Would it be a good idea to have an option to perma flag combatant on a meaningful cool down? (Week?)

ArchivedUser

An in game mechanic to remain in a combatant state  regardless of activity for a predetermined period.

Edit: Removed the idea of a buff or incentive.

ArchivedUser

More people flagged combatant can lead to more open world interactions instead of a stalemate waiting to see who attacks first. 

ArchivedUser

I voted no because although I think it would be a good idea, I don't think there should be any benefits/buffs/etc. associated with it. Why is everyone trying to squeak a buff out of everything?

ArchivedUser

Hardcore PvPers like to feel uber and elite.

ArchivedUser

Azathoth said:

I voted no because although I think it would be a good idea, I don't think there should be any benefits/buffs/etc. associated with it. Why is everyone trying to squeak a buff out of everything?

It's about incentivizing choices. If people are taking additional risk (by making themselves combatant enabled), then there needs to be some sort of potential reward. I don't know if I think it should come from farming, however. Perhaps the reward comes from succeeding in combat against an attacker? Additional gold?  

If there is no form of reward, people will avoid taking the risk. Not everyone; but most will.

ArchivedUser

being a combatant already has perks, if you die as a combatant you lose half the materials and gain half the negative exp as if you died as a non combatant, no need to add more buffs.

ArchivedUser

I guess if you always want to be a combatant, just escort caravans and siege nodes 24/7.

ArchivedUser

Dygz said:

Hardcore PvPers like to feel uber and elite.

I have no interest in feeling uber or elite, nor am I interested in buffs for being flagged all the time. Please to pool all of us hardcore PvPers together and generalize. I just want to challenge myself and my opponents as much as possible.

ArchivedUser

Some PvP players might like this but on the other side PvE players might not

ArchivedUser

Xombie said:

Dygz said:

Hardcore PvPers like to feel uber and elite.

I have no interest in feeling uber or elite, nor am I interested in buffs for being flagged all the time. Please to pool all of us hardcore PvPers together and generalize. I just want to challenge myself and my opponents as much as possible.

Did I mention your name?
If the shoe doesn't fit, don't wear it.

ArchivedUser

It wasn't my intention to reward or buff pvpers but I can see how that is implied. I wasn't directly concerned with pvpers cause most of them will fight back anyway. Just trying to promote more open world conflict while giving them a reason to flag up. Whether the buff or any other incentive is there... I'd still like to see a mechanic that allows you to stay a combatant. The only time I intend to be green is when I can take advantage of it and gather out in the world to discourage others from attacking me.

ArchivedUser

There will be plenty of open world conflict in Ashes.
Much of that conflict will be more meaningful than simply remaining flagged for PvP combat.

ArchivedUser

@Argentdawn, on that point I agree. It should be an option.

@Oiraeket, my thought is equality in all things. So there would have to be some sort of buff as an incentive for PvE players remaining green all the time, and I don't think any one here was trying to imply that. I don't think many, if any, here would even want that for this game.

If you want to PvP, and have the option to be perma-flagged, being attacked is the reward. It was the intended goal, and it happened, thus a reward for doing so. Encouraging peeps to perma-flag by giving them bonuses for doing so, to me, does not make any since.

So far players have advocated for a buff for playing with friends, a buff for being married, a buff for 'family,' a buff for adventuring with guild mates, and now a buff for PvP in general? Where does it all end???

Again, Argentdawn, I know that was not where you were going.

ArchivedUser

I voted no.

Why?

Because it's stupid.

The idea itself would never lead to PvP that wouldn't have happened anyway, and even if it launched with no buff, people will complain about it until tbey get one.

Azathoth said:

So far players have advocated for a buff for playing with friends, a buff for being married, a buff for 'family,' a buff for adventuring with guild mates, and now a buff for PvP in general? Where does it all end???

Don't forget dying. A poster here suggested a buff when you die.

So many WoW kiddies here.

ArchivedUser

Would you like another buff to go with that buffed buff madam ?
I have no objection to choice....self balancing penalty + buff...but yet another buff for the sake of a buff just makes balancing an ever more impossible task.
Especially when you have multiple sources that stack.
It becomes a find the buff stacking content game, instead of an adventure.

Having said that...I have no objection to a player having a switch if they want permanent personal PvP enabled without themselves causing corruption if they are killed without response.
A per player flagging disable option.
But that in itself would need a signalling system to let other players know they can attack you at leisure.
This sounds great..but its very existence also paints a non-pvp unflagged target for potential griefing too as you can differentiate the two.
There are plenty of PvP players that like nothing better than to find the easier PvE focused players.

So in the end, I would rather keep things exactly the way they are. The integrity of the corruption system is then not compromised in any way.

ArchivedUser

I didn't realize there were so many buff requests. Haha yeah I understand where your coming from. I'm biased because I tend to prefer pvp at the "end game" cause I get bored of scripted/memory fights and enjoy the challenge associated with fighting another player. It was not my goal to take away from anyone's playstyle so the buff incentive was probably a bad idea. 

ArchivedUser

Ashes should not have the issue of a stagnant endgame.
There will be fairly constant incentives on the server for people to participate in caravan battles and castle & node sieges. In addition to the monster coin events.

If you wish to spend the bulk of your time flagged as a combatant, that will probably be fairly easy to accomplish.

ArchivedUser

I think a WoW-like system would be better. A sort of "Come at me" option, that will remain on until deactivated, but can only be deactivated after being out of combat for 60 seconds or something. 

ArchivedUser

what about a perma flagged zone within the open world that only offers pvp badges you can decorate on your clothes. This way only the hard lined pvpers would be interested and a incentive. I do not see pvers caring so much about pvp badges. I would say pvp specific cloths but then I know the pvers would get testy about it.

( Arena is more isolated and can never offer the versatility of a huge opened area.)

Edit: it could be a large island or off the the edge of an area so pvers would never have to cross it) Yes I know it would be a huge under taking, but somewhere down the road.

ArchivedUser

Pve crowd will have no issue with pvp only cosmetics. Or if they do they are going to rage impotently, because pvp-only Arena cosmetics were confirmed ages ago.

ArchivedUser

Personally, I feel that Pvpers should be allowed to keep their pvp status on. how ashes does it, I don't care. I'm a PvE player, as long as I don't have to take a hit, whatever.

ArchivedUser

You more than likely will take a hit eventually; flagged or not.

ArchivedUser

Dygz said:

Xombie said:

Dygz said:

Hardcore PvPers like to feel uber and elite.

I have no interest in feeling uber or elite, nor am I interested in buffs for being flagged all the time. Please to pool all of us hardcore PvPers together and generalize. I just want to challenge myself and my opponents as much as possible.

Did I mention your name?
If the shoe doesn't fit, don't wear it.

You didn't name me directly, but you made a blanket statement and generalized Hardcore PvPers as a whole.

ArchivedUser

Well, that's really more likely to be Arena cosmetics/badges/titles.

Anyone who participates in caravan PvP combat and sieges should be able to get PvP combat cosmetics and badges and titles. 
And Ashes should have plenty of opportunities for caravan attacks and node sieges and castle sieges for the players who wish to stay focused on PvP combat.

ArchivedUser

Good idea. However if there is no incentive I don't see many people using this.

And if incentive would exist it would need to be balanced enough to incentivize using an option, but in same time that incentive is not too OP so that you don't feel that you absolutely MUST use an option.

This balance would be the hardest part to achieve here. However I do think the original idea is great.

ArchivedUser

Another idea that I would suggest is that system remains as it is, however that you are only able to activate and deactivate your "flagged state" inside the city with the special NPC.

It would mean you chose how you wish to go in the world, and then you have consequences of your choice. You do not just get to activate and deactivate your flag wherever you want, whenever you want depending how it suits you and depending on how weak/strong opponent you meet out there.

Make your choice and be stuck with it. If you wish to change your choice, go to city to change it.


Yes this would mean that if you went in the woods "green flagged", you are not able to initiate an attack on anyone, you are only able to defend yourself from those that already initiated an attack against you.

ArchivedUser

Gothix said:

Another idea that I would suggest is that system remains as it is, however that you are only able to activate and deactivate your "flagged state" inside the city with the special NPC.

It would mean you chose how you wish to go in the world, and then you have consequences of your choice. You do not just get to activate and deactivate your flag wherever you want, whenever you want depending how it suits you and depending on how weak/strong opponent you meet out there.

Make your choice and be stuck with it. If you wish to change your choice, go to city to change it.


Yes this would mean that if you went in the woods "green flagged", you are not able to initiate an attack on anyone, you are only able to defend yourself from those that already initiated an attack against you.

Interesting concept.

ArchivedUser

I don't really see the point but I am not against it. You'll be flagged for pvp during caravans and most likely siege events. If I want to kill you I am going to kill you regardless of "flagging". There are going to be a lot of ways to participate in pvp besides just running around killing random people...or not so random. 

ArchivedUser

If people were able to permanently flag, there would be less risk for PvP combat lovers to gain Corruption. Simply only attack the people who are flagged as combatants and people don't have to worry about gaining Corruption because the victim didn't fight back.

ArchivedUser

I don't see how that's a bad thing dygz. It would only serve to reduce the amount of attacks/deaths to people with no interest in pvp.

Personally I know.. 100% ....that I will end up red.. because I fully intend to find, and loot nearby resource areas, doing that I also know there will be people who troll me and not fight for the ability to gather in the area so I will end up inevitably killing greens and that's fine. 

I firmly believe in a player driven economy with an open world limited resource situation that gathering should flag you as a combatant but I have a feeling people would freak out about that because of the competition. Which was my initial mindset to offer a slight bonus to gathering by remaining flagged as a combatant. 

ArchivedUser

1: Steven wants to increase the incentive for players who typically avoid PvP combat to actually engage in combat.
2: Steven wants the Corruption system to have some meaning.

The Corruption system would be a completely broken mechanic if PvP lovers simply stayed flagged as combatants and non-PvPers were rarely if ever pushed to actively choose greater death penalties over minimum death penalties.