Corruption Discussion

245

Comments

  • Archeage was broken, it didn't do anything to dissuade people. People who didn't want to to pirate had no problem avoiding it. People would flag up to attack people from the same faction all the time. It's jail time and therefore amount of crime you built up was based on a random 5 player jury vote. The results were as random as you might imagine. Fun at times sure, effective it was not though.

    People on trade runs would see people they know would flag up and attack them as soon as they grouped up enough people. So traders would have to flag up first up and take initiative to avoid losing everything. Honestly it got to the point that more often than not people wouldn't even bother reporting crimes and if they didn't they left no description. Becoming more of a tool for trolls. Friends would report their own buddies crimes and say it was all good.

    Anyways, I don't see how fun fights could break out in any way if this corruption system is too zealous. I'm with a community who very fondly remember the early days of WoW and how wpvp fights would evolve. The often spontaneous nature of it was part of the fun. Of course in this game you can lose significant amounts of your time losing things from caravans. But if nothing is at risk and the worst thing that can happen is you dying without losing anything, well... not really a big deal. Dying becoming detrimental will just encourage the migrations towards the inevitable most viable cheesy op builds as possible. More rage induced when balance changes merely switch the most cheesy op thing from one to another. Lets be honest, we've seen it all before and I don't see how it will be any different. Especially with a complicated class system.

    It's also a matter of perspective. I haven't looked around enough into the devs intentions yet, but are they truly trying to dissuade pvp? Doesn't seem like it considering pvp seems to be a integral part of gameplay. On the flip side, are they trying to encourage such pvp? If so, what protection is there for these caravans with a significant amount of time invested at risk. Are large pvp centric gaming communities going to be punished merely for being what they are? At what point do they need to draw a line and say people just need to deal with it?

    Say you see someone who has successfully raided your caravan or killed you, or both. You still carry a grudge. Typically this is your opportunity to try for revenge. But wait, you know this guy is good, he's killed you before, well might as well not even bother trying cause the system punishes you. See my point?

    Honestly this corruption system will make or break it for a lot of people interested in this game. It'll be interesting to see where it goes.
  • I too think the system in its current form will be too hard on some Pk'ers.
    I will more than likely be a solo player as thats how I like to be most of the time. I also like to solo PK however the caravan system is cool for group pvp but I dont see it being an option for a solo player to attack, since having the guards and the player shipping the goods gaurding it, I dont think a solo attacker would have a chance. So I've been trying to think of ways that the system could be changed that would not kill the system as it stands now while still giving a wider range of options/freedom to pk'ers. I have a couple ideas which i know are by no means perfect and just hope they can provide some productive discussion.

    1) My first idea was to use the city politics and zones of influence to guide/interact with our PK'ers. Now issue number one for this idea is how the zones of influence will interact with each other; do they overlap? do they simply come in contact with each other and form a border of sorts? or can they maybe not even touch each other? (The only real issue for this idea would be them overlapping). (I will assume they either form a border or dont come in contact with each other) so my idea regarding the zones of influence was lets say you are from city A and your city is on bad terms with city B (not war, just not friendly), so you as a pk'er go over to city B's zone of influence and start hunting down citizens of that city (this idea also requires people to have their city of citizenship listed in a way that others can see). Ok so now you've killed 10 citizens of city B you are put on a bounty list for any bounty hunter that is a citizen of city B or from its allies, they begin to hunt you down and you start running back to your zone of influence. On your way back you run through an area that is not part of any zone of influence, assuming this is possible, you will now be listed on all bounty hunter lists except for those from your city and its allies. If both your city and city B are allies with the same city (lets call it city C) then bounty hunter from that city will also see and hunt you down. Now assuming you make it back into your city's zone of influence, you are no longer shown on the map for the bounty hunters that were chasing you, but lets say one happened to be close by and attack you after you enter your city's zone of influence, that bounty hunter would have to now flag red to kill you since you are back in your territory (he would still get his reward if he killed you). However since he flagged red he will now show to the bounty hunters from your city and your allies in the same way you showed on his. This system feeds into the politics of different cities since you could only do this type of killing to citizens of a city you are not friendly with.
    (Also important to note that killing in this way would only retain the bounty hunter aspect of the current corruption system as by killing those from the unfriendly city, you are doing a good deed for your city (you would have the normal (non-combatant or combatant) death penalty), however your bounty will still exist on the other zones bounty hunter list until you are killed or their city is destroyed or if you become allies with that city your bounty record will be forgiven)
    (Important: the system still would exist in its full form for killing players from your city and your allies or killing low level players..... meaning if you did either of these you would be listed for all bounty hunters within the world to hunt down as the system works currently)
    (as I said this is far from perfect and i didnt proof read as much as I would have liked to)

    2. This idea just hit me after I was reading another forum about a different issue.... Bots.... and it got me thinking; we all hate bots(gold/resource farming bots) so why not make use of them to solve an issue between our carebears and our PK'ers.
    Carebears hate bots because they drive down the demand for goods by flooding the market and lowering the prices of goods, basically killing the carebear way of life. Now Pk'ers on the other hand enjoy killing players and in my case I like getting some drops from it too, so basically i like to target resource gatherers because killing them gets me easy resources. By now you should see where the common ground might lie here... if instead of mods banning bots what if they were to be put on say a Bot bounty list of sorts where bounty hunters could hunt down these bots and get a % of their resources (the rest are destroyed on death, to keep bot hunting from being OP). This way AoC still gets the bots money if the bot owner doesn't notice within say a month and resubs the following month, Carebears get their bot problem taken care of and those bloodthirsty pk'ers get off their backs, and as stated pk'ers get a nice new juicy target. In this example I would say leave the corruption system as is just don't count killing bots as red flagging. (Also incase it was not obvious bots would perma stay on the Bounty list, until then run out of subscription then ban the account from the game to keep the list fresh)
  • [quote quote=11989]<a href="https://www.ashesofcreation.com/forums/users/maevynn/" rel="nofollow">@maevynn</a>

    If the developers truly wanted to disincentivize ganking then why not just make it so that you can’t attack other players except in certain PvP areas (e.g. Arenas, caravan zones and sieges)? If you only want players to engage in “consensual PvP” then why have a flagging system in the first place?

    Steven says he wants to give players a choice in the way they play, but if you don’t make those options fair and balanced then all you are doing is giving the illusion of choice. Elite Dangerous (a sandbox space simulator similar to Eve Online) has a similar problem, where even though there are multiple different playstyles you can choose from, they are so unbalanced that you are forced to be a trader in order to get anywhere in the game.

    Make the system too harsh for gankers and they will just quit, and if that was your intention then just don’t offer the option to begin with.

    [/quote]

    Because then you would not be able to assassinate people.
    One off RP 'necessary' murders will not kill your game.
    Kill everyone everywhere on site will (unless you are in legit PvP scenarios like caravans sieges and such).

    There is a time and place for everything.
    Thats the whole point.
    If you cant keep your weapon sheathed for more than 1 parsec, you wont be enjoying this game.
    Save it for when it matters.
    Learn some self control.
  • The dev's have stated numerous times Ashes will not be a murderbox or gank fest. There will be plenty of options to PvP that don't include ganking.

    Option to PvP include:
    1. Caravan's - Open world PvP - There will be tons of caravans going at all times. This one right here I feel is the answer for the people that just want to kill random people. And they even offer rewards if you win.
    2. Arena & battlegrounds - Closed world PvP
    3. Sieges - Open world PvP
    4. OWPVP - You see someone flagged go on and flag up and attack them. Or flag up and taunt people into attacking you.
    5. Guild wars - Open world PvP

    I plan to participate in all of the above. PvP can be fun when it's mutual. But, I'm opposed to people that enjoy ganking others in an attempt to ruin their game play. If you want the reward of killing a non-combatant then the risk is you'll lose gear.

    Here are a few suggestions to make to the corruption system so it can't be gamed to where there is no real penalty:

    1. Once a player has enough corruption to where their gear would drop when they die their gear is locked on their character and in their bags. So no dumping gear in a bank to save it. You can still swap between gear in your bags and on your character. Gear can still be repaired.

    2. As opposed to dropping gear the gear is just destroyed. That way there is no way to game the corruption system to get your gear back.

    3. Gear that is chosen to be destroyed is level appropriate. You can't just fill your bags with low level crap and hope that is destroyed over your max level gear.

    4. If a bounty hunter (however the system will work) kills a corrupted player the corruption lost is half of what it would normally be. That way the corrupted player can be hunted over and over and still be rewarding. And that bounty hunter is rewarded with some token that can be used to purchase cosmetic items specific to bounty hunters. Normal item destruction applies to each time they die if appropriate.
  • The whole point of the corruption system is to dis-incentivise murder and encourage honourable combat.
    The corruption system doesnt even apply outside of pure combat scenarios.
    Thus the corruption system is an anti murder system in the open world.
    So. Adapt or die. Evolve or die. Your choice.

    You should also notice it does not bar murder.....it dis-incentivises it.
    There are occasions where it will be strategically necessary to take out a target because of there influence.
    There is a big difference between that and lets go murder everyone, everywhere all the time.
    If you are looking for that, this game is not for you.
    And no you dont speak for all PvP'ers

    This is neither a pure PvE or a pure PvP game.
    It is a PvPvE game where both sides are absolutely crucial.
    The PvE players are essential to progress the PvP players node.
    The PvP players are essential to protect the PvE players node.
  • Non-consensual pvp for me is a game killer. I play video games to relax and have fun. I do not want to be spinning my camera around constantly looking for someone sneaking up to gank me....NOT FUN or RELAXING. I am all for PVP with a purpose and objective. But this nonsense of PVP just to ruin another players gaming experience is stupid. I understand that some players find this fun (have no idea why) but there are plenty of games out there that allow for this type of PVP please don't let this turn into another one of these gank fest.

    The current system as described doesn't seem to go far enough but is sound like they are on the right path.
  • Im fine with the karma being decreased for ganking lowbies, but please dear god do NOT implement gear dropping/destroyed permanently. That is the most absurb BS thing ever and should never be put into play. And do not implement stat penalties for fighting those at the same level as you.
  • i think simply ganking up on someone in open world will be a very little aspect of pvp.
    i can imagine the caravan system will be some kind of event and people are not decreasing their karma in this process.
    because of this, open world pvp will attract very few people due to the reasons that are mentioned by all of you
    and people are focusing more on caravans, arena or guild pvp
  • <blockquote><div class="d4p-bbp-quote-title"><a href="https://www.ashesofcreation.com/forums/topic/corruption-discussion/page/3/#post-27818">jerrinst wrote:</a></div>Im fine with the karma being decreased for ganking lowbies, but please dear god do NOT implement gear dropping/destroyed permanently. That is the most absurb BS thing ever and should never be put into play. And do not implement stat penalties for fighting those at the same level as you.

    </blockquote>



    <blockquote><div class="d4p-bbp-quote-title"><a href="https://www.ashesofcreation.com/forums/topic/corruption-discussion/page/3/#post-27848">Kasuto wrote:</a></div>i think simply ganking up on someone in open world will be a very little aspect of pvp.
    i can imagine the caravan system will be some kind of event and people are not decreasing their karma in this process.
    because of this, open world pvp will attract very few people due to the reasons that are mentioned by all of you
    and people are focusing more on caravans, arena or guild pvp

    </blockquote>

    This, exactly this. +1
  • You only drop gear or get penatlies when you attack and kill a non-combatant, who doesn't fight back.
    Why would you even want to duel with someone who doesn't try to fight back anyway? It's not fun for both of sides.
    For killer it's like killing a stone or a wall. For victim it's a very unpleasant experience being forced down their throat.

    If you want to PvP find someone who wants to do it too. Find a caravan. Take part in a siege. There's a lot of options.

    I think they idea of corruption system is good. I just hope I'll get to avoid trolls who will still try to kill non-combatans for fun.
  • In Ashes, you will want to stop characters from doing things that have a negative impact on your node or region.
    Won't matter whether they are intending to have a negative impact on your node.

    The corruption system will unfairly penalize avatars legitimately trying to prevent other avatars from disrupting their nodes... if their opponents refuse to fight back.
    And people who wish to gank can just create alts for the sole purpose of ganking.
  • I'm not generally a PvPer but I can see why these penalties need properly balanced. Occasionally I'll run around and be like hey that guy just collected a lot of mats maybe I'll get lucky if I kill him? That's a simple bandit/assassin mindset as long as someones not abusing other players constantly simply because they can I don't see an issue with this. Heck unless its just some group of gankers running around it'll probably be on average a 1v1.

    You won't avoid the gankers no matter how much incentivizing you do but you'll cripple the guy who might have a personal reason for killing his target regardless of any perceived "law". Like a vengeance thing or sabotaging a nodes development for tactical warfare. Strategically draining resources from an area through PKing would force gatherers to hire guards. Resulting in a weaker amount of supplies couple that with caravan raids and you could potentially cripple that node. Not everything is as black and white as "uhhhh pking/ganking is bad..."

    You also have the reversal for defensive measures if someone is taking resources from one nodes zone to transfer to another node.
  • <blockquote><div class="d4p-bbp-quote-title"><a href="https://www.ashesofcreation.com/forums/topic/corruption-discussion/page/2/#post-18294">Nightspyre wrote:</a></div>[quote quote=18279]I rly loved the Archeage PK system. If you got too much corruption you go to jail. If you got 5000 corruption points you will be a pirate and a open target for all.

    But you can loose your corruption if you do “greenpeace” quests where you help other players. And you can turn again from a pirate to a good player

    [/quote]

    That does the opposite of encouraging world PVP though.

    I honestly don’t get why people play a mmorpg if they are afraid of player versus player interaction. Sure, ganking low-levels and repeatedly killing the same player will ruin the fun of playing the game, but simply adding a buff on the killed party that gives a penalty if you kill him/her again for say 2-5 minutes should suffice, and ofc if the killed party with the buff decide to interact in pvp, he/she would lose said buff from protecting him/her.

    </blockquote>

    Hmmmm... a 5 minute grace period so that you are discouraged from killing the same player again or take a penalty? NICE! Basically that way you can only kill the same player 12 times an hour..... That would really not be bothersome at all..... lol
  • Race should play a part in the corruption mechanic. Kill a Dwarf and its not a big deal, kill a high Elf and you're gonna pay the price.
  • ArchivedUserArchivedUser Guest
    edited May 2017
    Maevynn said:

    From my understanding, within the current system you only take the effectiveness hits after you die. This is done through "Experience Debt" where you lose experience (not deleveling, as far as I know) and have to gain it back up to where you were before. It just so happens to be that the main way of getting rid of corruption is (repeated, I'm pretty sure) deaths. You gain x3 the amount of experience debt when you die while corrupt. So, if you managed to stay alive against all odds (from being pinged on the map for all bounty hunters to see), you wouldn't have to worry about the effects of corruption. But it is from that point on a constant risk to you—but not an immediate penalty.

    I would have to say I am for open world PvP being less penalizing, but if this is how the system is going to truly work for gankers than that is fine. I think this is a very well thought out solution to the problem.
  • I feel putting restrictions on PVP is a hindrance. The greatest deterrent to unwanted PVP advances, is server selection. If there were a PVP & PVE server, would the need for corruption still exist?
  • Would it be possible to have very strict area control. certain zones or places deal with the effects of corruption/karma/flagged players differently. 

    Example, maybe the more a route is made for trade caravans the more/less it is effected by corruption.
    If one doesn't wish to be ganked, simply find a new path. this is something that must be adopted by real businesses (big armoured vans are normally the end result).

    Perhaps being a mercenary for those that take these paths would be a good trade. postings could be put up, and an inter secular role/job could be forged. a protection racket not far behind. it would offer the world a deeper vibe and possibly level the field a little.

    While this is all about risk=reward. remember that the risk for one is greater than another and precautions should be made.
    Instead of balancing the issue, adopt it.

    As a wannabe merchant and hardcore PvP i feel both sides of this story. but would like to see a "real resolution" rather than just a patch fix.

    IF THIS IS OUR REALM TO MOULD, LETS TAKE THE POWER AND EVOLVE
  • I played SWG back at release. Managed to unlock Jedi before the NGE which killed the game. They had a "corruption" system in game, where if you used force powers where anyone, npc or otherwise could observe it, you would gain value on the bounty board. At a certain point (and it was a low threshold) you would get player bounty hunters able to take you as a mission. So you would be grinding away down in some remote location trying desperately to level up, and would get people coming in to gank you. The only problem with the system was that as the Jedi getting killed you would lose around 6 hours of experience getting killed, while the BH had no downside to dying. After several of these encounter I just got so pissed off at lag kills, exploits, and so on it turned me off of pvping in games for around 10 years. Finally got back into pvp years later and liked it, but if you make it where the person on receiving end of your gankfest is having their gameplay severely impacted to the tune of lost time, your game will die and only be populated by "pk bros" who will then move on to other games that allow them to feel better about themselves by ruining others experiences.
  • I played SWG back at release. Managed to unlock Jedi before the NGE which killed the game. They had a "corruption" system in game, where if you used force powers where anyone, npc or otherwise could observe it, you would gain value on the bounty board. At a certain point (and it was a low threshold) you would get player bounty hunters able to take you as a mission. So you would be grinding away down in some remote location trying desperately to level up, and would get people coming in to gank you. The only problem with the system was that as the Jedi getting killed you would lose around 6 hours of experience getting killed, while the BH had no downside to dying. After several of these encounter I just got so pissed off at lag kills, exploits, and so on it turned me off of pvping in games for around 10 years. Finally got back into pvp years later and liked it, but if you make it where the person on receiving end of your gankfest is having their gameplay severely impacted to the tune of lost time, your game will die and only be populated by "pk bros" who will then move on to other games that allow them to feel better about themselves by ruining others experiences.
    Holy shit I think I love you.
  • ArchivedUserArchivedUser Guest
    edited August 2017
    The problem with addressing griefing as "griefing", as a negative, is that people are going to grief regardless. In fact, in an open world game like this people fighting each other noncensually isn't even out of place. It exists in the real world, and we call those people bandits.

    Banditry is going to be an important part of an open world game like this. If there are any levels of political organization, if people are making kingdoms and empires, then one kingdom can theoretically finance bandits to damage caravans in another kingdom. Even better, it could do this as a prelude to a war where its enemy's damaged economy would make it even easier to conquer. Bandits also give the opportunity for players focused on PvP to get that experience without having to raid anyone. Instead, they can hunt down PC bandits and fight them.

    I think the best way to discourage people griefing while not overtly punishing bandits is to, like you said, have rewards to surviving longer, but also harsher penalties for dying. This penalty can tick down over time, maybe with a half-life of one week. A combat debuff would put griefers down for a while after dying, but doesn't necessarily punish them, which may be the best approach to guarantee that griefing is not nonexistent, but rather that it is manageable and only common in areas where bandits would feel comfortably safe. Miles from civilization and guards, a group of 4-5 players might feel comfortable getting together and raiding parties of 2-3 players on roads or lost in the wilderness, but will avoid larger groups unless they have the skill to take them. They would also have to avoid cities with any guards present, since obviously guards probably do not take kindly to frequent pkers showing up in town. This means that any players who would really want to avoid being griefed could easily avoid that happening by sticking with groups travelling on the road, or staying in town until they feel confident in their combat ability.

    Bandits, meanwhile, could establish camps far from other towns where, despite not being allowed into civilized areas, they could still conduct basic item maintenance, crafting, growing crops and such, and a place they could defend without having to rely on guards. This would be doubly important if you added bounties to players who frequently pk, since they would need to avoid civilization not only for guards, but for the risk of more powerful players or groups of players chasing them down, killing them, and collecting their bounties.

    Rather than opening up bounties to abuse by letting people place them, bounties could be calculated based on the personal value of the players pked by a griefer. This can adjust punishment based on the strength of the griefer in question, probably with a serious multiplier for killing people much lower level than you. This guarantees firstly that the players most abusing newcomers by frequently killing them will not only be punished, but will be punished by the playerbase itself, preventing players from feeling that it's the devs punishing them (which can alienate people fast). It also guarantees that relatively weak bandits aren't being chased by god-like nutcases whose punches split open mountains, but instead players roughly at their level, with similar combat ability. Likewise, the strongest bandits are capable of hunting higher-level players and therefore get more in bounty. The most skilled players who are lower level and can kill them get rewarded, while higher-level players who go bandit chasing don't feel like they're wasting their time for a small payout.

    This is definitely open to criticism, so tear it to pieces if you see something wrong.
  • There are too many casual MMO'S on the market , did they success ? No, even WoW mmo killer is slowly dying . I would like to see open world PvP zones on the top spots for resources and monsters. About the corruption system, it could be made like this: Any kill will place a debuff for 10 minutes. If you die , you can drop your equipment and part of loot for sure you will also lose exp. If you kill a player he has a chance 20% to drop a part from equipment and loot and a chance of 30% to lose an item. Risk versus reward, for now the system is absolutely one sided , no reward only risk.
    It would be another casual PvX mmo.  PvE- no open world pvp , PvX -open world pvp has penalties for PK but the risk=reward, PvP -free open world PvP no carebears casuals and those sort of players .
  • @ViolentSealion
    That sounds great! If the devs could make it like this it will be amazing!
  • ArchivedUserArchivedUser Guest
    edited August 2017
    Jubilum said:
    Non-consensual pvp for me is a game killer. I play video games to relax and have fun. I do not want to be spinning my camera around constantly looking for someone sneaking up to gank me....NOT FUN or RELAXING. I am all for PVP with a purpose and objective. But this nonsense of PVP just to ruin another players gaming experience is stupid. I understand that some players find this fun (have no idea why) but there are plenty of games out there that allow for this type of PVP please don't let this turn into another one of these gank fest.

    The current system as described doesn't seem to go far enough but is sound like they are on the right path.
    Whats the point to play a casual game ? If you want to relax do it by listening music. 
    If the game is not competitive the game play becomes boring. 
    The rules are same for all the people on the server.
  • I personally favor competitive and meaningful PvP. Ganking is not that and i share devs vision with this matter. Corruption system is good as it is right now. Minor tweaking after testing if needed at most.
  • ArchivedUserArchivedUser Guest
    edited August 2017
    Ferryman said:
    I personally favor competitive and meaningful PvP. Ganking is not that and i share devs vision with this matter. Corruption system is good as it is right now. Minor tweaking after testing if needed at most.
    Indeed!   We have the opportunity to test Ashes and give our input.  We can make suggestions and find what is broken so it can be fixed but ultimately it is Intrepid's and Steven's game and how they want to develop it for all of us to enjoy.  
  • Eleanc said:
    There are too many casual MMO'S on the market , did they success ? No, even WoW mmo killer is slowly dying . I would like to see open world PvP zones on the top spots for resources and monsters. About the corruption system, it could be made like this: Any kill will place a debuff for 10 minutes. If you die , you can drop your equipment and part of loot for sure you will also lose exp. If you kill a player he has a chance 20% to drop a part from equipment and loot and a chance of 30% to lose an item. Risk versus reward, for now the system is absolutely one sided , no reward only risk.
    It would be another casual PvX mmo.  PvE- no open world pvp , PvX -open world pvp has penalties for PK but the risk=reward, PvP -free open world PvP no carebears casuals and those sort of players .
    Albion is like this. I lived in the Black Zone in beta. Game was dead as shit after a month because no one came to the full pvp zones because zergs ran it.

    Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
  • ArchivedUserArchivedUser Guest
    edited August 2017
    Karthos said:
    Eleanc said:
    There are too many casual MMO'S on the market , did they success ? No, even WoW mmo killer is slowly dying . I would like to see open world PvP zones on the top spots for resources and monsters. About the corruption system, it could be made like this: Any kill will place a debuff for 10 minutes. If you die , you can drop your equipment and part of loot for sure you will also lose exp. If you kill a player he has a chance 20% to drop a part from equipment and loot and a chance of 30% to lose an item. Risk versus reward, for now the system is absolutely one sided , no reward only risk.
    It would be another casual PvX mmo.  PvE- no open world pvp , PvX -open world pvp has penalties for PK but the risk=reward, PvP -free open world PvP no carebears casuals and those sort of players .
    Albion is like this. I lived in the Black Zone in beta. Game was dead as shit after a month because no one came to the full pvp zones because zergs ran it.

    Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
    It still happens. No room for solo players and its even hard for small groups to survive. Even there are several reasons for that, lots of people are quiting, because zergs dominating the unrestricted PvP zones is real and unfortunately one of the major reasons to quits. Devs are trying in Albion to save this by adding band aid anti zerging mechanics, which are not working out. And if this pushes players out of these  full loot PvP zones and even from the game, game which is designed for open world full loot PvP, we can only imagine how bad it would done AoC.. My guess: ruin it. 
  • ArchivedUserArchivedUser Guest
    edited August 2017
    Karthos said:
    Eleanc said:
    There are too many casual MMO'S on the market , did they success ? No, even WoW mmo killer is slowly dying . I would like to see open world PvP zones on the top spots for resources and monsters. About the corruption system, it could be made like this: Any kill will place a debuff for 10 minutes. If you die , you can drop your equipment and part of loot for sure you will also lose exp. If you kill a player he has a chance 20% to drop a part from equipment and loot and a chance of 30% to lose an item. Risk versus reward, for now the system is absolutely one sided , no reward only risk.
    It would be another casual PvX mmo.  PvE- no open world pvp , PvX -open world pvp has penalties for PK but the risk=reward, PvP -free open world PvP no carebears casuals and those sort of players .
    Albion is like this. I lived in the Black Zone in beta. Game was dead as shit after a month because no one came to the full pvp zones because zergs ran it.

    Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
    It still happens. No room for solo players and its even hard for small groups to survive. Even there are several reasons for that drowning playerbase, lots of people are quiting, because zergs dominating the unrestricted PvP zones is real and unfortunately one of the major reasons to quits. Devs are trying in Albion to save this by adding band aid anti zerging mechanics, which are not working out. And if this pushes players out of these full loot PvP zones and even from the game, game which is designed for open world full loot PvP, we can only imagine how bad it would done AoC.. My guess: ruin it. 
  • ArchivedUserArchivedUser Guest
    edited August 2017
    Karthos said:
    Albion is like this. I lived in the Black Zone in beta. Game was dead as shit after a month because no one came to the full pvp zones because zergs ran it.

    Maybe because you should not be allowed to take all the best things solo? You are not the main hero of the game you know, there are thousands like you. Find  friends , join guilds, it is massive multiplayer  .
  • Ok, simple question here, gang.

    If you wanna PK and gank, why are you seeking to play a game where the devs have explicitly stated that they're doing whatever they can to dissuade that? I mean, gods alone know, there are literally tons of games out there that allow that. Why do you think it's appropriate that that should be a mechanic in all games?

    If you wanna do the crime, you gotta do the time ... anyone ever teach you that? The "killing other players cuz I had a bad day at work and wanna make someone else's day miserable" is -- to me -- one of the most despicable things I could hear someone say. You had a bad day, so you will self-soothe by making someone else's day bad?

    Karma, baby. It's a thing. Just sayin' ... anyway. Please feel free to answer my original question, all moralizing aside.
Sign In or Register to comment.