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
And Bringslite adds….
Its a completely different subject then, at this point.[/quote]
It's not a completely different subject.
The subject is: Please Don't Make Us the Victims of PvPers
PvPers have interpreted that to mean PKers.
My concern as always been mostly about PvPers who believe they have a legitimate reason to attack:
SCENARIO 2
Like I am flagged as a combatant and I'm out harvesting in a secluded area while waiting for the timer to cooldown. A player chooses to attack me even though I explain the situation and say that I'm not in the mood to fight. That is not a PKer.
If I win that battle, the timer for the flag resets and I have to wait, again, for the timer to cooldown. Which leaves me open, again, to be attacked without the attacker gaining corruption.
Again, doesn't matter if that is an individual or a group.
Sure, we've been bogged down by "grow a pair" and "to have a pve-only server you'd have to remove all pvp from the game" and "we can't split the community" and "just convince the pve-only crowd that they are paranoid" and "corruption is harsh enough that PKing will be rare."
I'm trying to ignore all that and re-focus on the topic. As we try to get all playstyles happily playing together on the same server.
We've got some headway going discussing my SCENARIO 1. I think we're on a positive path now. Thanks!
I'll read more and respond better if you get to the point without the scenarios. My eyes start to glaze when I have to read too much. I will also try to be more concise and brief.
P.S. Please disregard this: "And Bringslite adds….
Its a completely different subject then, at this point."
I didn't grasp what you were getting at....
[quote]
Bringslite wrote:
Sometimes you have to take one for the team or lobby for a mechanic that makes an enemy of your Node flag as combatant. At that point though, it is hardly you being forced into non consensual PVP.[/quote]
I need you to explain that in more detail. I understood none of it.
We are farming dryads in Kithicor so that I can siphon their Life energy, transmute that to Shadow energy and augment our Shadow spells and abilities. We don't belong to a guild. The druids of Kithicor wish to stop us.
Under the current mechanics, we can just choose to not fight back and the druids will gain corruption if they kill us.
You're suggestion is that the druids flag us as combatants against our wills. ???
The druids could do that even if we weren't killing dryads?
Can they do that to Artisans who are harvesting trees there?
If someone can flag me as a combatant against my will and then kill me with no penalties, that is non-consensual PvP combat.
"You’re suggestion is that the druids flag us as combatants against our wills. ???
The druids could do that even if we weren’t killing dryads?
Can they do that to Artisans who are harvesting trees there?"
You are either trolling me or being deliberately obtuse or just obtuse. How you get these ideas from what responses you get is very confusing.
You are in a Node (doing PVE or harvesting) that has some player group controlling it but it isn't your own group. You are [u]consenting[/u] to be a target of the controlling group by doing what you are doing if they decide that is an unwanted activity for outsiders.
You join a guild. It has benefits of teamwork and who knows what else(we will see) you are [u]consenting[/u] to possibly go to war with another guild and be combatant to that other guild.
^^^These things up there, if you think they are "bad things", are kind of what someone else posted to you about "you have to take the bad with the good"
[u]Taking one for the Team:[/u] I mean that if there are no other mechanics available during one of your "scenarios" then you may just have to kill and take a corruption hit. If you really want to stop that guy and there is no other way, you can choose to Take One For The Team by stopping him by killing.
[quote]
Bringslite wrote:
You are in a Node (doing PVE or harvesting) that has some player group controlling it but it isn’t your own group. You are consenting to be a target of the controlling group by doing what you are doing if they decide that is an unwanted activity for outsiders.
You join a guild. It has benefits of teamwork and who knows what else(we will see) you are consenting to possibly go to war with another guild and be combatant to that other guild.
^^^These things up there, if you think they are “bad things”, are kind of what someone else posted to you about “you have to take the bad with the good”
Taking one for the Team: I mean that if there are no other mechanics available during one of your “scenarios” then you may just have to kill and take a corruption hit. If you really want to stop that guy and there is no other way, you can choose to Take One For The Team by stopping him by killing.[/quote]
It doesn't necessarily matter which node we're from. People who live in Kithicor could be killing dyrads to siphon their Life magic.
We will all be doing stuff that has a negative impact on other people - sometimes without even realizing it.
The core of the game is PvP conflict. There will be people doing stuff you don't want them to do. It can't simply be that you can flag people as a combatant against their wills simply because you think what they're doing has an impact you don't like.
Joining a guild is irrelevant. I want to kill some dryads, I kill some dryads.
According to the current rules, if you kill me to stop me, you gain corruption.
That is OK for me and bad for those trying to stop me. If they don't care about gaining corruption...OK.
But, we can just come back, kill more dryads and if they kill us again, they gain more corruption.
If the answer is the PvPers will just gain corruption when the PvEers don't fight back, maybe that is a solution the PvErs will be willing to accept.
Seems to me that the PvPers wouldn't be happy with that, but if they are... let's see what the PvE only folk think about that.
[quote]
Bringslite wrote:
Choosing to NOT be in a guild so that you can escape any given Node’s idea of “Justice” is also a problem.
I am an old hand at this type of discussion. The game I am playing now has developed a pretty complicated system that covers just about all of this stuff, but it has taken a long time and lots of debate to get there. In this game, a person (past a certain level) who is not in a Company(plz read guild) that is part of a “player city” can’t advance past a certain level. This is for two reasons: The game design wants that player involved in the larger world after a certain time and the game does not want you to be really effective as a character unless you can be held accountable for your actions.
That makes rowdy players unable to duck responsibility for what they do. They can get their Guild involved in conflict, their guild could kick them, the city could kick that Guild or other cities could siege and take that whole city away if it is too annoying. Underneath all of this is a reputation system that punishes you for random murder. A multi layered approach and absolutely VERY weakly summarized here by me.[/quote]
That line of thinking reminds of the guilds who refuse to allow their members to have alts because alts can be used as spies.
I think you choose not be in a guild just because you choose not to be in a guild. Just like you have alts because you like playing different roles.
I'll have to spend some time thinking about how I think your concept of guilds would entice or dissuade PvErs from playing with PvPers. I guess what I think would be interesting to see is what that level restriction would be.
It seems like that's setting up artificial PvP zones. Hmmmn.
Food for thought.
Thanks!!
[quote]
Bringslite wrote:
You are in a Node (doing PVE or harvesting) that has some player group controlling it but it isn’t your own group. You are consenting to be a target of the controlling group by doing what you are doing if they decide that is an unwanted activity for outsiders.
You join a guild. It has benefits of teamwork and who knows what else(we will see) you are consenting to possibly go to war with another guild and be combatant to that other guild.
^^^These things up there, if you think they are “bad things”, are kind of what someone else posted to you about “you have to take the bad with the good”
Taking one for the Team: I mean that if there are no other mechanics available during one of your “scenarios” then you may just have to kill and take a corruption hit. If you really want to stop that guy and there is no other way, you can choose to Take One For The Team by stopping him by killing.[/quote]
It doesn't necessarily matter which node we're from. People who live in Kithicor could be killing dyrads to siphon their Life magic.
We will all be doing stuff that has a negative impact on other people - sometimes without even realizing it.
The core of the game is PvP conflict. There will be people doing stuff you don't want them to do. It can't simply be that you can flag people as a combatant against their wills simply because you think what they're doing has an impact you don't like.
Joining a guild is irrelevant. I want to kill some dryads, I kill some dryads.
According to the current rules, if you kill me to stop me, you gain corruption.
That is OK for me and bad for those trying to stop me. If they don't care about gaining corruption...OK.
But, we can just come back, kill more dryads and if they kill us again, they gain more corruption.
If the answer is the PvPers will just gain corruption when the PvEers don't fight back, maybe that is a solution the PvErs will be willing to accept.
Seems to me that the PvPers wouldn't be happy with that, but if they are... let's see what the PvE only folk think about that.
[quote]
Bringslite wrote:
Choosing to NOT be in a guild so that you can escape any given Node’s idea of “Justice” is also a problem.
I am an old hand at this type of discussion. The game I am playing now has developed a pretty complicated system that covers just about all of this stuff, but it has taken a long time and lots of debate to get there. In this game, a person (past a certain level) who is not in a Company(plz read guild) that is part of a “player city” can’t advance past a certain level. This is for two reasons: The game design wants that player involved in the larger world after a certain time and the game does not want you to be really effective as a character unless you can be held accountable for your actions.
That makes rowdy players unable to duck responsibility for what they do. They can get their Guild involved in conflict, their guild could kick them, the city could kick that Guild or other cities could siege and take that whole city away if it is too annoying. Underneath all of this is a reputation system that punishes you for random murder. A multi layered approach and absolutely VERY weakly summarized here by me.[/quote]
That line of thinking reminds of the guilds who refuse to allow their members to have alts because alts can be used as spies.
I think you choose not be in a guild just because you choose not to be in a guild. Just like you have alts because you like playing different roles.
I'll have to spend some time thinking about how I think your concept of guilds would entice or dissuade PvErs from playing with PvPers. I guess what I think would be interesting to see is what that level restriction would be.
It seems like that's setting up artificial PvP zones. Hmmmn.
Food for thought.
Thanks!!
(let's see if I can get this to post) :-p
This isn't my concept of how things should work. This is a system that ONE game uses and it is very convoluted but works well. Personally I would be just fine and happy to try a game that is a little more messy, without every possible situation covered in some way. Make the players work things out with less tools and more hard or soft political solutions of our own.
A right fine mess sounds like it could be fun.
-Euan G
This isn’t my concept of how things should work. This is a system that ONE game uses and it is very convoluted but works well. Personally I would be just fine and happy to try a game that is a little more messy, without every possible situation covered in some way. Make the players work things out with less tools and more hard or soft political solutions of our own.
A right fine mess sounds like it could be fun.[/quote]
hahaha
No need to quibble. It's a suggestion from another game that you are offering as a possible solution. That's basically what I meant.
Still great food for thought - I need to time to digest it.
Thanks again!
They will not have PvE servers! As for corruption and how the mechanics will work or not work we will have to wait until people start playing the alphas. All this theorycrafting and back and forth going on for pages is pointless. I believe the devs have spoken on this topic quite enough to see the direction they want to take the game. This thread looks terrible!
How about instead of trying to change the game, you just understand what the game is going to me and realize it may not be for you.
[/quote]
MAYBE for a month after launch. Players will get tired of 3 times xp debt and reduced stats after a lil while.
[/quote]
You keep saying the same thing as well...
Can´t wait to enter the arena for a fair fight... oh wait xD
Communities thrive from making friends. Friends mean retention. Retention means company success.
[/quote]
I think that it is impossible to make a good game by appealing to everyone; more games have been ruined by trying to do so than not.
I think the number of PvE players who will tolerate PvP mechanics (such as myself) with a reasonable penalty system and so long as there isn't 'Flavor of the Month Arena Balancing' constantly making me unable to defend myself from gankers vastly exceeds the vocal minority of carebears who want to play a co-op minecraft MMO.
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Up to the voted laws of the Node's ZOI, of course.
Just a thought! ;)
You keep saying the same thing as well…[/quote]
Actually, no. I'm staying on topic but have moved on to discussing how to have PvE Adventurers and casual PvP Adventurers happily playing with Artisans and hardcore PvP Adventurers.
I like the penalties exponentially getting worse, to the point they are so severe it would put a real hurt on someone that's PK'd so much they got to that severe point such that they'll think twice about doing it again.
I could only imagine how they would cry if bosses spawned in random locations around the world to one shot them.
I like the penalties exponentially getting worse, to the point they are so severe it would put a real hurt on someone that’s PK’d so much they got to that severe point such that they’ll think twice about doing it again.
[/quote]
Agree! Someone might get thier kicks out of watching the world burn, but I always feel good inside if they get the 3rd degree for trying. :)
DON'T BE A VICTIM! Only you can allow yourself to be a victim in your own eyes. Be an active participant in the game and give the dangerous world the respect that it is due instead of trying to play like you would in a perfectly safe PVE game.
I am not a hardcore gamer. My threshhold for hardcore gaming is about 60 minutes, then I want to focus on casual activities in the game world without being forced into hardcore stuff.
If I choose to run a caravan, great. I will gladly accept those risks. My caravans get destroyed a couple of times one day...well, that's what I scheduled. But, if I want to be done with caravans for the day and focus on crafting or harvesting, I'm going to be pissed if some other player can force me to run a caravan.
(That is just an analogy, btw. I am not literally concerned about being forced to run a caravan.)
Nobody can change me into a hardcore gamer.
I am not a hardcore challenge gamer. My threshhold for hardcore challenge gaming is about 60 minutes per day, then I want to focus on casual activities in the game world without being forced into hardcore challenge stuff. Even though I play MMORPGs hardcore time: 8 hours per day.
If I choose to run a caravan, great. I will gladly accept those risks. My caravans get destroyed a couple of times one day...well, that's what I scheduled. But, if I want to be done with caravans for the day and focus on crafting or harvesting, I'm going to be pissed if some other player can force me to run a caravan.
(That is just an analogy, btw. I am not literally concerned about being forced to run a caravan.)
Nobody can change me into a hardcore gamer.
I am not a hardcore challenge gamer. My threshhold for hardcore challenge gaming is about 60 minutes per day, then I want to focus on casual activities in the game world without being forced into hardcore challenge stuff. Even though I play MMORPGs hardcore time: 8 hours per day.
If I choose to run a caravan, great. I will gladly accept those risks. My caravans get destroyed a couple of times one day...well, that's what I scheduled. But, if I want to be done with caravans for the day and focus on crafting or harvesting, I'm going to be pissed if some other player can force me to run a caravan.
(That is just an analogy, btw. I am not literally concerned about being forced to run a caravan.)
Nobody can change me into a hardcore gamer.
(edit roulette)
It's not as simple as don't be a victim. It's a matter of personality and playstyle and mood and taste.
I am not a hardcore challenge gamer. My threshhold for hardcore challenge gaming is about 60 minutes per day, then I want to focus on casual activities in the game world without being forced into hardcore challenge stuff. Even though I play MMORPGs hardcore time: 8 hours per day.
If I choose to run a caravan, great. I will gladly accept those risks. My caravans get destroyed a couple of times one day...well, that's what I scheduled. But, if I want to be done with caravans for the day and focus on crafting or harvesting, I'm going to be pissed if some other player can force me to run a caravan.
(That is just an analogy, btw. I am not literally concerned about being forced to run a caravan.)