As a pk player, labeling pk players toxic to me seems unfair.
Just as there are pkplayer that kill lowlevels, there are also pve players that are farming in your face and they take advantage of the fact that you cannot kill him to screw up the farm, there are toxic attitudes on both sides.
I think New World was pretty good on this topic since as a pk player they could all kill you without consequences and apart you threw all your inventory, and in my case it went for the players of the large clans, since we were one of the top pvp clans of the alpha, I hope that intrepid gives us the place to the pks and makes it difficult for us, but not impossibleI don't want to see pveplayer laugh at me in my face without being able to defend myself.
Sorry for my English
Once again, no one is entitled to a farming spot. If you want them to go somewhere else, fight them. If they want to keep their stuff they’ll fight back and defend it. If they don’t care, then maybe you should consider they might not have much worth defending.
You can always defend yourself, you can always harass them, as long as you don’t kill them you don’t get corruption.
If you see someone going about their business and all you wanna do is kill them and steal their stuff, maybe those assumptions aren’t off base at all.
PvPers will have plenty of opportunities for fair and meaningful fighting. PKers generally don’t want either of those and that’s why they’re generally labeled as toxic.
0
Options
AtamaMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
I’m trying to imagine “farming in your face”, but all I can come up with is one guy hitting another guy in the face with a hoe. Which is just more PvP.
PVP content needs to be completely opt in. The vast vast majority of people will be PVE only so you should not have to participate if you do not want. To be honest what the world really needs are PVE only MMOs that do not need to make any concessions for PVP. This would be a perfect title for that. PVP players tend to be the squeakiest wheel though so even though they are the vast minority they whine the hardest.
PVP content needs to be completely opt in. The vast vast majority of people will be PVE only so you should not have to participate if you do not want. To be honest what the world really needs are PVE only MMOs that do not need to make any concessions for PVP. This would be a perfect title for that. PVP players tend to be the squeakiest wheel though so even though they are the vast minority they whine the hardest.
The vast majority of mmos have always had a heavier pve tilt or have shifted to this over time. PvP is either an after thought, or something that you can easily avoid. Opt in pvp has little weight, and is completely antithetical to the idea of an open world where things matter. PvP can be tricky to design, to take into acount the human element, while PvE is by comparison, easy. And no, as they have been from day one stating this will be a PvX game, it is not the perfect title for that.
I’m trying to imagine “farming in your face”, but all I can come up with is one guy hitting another guy in the face with a hoe. Which is just more PvP.
Easy, you are collecting mines, I arrive and I am collecting them in front of you because I have more level and I do it faster and I am leaving you without them, and I do not activate the pvp, and I do not let you farm and you cannot do anything.
As a pk player, labeling pk players toxic to me seems unfair.
Oh, it's perfectly fair.
PK players are toxic.
Edit to add, those PK'ers that either don't realize they are toxic, or try to blame others for toxicity are easily the worst.
Not everyone has fun in the same way, and if the punishment is high for killing and you have the option to defend yourself, it seems fair to me, I consider a toxic person who does not let you play, if I kill you once I achieve the objective and I leave , and for this reason you consider me toxic ... well I will be toxic friend, but the pveplayer who steals your mines is the same for me.
PVP content needs to be completely opt in. The vast vast majority of people will be PVE only so you should not have to participate if you do not want. To be honest what the world really needs are PVE only MMOs that do not need to make any concessions for PVP. This would be a perfect title for that. PVP players tend to be the squeakiest wheel though so even though they are the vast minority they whine the hardest.
Over the last 20 years or so, my time in MMO's is probably split about 90% PvE, 10% PvP.
That is about as much PvP as I would chose to be involved in.
With that in mind, this game without PvP simply won't function. This isn't like taking PvP out of a game like WoW, because the PvP hete is actually intergral and essential to the game as a whole.
Taking PvP out of Ashes is more like taking the ability for player characters in WoW to move - in both cases, the game will be left as an unplayable mess.
I'm not sure which parts of the game you think would make Ashes "a perfect title" for a PvE only title, but as someone that far prefers PvE over PvP, I can tell you that it wouldn't.
PVP content needs to be completely opt in. The vast vast majority of people will be PVE only so you should not have to participate if you do not want. To be honest what the world really needs are PVE only MMOs that do not need to make any concessions for PVP. This would be a perfect title for that. PVP players tend to be the squeakiest wheel though so even though they are the vast minority they whine the hardest.
Over the last 20 years or so, my time in MMO's is probably split about 90% PvE, 10% PvP.
That is about as much PvP as I would chose to be involved in.
With that in mind, this game without PvP simply won't function. This isn't like taking PvP out of a game like WoW, because the PvP hete is actually intergral and essential to the game as a whole.
Taking PvP out of Ashes is more like taking the ability for player characters in WoW to move - in both cases, the game will be left as an unplayable mess.
I'm not sure which parts of the game you think would make Ashes "a perfect title" for a PvE only title, but as someone that far prefers PvE over PvP, I can tell you that it wouldn't.
Pretty much everything. Obviously sieges would likely need to be PVP but I would assume there are parameters to start the event and even a siege is pretty much opt in.
Here's the issue, I think the vast majority of players are like you- 90% PVE and 10% PVP. I was in beta for an unreleased MMO designed in a somewhat similar way to this in terms of PVP and when the developer asked the beta testers what they were doing in the game it was like 85% PVE stuff when the game was supposed to be all about PVE.
But free PVP and PVP required events make the game ultimately most greatly impacted by PVP when the vast majority of players want to do that only occassionally or never, and almost no one other than PKers enjoy PK elements at all.
So you make the most important element of the game the biggest focus when it is the least popular activity.
I don't get it to be honest. Opt in PVP is fine but should not be forced on people. And to be honest, who says that cities even need sieges? Would seem to be incredibly fun to just build and improve a city over years of play without it all being endangered. Nodes getting enhancements and ability to go to level 6 and 7 and the like could be great features for expansions.
Pretty much everything. Obviously sieges would likely need to be PVP but I would assume there are parameters to start the event and even a siege is pretty much opt in.
It's opt in to attack. You have no choice on the defense.
But free PVP and PVP required events make the game ultimately most greatly impacted by PVP when the vast majority of players want to do that only occassionally or never, and almost no one other than PKers enjoy PK elements at all.
Making alot of assumptions there. And don't conflate PKers with pvp. While at a base technical term they are the same, we all know the negative connotation given to PKers isn't from liking pvp, it's from ganking, harassment and pointless fighting.
I don't get it to be honest. Opt in PVP is fine but should not be forced on people. And to be honest, who says that cities even need sieges? Would seem to be incredibly fun to just build and improve a city over years of play without it all being endangered. Nodes getting enhancements and ability to go to level 6 and 7 and the like could be great features for expansions.
It sounds like this really won't be the game for you then. Opt in pvp is meaningless pvp. If you know there is no chance of being attacked, there is no tension, less excitement, and generally, you engage with the game and community less. And if the nodes could all become metros, what would be the point. Who cares about growing your node eventually it'll get there. Why flock to a particular place, everywhere is functionally the same. You eventually get a stagnant, dead world with everyone who still plays doing the newest pve content repeatedly until new content comes out.
PvP shouldn't be without consequence to be sure, there are too many assholes about for that, and in my opinion this is also a form of meaningless pvp. But to want another content type to be relegated to a place it can never effect you solely on the basis that you don't like it seems a little backward.
0
Options
Undead CanuckMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
I love when people consider a person toxic when they are harvesting and they 'steals your mines'.
There are harvesting locations everywhere. If you start harvesting first, you get the harvest. How hard is that to comprehend? Move to the left 10 feet, probably something else to harvest.
. Opt in pvp is meaningless pvp. If you know there is no chance of being attacked, there is no tension, less excitement, and generally, you engage with the game and community less. .
See this is a statement purely from a PVP point of view. You like that. It is your right. But not everyone in fact most people do not want to have that element in the game. It is also NOT true that PVP causes more engagement with others as working with others is more core than working to protect others or somethng. Plus there is plenty enough tension and excitement with PVE content. Neither side should be able to enforce their view of the game on the other. If I opt out of PVP and you can't attack me just go find someone that likes that. Why should your desire to have PVP trump my desire not to participate when the reality is that 80-100% of peoples interest will lie outside of PVP.
It is the core issue with PVP. It is experience crippling for the majority but the minority feel (and are VERY vocal about it, especially forums) that everyone should participate in it because its better for the feeling of playing the game. I have never needed PVP to help me find others to group with or create a guild and do content together. EVER. And I dont want to have to walk around while someone attacks me continuously until I mistakenly retaliate. Me opting out of PVP has no effect on your experience other than you cant kill whomever you want. Forcing PVP on me ruins my experience. And seriously why do PVPers care if there is a PVE only server. It does not affect you
0
Options
AtamaMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
I’m trying to imagine “farming in your face”, but all I can come up with is one guy hitting another guy in the face with a hoe. Which is just more PvP.
Easy, you are collecting mines, I arrive and I am collecting them in front of you because I have more level and I do it faster and I am leaving you without them, and I do not activate the pvp, and I do not let you farm and you cannot do anything.
...And? What is the problem with that? They can’t possibly take everything, you will be able to take some, they can take some. If they can take more then that is the benefit of having a higher gathering skill. Let that be a motivation to increase your own skill.
The fact that you think the only proper response is to kill the other person rather than improving yourself, or just cooperating, just reinforces the negative stereotype about PK players.
(By the way, I think your English skills are perfectly fine, if it’s not your first language I am impressed.)
@johnnysd You misunderstand me. I primarily PvE, as titles seldom makes engaging useful positions for tanks in pvp, and tanking is about all i do. I enjoy some pvp, but i can also see the simple fact that if you have opt in pvp, the game is chipping away at any semblance of open world pvp. You'll notice any title that has this system will eventually switch to a instanced battleground type system. This is fine if this is the stated goal of the game, regardless of how i feel about it.
And yes it is absolutely true. If you are being predated upon, perhaps in travel, or while farming, you group up, you hire some form of 'guard' group, you engage with your team, however that manifests in a game (faction, city, guild) to protect areas, or retaliate against the aggressors. You compete, you innovate, and stories and drama are made. This is the heart of engaging game play. Compare this with you running down the same path willy nilly because there is literally nothing you need worry about.
As to PvP or PvE servers, i personally don't care, especially if they are created to adequately house a proper server population. But there are titles in which this just won't work. ESO for example, or any title with a 'megaserver', also any game that at it's core encourages any form of open world pvp. It's baked into too many systems at that point.
Also again, you assume the vast majority of people solely enjoy PvE and abhor PvP. I'd say you're in the minority with that opinion. It seems most people enjoy both to some degree, with a tilt toward the PvE side.
Haha. You people that want to turn AoC in yet another ESO, FFXIV are wasting your time.
Open world PvP is not going anywhere, so make up your mind in what you want to do, rather than changing the core nature of this game.
I love PvP, and when I was playing FFXIV, not once did I complain that it didnt had PvP. When I grew tired of it I left it for BDO.
The world doesnt need to comply to your tantrums.
A full PvE Ashes would be a neutered version of the game.
Caravans are now zero-risk time sinks.
Without node sieges, the moment a node levels up all the nodes around it are basically permanently unable to level to max at any point.
Without open world PvP, the first players to tag the boss will always get its loot.
That's already three huge systems that get destroyed by a lack of PvP. Thankfully, this game is guaranteed to have open world PvP be meaningful, as that is a core facet of gameplay mechanics. And meaningless PvP where someone cries about someone stealing "their" farm spot is punished appropriately.
1
Options
AtamaMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
I’m a primarily PvE player who rarely dabbles in PvP, cringes at the thought of open world PvP, and can’t wait for AoC. Because the PvP has consequences and meaning. This game is the first I’ve seen that has open world PvP that I not only don’t mind, but look forward to.
Pretty much everything. Obviously sieges would likely need to be PVP but I would assume there are parameters to start the event and even a siege is pretty much opt in.
If you remove all PvP in Ashes other than sieges, you would be left with a very odd game.
First of all, they would probably be able to get rid of caravans, as the only use for them it to provide risk in relation to opening yourself up for PvP attacks. With the removal of caravans, they may as well increase inventory size in relation to raw materials.
What we have now is a game where raw materials acquisition is exactly the same as it is in every other MMO.
Then we remove the ability to attack players in the open world. This gets rid of the corruption system, which also means bounty hunters are gone as there is no one that is able to have a bounty put on them.
Then we have to figure out what to do with sieges. THere are two options here, we can keep them as an opt in only thing, or we can remove them from the game.
If we remove them from the game, then we may as well remove the node leveling mechanic from the game as well, as there is no system that is reasonably able to replace sieges in terms of a way to delevel nodes. Combined with the above changes, this would make Ashes literally exactly the same as every other MMO on the market - we have just gone through and stripped the game of what makes it different.
On the other hand, we could keep sieges in an opt in style. The problem here is that like it or not, if sieges are in the game, they will have to have consequences. Cities will be destroyed - there is no point having sieges if this is not the case.
And if this is the case, that is still leaving the most important aspect of the game in place, and it happens to be Pvp.
The issue now is that players can be playing what seems like a purely PvE game, only to find their home sieged by other players. If their city loses, it is destroyed - regardless of whether that individual player opts in or not.
At least with open PvP, there is the general notion in the game that things can happen at any point in time, so that one siege that destroys your city will be easier to shrug off.
So really, taking all PvP out of Ashes, but leaving sieges in is not an option. The game would feel off. Taking all PvP including sieges out of Ashes would leave the game as a hollow clone of any other MMO on the market.
Here's the issue, I think the vast majority of players are like you- 90% PVE and 10% PVP. I was in beta for an unreleased MMO designed in a somewhat similar way to this in terms of PVP and when the developer asked the beta testers what they were doing in the game it was like 85% PVE stuff when the game was supposed to be all about PVE.
But free PVP and PVP required events make the game ultimately most greatly impacted by PVP when the vast majority of players want to do that only occassionally or never, and almost no one other than PKers enjoy PK elements at all.
So you make the most important element of the game the biggest focus when it is the least popular activity.
I don't get it to be honest. Opt in PVP is fine but should not be forced on people. And to be honest, who says that cities even need sieges? Would seem to be incredibly fun to just build and improve a city over years of play without it all being endangered. Nodes getting enhancements and ability to go to level 6 and 7 and the like could be great features for expansions.
The issue here is that you are talking about a different game, and thus a different segment of the player base.
If that game said it was PvE focused, it would attract players that are PvE focused and PvP players would have stayed away.
On the other hand, if that game had have said it is PvP focused, players like you and I would likely have stayed away - much as I have stayed away from Crowfall.
The percentage of players in a particular game that want to PvP vs PvE is more a result of the marketing of that game than it is of anything else - and it absolutely never - in any circumstances - has any merit outside of discussions in relation to that game.
Ashes is not marketing itself as a PvE game, but rather a PvX game. This means Ashes will attract a different crowd - one that is ok with some PvP.
That may mean it isn't the game for you, but Intrepid have said before that they are not attempting to make a game to suit all MMO players, and that if you are not ok with PvP, then this game is simply not for you.
As someone who has been playing classic WoW (for like the unteenth goddamn time, but I was playing vanilla back in 2004- whenever the hell cata came out) and getting attacked randomly by people way over my level, or just by some random jerk off...yeah i'm glad the system that is in place is there. I play on pvp servers because I like pvp, if we're around the same level sure i'll smack you around and vice versa it's k...but when you're 20+ levels above me just running around killing lowbies for now reason (mostly because nothing bad happens to the attacking player)? Nah, you get the big F U head dong applied to you and a kos for your whole guild applied because of an addon. Ashes is the one game where, yeah I might get attacked but odds are I might not because of how it's setup, and i'm completely ok with that...for the first time in in forever (damn you frozen) I've found an MMO that I can officially vibe with correctly.
..and yes if you're a cowardly pker that ganks low levels for the hell of it you're toxic. >.> there is no argument there.
0
Options
NagashMember, Leader of Men, Kickstarter, Alpha One
The dead do not squabble as this land’s rulers do. The dead have no desires, petty jealousies or ambitions. A world of the dead is a world at peace
2
Options
MeowsedMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
Non-consensual PvP is not griefing. I am hoping they will "deal" with PKers by encouraging them in someway to continue PKing, such as rewarding them with loot when they successfully kill someone. I don't want to play in a boring care-bare world where nothing can ever go wrong, I can do that in every other game currently.
Never being completely safe and not knowing what happens next is what makes the world feel like a real world. A world I want to live in, because that's what an MMO is supposed to be. Somewhere along the line developers have forgotten what MMORPGs are really all about, and now only cater to the masses who are not interested in immersive, intense experiences.
I haven't been following the small details of development very closely, but so far being flagged as a criminal results in the possibility you lose some gear when dying? I also recall something about a debuff, but I'd rather see that removed. Making someone weaker in such an artificial way is a bit immersion breaking and nonsensical, I'd rather see political/gameplay penalties, like a poor reputation (either socially or mechanically enforced, or both) and difficulty accessing towns/services. This way it can be punishing for PKers, while still being fun... If I were an evil murderer, I sure as hell wouldn't mind being KoS in certain places and my life being harder for it, in-fact that sounds awesome!
PVP content needs to be completely opt in. The vast vast majority of people will be PVE only so you should not have to participate if you do not want. To be honest what the world really needs are PVE only MMOs that do not need to make any concessions for PVP. This would be a perfect title for that. PVP players tend to be the squeakiest wheel though so even though they are the vast minority they whine the hardest.
Has the direction of the game changed or something? I thought this was a full PvP open-world game. To say this is the perfect title for a 'PvE only' experience seems weird, seeing as it's the opposite of that.
PvP players tend to be the minority because games cater to larger audiences. If this game ends up having PvE opt-in then I'm seriously afraid that I've wasted my money supporting it.
If somebody starts attacking the mob
I am killing, resulting in me unwillingly sharing XP with them, I will PK them, full knowingly that I will be debuffed and then lose gear upon death
However, I and 90% of the population, wont go killing people outside city walls THANKS TO THE CORRUPTION SYSTEM.
It's a good system and Im glad it will stay.
If you find the corruption system too punishing and you want it removed, you my friend, risk being called a carebear.
Take responsibility for killing a player like a man.
Dont bother replying to people like johnysyd. They want to play a PvE mmo. They are on the wrong forums. Dont waste your time with them.
Non-consensual PvP is not griefing. I am hoping they will "deal" with PKers by encouraging them in someway to continue PKing, such as rewarding them with loot when they successfully kill someone. I don't want to play in a boring care-bare world where nothing can ever go wrong, I can do that in every other game currently.
Ganking is a trash form of pvp and it's the concept of not just killing them 1 time that makes griefing...it's over and over and over and over again. You'll get loot if they die sure in resources, but that's it. Eitherway seems Ashes isn't for you since you don't like the concept of Risk vs Reward.
Never being completely safe and not knowing what happens next is what makes the world feel like a real world. A world I want to live in, because that's what an MMO is supposed to be. Somewhere along the line developers have forgotten what MMORPGs are really all about, and now only cater to the masses who are not interested in immersive, intense experiences.
ok let me stop you right here...you really want to live in a world where you don't feel safe? Daftness aside, no one cares what you want, and the game isn't meant to be made how you want it to be but how the DEVS want it to be.
I haven't been following the small details of development very closely, but so far being flagged as a criminal results in the possibility you lose some gear when dying? I also recall something about a debuff, but I'd rather see that removed. Making someone weaker in such an artificial way is a bit immersion breaking and nonsensical, I'd rather see political/gameplay penalties, like a poor reputation (either socially or mechanically enforced, or both) and difficulty accessing towns/services. This way it can be punishing for PKers, while still being fun... If I were an evil murderer, I sure as hell wouldn't mind being KoS in certain places and my life being harder for it, in-fact that sounds awesome!
Well congratulations, we already know word of mouth is going to be a thing as it always happens. (just like how ninja looters in WoW were dealt with) Which means you're probably already not getting a political spot. You say you don't want the risk of having to deal with killing someone that will give you corruption, but then say "Well i'd like being kos cletus"....it's the same thing except with corruption if you keep being a dbag and killing people for no reason you WILL get a debuff as intended and have a chance to lose your "Newb basher of hee hee" for your troubles.
SO what you're not seeing here my dear gankarebear...is all of these things will already be part of it, even if it isn't official. Everything is there to deter assholes from being assholes for the sake of assholishness. Personally, I don't care if you like it or not, nor does anyone else here that is uptodate.
In closing, maybe Ashes isn't for you. No one cares.
0
Options
mcstackersonMember, Phoenix Initiative, Royalty, Kickstarter, Alpha One
I haven't been following the small details of development very closely, but so far being flagged as a criminal results in the possibility you lose some gear when dying? I also recall something about a debuff, but I'd rather see that removed. Making someone weaker in such an artificial way is a bit immersion breaking and nonsensical, I'd rather see political/gameplay penalties, like a poor reputation (either socially or mechanically enforced, or both) and difficulty accessing towns/services. This way it can be punishing for PKers, while still being fun... If I were an evil murderer, I sure as hell wouldn't mind being KoS in certain places and my life being harder for it, in-fact that sounds awesome!
I'm pretty sure you do get attacked by gaurds if you are corrupted but you also lose it when you die so it doesn't stick with you.
If you haven't followed the development closely then I'd recommend reading more on the system because there might be parts you are unaware of that would make you feel better about it as a whole. I'm not sure what you know and what you don't. Here is a link to the wiki page on the system Ashes pvp. I think it's also important to remember this isn't the only way to pvp in the game, it's just the most open system for it.
There is a lot of feeling out that needs to happen with the system. We can spend time guessing what will happen and trying to react to those guess but until we play the system, it won't help that much.
Non-consensual PvP is not griefing. I am hoping they will "deal" with PKers by encouraging them in someway to continue PKing, such as rewarding them with loot when they successfully kill someone. I don't want to play in a boring care-bare world where nothing can ever go wrong, I can do that in every other game currently.
Ganking is a trash form of pvp and it's the concept of not just killing them 1 time that makes griefing...it's over and over and over and over again. You'll get loot if they die sure in resources, but that's it. Eitherway seems Ashes isn't for you since you don't like the concept of Risk vs Reward.
Never being completely safe and not knowing what happens next is what makes the world feel like a real world. A world I want to live in, because that's what an MMO is supposed to be. Somewhere along the line developers have forgotten what MMORPGs are really all about, and now only cater to the masses who are not interested in immersive, intense experiences.
ok let me stop you right here...you really want to live in a world where you don't feel safe? Daftness aside, no one cares what you want, and the game isn't meant to be made how you want it to be but how the DEVS want it to be.
I haven't been following the small details of development very closely, but so far being flagged as a criminal results in the possibility you lose some gear when dying? I also recall something about a debuff, but I'd rather see that removed. Making someone weaker in such an artificial way is a bit immersion breaking and nonsensical, I'd rather see political/gameplay penalties, like a poor reputation (either socially or mechanically enforced, or both) and difficulty accessing towns/services. This way it can be punishing for PKers, while still being fun... If I were an evil murderer, I sure as hell wouldn't mind being KoS in certain places and my life being harder for it, in-fact that sounds awesome!
Well congratulations, we already know word of mouth is going to be a thing as it always happens. (just like how ninja looters in WoW were dealt with) Which means you're probably already not getting a political spot. You say you don't want the risk of having to deal with killing someone that will give you corruption, but then say "Well i'd like being kos cletus"....it's the same thing except with corruption if you keep being a dbag and killing people for no reason you WILL get a debuff as intended and have a chance to lose your "Newb basher of hee hee" for your troubles.
SO what you're not seeing here my dear gankarebear...is all of these things will already be part of it, even if it isn't official. Everything is there to deter assholes from being assholes for the sake of assholishness. Personally, I don't care if you like it or not, nor does anyone else here that is uptodate.
In closing, maybe Ashes isn't for you. No one cares.
Rude.
No, I'm pretty confident it is for me. I look forward to seeing you in game.
If somebody starts attacking the mob
I am killing, resulting in me unwillingly sharing XP with them, I will PK them, full knowingly that I will be debuffed and then lose gear upon death
However, I and 90% of the population, wont go killing people outside city walls THANKS TO THE CORRUPTION SYSTEM.
It's a good system and Im glad it will stay.
If you find the corruption system too punishing and you want it removed, you my friend, risk being called a carebear.
Take responsibility for killing a player like a man.
Dont bother replying to people like johnysyd. They want to play a PvE mmo. They are on the wrong forums. Dont waste your time with them.
Seems you've misread or misunderstood my post. I don't think corruption is too punishing or should be removed, I was just voicing an opinion about changing in what way it is punishing. The game is in alpha, and you'll find a lot of things are likely to change based on feedback.
I haven't been following the small details of development very closely, but so far being flagged as a criminal results in the possibility you lose some gear when dying? I also recall something about a debuff, but I'd rather see that removed. Making someone weaker in such an artificial way is a bit immersion breaking and nonsensical, I'd rather see political/gameplay penalties, like a poor reputation (either socially or mechanically enforced, or both) and difficulty accessing towns/services. This way it can be punishing for PKers, while still being fun... If I were an evil murderer, I sure as hell wouldn't mind being KoS in certain places and my life being harder for it, in-fact that sounds awesome!
I'm pretty sure you do get attacked by gaurds if you are corrupted but you also lose it when you die so it doesn't stick with you.
If you haven't followed the development closely then I'd recommend reading more on the system because there might be parts you are unaware of that would make you feel better about it as a whole. I'm not sure what you know and what you don't. Here is a link to the wiki page on the system Ashes pvp. I think it's also important to remember this isn't the only way to pvp in the game, it's just the most open system for it.
There is a lot of feeling out that needs to happen with the system. We can spend time guessing what will happen and trying to react to those guess but until we play the system, it won't help that much.
Comments
Once again, no one is entitled to a farming spot. If you want them to go somewhere else, fight them. If they want to keep their stuff they’ll fight back and defend it. If they don’t care, then maybe you should consider they might not have much worth defending.
You can always defend yourself, you can always harass them, as long as you don’t kill them you don’t get corruption.
If you see someone going about their business and all you wanna do is kill them and steal their stuff, maybe those assumptions aren’t off base at all.
PvPers will have plenty of opportunities for fair and meaningful fighting. PKers generally don’t want either of those and that’s why they’re generally labeled as toxic.
PK players are toxic.
Edit to add, those PK'ers that either don't realize they are toxic, or try to blame others for toxicity are easily the worst.
Why would someone laugh at you while they are harvesting? That makes absolutely no sense.
The vast majority of mmos have always had a heavier pve tilt or have shifted to this over time. PvP is either an after thought, or something that you can easily avoid. Opt in pvp has little weight, and is completely antithetical to the idea of an open world where things matter. PvP can be tricky to design, to take into acount the human element, while PvE is by comparison, easy. And no, as they have been from day one stating this will be a PvX game, it is not the perfect title for that.
Not everyone has fun in the same way, and if the punishment is high for killing and you have the option to defend yourself, it seems fair to me, I consider a toxic person who does not let you play, if I kill you once I achieve the objective and I leave , and for this reason you consider me toxic ... well I will be toxic friend, but the pveplayer who steals your mines is the same for me.
Over the last 20 years or so, my time in MMO's is probably split about 90% PvE, 10% PvP.
That is about as much PvP as I would chose to be involved in.
With that in mind, this game without PvP simply won't function. This isn't like taking PvP out of a game like WoW, because the PvP hete is actually intergral and essential to the game as a whole.
Taking PvP out of Ashes is more like taking the ability for player characters in WoW to move - in both cases, the game will be left as an unplayable mess.
I'm not sure which parts of the game you think would make Ashes "a perfect title" for a PvE only title, but as someone that far prefers PvE over PvP, I can tell you that it wouldn't.
Pretty much everything. Obviously sieges would likely need to be PVP but I would assume there are parameters to start the event and even a siege is pretty much opt in.
Here's the issue, I think the vast majority of players are like you- 90% PVE and 10% PVP. I was in beta for an unreleased MMO designed in a somewhat similar way to this in terms of PVP and when the developer asked the beta testers what they were doing in the game it was like 85% PVE stuff when the game was supposed to be all about PVE.
But free PVP and PVP required events make the game ultimately most greatly impacted by PVP when the vast majority of players want to do that only occassionally or never, and almost no one other than PKers enjoy PK elements at all.
So you make the most important element of the game the biggest focus when it is the least popular activity.
I don't get it to be honest. Opt in PVP is fine but should not be forced on people. And to be honest, who says that cities even need sieges? Would seem to be incredibly fun to just build and improve a city over years of play without it all being endangered. Nodes getting enhancements and ability to go to level 6 and 7 and the like could be great features for expansions.
It sounds like this really won't be the game for you then. Opt in pvp is meaningless pvp. If you know there is no chance of being attacked, there is no tension, less excitement, and generally, you engage with the game and community less. And if the nodes could all become metros, what would be the point. Who cares about growing your node eventually it'll get there. Why flock to a particular place, everywhere is functionally the same. You eventually get a stagnant, dead world with everyone who still plays doing the newest pve content repeatedly until new content comes out.
PvP shouldn't be without consequence to be sure, there are too many assholes about for that, and in my opinion this is also a form of meaningless pvp. But to want another content type to be relegated to a place it can never effect you solely on the basis that you don't like it seems a little backward.
There are harvesting locations everywhere. If you start harvesting first, you get the harvest. How hard is that to comprehend? Move to the left 10 feet, probably something else to harvest.
The fact that you think the only proper response is to kill the other person rather than improving yourself, or just cooperating, just reinforces the negative stereotype about PK players.
(By the way, I think your English skills are perfectly fine, if it’s not your first language I am impressed.)
And yes it is absolutely true. If you are being predated upon, perhaps in travel, or while farming, you group up, you hire some form of 'guard' group, you engage with your team, however that manifests in a game (faction, city, guild) to protect areas, or retaliate against the aggressors. You compete, you innovate, and stories and drama are made. This is the heart of engaging game play. Compare this with you running down the same path willy nilly because there is literally nothing you need worry about.
As to PvP or PvE servers, i personally don't care, especially if they are created to adequately house a proper server population. But there are titles in which this just won't work. ESO for example, or any title with a 'megaserver', also any game that at it's core encourages any form of open world pvp. It's baked into too many systems at that point.
Also again, you assume the vast majority of people solely enjoy PvE and abhor PvP. I'd say you're in the minority with that opinion. It seems most people enjoy both to some degree, with a tilt toward the PvE side.
Open world PvP is not going anywhere, so make up your mind in what you want to do, rather than changing the core nature of this game.
I love PvP, and when I was playing FFXIV, not once did I complain that it didnt had PvP. When I grew tired of it I left it for BDO.
The world doesnt need to comply to your tantrums.
Caravans are now zero-risk time sinks.
Without node sieges, the moment a node levels up all the nodes around it are basically permanently unable to level to max at any point.
Without open world PvP, the first players to tag the boss will always get its loot.
That's already three huge systems that get destroyed by a lack of PvP. Thankfully, this game is guaranteed to have open world PvP be meaningful, as that is a core facet of gameplay mechanics. And meaningless PvP where someone cries about someone stealing "their" farm spot is punished appropriately.
First of all, they would probably be able to get rid of caravans, as the only use for them it to provide risk in relation to opening yourself up for PvP attacks. With the removal of caravans, they may as well increase inventory size in relation to raw materials.
What we have now is a game where raw materials acquisition is exactly the same as it is in every other MMO.
Then we remove the ability to attack players in the open world. This gets rid of the corruption system, which also means bounty hunters are gone as there is no one that is able to have a bounty put on them.
Then we have to figure out what to do with sieges. THere are two options here, we can keep them as an opt in only thing, or we can remove them from the game.
If we remove them from the game, then we may as well remove the node leveling mechanic from the game as well, as there is no system that is reasonably able to replace sieges in terms of a way to delevel nodes. Combined with the above changes, this would make Ashes literally exactly the same as every other MMO on the market - we have just gone through and stripped the game of what makes it different.
On the other hand, we could keep sieges in an opt in style. The problem here is that like it or not, if sieges are in the game, they will have to have consequences. Cities will be destroyed - there is no point having sieges if this is not the case.
And if this is the case, that is still leaving the most important aspect of the game in place, and it happens to be Pvp.
The issue now is that players can be playing what seems like a purely PvE game, only to find their home sieged by other players. If their city loses, it is destroyed - regardless of whether that individual player opts in or not.
At least with open PvP, there is the general notion in the game that things can happen at any point in time, so that one siege that destroys your city will be easier to shrug off.
So really, taking all PvP out of Ashes, but leaving sieges in is not an option. The game would feel off. Taking all PvP including sieges out of Ashes would leave the game as a hollow clone of any other MMO on the market. The issue here is that you are talking about a different game, and thus a different segment of the player base.
If that game said it was PvE focused, it would attract players that are PvE focused and PvP players would have stayed away.
On the other hand, if that game had have said it is PvP focused, players like you and I would likely have stayed away - much as I have stayed away from Crowfall.
The percentage of players in a particular game that want to PvP vs PvE is more a result of the marketing of that game than it is of anything else - and it absolutely never - in any circumstances - has any merit outside of discussions in relation to that game.
Ashes is not marketing itself as a PvE game, but rather a PvX game. This means Ashes will attract a different crowd - one that is ok with some PvP.
That may mean it isn't the game for you, but Intrepid have said before that they are not attempting to make a game to suit all MMO players, and that if you are not ok with PvP, then this game is simply not for you.
There honestly isn't a whole lot more to be said.
..and yes if you're a cowardly pker that ganks low levels for the hell of it you're toxic. >.> there is no argument there.
Never being completely safe and not knowing what happens next is what makes the world feel like a real world. A world I want to live in, because that's what an MMO is supposed to be. Somewhere along the line developers have forgotten what MMORPGs are really all about, and now only cater to the masses who are not interested in immersive, intense experiences.
I haven't been following the small details of development very closely, but so far being flagged as a criminal results in the possibility you lose some gear when dying? I also recall something about a debuff, but I'd rather see that removed. Making someone weaker in such an artificial way is a bit immersion breaking and nonsensical, I'd rather see political/gameplay penalties, like a poor reputation (either socially or mechanically enforced, or both) and difficulty accessing towns/services. This way it can be punishing for PKers, while still being fun... If I were an evil murderer, I sure as hell wouldn't mind being KoS in certain places and my life being harder for it, in-fact that sounds awesome!
Has the direction of the game changed or something? I thought this was a full PvP open-world game. To say this is the perfect title for a 'PvE only' experience seems weird, seeing as it's the opposite of that.
PvP players tend to be the minority because games cater to larger audiences. If this game ends up having PvE opt-in then I'm seriously afraid that I've wasted my money supporting it.
If somebody starts attacking the mob
I am killing, resulting in me unwillingly sharing XP with them, I will PK them, full knowingly that I will be debuffed and then lose gear upon death
However, I and 90% of the population, wont go killing people outside city walls THANKS TO THE CORRUPTION SYSTEM.
It's a good system and Im glad it will stay.
If you find the corruption system too punishing and you want it removed, you my friend, risk being called a carebear.
Take responsibility for killing a player like a man.
Dont bother replying to people like johnysyd. They want to play a PvE mmo. They are on the wrong forums. Dont waste your time with them.
ok let me stop you right here...you really want to live in a world where you don't feel safe? Daftness aside, no one cares what you want, and the game isn't meant to be made how you want it to be but how the DEVS want it to be.
Well congratulations, we already know word of mouth is going to be a thing as it always happens. (just like how ninja looters in WoW were dealt with) Which means you're probably already not getting a political spot. You say you don't want the risk of having to deal with killing someone that will give you corruption, but then say "Well i'd like being kos cletus"....it's the same thing except with corruption if you keep being a dbag and killing people for no reason you WILL get a debuff as intended and have a chance to lose your "Newb basher of hee hee" for your troubles.
SO what you're not seeing here my dear gankarebear...is all of these things will already be part of it, even if it isn't official. Everything is there to deter assholes from being assholes for the sake of assholishness. Personally, I don't care if you like it or not, nor does anyone else here that is uptodate.
In closing, maybe Ashes isn't for you. No one cares.
I'm pretty sure you do get attacked by gaurds if you are corrupted but you also lose it when you die so it doesn't stick with you.
If you haven't followed the development closely then I'd recommend reading more on the system because there might be parts you are unaware of that would make you feel better about it as a whole. I'm not sure what you know and what you don't. Here is a link to the wiki page on the system Ashes pvp. I think it's also important to remember this isn't the only way to pvp in the game, it's just the most open system for it.
There is a lot of feeling out that needs to happen with the system. We can spend time guessing what will happen and trying to react to those guess but until we play the system, it won't help that much.
Rude.
No, I'm pretty confident it is for me. I look forward to seeing you in game.
Seems you've misread or misunderstood my post. I don't think corruption is too punishing or should be removed, I was just voicing an opinion about changing in what way it is punishing. The game is in alpha, and you'll find a lot of things are likely to change based on feedback.
Thanks, checking it out. You're right, looks good!
Here is another link https://www.ashes101.com/pvp#corruption with some good info.