We need good bad guys, a plea for a solid bounty hunter system ^-^

Hi I'll start by saying I just spent a good couple days catching up on Ashes of creation after being away for a year or so, and i am absolutely blown away. The depth and the careful thought that is being put into the game's systems gives me the good feels and reassures me that Ashes is a new breed. My only plea is to not too harshly disincentivize criminals. One of my previous favorite mmos was Archeage which had a crime system that was recently changed to be more punishing. Before, people were cautious about their crime points, but now they are overly cautious, many have stopped even bothering stealing peoples goods. The feeling of risk and reward are hardly present anymore because no one wants a full day of jailtime. The Bounty Hunter system looks like a fresh take on a crime system and i like that justice is placed in the hands of the community. I believe risk and reward should be present on both sides however. Some suggestions.

1) Bounty Hunters who are killed by Corrupted players during the bounty hunt should be penalized somehow(small loss of gear 1 or 2 pieces, and/ or loss of gold) this creates a risk for the bounty hunters and it becomes a more niche playstyle, great bounty hunters will rise to the top and develop identity

2) Since there is a risk to Bounty Hunt, it should be rewarding. Either an Npc can give a set amount of gold or items on a successful bounty(boring), or the community can pitch in gold to posted bounties of truly loathed criminals to make it more appealing to bounty hunters(exciting)

3) I'm hoping corrupted players wouldn't drop a full gearset on death, 3-4 pieces seems reasonable however

4) Griefing lowbies should be a bannable offence, just kidding, but there should be harsh crime points for killing low levels and i mean harsh, a level 50 pking a lvl 49 i have no problem with tho.

5) Corrupted players only drop gear on a bounty hunter kill

We need good bad guys, they create fun friction in mmos and add an additional playstyle path to the game for those who choose it. Too heavily punishing these players will lead to them to opt out of that playstyle because its not worth the risk. Then we have a shortage of corrupties and an oversupply of valiant warriors who would never try to steal my stuff.

So I could only come up with 5 points to add to the system and some of those are intertwined, which goes to show how well thought out these systems already are. I am so impressed by the direction of this game. You guys have done amazing work. *sending good vibes and lotsa love* i cannot wait to play ur badass game ^-^
«13

Comments

  • FuryBladeborneFuryBladeborne Member, Braver of Worlds
    The corruption system is intended to stop people from PK many others or griefing someone. It is not a reward system (such as being able to collect equipped gear from bounty hunters). It is specifically a deterrent. It is unlikely to be turned into a reward system or have the risks reduced (such as only bounty hunters can cause equipped gear to drop).

    If anything, the penalties may become more severe if the system does not deter enough people.
  • I don't think the system should reward corrupted players through looting fallen bounty hunters gear, but I do believe a risk to bounty hunters will create a barrier to entry so instead of having 1000 people willing to bounty hunt, u now have 100.

    The world is supposed to feel dangerous I imagine, if there's no threat of my goods being stolen solely because people don't want to be punished, many organic PvP interactions will never take place that would've otherwise.
  • CaerylCaeryl Member
    I don't think the system should reward corrupted players through looting fallen bounty hunters gear, but I do believe a risk to bounty hunters will create a barrier to entry so instead of having 1000 people willing to bounty hunt, u now have 100.

    The world is supposed to feel dangerous I imagine, if there's no threat of my goods being stolen solely because people don't want to be punished, many organic PvP interactions will never take place that would've otherwise.

    There cannot be any reward for corruption if the system is to function as a deterrent, which is the intent and full reason why it is so punishing. The devs do not want players to have any benefit from being corrupted
  • @Caeryl, yes absolutely; I guess what I'm trying to articulate is the desire for a system that allows corrupted players to carve out their own place in the community while remaining thoroughly ostracized and punished, if there's no corrupted players to hunt because the system is tilted too much in favor of non corruption, bounty hunters will have no bounties to hunt. An in game system will rarely be used because the deterrent is too strong.
  • CaerylCaeryl Member
    edited August 1
    @/Caeryl, yes absolutely; I guess what I'm trying to articulate is the desire for a system that allows corrupted players to carve out their own place in the community while remaining thoroughly ostracized and punished, if there's no corrupted players to hunt because the system is tilted too much in favor of non corruption, bounty hunters will have no bounties to hunt. An in game system will rarely be used because the deterrent is too strong.

    The game should in no way enable any aspect of corruption as a playstyle. It isn’t a niche, and it’s not an alternate way of play, corruption is a punishment.

    If you want a corruption friendly area, the players themselves have to make it. The game cannot and should not create any safe spaces for people who have chosen to gain corruption if it wants to have that system be an actual deterrent to griefers.
  • edited August 1
    As others have said, there appears to be a misunderstanding surrounding "Corrupt" players. Not necessarily by you, OP. Maybe by you but certainly by others. Corruption is a black spot, a Scarlet Letter, a brand, a societal mark of shame. It has never been communicated to me that this is anything other than that.

    Adding a game-play style or mechanic, relaxing sanctions, and assuredly adding a reward is counter to its foundational principle.
    "Don't be hasty."
  • leameseleamese Member, Braver of Worlds
    Liking idea nr. 2, where perhaps a 'Wanted' sign is displayed in town Square and people can pitch in money (in a pool) to intensivive punt hunters
  • JexzJexz Member
    I think the negative stats to corrupted players is over the top. I imagine there will be more bounty hunters than corrupted players. If bounty hunters can see corrupted players on the map that in it's self is a big penalty.

    But I am unaware of the capacity of corrupted players party to intervene. My assumption is bounty hunters will be flagged purple so anyone grouped with the corrupted player will be able to defend them with out penalty.
  • As others have said, there appears to be a misunderstanding surrounding "Corrupt" players. Not necessarily by you, OP. Maybe by you but certainly by others. Corruption is a black spot, a Scarlet Letter, a brand, a societal mark of shame. It has never been communicated to me that this is anything other than that.

    Adding a game-play style or mechanic, relaxing sanctions, and assuredly adding a reward is counter to its foundational principle.

    the societal mark of shame is real and I'm totally for it, criminals should be hunted, should be hated, should be punished by in game systems, should be punished by players. If the system makes in game life unliveable and unrewarding for criminals however, no one will become a criminal, and the complex system means nothing because you could've saved time and given caravans an immunity buff to get a similar result
  • There will definitely be pk guilds which will gank ppl around the map. And just because economic is very important in the game people will just naturally make enemies, like they do irl. And for the 3) they drop only 1 piece of equipment
  • SSRogueSSRogue Member
    edited August 1
    As others have said, there appears to be a misunderstanding surrounding "Corrupt" players. Not necessarily by you, OP. Maybe by you but certainly by others. Corruption is a black spot, a Scarlet Letter, a brand, a societal mark of shame. It has never been communicated to me that this is anything other than that.

    Adding a game-play style or mechanic, relaxing sanctions, and assuredly adding a reward is counter to its foundational principle.

    the societal mark of shame is real and I'm totally for it, criminals should be hunted, should be hated, should be punished by in game systems, should be punished by players. If the system makes in game life unliveable and unrewarding for criminals however, no one will become a criminal, and the complex system means nothing because you could've saved time and given caravans an immunity buff to get a similar result

    So many people who comment on these threads who are so clearly anti pvp with "NEVER REWARD CORRUPTION" are so jaded by the potential. The devs came up with a bounty system, so they reward players for hunting corrupted players yet corrupted players can defend themselves without gaining more corruption thus creating a new way to play with in game mechanics designed as intended. With so many different ways to play this game, lets constructively discuss expanding this system. You now have corrupted guy vs bounty hunter, this is a system in-game, now less flush this out. Do not read any further if you are not going to be corrupted or if you or not going to be a bounty hunter because this is not affecting you in any way. Yes do not reward or condone the killing of unwilling participants but let's talk about a bounty hunter vs a corrupted player who did not pk low-level unwilling participants.

    You have a bounty system that can reward good bounty hunters, well that can't exist unless you have famous outlaws right? Again, this is for a conversation on how to make this system work and not for people not interested in it.
  • Beateerr wrote: »
    There will definitely be pk guilds which will gank ppl around the map. And just because economic is very important in the game people will just naturally make enemies, like they do irl. And for the 3) they drop only 1 piece of equipment

    I've been bad b4, that punishment is too light hehe ;)
  • Only corrupted players should be allowed to enter Thieve's guild! Yeah I said it.
  • Over1anderOver1ander Member, Braver of Worlds
    1) Bounty Hunters who are killed by Corrupted players during the bounty hunt should be penalized somehow(small loss of gear 1 or 2 pieces, and/ or loss of gold) this creates a risk for the bounty hunters and it becomes a more niche playstyle, great bounty hunters will rise to the top and develop identity

    2) Since there is a risk to Bounty Hunt, it should be rewarding. Either an Npc can give a set amount of gold or items on a successful bounty(boring), or the community can pitch in gold to posted bounties of truly loathed criminals to make it more appealing to bounty hunters(exciting)

    3) I'm hoping corrupted players wouldn't drop a full gearset on death, 3-4 pieces seems reasonable however

    4) Griefing lowbies should be a bannable offence, just kidding, but there should be harsh crime points for killing low levels and i mean harsh, a level 50 pking a lvl 49 i have no problem with tho.

    5) Corrupted players only drop gear on a bounty hunter kill

    Hmmmm,

    1. Bounty Hunters should not share the same Risks as corrupted players, maybe a slap on the wrist or reduced bounty if killed by your bounty.

    2. With the system expressed by AoC in mind there won't be a risk for the hunters, just a way to keep the corrupted in their place. So High rewards shouldn't be a thing either.

    3. Corrupted players will "Maybe" drop a piece on death I can imagine a 20% chance to drop a piece at near max corruption, just due to the amount of people on a server (10k).

    4. Sure, take level and gearscore into consideration when flagging on characters and scale the corruption points based on how much of a bully one is.

    5. On the fence with this one, Maybe have a reduced chance to drop gear depending on how many people are involved with your death. Each person that hits you, heals the person that hits you, buffs the person, etc. should be taken into account if possible. And just reduced the chance to drop gear down to 1% if applicable.

    Maybe a 50% chance to drop gear on death by bounty hunter, 20% by a random solo player, which can be reduced down to 1% if more players are added to the equation.
  • @Over1ander I like ur number 5 :)
  • SSRogueSSRogue Member
    edited August 2
    Over1ander wrote: »

    Hmmmm,

    1. Bounty Hunters should not share the same Risks as corrupted players, maybe a slap on the wrist or reduced bounty if killed by your bounty.

    2. With the system expressed by AoC in mind there won't be a risk for the hunters, just a way to keep the corrupted in their place. So High rewards shouldn't be a thing either.

    3. Corrupted players will "Maybe" drop a piece on death I can imagine a 20% chance to drop a piece at near max corruption, just due to the amount of people on a server (10k).

    4. Sure, take level and gearscore into consideration when flagging on characters and scale the corruption points based on how much of a bully one is.

    5. On the fence with this one, Maybe have a reduced chance to drop gear depending on how many people are involved with your death. Each person that hits you, heals the person that hits you, buffs the person, etc. should be taken into account if possible. And just reduced the chance to drop gear down to 1% if applicable.

    Maybe a 50% chance to drop gear on death by a bounty hunter, 20% by a random solo player, which can be reduced down to 1% if more players are added to the equation.

    I think bounty hunting should be promoted more and rewarded. If a player goes corrupted there is no fun in fighting unwilling people we want to fight small scale wars like an old west bank heist crew vs a sheriff and his posse. If a bounty hunter wanted to go up against someone willingly being corrupted then they should be rewarded because that person will fight back because they can and they must defend themselves. I also believe that in this one situation as a corrupted person vs a bounty hunter then the corrupted person who chooses to fight back and fend off several bounty attempts should be rewarded with something ffs. It's a built-in mechanic that allows a situation for consensual pvp between a known bad guy and a known good guy. The more bounty hunters a bad guy kills, he should have a higher price on his head and maybe if he survives for x amount of attempts maybe give him a title or a little pet or something. Why not explore this system between the two consensual participants while still heavily penalizing any griefing or big level gap pking. U can have honest bad guys who aren't running the game for people that is outside of big-scale guild war and city raids.
  • Over1anderOver1ander Member, Braver of Worlds
    edited August 2
    @SSRogue

    I hard disagree because the player base will be too high, the only situations what you suggesting with the bank heist vs sheriff only works in situations where RP rules are in place, GTA RP servers comes to mind. The bounty system will only be a way for players to self regulate themselves without constant attention from GM's. When you start putting things like Good vs Bad it just sounds like faction PvP.

    Also bounty hunters aren't good guys, they're bounty hunters, they hunt corrupted for bounties not justice. There's no honest bad guys if you initiate an attack in cold blood for financial gain or emotional gain you are corrupted.
    SSRogue wrote: »
    If a bounty hunter wanted to go up against someone willingly being corrupted then they should be rewarded because that person will fight back because they can and they must defend themselves. I also believe that in this one situation as a corrupted person vs a bounty hunter then the corrupted person who chooses to fight back and fend off several bounty attempts should be rewarded with something ffs.

    You're contradicting yourself here with "they can and they must defend themselves" and "the corrupted person who chooses to fight back", can't have both.

  • SSRogueSSRogue Member
    edited August 2
    Over1ander wrote: »
    @SSRogue

    I hard disagree because the player base will be too high

    You have every right to disagree, the game isn't out and isn't finished. We will truly never know unless we get to test it out, therefore it is all just discussion of which ideas are born.



    Over1ander wrote: »
    @SSRogue

    You're contradicting yourself here with "they can and they must defend themselves" and "the corrupted person who chooses to fight back", can't have both.

    No, not really... Player A (corrupted) and Player B (bounty hunter). Player B is attacking player A because it is an allowed system and is promoted for B to hunt A, but player A can freely attack B with no further penality, therefore, is incentivized to do so if he/she desires to obtain said title for being a corrupted player or just wants to stay corrupted just enough to be a known villain character but not a dick that keeps killing innocents and gets heavily corrupted. In this situation, everything is already in the game as an actual option besides my hypothetical title reword for a bad guy questline that asks you to do x things to prove you are bad. So by me saying that Player A can and should defend themselves is not a contradiction. It is all relative to the situation. If player A accidentally became corrupted they would most likely run from player B or just let player B kill them. In this situation player A wants player B to come around and wants to fight them and enjoys it and player B loved being able to hunt player A and they go back and forth and it becomes a fun cat and mouse game not messing with anyone else and if player A kills player B enough times then he is just better.
  • 3am3am Member
    I can 100% attest to the fact that no matter what you put in people's way they will still go corrupt. A lot of the systems and pvp systems in the game are nearly identical to an older game called Silk Road Online (outdated but check it out). Loss of gear, loss of experience(wish this was included), being hunted, caravans and the like. Don't worry people will be murdering other people. And the point of the reduced stats is that corruption isn't meant to create a new pvp dynamic, it's meant to force you into a corner of the map trying to grind off your corruption and run from bounty hunters. This is the dynamic, It's the criminal dynamic, you run from the cops you don't fight them.
  • As others have said, there appears to be a misunderstanding surrounding "Corrupt" players. Not necessarily by you, OP. Maybe by you but certainly by others. Corruption is a black spot, a Scarlet Letter, a brand, a societal mark of shame. It has never been communicated to me that this is anything other than that.

    Adding a game-play style or mechanic, relaxing sanctions, and assuredly adding a reward is counter to its foundational principle.

    They already added a "game-play style or mechanic" with the bounty hunter system though. I'm sure plenty of people would love to be bounty hunters, but why would anyone ever PK? Meaning an entire in game system, that has probably had dozens of hours poured into it (if not more) will never fully be utilized.


    The corruption system already seems flawed.
    I can already see a way people can use it to grief endlessly.
    1. be a neutral player
    2. have some friends that want to player kill hiding close by
    3. go harass a player to the point where they either want to log off or kill you in frustration because you are taking their resources or their mobs or whatever else
    4. they turn to attack you, but you don't attack back and let yourself be killed
    5. that player is now corrupted
    6. your entire guild/party/friends all jump the player and kill him, incurring no penalty unto themselves, and he cannot fight back because he'd gain MORE corruption for fighting back (assuming your friends/guild/party are non-combatants)
    7. you get his gear and his resources and have intentionally harassed him to the point where he might not even want to play the game anymore
    8. repeat ad nauseum
  • CaerylCaeryl Member
    Linstead wrote: »
    As others have said, there appears to be a misunderstanding surrounding "Corrupt" players. Not necessarily by you, OP. Maybe by you but certainly by others. Corruption is a black spot, a Scarlet Letter, a brand, a societal mark of shame. It has never been communicated to me that this is anything other than that.

    Adding a game-play style or mechanic, relaxing sanctions, and assuredly adding a reward is counter to its foundational principle.

    They already added a "game-play style or mechanic" with the bounty hunter system though. I'm sure plenty of people would love to be bounty hunters, but why would anyone ever PK? Meaning an entire in game system, that has probably had dozens of hours poured into it (if not more) will never fully be utilized.


    The corruption system already seems flawed.
    I can already see a way people can use it to grief endlessly.
    1. be a neutral player
    2. have some friends that want to player kill hiding close by
    3. go harass a player to the point where they either want to log off or kill you in frustration because you are taking their resources or their mobs or whatever else
    4. they turn to attack you, but you don't attack back and let yourself be killed
    5. that player is now corrupted
    6. your entire guild/party/friends all jump the player and kill him, incurring no penalty unto themselves, and he cannot fight back because he'd gain MORE corruption for fighting back (assuming your friends/guild/party are non-combatants)
    7. you get his gear and his resources and have intentionally harassed him to the point where he might not even want to play the game anymore
    8. repeat ad nauseum

    So in this scenario the player has no access to a basic Ignore, has the mentality of a preeteen, and is also blind to the group of greens in the area?

    If they’re that bad off then they’ve got bigger problems to deal with than some corruption.

    Not to mention if one of you kills the player they’re no longer going to be corrupted when they come back, probably with friends, and it’s highly unlikely you would have gotten any gear from them because the penalties after the first kill are minor.

  • Caeryl wrote: »
    So in this scenario the player has no access to a basic Ignore, has the mentality of a preeteen, and is also blind to the group of greens in the area?

    If they’re that bad off then they’ve got bigger problems to deal with than some corruption.

    Not to mention if one of you kills the player they’re no longer going to be corrupted when they come back, probably with friends, and it’s highly unlikely you would have gotten any gear from them because the penalties after the first kill are minor.

    That's just being disingenuous as Steven himself has said there will be times where you just want to kill someone, start a guild fight, with people who are taking your spawns even if it means being corrupted. Players will do it, because no one likes being griefed for hours on end. If some guy is constantly making your leveling experience hell, and is literally following you around the world (because there is no fast travel and he can do so), why wouldn't you kill him? You don't know that the party of greens around the area is with him or will even pay you any mind.

  • Juk KOJuk KO Member
    Only corrupted players should be allowed to enter Thieve's guild! Yeah I said it.

    Only Combatants or Corrupted. No Greens.
  • PhluxPhlux Member, Phoenix Initiative, Royalty
    edited August 2
    TL:DR: There are a lot of side progression tracks in the game that are encouraged, but are not core gameplay features; Corruption is not one of them. The Corruption system should not be rewarded beyond its base Rewards. It is not a core gameplay role. It is the Risk portion of taking a Non-combatants resources (the Reward part). It is also the penalty to discourage a specific side effect of the Reward portion of a one-sided player choice; namely Griefing. Bounty Hunting doesn't need more rewards than reasonable payment, the potential for bonus rewards on the target’s death, and baseline progression on the Bounty Hunter track. This is because it's also not a core gameplay role but a side job underneath the penalty system for Corruption (player agency of Corruption). Neither side of this conflict gains corruption for killing each other.

    The design philosophy of AoC is straightforward. This a PvX not PvP or a PvE game. This means that all sides need to be relevant. PvE players far outnumber PvP players within the genre. They are the foundation that the game is built on but can’t change the world beyond the foundational states. PvP players are the drivers of the game. They make the systems evolve and change how the world is shaped. Both sides are needed to make the game feel alive. PvE only and the game will go stale or feel lifeless. PvP only and there will not be enough of a player base or positive community outlook for the game to feel alive and welcoming.
    Foundational Gameplay (PvX)

    PvE: Every player is a Non-combatant (Green) by default. This is the start state and is the baseline for every core system. They can not advance the game beyond the foundational stages without the help of Combatants (Purple).

    Baseline Encouraged Core Gameplay
    • Gathering
    • Processing
    • Crafting
    • Exploring
    • Adventuring (vs. NPC's)
    • the standard PvE experience.

    Rewards
    • Loot
    • Resources
    • Experience
    Can’t gain Corruption

    Risks
    • NPC's can kill the player and grant Experience Debt.
    • The environment can kill the play and grant Experience Debt.
    • Combatants (Purple) and Corrupted (Red) players can kill the player and take a percentage of their carried resources.
    Attack a Non-Combatant (Green) or a Combatant (Purple) and become a Combatant (Purple).

    PvP: Every player can choose to flag as a Combatant (Purple). This is the intended baseline for change within the world.

    Baseline Encouraged Core Gameplay
    • All PvE Gameplay
    • World PvP: Combatant vs. Combatant
    • Caravans: Guard vs. Highwayman
    • Guild Wars
    • Node Sieges
    • Castle Sieges
    • Arenas
    • Duels

    Rewards
    • All of the PvE Rewards
    • No Corruption for PvP within these systems
    • Half the Experience Debt penalties of a Non-combatant (Green) when killed.

    Risks
    • NPC's can kill the player and grant Experience Debt.
    • The environment can kill the play and grant Experience Debt.
    • Combatants (Purple) and Corrupted (Red) players can kill the player and take a percentage of their carried resources.
    Corruption: Kill a Non-combatant and become a Corrupted (Red).
  • CaerylCaeryl Member
    Linstead wrote: »
    Caeryl wrote: »
    So in this scenario the player has no access to a basic Ignore, has the mentality of a preeteen, and is also blind to the group of greens in the area?

    If they’re that bad off then they’ve got bigger problems to deal with than some corruption.

    Not to mention if one of you kills the player they’re no longer going to be corrupted when they come back, probably with friends, and it’s highly unlikely you would have gotten any gear from them because the penalties after the first kill are minor.

    That's just being disingenuous as Steven himself has said there will be times where you just want to kill someone, start a guild fight, with people who are taking your spawns even if it means being corrupted. Players will do it, because no one likes being griefed for hours on end. If some guy is constantly making your leveling experience hell, and is literally following you around the world (because there is no fast travel and he can do so), why wouldn't you kill him? You don't know that the party of greens around the area is with him or will even pay you any mind.

    If I saw a group of greens all gathering in peace with each other, my first thought is to vacate because 10v1 isn’t feasible.

    If you approach that group of greens as ten individual mugging targets, then it’s your fault for getting corrupted and killed after you murder their buddy.

    If someone is game-stalking you, you have multiple corruption-free options:
    1) Report them for harassment, there will be GMs in the game
    2) Have your guild declare a war on their guild, kill them without penalty
    3) Call for assistance from your friends and guildies and wipe the floor with the group
    4) Go somewhere they can’t follow, a freehold or a guild hall or a castle or instanced housing. Anywhere with permissions will do

    Yeah some people will be fine with taking a bit of a corruption hit to clear someone out of an area they want. That doesn’t mean corruption isn’t a penalty.
  • SSRogueSSRogue Member
    Linstead wrote: »
    If some guy is constantly making your leveling experience hell, and is literally following you around the world (because there is no fast travel and he can do so), why wouldn't you kill him? You don't know that the party of greens around the area is with him or will even pay you any mind.

    Ooooooo I never put a lot of thought into this but selling yourself out to guilds as a professional antagonist could be a good side hustle for a bad guy player.

    Also please be wary of Caeryl, this person doesn't seem interested in proper forum thread discussion. He/she just seems to want their input viewed as right, vs just trying to have a constructive conversation to grow a topic.
  • SSRogueSSRogue Member
    Juk KO wrote: »
    Only corrupted players should be allowed to enter Thieve's guild! Yeah I said it.

    Only Combatants or Corrupted. No Greens.

    Hell yea! If we can be farmed freely and we have to risk it all for our small rewards then exclusivity should be easy. Besides the Ultima Online pickpocket skill is perfect for this. It had very high risk because once you stole something you became grey to that person and could be tracked by them and kill within a small window of time and the likely hood of getting something good in the time it took to sneak up, actually peek into the bag of a person without being detected and dig around to find something good was tedious but so rewarding when you got something good or it lead to some fun back and forth fights.
  • SSRogueSSRogue Member
    Phlux wrote: »
    The design philosophy of AoC is straightforward. This a PvX not PvP or a PvE game. This means that all sides need to be relevant. PvE players far outnumber PvP players within the genre. They are the foundation that the game is built on but can’t change the world beyond the foundational states. PvP players are the drivers of the game. They make the systems evolve and change how the world is shaped. Both sides are needed to make the game feel alive. PvE only and the game will go stale or feel lifeless. PvP only and there will not be enough of a player base or positive community outlook for the game to feel alive and welcoming.

    First off, I am sorry for cutting out most of your very good post, but we can all scroll up for it. Secondly, thank you for some more information to carry a conversation and not just trying to have a forum pissing contest.

    I do not speak for everyone on what is clearly my view of the "bad buy player" role but I do want to say that I agree the game as it is right now is as balanced for all levels of play as it can organically be. I believe that the strongest point of this is that from what we see and hear about the game as it is, is that it is very organic. Now, I can only speak on the threads I am a part of, and they are all focused on player vs player information as I feel player vs environment and ai is a few hours of game time from being understood and mapped out to the point of paint by numbers easy. I have always seen player vs player the larger scale daily fun factor that keeps me entertained.

    You did leave out a few other things but you covered everything needed to be mentioned to flush out the role of pvp in a game and it impacts. I know my own personal view on things like the bounty system and corruption are going beyond what they are intended but that is because I am playing the game in my head and imagining more and wanting more and discussing it here on a thread with what is supposed to be likeminded people with the same interest and not people just wanting to say "no it is wrong, not what is intended, never going to happen". We know the rules, we can read... we are having conversations, and we hope maybe a dev may see our interests and bring something up in a meeting and spark an idea, because that is how progress is made and not by shutting down peoples right to think and talk.

    You presented some structured information for us to build off and I again thank you for kinda refreshing everyone on things should we get too far away from what is the intent of the current system. Would you have any views on pvp related things that may involve tweaking a system or adding something from another game that AoC could integrate and improve upon?
  • imo.. bounty system should work when there are corruption players.

    The thing with going corrupt imo.. there no benefits in doing so..

    which makes me wonder if this bounty system will work in the current settings.

    Corruption players need to stuff do get or achieve for going corrupt.

    highly suggest quest's or pvp goals for corrupt players in order to keep things balanced
  • CaerylCaeryl Member
    SSRogue wrote: »
    Linstead wrote: »
    If some guy is constantly making your leveling experience hell, and is literally following you around the world (because there is no fast travel and he can do so), why wouldn't you kill him? You don't know that the party of greens around the area is with him or will even pay you any mind.

    Ooooooo I never put a lot of thought into this but selling yourself out to guilds as a professional antagonist could be a good side hustle for a bad guy player.

    Also please be wary of Caeryl, this person doesn't seem interested in proper forum thread discussion. He/she just seems to want their input viewed as right, vs just trying to have a constructive conversation to grow a topic.

    I’d have a discussion if everything put forth wasn’t exaggerated, wrong, or plain dishonest. I’m happy to concede points if they’re based on fact and logic, but I’m not budging when it’s just a handful of people who refuse to understand why the system functions like it does.

    PvP over resources isn’t griefing, but neither is farming in an area you’ve erroneously decided is “yours”.

    When you see both “corruption is too punishing” and “corruption is not punishing enough” threads, then it seems like corruption is probably in a decent spot.
Sign In or Register to comment.