That stat decrease has huge role to prevent continuing ganking and that's why its important to have.
Your death should be prevented by you actually moving your ass and fighting back, and not this being replaced by game mechanics protecting you.
_______________________________________________ And once again equal level engagement is not GANKING! _______________________________________________
It's partially a players choice to commit suicide by not fighting back, and trying to save yourself, which you have option to.
You don't wish to fight back? Ok, but don't put full blame on others for your death then, it's half your fault.
Ganking = killing LOWER LEVELS who can't win even if they fight back (and for this stat degradation is ok).
Choosing not to fight back = half your fault that you ended up dead, same like not trying to exit a burning building but choosing to remain inside knowing you will die if you try nothing (and for this stat degradation is NOT OK).
_______________________________________________
EVEN IF you will call your not fighting back and dieing a MURDER, it still isn't GANKING. Ganking is killing lower level who doesn't even have an option to successfuly fight back.
Here is a RL example:
* Someone breaks glass, hotwires your car and steals it. This is punishable by the law.
* Ok, now in second example you left your keys in car doors, someone uses key to unlock car, turn it on and steal it. It is still a crime, BUT law looks at this crime Much DIFFERENTLY, and punishment is much lower, because it WAS HALF YOUR FAULT that the thief was able to steal your car.
Check laws if you don't believe me. The same way by not fighting back in Ashes it's HALF YOUR FAULT that you ended up dead.
Thus a crime should be treated a lot more leniently. Thus stat degradation is very unfair here. _______________________________________________
And again I am not asking for removal of corruption, I am asking for removal of stat degradation for EQUAL LEVEL engagement.
Also STAT DEGRADATION would mean that whole BOUNTY HUNTER SYSTEM is something laughable. Basically a race for who will reach target first and 2 shot him (or at least kill him very easily).
Do you wish bounty hunter system to be this? Skill-less race of people to see who hits target first? I surely don't. But this is what stat degradation will do. I will not touch bounty hunter system with a 2 meter stick like that. I would be ashamed to participate really.
But again, I know my words will hit deaf ears here again. So I guess nothing I say will mean anything to you. But at least I HOPE it will mean something to devs.
Once again you have your own meaning for word.. murderbox this time and its not in line what it actually meens.
That stat decrease has huge role to prevent continuing ganking and thats why its important to have. Your whole approach is wrong and it does not just goal to give gankers some relief, it penalizes non-combatant players. So your suggestion just goals to continuing ganking with protection to not get so much attacked by yourself.
Now if after testing gankers life is acknowledge to be too penalized, that relief should start from experience debuff, loot drop rate or making bounty hunting system harder. That would be tweaking without penalizing green non-combatant players who are ment to be protected by the corruption system.
But yeah i know, you dont share the devs vision to protect those players who dont want to take apart to open world PvP. Because in your eyes those PvE minded players should not have that priviledge and they should be fed for wolfs so those wolfs would have more fun when they get easy kills.
And once again equal level engagement is not GANKING.
It's players choice to commit suicide by not fighting back. Why would anyone be punished by someones choice to commit suicide ?!
You don't wish to fight back? Ok, but don't blame others for your death then.
Ofc. this discussion will get us nowhere because you want all possible mechanics to protect you so you can play your own little farm empire.
Ganking = killing LOWER LEVELS who can't win even if they fight back (and for this stat degradation is ok).
Choosing not to fight back = committing a suicide, same like not trying to exit a burning building but choosing to remain inside knowing you will die if you try nothing. This is suicide (and for this stat degradation is NOT OK).
EVEN IF you will call your not fighting back and dieing a MURDER, it still isn't GANKING. Ganking is killing lower level who doesn't even have an option to successfuly fight back.
And again I am not asking for removal of corruption, I am asking for removal of stat degradation for EQUAL LEVEL engagement.
Also STAT DEGRADATiON would mean that whole bounty hunter system is something laughable. Basically a race for who will reach target first and 2 shot him (or at least kill him very easily).
Do you wish bounty hunter system to be this? Skill-less race of people to see who hits target first? I surely don't. But this is what stat degradation will do. I will not touch bounty hunter system with a 2 meter stick like that. I would be ashamed to participate really.
But again, I know my words will hit deaf ears here again. So I guess nothing I say will mean anything to you. But at least I hope it will mean something to devs.
You are the only who does not know what ganking meens so stop it already.
Suicide? What the hell you are talking about? You dont clearly understand the design of AoC open world. There are lots of players who dont want to PvP at all or they want to do that in specific PvP areas. Lets call them PvE players. Now AoC developers wants to cater also these type of players and gives them good changes to avoid open world PvP. That way these PvE oriented players can also enjoy the game. If the open world would be more about ganking/PKing and forces players to participate PvP, that will lead to situation where PvE playerbase will leave.
Now you are basically asking devs to deceive the PvE and PvX playerbase by changing the open world to cater these PvP players who wants to kill PvE minded players. Also you want to do that with less penalty and with protection of green players not to attack corrupted players freely. You dont clearly understand how pathetic that suggestion is at first place.
Try to understand that those PvE and PvX players are the main audiance and not player killers and gankers! If you dont want to understand this starting point, then its clearly no need to continue this discussion.
It kind of sounds like you're describing a newbie-friendly King-of-the-Hill style FPS.
In ashes, you're not supposed to run up and try to kill every other player you see... i mean, you could... but that's really not what the game designers of this... or any other MMO i can think of.. have in mind.
PVP is an element of the game, it isn't the entire game.
There will be plenty of opportunity for PVP with the rules that the devs have laid out.
It kind of sounds like you're describing a newbie-friendly King-of-the-Hill style FPS.
In ashes, you're not supposed to run up and try to kill every other player you see... i mean, you could... but that's really not what the game designers of this... or any other MMO i can think of.. have in mind.
PVP is an element of the game, it isn't the entire game.
There will be plenty of opportunity for PVP with the rules that the devs have laid out.
Well actually there are and also is coming good amount of mmorpg games which focus more on open world PvP than AoC. Currently i play Albion online and i have played it actually start of beta testing. That game for example has full loot open world PvP. That model suits perfectly on their product even ganking is something which causes constantly different kind of problems. So thats why i am glad AoC has their own approach to OWPvP, because i have seen how ganking causes problematic situations even in game where that should be one of the core part.
And i agree with you that PvP is just one element of AoC and OWPvP is just one smaller part of the PvP itself. Developers vision of meaningful PvP conflict is absolutly fantastic approach and one of the biggest reasons i have started to follow AoCs development.
Well ok to be fair I should acknowledge games like mortal online with the open world pvp... but even in those games, that sort of pvp doesn't occur very often and when it does it's almost always ridiculously unbalanced or one hit one kill.
the game forced players to travel in groups and stick close to 'safe' areas . Kinda lame
Well ok to be fair I should acknowledge games like mortal online with the open world pvp... but even in those games, that sort of pvp doesn't occur very often and when it does it's almost always ridiculously unbalanced or one hit one kill.
the game forced players to travel in groups and stick close to 'safe' areas . Kinda lame
Thats true, biggest problem with OWPvP and ganking is that its almost always unfair and unbalanced. It is shame, but games which focus on open world PvP usually turns to zerg fest where numbers are more valueable than skills. Also in free open world games the whole enjoyment of the environment suffers, because either you are running to gather some resources and escape after that for your life or you are roaming around and trying to find players to gank. I have not seen game where unrestricted OWPvP would work fine and thats why it was smart to create corruption system what we have now. It encourages consensual open world PvP and discourages non-consensual. Thats fair system and caters well the whole planned audiance.
Yeah it's very much clear to me that there is no point to discuss anything with you.
But here is another newsflash for you. I am not writing my feedback for YOU because I do not care about your misguided opinions.
I write my feedback, and my opinions for devs to read.
So go try to sell your vision of what ganking means to someone else.
For me (and most other players) ganking is, and always will be, killing of lower levels whose lower level means certain death for them because they cant win vs you.
Carebears not wishing to fight back, that's something completely different.
So go try to sell your vision of what ganking means to someone else.
For me (and most other players) ganking is, and always will be, killing of lower levels whose lower level means certain death for them because they cant win vs you.
Carebears not wishing to fight back, that's something completely different.
Actually the original meening of ganking comes from gang up against your enemies. Situation where larger group kills smaller group or single player. Now after that it has evolved to mean killing lower levels and players who has no chance to fight back. So at this point its already evolved from its original intend to wider meaning.
Now what i noticed in Albion community, lots of people speaked about ganking really generally when they just mean open world roaming and player killing. Going to kill and hunt down people is easy to just call ganking and i guess thats the main reason why its more commonly used that way nowdays. Also open world PvP conflicts are usually unfair and that might have something to do with that too.
I dont know why this so huge issue with you, because everyone else seems to be fine with it. Its not something i have made up my mind, i just use the word like many people have used before me. I dont say its reasonable to use ganking with so general meaning, but it works nicely and at least makes explaining more easier.
Not sure I like the "if the combatant fights back, they get flagged", so we just stand there and get killed, but try to defend ourselves and the PK'er gets legitimised.
I agree, I do not like this " If the attacked players fight back, they are also flagged as
combatants, otherwise the attacked player will remain flagged as a
non-combatant" Because this counts as self defense against the purpler but should not automatically make you also a purpler for finishing a fight they started.
I hope your corruption level does not decay while offline, cause then people will be logging off as soon as they gank someone, only to log back on a few hours later to have their corruption erased. That won't be good for bounty hunters since they won't see any corrupt players on the map as much.
I also agree that corruption timers should be paused when a player goes offline to avoid them taking advantage of the system just to be a douche. Corruption needs to account for online time only
It has been stated that corruption is only decreased by death caused by a non-aligned player action. Aligned players are party members, friendslist, guild members and alliance members. Quote from following interview with Steven.
"Now this corruption value stays with you until you die. If you die while corrupt, the death penalties that you will receive will be tripled from what it would have been had you died while a noncombatant. So those death penalties include a negative experience that you gain an experience debt. It doesn't necessarily de-level your character, but that experience debt, as it accrues, will cause skill penalties, will cause stat penalties, and if you just go on a PKing rage where you are just killing a bunch of noncombatants, that death penalty, that experience debt is just going to rack up and it’s going to adversely affect your ability to participate in combat. So this prevents PK alts from being made. So that’s corruption. If you die, you’ll lose a value of corruption equal to your level in game and how much experience loss you accrue from death."
Will there be rewards for being corrupt? Such as gear or titles? Same for being a bounty hunter? Would pvp have a goal besides just being pvp?
It sounds like the corruption is designed to deter the "i can attack you so i will" mentality. It's there to allow pvp but i don't think we know when developers intend us to go corrupt. Since players drop resources on death, there might be resources that are worth stealing and taking the penalty. It's important to note that there are zones intended for pvp that ignore the corruption system.
It sounds like players will mostly be fighting for resources and political/personal reasons. You aren't going to kill people to get tokens but you will kill people so that you can take resources from caravans, dungeons, world bosses, etc. On top of this, there will be relationships you form with different players as you fight against and with people. You might attack someone because you don't like them or you might defend a caravan because you know the guy running it. There will be plenty of reasons to fight.
@Lexmax This sounds great i like the bounty system reminds me kinda of Silkroad Online(SRO) but there wasnt a bounty for a corruptet players but nicely done
@Lexmax This sounds great i like the bounty system reminds me kinda of Silkroad Online(SRO) but there wasnt a bounty for a corruptet players but nicely done
Thanks! There is some further updated information here:
Not sure I like the "if the combatant fights back, they get flagged", so we just stand there and get killed, but try to defend ourselves and the PK'er gets legitimised.
I agree, I do not like this " If the attacked players fight back, they are also flagged as
combatants, otherwise the attacked player will remain flagged as a
non-combatant" Because this counts as self defense against the purpler but should not automatically make you also a purpler for finishing a fight they started.
First I'd like to say I think the whole PVP system proposed in AOC sounds great. It's innovative and effective on paper and really hope it works out.
I agree with Iscoed and Revanon on this a bit. I think we need to add a new chart to the system.
The system should be devised not just based on Attacking but also based on Defending.
This could already be accounted for if the original chart is based on who initiates the attack only, I am not sure about this or not just from what I have read so far.
Examples:
Non Combatant defends against a Combatant = Non Combatant.
Non Combatant attacks a Combatant = Combatant
Combatant defends against a Non Combatant = Combatant
Combatant attacks a Non Combatant = Corrupt.
I have to say I agree with most of the system except for " If the attacked players fight back, they are also flagged as combatants, otherwise the attacked player will remain flagged as a non-combatant. " I do not think a Non Combatant that defends themselves by attacking their assailants should be flagged as a Combatant.
The bounty hunter system sounds great. A lot of time went into this and I can't wait to try it out. I am sure the system could end up getting a few changes during testing but I hope not too much is necessary.
I do have a question and am curious how does AOE work in the scope of effecting the flag system.
Let's say as you are attacking a mob a passer-by not in your group get's a little close to the AOE. Do they get damaged and would you get flagged for unintentionally damaging another player.
Also does anyone have the specifics or point me in the right direction of how Combatants lose their flag. I've seen how Corrupt lose theirs but nothing specific on combatants other than time. Is there more specifics like how long and such.
If it is time based I think someone brought up before I believe if for Corrupt their timer should freeze and not countdown while logged out.
No one has any fast and hard information till December, and then it still won't be available to the wider community until IS decides to comment on it. If someone is green you must force flag (specifically target) them to start combat with them. Just like your aoe when you are grouped with someone doesn't damage them through friendly fire, the same probably will apply to aoe in the wild. If they are purple and not grouped with you or don't fit the other exclusions they have mentioned, you will damage them. Purple status from the last livestream is "in combat" as far as we know, and would revert to green barring other corruption mechanics once combat is over. (not confirmed). Corruption as stated so far is only cleared on death, and does not count down whether online or offline.
I do have a question and am curious how does AOE work in the scope of effecting the flag system.
Let's say as you are attacking a mob a passer-by not in your group get's a little close to the AOE. Do they get damaged and would you get flagged for unintentionally damaging another player.
Also does anyone have the specifics or point me in the right direction of how Combatants lose their flag. I've seen how Corrupt lose theirs but nothing specific on combatants other than time. Is there more specifics like how long and such.
If it is time based I think someone brought up before I believe if for Corrupt their timer should freeze and not countdown while logged out.
Ashes of creation has an excellent flagging and open world pvp system on place. The only change i see and will obviously be based on numbers available upon alpha or beta is stat deduction for corruption. If the game plays out the way ive seen it in past open pvp games pks will always be outnumbered. While im not an avid pker i do enjoy pvp as a whole. I would rather there be no stat reduction. Because the bonuses of being a pk are open pvp and fighting an uphill battle.
With both bounty hunters and a larger subset of the population being antipk (Antis for anyone who played UO). I think the fear of a pk run game are vastly overblown. Will there be pks? Yes there will. Will there be pk guilds? Yes there will be. But by no means will they be the standard. Being the target of everyone around you is by far more of a nerf than a stat reduction would ever need be.
Also for those worrying over flagging and being primarily a crafter or pve player. Do not worry. One flagging actually harms those players who wish to only pk. It reduces the death penalty and actually reduces the loot they gain. Thus you maintain far more of the goods you wanted. His givea you two choices to maintain youre goods or not fight back and force them into higher levels of corruption. In addition, as ashes is a pvx game and not everyone will build crafters bullying a guild of crafters is a foolish endeavor. As those crafters will also be wartime engineers. Siege weapons are craftable and the entire group you picked a fight with might well be the siege arm of a larger guild that will steamroll any competition. A talented war engineer for node wars will be an extremely sought after commodity seeing as top tier nodes are limited. All in all i see a lot of good in the system as it allows for multiple types of players to benefit. ( Pure crafter, pure pvper, or a mixture of both)
I am basing this off Lineage 2's flagging system in which this system is based off of. They may come up with another method but most likely it will work as follows:
If player A and B are both flagged and fighting, you attack with AOE, you will hit both targets assuming both are within range. The way to NOT attack one of the two players is for them to be in your party.
Same scenario, If player B is in your party and you cast aoe on both player A and player B; Only player A will be hit by the attack
I can't imagine it working much differently just do to the fact of the game having no clue who your ally is unless they are in your party.
Odds are if it's not a single target buff, it will be a party buff. I don't imagine a buff that is just AOE, party or not. I have played L2 with classes that buffed if you were in range and in the same guild, THAT is pretty cool. Also, if you buff or heal a player while they are "flagged", I am willing to bet that will flag you also
Now, in Lineage 2 in order to attack another player you needed to hold Cntrl while attacking. This was implemented to prevent you from accidentally attacking a player because you meant to click on a mob instead. I wouldn't be surprised if they do something similar here.... In fact I really hope they do.
Totally agree with you, my friend.
The PVP system in lineage 2 is perhaps the best PVP system in the MMO
The main thing that would be PVP was "skill-dependent" and depended on your skill and not weapons that you have crafted.
Personally, I would like that the mechanics (rollback, duration, effects) of abilities would be similar to those in DotA2
First of all, I'm sorry, maybe this has already been said, but I have this question:
Will I see the HP and MP bar of my opponent or not (as in la2)?
At the pax PvP demo, your opponent only had a healthbar but it didn't display their health percentage like traditional games. As the targets health went down the bar would break up and fall apart. It gave you an idea of your opponents health but didn't give you a exact read.
Besides that, i don't know if they have talked about it.
I've been saying this in multiple of these threads.. but there needs to be an equal incentive to go purple for both parties. At current build the penalty for not fighting back is minimal, So what you lose resources and 2x baseline exp debt at max level... your already max level who cares.
A simple fix would be to add a stat debuff (damage, healing, health, mitigation, gather speed/quantity/quality and or reduced carry capacity) to any character holding experience debt (More severe for players with corruption) and remove the exp debt from consensual pvp.
This doesn't change the existing system by much, keeps things in line with IS stance on killing lowbies (ganking) and encourages people to flag up.
I've been saying this in multiple of these threads.. but there needs to be an equal incentive to go purple for both parties. At current build the penalty for not fighting back is minimal, So what you lose resources and 2x baseline exp debt at max level... your already max level who cares.
A simple fix would be to add a stat debuff (damage, healing, health, mitigation, gather speed/quantity/quality and or reduced carry capacity) to any character holding experience debt (More severe for players with corruption) and remove the exp debt from consensual pvp.
This doesn't change the existing system by much, keeps things in line with IS stance on killing lowbies (ganking) and encourages people to flag up.
The question is what kind of game is this? Is it a PVE game? Is it a PVP game? IS it a PVX game? I think it has potential to be so much more.
I see a lot of posts where people want to push the game into what they want.
Why can't it be a game that we all want?
At first I was worried the PVP was a bit unbalanced, I was worried about the opposite that Non-Combatants had more risk. So I wrote a post, Proposal for slight change in the PVP Flagging System ~ (determined unnecessary), which after listening to some of the peoples responses and trying to be unbiased run various scenarios in my mind, I came to the conclusion I was wrong and maybe the developers had it right all along. I edited the post as (determined unnecessary) and left the post up, simply for the reason that if people shared my initial concern maybe they could see what I saw when I altered my thoughts. I was initially concerned cause well I am normally more drawn to PVE over PVP and maybe my thoughts were a bit biased to begin with.
Some primarily want a PVE game and some want a PVP game and some love the potential of it being both. The developers are envisioning a PVX game, something different and something more than games that just lean towards one or the other.
They are trying to create the system that allows for dynamic game play and want to try to encourage PVP but also limit potential bullying.
I think ultimately we have to wait and see what happens. Sometimes whats written on paper sounds great and doesn't work out. Sometimes what is written down sounds like it won't work but does. Ultimately time will tell.
Until we start playing the game all we can do is speculate on what will and will not work what we will and will not like.
I think meanwhile we voice what we would like to see but also listen to what other would like also with an open mind and hope and truest the Developers will do what is right and imbalances will be worked out during Alpha phase.
So if you were just minding your own business and not wanting to pvp at the time. If u die, they get corruption and you have the normal death penalty... but if you don't want the stronger death penalty you fight back a little and get flagged, but then the aggressor gets no penalty.
I feel like the death penalty for non-tagged players shouldn't be higher than flagged when it comes to player versus player combat. I overall like the looks of this system, but that area I think could be smoothed out to make sure penalties hit intended targets.
Comments
_______________________________________________
And once again equal level engagement is not GANKING!
_______________________________________________
It's partially a players choice to commit suicide by not fighting back, and trying to save yourself, which you have option to.
You don't wish to fight back? Ok, but don't put full blame on others for your death then, it's half your fault.
Ganking = killing LOWER LEVELS who can't win even if they fight back (and for this stat degradation is ok).
Choosing not to fight back = half your fault that you ended up dead, same like not trying to exit a burning building but choosing to remain inside knowing you will die if you try nothing (and for this stat degradation is NOT OK).
_______________________________________________
EVEN IF you will call your not fighting back and dieing a MURDER, it still isn't GANKING. Ganking is killing lower level who doesn't even have an option to successfuly fight back.
Here is a RL example:
* Someone breaks glass, hotwires your car and steals it. This is punishable by the law.
* Ok, now in second example you left your keys in car doors, someone uses key to unlock car, turn it on and steal it. It is still a crime, BUT law looks at this crime Much DIFFERENTLY, and punishment is much lower, because it WAS HALF YOUR FAULT that the thief was able to steal your car.
Check laws if you don't believe me. The same way by not fighting back in Ashes it's HALF YOUR FAULT that you ended up dead.
Thus a crime should be treated a lot more leniently. Thus stat degradation is very unfair here.
_______________________________________________
And again I am not asking for removal of corruption, I am asking for removal of stat degradation for EQUAL LEVEL engagement.
Also STAT DEGRADATION would mean that whole BOUNTY HUNTER SYSTEM is something laughable. Basically a race for who will reach target first and 2 shot him (or at least kill him very easily).
Do you wish bounty hunter system to be this? Skill-less race of people to see who hits target first? I surely don't. But this is what stat degradation will do.
I will not touch bounty hunter system with a 2 meter stick like that. I would be ashamed to participate really.
But again, I know my words will hit deaf ears here again. So I guess nothing I say will mean anything to you. But at least I HOPE it will mean something to devs.
Suicide? What the hell you are talking about? You dont clearly understand the design of AoC open world. There are lots of players who dont want to PvP at all or they want to do that in specific PvP areas. Lets call them PvE players. Now AoC developers wants to cater also these type of players and gives them good changes to avoid open world PvP. That way these PvE oriented players can also enjoy the game. If the open world would be more about ganking/PKing and forces players to participate PvP, that will lead to situation where PvE playerbase will leave.
Now you are basically asking devs to deceive the PvE and PvX playerbase by changing the open world to cater these PvP players who wants to kill PvE minded players. Also you want to do that with less penalty and with protection of green players not to attack corrupted players freely. You dont clearly understand how pathetic that suggestion is at first place.
Try to understand that those PvE and PvX players are the main audiance and not player killers and gankers! If you dont want to understand this starting point, then its clearly no need to continue this discussion.
In ashes, you're not supposed to run up and try to kill every other player you see... i mean, you could... but that's really not what the game designers of this... or any other MMO i can think of.. have in mind.
PVP is an element of the game, it isn't the entire game.
There will be plenty of opportunity for PVP with the rules that the devs have laid out.
And i agree with you that PvP is just one element of AoC and OWPvP is just one smaller part of the PvP itself. Developers vision of meaningful PvP conflict is absolutly fantastic approach and one of the biggest reasons i have started to follow AoCs development.
the game forced players to travel in groups and stick close to 'safe' areas . Kinda lame
But here is another newsflash for you. I am not writing my feedback for YOU because I do not care about your misguided opinions.
I write my feedback, and my opinions for devs to read.
So go try to sell your vision of what ganking means to someone else.
For me (and most other players) ganking is, and always will be, killing of lower levels whose lower level means certain death for them because they cant win vs you.
Carebears not wishing to fight back, that's something completely different.
Cya
Now what i noticed in Albion community, lots of people speaked about ganking really generally when they just mean open world roaming and player killing. Going to kill and hunt down people is easy to just call ganking and i guess thats the main reason why its more commonly used that way nowdays. Also open world PvP conflicts are usually unfair and that might have something to do with that too.
I dont know why this so huge issue with you, because everyone else seems to be fine with it. Its not something i have made up my mind, i just use the word like many people have used before me. I dont say its reasonable to use ganking with so general meaning, but it works nicely and at least makes explaining more easier.
I also agree that corruption timers should be paused when a player goes offline to avoid them taking advantage of the system just to be a douche. Corruption needs to account for online time only
"Now this corruption value stays with you until you die. If you die while corrupt, the death penalties that you will receive will be tripled from what it would have been had you died while a noncombatant. So those death penalties include a negative experience that you gain an experience debt. It doesn't necessarily de-level your character, but that experience debt, as it accrues, will cause skill penalties, will cause stat penalties, and if you just go on a PKing rage where you are just killing a bunch of noncombatants, that death penalty, that experience debt is just going to rack up and it’s going to adversely affect your ability to participate in combat. So this prevents PK alts from being made. So that’s corruption. If you die, you’ll lose a value of corruption equal to your level in game and how much experience loss you accrue from death."
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Fvr9KYT104i8WYppCup1v6SUTZFJTobVz8uRHDas4YM/edit
It sounds like players will mostly be fighting for resources and political/personal reasons. You aren't going to kill people to get tokens but you will kill people so that you can take resources from caravans, dungeons, world bosses, etc. On top of this, there will be relationships you form with different players as you fight against and with people. You might attack someone because you don't like them or you might defend a caravan because you know the guy running it. There will be plenty of reasons to fight.
https://wiki.ashesofcommunity.com/wiki/PvP
I agree with Iscoed and Revanon on this a bit. I think we need to add a new chart to the system.
The system should be devised not just based on Attacking but also based on Defending.
This could already be accounted for if the original chart is based on who initiates the attack only, I am not sure about this or not just from what I have read so far.
Examples:
- Combatant defends against a Non Combatant = Combatant
- Combatant attacks a Non Combatant = Corrupt.
I have to say I agree with most of the system except for " If the attacked players fight back, they are also flagged as combatants, otherwise the attacked player will remain flagged as a non-combatant. " I do not think a Non Combatant that defends themselves by attacking their assailants should be flagged as a Combatant.The bounty hunter system sounds great. A lot of time went into this and I can't wait to try it out. I am sure the system could end up getting a few changes during testing but I hope not too much is necessary.
Let's say as you are attacking a mob a passer-by not in your group get's a little close to the AOE. Do they get damaged and would you get flagged for unintentionally damaging another player.
Also does anyone have the specifics or point me in the right direction of how Combatants lose their flag. I've seen how Corrupt lose theirs but nothing specific on combatants other than time. Is there more specifics like how long and such.
If it is time based I think someone brought up before I believe if for Corrupt their timer should freeze and not countdown while logged out.
AoE and other non-forced attacks will not hit non-combatants (green flagged players).
Players loose combatant status after a period of time after leaving a PvP zone (battleground).
Corrupt players can only loose corruption via death. There is no indication if the timer freezes while logged out, but yes that would make sense
Developer quotes backing up the above info can be found here: https://wiki.ashesofcommunity.com/wiki/PvP#Player_flagging
With both bounty hunters and a larger subset of the population being antipk (Antis for anyone who played UO). I think the fear of a pk run game are vastly overblown. Will there be pks? Yes there will. Will there be pk guilds? Yes there will be. But by no means will they be the standard. Being the target of everyone around you is by far more of a nerf than a stat reduction would ever need be.
Also for those worrying over flagging and being primarily a crafter or pve player. Do not worry. One flagging actually harms those players who wish to only pk. It reduces the death penalty and actually reduces the loot they gain. Thus you maintain far more of the goods you wanted. His givea you two choices to maintain youre goods or not fight back and force them into higher levels of corruption. In addition, as ashes is a pvx game and not everyone will build crafters bullying a guild of crafters is a foolish endeavor. As those crafters will also be wartime engineers. Siege weapons are craftable and the entire group you picked a fight with might well be the siege arm of a larger guild that will steamroll any competition. A talented war engineer for node wars will be an extremely sought after commodity seeing as top tier nodes are limited. All in all i see a lot of good in the system as it allows for multiple types of players to benefit. ( Pure crafter, pure pvper, or a mixture of both)
Besides that, i don't know if they have talked about it.
A simple fix would be to add a stat debuff (damage, healing, health, mitigation, gather speed/quantity/quality and or reduced carry capacity) to any character holding experience debt (More severe for players with corruption) and remove the exp debt from consensual pvp.
This doesn't change the existing system by much, keeps things in line with IS stance on killing lowbies (ganking) and encourages people to flag up.
I see a lot of posts where people want to push the game into what they want.
Why can't it be a game that we all want?
At first I was worried the PVP was a bit unbalanced, I was worried about the opposite that Non-Combatants had more risk. So I wrote a post, Proposal for slight change in the PVP Flagging System ~ (determined unnecessary), which after listening to some of the peoples responses and trying to be unbiased run various scenarios in my mind, I came to the conclusion I was wrong and maybe the developers had it right all along. I edited the post as (determined unnecessary) and left the post up, simply for the reason that if people shared my initial concern maybe they could see what I saw when I altered my thoughts. I was initially concerned cause well I am normally more drawn to PVE over PVP and maybe my thoughts were a bit biased to begin with.
Some primarily want a PVE game and some want a PVP game and some love the potential of it being both. The developers are envisioning a PVX game, something different and something more than games that just lean towards one or the other.
They are trying to create the system that allows for dynamic game play and want to try to encourage PVP but also limit potential bullying.
I think ultimately we have to wait and see what happens. Sometimes whats written on paper sounds great and doesn't work out. Sometimes what is written down sounds like it won't work but does. Ultimately time will tell.
Until we start playing the game all we can do is speculate on what will and will not work what we will and will not like.
I think meanwhile we voice what we would like to see but also listen to what other would like also with an open mind and hope and truest the Developers will do what is right and imbalances will be worked out during Alpha phase.
I feel like the death penalty for non-tagged players shouldn't be higher than flagged when it comes to player versus player combat. I overall like the looks of this system, but that area I think could be smoothed out to make sure penalties hit intended targets.