Glorious Alpha Two Testers!
Phase I of Alpha Two testing will occur on weekends. Each weekend is scheduled to start on Fridays at 10 AM PT and end on Sundays at 10 PM PT. Find out more here.
Check out Alpha Two Announcements here to see the latest Alpha Two news and update notes.
Our quickest Alpha Two updates are in Discord. Testers with Alpha Two access can chat in Alpha Two channels by connecting your Discord and Intrepid accounts here.
Phase I of Alpha Two testing will occur on weekends. Each weekend is scheduled to start on Fridays at 10 AM PT and end on Sundays at 10 PM PT. Find out more here.
Check out Alpha Two Announcements here to see the latest Alpha Two news and update notes.
Our quickest Alpha Two updates are in Discord. Testers with Alpha Two access can chat in Alpha Two channels by connecting your Discord and Intrepid accounts here.
Comments
Your argument isn't about PvP in general. You may think it is, but it doesn't hold up at all. Your argument is about the way YOU want to PvP and the fact that Intrepid are not making their game around that one style of PvP.
There is just as much opportunity in PvP play to gain wealth as there is in PvE. The obvious first method for this is by attacking caravans. You gain the wealth, and there is no corruption to be had.
There is also attacking harvesting players - while this may cause corruption (it also may not), you will gain financially from doing it.
There is also bounty hunting - a PvP activity that essentially has no negative effects on the player. You stand to make coin from killing people with corruption, and have no potential for corruption gain yourself.
We also have no reason at all to assume there won't be experience gain from PvP.
So right there we have PvP players progressing in wealth and experience.
While progress absolutely will be slower if a player only PvP's, this is in exactly the same way a PvE player using mules to carry resources between nodes is setting themselves up for slower progression.
So which is it?
Are we accepting that slower progression is acceptable, in which case a PvP player can simply stick to PvP aspects to progress slower and a PvE player can stick to PvE aspects to progress slower, or are we saying neither is a valid option?
It is either one or the other. You can't pick and chose in order to have things fit in with your argument, as that just isn't how things work.
Small scale PvP - where one player interrupts the activities of another - is disruptive to a game. By definition, there is always one player that doesn't want to be fighting (this is why I like the idea of the corruption system giving these players another option).
With large scale PvP - sieges, guild battles, battles over large scale encounters etc - everyone present is there by choice. It is prepared, consensual PvP.
This isn't the only PvP in Ashes, but it seems to me to be the focus.
Personally, I think this is an amazingly fantastic move - as all of my best PvP experiences in games (specifically Archeage) have been in relation to large scale PvP. Two factions with 100 people each fighting over the Red Dragon, or 3 factions all in about 20 boats fighting over the Kraken or Leviathan is far more enjoyable as content - for all involved - than sneaking up on someone picking flowers and stabbing them in the back.
As to your question of PvP specific areas - as I've mentioned in this thread - I'm all for them if done right. They should have a very specific reason to be there (an encounter of some description), and basically nothing else. There should not be any harvestable resources unless connected directly to the encounter.
Basically, such areas need to be designed in a way where a single player would have no specific desire to go there. The only people present should be people that are there willingly to participate in what ever content the area is set up to provide, including the PvP that comes with it.
Ok one last answer...
PvE player doing only PvE = will be fully leveled AND fully geared -- in 3 months
compared to that (assuming full PvE takes 3 months to do that)
PvP player doing only PvP (assuming exp from PvP) = fully leveled / fully geared -- in 3 years or more
Just a comparison. And that's ASSUMING exp from PvP, which hasn't been mentioned at all, not even once.
AND in PvE you can't lose gear anywhere, while in PvP you can.
So please cut the BS.
** Oh yeah, why don't we make that you can GATHER stuff only in 2 hour window ONCE each week **
** Let's also make that you can CRAFT only when you see some caravan carrying crafting stations passing through **
** Let's also make that you can kill mobs, but when mobs detect your gear is too strong for them they can stay green, and then if you kill them you get corrupted and lose stats and gear **
** you are only allowed to enter your freehold once per 2 weeks **
** one dungeon run per month, and you need to prepare for it by PvPing 1000 people each week before it begins to open the gates**
-- Meanwhile lets make sieges last forever, as soon as one ends new one begins --
-- players perma purple --
-- PvP kills letting you loot opponents gold and gear --
-- PvP everywhere all the time, you can't even level up without it --
Hey, look that would be PvX game, it WOULD, it would have PvE in it!
I'm out. Now you can keep talking to yourself, and to Dygz.
As a PvP player myself, I am happy with the choices we have.
Caravans, Sieges, BG's, GvG's etc is more than enough choice for us PvP players.
Intrepid has made it pretty clear with the corruption system, that they do not want gankers to roam wild in the world, which is fine, it's their game. We as PvP players just have to adapt to this system.
I'm sorry to say, but quit pretending. You are NOT a PvPer.
edit: Bish lol
No regulation is an absolute shitfest and i really think youre in the minority here. Saying this game doesn't do justice to PvPers is false. I love pvp and i think this system will do just fine as long as corruption numbers are balanced.
I agree that anyone avoiding pvp is just missing half the game but who the hell cares about them. let them miss half the fun. Its not like the game is less fun for us pvpers. Theres tons of things to do aside from world pvp. As long as corruption isn't too severe you will have your open world pvp and you can always work your way around things as well.
Just try having fun and you will. Try new things and all. Not everything is about world pvp. Im sure economy and crafts and professions will keep you occupied as well. And theres all the other forms of pvp this game provides that sounds hella fun to me. Saying that "well maybe i dont wanna do those kinds of pvp and just want world pvp" sounds like a cowardly excuse to me and a real shitty one at that. And like ive mentioned before, numbers can be balanced. Theres double the penalty for dying green and if that isn't enough, i have faith that inrepid will balance things and either lessen corruption or increase green death penalty. In which case greens will be forced to fight back. I also believe that a lot of gatherers won't just sit there and let you kill them so half the time corruption won't even be applied.
I just feel like youre worrying without having a good reason. I want this game to succeed as much as the next person so lets just wait and have a bit of faith in the devs
Love when people make stuff up about "what I said". lol
I said it's unfair that PvE-ers "can" skip all PvP and still get fully geared and have loads of cash.
While if PvP-ers skip all PvE they will not have anything much really.
Which is extremely unfair to say the least.
Also 90% of PvP content are timed / occasional / rare events, while 90% of PvE content is available full time.
My point is game is 80% tailored towards PvE, and PvX game should NOT be tailored like this.
My final point is if things remain like this, most of PvPers will not play this, which will damage the population in a way that it will be made of 95% PvEers and 5% casual PvPers, which will destroy it even further (since Intrepid claims it is based on conflict).
So, really, think you want.
It boggles my mind how you can still claim that PKing won't exist after the many times you have been told otherwise by a great deal of other people.
Literally no one will be able to avoid PvP entirely. It is structured into a game. You can opt not to participate in many of the organized PvP systems, but odds are, you will be PK'd by someone eventually because this system is not designed to, and will not prevent PKing.
I don't even know what to say to you anymore. I've said every point I have and negated all of yours multiple times. If you doubt the verity of that statement, go back through the thread and read what we both wrote. You clearly have no intention to discuss this. You have your opinion, and no matter how many rational arguments are laid before you, you will just ignore them and continue to repeat some nonsense about PvPers not playing this, as if you represent the population.
Not only that, but even after spending as much time on this thread as you have, you don't even appear to fully understand the PvP or the Corruption system. An example:
PKing is not the only way to gain money for a PvPer. We've established this multiple times that there are various Battlegrounds such as Caravans that provide loot to whoever wins in PvP. PKing funds will be marginal compared to winning these events. These are in-world events geared towards giving PvPers a way to win money while PvPing. It's exactly what you said the game doesn't have. Battlegrounds will be won and looted almost consistently by PvPers, because people who exclusively PvE will lack the experience and skills to take it from them.
And you know, people can choose to not participate in Node Wars if they don't want to. But guess what that means. That means that they will lose all the stuff they farmed and built anyways because a node can't survive if people don't defend it. Nothing is forcing them to fight, but their allies will be pretty P/O'd if they don't.
There is no one in this entire game who can avoid PvE OR PvP. Anyone who does, or tries to do so won't be able to progress.
Please read the comments for once. Because clearly you haven't, and many of us are trying very hard and putting in a lot of effort into clearing up your misconceptions so that you too can better understand and enjoy the game.
- Sikuba
Well that's good to know.
Now I know who to go to as the arbiter of what is and isn't PvP.
My point is compared to a PvE-er who would do only PvE, PvP-er who did only PvP would be a very poor guy.
Also I didn't say PK would not exist, I said It would be extremely rare (practically non existent) due to current corruption design. This means it would exist but amount of it would be statistically insignificant.
Other PvP events are rare / occasional events, not available most of the time to PvP-ers.
"Of who is or isn't a PvP-er."
As someone who likes to only occasionally / casually join PvP events, you do not classify as PvP-er. You classify as PvE-er, who cassually/ occasionally joins PvP when in mood for it. That's still being a PvE-er.
And since you claimed this rare / occasional PvP events are enough for you, I used a correct description.
hm, as a primarily PvP'er I would have to disagree with that statement.
I think hunting Caravans around the map will do me just fine in terms of purely PvP'ing in my playing sessions.
Don't even have to hit any mobs.
But sure, call me a PvE'er just because I don't fit your narrative.
The occurrence or rarity of PKing is all determined by balancing Corruption with Loot Drop. An increase in Loot Drop or a decrease in Corruption penalties will result in more PKing. The converse would result in less PKing. If you wanted to get rid of Corruption, you would have to almost completely remove Loot Drop, and that would remove a lot of the incentive anyway.
It's a balancing act, which I'm sure will be tested and altered extensively in the Alphas.
I guess you have been whining to much to read what I've written on the subject, but you can go find it in this thread.
Will it hurt hardcore PvPers if the is a PvE-only server?
Doesn't matter whether I think static PvP zones will hurt the game.
Just like it doesn't matter whether I think ubiquitous flying or global fast travel will hurt the game.
What matters is Stephen's vision of the game design.
The "too much time" excuse is completely made up, so is not at all convincing.
Doesn't matter how often you assert something when you have nothing real to back it up.
I don't whine about games that are too PvP-centric for my tastes.
I simply refuse to play games with rules and mechanics I don't like.
And I go find games that have the rules and mechanics I do like.
Yesterday, I had breakfast with a 2 year-old who whined and whined about how he wanted waffles for breakfast. He didn't want a bagel!!
But, when he actually ate the bagel, he said it was very, very good.
Stop making stuff up to whine about.
Play the game as designed - and then complain about the difficulty of finding enough PvP combat that is Corruption-free.
Based on actual experience of Ashes gameplay.
Explain to me - use small words if you need too - how you know what the rewards will be for taking over a caravan, what percentage of materials will drop when killed in PvP, how often said PvP combat will happen, what the rewards will be for bounty hunting on top of player drops, what the rewards will be for arenas, what the rewards will be for winning guild wars, what the rewards will be for sieges and the individual components of them...
Honestly, there is a huge list of ways PvP'ers will be able to profit, and as with everything, it is all subject to balance.
How you can claim things like the above is well beyond me.
He can claim all he wants, but he has no tangible proof to support his argument. Most of the arguments in this thread is based on assumptions about what PvP or PvE "might" be like.
This corruption system looks on paper almost perfect if we look what is the intend of it. Idea is not to give gankers anything more than this. I am personally fine with it, that i need to pick my targets carefully and resource wise f.e.. I just have to accept the fact, that i need to stop after one, few or some kills/attempts or i will eventually be hunted down.
If corrupted player needs some relief to penalties that is totally fine, but those reliefs should not effect negatively to players who are the targets. I am not personally sure should dying be the only way to get rid corruption and maybe it could also decay with time.
After ganking session can i easily get rid of corruption just putting all my stuff to bank and let another player or monster to kill me when i am naked? Well if this is the case then the system is quite easy to go around.
NTBRO since you're confused about this system I'll try and explain. The Dev is going for a driven pvp system. They don't want players being harassed out of an area over something as silly as trash mobs. BDOs endgame is basically nothing but pvp over mob grinding spots. So if that's really your ticket you should try it. They've already said that there are areas that once entered will flag you for pvp. For instance, nodes will be able to decide whether they are friendly or hostile towards another zone. Effectively putting the nodes in a war state. Now while they haven't elaborated you can safely assume these two groups of citizens will be flagged for each other. Between caravans, node wars, possible guild wars and no doubt some form of arena pvp I think there will be plenty of opportunity for players to kill each other.
Even if you dont care about anything else but PvE, this kind of system can hurt you as well. Having too much free gathering is not good balancing and is not good for the games long term economy....This is pretty common sense and not debatable...If there arent enough things to keep you from just straight up gathering then you are only lowering the value of what you are gathering due to abundance of that substance.
Now also have to take into consideration of bot's and macro's. I dont know how spammy the system will be in terms of how long or how many clicks it will take to gather the resources, but im sure there will be bots, and how many players will want to kill the bot's or the people who are clearly afk but using a macro....with current corruption it would be better to just let them bot away... and hurt the economy even further.....
There are a lot of different issues that come up due to this system looking not balanced properly that has nothing to do with PvP or PvE, it will hurt other aspects if players are scared to experience the other side of the game past simple PvE.
You are telling me you will sit there for hours waiting for a caravan that might never come? Meanwhile watching all these players run by you in the open world and gathering next to you?
Also will you be PvPing at lvl 1? Cuz if not then you wont be "purely" PvPing... you will HAVE to level up or what ever equivalent to leveling will be in this game to progress your character to even be strong enough to PvP, so end game you might be ready to PvP, but until then you are a PvPer.
Its almost like you think there is only one Caravan running in the entirety of Verra. And yes, ofc we need to gear up/level up, that is common sense so I didn't bring it up. My main goal is PvP, and that will mostly consist of Caravans since ganking "noobs" is frowned upon by Intrepid and will hit me with severe penalties. No point in whining about it, its the choice of the Devs.
I've said it many times and I'll keep saying it.. this is a player driven game/economy and to allow unchallenged gathering of world resources only takes out risk and challenge. A simple mechanic to allow you to defend or attack a resource would fix that point (like a short term combatant flag for gathering)
Caravans and sieges ( sieges by the way take prep have a cool down and a waiting period) may keep you occupied if there is one in your area and up currently that you can get to (no fast travel).
Bgs don't exist, Steven has already stated (thanks for the quote dygz) that his idea of a battle ground are the current known pvp avenues like the caravans, sieges, castles (potentially hunting grounds)
Guild versus guild could potentially elicit sustainable pvp but if we become spread out to much we may not see that guild often and that's assuming the majority of guilds opt to have a larger player base.
Castles happen (I believe) once a month. Which will be fought over by larger guilds by design.
Arena content (ladder system I believe) could be entertaining as long as we don't keep popping into the same arena over and over.
Now that may sound like a lot of pvp outlets but they are all timed, limited, or in the case of arena "removed" from the world.
By no means will this make me not want to play (I'm currently playing a game with no pvx it's strictly pve FFXIV) I was simply hopeful a decent pvx game was about to be made and may have been to excited.