Greetings, glorious adventurers! If you're joining in our Alpha One spot testing, please follow the steps here to see all the latest test info on our forums and Discord!

Two Things Bugging The Hell Outa Me!

1. Node type, i.e. Scientific, Military, Divine, Economic is predetermined before a player steps foot into it. Rather than lets us build it into it's final glory, we have to go with what the Devs lay out for us. Will it be the same layout on every server? Will Nodes that are knocked back to lvl zero be the same when built up again? What the Hell? Why take so much of "The Story" and make it predetermined?

2. Intrepid is ramming PVP down the throats of players that are a little bit shy about PVP with the noncombatant flag system. I am all for PVP, so don't get me wrong. I love the idea of risk vs reward in everything possible. However, by making the penalties for flagging as noncombatant more powerful than combatant, they are pretty much strong-arming players to go around flagged as combatant.

"Take your lumps, smile, there that didn't hurt so bad did it? Now if you would just flag up as combatant, it won't be so bad next time, will it?"

This is a PVP game, sure thing. I get that. There really isn't any need to FORCE compliance through advantageous or penalizing mechanics for not playing along as a "Good PVP player should". You leave little room for choice except to players that really want to corruption bomb other players. I have a feeling that making death penalties the same for non or pro combatants or better for non combatants would go further if you want PVP shy players to try your game. The current design just comes across as punishment...

All done for now!

Comments

  • 1 ) hopeful this will chance if it is predetermined nodes 
    2) the players how don't won't to PvP can hire PvP players to project them and there goods.also there is the bounty hunter system 
  • 1. Node type, i.e. Scientific, Military, Divine, Economic is predetermined before a player steps foot into it. Rather than lets us build it into it's final glory, we have to go with what the Devs lay out for us. Will it be the same layout on every server? Will Nodes that are knocked back to lvl zero be the same when built up again? What the Hell? Why take so much of "The Story" and make it predetermined?

    On your first point, I share the same concern. On your second point I'm less opinionated, so will skip that one.

    Regarding the node (arche)type: In a dynamic world like AoC I would hope that nodes can adapt to the demands and characteristics of their populace, rather than just being pigeonholed. In my mind it would be more advantageous to have the Scientific, Military, Divine, Economic attribute at the Guild level rather than the node level. That way, guilds will be structured around these activities rather than being able to monopolise everything and become an unstoppable force. However this may still happen through guild alliances, but these could be easier to police (or not!). 

    In my mind, nodes are made up of citizens who belong to guilds. The voting power really does lie with the larger guilds; however guild alliances could shift to alter the power structure of a node. I think a successful node should require a mixture of guild archetypes to remain viable. A node with purely scientific guilds for example would be fairly easy to stomp by an organized militia; it would also be fairly economically weak if there were no crafting/professional guilds powering the economy.

    So I see these two types of structures in competition. Each depend on the other but are always in contention. 
  • ArchivedUserArchivedUser Guest
    edited June 2017
    1) where have you seen that node types are predetermined? This was not my impression. I believe the node type is chosen by the king or queen of that node, or at least in the players' control by a citizen vote. Dont quote me.

    2) i also have not seen anywhere where it said non-combatants get less rewards or more penalties from anything than combatants do. Other than the fact that if you dont enter combat zones such as caravans or sieges you miss out on those rewards. This is a pvp game after all.

    No idea where you are getting information. Please link or quote.

  • ArchivedUserArchivedUser Guest
    edited June 2017
    (This post has been edited to make more sense.  Thank you.)

    Think of the current PvP system of flagging, and corruption, as an extension of Intrepid's idea of risk vs. reward.

    As a non flagged player, if attacked you have the choice to defend yourself (flag), and incur minimal xp debt, should you die, with only materials on hand loss.

    If you choose to stay unflagged, you still lose any materials on hand, but also incur more xp debt, than normal.  But, the "reward" is that you inflict your attacker with corruption.  Corruption scales, the higher the disparity between the two players equates to.

    Imo, this encourages players to defend against players of around the same level, while giving players the option to punish high lvl characters who choose to grief, for whatever reason.


  • According to the Developers blog (Metropolises), it seems that a Node's type can vary. While not specifically indicated, it was pointed out that once a node had been besieged and destroyed, it could be rebuilt with a different type.
  • I don't understand why people want to play an MMORPG and not have to interact with anyone.

    Go play Skyrim or something. Don't try to change a game built on player interaction to fit your game style...
  • In reference to nodes, the devs have said that node types are predetermined.  As a node is built up, you will see what kind of node it is, based on it's appearance.  Players can then choose whether to continue to advance that node, or find another one, more to their preference.  

    All early game concepts.  As the game is tested, changes could occur.  But, this is the route they're planning to go.
  • Can't speak much on the node part as I've not seen anything about that, but the idea behind Non combatants taking normal death penalties and people fighting back only taking half isn't a punishment, It's a reward. 

    If you choose to not fight back you take the same punishment as dying to a mob. To me this doesn't sound bad you die you take a death penalty, but if you fight back, get into the spirit of the game, try to save yourself instead of giving up you are rewarded with less of a penalty. 

    While I know it won't happen I wish people would stop looking at it as a punishment for people who give up and more as a reward for people who will try.

  • huh, i never seen it that. Although I slightly prefer PvE, I just figured that both
     Non-Combatants will turn into Combatants and it'll be fair.

    How is it not fair :open_mouth: ?

  • In reference to nodes, the devs have said that node types are predetermined.  As a node is built up, you will see what kind of node it is, based on it's appearance.  Players can then choose whether to continue to advance that node, or find another one, more to their preference.  

    All early game concepts.  As the game is tested, changes could occur.  But, this is the route they're planning to go.
    Yes, and I hope this does evolve to be more fluid without necessitating a node to be destroyed before it can be remade. And just how non-military nodes are supposed to defend themselves is quite unclear to me.
  • @Bringslite I like discussing all of the concerns because we may end up finding more solutions and more common ground as we learn more about each playstyle's points of view. But, so far, the best solution I've seen is for PvE folk to try to congregate on a server with low PvP combat. The Stock Exchange should provide us with analytics to help determine that during alpha/beta. And then those players can all join the same server during headstart. Hopefully keeping the unwanted PvP combat at a minimum
  • lexmax said:
    In reference to nodes, the devs have said that node types are predetermined.  As a node is built up, you will see what kind of node it is, based on it's appearance.  Players can then choose whether to continue to advance that node, or find another one, more to their preference.  

    All early game concepts.  As the game is tested, changes could occur.  But, this is the route they're planning to go.
    Yes, and I hope this does evolve to be more fluid without necessitating a node to be destroyed before it can be remade. And just how non-military nodes are supposed to defend themselves is quite unclear to me.
    All nodes will have the ability to defend themselves.  Different nodes will have different advantages, however.  

    For example, if it came to brute strength, a military node would have the advantage, in defending.  Scientific nodes may have to rely on maneuverability, or magic, as an advantage to defend.  Divine nodes may rely on the intervention of the gods, and so on.
  • Nodes are definitely pre-determined as of now. I believe the reason they want this is due to how the nodes interact with each other. I have heard Steven mention a couple times that the nodes will interact with each other certain ways which is one of the main reason they do not foresee adding the ability for a 6th metropolis. I also do not think that they want 5 scientific metropolis "next" to one another. 

    As for PvP...ugh this topic. 


  • Sorry. Exact quotes are beyond my ability to locate. The second is very well known and the first is too. People good at finding that stuff will hopefully confirm...

    I didn't say it was unfair. If the rules are layed out and I sign up, anything is fair. What I am saying is that, according to these rules(so far) it is 100% better to flag as combatant. You drop more stuff if flagged as non combatant.

    Despite the yet to be seen corruption penalties, dropping "more stuff" pretty much ensures that RPK players will target non combatant flagged players as first choice. I mean the kind of RPK that Intrepid wants most IS RPK for a reason right? That means they want RPK for taking over/driving away/protecting some player from a farming spot and RPK for loot. They don't want "RPK for the lulz".

    Another problem: You can get bumped to "combatant" if you fight back and attack a player that attacks you. So you drop less stuff, take less xp debt right? What if the fellow that attacks you is ALREADY carrying a corruption score? Well then you DON"T GET BUMPED TO COMBATANT FLAGGED from non combatant. Fighting back does nothing for you mechanically.

  • theyre not ramming anything down your throat. dont like it, play something else.
  • @Bringslite
    Intrepid doesn't want "PK" of any kind.  They've stated multiple times that the core of their game revolves around PvX.  Meaning a healthy dose of both PvE, and PvP, working in concert with one another.  And, for there to be a reason why you choose to PvE, and or PvP, and seeing your decisions play out in the world around you.  

    They've also stated that they would be keeping careful tabs, for any potential balancing issues, and the such.  That may sound good to some, not so good to others.  It is what it is, at this point.
  • Dygz said:
    @Bringslite I like discussing all of the concerns because we may end up finding more solutions and more common ground as we learn more about each playstyle's points of view. But, so far, the best solution I've seen is for PvE folk to try to congregate on a server with low PvP combat. The Stock Exchange should provide us with analytics to help determine that during alpha/beta. And then those players can all join the same server during headstart. Hopefully keeping the unwanted PvP combat at a minimum
    Well I hope that you are right, Dygz. One problem I see though is how juicy and tasty your low PVP server will look to the slavering wolves looking for somewhere they can get a foothold and some relatively unsuspecting, unready players.
  • ArchivedUserArchivedUser Guest
    edited June 2017
    @Bringslite
    Intrepid doesn't want "PK" of any kind.  They've stated multiple times that the core of their game revolves around PvX.  Meaning a healthy dose of both PvE, and PvP, working in concert with one another.  And, for there to be a reason why you choose to PvE, and or PvP, and seeing your decisions play out in the world around you.  

    They've also stated that they would be keeping careful tabs, for any potential balancing issues, and the such.  That may sound good to some, not so good to others.  It is what it is, at this point.

    All true, except Intrepid does want PVP and part of what they want is PK. They just want us to think of it differently. I don't mind that at all and not trying to split hairs. Just pointing out a cpl things I don't like so far.

    That and it is fun to do so with Big Drama!

  • Dygz said:
    @Bringslite I like discussing all of the concerns because we may end up finding more solutions and more common ground as we learn more about each playstyle's points of view. But, so far, the best solution I've seen is for PvE folk to try to congregate on a server with low PvP combat. The Stock Exchange should provide us with analytics to help determine that during alpha/beta. And then those players can all join the same server during headstart. Hopefully keeping the unwanted PvP combat at a minimum
    Well I hope that you are right, Dygz. One problem I see though is how juicy and tasty your low PVP server will look to the slavering wolves looking for somewhere they can get a foothold and some relatively unsuspecting, unready players.
    You could do something akin to what RP'ers usually do, and proclaim an official PvE server, for like minded players to congregate to.  


  • For example, if it came to brute strength, a military node would have the advantage, in defending.  Scientific nodes may have to rely on maneuverability, or magic, as an advantage to defend.  Divine nodes may rely on the intervention of the gods, and so on.
    Science relying on magic? That's an immersion breaker right there.
  • lexmax said:
    For example, if it came to brute strength, a military node would have the advantage, in defending.  Scientific nodes may have to rely on maneuverability, or magic, as an advantage to defend.  Divine nodes may rely on the intervention of the gods, and so on.
    Science relying on magic? That's an immersion breaker right there.
    lol  Depends on how the elements are introduced to one another.  One man's "science", is another man's "magic".  If I had a way to go back into the past...the medieval ages, for example...with an ordinary flashlight, I would probably be branded either a divine prophet, or demon-spawn.  :wink:
  • Dygz said:
    @Bringslite I like discussing all of the concerns because we may end up finding more solutions and more common ground as we learn more about each playstyle's points of view. But, so far, the best solution I've seen is for PvE folk to try to congregate on a server with low PvP combat. The Stock Exchange should provide us with analytics to help determine that during alpha/beta. And then those players can all join the same server during headstart. Hopefully keeping the unwanted PvP combat at a minimum
    Well I hope that you are right, Dygz. One problem I see though is how juicy and tasty your low PVP server will look to the slavering wolves looking for somewhere they can get a foothold and some relatively unsuspecting, unready players.
    Yep. May be an interesting cat and mouse game though as folks monitor the Stock Exchange and hop servers.
    We'll see.
Sign In or Register to comment.