decision. I like really a lot on Ashes, but not that design. Therefore I want to get the highest possible punishments for thoese type of players I'm referring to. I don't care if that happens 1% or 5% of the time. Every thousandth counts.
Character on the account not account wide lol. So what they go somewhere at 7am, that doesn't mean other people aren't going to be on just cause there is less lmao. If they go corrupt that is up to them it is not going to be a common occurrence do to all the draw backs.
If attacking another player is bad design for you, why are you investing in a game around that that is going to have a lot of pvp. I'd recommend more pve focused games.
I feel you really don't understand how node / guild wars work as well, so you don't really understand the full scope of the level of pvp this game is going to have. And clearly just wanting to ignore it thinking it is different.
If you are on the alpha i look forward to your reaction when you get jumped as you are alone somewhere from a guild / node do to a dec while you are doing your own thing and not trying to be in the war. Do to a person being in your area randomly.
You can complain as much as you want, one of the core elements of this game isn't going to be changed regardless how much you hate owpvp. Its like jumping on a racing game and saying you hate racing.
Mag7spy
1
Re: Player enemy visual Health Bar update on hit.
"Non-combatant" means "hasn't taken part in an attack yet." That doesn't mean they can't be attacked. I feel like these misinterpretations of terminology are seriously screwing with your understanding of the game.Again, it's no competion if one side attacks a player that doesnt want to pvp. It's a PvX game and there is a state called non-combatant where no pvp fights are active. You are unwilling to change your perspective and think outside your box, that's all.Okay, sorry, I can't bother. You just don't seem to be willing to comprehend the concept of competitive gameplay, I don't know how to help you. Good luck out there.
Yes, there are protections for non-combatants to prevent griefing. But the reason those protections have to exist is that it is fully intentional for non-combatants to be attackable in the first place, as a core part of the game's design. These are directly linked logical dependencies.
And absolutely nothing could be deeper inside the box than carebear PvP protections. You can't be serious with that accusation. I'm not willing to "change my perspective", because you're trying to rid the game of a fundamental design pillar; you're the one inside the mainstream box.
Listen. I don't harass, I don't gank. I prefer fighting people of my own character level, in numbers of players that match or slightly outnumber my own.Your strenght is only proved by fighting in equally ballanced fights, not in fights where a 10h+ top-geared combatant attacks a fishing green non-combatant. It's wet dreams of teenagers and elitist community behaviur that will lead to toxic gameplay. Nothing more.
[...]
You are very very fixed only on one side of the coin, and that's the attacker-perspective.
I am very rarely "the attacker" in general, and when I am, it's only in large objective contestation.
I also rarely have the best gear, because I care more about my guild's and realm's strength than my individual character, so I pass opportunities for getting the best stuff on to more ambitious allies that I can enable with my support.
But I like playing games where **people** are able to enforce engagements that contribute to their own power increase. And games where weaker players can *choose* to attempt to contest valuable resources.
Because competing over, and controlling, and defending territory and contested resources is the most fun, engaging, and rewarding part of MMO PvP.
And a necessary part of that possibility is the other side: That stronger players have to have the ability to kill weaker players. They won't always do it, weaker players can reduce the risk for themselves by avoiding conflict, and there should (at least in a game like Ashes) be effective mechanics to discourage stronger players from abusively harassing weaker players.
If you can prevent other players from denying your access to contested territory (at the cost of Corruption!) by just not flagging up yourself, this competition cedes to exist.
If you want the best stuff, compete at the level of the people who get the best stuff.
Otherwise, learn to accept that they'll have better stuff, and find your role in that dynamic.
If you can't do that, sorry, why are you here? Isn't there a new dungeon in ESO or FFXIV for you to run 50 times a month?
Because you don't understand Corruption.No, I see this different for this specific case of non-combatants.Yes. It should.
Literally for everyone. For the greens trying take stuff in contested territory, for the people protecting the territory they want to control, for the players defending the lower-levelled players, for the bounty-hunters who get to cash in on the Corruption.For whom? The one attacking harmless greens during their quests? Well, what to say.that makes the game interesting
The only reason you're not having fun there is that you can't handle trying something and failing because someone else gets to stop you. If Ashes can't teach you to overcome that constraint, sorry, you're in the wrong place.
Yes, harassment is a somewhat unfortunate side effect of this policy. But
1) it's disincentivised by Corruption and bounty hunting,
2) the Corrupted-versus-bounty hunter dynamic itself is fun, and
3) any self-respecting green should be able to find some fun in not being able to go wherever they please and do whatever they want without consequences, too. That just means you have a motivation to get stronger and find people to do the things you want to do with!
"Mustn't" = "Isn't allowed to."/"Shouldn't." =/= "Doesn't have to."Mustn't be a good one just because it's in.It's part of the game's design philosophy
I didn't say it was good because it's in. I said why I think it's good and that it happens to be a part of the game now, and an essential part of the cohesion of the community coordination and power growth element of the game.
By removing it, you'd have to replace it with something else to make the game interesting, and you'd make the game no longer be Ashes.
Off-topic: Absolutely no hate, but if you learn the differences in the use of adverbs and adjectives in English, you'll reduce your syntax errors by like 60% in one go. Just saying.
I'll stop commenting on your English now, promise. It's fine, just caught my eye in this one, I guess because the conversation is a little more heated.
Re: Is there a problem for solo players
That’s what it’s all about for you.It's all about the rewards by respecting player time. It's not a question of grouping.
That’s not what Steven wants Ashes to be primarily about for Steven.
Steven wants Ashes to mostly be about massive groups of PvP combat.
That being said, Soloers can do stuff in Ashes.
Dygz
2
Re: Is there a problem for solo players
This whole thing can be simplified down to a problem that comes up all the time.
The most vocal community is almost always the 8h+ per day community. This community warps public perception of games.
The real solution is to 'disrespect' the time of a player who plays more than X hours per day. Steven doesn't want to implement this in the simple way (Labor), nor in the complex ways (grind droprate decay, limit scaling), instead preferring to put it into the World Manager, as far as we know now.
Ashes' design does not allow for any solution to this that I know of. We can hope they come up with one.
But any game with a basic econ loop that doesn't give diminishing returns for playing longer in a very specific way will have this problem. Older MMOs tend to solve this problem 'accidentally' through some things that are now treated as pain-points. Ashes has not added the relevant ones yet.
It's not just that. It's generic problems like how OWPvP works in MMORPGs. One group/guild tends to build up power and dominate everyone else which drives most people out of the server. This is because of how MMORPGs work on a fundamental level so it can't be removed. It has to be dealt with which they aren't doing.
Most PvPers like having a balanced fight. Not stomping people that never stood a chance in winning in the first place. This game has no access to that at all, with the exception of arenas which wont work because the classes aren't balanced to each other they are balanced on a paper-rock-scissors system.
And since most of end game is based around OWPvP that means most people coming in late (6+ months) wont be able to participate in PvP for the first 6 -12 months of play because they will have to level to max then get mostly geared before they can ever touch any kind of PvP.
Re: Player enemy visual Health Bar update on hit.
Or a very shoooort time.Ludullu_(NiKr) wrote: »https://ashesofcreation.wiki/Player_flaggingIs there something that stops a corrupted player to log ouf beside escaping for some time?
There is a 60 second timer to logout while corrupt. Force-disconnecting the client during the cooldown will leave the character in-game.[21][26]
Depending on the location of the PK, 60s can be a reaaaal long time.
The killed guy for sure needs more than 60secs from his closest respawn point back to the spot he was killed. His "risk" (with absolutely no reward) is much higher.
The corrupted guy had fun, reward (loot) and bit risk, but if he escapes and logs out, that's it. He will log in later and try to ged rid of his corruption (which will still be active). Between this, perhaps he just logs into his twink/alt and starts playing normally - or is doing the same shit again.
What about account-wide corruption?
Like you said though, he's still gotta log back in. He's still gotta farm that off, and while he does he's marked on the map for bounty hunters.
If he ganks one guy a day, maybe he find a quiet time to do that. But after the first time or two, the whole node is gonna be on the lookout for him. When my node has a problematic ganker, I personally am planning on putting together a posse, and going to go deal with the problem.
He can maybe hide for a bit, but not forever. It just takes one player who notices when he likes to grind it off and report back. He's still marked on my (bounty hunter) map while he's corrupted.
The more people he ganks, the more time he has to spend on that, and the easier it is to hunt him down.
Alts don't change a thing. The only thing more alts or more gankers does is give me and my crew even more reason to hang around, because we know we'll run into one of them. They all gotta grind it off eventually, and I don't care which bounty I claim.
All that 60 seconds needs to do is stop him from logging out the second he sees me coming.
SongRune
5