Greetings, glorious adventurers! If you're joining in our Alpha One spot testing, please follow the steps here to see all the latest test info on our forums and Discord!

What happens if I defend myself?

I am still trying to learn about this game and how it works. Perhaps the answer has already been given and I missed it. So here is a scenario and few questions.

I saw somewhere that if a player attacks you but you do NOT fight back and you die.. The player that has attacked you gets flagged and if that attacking PvPer keeps targeting people for the heck of it but players do not fight back and die.. that attacker will eventually be flagged so much that they will lose abilities and/or even items, etc... something to this effect.

Question is what if I am attacked but I decide to defend myself and I kill the attacker? would I be flagged because I killed him/her? Or not? Or would I get a reward for defending myself and winning?

I mean it really wouldn't be fair for me to be attacked then respond back by defending myself and kill the attacker - only to find out that I was flagged for killing someone in self defence! LOL

I hope we can defend ourselves and even be rewarded for successfully defending ourselves. 'cause being attacked and just stand there not do anything because you don't want to be flagged is a bit harsh.. I for one am not going to stand there and let someone kill me for the heck of it LOL 

So can someone clear this one for me please? as how this plays out in Ashes?

Comments

  • ArchivedUserArchivedUser Guest
    edited July 2018
    I found alot of my information on the corruption system on the wiki and discord there's also a great comment and visual posted by UnknownSystemError in this thread here that answers most of your question:

    https://forums.ashesofcreation.com/discussion/comment/151817#Comment_151817

    Visual link for reference:

    http://www.aocwiki.net/images/thumb/f/fb/Corruption_system.png/640px-Corruption_system.png
     
  • I edit my comment to capitalize Unknown's name right and out of no where there's a comment from them with all the information lol
  • ArchivedUserArchivedUser Guest
    edited July 2018
    " defend " is vague ( such as escaping and never being flagged as Purple via Movement Abilities ) . It'll ultimately be based on two things
    • How diverse is Action-Combat going to be ( including if Action-Combat will be more prominent over tab-target )
    • If its even planned to have defensive-spells/ defensive-abilities of each Element in the game  ... both Magic & Non-Magic Abilities ... for all Archetypes
    An example of the last bulletin ...
    1. Water has an aggressive-side & defensive-side. If water is pressurized high-enough, it can cut through rock (very similar to a lazer) . But Water can also Heal & Nurture.
    2. There's technically a passive-side to water too - like ensnaring/ trapping. or maybe a Shield/ Cage ... but this part comes with how other Fictions depicted Water-Magic
    Water is technically Air/ Wind ... i.e. H2O

    But i personally think its best to keep Wind & Water separate from each other - as two separate types of Magic

    But this kinda relates to ALL of the other Elements too

    Fortunately though ... Non-Magic-Defensive abilties are more straightforward via Sword Blocking ... but which weapon blocking what ?

    All-in-all , it'll be based on how technical / in-depth Intrepid wants combat to be. But just having some sort of Action-Combat opens new possibilities for combat as a whole 
  • ArchivedUserArchivedUser Guest
    edited July 2018
    Long-Story-Short ... just wait-&-see , whatever Intrepid comes-up with ... I'm sure it'll be good. And if players don't like it ... its the perfect time for Feedback since its still testing phases
  • ArchivedUserArchivedUser Guest
    edited July 2018
    If you are attacked by a Purple (consented to PvP) and you are Green (non-consent PvP), you will automaticially be flagged Purple if you strike back (thus giving consent to PvP) and neither of you will gain corruption.

    However, if you are attacked by a Red (already corrupt) you can be Green/Purple and kill them without being corrupted.
  • Escaping and never flagging is not defense - that's avoidance.
    I suppose blocking via adventurer class abilities might be construed as defense.
    But, defense really means attacking back - it's not vague.

    Attacking back will flag you as a combatant.
    You will be rewarded by only receiving half the normal death penalties if you die.
    You will be rewarded by being able to loot resources from your attacker(s) if you kill them.
    You both would be combatants, so killing your combatant foe(s) would mean they receive half the normal death penalties, even though they initiated the combat.
  • If I'm attacked and my "best" (some will consider that "only") option is to fight back, I'm not sure I'd consider that entirely consensual.

    So, if I don't want to fight, but the best response is to do so, I will take 1 swing at the other guy and then let him kill me?

    (Devil's Advocate)
  • Dygz said:
    Escaping and never flagging is not defense - that's avoidance.
    I suppose blocking via adventurer class abilities might be construed as defense.
    But, defense really means attacking back - it's not vague.

    Attacking back will flag you as a combatant.
    You will be rewarded by only receiving half the normal death penalties if you die.
    You will be rewarded by being able to loot resources from your attacker(s) if you kill them.
    You both would be combatants, so killing your combatant foe(s) would mean they receive half the normal death penalties, even though they initiated the combat.
    Just to clarify Dygz point, being flagged as a combatant is not the same as being flagged as corrupted. Corruption is given when you attack and the victim does not defend. Corruption causes stat reduction and increased risk of dropping gear upon death. In short being flagged as a combatant isn't very punishing. I'm sure the google docs or wiki links above will clarify further if need be
  • Or, you take the standard death penalty, and the other guy gets corruption.  So it's a matter of do you want to minimize your loss, or punish your attacker?
  • ArchivedUserArchivedUser Guest
    edited July 2018
    @Dygz I will admit, there was a "little-bit" of playing-with-words when i said that
    • it is technically possible " defend " the Crafting Materials from being looted .. so as long as I avoid getting hit from the Attacker. This can be further emphasized if Action-Combat has more of a Presence in the Overall-Combat for all Archetypes .. if Players has to aim ( think of WildStar's Combat ... only no Templates/Telegraphs being so oblivious ) ...  and/or
    •  the Ranger having an ability to freely shoot it's Bow without any Range-restrictions ... *cough*
  • tinukeda said:
    If I'm attacked and my "best" (some will consider that "only") option is to fight back, I'm not sure I'd consider that entirely consensual.

    So, if I don't want to fight, but the best response is to do so, I will take 1 swing at the other guy and then let him kill me?

    (Devil's Advocate)
    Depends on your situation. If your best response is to do so, then you probably have a reason to live and not suffer the death penalty. Your best scenario would be to attack back and win. 

    However if you don't want to fight but also don't want to suffer the penalties of dying green, then yeah take a swing and die and only suffer the penalties of dying as a combatant. <<<Although the only reason i can think of that you wouldn't want to fight back is "I'm not in the mood to deal with this shit". So i really can't understand why you wouldnt fight back because winning is as mentioned, your best case scenario.

    I also don't expect people to attack at random. The devs want open pvp to be meaningful. I expect attacks only when contesting some rare resource. So if you're gathering something rare, you cant just be like "not in the mood to deal with pvpers" you should always expect an assault in that type of situation.
  • If you really need a good feel for this system, go play Lineage 2 for an hour or so and just attack random people, noobs or bots most like. It's free to do and play, and it is where Steve got the system from to begin with. The game itself is ruined and some 15 years old so dont bother with any details besides the PvP system. The only single difference I can see is that in AoC, you get a slightly less death penalty for fighting back.
  • tinukeda said:
    If I'm attacked and my "best" (some will consider that "only") option is to fight back, I'm not sure I'd consider that entirely consensual.

    So, if I don't want to fight, but the best response is to do so, I will take 1 swing at the other guy and then let him kill me?

    (Devil's Advocate)
    Depends on your situation. If your best response is to do so, then you probably have a reason to live and not suffer the death penalty. Your best scenario would be to attack back and win. 

    However if you don't want to fight but also don't want to suffer the penalties of dying green, then yeah take a swing and die and only suffer the penalties of dying as a combatant. <<<Although the only reason i can think of that you wouldn't want to fight back is "I'm not in the mood to deal with this shit". So i really can't understand why you wouldnt fight back because winning is as mentioned, your best case scenario.

    I also don't expect people to attack at random. The devs want open pvp to be meaningful. I expect attacks only when contesting some rare resource. So if you're gathering something rare, you cant just be like "not in the mood to deal with pvpers" you should always expect an assault in that type of situation.
    Best option depends on overall philosophy as well as specific situation.
    If you have resources you want to keep, your best option is to become a combatant and lose minimal resources.
    If you're more interested in minimizing non-consensual PvP combat, you stay green and punish the attacker with Corruption.

    Looting resources is not an example of meaningful combat.
    Meaningful combat will have more impact on the rest of the world beyond just the resources one person is able to carry in character inventory.
  • Dygz said:
    tinukeda said:
    If I'm attacked and my "best" (some will consider that "only") option is to fight back, I'm not sure I'd consider that entirely consensual.

    So, if I don't want to fight, but the best response is to do so, I will take 1 swing at the other guy and then let him kill me?

    (Devil's Advocate)
    Depends on your situation. If your best response is to do so, then you probably have a reason to live and not suffer the death penalty. Your best scenario would be to attack back and win. 

    However if you don't want to fight but also don't want to suffer the penalties of dying green, then yeah take a swing and die and only suffer the penalties of dying as a combatant. <<<Although the only reason i can think of that you wouldn't want to fight back is "I'm not in the mood to deal with this shit". So i really can't understand why you wouldnt fight back because winning is as mentioned, your best case scenario.

    I also don't expect people to attack at random. The devs want open pvp to be meaningful. I expect attacks only when contesting some rare resource. So if you're gathering something rare, you cant just be like "not in the mood to deal with pvpers" you should always expect an assault in that type of situation.
    Best option depends on overall philosophy as well as specific situation.
    If you have resources you want to keep, your best option is to become a combatant and lose minimal resources.
    If you're more interested in minimizing non-consensual PvP combat, you stay green and punish the attacker with Corruption.

    Looting resources is not an example of meaningful combat.
    Meaningful combat will have more impact on the rest of the world beyond just the resources one person is able to carry in character inventory.
    I understand all that its just i don't wanna write an essay explaining it. We should just leave this kinda stuff to UnknownSystemError
  • Don't drag me into this one. @Dygz is our resident philosopher, I try to keep mine to parroting quoted information, though occasionally I do break into a rant.
  • a dead person is a dead person nothing else matters as Arnaud Amalric said Kill them all and let God sort them out. see I can be a philosopher as well 
  • Thanks everyone and a /Bow. Much appreciated for the responses. I am learning a lot from each response. 

    This is a very helpful community, which makes me more excited about Ashes of Creation. Healthy community is very important to keep population growing. So keep it up..

  • nagash said:
    a dead person is a dead person nothing else matters as Arnaud Amalric said Kill them all and let God sort them out. see I can be a philosopher as well 
    A dead person is an undead person...
    I fixed it for you. <3
Sign In or Register to comment.