I'm confused by your last post as well @Consultant. Pv "x" is meant to be used as a variable. Commonly player vs everything/anything. Just because your vulnerable to attack does not mean your actively participating in pvp.
Well deifinitely not a server were you are always flagged for pvp. But actually it is kind of an ambigious question. But will try to answer anyways.
Well if Ashes of creation dev team would have it so there is no PVP in dungeouns and while doing world bosses then you would have a situation were you would only be doing PVE content.
So It would be PVP cause you would always be in danger of getting into a pvp situation while you are traveling in the world.
But it would be PVE ounce in a dungeoun or world boss. No chance of PVP experience while actually doing PVE content.
So you have PVE/PVP Server or PVX.
This is not my favored solution but I am just trying to work with the content that is already there without scrapping corruption system.(most viable solution)
Just a to be clear having World PVP zones caravans hunting grounds, seiges is not a pvp server. That is world PVP that does not make it a pvp server, because people have a choice. Well in Caravans guess no choice if get attacked but I think you get my point.
The everyone attacks everyone is the essence of a pvp server and the opposite of a pve server. So if you want a PVX then you have to a have both. But in some games this is considered a PVP server so.....like I said ambigious.
Anyways A tweak I would like to see is having the ability know who is in your node so you do not make a rival in your own townhall. Would like it better if we could not attack some one in same node. But if there was an icon or color that was part of my UI that I could see to keep relations with people in my node healthy that would be great.
I'm confused by your last post as well @Consultant. Pv "x" is meant to be used as a variable. Commonly player vs everything/anything. Just because your vulnerable to attack does not mean your actively participating in pvp.
Basically what you are saying PVX means variety. Then let me put it this way IS are going to have servers with variety (basically can do everythign) that are going to be PVP servers with controlled ganking.
Being flagged for PVP all the time does not equal being attacked all the time which is true even for MOBAs so.....
IS said we have PVX servers. Well if that is true according to what you are saying it is no different saying. We have servers that basically do everything. Could be said about a pvp server or pve server which both basically do everthing. Except for ganking.
So it is the every one attack everyone game mechanic that makes a pvp server a pvp server even with a corruption system.
So......you would have a valid bitch if they hadn't stated from the very start what the game was going to be. If they had portrayed the game as a PVE themepark, and then a month from release said "BTW, we are going with a flagging mechanic we think will be great, get used to it." your constant semantic quibbling would have merit. As it stands right now, the more you post, the more you sound like the homeless guy who waits in line at KFC, gets to the counter, then goes into a long rant at the staff about how they are ripping him off because the chicken isn't actually physically cooked in Kentucky.
How come you deleted my post where I pointed out to UnknownSystemError, where he compares people to homeless persons, but his post remains? After line of such posts? So I was right he is protected by you mods?
@GMSteven can you please look into your mods, who protect certain people who keep write insulting posts, but delete posts from other people who point out to that?
How come you deleted my post where I pointed out to UnknownSystemError, where he compares people to homeless persons, but his post remains? After line of such posts? So I was right he is protected by you mods?
@GMSteven can you please look into your mods, who protect certain people who keep write insulting posts, but delete posts from other people who point out to that?
Your mods are not being objective. Ty.
I deleted both of your posts because they were both personally attacking each other. I take no sides when it comes to the guidelines being breached.
So......you would have a valid bitch if they hadn't stated from the very start what
When the game is in its Alpha Stage that is when to make such comments. Ounce they get to Beta 2 the game is pretty much done and the devs are pretty much polishing the game, so now would be the best time to state concerns.
Further more would like to add that if I posted my post 2 years after games release that would not make my post more or less valid. It is up to the devs to decide what to do with info.
Plus I would like to add I cannot post about something they have not already said. So I have to wait until after they say it. Them already saying for example that naval battles will be in game does not mean I should not post for it not to be in game. So what if they already said it was going in game and it is a promised strectch goal I could still make the case that they should not have sea battles.
Do not see how posting about a topic is related to what they already said. Have read some of your other posts and they have the same theme. (IS already stated its policy this is the way it is) sounds more like you are trying to shut down peoples idea down cause it is contrary to what already has been said.
Yeah I know what they said that is why I am posting something about it. I mean I can read you know.
Notice that UknownSystem Error did not post anything about the actual game mechanics Just saying well you should not post about it anymore cause they are not going to their change minds cause they already said..... (Pretty close to the truth)
Actually I have more to say about this topic so I will just keep on posting even if they aready said it and the excercise my freedom to post(no such right exists just making reference to freedom of speech)
Forums are kind of a complaint department. (Place were people go to state things they do not like even if they already said it and implemented.) The standard response to what you are saying is if you do not like complaints stay out of the complaint departement.
Besides Another toon could make a similar post to mine ten years from now after release. Are you going to tell them Well They already said...........Yes I know. That is why I am posting.
Furhter more I like to add that I actually took the time to read all the posts (172 at the time)before positng (By the way 172 posts came out to be in my opinion one valid reason for corruption system Sense of Danger) so I can see peoples point of veiw not just this the way I like it. I really do not see any value of this system.
Is it right for some one to say. Hey Do not post about wanting that anymore because Inntrepid Studios already said...
Plus would like to remind you that well Everything is subject to Change and I do not know which but ther will be changes after release some of them pretty major.
And notice I did not call Unkown System Error any names just put some of what he said in simple terms and in my opinion did not twist his words.
Well this curruption system will make situations like this:
Hey could you kill me I am about to go to a hard dungeoun and need my corruption gone.
Hey could you kill me? Just killed some one and I do not want to be killed by them, so kill me so I can be green again
It is time for this guild to do a raid or siege but wait we have to kill our own corrupted toons first.
Hey I do not like this person I will give you x amount of gold to go and kill them.
And since there is a human element sure there will be other situations that will not work as intended.
I guess you have guilds and cities and other clubs like (thieves guild). So this system allows infighting within guilds not promoting the unity of a community.
Just as a recap made some posts about PVX and PVP and PVE but just to simplify itthere are lot of people that do not like the Everyone can Attack Everyone game mechanic You can call it whatever you want.
Would also like the following tweek to the system: Have some game mechanic that will allow certain guilds to flag all guild members so they cannot attack each other. Do not see the point in guildies attacking each other but if you want that type of guild it would be up to you.
They have stated multiple times how corruption will work and these workarounds you are talking about have been addressed. Corruption is cleared through a death to a non-aligned pvp action. You only gain corruption by attacking someone who doesn't fight back. It is a choice you make. There are 4 classes/states that will NOT allow you to "clear" corruption from someone. If you are in the same group, friends list, guild, or alliance this does not work, just like your aoe doesn't do friendly fire on someone. Committing suicide by jumping off a cliff doesn't work. Sure, there is bound to be someone who comes up with a crafty workaround to try to game the system. That is what testing is for, to find those loopholes and close them to make the system work as intended. Since people like direct quotes from developers, here is a link that goes into depth on how corruption works. https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Fvr9KYT104i8WYppCup1v6SUTZFJTobVz8uRHDas4YM/edit
Well this curruption system will make situations like this:
Hey I do not like this person I will give you x amount of gold to go and kill them.
Thats what I like about that! That's Roleplay maaan And if there are Bounty Hunters who chase corrupted players there HAVE to be people who will chase others for gold or they have nothing to do.
I know you prefer a System/Server where PVE and PVP is divided, like other people do, too. Me and many other people want to actually try out that corruption system and PVX. That will not change with more posts telling us, what you prefer You made your point around 5-10 posts ago. No offense but we can read too
EDIT: If that system is viable will be tested in betas. If many people say "NOO that system is garbage, change! change! change!" they will probably put some servers up where you can do pve without world pvp enabled. I would like to play the game like it's been designed and I would hate to see players devided... PVEers on PVE and PVPers in PVP Servers... Lame. ^^
So it is going to be a little diffucult to clear coruption Unknown System Errors last post in a nut shell. All my statements still hold true it is just going to be a little more difficult to clear corruption but situations will still exist. But thanks for the information and were to find it.
Well this curruption system will make situations like this:
Hey I do not like this person I will give you x amount of gold to go and kill them.
Thats what I like about that! That's Roleplay maaan And if there are Bounty Hunters who chase corrupted players there HAVE to be people who will chase others for gold or they have nothing to do.
I see your point playing the part of the mercenary but it could also be done on regular pvp server. It just this system is based on dead green or non-combatants. Based on going and killing PVEers (in this case might be PVPer doing PVE content) basically. . Greens gets killed (ganked) toons go purple, kill purple people and there is your PVP. Really? (not the time to state world pvp events like sieges and caravans and hunting zones and pvp zones that requires a choice for participation)
For people that like PVP should it not be possible to flag themselves for pvp. Actually from what I know I do not know IF it is even possible to flag your self for pvp.
Normal PVP server I get killed by toon, I kill toon that killed me cool. Maybe I made a rival maybe not I have made some pretty interesting ventures getting even. some of them pretty funny in fact and memorable.
PVX server I get killed by toon. Does not matter if he got killed by other toon or not and got his corruption cleansed. I really do not care how many times he has been killed by other players I WANT TO KILL the toon that killed me . So I go and do that and if they do not fight back then I am corrupted. If he is green that is, seriously doubt he is going to wait for corruption to cleanse itself naturally.
Well Why would anyone in their right mind want to do anything while corrupted. What ever it is that you are doing it is going to get interupted by bounty hunters or other greens sooner or later. So might as well have someone that will kill you (little difficult bot not impossible as UnknownSystemError put it but still necessary as soon as possible)
Personally I would pay someone to kill me just so I would not be interupted later on by some bounty hunter or green. I would just take them with me. Hey as soon as I kill this person kill me. The actual person that I killed would have to come get me or pay someone or ask some one. But at least I would not be a red alert on the map saying come kill me.
I do not see any good situations or benifits (maybe sense of danger but could be done through smart PVE content) from this system. By the way if you really want to deter ganking all you have to do is bann people for one or two days or make them lose like 20 levels or lose half their gold or .......point is this is not an antiganking system or well we do want a murder box system or even protecting the care bears system.
Most people will want to fight back at 100% health so what situation is it made for......It is basically made for people getting one shoted like when low on health fighting mobs or fighting world bosses or one shoting a low level toon. It is just an Anti-cheapshot mechanism. But it just hampers real pvp(not talking about world pvp events)
Another tweek I would like to see is giving the players the ability to flag themselves for PVP without playing part in being bounty hunted and showing up on the map.
This system was not randomly created, it was based off a system that Steven enjoyed in Lineage 2.
You have cherry picked you situations with that pvp/pvx comparison. On a pvp server in other games, the person who killed you could easily just run into a town for protection. The first and most obvious solution to that situation would be for them to have a cooldown so you can't go none combatant right after killing someone. Second, there will be social repercussions for people who try to pull that stuff. Remember, we have a large world that the player base will be spread across with no fast travel or dungeon finder. If someone is being shitty in a region, the players in that area will catch on and not want to play with them. Not only will people they screw over not want to group with them but others will be deterred if they think the person might bring conflict. Most of the content is in the open world and you don't want your group to be attacked because people don't like one of your members.
At the very least you will always suffer the exp debt which is increased based off corruption score and will gimp you until you work it off. You will also not lose all your corruption off one death if you have a lot of it and the random respawn will make it more time consuming. I feel like you are completely ignoring the inconvenience of the whole situation which is the point of the system. Even if you pay someone to kill you, you still have to spend time working of the exp debt.
A lot of how this system will work hinges on how harsh the death penalty is and it's hard to judge how it plays out until we have more details on it. They have said the goal is to encourage people to fight back so all i can say is it will be balanced for that. Do i think the first iteration of the system will be perfect, no, but i think it will be able to be adjusted into what they want. I don't think it needs to be completely scrapped because it wont be perfect at first.
You have now adopted this term PVX server which I think is your core problem. This is a PVX game not a PVX server, as in this game is designed so both pve and pvp play roles in the game. It's not just wow or guild wars with a new flagging system. I think a lot of your problems with comprehending how this system will play out stems from the fact we haven't had a game like this developed in the west. On top of that, they are trying to innovate and not just copy a game.
I think an easy way to approach this is to think about incentives and the way most people respond to "carrots and sticks." This game will essentially have no incentives for people to go on some sort of random PvP killing spree. In fact, it will punish them. Will there be players who will still find it amusing to go against that mold and attack random players? Of course, but a few players doing something stupid won't breake the game. Also, it seems like this is something that will be fairly easy to fix since the mechanics for "punishing" bad behavior will already be there.
For the most part, PvP will be focused on specific tasks and objectives that will concentrate player vs player combat in those areas. Players simply won't have any reason to venture out to fight random battles and especially non-combatants.
@Memmi Thats what I already told on page... dunno... of this thread. It just doesn't pay off for the attacker to kill greens!
That's why I told @Consultant that we understood and registered what he is concerned about. A lot of people already said things like "It doesn't pay off." "The system will be adjusted/tested in betas.", "Lets just try it", "it's the way it's designed and that was no secret.", "I prefer this/that."
we are just runnig circles here...
I played Lineage 2 for a short time, too. My brother played it for a longer time and he never complained about something like getting killed all the day. Im not sure if he even was killed ONCE. I haven't been killed. That I know for sure. The first time playing it I was aware of the possibility to get killed... It just doesn't happen.
What people have to understand is that not everyone who is interested in PVP is actually an as...le or dumb...
This system was not randomly created, it was based off a system that Steven enjoyed in Lineage 2..........
You have cherry picked you situations with that pvp/pvx comparison. On a pvp server in other games,....... You have now adopted this term PVX server which I think is your core problem. (Deleted some things to save wall space).
I have Cherry picked situations to point out some of things the that I see wrong. There are more mechanics that could be added to this system to make it better. So the situations that I Cherry Picked could be avoided. I think Cherry picking what is wrong with the game as a whole not just this system is a good thing. That way situations that get cherry picked could be avoided by smart game mechanics.
I did not adopt it. Steve was asked what type of servers he was going to have he said PVX. Obviously PVX meant what he was going to create not what he was not going to create. Created PVE content with lots of World Pvp (events) with the current flagging and curroption system. I am sure that is what he meant cause that is what he did.
I made a mistake by debating about PVX and PVP and PVE just aurging about well are we calling it an orange or an apple. Sorry about that.
So Would like to retract those posts and just go with a simple version of it and say That Every can kill Every one game mechanic (even with corruption system which needs changes in my opinion) it just not to good and list reasons why.
Not sure where you are going with inconveniences or corruption. that is what I have the problem with. I want to say it is punished pvp but that is not the case. It is punished cheapshoting or if they do not fight back (do not see how it could be pvp if they do not fight back)
Oh I have Inconveince (corruption) well best thing to do is find someone to kill me. That is the solution to corruption. It does not make for meaningful PVP. You have to have a meaningless death (kill toon at low health without chance to defend or kill some one that does not fight back).
Well hey I just had some meaningless pvp. I am corrupted lets see here...........best thing to do is more meaningless pvp and just find some one to kill me so if a bounty hunter shows up that is actaully a good thing. Bounty Hunter just showed up oh good kill me to get corruption off do not want to have more than one stack. Saves him the trouble of finding some one to kill them. But thing is best way to kill a corrupted player is a green not a bounty hunter.. Bounty Hunter could in fact get farmed by toon with one level of corruption cause no punishment for killing bounty hunter.(Corruption will be little difficult to get rid of as Unkown System Error pointed out but still necessary)
So lets see her looking to do bit of pvp(killing other toons). First I get my meaningless death of some grean then hopefully some bounty hunter will try to kill me and I will show that bounty hunter who is boss It requires a victum. This whole system is based of victums kind of unethical in my opinion.
Why would any one let themselves get more than one stack of corroption you have to get rid of it right? I have corruption ...kill me kill me!!!! Bounty Hunter just showed up right away got lucky that time.
Are you guys getting this. As it stands think some changes are in order. Will suggest some changes later. Take care every one.
Yes, the corruption system is supposed to punish cheapshotting and instances where people don't fight back. That's the goal of the system. It's supposed to punish undesirable forms of pvp not all pvp. Players probably will be encouraged to defend themselves if they have valuable resources on them so their attackers wont get corruption. Once again, point of the system. I could be wrong but they probably don't see people attacking people over resources as being a negative form of pvp. It's pretty much the same thing as the caravan system, a fight over resources.
The more you kill, the more you corruption score you gain, and the more deaths it will take to remove the corruption. One death isn't going to remove all your corruption if you went on a spree. While gaining corruption, you get weaker, and are at increased risk of dropping your gear. No matter what, you will always have to work off the negative exp and that is increased with the amount of corruption you have as well.
How many people would you think find it worth it to kill someone then spend 15 minutes to 30 minutes getting someone else to kill them then another chunk of time farming back the negative exp they loss? It's not worth it for most and that's the point of the system.
If you want some pvp then instead of trying to bait a bounty hunter you would probably get better luck if you went to a location with valuable resources or other popular zone and looked for people. You can either attack those trying to farm or attack those who came to attack the farmers. That said, you probably can find some kind of pvp no matter what you do so don't really need to go out looking for it.
As i said, system might need some work. I have thought of the same scenario and think it's silly to find someone to kill me. Part of me thinks there should be either another way to work it off or you not to be punished for continuing to play until someone kills you. If i having corruption means i'm dropping more resources then i definitely want to get killed before i go out farming again.
NOTE: What i say with a grain of salt. I'm making some assumptions on the situations that they will try to encourage pvp.
I See more situations for meaningless play then situations working as intended.Right from the get go it requires one meaningless (cheapshot) event to make one meaningful event(corruption player get killed cause they deserve it) So right from the start they cancel each other out plus you have situations like....
Well I will not kill this player just keep him about 60 percent health until he fights back and when that happens I will win anyways cause I am at 100 percent and he is at 60 percent,
I agree with Mcstackerson on one point If you want PVP (in general) there is enough to feed your PVP urges at PVP zones. So why have this corruption system in the first place just to have bounty hunter vs corrupted? It is only good going to and from pvp events and pve areas.
Why not just say Look you cannot attack a player that is at less than 100 percent health or even 90 percent maybe even 80 percent. Or some other game mechanic.
If you attack first (huge advantage) and player is at like 80 percent health (huge advantage) and guessing the toon will take about 2 seconds to go into pvp mode and target opponent (another huge advantage) and if he is engaged with a mob (another huge advantage) attacks to avoid greatter death penalty. It is still pretty much a cheap shot. And if he does not attack he gets punished
Sounds like meaningless conflict to me but there is no game mechinics to stop it. (actually game mechanics enable this)Unless he does not attack but that is not what most players will do. (Most toons will defend) plus there is the death penalty incentive so I Just described working as intended situation.
If lets say well you can only be attacked at 100 percent health and while not engaged with a mob then well you would only be cheapshotted if you did not defend really not a cheapshot in my opinion. Player should be punished for not defending. Any other game mechanics will do to fix this does not have to be my way.
So Corruption system fails as an anti-cheapshot game mechanic which is what it is suppose to be.
Would like following change
If you get cheap shotted cause attacked when you are not ready for it. Then you get to see that toon on the map for a chance to get even like bounty hunter. Maybe even allow a double kill one for cleansing corruption another from toon that got ganked.
If you get cheap shotted cause attacked when you are not ready for it.
How would game mechanics know if you were ready for it or no?
In each combat situation there is always one person that starts first and initiates it. Game can't know if other person saw it coming or not.
Well actually that situation can be helped a little. Just had not gotten that far along.
If per say a toon had to flag himself as a combatant purple and lets say a one second cast then it would be more evident that he was going to attack some one not just well a world with a bunch of greens that could attack each other at any moment. Every one agains Every one game mechanics.
In faction based games other faction shows up as red (normally) So that alerts a player. But the way it is in Ashes is just a bunch of Greens that could attack each other. I do not think that builds cohession cause every time you see a green you are going to be like well are they going to attack me or not. Makes a sense of danger, thing is it is coming from every one all time.
And if there was an alert that you were just targeted by a combatant and have a one second immunity to react then that would be more fair.
Point is the corruption system is an anticheapshot mechanism that is not too good. Most likely reason for corruption system is as Steve put meaningful conflict. I will put it as somewhat fair PVP in non pvp zones.
If they want to make PVP in PVE areas close to fair then go ahead. The game mechinics I list are not important just showing that it is possible to have a system that makes it more fair. In conclusion they could avoid most Meaningless (unfair) pvp but they would have to make various changes to current system or make their own.
In my opinion corruption does not enable meaningful pvp just make reds and bounty hunters but there are more meaningless conflict situations. and actually enables more meaningless conflicts then a regular PVP server. More examples........
Well think I will just attack some one see if they attack back and if they do I will keep attacking them since I have the element of surprise and advantage if not I will just stop attacking and go on to next one till I find that does attack me.
I just got attacked I have a mob on me chances of fighting back and winning not to good so I will just let him kill me so he gets greater death penalty than me plus corruption. If I do attack then odds already in his favor to win and might kill me with out any punishment at all. But if I do not attack I will have more of a death penalty but at least he gets corruption and a greater death penalty than me.
Then there is the infamous get naked to not get attacked. Lets say I have a long way travel and do not want to get interuppted best way to do that is unequip all gear. People will see you are naked and not attack cause they will oneshot you and get corrupted.
I have Cherry picked a lot of situations but corruption system only has one meaningful pvp situation. Corrupted at 2 or less stacks (anything more most likely skill degradation which means one shot or meaninigless conflict) killed by a bounty hunter.
Green vs Corrupted best thing to do is to for corrupted player to let him kill him or makes his own situation worst.
Think that pretty much sums it up. However will point out the reason you will most likely not get ganked is drum roll pls..................................
Combatant vs Combatant loser will have a death penalty. And well since even good pvpers die more in PvP than PVE. In one hour of PVE you might not experience any death. But like I said even good PVPers will die say about 6 times in PVP in one hour That is 6 death penalties. Or punishing pvp which people will weary of very fast. Most games their is just a durability cost but think Steves is going for meaningful deaths so...
So for the most part there will only be PVP in PVP zones plus ther are enough world PVP events and zones to please most PVPErs. Making most of posts meaninginless.
This world pvp model sounds abysmal. It is basicly Lineage2 karma system. The penalites must not be so severe or it will deter anyone from even attempting to pk. Instead of just listing problems i will post some possible solutions.
First and foremost dying as a corrupt player should have some negative effects but not as harsh as described. For example you could lose gems on gear or something like that, but not a full item drop or something like the archeage criminal point system and jail. Besides that i would suggest one of the following models.
1. Something like the Tera/archeage pk model. There is only one flagged state not two, meaning there is no (corrupt) state. You pop pk, u enter that flagged mode by will and you become an enemy to everyone else. If you engage in combat while flagged you cannot turn it off for a while. If you kill a low level player u cannot turn the flag off for prolonged periods of time that increase with every kill, forcing you to wait the time out at some safe zone. (This has proved to be the most successful one).
2. Something like bdo. Having a limit on how many targets u can pk before getting the corrupt state. But having unlimited kill times without penalty if you keep killing the same target (this prevents karma bombing). (karma bombing: When someone keeps coming to your farm zone and gets killed on purpose until you get corrupt and can no longer kill him. Then he farms in your zone and there is nothing you can do about it except trying to farm faster than him.)
If you didn't like the Lineage 2 system, you are going to hate this one. The owner spent a fair amount of time in Lineage 2, he liked their system, and that is what you are going to get. Wanna pk, pay the price.
As long as there is better incentive to attacking.
Without incentive this will just end up a PvE server, because if attacking only gets you (certain) punishment without any tangible reward, noone is going to attack anyone. Why would they?
Perhaps someone will, but it will be extremely rare on a global scale, and this will basically be a PvE game, with few occasional PvP events (sieges, caravans).
AoC needs to have good incentive for you to go purple, or else everyone will stay green.
Currently this incentive isn't as good for people to actually to want go purple. It is currently a lot better for people to all stay green and just PvE. And this will definitely not attract a PvP part of the crowd to the game.
Well if you could flagg yourself purple without attacking and have it linked to being part of like a PVP Hall. For example you can flag your self for pvp but you have to go to PVP hall to do it. Then that would make a true PVP community within a PVe server.
There could be point system like if you kill a novice at PVP then get low points and just have it increase the higher the ranking if any. we could have achievements to likegank one then ten then fifty then one hundred and Titles and ranks like Grand Ganker. Then that would build a true PVP community. And if you decide to go green to unflag yourself then you lose some of your current points accrued that way you stay purple for longer periods. Not just well I will flag myself for pvp go gank people then unflag. Point being people should not be allowed to just go back and forth at will.
There are more game mechanics that have to be worked out but just wanted to present the Idea.
Without repostin would like to say this system comes out to be anti-PVP (that is PVP in PVE zones not World PVP events liek sieges and caravans.
Agree with Gothix:
Without incentive this will just end up a PvE server, because if attacking only gets you (certain) punishment without any tangible reward, noone is going to attack anyone. Why would they?
if you reduce significantly the hp of another player and this player die from a creature or anoter player a few moment later do you still recive the corruption?
can you put yourself in front of a non-combattant attack in order to turn him into a combattant and then kill him? (for example rush in a duel betwen member of the same group)
and finally can you run into a fight as a non-combattant with extremly low hp in order to turn a combattant into a corrupted?
So basically running into someones aoe or field of fire will not cause them to flag on you, they have to target you with a specific ability, healing or damage and mash that button.
Your first question has not been clarified on using the environment to "finish" your victim to avoid corruption. Will be looked at in testing and exploits will be blocked you can be sure.
Comments
But actually it is kind of an ambigious question. But will try to answer anyways.
Well if Ashes of creation dev team would have it so there is no PVP in dungeouns and while doing world bosses then you would have a situation were you would only be doing PVE content.
So It would be PVP cause you would always be in danger of getting into a pvp situation while you are traveling in the world.
But it would be PVE ounce in a dungeoun or world boss. No chance of PVP experience while actually doing PVE content.
So you have PVE/PVP Server or PVX.
This is not my favored solution but I am just trying to work with the content that is already there without scrapping corruption system.(most viable solution)
Just a to be clear having World PVP zones caravans hunting grounds, seiges is not a pvp server. That is world PVP that does not make it a pvp server, because people have a choice. Well in Caravans guess no choice if get attacked but I think you get my point.
The everyone attacks everyone is the essence of a pvp server and the opposite of a pve server. So if you want a PVX then you have to a have both.
But in some games this is considered a PVP server so.....like I said ambigious.
Anyways A tweak I would like to see is having the ability know who is in your node so you do not make a rival in your own townhall. Would like it better if we could not attack some one in same node. But if there was an icon or color that was part of my UI that I could see to keep relations with people in my node healthy that would be great.
https://forums.ashesofcreation.com/discussion/6855/read-me-community-guidelines-code-of-conduct/p1
How come you deleted my post where I pointed out to UnknownSystemError, where he compares people to homeless persons, but his post remains? After line of such posts? So I was right he is protected by you mods?
@GMSteven can you please look into your mods, who protect certain people who keep write insulting posts, but delete posts from other people who point out to that?
Your mods are not being objective. Ty.
Further more would like to add that if I posted my post 2 years after games release that would not make my post more or less valid. It is up to the devs to decide what to do with info.
Plus I would like to add I cannot post about something they have not already said. So I have to wait until after they say it. Them already saying for example that naval battles will be in game does not mean I should not post for it not to be in game. So what if they already said it was going in game and it is a promised strectch goal I could still make the case that they should not have sea battles.
Do not see how posting about a topic is related to what they already said. Have read some of your other posts and they have the same theme. (IS already stated its policy this is the way it is) sounds more like you are trying to shut down peoples idea down cause it is contrary to what already has been said.
Yeah I know what they said that is why I am posting something about it. I mean I can read you know.
Notice that UknownSystem Error did not post anything about the actual game mechanics Just saying well you should not post about it anymore cause they are not going to their change minds cause they already said..... (Pretty close to the truth)
Actually I have more to say about this topic so I will just keep on posting even if they aready said it and the excercise my freedom to post(no such right exists just making reference to freedom of speech)
Forums are kind of a complaint department. (Place were people go to state things they do not like even if they already said it and implemented.) The standard response to what you are saying is if you do not like complaints stay out of the complaint departement.
Besides Another toon could make a similar post to mine ten years from now after release. Are you going to tell them Well They already said...........Yes I know. That is why I am posting.
Furhter more I like to add that I actually took the time to read all the posts (172 at the time)before positng (By the way 172 posts came out to be in my opinion one valid reason for corruption system Sense of Danger) so I can see peoples point of veiw not just this the way I like it. I really do not see any value of this system.
Is it right for some one to say. Hey Do not post about wanting that anymore because Inntrepid Studios already said...
Plus would like to remind you that well Everything is subject to Change and I do not know which but ther will be changes after release some of them pretty major.
And notice I did not call Unkown System Error any names just put some of what he said in simple terms and in my opinion did not twist his words.
Hey could you kill me I am about to go to a hard dungeoun and need my corruption gone.
Hey could you kill me? Just killed some one and I do not want to be killed by them, so kill me so I can be green again
It is time for this guild to do a raid or siege but wait we have to kill our own corrupted toons first.
Hey I do not like this person I will give you x amount of gold to go and kill them.
And since there is a human element sure there will be other situations that will not work as intended.
I guess you have guilds and cities and other clubs like (thieves guild). So this system allows infighting within guilds not promoting the unity of a community.
Just as a recap made some posts about PVX and PVP and PVE but just to simplify itthere are lot of people that do not like the Everyone can Attack Everyone game mechanic You can call it whatever you want.
Would also like the following tweek to the system:
Have some game mechanic that will allow certain guilds to flag all guild members so they cannot attack each other. Do not see the point in guildies attacking each other but if you want that type of guild it would be up to you.
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Fvr9KYT104i8WYppCup1v6SUTZFJTobVz8uRHDas4YM/edit
I know you prefer a System/Server where PVE and PVP is divided, like other people do, too. Me and many other people want to actually try out that corruption system and PVX. That will not change with more posts telling us, what you prefer
EDIT: If that system is viable will be tested in betas. If many people say "NOO that system is garbage, change! change! change!" they will probably put some servers up where you can do pve without world pvp enabled. I would like to play the game like it's been designed and I would hate to see players devided... PVEers on PVE and PVPers in PVP Servers... Lame. ^^
Amaze said:
You have cherry picked you situations with that pvp/pvx comparison. On a pvp server in other games, the person who killed you could easily just run into a town for protection. The first and most obvious solution to that situation would be for them to have a cooldown so you can't go none combatant right after killing someone. Second, there will be social repercussions for people who try to pull that stuff. Remember, we have a large world that the player base will be spread across with no fast travel or dungeon finder. If someone is being shitty in a region, the players in that area will catch on and not want to play with them. Not only will people they screw over not want to group with them but others will be deterred if they think the person might bring conflict. Most of the content is in the open world and you don't want your group to be attacked because people don't like one of your members.
At the very least you will always suffer the exp debt which is increased based off corruption score and will gimp you until you work it off. You will also not lose all your corruption off one death if you have a lot of it and the random respawn will make it more time consuming. I feel like you are completely ignoring the inconvenience of the whole situation which is the point of the system. Even if you pay someone to kill you, you still have to spend time working of the exp debt.
A lot of how this system will work hinges on how harsh the death penalty is and it's hard to judge how it plays out until we have more details on it. They have said the goal is to encourage people to fight back so all i can say is it will be balanced for that. Do i think the first iteration of the system will be perfect, no, but i think it will be able to be adjusted into what they want. I don't think it needs to be completely scrapped because it wont be perfect at first.
You have now adopted this term PVX server which I think is your core problem. This is a PVX game not a PVX server, as in this game is designed so both pve and pvp play roles in the game. It's not just wow or guild wars with a new flagging system. I think a lot of your problems with comprehending how this system will play out stems from the fact we haven't had a game like this developed in the west. On top of that, they are trying to innovate and not just copy a game.
For the most part, PvP will be focused on specific tasks and objectives that will concentrate player vs player combat in those areas. Players simply won't have any reason to venture out to fight random battles and especially non-combatants.
Thats what I already told on page... dunno... of this thread. It just doesn't pay off for the attacker to kill greens!
That's why I told @Consultant that we understood and registered what he is concerned about. A lot of people already said things like "It doesn't pay off." "The system will be adjusted/tested in betas.", "Lets just try it", "it's the way it's designed and that was no secret.", "I prefer this/that."
we are just runnig circles here...
I played Lineage 2 for a short time, too. My brother played it for a longer time and he never complained about something like getting killed all the day. Im not sure if he even was killed ONCE. I haven't been killed. That I know for sure. The first time playing it I was aware of the possibility to get killed... It just doesn't happen.
What people have to understand is that not everyone who is interested in PVP is actually an as...le or dumb...
I did not adopt it. Steve was asked what type of servers he was going to have he said PVX. Obviously PVX meant what he was going to create not what he was not going to create. Created PVE content with lots of World Pvp (events) with the current flagging and curroption system. I am sure that is what he meant cause that is what he did.
I made a mistake by debating about PVX and PVP and PVE just aurging about well are we calling it an orange or an apple. Sorry about that.
So Would like to retract those posts and just go with a simple version of it and say
That Every can kill Every one game mechanic (even with corruption system which needs changes in my opinion) it just not to good and list reasons why.
Not sure where you are going with inconveniences or corruption. that is what I have the problem with. I want to say it is punished pvp but that is not the case. It is punished cheapshoting or if they do not fight back (do not see how it could be pvp if they do not fight back)
Oh I have Inconveince (corruption) well best thing to do is find someone to kill me. That is the solution to corruption. It does not make for meaningful PVP. You have to have a meaningless death (kill toon at low health without chance to defend or kill some one that does not fight back).
Well hey I just had some meaningless pvp. I am corrupted lets see here...........best thing to do is more meaningless pvp and just find some one to kill me so if a bounty hunter shows up that is actaully a good thing. Bounty Hunter just showed up oh good kill me to get corruption off do not want to have more than one stack. Saves him the trouble of finding some one to kill them. But thing is best way to kill a corrupted player is a green not a bounty hunter.. Bounty Hunter could in fact get farmed by toon with one level of corruption cause no punishment for killing bounty hunter.(Corruption will be little difficult to get rid of as Unkown System Error pointed out but still necessary)
So lets see her looking to do bit of pvp(killing other toons). First I get my meaningless death of some grean then hopefully some bounty hunter will try to kill me and I will show that bounty hunter who is boss
Why would any one let themselves get more than one stack of corroption you have to get rid of it right? I have corruption ...kill me kill me!!!! Bounty Hunter just showed up right away got lucky that time.
Are you guys getting this. As it stands think some changes are in order.
Will suggest some changes later. Take care every one.
The more you kill, the more you corruption score you gain, and the more deaths it will take to remove the corruption. One death isn't going to remove all your corruption if you went on a spree. While gaining corruption, you get weaker, and are at increased risk of dropping your gear. No matter what, you will always have to work off the negative exp and that is increased with the amount of corruption you have as well.
How many people would you think find it worth it to kill someone then spend 15 minutes to 30 minutes getting someone else to kill them then another chunk of time farming back the negative exp they loss? It's not worth it for most and that's the point of the system.
If you want some pvp then instead of trying to bait a bounty hunter you would probably get better luck if you went to a location with valuable resources or other popular zone and looked for people. You can either attack those trying to farm or attack those who came to attack the farmers. That said, you probably can find some kind of pvp no matter what you do so don't really need to go out looking for it.
As i said, system might need some work. I have thought of the same scenario and think it's silly to find someone to kill me. Part of me thinks there should be either another way to work it off or you not to be punished for continuing to play until someone kills you. If i having corruption means i'm dropping more resources then i definitely want to get killed before i go out farming again.
NOTE: What i say with a grain of salt. I'm making some assumptions on the situations that they will try to encourage pvp.
Well I will not kill this player just keep him about 60 percent health until he fights back and when that happens I will win anyways cause I am at 100 percent and he is at 60 percent,
I agree with Mcstackerson on one point If you want PVP (in general) there is enough to feed your PVP urges at PVP zones. So why have this corruption system in the first place just to have bounty hunter vs corrupted? It is only good going to and from pvp events and pve areas.
Why not just say Look you cannot attack a player that is at less than 100 percent health or even 90 percent maybe even 80 percent. Or some other game mechanic.
If you attack first (huge advantage) and player is at like 80 percent health (huge advantage) and guessing the toon will take about 2 seconds to go into pvp mode and target opponent (another huge advantage) and if he is engaged with a mob (another huge advantage) attacks to avoid greatter death penalty. It is still pretty much a cheap shot. And if he does not attack he gets punished
Sounds like meaningless conflict to me but there is no game mechinics to stop it. (actually game mechanics enable this)Unless he does not attack but that is not what most players will do. (Most toons will defend) plus there is the death penalty incentive so I Just described working as intended situation.
If lets say well you can only be attacked at 100 percent health and while not engaged with a mob then well you would only be cheapshotted if you did not defend really not a cheapshot in my opinion. Player should be punished for not defending. Any other game mechanics will do to fix this does not have to be my way.
So Corruption system fails as an anti-cheapshot game mechanic which is what it is suppose to be.
Would like following change
If you get cheap shotted cause attacked when you are not ready for it. Then you get to see that toon on the map for a chance to get even like bounty hunter. Maybe even allow a double kill one for cleansing corruption another from toon that got ganked.
How would game mechanics know if you were ready for it or no?
In each combat situation there is always one person that starts first and initiates it. Game can't know if other person saw it coming or not.
If per say a toon had to flag himself as a combatant purple and lets say a one second cast then it would be more evident that he was going to attack some one not just well a world with a bunch of greens that could attack each other at any moment.
Every one agains Every one game mechanics.
In faction based games other faction shows up as red (normally) So that alerts a player. But the way it is in Ashes is just a bunch of Greens that could attack each other. I do not think that builds cohession cause every time you see a green you are going to be like well are they going to attack me or not. Makes a sense of danger, thing is it is coming from every one all time.
And if there was an alert that you were just targeted by a combatant and have a one second immunity to react then that would be more fair.
Point is the corruption system is an anticheapshot mechanism that is not too good.
Most likely reason for corruption system is as Steve put meaningful conflict. I will put it as somewhat fair PVP in non pvp zones.
If they want to make PVP in PVE areas close to fair then go ahead. The game mechinics I list are not important just showing that it is possible to have a system that makes it more fair. In conclusion they could avoid most Meaningless (unfair) pvp but they would have to make various changes to current system or make their own.
In my opinion corruption does not enable meaningful pvp just make reds and bounty hunters but there are more meaningless conflict situations. and actually enables more meaningless conflicts then a regular PVP server. More examples........
Well think I will just attack some one see if they attack back and if they do I will keep attacking them since I have the element of surprise and advantage if not I will just stop attacking and go on to next one till I find that does attack me.
I just got attacked I have a mob on me chances of fighting back and winning not to good so I will just let him kill me so he gets greater death penalty than me plus corruption. If I do attack then odds already in his favor to win and might kill me with out any punishment at all. But if I do not attack I will have more of a death penalty but at least he gets corruption and a greater death penalty than me.
Then there is the infamous get naked to not get attacked. Lets say I have a long way travel and do not want to get interuppted best way to do that is unequip all gear. People will see you are naked and not attack cause they will oneshot you and get corrupted.
I have Cherry picked a lot of situations but corruption system only has one meaningful pvp situation. Corrupted at 2 or less stacks (anything more most likely skill degradation which means one shot or meaninigless conflict) killed by a bounty hunter.
Green vs Corrupted best thing to do is to for corrupted player to let him kill him or makes his own situation worst.
Think that pretty much sums it up. However will point out the reason you will most likely not get ganked is drum roll pls..................................
Combatant vs Combatant loser will have a death penalty. And well since even good pvpers die more in PvP than PVE. In one hour of PVE you might not experience any death. But like I said even good PVPers will die say about 6 times in PVP in one hour That is 6 death penalties. Or punishing pvp which people will weary of very fast. Most games their is just a durability cost but think Steves is going for meaningful deaths so...
So for the most part there will only be PVP in PVP zones plus ther are enough world PVP events and zones to please most PVPErs. Making most of posts meaninginless.
The penalites must not be so severe or it will deter anyone from even attempting to pk.
Instead of just listing problems i will post some possible solutions.
First and foremost dying as a corrupt player should have some negative effects but not as harsh as described. For example you could lose gems on gear or something like that, but not a full item drop or something like the archeage criminal point system and jail. Besides that i would suggest one of the following models.
1. Something like the Tera/archeage pk model. There is only one flagged state not two, meaning there is no (corrupt) state. You pop pk, u enter that flagged mode by will and you become an enemy to everyone else. If you engage in combat while flagged you cannot turn it off for a while. If you kill a low level player u cannot turn the flag off for prolonged periods of time that increase with every kill, forcing you to wait the time out at some safe zone. (This has proved to be the most successful one).
2. Something like bdo. Having a limit on how many targets u can pk before getting the corrupt state. But having unlimited kill times without penalty if you keep killing the same target (this prevents karma bombing).
(karma bombing: When someone keeps coming to your farm zone and gets killed on purpose until you get corrupt and can no longer kill him. Then he farms in your zone and there is nothing you can do about it except trying to farm faster than him.)
Without incentive this will just end up a PvE server, because if attacking only gets you (certain) punishment without any tangible reward, noone is going to attack anyone. Why would they?
Perhaps someone will, but it will be extremely rare on a global scale, and this will basically be a PvE game, with few occasional PvP events (sieges, caravans).
AoC needs to have good incentive for you to go purple, or else everyone will stay green.
Currently this incentive isn't as good for people to actually to want go purple. It is currently a lot better for people to all stay green and just PvE. And this will definitely not attract a PvP part of the crowd to the game.
There could be point system like if you kill a novice at PVP then get low points and just have it increase the higher the ranking if any. we could have achievements to likegank one then ten then fifty then one hundred and Titles and ranks like Grand Ganker.
Then that would build a true PVP community. And if you decide to go green to unflag yourself then you lose some of your current points accrued that way you stay purple for longer periods. Not just well I will flag myself for pvp go gank people then unflag.
Point being people should not be allowed to just go back and forth at will.
There are more game mechanics that have to be worked out but just wanted to present the Idea.
Without repostin would like to say this system comes out to be anti-PVP
(that is PVP in PVE zones not World PVP events liek sieges and caravans.
Agree with Gothix:
Without incentive this will just end up a PvE server, because if attacking only gets you (certain) punishment without any tangible reward, noone is going to attack anyone. Why would they?
can you put yourself in front of a non-combattant attack in order to turn him into a combattant and then kill him? (for example rush in a duel betwen member of the same group)
and finally can you run into a fight as a non-combattant with extremly low hp in order to turn a combattant into a corrupted?
So basically running into someones aoe or field of fire will not cause them to flag on you, they have to target you with a specific ability, healing or damage and mash that button.
Your first question has not been clarified on using the environment to "finish" your victim to avoid corruption. Will be looked at in testing and exploits will be blocked you can be sure.