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!

1252628303150

Comments

  • Part of the problem here is that some are basing their main points on categorizing play types like they are universal laws. We all just plain don't fit neatly into categories and sub categories to be labeled and judged.

    Fixating arguments on such labels narrows your viewpoints of the issues. You start deciding "he says THIS because he is a hard core PVP category player". You lose sight of the real weaknesses of your own points and stop listening/looking at what these "categories" say.

    Also there is obvious stubbornness throughout these various threads that boggles the mind. Complete denial of anything but our own viewpoint on things like definitions of words, meanings of phrases, and refusal to read and "think".

    Why should I think about what they wrote? I am 100% right so therefore what they write has to be false. I can't be 100% correct if anything they write makes any sense or has any value....

  • ArchivedUserArchivedUser Guest
    edited June 2017
    @CptBrownBeard
     And thats how the PvP System will actually benefit you:

    Did someone just Rob that treasure Chest ? Attack him. Is someone bothering you ? Attack him. Is a Guild trying to Gank/Mess with players ? Gather some Friends/Volunteers/Other Guilds and attack them.

    (Not instigating btw xD )

    You don't want to Engage in Open-World PvP, BUT you want him/her/them to leave you alone ?

    Well ... Firstly, Devs are still Formalizing other-ways for this scenario. But at this time ... best thing to do is "Fight-Back" :

    `Devs said they will try to implement Cat-&-Mouse tactics. Meaning you very well just Use Defensive Abilites, Healing Abilites, Movment-Buffs Abilities and Movement-Snaring Abilities to avoid it.

    Unfortunately ... it won't prevent your name from turning Purple, but IF you die, any-gear-related items will not be looted. Other items might - though not exactly specified.

    Best way for them to solve this .. is for Devs to undergo Testing-Scenarios via Devs Testing it-out & Alpha & Beta Participants testing it out.

  • @Bringslite

    Regardless, all scenarios revolves around how PvP Engagement will commence. Hence, depending on their Color-Coded Name
  • Dygz said:
    Stabby said:
    (talk, talk, talk
    (talk, talk, talk)

    You two don't even have the same definition of "pve player" or the same goals for what that's supposed to mean in the game so how do you expect to be represented homogeneously to a development studio?

    The game isn't designed to have a conflict free path to progression. How would you remove PVP and expect that not to be exploited? All either of you have done is complain that it will ruin the game but neither of you have addressed how the game could actually even work without it.

    Some player harvesting materials in a node isn't an isolated activity. It may be negatively affecting that node by affecting its development and the resources available to the citizens of that node?
    1: The goal I share with the devs is to try to get all the playstyles playing happily together on the same server - if possible. I don't think Stabby is there, yet.

    2: Stabby is more of a PvE adventurer. I am a casual PvPer.
    There should be no surprise that we don't share the exact same goals.
    Being represented homogeneously is not a goal of mine. That thought never even occurred to me.
    If we can avoid splitting the playerbase, we should avoid splitting the playerbase.
    I don't think we can avoid splitting the playerbase precisely because the needs and desires and points of view of the different playstyles are so different.
    My expectation is that the playerbase will be split: either by separate servers or by a bunch of the PvE adventurers and casual PvPers just not playing.
    And then the devs have to hope the numbers of players for Ashes is similar to the numbers for EVE. Or whatever numbers the devs deem acceptable.

    3: Of course, I would still love to get a PvE-only server with PvP combat disabled (player characters directly attacking player characters) so the PvE only folk can judge for themselves, firsthand, how broken the game would be without PvP combat.
    But, that's part of my Exploration mindset. I like to test ish out and see what happens.

    4: Yep. We agree. That PvP Conflict/Meaningful Conflict is core - and has to remain core. But, again, I am a casual PvPEr. It's going to be more difficult for a PvE adventurer to accept that.

    5: I have explained for pages and pages how the game could work on a server with PvP combat disabled. You can go back to the first several pages of this thread if you really care to know.
  • ArchivedUserArchivedUser Guest
    edited June 2017

    @Stabby @Digz

    You two are persistent, if nothing else.

    Stabby, you keep saying that "the game can be anything that they want it to be." Well, lol, I suppose that is true enough. They are making it how they want it to be. Doesn't look like much is going to change their minds about that, for now...

    Dygz, you have this fixation around the separation between PVP conflict and PVP combat. I would bet my alpha access(if I had one) that Steven means combat along with everything else PVP related when he uses the word "conflict". I don't buy, and I don't think that many would buy a game in which conflicts of interest would all be settled by NPCs on one side of any part of the "disagreement". It isn't like red blooded players to trust their hard work to NPC guards. It isn't like different players to go along with having their Metropolises auto destroyed every 3 months so that lesser hard working groups can auto have their Metropolis for 3 months...

    Steven refers to PvP conflict as Meaningful Conflict.
    He specifically said that the pillar is Meaningful Conflict; not Meaningful PvP.
    And that Ashes of Creation is not a "PvP Game".

    We have different playstyles.
    I don't expect you to share my playstyle values, interests, points of view or expectations. Just as I don't expect advocates of intelligent design to share the same values, interests, points of view or expectations as advocates of evolution. I don't expect FLDS folk to share the same values, interests, points of view or expectations as atheists.

    I don't know what you mean by "red-blooded".
    Hardcore PvP competitive gamers who are Killer/Achiever won't trust their hard work to NPC guards.
    Casual PvE cooperative players who are Explorer/Socializers probably will trust their hard work to NPC guards.
    Only way to know for sure is to test it. I'm guessing @Stabby would be up for that. but Stabby will have to speak for himself.
  • @Eragale
    hahaha
    In other words, do we understand corruption mechanics??
    Yes.
  • By "red blooded", in the context that I used it there, I mean players will want to defend what they have built(themselves ideally but real players in a pinch) rather than trust to NPC defense. Conversely, I believe that many or most that play a game like AoC is described as, will want PC hands on(their own but at least real players) to do the attacking when they want to capture or burn things of other players.

    Unless I am mistaken, your idea for PVP conflict which can't be resolved any other way than combat, is for one side of the conflict to only use NPC "guards" or something similar? I don't really believe that would be very fun, practical at all, or satisfying.

    If I have the basis of your idea wrong, please set me straight. In cases where there is no talking to a peaceful resolution and combat will be the only way, how will your ideal "PVP combat is disabled" play out?

  • PVP ruins playing any sort of healing class generally by getting ganked, or forcing them to gather two sets of gear/stats....and even when switching to a dps spec, their dps is usually far below other classes.

    Later, everyone will complain that there are not enough good healers to do dungeons/raids.

    Some of the solutions people are giving to the PVP issue are ridiculous...travel in large groups, make friends with pvpr's, or hang around in cities, or just run and hide!  Why would anyone want to play a game like that?
  • ArchivedUserArchivedUser Guest
    edited June 2017
    Poot said:
    PVP ruins playing any sort of healing class generally by getting ganked, or forcing them to gather two sets of gear/stats....and even when switching to a dps spec, their dps is usually far below other classes.

    Later, everyone will complain that there are not enough good healers to do dungeons/raids.

    Some of the solutions people are giving to the PVP issue are ridiculous...travel in large groups, make friends with pvpr's, or hang around in cities, or just run and hide!  Why would anyone want to play a game like that?


    You could travel around with 3 friends and be larger than most RPK groups that are any more than one person. Why would I do that? Well it's an MMO not a single player game.

    The bottom line is people just want to make suggestions that help players who hate PVP to give such games a shot. Some of the advice works. Some is ridiculous to some people. Not all aversions can be overcome. Intrepid would love for ALL mmo players to love their game but recognizes that AoC won't be attractive for everyone.

  • ArchivedUserArchivedUser Guest
    edited June 2017
    Dygz said:
    Nare said:
    Not being able to kill other players enables far more griefing opportunities than it prevents. I personally want to be able to attack other players in open world. Actually being able to gain some loot from it only makes it more exciting. And in the end it provides some fun to the bounty hunters.

    Do you have a few examples to share of griefing that doesn't involve player characters killing other player characters?
    @Dygz
    I liked reading your reply. Some griefing examples: breaking immersion of the roleplayers by out of character insults, spamming spell effects, standing on you with big mount.. lets count that as one. Second: following you around and mining and collecting herbs that you are after, so following you in order to minimize resources you get. Third: tagging your mobs. It's fun trying to compete with ranged toon as melee. Fourth: body pulling mobs into your aoe. Fifth: WoW exclusive, when player is killing a difficult elite.. mage comes and sheeps that mob healing it. Similar thing in other games could include breaking players cc on mobs by dealing that tiny damage to them.

    Any of this won't stop your progress, but some of them greatly add to your game time - probably more than killing your toon.
  • @Dygz
    i hope so. Because so far it doesn't seem like it
  • Poot said:
    PVP ruins playing any sort of healing class generally by getting ganked, or forcing them to gather two sets of gear/stats....and even when switching to a dps spec, their dps is usually far below other classes.

    Later, everyone will complain that there are not enough good healers to do dungeons/raids.

    Some of the solutions people are giving to the PVP issue are ridiculous...travel in large groups, make friends with pvpr's, or hang around in cities, or just run and hide!  Why would anyone want to play a game like that?
    I don't necessarily think this is true. If you have a good tank to control people and a damaging class hiding somewhere nearby the healer shouldnt have any issue. Ashes is an MMO get involved with the community otherwise your just playing with glorified NPCs. 

    The game sounds amazing as the developers are intending it to play as. Open world PvP, conflict on nodes. Lore attached to an anti ganking mechanic.

    The game is "faction less" right now. So your choices and the actions and emotions of others will effect how people and guilds treat you. You best be sure if I come in to mine and your not willing to split with me and start to take everything I will drop you and continue on my merry way. But if your willing to let me get some resources nothing will happen. 

    Obviously I'm on the "PVP side" but that's because I enjoy unscripted fights. The current state of MMOs with the ease of playing, overly accessable content and the lack of any specific challenge or loss gets boring.

    If I upset *Guild A* you can be sure I'm gonna pay attention to any of their members hanging around. The human element in this style game is what makes it entertaining. Avoiding a scripted mobs pathing is easy, avoiding the rogue I upset 2 days ago isn't. 

    Long wall of text short the developers already have a direction in mind and with the exception of huge problems in testing I don't think it'll change nor should it. It's been too long since an MMO was honestly engaging instead of a hack and slash button smash. 
  • By "red blooded", in the context that I used it there, I mean players will want to defend what they have built(themselves ideally but real players in a pinch) rather than trust to NPC defense. Conversely, I believe that many or most that play a game like AoC is described as, will want PC hands on(their own but at least real players) to do the attacking when they want to capture or burn things of other players.

    Unless I am mistaken, your idea for PVP conflict which can't be resolved any other way than combat, is for one side of the conflict to only use NPC "guards" or something similar? I don't really believe that would be very fun, practical at all, or satisfying.

    If I have the basis of your idea wrong, please set me straight. In cases where there is no talking to a peaceful resolution and combat will be the only way, how will your ideal "PVP combat is disabled" play out?


    My expectation is that a PvE server with PvP combat turned off would be played considerably differently than normal servers. The players would have to play more cooperatively even though the characters would still be competitive.

    Again, the Star Trek: TOS episode A Taste of Armageddon is a good example of how players would likely perform on such a server.

    Using NPC guards wouldn't be fun for you because PvP combat is fun for you.
    Using NPC guards would be fun for people who hate PvP combat.
    PvP folk want the ultimate challenge of fighting against human minds - PvE folk like the challenges associated with NPCs.

    For caravans, the challenge would be negotiating enough fellow traders to be able to afford sufficient guards to protect the caravan. For sieges, the challenge would be destroying v defending the infrastructure, like the catapults, etc.

    Different people like different stuff. When I played PvP in NWO, I completely ignored the killing and combat and just focused on capturing the flag points. And I often ended up in the top of the leaderboards because capturing flags was worth at least twice as much as kills. That was fun for me. I love figuring out how to complete objectives without killing people.

    I guess you'd have to give me scenarios where you think player characters killing player characters would be the only solution. And what you think would happen ultimately if combat were not an option.

    But, again, that's why I like the idea of one PVE server with PVP combat turned off...
    So that we can see first hand how broken or fun it is. Rather than just making assumptions based on how we like to play.

  • ArchivedUserArchivedUser Guest
    edited June 2017

    @Dygz

    On your PVE only server, I could go and harvest resources wherever I want and besides local NPC mobs, I would have pretty much zero risk getting my goods to my crafters or the market place?

    Sorry for the add: Who would determine who has to attack/defend and who has to rely on NPC guards?

  • Nope. You still have to do a caravan run. Player characters would still attack your caravan. The caravan would be defended by NPC guards.
    A caravan still either arrives safely or is destroyed, but that would really be PvP conflict with PvE combat.

    I think determining who attacks and who defends is the same.
    But, the defenders would probably have to be more diligent about pooling their resources with multiple traders to be able to hire sufficient NPC defenders.

    I think it would be easier to destroy the caravans than to defend the caravans if the player characters aren't killing each other.
  • Dygz said:
    Nope. You still have to do a caravan run. Player characters would still attack your caravan. The caravan would be defended by NPC guards.
    A caravan still either arrives safely or is destroyed, but that would really be PvP conflict with PvE combat.

    I mean everyday gathering. Each time I go out to get some iron ore I'm not going to need a caravan. Each time I want to take 10 swords to the next ZOI's market I won't need a caravan. Anything just a bit over carry allowance I'll use a mule.

    ^^^These players get risk free materials?^^^

  • ArchivedUserArchivedUser Guest
    edited June 2017
    Nare said:
    Dygz said:
    Nare said:
    Not being able to kill other players enables far more griefing opportunities than it prevents. I personally want to be able to attack other players in open world. Actually being able to gain some loot from it only makes it more exciting. And in the end it provides some fun to the bounty hunters.

    Do you have a few examples to share of griefing that doesn't involve player characters killing other player characters?
    @Dygz
    I liked reading your reply. Some griefing examples: breaking immersion of the roleplayers by out of character insults, spamming spell effects, standing on you with big mount.. lets count that as one. Second: following you around and mining and collecting herbs that you are after, so following you in order to minimize resources you get. Third: tagging your mobs. It's fun trying to compete with ranged toon as melee. Fourth: body pulling mobs into your aoe. Fifth: WoW exclusive, when player is killing a difficult elite.. mage comes and sheeps that mob healing it. Similar thing in other games could include breaking players cc on mobs by dealing that tiny damage to them.

    Any of this won't stop your progress, but some of them greatly add to your game time - probably more than killing your toon.

    For me, it's sticks and stones. 1: Insults in an MMORPG don't bother me. I can ignore them. I often ignore in-game chat anyways. I'm usually on skype/discord and twitter and/or twitch and twitch chat. I tend to ignore out-of-character comments anyways, but pretty much anything someone can say in the game either gets rolled into my RP or gets ignored. Insults don't give me xp debt or cause me to spend hours regaining stolen loot. I can typically port someplace else, if I want to get away from chat. Once you get attacked in PvP combat, the port ability is disabled. It's possible to stand on someone with a big mount???!!! Pics or it didn't happen!!!! I have never seen that!!! lmao 2/3: I think you mentioned that in the previous post, but I have never had anyone follow me around unless they want to gank me. Back in EQ, someone might try to kill steal or arrive to start farming "my mobs". But, I would just go find somewhere else to farm. If you port away, it's kinda difficult for someone to follow you. But, I'm a casual carebear hippie...I don't really have the concept of "my mobs". I don't own the mobs. There is a whole world of mobs to share. I usually, pretty easily, can go find different mobs to farm. If you want those mobs, you can have them. Better, though, when there is no mob tagging at all. 4: I guess someone could try to body pull something into my AoE??? I can't fathom how that would work. I typically pull mobs to a spot where I can fight with my back to a wall, so I can't imagine how someone could pull that off without me seeing them. Or how they would be able to time that to fit with my AoE. 5: Never heard of that. Never encountered that. And I played WoW from vanilla through Cataclysm. But, I rarely fight elite mobs. I am an Explorer/ Socializer rather than a Killer/Achiever, so I would probably just give up on the Elite mob, go do something else and not feel griefed. I never have elite mobs factored into my play session time.
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Thanks. Those are great examples. Again all very different from my experiences playing my playstyle.

    On the EQNext forums, one of the suggestions PvE folk made was to be able to move through PvP zones as diplomats with immunity - they just want to be able to explore everywhere, they don't want to attack anything.
    The PvP folk reacted as if that was griefing them. Taking away their ability/rights to attack whomever they wanted in PvP space.
    Very different points of view.

    I'll have to see what having no fast travel truly means in Ashes.
    Will there not be some form of callstone to port us home?

    Another thing to keep an eye open for.
    Thanks again!
  • Dygz said:
    Nope. You still have to do a caravan run. Player characters would still attack your caravan. The caravan would be defended by NPC guards.
    A caravan still either arrives safely or is destroyed, but that would really be PvP conflict with PvE combat.

    I mean everyday gathering. Each time I go out to get some iron ore I'm not going to need a caravan. Each time I want to take 10 swords to the next ZOI's market I won't need a caravan. Anything just a bit over carry allowance I'll use a mule.

    ^^^These players get risk free materials?^^^

    It's not risk free materials. The risk comes from mob and NPC attacks. Raw materials are still dropped at death.
  • One of the things that has given me hope in regards to PVP is when Steven refers to his time on Warhammer Online in a positive note. Perhaps the most fun PVP combat I've ever had. If AoC is half as balanced as Warhammer Online in regards to archetype abilities, it will make PVP considerably easier than games where it is not.

    If you don't want to flag yourself as a combatant, I don't think you have to. And dying as a noncombatant (according to Developers and various youtube videos paraphrasing Developers) is the same as dying from a monster. It is the same penalty (as I understand it, but please point it out if I am wrong.) 
  • Eragale said:
    With all this said ... how can anyone "abuse" the Mechanics ... if others can just Balance these scenarios ?

    With all this said, how does anyone not feel abused and unbalanced after trying to keep up with this thread and not have a headache???  :'(
  • The difference is that it's way easier to avoid dying from mobs than it is to avoid dying from human players.
  • Dygz said:
    Dygz said:
    Nope. You still have to do a caravan run. Player characters would still attack your caravan. The caravan would be defended by NPC guards.
    A caravan still either arrives safely or is destroyed, but that would really be PvP conflict with PvE combat.

    I mean everyday gathering. Each time I go out to get some iron ore I'm not going to need a caravan. Each time I want to take 10 swords to the next ZOI's market I won't need a caravan. Anything just a bit over carry allowance I'll use a mule.

    ^^^These players get risk free materials?^^^

    It's not risk free materials. The risk comes from mob and NPC attacks. Raw materials are still dropped at death.

    "The difference is that it's way easier to avoid dying from mobs than it is to avoid dying from human players. "


    Hmmmm....

  • That is the level of risk that casual players and PvE players want.
    Casual challenge risk rather than hardcore challenge risk.
  • So when I asked about gathering risk free except for NPC mobs... your answer could have been yes instead of no?
  • ArchivedUserArchivedUser Guest
    edited June 2017
    It's not risk free. It's less challenge than fighting against players.
  • Sigh, Dygz. If not counting the NPC mobs, as in how my question was phrased, then it would be risk free. Why be stubborn about this?
  • ArchivedUserArchivedUser Guest
    edited June 2017
    You're original question appeared to be about caravans.
    Your follow-up post about what you can carry on your own didn't disclude mobs or NPCs.

    Mobs and NPCs are the risks when solo in PvE.
    So asking if it's risk free besides mobs and NPCs where PvP combat is disabled makes no sense.
  • ArchivedUserArchivedUser Guest
    edited June 2017

    "On your PVE only server, I could go and harvest resources wherever I want and besides local NPC mobs, I would have pretty much zero risk getting my goods to my crafters or the market place?"

    Could be taken several ways, I suppose. Though I am doubting I will need a caravan for each time I pick flowers. I also would bet that most places to pick flowers will not have mobs running through them. That is speculation though. Just based from what most MMOs do.

    Since I don't feel like npc mobs are a threat or a risk and all the other stuff about not being able to defend against or attack players, I just can't get any enthusiasm for the PVE server worked up.

  • ArchivedUserArchivedUser Guest
    edited June 2017
    You don't need a caravan each time you go pick flowers, but the amount of flowers people can carry without a caravan is inconsequential.

    You wouldn't be expected to play on the PvE server.
    You would play where you'd have fun playing... on the normal servers.
    Duh!!!
  • Dygz said:
    Your third option, I believe, is to fight back and win.
    Still having to march to the tune of someone else's drum, @Dygz, and that's kinda the point I was making there. And again, for what it's worth, I do draw a distinction between PvPers and griefers, and I do believe the system IS is coming up with to handle griefers/PKers will work, in time.
Sign In or Register to comment.