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
A place to pvp without negatives is what op proposed.
Even if everyone becomes combatants (purple) there are still penalties for dying.
- Experience debt (negative experience).
- Skill and stat dampening.
- Lower health and mana.
- Lower gear proficiency.
- Durability loss.
- Dropping a percentage of carried raw materials.
- This includes a percentage of items carried on the player's mule.
Even if nobody is carrying any raw materials in the proposed zone, they will still lose a lot of things for dying.Invincible Tank
Unrivalled Dps
Queen of Growlgate
Kraken Tamer
Super Cutie
H8 me cuz u ain't me
Read the following quote and if you still have your stance after then I have to assume you have some sort of victim complex.
Invincible Tank
Unrivalled Dps
Queen of Growlgate
Kraken Tamer
Super Cutie
H8 me cuz u ain't me
There is a huge difference between wanting to engage in pvp and beating on players who (for whatever reason) have no chance of fighting back. No matter what game you play, you will always find players who enjoy killing defenseless players, even if there is no benefit to doing so. If you believe that all players who engage in PKing are looking for a fair fight against a worthy opponent then you are very naive indeed. That is why the corruption status exists in the first place.
Are you sure, that PvP as only motivation is enough to get people in area like this? I understand it can be that to some people, but part of PvP players wants more meaningful PvP content and not just PvP playground. I can imagine how this can be fun for a while, but also how this can turn really fast quite boring.
Unless I have a reason to be there (besides exploration), why would I go to this place?
If there's important materials to gather, then PvErs will complain. PvPers might be happy. But do you see the problem? PvErs are risking everything going into this zone, while PvPers are not. What is their penalty for dying if they fail a gank? None. What is the penalty for the PvErs? Losing part of their hard work.
Now, if there's nothing of interest for a PvErs, why would they go there, besides exploration? No reason. If they want to explore, they can just go naked.
So, you have an entire zone only for PvPers... what is the difference between that and an arena?
I don't really care either way, so I dont have a dog in this fight. However, if I understood the thread so far, the PvErs would also lose nothing if they die. I believe the whole point of this is to not have consequences for death or murder. In the open world, even consensual 'purple' pvp has consequences, albeit reduced ones from nonconsensual pvp. As for the differences from an Arena, there is something strangely exciting about knowing you can and will likely be ganked at any moment. I believe this feeling just isnt there for Arenas. I could take or leave this idea though, it's not something I'm really concerned about.
Lots of PvE-only folk will want to be able to explore that area while being immune to attack. Especially if it has unique or rare materials.
So, it would still be controversial regardless.
Which doesn't mean a lawless zone shouldn't be implemented - just there would be lots of people who would not view that as a win/win.
I would think if there is a lawless zone where there is no Corruption, there would also have to be a lawful zone where PvP combat is not possible.
Eh, then let me PvP in raids/dungeons
I want to go play my way in raids, let me kill other players in instanced dungeons. I want to explore those areas of the game by not adhering to the set rules of that location.
I don't think that would be well received by raiders. So why is it okay to tell PvPers that?
Are we lesser people? Is our play-style inferior? Do we deserve less? Should accommodation be only made for one group and not the other?
I'm also open to the lawful zone idea, although I'm seeing this as something people would exploit significantly.
How would a lawful zone be exploited?
People engaging others outside of it, the retreating into it. Tactics of many a griefer.
Also as we saw in Archeage with the infamous roadblocks during Peace Time. People would block the bridges with carts to stop trade pack runs to troll or extort money. Couldn't clear them out because Peace Time.
Life, uh, finds a way.
Engaging a fight and then running away to safety or combat logging is always going to happen regardless of whether there are lawful zones or not.
As for blocking trade routes, I have never played a game where that was possible (unit collision is rarely seen to that extent) so I never considered it. Could you even do such a thing in Ashes?
Sometimes the conversation seems to be focused on wanting to be able to PvP without gear loss. So two PvP's can attack each other and have fun while honing their skills without losing anything for that. I am with this idea. If a player is attacked, and they fight back, after death neither player should lose anything. I just don't think it should be limited to a single zone if that's what they want.
The other aspect I picked up is some want a corruption free zone. This would allow them to attack anyone, and if said player doesn't fight back, they want to be able to kill them without taking corruption. This I am not so much for. This seems to alleviate the risk from the PvP and only cause risk to the PvE players that don't fight back. Rather it's a zone or not, that doesn't seem fair (based on Ashes current structure and my understanding of it). Telling players to avoid said area is odd, since most have a problem with being told to keep it to an arena. You either trying to encourage players to not go to a said location, making it less of an open world, or telling players to stay in a single location making it an arena. To me a zone does both of those things.
I'm sure there have been many other sides raised, but this is my understanding and my opinion as is. I think a few have mentioned they prefer both, a zone with no corruption or gear loss/degradation. I would be opposed to this because of the 'no corruption' part.
At some point it was mentioned that to attract players, likely PvE, to a lawless PvP zone Ashes could have rare or otherwise hard to gather resources (hence the PvE players) there. Which means no risk for PvP and a lot of risk for PvE, so I am not sure if that was meant to be a serious suggestion.
I have been asked why I post here or why I continue to insert my opinion.
It's because I have one, and like all others in this thread, I think mine is equally valuable.
I don't understand these questions: Why is it OK to tell PvPers that? Are we lesser people?
Exactly, you don't understand.
Or refuse to it seems.
Literally as simple as wanting some content in a game that would make it more fun to many people.
I want a game to be fun.
Fuck me, right?
For example.... you need a reason for people to go to these zones that are lawless. Increased Rewards? After all, greater risk should mean greater reward otherwise they simply don't get used. And if you do that, then you introduce these zones vs. the benefit of any other zones and you then need to balance that.
So to that point, what would be the potential impact of this on nodes? the economy?
I think this needs to be highlighted. Meaningful PvP is really the key here. You can get a PvP playground really in most games , but its fun is really limited. I want meaningful PvP that keeps providing over time.
I think spaceships are fun but they don’t fit in this game. That’s not a good argument.
That being said, I don’t care about a “bandit zone” as long as the following is true:
If it’s done like Jubilum suggests then fine with me. I can blissfully pretend it doesn’t exist and it’ll never impact my play.
Many people think flying mounts are fun, fuck them too.
I think drinking the blood of civilians is fun. Fuck me right?
You read it here first guys, @azathoth told the Ashes community to fuck off.
Yeah I agree, meaningful PvP is actually own topic.. however, it easily turns to same conversation as here.
As @dracdoc has said, it's not just about what sounds fun and putting it into the game. You need to consider how the suggestion will affect the game, the community and the economy. Something that may seem fun at the start can have terrible side effects later on down the line. Flying in WoW is a perfect example of this. It sounds great to be able to fly around wherever you like, but the effect it has on the game world and the community (especially for world PvP) make it a really bad decision.
If you'd bother to go back to the beginning of this thread, to my previous replies you'll see the reasons I give for why a Lawless Zone would be bad for the game.
If someone is looking for an area without the corruption system, they would be attempting to avoid the punishment for griefing. The flagging system is going to be in place to avoid non-consensual PvP and punish greifers. This is not what I have understood most of the people asking for the "lawless zone" want.
For people that absolutely dont want any PvP EVER, Ashes probably isnt going to be the game for them. There will be PvP. There will be methods to mitigate unwanted PKing and to have meaningful PvP in the context of the world.
If someone is looking for PvP without losing exp or resources after dying I dont see much of a difference between whether that happens in the "open world" or in a separate arena/br. If it is a certain zone in the world, you cant leave that zone or you get the penalties anyway. I believe most of the points have been stating that open world PvP and arena/br/instanced PvP being different. I agree with that personally but its ultimately irrelevant whether you agree or disagree with that opinion. If you could access a separate arena/br at at will, would that not be the same as having a certain area on the map with the same function. People who go the that arena/br would be there for PvP, PvE players wouldnt go there and it would have many of the same components as open world PvP. People could jump in on fights, there could be ambushes or teams running around and they could put some mobs that dont drop loot or give exp to give static danger. All of those things are my opinion on what could be made or put into an arena/br to give the same feeling as the open world, but the no risk PvP that some people want.
From what I have read, the people advocating for a "lawless zone" are looking for consensual PvP without losing exp or resources on death for the fun of PvPing. An arena/br would give them that as long as it similar to the open world pvp experience.
If something like that were implemented, I dont see how it would not detract for the game except for the fact that some people would be out of the actual world sometimes. If someone wants "meaningful PvP" in the context of the world, they already have systems in place to do that anywhere in addition to castles, sieges and caravans.
In my understanding both sides, PvP heavy and PvE heavy would be satisfied as long as the arena/br was similar to the open world. People who want both play Ashes in the open world and have both. People who dont want to PvP have less people in the world trying to fight but still have the PvX experience that Ashes is looking to deliver.
Touché