Glorious Alpha Two Testers!
Alpha Two Realms are now unlocked for Phase II testing!
For our initial launch, testing will begin on Friday, December 20, 2024, at 10 AM Pacific and continue uninterrupted until Monday, January 6, 2025, at 10 AM Pacific. After January 6th, we’ll transition to a schedule of five-day-per-week access for the remainder of Phase II.
You can download the game launcher here and we encourage you to join us on our for the most up to date testing news.
Alpha Two Realms are now unlocked for Phase II testing!
For our initial launch, testing will begin on Friday, December 20, 2024, at 10 AM Pacific and continue uninterrupted until Monday, January 6, 2025, at 10 AM Pacific. After January 6th, we’ll transition to a schedule of five-day-per-week access for the remainder of Phase II.
You can download the game launcher here and we encourage you to join us on our for the most up to date testing news.
Comments
You have the right to comment and the right to be apart of a thread but you have many rights to do many things that you shouldn't do just because you can. I am not in pve threads because those systems do not entertain me and I do not want to voice my opinions even though I read over many posts and have things to say. These threads that you are in right now are not discussing what we think the game is, we are discussing what we want the game to be. It is like when you talk about what you would do if you found a million dollars, will you ever just come across that? almost certainly not, but it is fun to talk about and make plans and have ideas. We are talking about ideas and ideas aren't factually unless they lead to something a dev sees and makes reality.
So... is this a hard concept? I do not want to alienate opposing points of view, nor do I want to say do not reply ever again. I just want you to see why you are thinking we are posting such varying things and are base don current in-game facts. We are discussing the potential of change, the "what if" type conversation.
This thread topic is about wanting to create a reason for bounty hunters because we feel that people wouldn't want to waste their time doing it. We want more reasons for people to be bounty hunters and therefore more reasons for people to be corrupted. Nobody is asking to reward griefing or the killing of lower-level players or incentivize the killing of unwilling participants. The current corruption system doesn't quite work in our heads for what we want. So we are discussing ways people can become corrupted and then be able to have fun killing other corrupted people and good guys trying to attack us because we are bad guys or bounty hunters whos job it is to hunt us bad guys. This is the entire point of this thread and it is not to tell us we are wrong because the corruption system isn't designed for this... we know ffs.
So please take one step back and grasp the full intent of the thread topic and read all the posts and then see if this is a thread that you want to be a part of, because from where I stand I do not think it is. I think you are more focused on the game as it is without changing it and that is fine, but that is not this thread.
I agree on a basic level. I don't know if it is this thread or my personal thread where it was broken down but there is some good potential for a bounty hunter to have fun and a corrupted player to have fun fighting each other without invading on others gaming sessions.
I’ve grasped the intent of the topic. It was very clear it intended to reduce the penalties of and benefit Corrupted players, which goes directly against the basic existence of Corruption as a punishment system. It’s nothing like wondering what you’d do with a million dollars. It’s like pitching an idea that if you get put in jail you should be able to steal from the confiscated goods as you escape.
I like PvP just fine. I’ll be participating in sieges and raiding caravans just as I’ll protect my own node and my own caravans. I’ll be guarding dungeons and fighting over rare resources.
This isn’t PvPers vs PvEers, it’s people wanting to twist the game into something it’s not, no different than people asking for streamers to be immune to PvP, no different than asking for nodes to have no growth limitations, no different than asking for a global AH or plentiful flying mounts or no-PvP dungeons.
Some things are not reasonable requests because they go against the spirit of what Ashes of Creation is trying to be.
Edit: seriously, the first point in the OP is that bounty hunters lose gear to corrupted players.
I also only want to engage in this with people who feel the same. I've played solely pve in many games and I can tell u the ecosystem feels dead when the bois aren't battling. In order to have a robust and moving economy you need to have people say " I need to dunk on this guy, lemme buy this stuff and go battle" So many times I've pvp'd I've overspent on items I need to get cause I gotta go fast, I gotta get there.
The more organic PvP interactions happen the more the economy moves, but the action must be there, people need dopamine fuel to be invested.
I think pvers should be made safe from pvpers, something like" if u haven't flagged in 2 days u can buy a scroll for 100g" "upon pk ur aggressor gets 25x crime points" or somethin like that a special protection for pvers who don't wish to attack or be attacked
This isn't for you to decide!
Again, you can have views but you can't tell us we are wrong because we are bringing up ideas about a game that isn't out and isn't finished and the devs are openly looking for community feedback and ideas.
Even if Steven himself said something is a certain way, who knows what it will be 5 years down the road?
Nobody is fighting you on this, you just are trying to defend the game as if we are attacking it. We just point out things we want to see or think would be fun or cool and interesting. So why do you feel the need to police this thread and a few others where you take such an offensive stand to tell others they are wrong when we aren't seeking fact checks?
If someone asks clarification on something in-game as it is intended right now then you are the individual to look for. We aren't needing that here. This is hypothetical conversation and imaginative concepts for a dev to see and possibly think over or just for us to have fun wishing about.
I have not decided what is against the spirit of Ashes. The devs had. It’s not been a secret they intend Corruption to be the risk, not a reward.
It is the penalty you have to weigh against the potential reward before you kill someone.
It shouldn’t give you a one-up when you kill a Bounty Hunter, who you face on even stat ground with anyway. The system already will let you always get the full resource drop off greens, but that comes hand in hand with more corruption if your willing to risk it.
Corruption has no direct effect on PvE, which is used to clear corruption. It has no effect against Bounty Hunters. It will not be a factor in large battles or sieges or caravans. It will not affect your group’s ability to clear a dungeon. It will not drop your gear after the first kill.
So much pushback for the system comes from people misunderstanding how the penalties scale, and this is true for both sides of the argument. Someone killing 1 or 2 people will be treated very differently than someone killing 20 by the Corruption system.
People still act like stat damps are exclusive to the corruption system too, for some reason? Experience debt will do the same thing for PvE and PvP combat, while Corruption-based stat damps only apply to PvP combat.
Like yeah you want corruption to be easier to deal with, it already is as long as you’re not making a habit of killing greens.
Then having your own clan / allied clan give the infos and ambush those caravans. With the infos on how many are defending, where they going, what classes are with them etc. you can let your people know what they deal with and "counter" accordingly to make the heist go even smoother. Im pretty sure this will and can become the main form of Bad guy threat in this game.
I don't think you understand what a discussion is. A discussion naturally ranges from those for the idea and those against it. That is the actual full scope: some ideas are worth considering and talking about, some are not and should be disregarded immediately.
If you think only those who want to want to build/ change up the original points is considered "constructively discussing," you are wrong. What you are actually trying to construct is an echo chamber. It's imperative that you realize this, despite hypocritically saying you want opposing views.
People who disagree are not doing so because they are in bad faith, unworthy, or whatever maligned reasoning. They too have perspectives possibly worth considering.
Your "concept" of whose worthy to speak is weak. Who decides who is worthy, knowledgeable enough, skilled, or w/e prerequisite when the system hasn't been fully revealed nor tested. In that case, none of us should be talking about it but here we are. Also, I am a believer in letting people freely speak to learn/ better themselves, even should it mean they considerably make a mistake or say something dumb. This isn't an academic forum peer-reviewing a decade long study.
You are literally missing the point...
We are asking for corruption stat reduction, we are asking for more corruption based things and more bounty hunter things for a hypothetically new system. A new system means it is NEW and not currently in place as intended. That is the point, we do not need correcting, we are not asking for clarification, we know the current system. When we need an answer on the system as it is this very second I will personally tag you, but we aren't talking about that. You do not know the future and this game is still being developed, you are trying to hard to create a stance that isn't being asked for or needed.
Yes we are talking and trying to have constructive dialogue about a system that isn't yet fully flushed out, all voices should be heard on this subject. I admit I am coming at this topic from the view of a corrupted player, but the mischaracterization of all "bad guys" as griefers is ill informed, some bad guys like disrupting high end guilds and pvping with high geared players.
Griefers killing low levels and pvers for the lulz is not the kind of stuff I'm fighting for.
We understand the theories but no specific stats have been revealed. I do not understand this obsession by some to counter-act the penalties put in place for inappropriate behaviour. IS does not want to encourage inappropriate behaviour, and, if the current penalties do not dissuade enough people then penalties could even be increased.
Yeah man, that's cool I understand what yall's trying to do even though I disagree (said it in one of the 10 other threads). I think the perspective against it is something like this. Being a corrupted player is in itself already a niche population. Being a good-bad buy is even more niche. So changing the system to benefit the good-bad guy will naturally benefit the many more bad guys who will go farther with their choices. Something like... for every Punisher (the hero) there are a hundred criminals.
Conversation - a talk, especially an informal one, between two or more people, in which news and ideas are exchanged
Argument - a reason or set of reasons given with the aim of persuading others that an action or idea is right or wrong.
So you see the is a fact and a thing you got incorrect.
As for my topic in my thread and my statement, then everything stands because it is directly referring to the intent of the thread which is not subject to the fact-checking of current in-game systems. As stated, those of us interested in this thread are seeking constructive ideas on news systems or tweaks to the systems to bring out more player vs player scenarios while still holding a higher standard of common curtsey for individuals who wish to not participate in said pvp.
Thusly any replies that are focus don tellin us that we are wrong, or we are going against the intent of the devs or that we do not understand the in-game systems are either A) confused on the threads subject or
So GodsThesis with all this being said, if you so desire a conversation about this thread's topic then please feel free to have thoughts for or against it withing the topic of the thread and bring into this conversation new ideas and thoughts. If you desire to only argue then I cannot stop you from trolling, or trying to have a dick measuring contest, but I can and will simply overlook you because you will have nothing of worth to say for this specific thread's topic.
I do appreciate your time and I thank you for your input. I greatly apologize if in some weird and unknown way, I am completely unable to comprehend your honest interest in wanting to have a back and forth conversation about new ideas to add or tweak the current system. If this is the case then please present the ideas, but just as a reminder... we are well aware of the current system and we are quite understanding of the current ideal meta as it stands at this moment. We are discussing our thoughts beyond this.
I've been told there will be a 20% of dropping 1 piece of gear if u die with a large amount of corruption points, I suggested 3 or 4 pieces at 100% drop rate, definitely not a request to lessen punishments
SSrogue had a nice well spoken post just above, which could be summed up as essentially "Stop arguing with us if you don't agree with us."
You guys are interested in changing a system the game is going to have to be a system completely contrary to the developer's vision for the game.
I have to ask... what's the point guys? If it's just sort of spit balling for fun, that's one thing, but you gotta understand why people are pointing out that your ideas quite literally can't exist in the game right? DOn't get so defensive about it.
Being a corrupted player is not going to be remotely rewarding. If you become corrupt, it's going to be something you did out of necessity, not because it is a playstyle. As a result, being a bounty hunter cannot be an effective playstyle either. You're just sort of going "I hear you... but what if it could be, by disregarding the vision of the game?" That's obviously going to annoy people.
Coming up with ideas and posting them to share with others is fun. Coming up with ideas that have absolutely no hope of even tangentially being implemented is... pointless.
So when I talk about good bad guys I'm not necessarily talking about vigilante types, I'm talking about bad guys who are good at being bad. The dynamic of good and evil is something ever present in the human condition and its nice to be in a feud with another guild, but to add the dynamic that now those feuding guilds will band together because the truly undesirables have shown up creates well rounded politics and tension.
Giving people the option to go Corrupt (and have it be bearable yet punishing experience) will signify their intent and I prefer that to guilds doing bad things anyway and then potentially scrubbing corruption points by killing each other.
Again, this thread falls under "discussion". I am not arguing with you. If you think that's what my post is an argument against you, you are looking at it too shortsightedly. I am saying the opposing viewpoints have something worth considering.
Ignoring them and only having replies that build up the topic is disingenuous to what a discussion is. That being an exchange of ideas, ranging from those for and against it.
All you wrote were circular arguments (not an actual argument, a faulty line of reasoning) that essentially says, "This post is valid, all others against it are invalid: thus all subsequent posts against contribute nothing and aren't noteworthy."
When actually, those against it seem to be writing noteworthy things. It's also possible then for others to think it's not actually valid because it's not fully revealed. But it's always fine to speculate.
When I say an idea is weak or insufficient, that does not mean you are weak or unintelligent. I feel like I have to make this clear. And again, what you're looking for is an echo chamber, not constructive ideas. At best, I am highlighting the flaws of your reasoning for ignoring opposing views, not argue. It's showing me you cannot take constructive criticism, yet you ironically want a constructive discussion.
If I choose to be a corrupted player aka "a bad guy" then I should have penalities and the people who go out of their ay to accept a quest to hunt me should be rewarded because imma fight back. If I die and lose gear then it is my fault and my personal punishment every day I decide to keep being corrupted and not farm it off and have to decide either I should use my good gear or have some crap stuff just to get my by. That right there is a fun system and not once are we asking for lessened punishment or the ability to grief unwilling participants.
Now in a perfect world making a corrupted players stats not be so negatively weakened to the point where a fart could kill them would be ideal for a system where people didn't abuse a lesser version of a corruption penalty but sadly we do have to assume some people sadly find joy in griefing and would abuse it.
I do not fear losing gear because I'll most likely not wear good gear while I'm being hunter by bounty hunters, but I still don't see why there is so much backlash on talking about bounty hunters vs corrupted players and how both can benefit from each other in a positive style of gameplay. Aside from the fact that the current system isn't intended for it which we know and understand, and we are talking hypothetically here in a sense of testing a new system in a mental beta version that exists only in this thread, then why can't a bounty hunter get increased reward for trying to kill a corrupted player that has successfully survived like 10 attempted of bounty claim? and why can't that corrupted player get a title for surviving so long with everything against him? Again doing all of this without griefing anyone and only fighting other corrupted players and bounty hunters or people who attack them first.
I can only speak for me, I do agree with some of what Ssrogue says and disagree with other things, u can only attribute an individuals words to that individual.
I can say I am not being defensive I simply have my ideas, u are free to challenge those ideas, I am free to rebut (hehe but) this cycle creates a dialogue and its so important anyone feel free to voice their concerns and not be shut out of the conversation
My intent was to not argue but it wasn't if you do to agree. It was the fact that we are here to discuss our thoughts on this topic and the point of a forum is to create a thread and talk about that topic and get people wanting to build on that topic in a constructive way. Then one day a dev will see it as they read the forums and might post something or address it in a Q&A.
We are not looking for reminders of how the game is intended to be played or how certain rules exist in their current forms because we know this, we aren't seeking clarification on it. We are wanting to brainstorm different and new things based on the topic of the thread.
So when people post things just for the sake of telling us we are wrong then it is to argue and not to contribute. If you pointed out something that was related to the topic and within what our current conversation as lead to then feel free and we encourage it, but we are not bashing the game and are not looking to be informed on things we already know. so we do not need you to defend the game or inform us we are taking about things that don't fit in the current intent of the game because we know, its why we are discussing things we wished were in the game.
Talking about dreams and wishes and desires is how we become creative and creativity leads to new thoughts and ideas and new thoughts and ideas leads to breakthroughs and this is what we have a world with video games and movies and comic books. So why would you want to sit there and tells us we are wasting time trying to creatively think of new ways to play a game that if I may remind you ISNT FINISHED yet?
You both seem to agree that griefing is horrible, but fail to see that the only functional way to become a corrupt player is to be a griefer. I think you should start by addressing that part first.
"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"
This is what lead to the back and forth replies in which you came into by leaving a comment directed to me.
In this, the poster of the first reply said information we know about that game and didn't ask to be informed us as we are talking about systems outside the current in-game mechanics. That lead to your comments and where we are now. So after reading everything again, not once did I see the "conversation" bring about an opposing idea, I only saw the original commenter saying we were wrong for ignoring what the intent of the game currently is. Both of you have since said that you do not mind out conversation topic but neither of you have contributed to it, you only point out how what we are saying isn't supported within the current system which yet again we know...
So please contribute to the actual topic, you do not have to agree with it but if you insist on commenting then at least continue the conversation. It can be something to point how it may not work and it can be something to try and make it work but it absolutely is not based on it working as the game currently is at this moment. This topic is "We need good bad guys, a plea for a solid bounty hunter system" This thread is not about griefing, it is not about the mechanics as they exist right this moment and it isn't trying to fit the idea of this thread into the current system. This is about expanding the current game and thinking of a way to fit a better bounty system in it, how do we do it, how could it work?
Adding system like locking XP gain when your not flagging for PvP or Increase PvE loot when you toggle a PvP flag is the first step to get everyone into the PvP camp.
Adding a Anti PK guild role so that less skilled players can work as a sort of "Sheriff" against Reds
At this point people who like to PvP might be interested in joining a Sheriff guild because they get increased damage at the cost of less harvesting/PvE loot.
To enhance a guild who takes on this roll they could be given contracts to guard players or an area so that all the correct PvP damage they rack up gives them a reward out of a Trust Fund.
A contact could also be used to limit the amount of players an anti PvP guild is willing to bring into a fight by weakening their buffs when they leave an area or if they have too many players on the field.
PvP in a MMO is always a numbers game so getting two sides as close to balanced as possible will create longer more interesting fights.
You could be farming minerals and a guy pokes at you, tries invading your zone. He is the same level as you and is trying to bully you out of your area, so you decided to stand your ground and attack because you are not going to waste your time dealing with his/her antics.
Maybe you get attacked by one guy and you attack him back because you don't want to lose xp and items anyways and you notice he has a friend over there coming to help and instead of letting him get the first spell on you, you go for him.
Maybe someone wronged you in the past and caused your guild to disband because they were a spy from another guild and you see them and you seek revenge.
This is not griefing, this is not randomly attacking low-level players, this is not taking advantage of an unwilling target that is innocent and just wants to pve.
So a major concern amongst people is artificially gaming the system and killing ur main on a second account to scrub his corruption points. So someone will be allowed to do bad things and potentially dodge any social consequence.
You are placing yourself in a position, where no one can realistically have an opposing viewpoint. Either it is about how to make a solid bounty hunter system work within the scope of this game, in which case plenty of people have commented why it can't work, to which they have been disregarded. Or it is about how to make a solid bounty hunter system work outside the scope of this game, in which case it is off topic.
Corruption, as it stands, is meant to be just a straight punishment to crack down on low-level camping, and the bounty is more just to give people a little reason to go after players who don't care about the risks.
At this point, I think it's best to keep it simple and not complicate it further. Maybe in the future, it might be considered, depending on how things go.
As stated above there are ways to become corrupted currently in-game that are not griefing. Also in this hypothetical situation, we are presenting, there could be new ways introduced like a quest line that turns you corrupted by killing npcs or simply just becoming corrupted because you join a bad religion. If more people would actually have a conversation besides only wanting to point out obvious information we all know and can read on the wiki page then we could actually get somewhere lol.
I do not think you have the intent as some of the others seem to by causing arguing.
Very good post! I like the idea of a potential npc guild that lets players joining to either help and be a good guy or the counterpart thieves guild for the bad guys.