Glorious Alpha Two Testers!
Phase I of Alpha Two testing will occur on weekends. Each weekend is scheduled to start on Fridays at 10 AM PT and end on Sundays at 10 PM PT. Find out more here.
Check out Alpha Two Announcements here to see the latest Alpha Two news and update notes.
Our quickest Alpha Two updates are in Discord. Testers with Alpha Two access can chat in Alpha Two channels by connecting your Discord and Intrepid accounts here.
Phase I of Alpha Two testing will occur on weekends. Each weekend is scheduled to start on Fridays at 10 AM PT and end on Sundays at 10 PM PT. Find out more here.
Check out Alpha Two Announcements here to see the latest Alpha Two news and update notes.
Our quickest Alpha Two updates are in Discord. Testers with Alpha Two access can chat in Alpha Two channels by connecting your Discord and Intrepid accounts here.
Comments
I am a PvE Player but i dont see any problems with the flanking system to be honest. If someone decides to gank me he will get penalties for killing me and is marked on the map to get killed by other players and even have the chance to drop their gear. I dont think much people will actually risk that and gank a few low-lvls. But even if, lets say you get killed 2 times a day by a player, i wouldnt mind it. I have played games where i got killed 50 times by some players/guilds. I think if you want to avoid pvp at all cost, AoC isnt the game for you buddy, the game is designed like "pve builds>pvp destroys". The whole node system just works with both of them, not just with pve or pvp alone.
I want to say that I'm fully on board with AOC as is and I'm all for the game as advertised.
Let's start with the motivations for players to pk... Just a couple factual examples.
1. There are griefers. Players who simply enjoy (for whatever reason) killing other players despite level, lack of challenge or whatever. If you've pvp'd you've encountered this time and again. There will be griefers in AOC.
2. There is an actual gameplay motivation to do so. Hindering node development will be a thing and even the non-combatant gatherer is a worthy target.
These are just 2 very real facts that players in the game will have to deal with.
The corruption system is an attempt to add an interesting twist to the pvp element of the game and limit griefing of other players.
I can tell you that it will fail in that regard. I already see multiple ways to bypass the negative aspects of the corruption system and furthermore use that system to my benefit. I won't use my knowledge to pk low levels, but that won't hinder others from doing so. I will use that knowledge on everyone else as it's beneficial for me to do so on multiple counts.
Anyone thinking the corruption system will truly be a deterrent will find themselves experiencing a great deal of disappointment.
Do not believe for a moment these battles will be fair and 1v1 battles... no, those types of battles can be lengthy enough for aid to arrive... expect groups to fall upon you swiftly, and move on just as quickly as they came.
The only true deterrent will be a group of individuals prepared for battle.
Should you be a PVE oriented player and hate PvP this game isn't going to be for you. You already know this, which is why there are already people trying to encourage change in game development.
Developers need to hold true to their original vision and avoid the trappings of trying to appeal to everyone. Once you begin to try to appeal to everyone, you fail to satisfy anyone. Create the game you set out to develop and accept the sizeable number of potential customers that will pass on your game. In doing so, you will gain the customer loyalty of those who share your vision.
That's still a feature. Especially if our goal is more about disrupting their gameplay than killing them.
Doesn't really matter who wins.
And... I think I would play the zombie the same amount of time per play session even with this additional penalty.
(Treve! Great post!)
PvP vs PvP vs PvE
It is pvp+pve players with one idea vs pvp+pve players with a different idea vs the world with its own ideas.
Al vying for control over the future of the server.
Removing PvP is literally breaking the game, as would be removing the PvE.[/quote]
Hmmnn. No.
Neither of those player groups will have just one idea.
And there is a false assumption that the pve players would rather support the pvp than they would the pve players of other regions.
The default servers are player v all.
Totally get that; however, in my experience, it takes a while for the neanderthals to get through their thick skulls that "hey, man, this ain't fun!"
:-D
<div class="d4p-bbt-quote-title"><a href="https://www.ashesofcreation.com/forums/topic/please-dont-force-us-to-be-victims-of-pvpers/page/9/#post-17436" rel="nofollow">Helzbelz wrote:</a></div>
With the corruption system you will reduce ganking a lot. The reason is, is that players will lose combat effectiveness and they will also lose their gear if they die.
</blockquote>
Totally get that; however, in my experience, it takes a while for the neanderthals to get through their thick skulls that “hey, man, this ain’t fun!”
<img alt="????" src="https://s.w.org/images/core/emoji/2.2.1/svg/1f600.svg" />
[/quote]
But if the system is done effectively, then they can continue trying to gank people all they want, but it doesn't mean they'll succeed. And really, that's what matters most. I don't care much if a person keeps <em>trying</em> to kill me if they can't actually kill me, or I can easily turn around and dispose of them. Also, if they do get marked on the map, then you'll be able to see them coming.
Anyway, good luck to you guys. I hope you enjoy AoC.
[/quote]
I still think you should try the game out before you pass judgement. Use your wits to avoid the pvp as much as possible, make friends and join a guild so you have people to back you up. Don't be so closed minded about pvp but if you are dead set about having no open world pvp I wish you luck in finding a game you will enjoy.
[quote quote=17774]I dunno. If I’m roleplaying my corrupted alts as zombies and I have a gaggle of friends doing the same, then…
That’s still a feature. Especially if our goal is more about disrupting their gameplay than killing them.
Doesn’t really matter who wins.
And… I think I would play the zombie the same amount of time per play session even with this additional penalty.
(Treve! Great post!)
[/quote]
You, I am just going to label as a troll and shit stirrer at this point. On one side you want no forced pvp and on the other you constantly talk about creating alt just to grief people as the go about in the game. One poster said you were "playing devil's advocate" but you didn't write any of your zombie alt crap as a hypothetical. So here is your troll label, wear it with pride.
Agreed. Gear will not give those who wish to PvP any large advantage over those questing or out gathering. Players all have the same potential for growth and power level (class balancing notwithstanding). It will likely come down to numbers involved on both sides. I highly doubt we'll see whole guilds wandering the wild to attack single or paired groups of players. There's not enough profit or entertainment value in such a sizeable excursion, in my opinion. Personally, I might find it rather entertaining just to see someone try and gank me, only to find themselves face first in the dirt. That's coming from someone who tends to stick to crafting and questing.
<div class="d4p-bbt-quote-title"><a href="https://www.ashesofcreation.com/forums/topic/please-dont-force-us-to-be-victims-of-pvpers/page/12/#post-17802" rel="nofollow">Kaira wrote:</a></div>
But if the system is done effectively, then they can continue trying to gank people all they want, but it doesn’t mean they’ll succeed. And really, that’s what matters most. I don’t care much if a person keeps trying to kill me if they can’t actually kill me, or I can easily turn around and dispose of them. Also, if they do get marked on the map, then you’ll be able to see them coming.
</blockquote>
Agreed. Gear will not give those who wish to PvP any large advantage over those questing or out gathering. Players all have the same potential for growth and power level (class balancing notwithstanding). It will likely come down to numbers involved on both sides. I highly doubt we’ll see whole guilds wandering the wild to attack single or paired groups of players. There’s not enough profit or entertainment value in such a sizeable excursion, in my opinion. Personally, I might find it rather entertaining just to see someone try and gank me, only to find themselves face first in the dirt. That’s coming from someone who tends to stick to crafting and questing.
[/quote]
This is why I asked if everything that hits a target before death would be tagged with corruption or just the killer.
If its just the killer than you allow gank squads to run around and spread the corruption among them.
As well as kill each other to cleanse it.
Agreed. Gear will not give those who wish to PvP any large advantage over those questing or out gathering. Players all have the same potential for growth and power level (class balancing notwithstanding). It will likely come down to numbers involved on both sides. I highly doubt we’ll see whole guilds wandering the wild to attack single or paired groups of players. There’s not enough profit or entertainment value in such a sizeable excursion, in my opinion. Personally, I might find it rather entertaining just to see someone try and gank me, only to find themselves face first in the dirt. That’s coming from someone who tends to stick to crafting and questing.
[/quote]
Gear may not give an advantage, but levels probably will.
If I were going to gank, I'd be ganking newbies and lowbies
But, we'll also have to see if gatherers, etc harvest in groups.
If its just the killer than you allow gank squads to run around and spread the corruption among them.
As well as kill each other to cleanse it.[/quote]
[quote quote=17895]Gear may not give an advantage, but levels probably will.
If I were going to gank, I’d be ganking newbies and lowbies
But, we’ll also have to see if gatherers, etc harvest in groups.[/quote]
Both are fair points. Here's the excerpt of what Steven said on the matter:
"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). This Corruption Score can be worked off with effort through a few mechanics, but the primary means of getting rid of it is through death.
While a player is marked as Corrupt, they may be attacked by both Combatants and Non-Combatants. If a non-combatant attacks a corrupt player, the non-combatant will not flag as a combatant."
So according to him, attacking will trigger the flag, and not just a death blow. This should prevent a single player taking on all of the corruption unless they are able to solo their target to begin with. Which defeats the purpose of gank parties.
He also notes that the level differential will matter for the amount of corruption the combatant receives. So ganking lower level players will most likely offer severe punishment for the combatant.
Hope that helps clarify some things.
I think the devs would disagree with you on that point. The game is designed around conflict for sure, but there is both PVP and PVE conflict that they're developing.
I don´t want to participate in it, i would never kill or even hit another player, so i don´t want to get ganked and spawn camped by some mindless idiots...
[/quote]
Yes it has. The pve only players just will not stop their incessant whining about wanting a game or server that caters to their one dimensional game play style.
The game is for people that love both pve and pvp.
End of discussion.
The assumption that all players on my side of the fence are peaches and cream hands across the world is just delusional.
There is no safety blanket from trolls and harassment on the internet, Only design protocols that mitigate it.
Spawn camping isn't a pvp issue, but poor design.
You are not being 'Forced to do anything' other than engage with other players in an online environment.
Nobody likes getting ganged or spawn camped, nor do people like having their immersion broken by inappropriate behavior PVE or PVP.
you don't want to be killed buy another player, I don't want to see you skipping through a battle field. But it is up to the game systems and the players to respect and understand them. Because the world is a richer more populated place when both 'playstyles' are reliant upon each other.
IMO i cannot see how the Ashes world being proposed would even work without both forms of interaction symbiotically,
and even if there was some possible way to split the system, all you are doing is self a disservice and missing out on the design vision.
I am not a PvP or PvE player, I am an MMO player.
You're coming to a steakhouse and complaining that there are no gluten-free vegan dishes. This steakhouse, by design, serves up competition by murder. The folks who have bought into this game and put good money into the Kickstarter are bloodmouths who do not mind PvP to take center stage of what we do: the constant power struggle among not just players, but the <em>organizations</em> the players belong to. That was the concept pitched to us in the beginning: old MMO gamers like I got tired of MMOs of recent times which gave welfare loot for free, and made things so easy it was no longer challenging, and in turn it wasn't fun anymore.
Unlike you, we in this steakhouse like our food a bit on the raw side, and when we cut into it, we like to see blood seep into the bottom of our platters. There are more than enough MMOs out there which serve up safe and bland fare, and you do not lack for options already. Please don't walk into our steakhouse and call us <em>"mindless idiots"</em> for liking our meat.
[/quote]
Amen, brother.
The assumption that all players on my side of the fence are peaches and cream hands across the world is just delusional.
There is no safety blanket from trolls and harassment on the internet, Only design protocols that mitigate it. Spawn camping isn’t a pvp issue, but poor design.[/quote]
Sticks and stones...
Sticks and stones...
It's the PvPers who tend to be wounded by words.
Spawn camping is like stomping on a dead horse. Damage is already done once the horse is dead.
[quote]You are not being ‘Forced to do anything’ other than engage with other players in an online environment.[/quote]
Forced to engage in combat with other players in an online environment when you're not in the mood to combat them.
[quote]Nobody likes getting ganged or spawn camped, nor do people like having their immersion broken by inappropriate behavior PVE or PVP.[/quote]
Only thing I don't like is being forced into PvP combat when I'm not in the mood to engage in PvP combat.
I can ignore everything else.
[quote]you don’t want to be killed buy another player, I don’t want to see you skipping through a battle field. But it is up to the game systems and the players to respect and understand them. Because the world is a richer more populated place when both ‘playstyles’ are reliant upon each other.[/quote]
Exactly. Which is why there should be a PvE-only server.
[quote]IMO i cannot see how the Ashes world being proposed would even work without both forms of interaction symbiotically, and even if there was some possible way to split the system, all you are doing is self a disservice and missing out on the design vision.[/quote]
Right. Because the playstyle on the server would be alien to you. Driven by co-operation rather than competition. The competition would be more roleplay than game.
[quote]I am not a PvP or PvE player, I am an MMO player.[/quote]
Exactly! And the key there is that you left out RP, which is really the most important part.
There's no permadeath, so the progression of the node is going to be linked to the contribution of every player in the node in any case.
Does the node progress only when all the citizens of the node are safe??
I know PvPers have a hard time with the concept, but this notion of PvPers providing security is just offensive.. That is a thing that PvPers want to do to promote more PvP.
Having other players fight other players is not a solution for not wanting to participate in PvP combat.
If I go to a steakhouse, I still expect to be able to eat a salad without having to purchase a steak.
I have never eaten at a steakhouse where I was forced to eat a steak when I wasn't in the mood for steak.
The security and safeguard delusion PvPers have is like wanting to eat a salad at a steakhouse, but being told I have to purchase a steak in order to get the salad.
I'm told I don't have to eat the steak. I can let the people at the next table eat it for me.
If I don't offend the entrenched thinking of folks who insist on ignoring the core concept of Ashes of Creation: player groups clashing in direct competition against each other, it wouldn't be intellectually honest of me. It was your choice to be offended, and if you expected me to stay quiet because you <em>were offended</em>, you have expected the wrong person to apologize.
[quote]I have never eaten at a steakhouse where I was forced to eat a steak when I wasn’t in the mood for steak.[/quote]
Keep in mind that this is a crowd-funded game, where resources, staff and time are in limited supply. You're welcome to feel entitled to having PVE-only for a MMO developed and published by a company like Activision Blizzard, but when this steakhouse isn't a full-service establishment and they have only so much ingredients to keep in supply, providing for gluten-free vegan options is out of the question.
[quote]That is a thing that PvPers want to do to promote more PvP.[/quote]
Not necessarily. As much as I enjoy PVP, I have no desire to participate in it most of the time. However, I recognize the importance and significance it plays in this game. The lack of conflict between players will completely invalidate the premises of Ashes. My approach to PVP is defensive in nature, but it is not weak: it is a show of strong deterrence which is so overwhelming that raiders may think twice and move on. It's pro-active, and I'd rather spend effort in planning for that contingency instead of waiting for developers to cater to my whims.
[quote]The security and safeguard delusion PvPers have is like wanting to eat a salad at a steakhouse, but being told I have to purchase a steak in order to get the salad.[/quote]
That's also known as wanting to have your cake and eat it. Dairy Queen, Cheesecake Factory, Applebee's and Chili's are next door. You're welcome to head there instead.
I also acknowledge that taking a statement or manipulation of others opinions out of context is rather disrespectful, and should be exposed...good point indeed.
And that good RP takes sticks and stones to build a well designed symbiotic system in a massively multiplayer online game that can appeal to the role players vs player vs players vs environment population in a positive, motivational and non forced consenting way.
because building a strong community is really what MMO are really all about
Appreciate the kudos and thanks for the E for effort commendation.
Good luck with the PVE server campaign.
If I don’t offend the entrenched thinking of folks who insist on ignoring the core concept of Ashes of Creation: player groups clashing in direct competition against each other, it wouldn’t be intellectually honest of me. It was your choice to be offended, and if you expected me to stay quiet because you <em>were offended</em>, you have expected the wrong person to apologize.[/quote]
Did I say I wanted an apology? Did I say you should be quiet?
[quote]Keep in mind that this is a crowd-funded game, where resources, staff and time are in limited supply. You’re welcome to feel entitled to having PVE-only for a MMO developed and published by a company like Activision Blizzard, but when this steakhouse isn’t a full-service establishment and they have only so much ingredients to keep in supply, providing for gluten-free vegan options is out of the question.[/quote]
I didn't say anything about being entitled to a PvE-Only server.
You just keep making stuff up and then responding as if I said something I didn't say.
I am advocating for a PvE-Only server...provided that it can reasonably fit the schedule.
Seems to me that a toggle that prevents players from attacking players should not be overly time-consuming to code... but even if it is, designating a server as PvE-Only with no change to the code similar to designating a server as RP requires no change to the code. The rules would be policed on the PvE-Only server as they are on the RP server.
[quote]As much as I enjoy PVP, I have no desire to participate in it most of the time. However, I recognize the importance and significance it plays in this game. The lack of conflict between players will completely invalidate the premises of Ashes. My approach to PVP is defensive in nature, but it is not weak: it is a show of strong deterrence which is so overwhelming that raiders may think twice and move on. It’s pro-active, and I’d rather spend effort in planning for that contingency instead of waiting for developers to cater to my whims.[/quote]
PvP conflict is paramount. Players killing players... not so much.
Well, to be more precise... Character v character <ul>conflict</ul> is paramount.
Player characters killing player characters not so much.
Lack of conflict between players doesn't invalidate anything.
Lack of player characters killing player characters does not mean there is no conflict between those characters. It just means that those characters aren't killing each other to resolve the conflicts. The sieges and caravan attacks doesn't lead to those characters killing each other. But still leads to cities and caravans being destroyed.
<blockquote>
That’s also known as wanting to have your cake and eat it. Dairy Queen, Cheesecake Factory, Applebee’s and Chili’s are next door. You’re welcome to head there instead.[/quote]
It is wanting to be able to eat a salad at a steakhouse without being forced to purchase a steak first.
A reasonable expectation. Although, wanting to have cake and eat it too is literally a reasonable expectation.
Forcing people at a steakhouse to purchase a steak in order to eat a salad is unreasonable.
I am certainly free to head somewhere else. don't eat at a place that you don't like. Don't play a game that you don't like. If I don't like playing AoC, I won't play it.
That doesn't mean I won't state how unreasonable the situation is. (Possibly ad infinitum)
And doesn't mean I won't advocate for changing the unreasonable situation.
I also acknowledge that taking a statement or manipulation of others opinions out of context is rather disrespectful, and should be exposed…good point indeed.[/quote]
Or I just misunderstood the context. But, should be pointed out in any case. Yes.
If you pking for fun or to steal then you should be punished. If you're pking to make things more civilized or in defense I'm fine with that. People will have there own opinion about what's civilized and it would create plenty of conflict.