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
https://errantpenman.com/2017/01/11/interview-ashes-of-creation-wants-to-bring-the-virtual-world-to-life/
<em>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.</em>
To make the attacker go red, they would just stand and not fight. But, they would suffer the normal death penalty rather than the half death penalty benefit they'd gain if they attack their attacker and lose the battle.
When I read that I interpret it so suggest that if a non-combatant initiates an attack they become a combatant. I can't bring myself to assume self defense triggers the change. What is most logical to me is that the status locks in when the engagement begins. I feel like the description you quoted leaves some room for interpretation either way. I'm not saying I'm right. :)
An attacker hits a non-combatant.
If the non-combatant is killed, he suffers normal death penalty.
If the attacker is killed, she suffers half death penalty.
Does that really seem fair to you?? ??
The innocent bystander suffers twice the death penalty for minding his own business?
How does that encourage the non-combatant to participate in the fight?
It's better to not fight and punish the attacker by making her flag corrupted.
That's not really promoting combat. Nor encouraging non-combatants to fight.
<div class="d4p-bbt-quote-title"><a href="https://www.ashesofcreation.com/forums/topic/gear-loss-as-a-red-player/page/8/#post-19358" rel="nofollow">Quisari wrote:</a></div>
Yea you did but i thought that after killing a player i would go red and if im not Wrong now, the only way to go red is by killing a player that does not fight back? Right? The moment they hit you back they turn purple as well and by killing them i stay purple?
Sorry for some reason they way i got that information Into my brain must have messed it up q.q
</blockquote>
haha – it’s new and complex. Don’t worry about it.
If you kill a non-combatant you will gain a corruption score. And it seems like you would have to chase down a non-combatant who is not attacking you for that to happen. Or maybe she just stands their defiantly, daring you to kill her so that you’ll gain corruption.
Seems to me that if the non-combatant attacks you back, they flag as a combatant. Which means you won’t gain corruption when you kill them. That’s what you want to focus on. Killing combatants. You only have to worry about gear drop if you keep killing non-combatants.
Your plan to start a gang of rogues has me envisioning you sneaking around the city stabbing combatants in the back while they’re in the middle of another fight. haha
[/quote]
Pretty Much xD stealing their goods, rushing out of the City with a hole guild on our ass and jump on our horses riding to Our underground dungeon :p
MUST RESEARCH MORE!!! X.X[/quote]
Oh, no, we don't think that griefers are only neanderthals that attack players whose levels or gear are significantly below theirs. We think that your "fun" of forcing a fight on us, when we're not flagged, should land you some significant trouble. Enough to make you sit back and think, "Huh. I'm losing gear, I'm corrupted, bounty hunters are gonna be after me (which you might enjoy) and if I keep this up, shortly that ungeard person I'm attacking will be able to wipe the floor with me."
In short, we want exactly what Intrepid is trying to create; a world where you, the ganker, the PK griefer who thinks it's fun to impose your idea of fun on our heads when we're out in the world, exploring, crafting, gathering, whatever.
The simple fact is that this stance, taken by Intrepid, is pulling quite a few people like me into this game. Why? Because there will be harsh consequences and penalties to you, if you grief me. You believe that if we're equal levels then it isn't technically griefing; I respond by pointing out that I'm paying as much money into the game per month as you are and that means I have a right to play the game the way that's fun to me, without your imposition.
I think that the amount of people like me who are coming to this game specifically <em>because</em> Intrepid has set up the corruption system as they have is going to be bigger than those of you who think it's perfectly ok to eff up someone else's moment, hour, day or whatever while they're playing their game, not bothering you. There are enough avenues available for PVP with folk who want to PVP that you should have no need to go around griefing folk like me, and like my friends who're comin' over to party with me in AoC.
Further, as was pointed out earlier, it doesn't much matter what you think <em>should</em> be done to make it less obtrusive for you to gank/grief; Intrepid is doing what they're doing, and you can operate within that, or not, at your choice.
In my ever-so-humble opinion, I believe that there will be lots of people like you who think "Man, this sucks, I don't like these penalties!" and leave after the first few months. I'm content to let Intrepid's system take its toll on you and wait you guys out. You'll leave when you can't get the "fun" you think you deserve, and go back to BDO or somesuch ... or you'll change your playstyle to avoid corruption.
Again, I am content with this.
The system is designed to do precisely what I outlined.
If the non-combatant auto flags to combatant when they attack they're attacker, they are rewarded with half the death penalty.
If they were locked at full death penalty there is no incentive to fight back. It is better for them to not fight back because that punishes their attacker more and they get no benefit at all if they fight back and lose. They've also lost the time it takes to fight if they lose.
Because the non-combatant gets half the death penalty if they attack their attacker, it behooves the non-combatant to attack back rather than flee or wait to be killed. Also, if the person who was initially attacked wins, they remain flagged as a combatant for a few minutes. Which encourages other enemies to attack them rather than non-combatants.
Having the non-combatant auto flag to combatant when they attack their attacker is what encourages PvP combat.
If the non-combatant that gets attacked is locked they are encouraged to not fight, because the penalty is the same if they die and worse for their opponent as well.
Also, if both are flagged as combatant (due to the non-combatant auto-flagging) the result has a fair outcome.
Regardless of who wins, the one killed receives half the normal death penalty. And the one initiated will not gain corruption if he wins.
That is fair.
It makes no sense for the non-combatant to lock as non-combatant just because someone attacked them.
It isn't fair.
So, occam's razor... it must work as stated. The non-combatant auto-flags when they attack a combatant or a non-combatant.
Doesn't matter whether they initiated or not.
Seems to me that if the non-combatant attacks you back, they flag as a combatant. Which means you won’t gain corruption when you kill them.[/quote]
That person just standing there? That would totally be me. Then I'd laugh delightedly as you became a red player, thus open for all kindsa bounties. Seems fitting.
As for the rest of the quote, I believe you are correct, as my understanding is at this time. If someone attacks you and you're not flagged, you can choose to fight them -- becoming purple. If you don't choose to fight them, you stay unflagged, possibly die, and the other player becomes red.
I also believe that self-defense falls under the turning purple category; if anyone knows differently, please feel free to correct me, and thanks!
<div class="d4p-bbt-quote-title"><a href="https://www.ashesofcreation.com/forums/topic/gear-loss-as-a-red-player/page/8/#post-19226" rel="nofollow">Quisari wrote:</a></div>
What i am refering to is Going red by killing people around your own lvl, but i guess i must have misunderstood the corruption system as in i kill a player with equal gear/LVL and I become red by doing so ^^ does everyone think a pk’er is a Player that litterly only kills lowbies?
MUST RESEARCH MORE!!! X.X
</blockquote>
Oh, no, we don’t think that griefers are only neanderthals that attack players whose levels or gear are significantly below theirs. We think that your “fun” of forcing a fight on us, when we’re not flagged, should land you some significant trouble. Enough to make you sit back and think, “Huh. I’m losing gear, I’m corrupted, bounty hunters are gonna be after me (which you might enjoy) and if I keep this up, shortly that ungeard person I’m attacking will be able to wipe the floor with me.”
In short, we want exactly what Intrepid is trying to create; a world where you, the ganker, the PK griefer who thinks it’s fun to impose your idea of fun on our heads when we’re out in the world, exploring, crafting, gathering, whatever.
The simple fact is that this stance, taken by Intrepid, is pulling quite a few people like me into this game. Why? Because there will be harsh consequences and penalties to you, if you grief me. You believe that if we’re equal levels then it isn’t technically griefing; I respond by pointing out that I’m paying as much money into the game per month as you are and that means I have a right to play the game the way that’s fun to me, without your imposition.
I think that the amount of people like me who are coming to this game specifically <em>because</em> Intrepid has set up the corruption system as they have is going to be bigger than those of you who think it’s perfectly ok to eff up someone else’s moment, hour, day or whatever while they’re playing their game, not bothering you. There are enough avenues available for PVP with folk who want to PVP that you should have no need to go around griefing folk like me, and like my friends who’re comin’ over to party with me in AoC.
Further, as was pointed out earlier, it doesn’t much matter what you think <em>should</em> be done to make it less obtrusive for you to gank/grief; Intrepid is doing what they’re doing, and you can operate within that, or not, at your choice.
In my ever-so-humble opinion, I believe that there will be lots of people like you who think “Man, this sucks, I don’t like these penalties!” and leave after the first few months. I’m content to let Intrepid’s system take its toll on you and wait you guys out. You’ll leave when you can’t get the “fun” you think you deserve, and go back to BDO or somesuch … or you’ll change your playstyle to avoid corruption.
Again, I am content with this.
[/quote]
Well written ^^ though my caveman instinct tells me to slap you silly.. still very well written but you seem to not have read everything since you clearly don't Even try to understand why im asking the questions... And btw bdo have a 10 times harder punishment outside the desert :) just thinking of loosing an enhancement lvl from tet or pen makes me want to curl up and cry :(
Also when you have decided to buy and Play the game you Also have accepted the fact that you might and probably will be pk'ed.. . As Another person have said just have backup gear, sure with all the materials you would get from players that won't fight back, backups might not be to hard to come by ^^
Anyway well written
These topics can be rough!
Easy to get "triggered".
@Isende
I think Quisari really wants to be a purple bandit. He was just confused by the new mechanics.
These topics can be rough!
Easy to get “triggered”.
<a href="https://www.ashesofcreation.com/forums/users/isende/" rel="nofollow">@isende</a>
I think Quisari really wants to be a purple bandit. He was just confused by the new mechanics.
[/quote]
Me caveman me triggered :3
Yea i Know and sadly for some reason that single post just clicked peeeeerfect.... well freaking done xD
True.. learned that i have to abuse the purple status to all its might :3
Does anyone Know if there Will be a max lvl like wow or more like bdo with unlimited grinding?
It sounds like the devs are trying for something along the lines of EQNext - shallow vertical progression with broad horizontal progression.
So, a relatively lower max vertically... I'm thinking 25 or 30 since they said the max Node level is 25, IIRC.
But, lots of different ways we can spec our abilities via the secondary class augments (+ gear).
It sounds like the devs are trying for something along the lines of EQNext – shallow vertical progression with broad horizontal progression.
So, a relatively lower max vertically… I’m thinking 25 or 30 since they said the max Node level is 25, IIRC.
But, lots of different ways we can spec our abilities via the secondary class augments (+ gear).
[/quote]
Fair Enough ^^ cant wait for more details :D
The only part i don't like about the system is where defending yourself turns you purple. So in most cases i would say just don't. then the pk griefer can build karma and lose his items to a bounty hunter or another pk griefer, then his behavior will change.
So, that really depends on how much xp debt you want to deal with as well as how much durabilty and raw materials you're willing to lose.
It's not really fair to call a combatant who initiates an attack on a non-combatant a PK griefer because if you defend yourself, you're both combatants. If it's an honorable combatant, the initiator is looking for an honorable fight: same level and geared as an adventurer rather than an artisan.
But, you know, even a fair fight can seem unfair from the perspective of the victim.
If it's a PK griefer, true.
If it's an honorable combatant, no.
I hope so! If that's the fact, then I'm done, and @quisari? I hope you enjoy playing the game ... hopefully the purple combat will excite and titillate you!
Also, thank you, @dygz, for making this point.
Macros. MMMMMMmmmmmmmm!
So, if @SLSteele's take on non-combatants getting locked when attacked is correct, the best way to win a siege is to have the local militia rush into battle waving their weapons and when the enemy hits the stop and say, "“Hey, hope you’re havin’ a great day, I’m not interested in fighting you!”
Then laugh at all them corrupted.
The concept still remains a hilarious tactic for winning an epic battle.
A squad of non-combatants turning a relatively few gaggle of combatants red wouldn't literally end a siege event in the first place.
Sometimes you gotta just go with the joke.
It’s not really fair to call a combatant who initiates an attack on a non-combatant a PK griefer because if you defend yourself, you’re both combatants. If it’s an honorable combatant, the initiator is looking for an honorable fight: same level and geared as an adventurer rather than an artisan.
But, you know, even a fair fight can seem unfair from the perspective of the victim.
[/quote]
The only honorable fight is if the person you attack is flagged Purple. If you attack a Green you are a griefer, because by being Green that person is alerting everyone around them they do NOT want to fight. There is no honor to attack a person who does not want to fight. Now if you approach a Green and ask to fight and they agree by turning Purple, then it's an honorable fight.
If you don't want to fight, you won't fight back when someone attacks you and that will indicate clearly that you don't want to fight. The attacker then has the option to stop attacking - the honorable thing to do. Or to kill you. The griefer decision.
If you fight back, you both will be flagged as combatants. That is the consent. And honorable.
If you don't fight back and the attacker kills you, they will be flagged as a corrupted PK griefer.
If you attack a Green you are attacking someone who does not want to fight. Yes, if you attack and don't kill them, then you aren't a scumbag, but still you have forced yourself on someone who is unwilling.
There are plenty of avenues for PvP, why do some people feel the need to attack innocents?
If you attack a Green you are attacking someone who does not want to fight. Yes, if you attack and don’t kill them, then you aren’t a scumbag, but still you have forced yourself on someone who is unwilling.
There are plenty of avenues for PvP, why do some people feel the need to attack innocents?
[/quote]
There are some reasons too at times and that is why they are keeping the option open. The system is to prevent griefing where it is unlikely you will be killed more then once by the red attacker. PK'ers won't have it easy and most players will be hostile to them.
If you attack a Green you are attacking someone who does not want to fight. Yes, if you attack and don’t kill them, then you aren’t a scumbag, but still you have forced yourself on someone who is unwilling.
There are plenty of avenues for PvP, why do some people feel the need to attack innocents?
[/quote]
haha I feel your pain.
In AoC, it's really non-combatants.
Some people are not going to flag even though they are about to kill folk.
When a large battle starts, you cannot just ask if those who are interested in combat would please flag for combat.
And you shouldn't trust that everyone who hasn't flagged won't stab you in the back.
Because there is no penalty for attacking someone without flagging.
Flagging automatically happens when someone attacks.
Again, I feel your pain. I get it.
But, that's not way the PvP fans perceive consent.
Your gonna be spending a lot of time feeling abused if your hoping people will politely ask for your consent before they attack you.
That might happen if someone is offering a non-lethal duel.
You are talking about attacking Greens, who are off doing their own thing, and NO, flagging doesn't automatically happen when you attack, flagging Purple only happens if the Green attacks back in self defense. You are forcing yourself on another person, if this was sexual, it would be ****. That's how PvE people feel.