Early backer feedback - non-consensual griefing and "caravan PVP" is a hard NO for me

Just feedback from someone who backed you early. I never signed up for non-consensual PvP griefing. I never signed up for "caravan PvP". How on Earth could you be repeating these fundamental mistakes from earlier MMOs? The caravan PvP system in ArcheAge, for example, drove thousands of us away (or kept us away in the first place). And the various karma/corruption/etc. systems to somehow limit non-consensual open world griefing? It NEVER works. It is ALWAYS gamed by certain players. It RUINS the experience of PvE players.

No thanks. It's your game, you can do what you want, but I'm out. And you are setting yourself up to fail in the marketplace.

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

TPOTK1NG

You don't have to use the caravan system. It's there for you as a high risk but high reward system. You can greatly increase the value of your materials by transporting them to a different node or just take a small profit in whatever city you're currently situated in.

arsnn

I couldnt agree less with your statements and i hope intrepid wont butcher the game for a vocal minority.
New world seems to be suiting better to your preferences.

JamesSunderland

It may be hard for you to accept but, Ashes of Creation was never supposed to be a PvE only Carebear's paradise, even with the extremaly punishing Corruption system(even more punishing than the lineage 2 PK system it comes from) people will still PK, the majority of MMORPG players wants PvP open world and the Caravan System would be meaningless without PvP for the sense of High Risk High Reward.

darthaden

Did you forget to read up on the game you backed before backing it? The caravan system was a known system before the kickstarter. If your that against it though you could always simply focus on crafting and buy your mats. If you get some rare recipes I'd assume y ou u could make a good living as a crafter without ever having to deal with caravans

phdmonster

Tsukasa wrote: »

Lincoln Hawk wrote: »

I also think alot of you guys are overestimating just how many players are going to be ganking everyone they see.

Wrong, Caravans create PvP zone, where players automatically become combatants. There is absolutely nothing to lose from attacking a caravan. NO CORRUPTION.
Hate? Guild drama? Bring it on.

It sounds horrible but in Archeage, trade runs were the main source of gold. It's a joke, because you can choose to do it without risks or PvP!

Repeating boring trade runs for their efficiency was one of the reasons I quit Archeage.

You do not automatically become a combatant, you can choose to attack the caravan, defend it or pass on the free of corruption PvP (which IMO is the most boring choice, but that's just me).

Xrael

yokai wrote: »

Just feedback from someone who backed you early. I never signed up for non-consensual PvP griefing. I never signed up for "caravan PvP". How on Earth could you be repeating these fundamental mistakes from earlier MMOs? The caravan PvP system in ArcheAge, for example, drove thousands of us away (or kept us away in the first place). And the various karma/corruption/etc. systems to somehow limit non-consensual open world griefing? It NEVER works. It is ALWAYS gamed by certain players. It RUINS the experience of PvE players.

No thanks. It's your game, you can do what you want, but I'm out. And you are setting yourself up to fail in the marketplace.

Relax bro. The game isnt even out yet. There is still a LOT of room for change. If the corruption system turns out to be abused by griefers, the developers will adjust it accordingly. They listen to community feedback. No one likes being griefed by higher level players so you're not alone. Steven doesn't want to force pvp. He just wants to create some soft friction in the world, that's all.

Also when a player commits a pk, it tpes them to elsewhere on the map. Because distance matters in this game, this prevents them from pking u repeatedly. So this sets AoC apart from BDO and ArcheAge in that regard and might be enough to prevent griefing to some extent.

Talents

Oh boy it's another "PvP bad wahh" post, very original and creative.

George_Black

Talents wrote: »

Oh boy it's another "PvP bad wahh" post, very original and creative.

It was very original and creative!
First time I see a person backing a game financially without paying attentions to the games details.

akabear

yokai wrote: »

I heard the same glad-hand arguments in favor of PvPers in ArcheAge, in Black Desert, and in countless other MMOs by now. It just doesn't work. When you design a game with non-consensual PvP of any sort, griefing and exploits *always* happen. And there are a lot of potential players who want nothing to do with it.

I hear what you are saying. The system being proposed is similar to the Lineage 2 model. This largely worked.
There were occasionally players that abused the system, as there will be in an game. Those players ran large risks and some fell very hard when karma came around. Having "villans" in the game sometimes adds to the atmosphere, sometimes an annoyance.

But there were times that the system was useful, even for the most passive pve groups.

Take for example, you take 20-30min to assemble your party, you then take 20-30min to venture deep into a dungeon with the plan to XP for a few hours. Then 10min in, another group starts playing in the same spot. Do you keep playing together at half the potential the space will benefit. Do you suspend your playing until the group goes away, waiting 2-3hrs by which time most of your own party wants to log off. Do you engage in endless dialogue to no avail. Or do you decide as a team, after all else has failed, to kill them so you can keep playing?

How about the raid on a signifincant boss. Your groups have been fight for close to an hour and the boss is about to die and another group come in to take the kill and potentially all the loot.

How about the player that for what ever reason just come along to annoy you, killing every mob just as you were about to for the sport of the irate chat conversation they might elicit.

These are where I see the corruption system benefits even the most die hard PVE`er.

Just a thought

Aardvark

akabear wrote: »

yokai wrote: »

I heard the same glad-hand arguments in favor of PvPers in ArcheAge, in Black Desert, and in countless other MMOs by now. It just doesn't work. When you design a game with non-consensual PvP of any sort, griefing and exploits *always* happen. And there are a lot of potential players who want nothing to do with it.

I hear what you are saying. The system being proposed is similar to the Lineage 2 model. This largely worked.
There were occasionally players that abused the system, as there will be in an game. Those players ran large risks and some fell very hard when karma came around. Having "villans" in the game sometimes adds to the atmosphere, sometimes an annoyance.

But there were times that the system was useful, even for the most passive pve groups.

Take for example, you take 20-30min to assemble your party, you then take 20-30min to venture deep into a dungeon with the plan to XP for a few hours. Then 10min in, another group starts playing in the same spot. Do you keep playing together at half the potential the space will benefit. Do you suspend your playing until the group goes away, waiting 2-3hrs by which time most of your own party wants to log off. Do you engage in endless dialogue to no avail. Or do you decide as a team, after all else has failed, to kill them so you can keep playing?

How about the raid on a signifincant boss. Your groups have been fight for close to an hour and the boss is about to die and another group come in to take the kill and potentially all the loot.

How about the player that for what ever reason just come along to annoy you, killing every mob just as you were about to for the sport of the irate chat conversation they might elicit.

These are where I see the corruption system benefits even the most die hard PVE`er.

Just a thought

Or do you make high end dungeons an instance so that won’t be an issue at all

Jahlon

yokai wrote: »

Just feedback from someone who backed you early. I never signed up for non-consensual PvP griefing. I never signed up for "caravan PvP". How on Earth could you be repeating these fundamental mistakes from earlier MMOs? The caravan PvP system in ArcheAge, for example, drove thousands of us away (or kept us away in the first place). And the various karma/corruption/etc. systems to somehow limit non-consensual open world griefing? It NEVER works. It is ALWAYS gamed by certain players. It RUINS the experience of PvE players.

No thanks. It's your game, you can do what you want, but I'm out. And you are setting yourself up to fail in the marketplace.

You actually did sign up for non-consensual PvP.

Its been known since the kickstarter that there would be a flagging system and open world PvP.

Also, its a nice opinion to have, but they aren't setting themselves up for failure. The majority of people are ok with the flagging system, the gankers want a few things changed.

If Ashes doesn't work out, there is always Pantheon.

And this is why Steven has Said Ashes won't be for everyone.

Looty

My question here is.. who are the caravan’s intended for? If a small group of players need to do these caravans to progress or are they only really needed for large groups of people?

If the small groups of people are needed to do these caravans do they come with some sort of NPC guards as well, so there has to be a threshold of people attaching to defeat the caravan? If it’s just who ever is sending it then it’s like just throwing around a loot bag on the floor to another location hoping people won’t take it..

If it’s Only required for large groups of people, like guilds etc, I don’t really see a problem..

tugowar

@yokai did u buy a kickstarter pack?

Lazyactor

Jahlon wrote: »

yokai wrote: »

Just feedback from someone who backed you early. I never signed up for non-consensual PvP griefing. I never signed up for "caravan PvP". How on Earth could you be repeating these fundamental mistakes from earlier MMOs? The caravan PvP system in ArcheAge, for example, drove thousands of us away (or kept us away in the first place). And the various karma/corruption/etc. systems to somehow limit non-consensual open world griefing? It NEVER works. It is ALWAYS gamed by certain players. It RUINS the experience of PvE players.

No thanks. It's your game, you can do what you want, but I'm out. And you are setting yourself up to fail in the marketplace.

You actually did sign up for non-consensual PvP.

Its been known since the kickstarter that there would be a flagging system and open world PvP.

Also, its a nice opinion to have, but they aren't setting themselves up for failure. The majority of people are ok with the flagging system, the gankers want a few things changed.

If Ashes doesn't work out, there is always Pantheon.

And this is why Steven has Said Ashes won't be for everyone.

if it wasnt obvious this guy is just an anti PvPer. Chances are he didnt even know the game existed until a day or so ago. He didnt back the game. All that happened is he watched a video of the next possible big MMO and decided he wanted to play it. But not that he wanted to play the devs version. No he is an anti PvPer. He could give two shits that the devs want PvX or you or I do or anyone else. As far as this guy is concerned if you want PvP go play call of duty. You cant reason with it. You cant explain anything to it. It gives 0 shits. All you can do is make sure that these kids dont come across as the majority that they like to.

HazardNumberSeven

People who haven't backed can post on these forums?
That's different to what I'm used to. Maybe only backers should be able to post, to prevent all these toxic threads from popping up constantly.

Khronus

Take a look at every mmo that has come out and failed. Removing PvP will destroy every single game that comes out. Look at what is happening to new world. NON STOP complaints about it on facebook groups, forums, youtube. Ganking and griefing will happen. They do need to stay on top of positive implementations to prevent these things but don't ever remove pvp.

I like how you throw in the early backer comment as if it makes your opinion more relevant than the next haha. Silly.

Lazyactor

hazardnumberseven wrote: »

People who haven't backed can post on these forums?
That's different to what I'm used to. Maybe only backers should be able to post, to prevent all these toxic threads from popping up constantly.

no sadly your moms credit card cant help you in the forums.

HazardNumberSeven

Lazyactor wrote: »

hazardnumberseven wrote: »

People who haven't backed can post on these forums?
That's different to what I'm used to. Maybe only backers should be able to post, to prevent all these toxic threads from popping up constantly.

no sadly your moms credit card cant help you in the forums.

Excuse me?

cheapthot

Nothing wrong with providing construction criticism but imagine demanding a feature before even playing the game or threatening to quit.

Are you saying you don't trust the devs to build the game you want? Are you saying that if they don't make the game exactly the way you want that you will quit the game?

Suggest changes that you want and back it up with good reasons why.

Lazyactor

hazardnumberseven wrote: »

Lazyactor wrote: »

hazardnumberseven wrote: »

People who haven't backed can post on these forums?
That's different to what I'm used to. Maybe only backers should be able to post, to prevent all these toxic threads from popping up constantly.

no sadly your moms credit card cant help you in the forums.

Excuse me?

Dont clutch your pearls just re read the post.

Child Item