Possible ganking workaround?

ArchivedUser

Hello, so I have done some thinking in this and I may be ignorant in this, but from what I've been reading about the corruption system, if a Non-combatant attacks another non-combatant or a combatant, they get flagged as a combatant form just attacking.  So if the combatant that is attacked by the new combatant kills the new combatant, then he doesn't have a change in corruption, at least this is what I gathered, am I wrong?

So, here's the scenario;

You see lone non-combatants playing solo, they're just farming mobs/grinding exp.  They like to AoE in their rotation.  What's to stop a person (or a group of 2+) from running in as an AoE is going off, flagging this non-combatant into being a combatant, and killing them?  I mean, this is a legitimate way around the corruption system from what I've read without any repercussions at all to these players.

Another thing.  If someone who is Combatant attacks a non-combatant they don't have a status change unless they kill that person.  Well, what if this player is fighting mobs, and say a Rouge sneaks up and bursts down most of their health, leaving a sliver of it left for the monsters to finish them off easy?

I mean, I may have misread something or may not have all the information, but from what I've been looking at, griefing is still a good possibility.

The attacker may not get loot, but there is a large PvP player base that gets off to the idea of pissing people off like that.

This does bring upon the whole "Well just farm/exp in groups".  You can say this, but, nowadays the need or want to group and the preference of wanting to solo is so prevalent in MMOs these days.  Thus feeding the troll gank machine.

If I am completely wrong in my thinking please let me know, otherwise, there area  ton of holes to walk through in order to get around going red.

I say this as a person who finds ways to gank people relentlessly and if this system is allows what I posted, myself and many others will abuse this as well.


Here's the link for how the corruption system works via flow chart;
https://us.v-cdn.net/6030144/uploads/editor/wq/pthrl376f7e4.png

ArchivedUser

Both of these scenarios can be avoided with proper coding. Hopefully, Intrepid will make it so only single target abilities actually affect players if you are currently a non-combatant. Speaking to your next point, there could be an algorithm that states that if a player does at least 50% of another player's health and that player dies to an NPC, he/she is still responsible for the kill and gains corruption. 

Granted, if Intrepid doesn't take into account these two scenarios, you have found some ways around the corruption system.

ArchivedUser

I would agree, it would all have to do with the coding.  However, on your first point, I believe it would give a huge advantage to non-combatants using AoE as an opener, especially if said AoE is hard hitting.

As far as 50%, that's still a huge way of taking advantage of griefing folk. 
Say they have to fight some sort of elite or a group of mobs, or a quest with higher difficulty.  All people have to do is make sure they don't do more than the specified % of damage and the person still has a decent chance at dying.

I may be grasping at straws here, but I'm trying to look at any POSSIBLE loopholes that can be taken advantage of, even if it's a lower chance of them being able to do it, it still gives them a chance to grief.  I'm here as an avid PvPer who wants this as skill based straight across the board as possible without advantages on either side.  People who have the jump on others will have the advantage mostly, but that is part of world PvP.

ArchivedUser

I think discussing this early on is good because it allows opportunity to test possible loopholes through testing phases.

*edit*
A player is only flagged when they attack another player. An attacking player does not flag their target. (More on player flagging)

• Person A - Attacker
• Person B - Person fighting the Mob

I would like to think that Person B won't be flagged for PvP (regardless of AoE or Singe target attack) if targeting a mob, even if Person A initiates an attack. If Person B changes target from Mob to Person A then I would feel it was appropriate for them to be flagged.

I would also like to believe that when Person A is attacking Person B but allows the mob to take the kill would still be considered as a Player kill to avoid this situation. If you initiate any form of attack on a Player that does not return the attack - but dies of whatever causes then Person A should be corrupted.

However this would open opportunity to more problems such as Person B jumping to their death/ purposefully killing themselves (of course taking normal death penalties) to cause grief on Person A.

I think griefing will be unavoidable and impossible to eradicate, however I hope as a community we will be able to test the corruption system vigorously to reduce it as much as possible.

I look forward to seeing what can and can't be done with the flagging system ^^ Looking forward to reading all your ideas

ArchivedUser

I definitely agree, Diura.  I know that there will be a way to grief no matter the scenario and what they do to help avoid that.  However, I believe there's possible ways to think around all of that and just make it difficult for the griefing to happen, like make it so the planets have to align for you to be able to do said griefing.

As far as Player A doing any attack on Player B and the mob killing them, giving corruption to Player A regardless could involve in corruption that is "accidental". 

Player A, a non-combatant, is using AoE on a group of Mobs.  Another non-combatant is kiting a Rare/Elite in hopes to kill him, but gets clipped for 2-5% HP from the AoE, which results in Player A transitioning to Combatant upon attacking, and upon the death of this new player, puts Player A into the Red, thus bringing about a mob of players wanting to stab Player A.

It's a tricky road to walk on balance for this kind of system, but it will probably have to be a "Does having this happen outweigh having this other thing happen?" type of deal, it all depends on how the devs and community weigh the pros and cons for each scenario and PvP possibility.

ArchivedUser

I think the most simple solution is to have "combatant" status trigger after a player damages another player for (X)% of health, while also coding AOE abilities unable to damage players unless flagged as said combatant. This would prevent random AOE damage from triggering combatant status and gaining corruption, while at the same time it would trigger people earlier for attacking others enough to cause their death.

Moreover, this would prevent "trolling" in instances where players may intentionally run into other player's aoe abilities, causing them to be flagged unintentionally. 

ArchivedUser

Duninn said:

I think the most simple solution is to have "combatant" status trigger after a player damages another player for (X)% of health, while also coding AOE abilities unable to damage players unless flagged as said combatant. This would prevent random AOE damage from triggering combatant status and gaining corruption, while at the same time it would trigger people earlier for attacking others enough to cause their death.

Moreover, this would prevent "trolling" in instances where players may intentionally run into other player's aoe abilities, causing them to be flagged unintentionally. 

I mean, this would still leave a gap for griefing, but it would probably be the best way to do it.  It's definitely a "lesser of the evils" in play with this system, and I agree this would be the best way to implement it.

5-10% before triggered as a combatant would be a decent place to start testing IMO.

ArchivedUser

in lineage2, where devs are taking this system from it was very easy:

you hold CTRL = you are pvp-attacking, you don't hold it, you are not PVP-attacking.

So no one running into your AOE, when you don't want to fight player, will ever be able to flag you.

What you discussing is like  "oh, I'll lower my HP to minimum, and will go under that persons AOE to make him corrupted". This is always avoided by devs. ALWAYS.

ArchivedUser

@Shammyman88 Yes I agree that it isn't perfect, but I think it could work, especially with a 5-15% damage threshold to trigger combatant status. 

ArchivedUser

I always wondered if you gank a player (non-combatant or combatant) and gain corruption, can you loot their equipment too? Or, only corrupted players who die in the hands of a combatant or non-combatant drop equipped loot?

ArchivedUser

Awe said:

in lineage2, where devs are taking this system from it was very easy:

you hold CTRL = you are pvp-attacking, you don't hold it, you are not PVP-attacking.

So no one running into your AOE, when you don't want to fight player, will ever be able to flag you.

What you discussing is like  "oh, I'll lower my HP to minimum, and will go under that persons AOE to make him corrupted". This is always avoided by devs. ALWAYS.

Ah, so they're taking the core aspects form L2 for their corruption system?

Then that makes it easy, but there comes this;

I and many others bind abilities, I always bind my mouse as this 1 through = has mostly used abilities on it, CTRL+1 through CTRL+= is a set of abilities and ALT+1 through ALT+= has another set of abilities.  Wouldn't this just limit the keybinding functionality?  Yeah, it could be one of those "Just don't put attack spells on the CTRL bound bars" well, that still limits the keybinding and macro system just so someone doesn't accidentally flag themselves for PvP.

Just something else that comes up from it, though I would prefer this over anything else suggested so far.

Valerian said:

I always wondered if you gank a player (non-combatant or combatant) and gain corruption, can you loot their equipment too? Or, only corrupted players who die in the hands of a combatant or non-combatant drop equipped loot?

I think gear only drops if the person killed hits a certain threshold of corruption.  Other than that it's just some gathering mats I believe.

ArchivedUser

To be honest, they could implement an old eq2 system, when a pver attacks a mob its lock to that player, meaning no one else aside from that player, and group can do damage to that mob. That way it wont do dmg to the player if Player B tries to steal the mob away with an AOE. 

This way only direct attacks that you are targeting another player would flag you for pvp, while still protecting mobs from being stolen or the other countless scenarios of coding that would be needed to fix all of these issues. This seems like the most logical choice in what will go on.