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
I will start by saying I play Eve Online every day for 9 years now. For those of you familiar with Eve you will now that I am not anti-pvp. That does not mean I am pro ganking/griefing. And regardless of what anybody says ganking/greifing is not pvp.
I initially had high hopes for this game but after reading thru 24 pages it is apparent that the ganker/griefers are already coming out of the woodwork and this concerns me greatly. They are easy to spot, they are the ones who will not support in any way a pve server. They don't want any option for other players to hide someplace that they can't harvest their tears. Once you get these types invading a server it is cancer that will spread until the server dies and they move to the next one. The problem with this type of game play is that these people think it is fun. But without realizing that there is a real person on the other side of their victim. They think they are just killing pixels...they aren't. There are real people controlling those pixels with emotions and feelings. I have tried personally to gank another player and could not, literally pull the trigger even though I could of destroyed him without any chance of loosing. After this incident I put alot of thought into why I couldn't do it. And the answer was I have morals and compassion for other people and would not have wanted someone to do it to me, hence I could not do it to another.
If people want pve only servers why not...no tears for the gankers. I personally would not play on a pve only server but that is my choice. What I would like to see is a limited pvp server. Where guild wars and node seiges are fine but have to be declared and then there is a prep period before fighting starts (which I believe has alrady been stated to be the case). Now for caravans that is a different problem. I would say it is fine to attack them but you better come strong or not at all. Carvan NPC guards will hit at 10 levels above a players max level meaning the attackers will have to bring twice the numbers to have any chance of getting the goods. There should be no non-consensual ganking on these servers. If you are flagged green that is it you are not interested in being ganked, period and can not be targeted or attacked.
If you skipped over the rest of this wall of text in short Non-consenual pvp is just wrong.
If you want a strictly PvE only game then Ashes is not for you.
The only real issue once you accept that is how well the player flagging and corruption system will work to very strongly encourage volitional meaningful PvP, and strongly discourage non-volitional murdering.
At this stage no one really knows this yet and until we have access to Beta stages of the game at least I don't think anyone can really say how well this will work or not.
I am expecting lots of feedback from the Dev's on this whole subject even the whole idea of "what is meaningful PvP" needs clarification. As all of us will have widely differing views on that. The whole corruption system I am sure will take several revisions in testing to get right or even after that maybe.
My view based on the design is if your more focussed to PvP or PvE the game world will enable you to play more that way. However it will be players that like doing both who will get more out of this game.
@ Anyone besides Dygz(already know what bugs you about PVP)
Is the main concern RPK for you guys? Meaning that you feel the Corruption Mechanic will not be enough to stop griefers?
Non-combatants receive a higher death penalty because it motivates them to flag as combatants, participate in PvP combat and, if they die, at least they only suffer half the death penalty. technically all they have to do is strike back once and then let themselves be killed, but then their attacker won't be flagged with corruption. When a combatant kills a non-combatant, the combatant gains corruption. Whenever the corrupted dies, they suffer 3x the death penalty for the crime of causing the non-combatant to suffer the normal death penalty. That's almost reasonably fair. Especially from the perspective of people who like PvP combat. Probably doesn't mean much to PvE folk who abhor non-consensual PvP combat. I also find the claim from Steven that Ashes doesn't force anyone into PvP combat/ But, again, that claim is coming from the perspective of someone who loves PvP combat. It's a blind spot the devs have.
I lost the context flow of the middle section of your last post. I don't remember the context causing me to ask how xxx is different than a PvE-Only server, thus I don't understand your response to my question. Sorry.
In regard to your question about why PvPers have a problem with the idea of having a separate PvP server... I was in the same mind state you were in 3 years ago on the EQNext forums.
LockSixTime vehemently argued that we not split the playerbase and have all the playstyles playing on the same servers - especially after a private meeting with the EQNext devs, who explained their vision. Lock excitedly shared his vision -that is the same as Steven's- of PvE crafters who would gladly craft gear and supplies for the PvPers at war with some rival city. The PvPers would protect the crafters and the crafters would helpfully support the combat without having to fight directly. The crafters wouldn't have to wory about being killed because the PvPers would protect them.
I was bewildered - unable to comprehend why my character would want to help Lock attack some other city when I am ant-PvP combat !! If I am a carebear pacifist - which I am- why would I happily make weapons for people to use to invade a foreign country?? I don't want to participate in war, but I'm going to happily supply the soldiers with weapons... that makes no sense!!
And when I would try to explain that to Lock, he would explode from frustration.
I began to wonder why he seemed so eager to have people who hate PvP combat playing on the same server as people who love PvP combat. It felt like the only reason was to gank people who hate PvP combat.
But, I know Lock is a sweet guy and doesn't want to gank players. So, I knew what I was feeling wasn't true. Had to be some other reason. Something I was missing.
I finally realized I actually have a fair amount of friends in the EQNext community who love PvP combat. I speak with them almost daily. As friends, I would love to socialize with them in-game... outside of combat. I agree that i would prefer not to split the playerbase if it's possible for us to co-exist happily on the same server.
I started asking folks from both the PvE camp and the PvP camp to share ideas for what mechanics would need to be implemented to get us to play together on the same servers. Turned out that was the quickest way to get threads locked and people banned for weeks. Each camp would offer a "fair" solution, causing the other camp to explode in frustration, utterly offended by the suggestions.
Much like the corruption mechanic - which seems great from the perspective of the hardcore PvP adventurers. And not so great from the perspective of many PvEers. it's like the vegetarians who try to convince everyone that tofurkey tastes just like turkey - they just have to flavor tofu correctly and then everyone will love being vegetarian and give up meat. But, the meat lovers are all "Heck no! That nasty tofu does not taste like meat."
I think it's worthwhile to continue the conversation - trying to explore mechanics that will bring all the playstyles together on the same servers.
I find corruption to be woefully inadequate - and actually sounds like I would love playing a zombie on my alts - ganking and gaining corruption - if I liked griefing players. But, maybe there are other solutions that would actually suffice.
I doubt it, but... doesn't hurt to have the discussions.
1: Probably the thing that EQNext PvPers hated most was the suggestion of player characters immune to PvP combat moving through spaces designated for OWPVP.
2: I think you don't understand the Meaningful Conflict pillar.
Senario:
The Elves of the Empyrean Forest have learned through experience that when the trees in the Sacred Grove are harvested, Displaced Dryads roam at night, attacking the nearby towns and villages.
One day, a band of Nikua arrive in the Empyrean Forest. Their god has sent them to harvest wood from the Sacred Grove to be crafted into ceremonial masks which will allow them to complete the 7th Rite of Passage, bestowing upon them the rank of Journeyman Crafter and the ability to work with legendary recipes.
The Elves discover the Nikua and ask them to stop chopping down the trees else the nearby towns will suffer the wrath of the Displaced Dryads. The Nikua explain that they need the wood from these trees in order to advance to the next rank of Crafter.
The Elves feel compelled to attack the Nikua in order to protect the Sacred Grove and to protect the nearby towns from the Displaced Dryads. If the Nikua were normal non-combatants, the Elves would kill the Nikua - even gaining corruption if the Nikua didn't fight back. But these Nikua are "Passive" and are untouchable.
So, PvE Crafters have invaded a neighboring region and are engaging in PvE content which will cause the nearby towns to be attacked by undead hordes. The citizens of the region can't stop the invaders because the invaders are untouchable.
That's just not going to be acceptable.
I'm of the opinion that the devs don't care what we think. Which is kind of obvious by the lack of replies. They had a plan before these forums even existed and they're not going to deviate from that plan. This discussion is pretty much irrelevant now.
They are launching a PvP game, end of story. Just like any consumer product, Intrepid will offer us something that we all have to decide to buy or not buy. That's what it all boils down to.
This is key. Once we see the mechanics and corruption mechanisms we can start to evaluate how they can be gamed.
Corruption needs to be a hard row to hoe, but also an alternative if someone wants to live that life with their character. It just should not be a comfy cozy life.
I think with the options for conflict in a node it will provide a sizable outlet for the kind of stealthy gameplay that appeals to gankers.
I'm going to be brief for a change and just say, I think you're missing the significance of Meaningful Conflict and how that will foment legit PvPers to attack people who think they're just partaking in innocent PvE content.
I think most people understand that the game wouldn't function as described if large scale PvP wasn't possible. Where you would need to bring a dozen or more friends to sack a town or hold. People are worried about possible toxic 'small scale' PvP which isn't even necessary for most of these 'living world' systems to function.
The penalty would have to be so harsh that people who want to troll would do it by trying to trick people into killing non-flagged players, not just killing players and then 'gaming' the penalty. That's the level of penalty most PvE'ers will require.
better yet, I'll repost it:
https://errantpenman.com/2017/01/11/interview-ashes-of-creation-wants-to-bring-the-virtual-world-to-life/
better yet, I'll repost it:
https://errantpenman.com/2017/01/11/interview-ashes-of-creation-wants-to-bring-the-virtual-world-to-life/
There is one thing no one has mention although long thread so may if missed it.
Allowing playing murdering even if strongly discouraging it allows all servers to have this whole Bounty Hunter mechanic which really does sound incredible fun! Again we need more Dev confirmation on how the numbers work on this but allowing "criminal" activity gives us all this whole other area of content which is great I think.
If an action can result in a PvP conflict then you do not get to do it while being 'passive.' You can then opt not to do it, thus remaining passive and participate in another activity or decide to become a non-combatant. Don't want to PvP? Then you don't get to have a huge hold, but you can have personal housing or some such. Want to move resources via caravan? Sure, but you go in understanding this will involve PvP.
If some how any and all 'PvE' activities can result in a conflict or PvP then that is just outright poor and unimaginative game design. "He's milking a cow! RALLY THE TROOPS!" "You dare declare war on my clan by running a dungeon?!" "He has completed the kill 10 elk quest, CLEARLY AN INSULT TO ALL ELK WORSHIPERS!"
As it is with all the information we have the only way to truly opt out of PvP is to not play at all which would have the game missing a very large chunk of the MMO player base. You think they would be interested in this purely from a business standpoint especially since they keep saying they have no intentions of a cash shop. PvP games either find a way to integrate more player cash into the system outside of game purchase and subscription or they simply flounder and fall to the wayside. BDO is doing well with a open pvp system but it also takes minimal effort to turn cash shop items into in-game currency and all the best gear is sellable on the market.
YOU SIMPLY WILL NOT CONVERT PVE PLAYERS IN TO OPEN PVP'ERS.
Doesn't matter how much you massage it, ease it in or disguise it, soon as a PvE player gets killed minding their own business they are done. That's exactly how I quit Aion, got past level 30, started questing and suddenly this portal opened up, oh look players are pouring out. Now they are killing other players. Now they are killing me. Log out, uninstall. I still have a level 30-something sitting at quest hub somewhere.
The corruption system isn't new and the way it is used in other games is FAR too lenient on the offender. They usually don't start feeling consequences until about 5-6 kills and getting rid of corruption/negative karma/reputation etc. etc. is stupidly easy. Grind out mobs, special daily quests or just have a buddy kill you and not loot your stuff. They cite these games as good examples so there is no reason to think they would be much more restrictive to the offender, I'd be very surprised if they were. The fact they already decided there will be a harsher penalty for being a 'non-combatant' speaks to this.
The only way something isn't PvP is if PvP is removed as a possibility during the activity.
What is so terrible about conflicts with other living players? Why is it so much more devastating than fighting NPC mobs?
Would a large % of "PVE only" players refuse to play a game wherein the mobs could wander anywhere they want and were of mixed power?
Probably. I can't really think of a game that does this with NPC's tbh. Closest I can think of is the spawning of a public event/quest but they can be avoided as well and will certainly go away after a short amount of time.
Plus there is intent and all the toxic behavior that comes with aggressive PvP. Mobs don't decide to take over a spot simply because you are there and they can kill you repeatedly while attempting to circumvent 'trash talking' prevention's so they can tell you to 'git gud.'
Have you been accosted by a crafting station and compelled to attempt a craft or fail, losing resources? Do raid mobs routinely snipe you while you are on your 'kill 10 rats' quest? Does a group dungeon outside of your skill level suddenly force you to attempt clearing it while making a stack of drink? Does an epic questchain force themselves in your quest journal, allowing you to only work on this one quest while harvesting?
No, of course not. that would be silly.
PvP, however, supersedes all other styles when there is open PvP because it can INTERJECT itself in other activities simply by 1 player deciding they want to kill another while they are doing it.
With open PvP and no way to opt out, everything is PvP.
Passive PVP is in ALL games. It just matters more in OWPVP games.
In OWPVP, technically everything that you do affects other players. Its somewhat true in "Non PVP" games as well.
You farm a spot with rare materials and a limited or infrequent spawn, you are taking away Joe's chance to farm that stuff. You make daggers and sell them at he market, you are lessening Joe's chance to sell his daggers at the market.
Here we have a game where resource spawns last until empty and then 'respawn somewhere else in the world". Your group gets them first, Joe's group has to find a new source.
As far as I can tell, the main problem with the OWPvP (which is a problem I share) is that someone else can approach my innocently-gathering (or -whatevering) character and choose to inflict death on her. For that instance, I only have two options. Die as a non-combatant, thus suffering double the death penalties I would suffer as a combatant, or die as a combatant.
The reason I can't choose anything else is because the typical PKer will not allow the option of running away. They're out to cause trouble, grief, make themselves feel powerful, whatever. It doesn't matter that these are also always the loudest folk saying "We don't need no stinkin' PvE-only servers!" because IS has already informed us that there will be no separate rulesets on any servers. Furthermore, the shape of the game is integrally locked into PvP-driven occurrences. So saying "This should be" or "This should not be" is well-nigh useless.
I've already posted my belief on what will likely happen, so I won't rehash that. I will say that, until launch, and until we've waited a couple of months for the average griefer to wander away from the game due to harsh corruption, we don't know how things will shape up. We don't know if IS will take a step back and say "Hm. Maybe we do in fact need to give folk the ability to flag themselves as un-attackable, or to choose to flag themselves for combat when they choose to."
And that's just it. We, as well as the devs, are going to have to give those lifeless, empty little children their time to get their griefing outta their systems and/or move on, then see how things shape from there, before we'll really know any absolute way to move forward.
Anything else, prior to being able to actually experience that, is all conjecture. It's all hopes and wishes and so on and so forth. While I think the conversation is important, the ability to help others (and ourselves) see a differing viewpoint is a good thing, I also think that we're stuck where we are, until the experience phase can come about.
I do not, nor ever have, believe all PvPers are griefers. I know for a fact that all of us who prefer PvE to PvP aren't, in fact, special little carebears afraid to get our feet wet in the bloody pool of PvP; we are, in fact, people who see a different challenge to the same game played by PvPers. But I do believe that we, each one of us, has a very specific hope for this game that probably eclipses the possibility of having to suffer griefing for a time. And I, for myself, also have a hope that @Steven & the rest of the gang will step in, if they deem it necessary, to halt people taking advantage of ways to lessen the corruption or disregard it, or whatever way griefers find to continue their reign of selfishness. It is because of that hope-slash-belief that I'm still willing to wait and see exactly what experience will teach us.
@ Isende
I have to agree. Even if they get the PVE and PVP dichotomy right on their very first live gaming try, there is going to be a learning period that is messy. Probably both for the most aggressive gankers and the most wide eyed innocent players.
I love it when some players call them self righteous, take a "high moral stance", but then go on insulting a part of community with various attributes.
Once you do that all the good words that you have written thus far fall in water, and people do not see you with same eyes anymore. And rightfully so.
One should always keep civil, and not insult other players because they have different play style, even if you yourself don't approve of it. Stay above this, and stay away from calling people "those lifeless, empty little children" and your argument may sound stronger.
Also there is no need to tag developers in your posts. They read the forums, and also your opinion isn't more valuable than another players opinion so that devs should be specially notified specifically to your opinion by notifications.
Thank you for understanding.
Just my 2 cents.