Glorious Alpha Two Testers!
Alpha Two Realms are now unlocked for Phase II testing!
For our initial launch, testing will begin on Friday, December 20, 2024, at 10 AM Pacific and continue uninterrupted until Monday, January 6, 2025, at 10 AM Pacific. After January 6th, we’ll transition to a schedule of five-day-per-week access for the remainder of Phase II.
You can download the game launcher here and we encourage you to join us on our for the most up to date testing news.
Alpha Two Realms are now unlocked for Phase II testing!
For our initial launch, testing will begin on Friday, December 20, 2024, at 10 AM Pacific and continue uninterrupted until Monday, January 6, 2025, at 10 AM Pacific. After January 6th, we’ll transition to a schedule of five-day-per-week access for the remainder of Phase II.
You can download the game launcher here and we encourage you to join us on our for the most up to date testing news.
Comments
PvE players can do their stuff like exploring, RPing, Farming … without getting ganked then!
That would be a great compromise and keep the gankers out of the game!
[/quote]
There is a PvP combat bubble around caravans.
The problem with this suggestion is that destroying a caravan is really PvE...destroying buildings rather than killing player characters, so that is something PvE folks would like to do to. PvE folk want to destroy caravans, participate in sieges, etc.
But they want to be killing NPCs rather than player avatars.
<div class="d4p-bbt-quote-title"><a href="https://www.ashesofcreation.com/forums/topic/please-dont-force-us-to-be-victims-of-pvpers/page/21/#post-20340" rel="nofollow">Bringslite wrote:</a></div>
<—-Thinks he will listen to the stream before he jumps to conclusions. Could be that they mean during a war, in which no one should be safe anywhere, or as Stabby believes just any time. That still leaves the whole disincentive mechanic to fly or fail. Going “Red” in a city should really mean a short lifespan if the mechanics are spot on….. I am not sure that I like the interplay of the mechanics as so far as I belive they work between attacker and noncombatant flagged, players shouldn’t get xp debt if they didn’t start a random fight but I am open to being convinced it is necessary…
</blockquote>
The devs said they want to go with a guard system for cities and they are considering making freeholds safe spaces(expect during node siege).
[/quote]
OK. That does make sense and it falls back onto reliance on the corruption system too. Hopefully Node leaderships will be able to fine tune the quality and numbers of guards.
[/quote]
That should work.
Im a PvE player and Im looking forward to the PvP in this game. Seriously. Game is built on player conflict, get over it. There cant be a PvE only server, game isnt designed that way.
After I graduated, I played other games. Ultima Online was my first graphical MMO. It was fun at first, but every time I met someone in the open world, the first thing they did was run away from me because they thought I was going to try and kill them. It was terrible, and I hated it.
But then in 1999, I discovered EQ. As one of those college friends I mentioned earlier put it, “It's the graphical MUD of my dreams.” We all played, and somewhere along the way, I got married, and she played as well. Then EQ2 came along, and we've been playing ever since. Obviously, no open world PvP there, and it wasn't needed. However, the last couple years in EQ2 has been more about trying to relive old memories rather than creating new ones, and I feel like my time in Norrath is coming to an end.
I've tried playing other games. My wife and I even tried WoW. And as restrictive as the open world PvP is there, you'd think it wouldn't be an issue. But barely had we moved out of the complete newbie zones when we began to be trolled by higher level characters. We'd be trying to do lower level PvE zones/quests, and flagged players would come along and try to jump between us and the mobs we were killing. Eventually, we would accidentally attack the flagged player, and then he would kill us instantly. We would quit playing those days because there was nothing we good do, and we quit the game completely a short time later.
See, that's my experience with almost every MMO that allows open world PvP of any kind. If you give it to players, there are going to be jerks who find a way to abuse it. And the only way to make them stop is to nerf PvP into oblivion. The only successful solution to open world PvP I've seen is to have servers with separate PvP/PvE rules and allow the players to decide what kind of experience they want. I'm a casual gamer. I have a wife and kids. My hardcore MMO days are over. I just can't do it. And in PvP, it seems like the hardcore gamers (the jerks at least...and there's always a few) eventually get bored and decide try and make the game lives of casual gamers miserable.
In the last few years, my concerns about PvP and griefing have taken on a new perspective. See, I like to play games with my son. He's likes to playing games with myself and his mother.
He's autistic.
He's a high functioning autistic, and on good days, it's hard to tell that anything is wrong. Still, we have to avoid games that allow PvP griefing. For example, we've had to remove him from PE at school because he can't tell the difference between kids just trying to play the game and kids trying to be mean to him. An autistic meltdown is usually the end result.
Now, with games like Plants vs Zombies Garden Warfare, he understands that the point of the game is run around and battle the opposing team with crazy weapons. But with games like MMO's that are PvE and open world PvP, he can't tell the difference between someone just trying to play the game and someone being mean to him. All he sees is someone being mean and trying to keep him from playing the PvE game. And if someone is trying to grief him, just forget it. We have to stop playing in order to prevent an autistic, emotional reaction.
As a parent, it's very hard to watch. He loves computer games. It's the one place he's found where he feels like everyone else. No one can tell he's different when he's behind the keyboard, and the social interactions he struggles with in real life are so much easier in game.
Except for griefing PvP encounters. But even non-griefing ones can be a source of frustration for him since, as I said before, to him, it's just someone trying to keep him from playing the game.
So I guess what I want to know more about and hear more about is how are you going to protect PvE players from PvP players who just want to be jerks because they are bored? How are you going to protect casual players from hardcore players trying to dominate the game? How are you going to keep hardcore players from forcing casual players to play the game their way?
If the answer is that the game is not being made for me and mine, that's fair. We'll look elsewhere. Just please tell us before we invest our money. So far, all of these Q&A videos seem to dwell far more on PvP than anything else. It's like “Yeah PvP! Everyone PvP! PvP is great!” I know you've tried to explain some about the measures you're taking to keep things from becoming a kill box, but it comes off as a secondary concern. You get excited when talking about PvP, and then it's, “Oh, and we're also going to try and deter people from randomly killing people.” No one seems to be asking questions about and getting excited about PvE. And that's what's keeping me from jumping into the Kickstarter.
Thanks,
Lex
After I graduated, I played other games. Ultima Online was my first graphical MMO. It was fun at first, but every time I met someone in the open world, the first thing they did was run away from me because they thought I was going to try and kill them. It was terrible, and I hated it.
But then in 1999, I discovered EQ. As one of those college friends I mentioned earlier put it, “It’s the graphical MUD of my dreams.” We all played, and somewhere along the way, I got married, and she played as well. Then EQ2 came along, and we’ve been playing ever since. Obviously, no open world PvP there, and it wasn’t needed. However, the last couple years in EQ2 has been more about trying to relive old memories rather than creating new ones, and I feel like my time in Norrath is coming to an end.
I’ve tried playing other games. My wife and I even tried WoW. And as restrictive as the open world PvP is there, you’d think it wouldn’t be an issue. But barely had we moved out of the complete newbie zones when we began to be trolled by higher level characters. We’d be trying to do lower level PvE zones/quests, and flagged players would come along and try to jump between us and the mobs we were killing. Eventually, we would accidentally attack the flagged player, and then he would kill us instantly. We would quit playing those days because there was nothing we good do, and we quit the game completely a short time later.
See, that’s my experience with almost every MMO that allows open world PvP of any kind. If you give it to players, there are going to be jerks who find a way to abuse it. And the only way to make them stop is to nerf PvP into oblivion. The only successful solution to open world PvP I’ve seen is to have servers with separate PvP/PvE rules and allow the players to decide what kind of experience they want. I’m a casual gamer. I have a wife and kids. My hardcore MMO days are over. I just can’t do it. And in PvP, it seems like the hardcore gamers (the jerks at least…and there’s always a few) eventually get bored and decide try and make the game lives of casual gamers miserable.
In the last few years, my concerns about PvP and griefing have taken on a new perspective. See, I like to play games with my son. He’s likes to playing games with myself and his mother.
He’s autistic.
He’s a high functioning autistic, and on good days, it’s hard to tell that anything is wrong. Still, we have to avoid games that allow PvP griefing. For example, we’ve had to remove him from PE at school because he can’t tell the difference between kids just trying to play the game and kids trying to be mean to him. An autistic meltdown is usually the end result.
Now, with games like Plants vs Zombies Garden Warfare, he understands that the point of the game is run around and battle the opposing team with crazy weapons. But with games like MMO’s that are PvE and open world PvP, he can’t tell the difference between someone just trying to play the game and someone being mean to him. All he sees is someone being mean and trying to keep him from playing the PvE game. And if someone is trying to grief him, just forget it. We have to stop playing in order to prevent an autistic, emotional reaction.
As a parent, it’s very hard to watch. He loves computer games. It’s the one place he’s found where he feels like everyone else. No one can tell he’s different when he’s behind the keyboard, and the social interactions he struggles with in real life are so much easier in game.
Except for griefing PvP encounters. But even non-griefing ones can be a source of frustration for him since, as I said before, to him, it’s just someone trying to keep him from playing the game.
So I guess what I want to know more about and hear more about is how are you going to protect PvE players from PvP players who just want to be jerks because they are bored? How are you going to protect casual players from hardcore players trying to dominate the game? How are you going to keep hardcore players from forcing casual players to play the game their way?
If the answer is that the game is not being made for me and mine, that’s fair. We’ll look elsewhere. Just please tell us before we invest our money. So far, all of these Q&A videos seem to dwell far more on PvP than anything else. It’s like “Yeah PvP! Everyone PvP! PvP is great!” I know you’ve tried to explain some about the measures you’re taking to keep things from becoming a kill box, but it comes off as a secondary concern. You get excited when talking about PvP, and then it’s, “Oh, and we’re also going to try and deter people from randomly killing people.” No one seems to be asking questions about and getting excited about PvE. And that’s what’s keeping me from jumping into the Kickstarter.
[/quote]
I respect you and families feelings about pvp , all I can do is tell you what the game is and how it will be when you are playing. There will be pvp , you can be attacked by players and it will happen. The corruption system and the severe penalties on PK'ers is there to minimalize how often that happens , its to prevent body camping and someone harassing you all day long. There will be plenty of PVE things to do and there is plans for Raids and such. You can have some measures of safety such as travelling with players that can pvp and protect you and there will be guards in the cites and towns but its not total immunity to pvp. The corruption system is subject to change and tighter restrictions to how it works could happen while play testing. The devs don't want to have any separate servers as of right now.
I am not foreign to PVP, I have played a lot of games where PVP was part of the game mechanics. Some games did it well others did a band-aid solution. I have encountered all types of PVPers but at the end of the day if they kill you what do they kill just pixels. Maybe you will have a hissy fit for 5 mins or rage quit. In the end its just a game. All you lose is a bit of time and some inconvenience.
With PVP Gankers or Griefers these are people who find pleasure in tormenting other players. If what I read is correct, these people will not enjoy the game much as there are consequences.
I would like to see that once a red or purple player enters a town they get killed by the guards. But to also have it that death is not a way to have a clean slate. Make it that you have to work your butt off to remove all that corruption you accumulated during your crime of passion.
For the people who dont mind either PVE or PVP but want to be selective when you do switch sides well tough, it all comes to cause and effect. You need to take the good with the bad.
Now to the OP, what would you do if you had a npc monster just outside a town that once you appeared it would kill you and it would do this many times. What would you do, you cant complain its another player, but this mechanic is stopping you doing what you want. How will you over come it.
We need to help the devs not complain about it, suggest ways to make it fair for all. That in turn will make a better game for all and not for the few.
The part that kinda bothers me is lets say you and another node are on bad terms and citizens from both your node and their node are out in the world exploring in the same area and ran into each other..... now if that was me and i knew the other group of players was from a node on bad terms with ours I would want to attack them... not because im a crazed pvp/pker but because they are a potential threat/enemy of my node "my home".
With the current corruption system I would be hunted down by the all bounty hunters for such an act.
(unless unclaimed parts of the map are combat zones) <--- doubt that would be the case, but i would like it.
So that's were things go really wrong for me, even bounty hunters from my node and my nodes allies would come and hunt me down for attacking a threat/enemy of our node. (This is were the games system stops making sense to me) The act of killing a player from a node on bad/threatening terms with my node should be seen as a service to the node. I understand that war is an option but i feel like that is skipping a step, before people go to war there are normally smaller scale clashes first.
I made a post in another threat about corruption with similar idea's.
[quote quote=19307]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]
Because it matters, when you´re only Level 10 and want to spawn kill Level 1 players and it takes no time to get to that level....
The part that kinda bothers me is lets say you and another node are on bad terms and citizens from both your node and their node are out in the world exploring in the same area and ran into each other….. now if that was me and i knew the other group of players was from a node on bad terms with ours I would want to attack them… not because im a crazed pvp/pker but because they are a potential threat/enemy of my node “my home”.
With the current corruption system I would be hunted down by the all bounty hunters for such an act.
(unless unclaimed parts of the map are combat zones) <— doubt that would be the case, but i would like it.[/quote]
This is not necessarily a problem for you actually.
It's fine for you to attack people. What's important is how you respond to their reaction.
If they don't attack you back, the honorable thing to do is to let them live.
If they attack you back, it is also honorable for you to kill them.
If they don't attack you back,and you kill them, you are dishonorable and your avatar will gain corruption.
The reason that you give for attacking them though isn't really anything new.
"They are from an enemy region - everyone from there is kill on sight to me!"
People have been doing that for 20 years.
The beauty of the EQNext/Ashes of Creation design is that the Node v Node conflict is that the nodes provide very specific reasons to combat some one.
The nearby trade city builds a bridge over a river and that chokes off your fish supply, so you decide to blow up the bridge because the leaders of the rival region refuse to remove it. As you are working to destroy the bridge, avatars who are guarding the bridge attack you, trying to stop you. You have no choice but to kill them.
Or you notice people trying to destroy the fast travel network because they hate fast travel. Plus trade has been redirect from there city because it's so much easier and faster to trade in your city. You attack them in order to stop their nefarious plan.
I'm not sure how you're going to recognize people from a rival node just by sight, but that won't really matter because people will be doing things that negatively affect your node. The primary thing to do will be to stop them from doing whatever that is. Killing them might be the easiest way to do that.
Whatever the case, as long as people fight you back after you attack them, you won't gain corruption.
If you see a red skull on your map, groups are gonna view that redskull as potential loot. I dont think many will like being corrupt.[/quote]
Some people take that as part of the fun.
I would have a couple of alts devoted to that if I enjoyed ruining people's fun.
I think that the answers to your question are that if you operate the way that you describe, you are going to be unhappy. Just as the game DOES NOT offer 100% protection from PVP it also DOES NOT offer 100% freedom from consequences for your actions.
To be able to play the way that you describe, your targets need to be flagged "combatant" or, in general but not always, signaling that they are willing to PVP. The moral argument that they are all "enemies" because there is tension between your Node cities just won't be enough in this game to allow you unrestrained PVP. I have not yet seen if there will be formal "states of war" features and how that would affect the various "flag" statuses.
In short: The way that you describe wanting to PVP seems to be exactly(with or without the excuse of THOSE BE ENEMIES!) what the game is being coded to punish and keep to a minimal level.
I am not foreign to PVP, I have played a lot of games where PVP was part of the game mechanics. Some games did it well others did a band-aid solution. I have encountered all types of PVPers but at the end of the day if they kill you what do they kill just pixels. Maybe you will have a hissy fit for 5 mins or rage quit. In the end its just a game. All you lose is a bit of time and some inconvenience.
With PVP Gankers or Griefers these are people who find pleasure in tormenting other players. If what I read is correct, these people will not enjoy the game much as there are consequences.
I would like to see that once a red or purple player enters a town they get killed by the guards. But to also have it that death is not a way to have a clean slate. Make it that you have to work your butt off to remove all that corruption you accumulated during your crime of passion.
For the people who dont mind either PVE or PVP but want to be selective when you do switch sides well tough, it all comes to cause and effect. You need to take the good with the bad.
Now to the OP, what would you do if you had a npc monster just outside a town that once you appeared it would kill you and it would do this many times. What would you do, you cant complain its another player, but this mechanic is stopping you doing what you want. How will you over come it.
We need to help the devs not complain about it, suggest ways to make it fair for all. That in turn will make a better game for all and not for the few.
[/quote]
I too would both like to see consequences "stick" with a player for more than just passing through the resurrection shrine and more PVP skeptics to give the game a shot by A. Recognize that it is a game, B. Embrace it and learn how to take precautions, and C. Possibly come to enjoy being part of a great group and the enjoyment that comes with working together in a world where everyone else is a potential threat.
Being able to shed all past misdeeds by dying in game whether through legit bounty hunting, meeting your match, or by tricky "gaming of the system" isn't much of a deterrent for the determined. I suggest that a character has a long "cooldown" on corruption like a "record" of some type. Each time they regain corruption their past actions influence how much they gain. THIS IS WHERE INTREPID WILL NEED TO SHOW THIER RESOLVE for keeping bad acts to a minimal level. How exactly their mechanics thwart determination to be "bad". How their mechanics withstand being "gamed" by clever players. I can't wait to see if they can succeed!
[u]For players uncertain about PVP games[/u]
In these kinds of games, being in a good "group" or "guild" makes a HUGE difference. It changes and makes better almost everything about such games. Even for those that normally run as "lone wolves" when they play MMOs
After I graduated, I played other games. Ultima Online was my first graphical MMO. It was fun at first, but every time I met someone in the open world, the first thing they did was run away from me because they thought I was going to try and kill them. It was terrible, and I hated it.
But then in 1999, I discovered EQ. As one of those college friends I mentioned earlier put it, “It’s the graphical MUD of my dreams.” We all played, and somewhere along the way, I got married, and she played as well. Then EQ2 came along, and we’ve been playing ever since. Obviously, no open world PvP there, and it wasn’t needed. However, the last couple years in EQ2 has been more about trying to relive old memories rather than creating new ones, and I feel like my time in Norrath is coming to an end.
I’ve tried playing other games. My wife and I even tried WoW. And as restrictive as the open world PvP is there, you’d think it wouldn’t be an issue. But barely had we moved out of the complete newbie zones when we began to be trolled by higher level characters. We’d be trying to do lower level PvE zones/quests, and flagged players would come along and try to jump between us and the mobs we were killing. Eventually, we would accidentally attack the flagged player, and then he would kill us instantly. We would quit playing those days because there was nothing we good do, and we quit the game completely a short time later.
See, that’s my experience with almost every MMO that allows open world PvP of any kind. If you give it to players, there are going to be jerks who find a way to abuse it. And the only way to make them stop is to nerf PvP into oblivion. The only successful solution to open world PvP I’ve seen is to have servers with separate PvP/PvE rules and allow the players to decide what kind of experience they want. I’m a casual gamer. I have a wife and kids. My hardcore MMO days are over. I just can’t do it. And in PvP, it seems like the hardcore gamers (the jerks at least…and there’s always a few) eventually get bored and decide try and make the game lives of casual gamers miserable.
In the last few years, my concerns about PvP and griefing have taken on a new perspective. See, I like to play games with my son. He’s likes to playing games with myself and his mother.
He’s autistic.
He’s a high functioning autistic, and on good days, it’s hard to tell that anything is wrong. Still, we have to avoid games that allow PvP griefing. For example, we’ve had to remove him from PE at school because he can’t tell the difference between kids just trying to play the game and kids trying to be mean to him. An autistic meltdown is usually the end result.
Now, with games like Plants vs Zombies Garden Warfare, he understands that the point of the game is run around and battle the opposing team with crazy weapons. But with games like MMO’s that are PvE and open world PvP, he can’t tell the difference between someone just trying to play the game and someone being mean to him. All he sees is someone being mean and trying to keep him from playing the PvE game. And if someone is trying to grief him, just forget it. We have to stop playing in order to prevent an autistic, emotional reaction.
As a parent, it’s very hard to watch. He loves computer games. It’s the one place he’s found where he feels like everyone else. No one can tell he’s different when he’s behind the keyboard, and the social interactions he struggles with in real life are so much easier in game.
Except for griefing PvP encounters. But even non-griefing ones can be a source of frustration for him since, as I said before, to him, it’s just someone trying to keep him from playing the game.
So I guess what I want to know more about and hear more about is how are you going to protect PvE players from PvP players who just want to be jerks because they are bored? How are you going to protect casual players from hardcore players trying to dominate the game? How are you going to keep hardcore players from forcing casual players to play the game their way?
If the answer is that the game is not being made for me and mine, that’s fair. We’ll look elsewhere. Just please tell us before we invest our money. So far, all of these Q&A videos seem to dwell far more on PvP than anything else. It’s like “Yeah PvP! Everyone PvP! PvP is great!” I know you’ve tried to explain some about the measures you’re taking to keep things from becoming a kill box, but it comes off as a secondary concern. You get excited when talking about PvP, and then it’s, “Oh, and we’re also going to try and deter people from randomly killing people.” No one seems to be asking questions about and getting excited about PvE. And that’s what’s keeping me from jumping into the Kickstarter.
[/quote]
Hi Krey,
Sounds like you have a long gaming history(know where of you speak) as well as life throwing you challenges that make choosing the right games to play more difficult. Therefore, I am not going to BS you.
Let it be clear that I do not speak for Intrepid. Just from my own knowledge, experience and life wisdom.
Because there will not be (so far as we have seen) anything to prevent bad PVP experiences from happening "in the moment" so to speak, this game probably won't be a good match for your son. There will be consequences for how people act but results will almost never be instant and that would seem to be what you will need to make things playable realistically for your son. Just my take from your post. Remember that I do not speak for Intrepid and I hope that they can answer you and they have a better solution. :)
Best of luck in finding the right game for you and your family. I sometimes wish that I had a family of gamers myself.
I've played a lot of Runescape and there is an area called the wilderness where people can kill eachother, but honestly that is really boring to me and creates a lot of dead areas on the map.
[/quote]
It will harm it thats for sure. My observation of gaming overall is since the late 90's online gaming has grown immensely. Its now encompasing extreme casual players who are there for social aspects almost exclusively. Thats fine with me, Im glad millions of people enjoy the hobby I got hooked on in 1983 when I got an atari console.
I now seen a few mmos proclaim almost exclusively that they want to be PvP centric (Crowfall, CU) and while I think thats awesome (I'll play both) Its a niche market. That isnt to say there isnt profit to be made but the masses appear to want blended game play and have safe zones where they can experience the game at their pace and choosing. I personally have no problem with the AoC model as proposed, but I suspect several may.
So I guess what I want to know more about and hear more about is how are you going to protect PvE players from PvP players who just want to be jerks because they are bored? How are you going to protect casual players from hardcore players trying to dominate the game? How are you going to keep hardcore players from forcing casual players to play the game their way?
If the answer is that the game is not being made for me and mine, that’s fair. We’ll look elsewhere. Just please tell us before we invest our money. So far, all of these Q&A videos seem to dwell far more on PvP than anything else. It’s like “Yeah PvP! Everyone PvP! PvP is great!” I know you’ve tried to explain some about the measures you’re taking to keep things from becoming a kill box, but it comes off as a secondary concern. You get excited when talking about PvP, and then it’s, “Oh, and we’re also going to try and deter people from randomly killing people.” No one seems to be asking questions about and getting excited about PvE. And that’s what’s keeping me from jumping into the Kickstarter.[/quote]
There is nothing. When Steven says PvE players, he really means Crafters.
This is a game where the goal is for Crafters to support PvP players and PvP players in turn protect Crafters.
The Crafters willl typically be non-combatants. The PvPers will typically be combatants. PKers will be combatants who have earned a corruption penalty for killing non-combatants.
That's the way it's all set up.
There is nothing for players who love fighting mobs but don't like PvP combat 24/7.
<div class="d4p-bbt-quote-title"><a href="https://www.ashesofcreation.com/forums/topic/please-dont-force-us-to-be-victims-of-pvpers/page/22/#post-20512" rel="nofollow">NightshadeRaven wrote:</a></div>
I was going to grab quotes from all the various posts but I would have ended up with a wall of text and my content would have been missed.
I am not foreign to PVP, I have played a lot of games where PVP was part of the game mechanics. Some games did it well others did a band-aid solution. I have encountered all types of PVPers but at the end of the day if they kill you what do they kill just pixels. Maybe you will have a hissy fit for 5 mins or rage quit. In the end its just a game. All you lose is a bit of time and some inconvenience.
With PVP Gankers or Griefers these are people who find pleasure in tormenting other players. If what I read is correct, these people will not enjoy the game much as there are consequences.
I would like to see that once a red or purple player enters a town they get killed by the guards. But to also have it that death is not a way to have a clean slate. Make it that you have to work your butt off to remove all that corruption you accumulated during your crime of passion.
For the people who dont mind either PVE or PVP but want to be selective when you do switch sides well tough, it all comes to cause and effect. You need to take the good with the bad.
Now to the OP, what would you do if you had a npc monster just outside a town that once you appeared it would kill you and it would do this many times. What would you do, you cant complain its another player, but this mechanic is stopping you doing what you want. How will you over come it.
We need to help the devs not complain about it, suggest ways to make it fair for all. That in turn will make a better game for all and not for the few.
</blockquote>
I too would both like to see consequences “stick” with a player for more than just passing through the resurrection shrine and more PVP skeptics to give the game a shot by A. Recognize that it is a game, B. Embrace it and learn how to take precautions, and C. Possibly come to enjoy being part of a great group and the enjoyment that comes with working together in a world where everyone else is a potential threat.
Being able to shed all past misdeeds by dying in game whether through legit bounty hunting, meeting your match, or by tricky “gaming of the system” isn’t much of a deterrent for the determined. I suggest that a character has a long “cooldown” on corruption like a “record” of some type. Each time they regain corruption their past actions influence how much they gain. THIS IS WHERE INTREPID WILL NEED TO SHOW THIER RESOLVE for keeping bad acts to a minimal level. How exactly their mechanics thwart determination to be “bad”. How their mechanics withstand being “gamed” by clever players. I can’t wait to see if they can succeed!
<span class="d4pbbc-underline" style="text-decoration: underline;">For players uncertain about PVP games</span>
In these kinds of games, being in a good “group” or “guild” makes a HUGE difference. It changes and makes better almost everything about such games. Even for those that normally run as “lone wolves” when they play MMOs
[/quote]
You mean a time based corruption decay system ?
Perhaps one thats decay slows down with amplitude.
In effect, the occasional murder per day, might not take too long for corruption to wear off.
But some oen that has an immense amount of corruption, will not only take a long time to wear off, but the decay rate of the corruption will also slow down.
Taking even longer to wear off than normal.
Thus the punishment fits the crime.
A murderer will be punished.
A mass murderer on a killing spree simply wont be able to escape the punishment...and be eternally damned.
I too would both like to see consequences “stick” with a player for more than just passing through the resurrection shrine and more PVP skeptics to give the game a shot by A. Recognize that it is a game, B. Embrace it and learn how to take precautions, and C. Possibly come to enjoy being part of a great group and the enjoyment that comes with working together in a world where everyone else is a potential threat.[/quote]
A: Everyone recognizes that this is a game. The issue is that casual players don't always want to be stuck in hardcore activities. And they don't want to be forced into hardcore activities when they're not in the mood to do so. They want to be able to control when they do casual stuff and when they do hardcore stuff.
B: There aren't many precautions that can be taken, here. Especially not when you can be attacked 24/7. But, I would love to hear a few examples of how to avoid PvP combat in AoC when you're not in the mood for PvP combat. Especially when you're in the mood for the casual challenge of PvE combat, but you're not in the mood for PvP combat.
C: I'm still waiting for someone to explain how being a part of a mixed PvE/PvP works. The PvE Rogue and PvE Cleric refuse to fight other player characters and leave it up to the PvP Fighter and PvP Mage to save everyone when they're fighting an enemy group of 4 PvP players. ??? I find that difficult to believe.
That really happens???
[/quote]
I guess I'm not sure what you're referring to as bad.
Both PvE combat and PvP combat are good. I don't want to do either of them 24/7.
Casual players don't want to do hardcore content all the time. They want to be able to choose when they do casual stuff and when they do hardcore stuff. They especially don't want other players to be able to force them to do hardcore stuff when they aren't in the mood to do hardcore stuff.
I suppose the bad must be that we need to accept that other players will force us to do stuff we don't want to do?
So it's wrong for us to be selective about what we want to do, but it's OK for other players to be selective for us about what we must do??
Sounds like slavery to me.
I guess I’m not sure what you’re referring to as bad.[/quote]
You need to take a good situation and a bad situation.
[quote]
Sounds like slavery to me.[/quote]
Slavery is when your forced to do something and you dont have free will. You are at the beck and call of a master. No one is forcing you to do anything you dont want to do.
This is what has happened over the last 10+ years of MMORPGs and guess what? They have failed. So no MMORPGS do not need to be fully inclusive. You just believe that because you believe every game should be built for everyone. Guess what? MMORPGS are a niche genera not a one that is made for everyone.
Please start a new thread that already has a better premise than this one.
Or make several new threads so we can get to the heart of the conversation. Everyone is still wandering around 4 topics in their posts and its making it difficult for people to follow along.
@Dygz - Nothing in the gaming community has been and hopefully never will be like fucking slavery. What is wrong with you? You chained to your computer desk? They threatening to kill you or your family if you don't play? Please be more constructive with your posts. Cancer begets cancer. Be responsible.
Thanks,
Lex