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
PvP conflict is what the devs mean by meaningful conflict.
Steven specifically stated that the pillar is Meaningful Conflict; not Meaningful "PvP". And his use of "PvP" meant "PvP combat".
Meaningful Conflict is separate from, but related to PvP combat.
Player characters killing other player characters is not what causes the world to change. Destroying and building nodes/settlements/buildings/environment is what causes the world to change. As does destroying caravans.
The Ashes game design includes player characters killing playing characters as a method of resolving PvP conflict. We can expect that to be the most common method, given the mindset of hardcore PvPers. But, the pillar that drives world change is actually the conflict and caravan destruction and city building and destruction. It's really the PvE actions which arise from PvP conflict that cause the world to change.
People are concerned about being forced into PvP combat when they're not in the mood to participate in PvP combat.
People who were not following EQNext closely enough to understand the concept of PvP conflict (the EQNext/Daybreak term for meaningful conflict) and how that will motivate players to attack PvEers while they are engaging in PvE may think they're only concerned with random PKers. Sure.
But, the real issue is going to be that the actions of PvErs will negatively affect other nodes in such a way that the citizens of rival nodes will want to attack them.
As in the example I've given where the Nikua are chopping down Empyrean trees they need to complete their crafting quest, but chopping down those trees will cause the spirits of the dryads who lived in the trees to spawn and attack the nearby Empyrean villages.
And part of what's being said is that PvP combat and extortion don't have to be the primary way to solve conflicts.
We're all playing on the same server.
The Nikua should be able to resolve that conflict by offering to help kill the dryads or even to kill all the dryads by themselves.
Rather than the Empyreans just attacking the Nikua because PvP combat is possible and the players of the Empyreans prefer PvP combat over fighting mobs.
Who ever said that conflict of interest can't be solved with politics, bargaining or having some kind of talk?
We just can't expect that it will always be the way that it is resolved. We also can't expect that it will always even be considered by everyone.
From experience, we can predict how it's going to be resolved the majority of the time because hardcore PvPers have the attitude that it's OK for them to kill anyone it's possible for them to kill.
In Ashes, that will include people who are flagged as combatants.
But now can we all just take a moment, and enjoy the fact that the person who started the thread of "Don't force us to be the victims of PvPers" goes by the name stabby?
Mods need to lock this one up, more than enough has been said.
It's supposed to be more of a living world. That guy you see on the street tomorrow maybe he wants to punch you in the face. There's your real life PvP. He might have no reason and it also penalizes him with an assault charge. It's gonna happen, the difference here is it's a game and you have the means to play with friends or hire guards.
Possibly a handful of new ones.
Better to keep it all in this one instead of starting over in new threads.
I don't think it's asking too much myself to have servers with pvp lite, and full flavor pvp.
Honestly I don't either. The only PVP you will see me in voluntarily is what you described. There are some things to consider though:
With no RPKers, it is likely more players will gather as there is no risk besides NPCs. Your hard work bringing home the Bacon will likely not be worth much for your time. (mainly applies to gather/traders)
No Pirates! and no bandits and no real sense of accomplishment for another day in the wild. (Only applies to danger lovers)
No risk = ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ
I enjoy a good fight, but understand people don't. But we both have to play this game. So let's compromise. I think it's selfish to ask that a game change a major part of it just to cater to your desire to play the game on easy mode.
Hire me to protect you while you run your stuff! Win/Win!!
That's like telling vegetarians who are against people eating meat that they don't have to eat meat, you will eat meat for them.
Given, the argument above as been about PvE'ers avoiding gankers, but I will give a few other scenario's that PvE'ers encounter and question what they would do if not willing to PvP
a) Your group spent 40min to get to the desired PvE location, and have spent 1hr playing in the same location, with every intention to spend a few more hours there and then another PvE team arrives and starts XP'ing over your same play spot. After all PM conversing fails to have the other team depart. In a pacifist scenario, you either leave or play compromised.
Would you not want to PvP just to retain your area?
b) Similar to above, you are enjoying playing in an area and a nearby group of players are training mobs to power xp and they keep pulling trains through your area resulting in your full team from wiping out.
Would you not want to do something?
c) You are XP'ing quietly and a great item drops and some random player runs up and picks it up and runs off with it.
In the spur of the moment do you want to accept the loss or retaliate?
d) You are XP'ing in a remote area and you see the player that has been griefing your Guild buddies regularly, the notorious XP'ing alone and vulnerable.
Would you want the opportunity to take vengeance?
e) You are XP'ing with a group of friends and see the ex-guild member that ran off with all the guild's coin and top gear.
Would your group prefer to just turn the other cheek or would there be a little satisfaction for exercising the minimal punitive measures you can do within game?
f) Player X has been player killing every person that crosses Y bridge. You cannot pass to meet your buddies without paying his extortionate ransom.
Do you go home for the day, knowing you cannot pass?
Point being from above, not all scenarios are the PvP death of a PvE'er by griefing.
Agreed, there are times that it is great to enjoy a quiet, uninterrupted PvE session.
But in an open world game, not everyone will behave as you might like around you.
Options become very limited if no PvP capability.
But with all things, even in an MMO, sometimes I just want to be left alone. I can't be the only one in heavy raiding guilds that had alts nobody else knew about just so I could do my own thing sometimes. Having to have a body guard, or having to deal with Badguy McStabberson kinda defeats that.
(despite it still being in Pre-Alpha Xp )
In short, Open-World PvP is good because it creates a unique atmosphere.
We need a game that will be all immersive. That's evident by what most people are saying and we wouldn't be here if we didn't want that because that is what Intrepid is offering us. They seem to be trying to balance the system and be fair. Will it make us all happy all of the time? Highly unlikely. But where you going to find anything better or euphoric? Candyland ------------->
Is it going to be easy? No way! But if it was all that easy would we be here?
The problem is that AoC PvP is compunded by the fact that there are no safe spots and there are no channels to flee to if someone is harassing you. This opens the door for all kinds of potential griefing. And in the video the collision mechanics aint no joke. This is another major form of potential griefing.
*cough* swtor *cough*
And this will cause constant requests for server merges.
Why would there need to be a server merge other than it's easier on the devs?
who conned them before.
In game there is the choice to slay them, to strike them down from the pillars and ruin their stuff.
You don't like it? The mobs try to do the same thing left unchecked. What is the difference except that players are smarter (and cuter looking)?