Weight of Flagging vs Not Flagging

Linstead

So I understand when you're non-combatant (green) you lose 100% of your resources you have been gathering if killed by a player, and if you decide to fight back and go combatant (purple) then you only lose 50%. Correct? And if a Corrupt (red) dies then they end up losing 400%?

So this system is meant to incentivize fighting back so you lose less resources if you die and it creates pvp. Great, but even though spawn points seem to be "random" (I doubt it will be completely random and there will be specific points) I feel like if you know the map/area well and could immediately find that player again, why wouldn't you just stay green? Sure you lose 100%, but you just made that guy red. Meaning if you can find him again and kill him, you get 4x the amount of stuff you lost back, have a chance to get the guy's gear/completed items, and you have absolutely nothing to lose. You have no resources to lose, you don't flag when you attack the guy, you get more stuff than you started with, if the guy attacks you he corrupts himself more further dampening himself and setting off the bounty hunter alarm (and with discord, I could see guildies in town picking up a bounty for the guy and then just sending you screenshots of where he is on the map so you can hunt him down as a green), and even more.

I see absolutely no reason to ever flag myself if I know I can get back to the guy, have a friend around me to attack the guy, have a friend in town ready to cheat for me and send me his location, etc.

Unless the spawn points are so horrendously terrible that you end up across an entire continent (which in itself is it's own problem and would be very annoying if you're on a quest and now you're 10k miles away) I just don't see a reason. Let myself die and then kill the guy to steal all his stuff with no consequence. Seems like a win to me.

Linstead

Also, if I choose to not fight back, I'm sure half the time the person will stop attacking because they don't want to go red and were just trying to bait me into attacking them. Staying green seems like the best option.

Songcaller

No, not at all. You have 100% Death Penalty when Green, which is 50% resource drop, you have 50% death penalty when purple, which is 25% resource drop.

Linstead

Neurath wrote: »

No, not at all. You have 100% Death Penalty when Green, which is 50% resource drop, you have 50% death penalty when purple, which is 25% resource drop.

Well what else is covered by "Death penalty"? And thanks for clearing that up, but my point still stands.

mcstackerson

no, you don't lose 100% of your resources, you only lose a portion of your gathered resources. We don't know the percent yet. If you are a combatant you lose half as many.

That is a strategy you can employ and I don't know if they want to discourage that. You might be oversimplifying things as your attacker could run away in the time it takes for you to heal up and get back.

There is also the death penalty to consider and the fact you might be able to win the fight. If you let yourself die, you will also be gaining negative exp and losing durability, which might be something you can avoid if you just fight back and kill them.

That said, we will be testing it and adjustments might be made.

Yuyukoyay

It's meant to keep griefing in check while also making pvp meaningful. You can avoid the corrupted penalty by not putting yourself in a situation to die. There's also multiple ways to get rid of it.

Songcaller

https://ashesofcreation.wiki/Player_flagging#Player_death

Wiki Covers it a lot. You'd be better off fighting everyone. Even Reds. You won't reduce the death penalty against Reds, but, you'll increase their corruption if they kill you and if you kill them you'll get loot based on their corruption level.

Yuyukoyay

Well you can run away too if you a faster class than normal. It's overall just meant to be fun. I don't think there will be any way to get abused by this system in general. I don't know what the numbers actually mean in the penalty but it seems to be aiming at a middle of the road death penalty.

Beck Altarr

It's not meaningful pvp when the penalties for not fighting are more if I do fight.

As I've said a few times. You are forcing me, a player who does not want to participate in that kind of pop to enjoy ****.

Plenty of other pop systems for people to engage in. I will too. Just not a fan of some goof 10 lvls higher than me killing me for no reason and no chance to win. The reason to fight back, uselessly, to save half my stuff just doesn't hold water.

mcknightrider

If that person kept killing you without you fighting back it would further their corruption, lowering their effectiveness in pvp which will prompt them to lose more resources, gain more exp debt, more item decay and drop equipment. They may do it only once but your next time encountering them they will be corrupted and the way the corruption system works is you don't get flagged for combat fighting a corrupted which means you stay GREEN. So you have no reason NOT to fight back against a corrupted.

Sangramoire

There's many ways a situation like this can play out. If we assume no friends are involved and it's just you(green) and him(purple) then if you let him kill you without fighting back he become corrupted(red). Because he's newly corrupted he probably has not accumulated enough corruption for it to really matter for him as he could very well just run away from the area and kill some monsters to get rid of the little corruption he has. At this point I don't know how long it would take him to get rid of the initial corruption so if it doesn't take very long then he doesn't really risk much. If it does take a while then his risk can be substantial which probably means if you're anywhere near a place where you could easily get back to it's not likely that you will get attacked to begin with. If he still attacks you, it might be because he might have a friend(green) that's helping him.

now assuming you both have friends that will help you, once he turns red you can have others tell you of his whereabouts so that you can attack him as green without penalty but if he has another friend that's green that can also kill you his friend will just kill you while the red player runs away further to get rid of his corruption.

One of the main concerns with this corruption system has been with red players and bounty hunters. Bounty hunters are automatically flagged for red players to attack but they can see the whereabouts of red players so the concern has been with bounty hunters just telling greens where the reds are and having the green go hunt them down instead. I haven't really thought about it myself so I don't know of a possibly solution to it yet but there could be a work-around for red players that have a friend that's green. I don't know how loot will be distributed if a red player is killed but I'm assuming that the loot all goes to the player that did the most damage.

All the red player has to do is get his friend that's green to kill him and his friend who is still green will have the loot while also getting rid of the corruption of the red player. I don't know if that will be possible as I don't remember seeing anything on how loot from red players will work. We'll have to wait for more details on the system to figure things out.

Noaani

Linstead wrote: »

So I understand when you're non-combatant (green) you lose 100% of your resources you have been gathering if killed by a player, and if you decide to fight back and go combatant (purple) then you only lose 50%. Correct? And if a Corrupt (red) dies then they end up losing 400%?

So this system is meant to incentivize fighting back so you lose less resources if you die and it creates pvp. Great, but even though spawn points seem to be "random" (I doubt it will be completely random and there will be specific points) I feel like if you know the map/area well and could immediately find that player again, why wouldn't you just stay green? Sure you lose 100%, but you just made that guy red. Meaning if you can find him again and kill him, you get 4x the amount of stuff you lost back, have a chance to get the guy's gear/completed items, and you have absolutely nothing to lose. You have no resources to lose, you don't flag when you attack the guy, you get more stuff than you started with, if the guy attacks you he corrupts himself more further dampening himself and setting off the bounty hunter alarm (and with discord, I could see guildies in town picking up a bounty for the guy and then just sending you screenshots of where he is on the map so you can hunt him down as a green), and even more.

I see absolutely no reason to ever flag myself if I know I can get back to the guy, have a friend around me to attack the guy, have a friend in town ready to cheat for me and send me his location, etc.

Unless the spawn points are so horrendously terrible that you end up across an entire continent (which in itself is it's own problem and would be very annoying if you're on a quest and now you're 10k miles away) I just don't see a reason. Let myself die and then kill the guy to steal all his stuff with no consequence. Seems like a win to me.

A few points.

Random spawning is only a thing if you die while corrupt. The rest of us will respawn in a known location.

The other thing to keep in mind are the rest of the death penalties.

First of all, on top of losing raw materials, you are also going to take a hit to item durability. This hit is halved if you are a combatant.

Second, you are going to get experience debt. This will mean your stats will be lowered, you will be less effective in combat, and also PvE mobs you will will have their drop chance lowered. This debt is halved if you are a combatant.

So all up, there absolutely are times where the best thing for you to do would be to die, let the attacker get corruption and come back and kill them - but there would also be times where you want to preserve your gears durability, or you simply aren't keen on the drop rate penalty associated with experience debt just then.

Jubilum

To be perfectly clear the corruption system that IS has imagined and developed is the best that can be done, and if all people were of good morals and civil to each other it would work.

The problem with even having such a system is that not all people or even all gamers are civil, moral, and play by the rules. This leads me to believe that the system is pointless and will be ineffective at achieving it's intended purpose.

Noaani

jubilum wrote: »

To be perfectly clear the corruption system that IS has imagined and developed is the best that can be done, and if all people were of good morals and civil to each other it would work.

The problem with even having such a system is that not all people or even all gamers are civil, moral, and play by the rules. This leads me to believe that the system is pointless and will be ineffective at achieving it's intended purpose.

It will to start, without a doubt. Over time though, I'm sure it will have the desired effect.

In the first month or two of the game, people will be gaining massive amounts of corruption. These characters will be completely debilitated from this though.

Attar

The best that can be done is to have one server type as is, and another server type where you cannot attack greens.

Sangramoire

Attar wrote: »

The best that can be done is to have one server type as is, and another server type where you cannot attack greens.

Everyone starts off green meaning it would just be a PvE server. If greens can attack other greens then all that would happen is someone that's green will attack another green and turn purple then just go quest and get back to green and do it again.

Attar

Actually, you can manually flag yourself or auto flag when in bgs, caravans and sieges. Going back and forth when you want is exactly what some players want their own server for, not to be forced into pvp when trying to pve like the current iteration.