corruption scenario

I was wondering what would happen in the case of this: player A is not flagged for PvP
player A gets attacked by player B, B stop attacking before A is dead and A never attacks back, but leaves A in a bad state. Now a few seconds after B stops player C comes along and kills player A. Would B and C get corruption or just C?

or in another case un-flagged player A gets attacked by 3 other players, A dies, do the three that attacked get corruption, or just the one who landed the killing blow?

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

phdmonster

From what i understand only C should get corruption as they delivered the killing blow. At least that's what makes sense, but we don't have all the details for the corruption system yet.

There are details about it that we will find out during testing.

GreatThodric

Nexmagus wrote: »

I was wondering what would happen in the case of this: player A is not flagged for PvP
player A gets attacked by player B, B stop attacking before A is dead and A never attacks back, but leaves A in a bad state. Now a few seconds after B stops player C comes along and kills player A. Would B and C get corruption or just C?

or in another case un-flagged player A gets attacked by 3 other players, A dies, do the three that attacked get corruption, or just the one who landed the killing blow?

From what I understood is that as soon as you engage a player in PVP, no matter if they attack you or not, you mark yourself as a Combatant. I think that means that you get corruption as soon as you engage in PVP, but you probably get more corruption if you kill someone who doesn't fight back. So in your scenario, I'd give a bit of corruption to the instigator, but much more corruption to the one landing the killing blow.

phdmonster

GreatThodric wrote: »

Nexmagus wrote: »

I was wondering what would happen in the case of this: player A is not flagged for PvP
player A gets attacked by player B, B stop attacking before A is dead and A never attacks back, but leaves A in a bad state. Now a few seconds after B stops player C comes along and kills player A. Would B and C get corruption or just C?

or in another case un-flagged player A gets attacked by 3 other players, A dies, do the three that attacked get corruption, or just the one who landed the killing blow?

From what I understood is that as soon as you engage a player in PVP, no matter if they attack you or not, you mark yourself as a Combatant. I think that means that you get corruption as soon as you engage in PVP, but you probably get more corruption if you kill someone who doesn't fight back. So in your scenario, I'd give a bit of corruption to the instigator, but much more corruption to the one landing the killing blow.

You get corruption only if you kill someone. If you do not kill another player there is no corruption.

rodzor

Killing blow only counts, purple flag if you do damage and not kill.

rodzor

rodzor wrote: »

Killing blow only counts, purple flag if you do damage and not kill.

I assume that will also be the case if a monster kills you and the player only gets you low.

Lazyactor

I think I would want to see a formula for dividing the penalties among those that attacked a player. If its three VS one should they not all get corruption? Working towards a shared goal it seems fair. You cant just beat a man severely and claim innocence when your partner cuts his throat. I just beat him a little I didnt kill em. That doesn't make sense to me. Also I think its worth discussing what the community thinks is fair for healers when gaining corruption. Sure you might not of did any damage but if you provide buffs or heals to those who did should you gain corruption to? How much would be fair? I think we should discuss these things.

Songcaller

I would leave group if I'm forced into a situation where I could become corrupted. If I'm not an active combatant I would expect not to be corrupted. As Bard is the Buff class then buffs are to do with bards. Yet, if you think someone who is killing a green (Who doesn't fight back) needs a heal you'd be wrong.

Daiska

I think it's pretty important that all participants who damage a green who ultimately dies, or assist someone killing them, get the corruption. If they don't, it could get pretty ugly. I'm also concerned with how a person can become un-corrupted simply by standing there while someone else (a buddy who keeps themselves green) kills them. People will game this.

Songcaller

Daiska wrote: »

I think it's pretty important that all participants who damage a green who ultimately dies, or assist someone killing them, get the corruption. If they don't, it could get pretty ugly. I'm also concerned with how a person can become un-corrupted simply by standing there while someone else kills them. People will game this.

'If thou chooses a complicated system, thou should expect complications.' Its my new mantra every time corruption is brought up. Corruption is brought up so often I feel trapped in a time warp.

Nexmagus

I think there should be a penalty for attacking and not killing. Suppose I am off in the wilds fighting some creature which I would normally kill. Another player comes by and attacks me and reduces my health close to 0 but does not kill me, at this point the creature would likely finish me off. This could be used as a form of griefing

Noaani

If this or things like this become an issue, Intrepid could quite easily make it so that you gain corruption if a player dies within 5 seconds (or how ever long they decide) of you last attacking them.

There is no need for a penalty for attacking. The fact that you become a combatant is probably enough.

HazardNumberSeven

There is no penalty for attacking except becoming a combatant. PvP is a part of this game and punishing people for playing the game as it was intended to be played is a system that wouldn't make much sense.

There will no doubt be some sort of cool-down or shared mechanic to prevent people gaming the system. The truth is the devs have had years to plan out this system and find ways to game and exploit it, but until there is an actual testbed for them to make tweaks to, they can't. Corruption isn't the part of the game they're up to fiddling with yet, but rest assured when they are they won't allow gaming of it. The system is there to prevent griefing, not PvP. It will be adjusted so that it succeeds in preventing griefing if it needs to be adjusted.

TSG

Nexmagus wrote: »

I think there should be a penalty for attacking and not killing. Suppose I am off in the wilds fighting some creature which I would normally kill. Another player comes by and attacks me and reduces my health close to 0 but does not kill me, at this point the creature would likely finish me off. This could be used as a form of griefing

The penalty is that you become a target for corrupted pkers as they do not gain more corruption from killing combatants.

Xrael

Nexmagus wrote: »

I think there should be a penalty for attacking and not killing. Suppose I am off in the wilds fighting some creature which I would normally kill. Another player comes by and attacks me and reduces my health close to 0 but does not kill me, at this point the creature would likely finish me off. This could be used as a form of griefing

I've mentioned this before. We just have to wait and see. They will test the corruption system heavily and tune it so that griefers are punished accordingly.

Xrael

They might wanna disable open world pvp in starting areas as well. Otherwise it will be a massive **** fest.

Ventharien

CaptainChuck wrote: »

They might wanna disable open world pvp in starting areas as well. Otherwise it will be a massive **** fest.

Probably. But that would be a great mechanic for pushing people out into the world and away from the crazy. Plus i believe there are "settlements" outside the four divine gateways to get some of your first quests and direction. One would assume these will have guards around them.

SSRogue

CaptainChuck wrote: »

Nexmagus wrote: »

I think there should be a penalty for attacking and not killing. Suppose I am off in the wilds fighting some creature which I would normally kill. Another player comes by and attacks me and reduces my health close to 0 but does not kill me, at this point the creature would likely finish me off. This could be used as a form of griefing

I've mentioned this before. We just have to wait and see. They will test the corruption system heavily and tune it so that griefers are punished accordingly.

Like someone mentioned above, griefing doesn't prevent PvP so the corruption system already prevents it a lot. There will be plenty of people fighting each other back and forth outside of allowed circumstances because they enjoy PvP, but even a sad person can only kill a player standing there so many times until they just get bored or so corrupted that u can sneeze on them and they die, and then has to spend ALL that time getting rid of corruption. Sadly there will a few very pathetic people who will do this a few times but the devs made it very unfun for them and they will just go onto the other real PvP combat situations.

B1uefalc0n

No one is going to actually care about saving their gear if they want to have some corruption fun killing everyone on sight. They will simply wear a lesser set of gear from the get-go and bank anything worth keeping and then go out to the serial killer playground that is the open world. No one will intentionally become corrupted while wearing their best gear and weapons

Noaani

B1uefalc0n wrote: »

No one is going to actually care about saving their gear if they want to have some corruption fun killing everyone on sight. They will simply wear a lesser set of gear from the get-go and bank anything worth keeping and then go out to the serial killer playground that is the open world. No one will intentionally become corrupted while wearing their best gear and weapons

This is probably true.

But it is worth keeping in mind that this rampage they are going on is going to see them get progressively weaker as they kill more and more players, and earn more and more experience debt as they lose that corruption.

That experience debt is the real penalty, not the gear loss.

grisu

I would assume in ops scenario that both get corruption. You are in active combat and participated.
and before anyone says "well you could just keep him low and prevent him from healing up" keep in mind we won't have % indicator that tell you exactly how low someone is, so you could kill "by accident".

Think about it also from this angle. What if someone is already fighting a mob and you come in attacking this non-flagged player. Do you really think that if the npc gets the killing blow, you are spared from becoming corrupted? That would be a bold assumption. You actively participated in his downfall.

Child Item