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.

Please don't force us to be victims of PvPers!

1212224262750

Comments

  • @Bringslite Doesn't sound like a different game, but it does ask for too much extra programming and breaking mechanics in unrealistic ways. Strays way too far from the dev's vision. 

    A few examples:
    1:  Separate PvP gear. That calls for a continual state of extra art and extra stat balance. The devs are not going to bend over backwards to cater to PvE only folks to support a vision that is counter to their own vision.

    2:  No PvP penalty system and no bounty system
    I think corruption is probably too integral to the lore to be completely missing and some archetypes have abilities related to bounty hunting and detecting corrupted, so... there has to be some way to put those abilities to use.

    Actually, I think I would want them both to still come into play to help resolve my issue with unwanted PvP Getting attacked after I've moved away from a PvP battle and playing as a non-combatant but I'm waiting for the flag timer to cool down. (Still ways unscrupulous folk could exploit that so needs more thought)

    Seems like there would need to be other ways to have corruption and bounty hunting have meaning in the game. Off the cuff, I'm thinking of cursed zones or cursed dungeons. That might be even better than PvP tokens as an incentive to flag for PvP combat. Hardcore zones/dungeons that auto-flag participants as corrupted. hmmmn.
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    @Stabby
    Seems odd to me to consider node destruction as a PvP pillar.
    The pillar is "Nodes". Leveling nodes and destroying nodes is the pillar - along with all of the underlying systems that thereby cause the world to change.

    So... in that section, there would be no getting rid of node destruction as a PvP pillar.
    In fact, sieges would be a great reason to flag for PvP combat on a server where PvP combat is possible.
    Ashes AI isn't robust enough to simply have NPCs traveling around sieging cities and metropolises. The devs could program massive horde attacks into the narratives of the nodes, but... if they go through the trouble of designing and programming the various hordes that could take down a city or metropolis, that would need to be standard on all servers, not just limited to PvE-Optional servers.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Does have me wondering about a server with PvE zones and PvP zones, though.
    On the EQnext forums, we had discussed that as a way to have all the playstyles on the same servers - not splitting the playerbase.
    My guess is that for Ashes it would be too easy for PvE zones to monopolize the Metorpolises, so it would probably have to be some form of battlegrounds on an otherwise PvE-Only server.
    Hmmnn Probably unworkable, but a fun thought excercise.


  • Anc1ent said:
    to many posts to read so sorry if this has been mentioned, but a reason to "gank" random players is for a guild to claim a region to "farm" as there territory and trespassers will be executed. If this happens to all the best places to harvest resources or monsters, there will no longer be room for players to harvest or play by themselves. So is PvP going to be limited to caravan routes and city sieges, or are solo players just out of luck in the wild when faced with guilds?
    That would probably be considered meaningful conflict rather than ganking random players. That guild would probably be gaining corruption, so I don't know how long they could defend that territory. Bounty hunters would start pouring in, basically allowing gatherers to harvest while the guild is massacred. Also, it's not possible to farm one spot forever. Once the resources are all depleted, they're gone for days or week from that location and randomly respawn somewhere else in the world. PvP combat won't be limited to caravans and sieges. Hiring NPC guards is a thing for caravans and freeholds. Seems like NPC bodyguards should be able to be hired by solo gatherers. Or it may be that gatherers will tend to group - especially group with PvP adventurers acting as bodyguards.
  • Anc1ent said:
    to many posts to read so sorry if this has been mentioned, but a reason to "gank" random players is for a guild to claim a region to "farm" as there territory and trespassers will be executed. If this happens to all the best places to harvest resources or monsters, there will no longer be room for players to harvest or play by themselves. So is PvP going to be limited to caravan routes and city sieges, or are solo players just out of luck in the wild when faced with guilds?
    It sounds like you're thinking along the lines of what BDO did; the devs haven't indicated that Node buildup would be "exclusive" or that no one else could harvest them. That I'm aware of; I'm sure if they have, someone will correct me. However, I'm not thinking that what IS is doing with Ashes is quite the same.
  • ArchivedUserArchivedUser Guest
    edited June 2017
    I hope the daily gathering stuff is safe for soloers though or the mechanics help it be so, otherwise people will grow tired of this quite quickly. The game has to cater for those who want to enjoy the facets of the game which don't involve direct PvP imo.
  • The devs say they absolutely are not baking a "gankbox".
  • I guess my understanding of corruption is lacking....Does it lower their stats, or ban them from city entrance, or does it just say "Hey my names red now"? 


  • from what I understand Corruption lowers your stats, thus you get inherently weaker the more non-combatants you kill, it stacks for every kill, the only way to get rid of it is when you die (and it may take many, many deaths depending on how much corruption you've accrued). And if you're corrupted and die you have a chance to drop actual gear (the only instance where this can happen). Also, you become visible on the map to people who are flagged as bounty hunters (a status you can achieve through doing a series of quests). In other words...it sound slike there will be pretty severe consequences to griefing and ganking players who don't want to do pvp.
  • ArchivedUserArchivedUser Guest
    edited June 2017
    Summary of corruption and PvP so far:

    • No safe spots, you can be attacked anywhere at any time
    • Roaming trade caravans have proximity based options for PvP
    • If you're killed in PvP you lose XP regardless if you're the victim or the attacker
    • If you're attacked in PvP and fight back you both earn corruption 
    • If you kill a player you earn corruption (rate unknown)
    • Corruption begins with the death of the player, not the attack itself
    • There will be ways to recover your corruption (rate unknown)
    • If you're a corrupt player and die in PvP you lose XP and items in your inventory
    • Corruption increases with the more players you kill in non-consensual combat
    • As the corruption progresses, or increases a tier, it effects your combat performance
    • As the corruption progresses you become visible on the map for "bounty hunters". Bounty hunting has to be learned to increase efficiency.
    • Corruption begins with the death of the player, not the attack itself
    • Players can attack your freehold at any time and steal the items you have in your chest(s)
    • Players can destroy your freehold at the end of a node destruction sequence.
    • Based on one of the last videos there will be game mechanics built around the corruption system. Think good and evil. Dark and light.

    Did I miss anything? Please feel free to correct me if I'm wrong about any of that.



  • well looks like I have to get killing then if I want to be evil. 
  • If you're attacked in PvP and fight back you both earn corruption 

    Players can attack your freehold at any time and steal the items you have in your chest(s)

    ..................................

    Those two are absolutely incorrect. Some others may also be wrong but I'm not sure.

  • @Bringslite

    Exactly, Seriously guys ... @Dygz  posted an actual Article which states how PvP works - don't be discouraged in reading. 
  • @Eragale

    Do we have a link to this post?
  • I believe you get normal penalty for being killed as a noncombatant in PVP. The attacking player becomes corrupt on the death of the noncombatant. If both parties are flagged for PVP, death penalties are reduced. (I'm sure I saw a youtube video about this, not from Ashes, but one of the interviewers).

    So you would have the same penalty for dying from being ganked as you would as dying from PVE, provided you don't fight back. If you do fight back and die, you would have a reduced penalty.

    The youtube video I am having difficulty finding right now used the bunny-eared mount graphic to demonstrate this in a visual way and made it a lot easier to understand.
  • ArchivedUserArchivedUser Guest
    edited June 2017
    @Stabby
    https://errantpenman.com/2017/01/11/interview-ashes-of-creation-wants-to-bring-the-virtual-world-to-life/
    There are three states that a player can find themselves in: Non-Combatant (Green), Combatant (Purple), and Corrupt (Red). Everyone is a Non-Combatant by default. If a Non-Combatant attacks a Combatant or another non-combatant, then they become a Combatant for a period of time. Similarly, if a Non-Combatant enters a PVP zone (which includes things like Castles, City Sieges and Caravans) they are automatically flagged a Combatant while in the zone, and for a period of time after leaving that zone.

    Players can kill Combatants without repercussions, and are encouraged to do so, since dying while a Combatant means you suffer reduced death penalties. Where this changes is when a Combatant kills a Non-Combatant. In this case, the Combatant is Corrupt, and acquires a Corruption Score (which is accrued based on a number of different parameters, including the level differential of their freshly slain victim). 

  • ArchivedUserArchivedUser Guest
    edited June 2017
    @Stabby
    If you are going to advocate so stronly against the game design, you have to at least correctly understand what the game design is.
    Do some research, dude. Please.
    Make sure you have your facts straight.

    1: We don't lose xp when killed by other players - instead we gain xp debt.

    2: If you attack back and win, you don't gain corruption.

    3: If you attack back and lose, you only suffer half the normal death penalties.

    4: Better to say that dying while corrupted lowers your corruption score.

    5: If you're corrupt and die, you suffer 3x the normal death penalty and have a chance to drop gear - which is then destroyed.

    6: When you gain corruption, you become flagged to bounty hunters who can use their abilities to track corrupted on the map.

    7: You gain corruption when you kill a non-combatant. Yes.

    8: Players cannot steal from a freehold.

    9: Players can attack a freehold during a 60-120 minute window after a siege is successful.

    10: If you fail to fight off an attack on your freehold (friends and hired NPCs can help defend) during that 60-120 minute window after a siege is successful, your freehold will be destroyed.

    11: I would say that there is lore behind the corruption mechanic that is based on the gods which includes themes of dark and light.

  • If the penalties will be too high and no one will gank, game will turn Residentsleeper
  • ArchivedUserArchivedUser Guest
    edited June 2017
    Dygz said:
    @Stabby
    If you are going to advocate so stronly against the game design, you have to at least correctly understand what the game design is.
    Do some research, dude. Please.
    Make sure you have your facts straight.

    1: We don't lose xp when killed by other players - instead we gain xp debt.

    2: If you attack back and win, you don't gain corruption.

    3: If you attack back and lose, you only suffer half the normal death penalties.

    4: Better to say that dying while corrupted lowers your corruption score.

    5: If you're corrupt and die, you suffer 3x the normal death penalty and have a chance to drop gear - which is then destroyed.

    6: When you gain corruption, you become flagged to bounty hunters who can use their abilities to track corrupted on the map.

    7: Corruption begins when you kill a non-combatant. Yes.

    8: Players cannot steal from a freehold.

    9: Players can attack a freehold during a 60-120 minute window after a siege is successful.

    10: If you fail to fight off an attack on your freehold (friends and hired NPCs can help defend) during that 60-120 minute window after a siege is successful, your freehold will be destroyed.

    11: I would say that there is lore behind the corruption mechanic that is based on the gods which includes themes of dark and light.

    I'm not advocating for anybody, my opinions are mine alone. I don't represent the PvE community. I just have an extensive background in this industry (as a gamer) and want this game to be a smash hit. This genre needs this game to be successful!!

    People will disagree on everything you or I say because that's the nature of the gaming community. I've watched every video and have the exact same information of the game as everyone else.

    I already stated some of my points could be wrong. I'm watching the videos like everyone else. I'm not going to take notes, save timestamps or make a project out of the info they're giving us. I have better things to do with my time. That's why I added the disclaimer to the bottom of my post. 
  • ArchivedUserArchivedUser Guest
    edited June 2017
    Advocate - to publicly recommend or support.
    I didn't say you are advocating for anyone.
    If you are going to denounce the game design, you should at least have a correct understanding of what the game design entails.
    Instead of just making ish up.

    People will disagree with you if they don't share your values and philosophies.
    But, we need to at least agree on the facts - the actual content and mechanics of the game design.

    Sooo. You want to take the time to QQ about mechanics that don't function the way you think they function, but you don't want to take the time to investigate how they actually function?? Even when someone is sharing links and dev quotes every other page??

    If you want to be taken seriously, you need to at least get the facts straight.


  • @Dygz put it nicely in the 11 point post above.

    In a game like this with risk and reward I think the potential for being a victim is important. But as important, if not more so, are the consequences for victimizing (corruption).

    That is the PK mechanic. This is an open pvp non-full-loot game with a fairly light death penalty. If someone doesn't want that in their game then they are going to have to come to terms with that here.

    On the other hand this game also has character progression tied to pve and pvp focused on resource contention. If someone just wants pure horizontal equal purely skill based pvp then they're going to have to come to terms with that as well. If someone only likes full loot free for all gankfests then they're going to have to come to terms with the consequences of corruption, and all that should entail.

    I'm not sure about anyone else, but that was the core concept buy in for me. It's the same foundation first gen MMORPGs were built on (UO, Lineage, AC, EQ). Lineage was my first MMORPG and this game has a lot of those same design concepts matured. I wouldn't want to see it any other way.

  • Well shucks!

    <Bringslite dismantles large stake and piled wood>

    Just kiddng Stabby! ;)

  • @Krojak

    I think it was on Page 22 or 21 of this Forum. I'll check ...
  • ArchivedUserArchivedUser Guest
    edited June 2017
  • ArchivedUserArchivedUser Guest
    edited June 2017
    Well , me and mi frends changed our minds abaut pk and all this pvp crap : be kareful what and where you bild for we will be many on monster koin events and we will take pleasure in makeing all sufer bi destroing your work cuz of pk and all related to it.
    For one of us sufering many will sufer , inocent incudet so all can hate pk.
    BRING IT ON !!!
  • glykon said:
    Well , me and mi frends changed our minds abaut pk and all this pvp crap : be kareful what and where you bild for we will be many on monster koin events and we will take pleasure in makeing all sufer bi destroing your work cuz of pk and all related to it.
    For one of us sufering many will sufer , inocent incudet so all can hate pk.
    BRING IT ON !!!

    Arrghh!! You Get them Baddies! :)
  • Eragale said:
    Players can kill Combatants without repercussions, and are encouraged to do so, since dying while a Combatant means you suffer reduced death penalties.
    <snip>
    In any case, all this comes to a head via death penalties. A Non-Combatant who dies suffers normal penalties, which includes experience debt, durability loss, as well as dropping a portion of carried raw materials (which can then be looted). A Combatant who dies suffers these same penalties, but at half the Non-Combatant rate. A character who has a Corruption Score on the other hand, suffers penalties at three times the rate of a Non-Combatant, and has a chance to drop *any* carried/equiped items based on their current Corruption Score.

    So someone who isn't flagged for PvP suffers a HIGHER penalty on death than someone who is. That doesn't seem right. And dropping materials, great. This corruption better be pretty aggressive from 'go.'

    It is important to keep in mind, that players are not forced into PvP. If you want to influence the world around you through non-pvp methods, it is an equally viable option.

    I mean even other answers from this article make this an outright lie or at least 'unknowingly false.' And its something I have heard MANY times before only for it to be proven completely false when a game went live. Nothing I have heard up to this point indicates you could both advance in PvE greatly AND influence the living world without having to step foot in PvP. The fact anyone is attackable by another player in the open world pretty much squashes this out, not to mention the various other statements.

    But if some how this Is true that means a 'pve' server or one that just allows stricter flagging (non-combatants can't be attacked at all) is ENTIRELY possible.

    Far too many times I have seen people, including myself, lured in with promise of being able to live a 'pve' lifestyle only to be 'bait and switched' some time after buying the game and being a few dozen or more levels in. Go in, having a perfectly good PvE experience but then mid to high level SURPRISE you have no choice to PvP or all the best stuff requires directly participating in PvP.

  • In open world pvp mmorpgs, in own experience, it was still quite rare to enter into non-consensual pvp. It mostly revolved around Guild relationships rather than individual grievances or key grid spot fights, not much else.

    All of which were relatively manageable. 

    For the players that are apposed to open world PvP scenario proposed for Ashes, what games had open world non-consensual PvP that had an overbearing amount of ganking to make the game uncomfortable to play?

    In truth, just how often were you pk'ed ? 
  • I had a shorter version of this post but it disappeared for some reason after posting. Luckily I had it open in another tab to be easily replicated.
        Eragale said:
    /home/leaving?target=https%3A%2F%2Ferrantpenman.com%2F2017%2F01%2F11%2Finterview-ashes-of-creation-wants-to-bring-the-virtual-world-to-life%2F" class="Popup

    I re-post it (above)
    ( its darkened, move Cursor in it )

    Players can kill Combatants without repercussions, and are encouraged to do so, since dying while a Combatant means you suffer reduced death penalties.<snip>
    In any case, all this comes to a head via death penalties. A Non-Combatant who dies suffers normal penalties, which includes experience debt, durability loss, as well as dropping a portion of carried raw materials (which can then be looted). A Combatant who dies suffers these same penalties, but at half the Non-Combatant rate. A character who has a Corruption Score on the other hand, suffers penalties at three times the rate of a Non-Combatant, and has a chance to drop *any* carried/equiped items based on their current Corruption Score.

    So someone who isn't flagged for PvP suffers a HIGHER penalty on death than someone who is. That doesn't seem right. And dropping materials, great. This corruption better be pretty aggressive from 'go.'
    It is important to keep in mind, that players are not forced into PvP. If you want to influence the world around you through non-pvp methods, it is an equally viable option.

    I mean even other answers from this article make this at least 'unknowingly incorrect.' And its something I have heard MANY times before only for it to be proven completely false when a game went live. Nothing I have heard up to this point indicates you could both advance in PvE greatly AND influence the living world without having to step foot in PvP. The fact anyone is attackable by another player in the open world pretty much squashes this out, not to mention the various other statements.

    Dygz said:
    How is that different than a PvE-Only server?
    You are having a hard time figuring out the difference between taking PvP out of the GAME and having a PvE SERVER?

    Let me ask something, why do PvP'ers always seem to have a problem with the idea of having a PvE shard/server when they don't have to participate in them? They'll be dull? Boring? Broken? Again, you can completely avoid them. I can't think of a time when a game throws up a PvP ruleset server and the PvE players start shouting and rending garments, unlike the reverse.
  • AkaBear said:
    For the players that are apposed to open world PvP scenario proposed for Ashes, what games had open world non-consensual PvP that had an overbearing amount of ganking to make the game uncomfortable to play?

    In truth, just how often were you pk'ed ? 
    BDO and Aion once a higher level was achieved spring to mind. How often? Nearly every session where I was out in the world questing/grinding. I liked pretty much every part of BDO except for the open world PvP. Such a shame.
  • I had a shorter version of this post but it disappeared for some reason after posting. Luckily I had it open in another tab to be easily replicated.
        Eragale said:
    /home/leaving?target=https%3A%2F%2Ferrantpenman.com%2F2017%2F01%2F11%2Finterview-ashes-of-creation-wants-to-bring-the-virtual-world-to-life%2F" class="Popup

    I re-post it (above)
    ( its darkened, move Cursor in it )

    Players can kill Combatants without repercussions, and are encouraged to do so, since dying while a Combatant means you suffer reduced death penalties.<snip>
    In any case, all this comes to a head via death penalties. A Non-Combatant who dies suffers normal penalties, which includes experience debt, durability loss, as well as dropping a portion of carried raw materials (which can then be looted). A Combatant who dies suffers these same penalties, but at half the Non-Combatant rate. A character who has a Corruption Score on the other hand, suffers penalties at three times the rate of a Non-Combatant, and has a chance to drop *any* carried/equiped items based on their current Corruption Score.

    So someone who isn't flagged for PvP suffers a HIGHER penalty on death than someone who is? That doesn't seem right. And dropping materials, great. This corruption better be pretty aggressive from kill 1.
    It is important to keep in mind, that players are not forced into PvP. If you want to influence the world around you through non-pvp methods, it is an equally viable option.

    Even other answers from this article make this at least 'unknowingly incorrect.' This is something I have heard MANY times before only for it to be proven completely false when a game went live. Nothing I have heard up to this point indicates you could both advance in PvE greatly AND influence the living world without having to step foot in PvP. The fact anyone is attackable by another player in the open world pretty much squashes this out, not to mention the various other statements.

    Dygz said:
    How is that different than a PvE-Only server?
    There is a pretty distinct difference between having a PvE server and removing PvP from the game entirely. I suppose you could argue it removes PvP for some of the players but it is completely optional.

    Why do PvP'ers always seem to have a problem with the idea of having a PvE shard/server when they don't have to participate in them? They'll be dull? Boring? Broken? You can completely avoid them. I can't think of a time when a game throws up a PvP ruleset server and the PvE players start shouting and rending garments, unlike the reverse.

    Completely different sets of gear for PvP and PvE are not needed. Massive changes in design are not needed nor new 'PvE' only zones. You wouldn't even need to set up a PvE server. You would just need to change 'non-combatant' to be untouchable or come up with a new 4th state like 'Peaceful' or 'Passive' or 'Hunter' to indicate they are only going after NPCs. If you refuse to to go to a 'pvp' status you can not participate in PvP events or have it only apply to small scale/1v1 type scenarios.
Sign In or Register to comment.