Glorious Alpha Two Testers!
Phase I of Alpha Two testing will occur on weekends. Each weekend is scheduled to start on Fridays at 10 AM PT and end on Sundays at 10 PM PT. Find out more here.
Check out Alpha Two Announcements here to see the latest Alpha Two news and update notes.
Our quickest Alpha Two updates are in Discord. Testers with Alpha Two access can chat in Alpha Two channels by connecting your Discord and Intrepid accounts here.
Phase I of Alpha Two testing will occur on weekends. Each weekend is scheduled to start on Fridays at 10 AM PT and end on Sundays at 10 PM PT. Find out more here.
Check out Alpha Two Announcements here to see the latest Alpha Two news and update notes.
Our quickest Alpha Two updates are in Discord. Testers with Alpha Two access can chat in Alpha Two channels by connecting your Discord and Intrepid accounts here.
Time to Seaprate PVP from PKers
PVP things you do in the realm that are directly contested by other players. Sieges, Caravans, naval combat, Wars over control of nodes and even player tournaments are examples they have given of PvP activities. Hell if you really want to go that far PVP is also setting a market up next to another player and selling your good for lower prices then he does.
PKer are also called PKids, Gankers etc Are basically a few players that use the pvp system to wreck another players gaming experience. Activities like Spawn / Quest point camping, re-spawn point camping, Killing low level players, attacking players already in combat, attacking afk players and running just killing anyone they can find.
So when i hear all the anti pvp stuff i keep thinking that most people don't really mind pvp but don't want to deal with the PK group . For those who say they don't like pvp i would encourage you to try pvp as i have written it here . I think in the right setting pvp is allot of fun and really makes a game worth playing.
PKer are also called PKids, Gankers etc Are basically a few players that use the pvp system to wreck another players gaming experience. Activities like Spawn / Quest point camping, re-spawn point camping, Killing low level players, attacking players already in combat, attacking afk players and running just killing anyone they can find.
So when i hear all the anti pvp stuff i keep thinking that most people don't really mind pvp but don't want to deal with the PK group . For those who say they don't like pvp i would encourage you to try pvp as i have written it here . I think in the right setting pvp is allot of fun and really makes a game worth playing.
0
Comments
I'm not certain I'm fully on board with how they plan to implement the PK system penalties, but it's too early to tell right now.
[/quote]
True. I understand their fears, coming from a background of formerly being a hard-line PvE'er, myself. I witnessed first hand, as Im sure most who have played mmo's have, the juvenile behavior of people who like to be huge dick's for no reason other then lul's.
I've grown to really like PvP, while still enjoying PvE, and RP. I don't think one takes away from the other.
I, too, would like for people to no let their fears get the best of them, and wait for more details on how they plan to keep griefing at bay.
I understand how griefing can be a problem, but I have seen the act of player killing as a strategical maneuver, more than once. Some farming spots may simply be too good not to contest, sometimes you do it for political reasons (game politics, of course) and more often than not just to mess with people's minds, not in a bad way, sometimes a first impression is very important in a PvP-oriented game. In a sense, pking will be a very essential part of this game, and I trust people to learn to work and cope with that mechanic. Think positive, this game won't be too mainstream (I hope) and I believe it's aimed at a more patient and serious crowd, I expect good things out of this community, despite recent events.
"Wannabe Bounty Hunters will need to complete a quest in a minimum level 4 Militaristic Node." <--paraphrased
My problem with this is that it ties into my whole "Dev mistake #1: expect players to partially keep random PK down" theory but even more so, it will limit how many can be Bounty Hunters. Not great if you want them to help keep the lid on "naughty PVP".
Lots of players that have concerns about PVP can be, with patience and better replies, be shown that their worries are probably exaggerated OR can be convinced to give the game a shot and find that occasionally unexpected PVP isn't that bad.
1: Many who are anti-PvP don't want conflict with other players - because in D&D games interactions with other players are cooperative. Combat and competition in is with NPCs. That's what we hope to relive in MMORPGs.
2: Character v Character combat can be OK, but... players forcing other players to accrue xp dept and lose loot they've invested hours working to acquire is despicable. Especially when it's done just because it's fun for the attacker. Other players should not be able to force me to do things I don't want to do.
3: If a player attacks me when I tell them I'm not interested in combat with them - they are a filthy PKer, in my view.
BUT....
PvP is a core component of AoC.
A large chunk of that being indirect PvP conflict rather than direct PvP combat.
What the devs call "meaningful PvP".
And it's this form of PvP that actually does inspire me to be willing - and even eager to combat other players.
If I'm in a Divine Metropolis and the node sends me a task to destroy the shrines of a Divine Metropolis in another region - and the penalty for not doing so is losing the blessings that power the defenses of my home Metropolis... well, I'm gonna have to go destroy those shrines. And if players from that Metropolis attack me in order to defend their shrines... well, that's life. I'll just have to kill them. :D
My objective would be to not kill anyone - especially not other players. But, if I'm invading and damaging their territory, it makes perfect sense for them to attack me in defense. Same if I have to defend the shrines in my home city.
What remains to be seen is whether the devs will create servers where the nodes are more cooperative than they are competitive.
Where most of the conflict is against NPCs rather than other players.
I understand how griefing can be a problem, but I have seen the act of player killing as a strategical maneuver, more than once. Some farming spots may simply be too good not to contest, sometimes you do it for political reasons (game politics, of course) and more often than not just to mess with people’s minds, not in a bad way, sometimes a first impression is very important in a PvP-oriented game. In a sense, pking will be a very essential part of this game, and I trust people to learn to work and cope with that mechanic. Think positive, this game won’t be too mainstream (I hope) and I believe it’s aimed at a more patient and serious crowd, I expect good things out of this community, despite recent events.
[/quote]
I'm all for allowing players as much freedom as possible, in a sandbox game of this design, within reason. And, I think, that's the fine line that Intrepid is going to have to take. Making sure that they encourage meaningful player interaction, hostile otherwise, while keeping pointless, meaningless slaughter, aka griefing, to a minimum, while also trying to distinguish between the two.
Lots of players that have concerns about PVP can be, with patience and better replies, be shown that their worries are probably exaggerated OR can be convinced to give the game a shot and find that occasionally unexpected PVP isn’t that bad.[/quote]
I don't think that's true.
Concerns about PvP aren't exaggerated - especially in a game with xp debt.
You either are able to stomach the mechanics or you're not. It's a matter of taste. You're not going to convince me to eat fish eyes or chittlins. And really, the same is true for the PvP mechanics the devs have outlined.
You either like 'em or you don't. There will be very little convincing via discussion.
Lots of players that have concerns about PVP can be, with patience and better replies, be shown that their worries are probably exaggerated OR can be convinced to give the game a shot and find that occasionally unexpected PVP isn’t that bad.
[/quote]
I feel the same, but honestly, the only ones who can do that are the devs, themselves. And, since they themselves are still trying to iron out all the wrinkles, we as a player community have little to go on, outside basic concepts, and speculation. It's a game of wait and see.
<div class="d4p-bbt-quote-title"><a href="https://www.ashesofcreation.com/forums/topic/time-to-seaprate-pvp-from-pkers/#post-16566" rel="nofollow">Bringslite wrote:</a></div>
I hope that this issue does not drag this community down into a default state of replies: “If you don’t like it, don’t play this game”
Lots of players that have concerns about PVP can be, with patience and better replies, be shown that their worries are probably exaggerated OR can be convinced to give the game a shot and find that occasionally unexpected PVP isn’t that bad.
</blockquote>
I don’t think that’s true.
Concerns about PvP aren’t exaggerated – especially in a game with xp debt.
You either are able to stomach the mechanics or you’re not. It’s a matter of taste. You’re not going to convince me to eat fish eyes or chittlins. And really, the same is true for the PvP mechanics the devs have outlined.
You either like ’em or you don’t. There will be very little convincing via discussion.
[/quote]
Very true. In the end, the devs will make a game, true to their vision. If there are those who disagree with that vision, then they won't play the game, most likely. It is what, what it is.
<div class="d4p-bbt-quote-title"><a href="https://www.ashesofcreation.com/forums/topic/time-to-seaprate-pvp-from-pkers/#post-16566" rel="nofollow">Bringslite wrote:</a></div>
I hope that this issue does not drag this community down into a default state of replies: “If you don’t like it, don’t play this game”
Lots of players that have concerns about PVP can be, with patience and better replies, be shown that their worries are probably exaggerated OR can be convinced to give the game a shot and find that occasionally unexpected PVP isn’t that bad.
</blockquote>
I don’t think that’s true.
Concerns about PvP aren’t exaggerated – especially in a game with xp debt.
You either are able to stomach the mechanics or you’re not. It’s a matter of taste. You’re not going to convince me to eat fish eyes or chittlins. And really, the same is true for the PvP mechanics the devs have outlined.
You either like ’em or you don’t. There will be very little convincing via discussion.
[/quote]
As I said, I'm new. Is there xp debt on death planned for this game?
My favorite moment in an MMORPG was in Guild Wars 2's battle ground or WvWvW.
I was simply minding my own business actually trying to obtain key vistas for my 100% map completion. During this quest I was ganked. Not by one person, not by two, not even by 3! 4 people had decided that my long legged journey on reaching this vista was due to be done again. Being a warrior in mind and in game instead of fleeing I fought back! after a 20min long battle and near death I came out victorious!
And the thought that came into my head wasnt "I'm the greatest warrior there ever lived" (though it was close) nor was it "I love this game, or this mode" No. my thought was "I wish this was part of the actual game"
<div class="d4p-bbt-quote-title"><a href="https://www.ashesofcreation.com/forums/topic/time-to-seaprate-pvp-from-pkers/#post-16571" rel="nofollow">Dygz wrote:</a></div>
<blockquote>
<div class="d4p-bbt-quote-title"><a href="https://www.ashesofcreation.com/forums/topic/time-to-seaprate-pvp-from-pkers/#post-16566" rel="nofollow">Bringslite wrote:</a></div>
I hope that this issue does not drag this community down into a default state of replies: “If you don’t like it, don’t play this game”
Lots of players that have concerns about PVP can be, with patience and better replies, be shown that their worries are probably exaggerated OR can be convinced to give the game a shot and find that occasionally unexpected PVP isn’t that bad.
</blockquote>
I don’t think that’s true.
Concerns about PvP aren’t exaggerated – especially in a game with xp debt.
You either are able to stomach the mechanics or you’re not. It’s a matter of taste. You’re not going to convince me to eat fish eyes or chittlins. And really, the same is true for the PvP mechanics the devs have outlined.
You either like ’em or you don’t. There will be very little convincing via discussion.
</blockquote>
As I said, I’m new. Is there xp debt on death planned for this game?
[/quote]
The only time I've heard of "xp debt" was in reference to those players who gained corruption, as one of the forms of punishment. Outside of that, I can't honestly say.
My favorite moment in an MMORPG was in Guild Wars 2’s battle ground or WvWvW.
I was simply minding my own business actually trying to obtain key vistas for my 100% map completion. During this quest I was ganked. Not by one person, not by two, not even by 3! 4 people had decided that my long legged journey on reaching this vista was due to be done again. Being a warrior in mind and in game instead of fleeing I fought back! after a 20min long battle and near death I came out victorious!
And the thought that came into my head wasnt<strong> “I’m the greatest warrior there ever lived”</strong> (though it was close) nor was it “I love this game, or this mode” No. my thought was “I wish this was part of the actual game”
[/quote]
lol
1: Many who are anti-PvP don’t want conflict with other players – because in D&D games interactions with other players are cooperative. Combat and competition in is with NPCs. That’s what we hope to relive in MMORPGs.
2: Character v Character combat can be OK, but… players forcing other players to accrue xp dept and lose loot they’ve invested hours working to acquire is despicable. Especially when it’s done just because it’s fun for the attacker. Other players should not be able to force me to do things I don’t want to do.
3: If a player attacks me when I tell them I’m not interested in combat with them – they are a filthy PKer, in my view.
BUT….
PvP is a core component of AoC.
A large chunk of that being indirect PvP conflict rather than direct PvP combat.
What the devs call “meaningful PvP”.
And it’s this form of PvP that actually does inspire me to be willing – and even eager to combat other players.
If I’m in a Divine Metropolis and the node sends me a task to destroy the shrines of a Divine Metropolis in another region – and the penalty for not doing so is losing the blessings that power the defenses of my home Metropolis… well, I’m gonna have to go destroy those shrines. And if players from that Metropolis attack me in order to defend their shrines… well, that’s life. I’ll just have to kill them. <img alt="????" src="https://s.w.org/images/core/emoji/2.2.1/svg/1f600.svg" />
My objective would be to not kill anyone – especially not other players. But, if I’m invading and damaging their territory, it makes perfect sense for them to attack me in defense. Same if I have to defend the shrines in my home city.
What remains to be seen is whether the devs will create servers where the nodes are more cooperative than they are competitive.
Where most of the conflict is against NPCs rather than other players.
[/quote]
I'm going to digress from the issue of PvP/PK, for the moment. People have different opinions on the matter, and that's cool. I don't want to harangue anyone, on the same topic, as it's been previously discussed.
But, I would like to touch on the issue of nodes being cooperative/competitive, and the separation of the two. I think the devs are leaving those decisions up to the players. They're not forcing us to be one way, or the other. If a node is comprised of peace loving players, that prefer to eschew all conflict, than they won't be forced to, unless defending against an attack. To avert this, they may enter into an agreement with a larger, more militaristic minded node, in a peace agreement.
Just an example of how players have the choice to be aggressors, or not, instead of forced style of play.
<div class="d4p-bbt-quote-title"><a href="https://www.ashesofcreation.com/forums/topic/time-to-seaprate-pvp-from-pkers/#post-16577" rel="nofollow">Bringslite wrote:</a></div>
<blockquote>
<div class="d4p-bbt-quote-title"><a href="https://www.ashesofcreation.com/forums/topic/time-to-seaprate-pvp-from-pkers/#post-16571" rel="nofollow">Dygz wrote:</a></div>
<blockquote>
<div class="d4p-bbt-quote-title"><a href="https://www.ashesofcreation.com/forums/topic/time-to-seaprate-pvp-from-pkers/#post-16566" rel="nofollow">Bringslite wrote:</a></div>
I hope that this issue does not drag this community down into a default state of replies: “If you don’t like it, don’t play this game”
Lots of players that have concerns about PVP can be, with patience and better replies, be shown that their worries are probably exaggerated OR can be convinced to give the game a shot and find that occasionally unexpected PVP isn’t that bad.
</blockquote>
I don’t think that’s true.
Concerns about PvP aren’t exaggerated – especially in a game with xp debt.
You either are able to stomach the mechanics or you’re not. It’s a matter of taste. You’re not going to convince me to eat fish eyes or chittlins. And really, the same is true for the PvP mechanics the devs have outlined.
You either like ’em or you don’t. There will be very little convincing via discussion.
</blockquote>
As I said, I’m new. Is there xp debt on death planned for this game?
</blockquote>
The only time I’ve heard of “xp debt” was in reference to those players who gained corruption, as one of the forms of punishment. Outside of that, I can’t honestly say.
[/quote]
Sigh! Discussing things is pretty pointless if all sides don't have their facts straight.
Digz: I don’t think that’s true.
Concerns about PvP aren’t exaggerated – especially in a game with xp debt. <---Do you have a link for this, Good Sir?
You either are able to stomach the mechanics or you’re not. It’s a matter of taste. You’re not going to convince me to eat fish eyes or chittlins. And really, the same is true for the PvP mechanics the devs have outlined.
You either like ’em or you don’t. There will be very little convincing via discussion.
^^Not true^^ I am still playing a game, with OWPVP that had a cpl years discussion around PVP and I or others convinced PVP haters to give it a try. They are still there.
One of the important keys for an OWPVP game is NOT TO TRY AND PLAY IT THE SAME WAY THAT YOU DO IN CONSENSUAL ONLY PVP GAMES. You have to play smarter. Be ready to fight or be ready to flee with all needed set up. Try and gather at least in small groups. For seriously rewarding PVE have scouts keeping an eye on the area(man I HATE players that attack me when I am fighting mobs!). Use your noodle.
OP, thanks for the topic. there really is a big difference between PVPers and random murderers for the lulz.
[/quote]
My golden rule im my 20 years of gaming has been:
If you aint dying then you aint playing the game right.
Theres plenty of us to hire ;)
or
Without risk then what is the actual reward?
I call that the PvP-ness ;p
PVP is not PK-gank kiddies trying to prove they have more pvp-ness then the other gank kiddies out there.
For the love of god no class should ever be balanced on gank kiddie feed back.
DAoC - Died due to gear taking a front seat to player skill. Also the focus of the game changed from RvR to PvE in a sense.
Shadowbane - Died because it was just too hardcore (PvP) for most, and not a "pretty" game.
Aion - Died due to gear overwriting skill and new players not being able to gear without being farmed by geared people.
Black Desert - Died due to gear and levels being WAY more important than skill, and levels being much too time consuming for people with lives.
Star Wars Galaxies - Died due to builds that were out of control, then over-nerfing.
Warhammer - Died due to class imbalance and dev inattention for too long.
These are all games that started off very strong and then fell apart and it always seems to be related to PvP. In my experience, it isn't PvP by itself that causes the problem. It's that some players get so much more powerful than others that they trivialize the game. Or, players are allowed to kill players at will that they shouldn't. When player skill isn't the prime factor in determining the outcome of a PvP encounter it cheapens the experience. People that already don't like PvP grow to hate it when they are just getting blown up all the time; no matter how hard they try.
Oh! All the games above were also prohibitive in some degree to new players joining the game....which is always bad.
All I know, is that if there isn't a fun and meaningful way to implement this game's PvP system so that it is rewarding and attractive to PvE players this will become a niche market game and not be as successful as I think we all hope it is in the end.
P.S. In all fairness, PvE games also die all the time due to lack of content, build imbalances and not enough challenge. So I totally understand this works both ways. I want the PvP personally. But I want an equal footing at max level and I will be just fine. I really hope the devs keep power creep in check and this will be a blast.
DAoC – Died due to gear taking a front seat to player skill. Also the focus of the game changed from RvR to PvE in a sense.
Shadowbane – Died because it was just too hardcore (PvP) for most, and not a “pretty” game.
Aion – Died due to gear overwriting skill and new players not being able to gear without being farmed by geared people.
Black Desert – Died due to gear and levels being WAY more important than skill, and levels being much too time consuming for people with lives.
Star Wars Galaxies – Died due to builds that were out of control, then over-nerfing.
Warhammer – Died due to class imbalance and dev inattention for too long.
[/quote]
The devs talk about this issue you are addressing in the twitch stream today, they don't intend to make the same mistakes of overpowered geared players ruining the pvp experience and they talk about class balance. They have awareness of the flaws of past mmos , we will have to see if that translates into their own game.
Just an example of how players have the choice to be aggressors, or not, instead of forced style of play.[/quote]
Hmmmn. Nothing is forcing us to be one way or another. It will be a rather complex web of nodes driving narratives and events and players responses to those narratives and events - as well as players reacting to the impact of other players in the region/zone.
In my example of destroying the shrine of the rival god, I could choose to ignore that mission and let the city defenses decay - if I'm too much of a carebear to attack the followers of the rival god. Maybe that means we try to find a more peaceful god. Maybe that means we'd rather focus on having scientific defenses so we don't have to comply with the whims of a fickle god.
It may be that node of a rival god generates undead creatures that attack the living creatures in my region, so we players decide we have to destroy their shrines.
It may be that the fast travel network in a nearby Scientific Metropolis is negatively impacting the flow of caravans into my Economic Metropolis and the best way to counter that is destroy the fast travel network or delevel that city to a point where the fast travel network goes offline.
Or it may be there are enough players in that region who just hate fast travel to the degree that they decide to lay siege to the Scientific Metropolis.
It may be that the bridge the the Military City built over the river is killing too many of the fish, so we decide we have to destroy the bridge.
The devs aren't forcing anybody to blow up the bridge. But building the bridge may have unforeseen negative impacts to other nodes or other regions and the players who reside in those regions may decide they "have to" destroy the bridge to maintain their desired way of life.
We should expect the different types of nodes in some cases to be cooperative and benefit players when they are cooperative. And we should expect some cases where the nodes are competitive and pressure players to combat each other in order to resolve the conflict. In addition to factions of players striving to be as peaceful and cooperative as possible while other factions of players revel in using violence to control their regions.
A node is not comprised of peace loving players. The nodes are AI and NPCs and story and narratives and events.
A region can be comprised of peace loving players, a city can be comprised of peace loving players. They can choose that being a carebear is more important than using violence to overcome any competitive or negative impacts from other nodes. Like fast travel negatively impacting the caravan routes. They could try to make a positive change via diplomacy. Could even be that both cities would prefer to promote a change via diplomacy - but the fact remains that the caravans remain negatively impacted as long as the fast travel network is online.
It may be that over harvesting trees in one region causes dangerous mobs there to overrun the neighboring regions.
The lumberjacks don't care - they're reaping all the benefits and don't have to deal with the mobs, so they keep harvesting trees.
And the neighboring region decides violence against the lumberjacks is the best solution.
There will be times when the nodes in different regions synergize in cooperation and sometimes when the nodes foment competition that leads to war. In addition to the petty conflicts completely concocted by players who love to fight other players.
<div class="d4p-bbt-quote-title"><a href="https://www.ashesofcreation.com/forums/topic/time-to-seaprate-pvp-from-pkers/page/2/#post-16746" rel="nofollow">Mordencaine wrote:</a></div>
I’m a bit more worried about this game’s success having learned of the open PvP concept. I’ve watched so many games fail due to poorly handled PvP rules. Here’s a short list off the top of my head that I either played from beta or launch:
DAoC – Died due to gear taking a front seat to player skill. Also the focus of the game changed from RvR to PvE in a sense.
Shadowbane – Died because it was just too hardcore (PvP) for most, and not a “pretty” game.
Aion – Died due to gear overwriting skill and new players not being able to gear without being farmed by geared people.
Black Desert – Died due to gear and levels being WAY more important than skill, and levels being much too time consuming for people with lives.
Star Wars Galaxies – Died due to builds that were out of control, then over-nerfing.
Warhammer – Died due to class imbalance and dev inattention for too long.
</blockquote>
The devs talk about this issue you are addressing in the twitch stream today, they don’t intend to make the same mistakes of overpowered geared players ruining the pvp experience and they talk about class balance. They have awareness of the flaws of past mmos , we will have to see if that translates into their own game.
[/quote]
I am banking on this being correct and heavily investing in this game on that hope. A game with a level playing field will be SO FUN it will take over the entire MMO market. PvE players would come over to PvP if they can just stand a chance...I think at least.
That said, attacking people who don't fight back can have PvP purpose. I've played with people that attacked low levels in other games. The point is to get other players who can fight back to retaliate on the behalf of the people who can't. Any PK can spark an actual battle. The corruption bounty system actually will work in favor of the PvP seeking PKers, because it draws attention to them. It is the loss of items that will deter them from getting out of control. Only the random hit and run PKers won't like the bounty system.