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
Even the source you took your definition for the word "ganking" from lists a total of 7 definitions for the word.
You have picked one meaning of it that is openly debatable and called it the only true meaning, as it is the one meaning that allows you to defend your playstyle as not ganking.
You seem to think that if you can convince people that the way you play is not ganking according to your definition, then it should be ok to play the way you play.
That said, I'm not sure if it is others you are trying to convince, or if it is yourself you are trying to convince - but truthfully, neither are likely to happen.
The type of gameplay you want is toxic to a game. You know this, and you know it remains true whether an arbitrary definition of the word "ganking" fits what you do or not.
https://www.twitch.tv/videos/252860173?t=00h50m34s
"Our flagging system - the Corruption mechanics- are based around dis-incentivizing a griefer or PKer, but still offering the opportunity. Should the occasion arise where the benefits outweigh the risk, you have the ability to do so.
But, if you gain Corruption -which is killing a non-combatant: a player who is not fighting back, basically- if you gain that Corruption, your world has changed.
It's not going to be a very beneficial place to be and you have the potential for losing your gear. Your combat efficacy decreases based on the amount of Corruption you accrue.
So, it is a comfortable balance between player agency and griefing, basically, for removing agency for other players."
While CopperRaven doesn't consider killing someone who doesn't fight back (or someone who isn't in the mood for PvP combat) to be ganking, clearly Steven does since doing so comes with the penalty of Corruption.
It's not a misinterpretation of definition, as CopperRaven suggests, rather it's a disagreement of ideology.
And it's Steven's ideology that really counts since he's the one designing the rules and mechanics of the game.
Again, doesn't matter whether a soccer player thinks that it should be OK for players in the field to catch the ball with their hands simply because it's OK to do so in other ball games, like football and basketball.
In an MMOFPS or an MMOPvP game, wantonly killing other players likely would be considered by everyone to be fairplay.
But, Steven's philosophy is that an MMORPG should not be a murderbox. Especially, the MMORPG he's creating.
Which is why, in Ashes of Creation, player characters who kill non-combatants will gain Corruption.
No my type of play is normal. i certainly know what is toxic pvp, and it's not mine. Basically yours is ( leave me alone)
I love PvP. I've said it before on these forums, I played most of my time in Archeage as a pirate (basically perma-flagged combatant).
You are only able to see things from one side of a given situation (as is the case with most people that argue for more open PvP). You also seem to assume anyone that is able to see things from a perspective other than yours must inherently hate PvP.
You seem unable to comprehend that people can look at a situation as a whole and debate the topic based on what they see as right, rather than what they themselves want.
Not that it matters - your opinion, my opinion, the only opinion that actually makes a difference is Stevens, and he seems to have looked at the situation from multiple perspectives
It instead caters to gamers who are focused on killing other players as if the game were a MOBA or MMOFPS.
Shadowbane was fostered on "play-to-crush" but didn't last long. Ironically the same creators later gave us Wizard 101, which is now hitting it's 10th year.
We'll have to see how long Crowfall lasts (again, same creators) - although, I haven't been following the game closely enough to know how much ganking that game will allow.
At, the end of the day, it really depends on your primary audience. If your primary audience is intended to be hardcore gamers - free-for-all ganking is probably great.
If hardcore gamers are not the primary audience and the primary audience is, instead, roleplayers (which should be likely for an MMORPG), ganking is probably going to be restricted in some fashion.
Either via segregated servers or some form of flagging system or instanced PvP combat zones/arenas.
Ever seen something so shocking you don't even get mad lol. You know come to think of it. What if I have a superior gaming rig vs someone's crappy laptop and they are unable to compete on my level? Yes that's ganking too!! Death by 1070ti. What's that you say? You have a Walmart generic mouse pfffff well heres a incoming gank!
ok ok I will stop, it was to funny for me to pass up.
Will be interesting to see the arguments when I get back
And he still might be pissed that his day was interrupted and that he has to take time out of his day to get some stitches even though he's not anywhere near as jacked up as his assailants.
"2(in a video game) use underhand means to defeat or kill (a less experienced opponent)
I guess it pretty much comes down to ambushing and killing lowbies and newbies.
On the side note if ganking is bad, if speaking in the context of crushing players at a disadvantage continuously and unchecked then yes I would say it is a bad thing.
However
If for example lets say 3-4 players Role play as bandit highwaymen, and rob/kill players at a certain spot of road. I would say no, as it might open up interesting interactions.
Maybe :
- the mayor of a node decides he has enough of these bandits, and sends out a squad to make short work of them?
- maybe the traders band together and create a caravan to protect themselves with the help of some of the local node warriors?
- perhaps a trader will start looking for a better more safer trade route?
etc.
So I would say left unchecked with no deterrent it will become a menace, on the other hand being ganked (in the context of being ambushed/jumped on) , is also part of the game. You cannot always win, and it also leads to excitement, and a feeling of a world that is alive, there scumbags and goody two shoes. The two need to be balanced out to create a vivid and exciting world.
Latency is actually a fairly major consideration for MMO developers in general. In fact, global cooldowns first existed as a means of putting people with a higher ping on a more level playing field. The idea being that as long as the players latency was less than the GCD time, ping wouldn't be an issue.
While it is less of an issue now than it used to be - I've seen people play with standard latency of 750ms or higher, and I've seen spikes of over 2 million ms, or more than half an hour (though that was due to an under-sea cable being severed, and was obviously not sustained as data was re-routed) - it can still be an issue.
So, yeah, if I am in the mood to roleplay getting jumped by other players, that could be a lot of fun.
If I'm not in the mood for that... in Ashes, I guess they will be accruing Corruption.
Roleplaying should be more involved than simply, "I am roleplaying a villain so everyone is KoS."
Or the dreaded, "Elves killed my parents so all Elves are KoS. (OOC, See, I'm RPing!!)"
PvP conflict doesn't always have to be about killing.
Bandits and highwaymen should also be able to extort; not only attack.
"I will let you go today, but next time I see you, you had better..."
Hell some player might even band together to form a bandit node, and just gank players in other nodes and work of their corruption in the safety of their own node.
Furthermore there are murderous bastards will always exist, if a player decides that his character hates Elves and wants to kill as many as possible, corruption will still prevent him from going on a murder spree, well he can if he wishes to, if he is willing to face the consequences. Additionally that does not exclude the option of the player having more story/backstory to his character.
For you pvp conflict might not always entail killing for others it might just as well.
And that why I said Rob/kill
When I transport goods, i'm not particularly in the mood to fight, I'm in the mood to get my goods from point A to Point B and I'm hoping I don't get attacked (or ganked, call it what you want) but it may happen. Nothing wrong with that and that's a danger.
I use as example Albion Online, which i have played over 2 years now. The whole community what i have seen uses word ganking quite freely. It is many times same thing as playerkilling and people even uses word combination "solo ganking". So ganking is just a common word to going killing other players, no matter is the target same or lower level or outnumbered or equal fight. But it is also totally separated from griefing.
And what is the best part, that i have not seen any discussions about this matter and everybody seems to be just fine with that in AO. I am actually suprised why this is so big deal within AoC community..
Or is the problem that in AoC people comes from different backrounds, games and communities, where the "ganking" word is seen in different light?
Point is, this is a PvX game with conflict around limited resources.
NOTHING (besides perhaps high lvl players attacking low lvl players) should be punished with corruption.
People being flagged purple while gathering is already a significant COMPROMISE, as you can still run around green while traveling. I would not even allow that. But hell, I know there is lots of PvE snowflakes in here, this is the only reason i suggested ONLY flagging people purple while gathering.
But you snowflakes have no desire to compromise, you want it your way, where you can avoid all PvP if you wish.
Again, we will see what Intrepid does in the end. If they make the AoC a "snowflake game" I will not be here. That's 'bout it, what I want to say.
But the term "gank" was certainly being used in 1997 during UO days with no such things as levels.
I know this is slightly shifting topics but now i'm genuinely curious as to where the term came from
As I just wrote in "Elephant in the Room" thread after seeing a podcast.
Have fun all, I'm out. Hope you enjoy your PvE experience.
- Gank means stealing or robbing.
- Gank means killing.
- Gank means swindle.
- Gank means gang kill.
- Gank means killing with little effort.
- Gank means ambush.
And yeah i agree with you that it was not about levels, because gank was most likely used first in sandbox games with full loot rules. There is not such as levels. In sandbox games you can beat your enemy with lower level gear using skills, so i guess outgearing is not the one either.So it might be mix of just killing people and stealing their stuff, because of full loot rules back then. And that might be mixed with gang kill. After that the word has spread to different directions and to different games. Each game and its community has own definition to ganking. So i guess this is mostly about natural evolve and most of the definitions we have herd here are actually right ones, those just came from different branch.
Wikipedia: . Ganking (short for gang killing) is a type of PKing in which the killer has a significant advantage over his victim, such as being part of a group, being a higher level, or attacking the victim while they are at low health.
It is is pretty much the same sentiment of the what I have already said. Except for the ( player is at low health) I feel that is still pvp personally. It the fact remains I could pull it straight from the websters dictionary and still that won't be good enough.
Also I keep seeing the corruption this and it's tied into lore and so on. Again I say to what extent nobody knows yet. I seriously doubt if I kill someone one time it's complete corruption. Also there is evedince it builds up. Maybe if I kill 3 ppl? Perhaps 50? We don't know.
My primary argument has been about having a lawless land like that of tatooine. The enticement being of course a pvper that can really take advantage of the Open world. Also receive non stat items that we can only attain from that area associated with pvp of course. In noway does a pver ever have to go there or associate with it.
Some of you without saying it in so many words, simply do not want to be attacked..... like at all. The mere fact of a pvper jumps you ambush whatever it's a gank. To even go so far as ping difference being Ganking. Is that an issue sure it is, but so many types of things mentioned are unavoidable
and honestly abit silly. To the point some of you come of entitl d and I am to ask permission if it's ok if I attack (smh). I really see no end to this dispute honestly. But I do know that pvpers are the under dog when it comes to this game. As long as some of you are willing to argue. It will inadvertently help keep the topic going and be a force of consideration on the devs part. So for me this is all net and I am willing to keep it going as long as the nay Sayers are too.
Please excuse grammatical errors due in part I am back at work doing this over a phone on a ridiculous tiny screen.
I am not a pver but as you said it makes the world seem so stagnate and boring if my only r al competition was npcs. (( oh we better not go there because there is a predetermine boss that's there every single day)). Wish there was some common middle ground because the game does look amazing. Best I can ask for is just a lawless land and be happy with it. My gut tells me it won't take much At all to build corruption, and even harder to take it off