Glorious Alpha Two Testers!
Phase I of Alpha Two testing will occur on weekends. Each weekend is scheduled to start on Fridays at 10 AM PT and end on Sundays at 10 PM PT. Find out more here.
Check out Alpha Two Announcements here to see the latest Alpha Two news and update notes.
Our quickest Alpha Two updates are in Discord. Testers with Alpha Two access can chat in Alpha Two channels by connecting your Discord and Intrepid accounts here.
Phase I of Alpha Two testing will occur on weekends. Each weekend is scheduled to start on Fridays at 10 AM PT and end on Sundays at 10 PM PT. Find out more here.
Check out Alpha Two Announcements here to see the latest Alpha Two news and update notes.
Our quickest Alpha Two updates are in Discord. Testers with Alpha Two access can chat in Alpha Two channels by connecting your Discord and Intrepid accounts here.
Comments
Reds should drop all gear no matter what.
Reds should NOT have active debuffs, that just means giant red Zerg armies.
Reds should NOT have a lower gear score by default, they should be rocking low tier gear since they might be killed, that would mitigate any reds using high level gear.
The rest I agree with
There are many things one could talk about, and all you're telling me here, is that not only you keep misconstruing what I've said, but that you don't realise that other MMOs matter as well.
I didn't list every single one that was in production, about to be released, or still running because there's no need to make such a long list.
The market is bigger, but it is undoubtedly saturated, in a genre that requires commitment from the players to play it consistently. Especially when AoC is going to go the extra mile on this one just because it seeks to create "meaningful" progression, and with the xp loss and the debt, and as @Drokk already stated, chances are high it will be seen as tedious, hence boring.
If you keep missing the point of why I brought up the other perspective, it's because of you being incapable of understanding what's going on, not me.
And as I stated earlier, there are many other concerns that exist, not because I am the one coming up with them, but because they exist outside of this echo chamber.
Especially from someone who wastes no time calling other people "carebears", it's obvious then that it's going to be the very same type of person that is going to be obsessed with "challenge" and "risk". Just because you like those aspects, doesn't make them good, it's "hot air" as you would say, except this time it would make more sense.
In the end, you're the one living in a bubble.
In regards to AoC's success, I'm not sure. That's why the doubts are there, mismanagement could be a very real problem. So i'll reiterate that you have to be naive if you think there is reason to believe that everything will be fine as is.
Or to believe that what Steven wants is to settle for the max 100k players.
When you ignore what the PvP element does naturally to the playerbase, in the environment that AoC will create, in what is (no matter how addled you are with nostalgia) a saturated market, then it's short-sighted to say the least.
Especially when PvP heavy MMOs do not fare well and mainly end up with a small niche community or end up dying, and this isn't a made up reality, it's just what happens.
And if AoC wants to "have something for everyone" it's counterproductive to have a barrier like xp loss, as well as adding a debt to it, when there are enough already as is.
1) Tedious MMO = Boring. Must have been a lot of boring MMOs released in the past. Did you think WoW wasn't tedious?
2) Mismanagement = problem. Yes very true, this isn't AoC specific and it has nothing to do with game design.
3) IS settling for 100k players. Who said this? Just based on their server allocation plans (US(west,central,east), EU and BR) it's hard to understand where you dreamed this up. 50k/accounts per server threshold. Even if they just plan 1 server for EU and BR respectively you're talking 250k at the bear minimum of 1 server per region if they have zero servers in Asia or multiple through US/EU/BR.
4) PvP = Nostalgia/Game death. You must forget that WoW had(s) PvP. It didn't kill their game. Sure it was faction based but I mean most successful subscriber base in the history of games. I think you need a new argument here. It's not PvP that is going to kill a game. Maybe I'm not reading between the lines well enough, you must mean Death Penalty and you're suggesting games with death penalties kill games? If that is the case feel free to provide actual evidence of this, and very specifically show how it was death penalty, not poor economic systems, grind, lack of content, mismanagement, poor server performance, bugs and other factors that actually killed those games. If you can't even manage a basis for your opinion outside of "I don't like it" and "other people don't like it" then just say that don't go all in and say "dead game".
It's my personal opinion the PvP allowed in the open world is weak in AoC compared to a lot of the "niche", "nostagia" MMOs of the past. Frankly the fact that most players will be non-combatants in the open world mean(s) there is more risk to attack someone in this game for example to the "PKer" than in WoW. In WoW you could just roll into a zone and attack anyone you saw on the other faction with ZERO penalty or punishment for doing so if you killed someone who doesn't fight back AND at no risk for your own death.
I called games carebear not people, players or you. I think WoW is a carebear game and I played it, does it make me a carebear? No I don't believe so but it's a "safe" place for people to play because there is no risk in PvP this cuts both ways. A few friends and I could camp open world conflict zones in WoW with zero fear of dying, we could repeatedly roll over anyone we killed again and again until their faction could zerg us. Then our punishment was we had to run back and we could do that all day with no penalty, no loss of xp, durability, loss of items, etc.
If you're scared to get PKed while you have loot then that probably means the economy isn't designed well. If the economy is designed well a few deaths will be insignifigant in terms of items, and time lost. You know even EQ had PvP item loot servers? LOL in a game designed around a massive "tedious" grind and loot farming through hours of camping spaawns for the 1% chance some item drops, then have the risk that item could be looted LOL.
Anyway your "hot air" is just attributed to the fact you've got no basis for the points you make. Your entire post(s) are subjective to what ifs and just because you can write your opinion in this thread. Youv'e yet to even consider simple mathematical concepts in relation to playerbase and success. You also do not understand (as do I) what IS considers a base line for return on their work financially as success/failure. Is it a yield of 5%, 8%, 10%, 20% etc?
You could argue Steven could invest the same $ total over the same period in Real Estate, Stocks or Hard money lending and in these scenarios his return on investment would most likely range from 4% to 12% by in large in terms of regional expectations to California/US. So would you like to enlighten us with what his/their expected yield is going to be over the initial 12, 24, 36 months or lifetime of the game? I'd love to know where you're drawing the line in the sand for them and their time and money to give further relevance to your argument of don't do it... because... pvp... bad....
Master Assassin
(Yes same Tyrantor from Shadowbane)
Book suggestions:
Galaxy Outlaws books 1-16.5, Metagamer Chronicles, The Land litrpg series, Ready Player One, Zen in the Martial Arts
Haha like most public forums
Master Assassin
(Yes same Tyrantor from Shadowbane)
Book suggestions:
Galaxy Outlaws books 1-16.5, Metagamer Chronicles, The Land litrpg series, Ready Player One, Zen in the Martial Arts
Just FYI, Ashes is not taking the path of being designed for everyone. Hopefully, most people will like it but Steven is not trying to cater to every last person in the way that has become a staple of MMOs. Some examples of design that some people will not like are lack of DPS meters, lack of LFG, as well as exclusive gear, cosmetics and benefits. These choices respectively result in requiring more attention to the what is happening in the world rather than a meter, community interaction, and rewards that feel more rewarding as they stand out when others do not have them.
By the way, characters will not receive xp loss. There will only be xp debt.
https://ashesofcreation.wiki/Player_death
Certificates: "Hunting certificates is a term that covers items, such as Pelts that house the value of a mob's death."
Certificates seems to be the name used in programming for a category of items gained from hunting. It looks like we will see a normal item called a pelt in our inventory, not the name certificate or image of a certificate. As such, these items are similar to crafting materials in that you gather them in the world and essentially trade them to make money. Treating them in the same way as crafting materials seems logical.
Source: https://ashesofcreation.wiki/Loot_tables
Removing all dropped items from death will make death significantly less risky. On the other hand, items that you have gathered or hunted for can probably be replaced by walking outside of town to gather or hunt for a bit. How much do you think that you really need to remove risk from death?
I think having bigger death penalties is a fantastic way to reinvigorate exploration to what it should be actually. Nothing is going to stop people exploring because they'll want to see the content, but exploration in past MMOs has been far too easy.
We're rediscovering a lost world overrun with dangers. Uncovering the map should be more involved than simply covering ground on foot or a mount to remove that map fog of war.
Penalties for death may be harsh, but I think it's ok as long as the game gives you adequate visual cues and opportunity to avoid it (i.e. gauging enemy difficulty from a distance and having a chance to escape/run away from an encounter going badly) such that death is the deserved result of a few, consecutive bad choices.
First of all, welcome in the community, Enjoy your stay.
He will loot a part of it from your corpse. We don't know the percentage yet, but that will probably be fine tuned during the Alphas. You will most likely retain more than 50% of the resource you just gathered.
He certainly can loot it, but he also gets corrupted which makes him a loot pinata for everybody on the server. So unless you have a full inventory of stuff, you pissed him off or you gathered a very rare resource he will probably not even bother killing you.
Sorry, but its the clear intention to incentive people to fight back, if they want to retain what they have just looted. It's a system meant to incentivize people to fight back.
You will lose half if you fight back though. @Great Brae
Wait it'll make players play with each other? It's almost like this is an mmo! Joking aside, That's kind of the point. If you are going into unexplored, or unfamiliar territory, then you should want to be with your party, exploring, gathering, and testing out the mobs in the area. No doubt you will start to learn what areas are dangerous, and what areas aren't.
As i have PTSD flashbacks to every lava fall that kills me and destroys my stuff.
It's not about thinking it's inconsequential, it's that they have repeatedly said, they aren't making Ashes for everyone. If people like the ideas of the game they'll play, if not they won't. So complaining at this point about intended mechanics is pointless. It'll definately be tested and tweaked, and people will give their feedback, but it's highly unlikely the system would be entirely removed. So if it's a dealbreaker for people, there are other games out there for them.
But wouldn't that act like a double edged blade and incentivize ppl to kill players more often for resources or certificates rather then go through the harder content to gather the stuff, since attacking an unwary player and killing him would generally be easier then to fight the mob or go to the gathering site? Would it not be better to not let him loot your corpse at all to discourage greifing?
This could also result in stalking as well if the player finds out your maxxed profession is resource gathering would it not?
Edit: I thought I read that if your combative and you die your supposed to suffer less death penalty then if you are non-combative. And if you are killed as a combative the opponent don't get currupt.
Keep in mind the game is meant to have PvP conflict as a "risk". Someone could kill you when ever they want. You will have the choice to join friends, guilds, military nodes for the additional benefit of bounty hunters, and i'm sure people will figure out other ways to limit death.. You may have to actually socialize in the game to avoid being solo prey - or get really good at running when someone pops on screen. lol
Master Assassin
(Yes same Tyrantor from Shadowbane)
Book suggestions:
Galaxy Outlaws books 1-16.5, Metagamer Chronicles, The Land litrpg series, Ready Player One, Zen in the Martial Arts
So we assume I will play alone or the greifers will also be solo now? Lol. Or that PvP needs to have 'risk' to be enjoyable? Lol. I love PvP with or without risk. I am actually thinking of being a bounty hunter. I just don't see the need to greif other players to add this so called 'risk'.
You're assuming that having a death penalty = grieving. You seem to be completely dismissive of the fact the person attacking you may fail to kill you and you would then get to loot them, if they've been "grieving" a bunch of gatherers especially all of them out in parties/groups gathering together, then you should get rewarded with all that loot (% of) and now you don't have to gather as much.
I find it sort of funny the same guy who's talking about being a master gatherer and being stalked "love"s pvp. BUT since you're suggesting that and want to be a bounty hunter then you'll not only get to loot a % of corrupt player bagged items but also some of their gear if their corrupt enough. You could further this by letting players kill you while you don't fight back (with no loot on you dun dun dun) so they get absolutely nothing then go corrupt and THEN you as the bounty hunter can revenge your death.
If there is no death penalty or loss of loot/gear there is very little "risk" in pvp which means there is no sense of fear, excitment or other associated with walking alone, in small groups or in contested areas. Without that what's the point really? Just having to worry about re spawning and running back to your death location/area is nonsense. If you don't have to weight risk with reward, you can go where ever you want, carry anything on you at all times and say/do actions in game that affect other people negatively with zero recourse.
It's unlikely that someone who kills you randomly is going to decide to "stalk" you unless of course you do or say something that causes enough resentment for that person to dedicate that much energy towards you.
Just to point this out, master gatherer or not, I'm sure most people will have better things to do than risk going corrupt for some gathered items. Not saying someone wouldn't kill you for them, but I mean in all honesty this is going to be your basis for getting rid of death penalties? lol.
Master Assassin
(Yes same Tyrantor from Shadowbane)
Book suggestions:
Galaxy Outlaws books 1-16.5, Metagamer Chronicles, The Land litrpg series, Ready Player One, Zen in the Martial Arts
Plus it's a gamble... Imagine getting into a long, epic battle with an enemy and barely defeating them, and then they drop almost nothing because they didn't happen to be carrying much of anything. You will probably have a steadier and more reliable means of gaining resources if you are out gathering it yourself. I doubt that people are going to be engaging in PvP as a means to become rich. They will likely have other motives; war, structured events like a caravan or siege, a personal grudge against someone.
This is all speculation anyway until we have actual numbers for drops (PvE and PvP), and we won't have anything final until launch. And that's years away. It's way too early to be concerned about things we don't know about.
I don't pvp to greive others, I play pvp with objectives such as battlegrounds or arena's, I have very little love for world pvp as it always has greiving of some form. While I do enjoy hunting those that does wrong to others, I do not like to do wrong to others, such as steal there goods. If I where to be in a scenaro where I "could" take there goods I would pass on it, as it is the very same as stealing in reality, it's wrong, and it being in a game is equally wrong. The game how ever should have a death penalty, but not in a form where it encourages wrong-doings.
If you don't beleive ppl won't stalk you, and attack you when your vulnerable you are very naive, espaically in games that has stealth mechanics.
To put, you and your party could had just fought a difficult mob, but weakened and need to heal, but the opponent player group comes in and make easy work on you for your loot, would that not be greiving? Yes in most games that is considered greiving.
I think it's best to lose gatherables, but not have it lootable by others is what I simply will say on this one.
Killing people for the loot they are carrying isn't considered griefing here. Its a central part of the game. Open World PvP is a central part of the game. Also, yes both the PvE and PvP in this game does need risk. That's one of the central design philosophies of the game.
The materials you looted don't really belong to you, here you gotta get that out of your head. They aren't really yours ubtil you manage to put them into your warehouse and even then people might become able to loot it once your node is sieged.
You can agree with that or not, but these are core principles of the game which will probably never change.
Exactly, less death penalties and corruption are matually exclusive. People might follow you knowing that you gather the good stuff, just to take part of it of your hands, which again is by design.
Corruption is the risk they take for your loot. With your loot being the incentive. They want people to fight over the limited ressources in the game.
As @wrath points out resources are going to be fought over and core component to not just the game in a general term but the development and intricate parts of the node & castle systems. The Caravans have been specifically designed for this function to transport large quantities of goods, money etc to other nodes/regions of the map.
Oh I know people will go out of their way to kill you for a lot of reasons or no reason. That is how games like this are supposed to work - player choice.
In both of your scenarios about stealth mechanics and being attacked after a mob fight I will suggest that those scenarios would open up the attacking side to corruption. Which again I believe the vast majority of people are going to avoid. Attacking someone that is 1 hit from dying does not give them the opportunity to even fight back which would then cause corruption. If that player(s) wiped out an entire party of 8 people and none of them had the opportunity to fight back that would likely result in a heavy corruption score and potentially they would risk losing their own worn gear at that point. So unless they wiped you guys out with a bunch of starter weapons and armor equipped it will put them in a pretty bleak spot until the corruption is gone. Since they won't be able to access towns that have guards this will severely limit their ability to bank anything they looted form you, or their gear.
Now anyone traveling that see's their red names can attack them with no fear of going corrupt, however to help balance this the attacker can still lose and as a result lose inventory that is on their person(s) including durability loss of items etc. See there is risk to attack anyone under this concept. While you may avoid corruption as part of the decision, your actions will carry more thought than simply "guess i'll have to respawn and run back if this doesn't work" or per your desire not to loot/be looted "at least if I die they don't get my stuff".
Anyway you also have the choice not to be a master gatherer so you do not have to risk these scenarios. Once you reach max level you can focus all your time in the instanced arena(s), castle sieges, node sieges and caravans so you can "pvp" with no open world consequences associated with it. If you travel in the open world you could always do so with no inventory and then have no risk of item loss.
If you can't do those things and must be a gatherer then you'll need to figure out a way to do it within a playstyle you enjoy. Again - learn to run that option is available to you until it isn't but you sound like you understand pvp so I'm sure you know this already right?
Master Assassin
(Yes same Tyrantor from Shadowbane)
Book suggestions:
Galaxy Outlaws books 1-16.5, Metagamer Chronicles, The Land litrpg series, Ready Player One, Zen in the Martial Arts
Experience debt is something you accrue and have to work it off to remove it. Will not be time-based thing.
I agree? I was talking about the stat dampening on the death penalty not xp loss.
Master Assassin
(Yes same Tyrantor from Shadowbane)
Book suggestions:
Galaxy Outlaws books 1-16.5, Metagamer Chronicles, The Land litrpg series, Ready Player One, Zen in the Martial Arts
Whether you consider that greifing or not, is obsolete. As the larger gaming community over-all does consider that greifing. In and out of MMO's. There can be plenty of risk and reward without the need to reward ruining a players fun.
I will need to learn more about caravan pvp to make a proper judgement on it, as I was assuming it's more city property that is in danger and node pvp, then player owned products.
I am alittle concerned on how that would effect pvp scenaro's. I hope that pvp zones/arena's/battlegrounds would find a way to balance it out.
Otherwise a player that seems to be down on his luck would be pushed out from the fight very fast even with the lower combatant death penalty.
What's to say the greifer won't do the same thing about porting as another said in this thread around via summons from the party. You underestimate greifers, if they find it easier to kill players for loot and work together to avoid death easily with a fast travel system (which the dev's don't want in this game, but using what this threads examples) to do it? In many cases the greifer that is experienced in doing these things in many games knows how to get away from doing the deed easiliy and most likely be with friends with like minded individuals. I'm only bringing this up and argueing because I don't want this game to be eventually memed as "Greifers of creation". The gamer community isn't the same as back then and lack moral values after all.
@Great Brae
Also, the game's developer team doesn't. Which is all that counts. Also, across all the death penalties from open world pve and pvx games, this is one of the most harmeless incarnations. It's barely mentionable when compared to
Permadeath > Full loot > Inventory Loot + Random Gear drops > Inventory loot > Loot of Gatherables and Materials > Loot of a limited amount of gatherables and materials.
‐
Also, Caravans are the primary (almost sole) way to get your goods from Place A to place B. Which can be robbed/looted.
I could care less about losing items aside from gear from the death penalty, I care more about allowing theft, thus giving reason to greif other players.
if caravans is like then yes, this game will be memed as greifers of creation.
"wahh! I wanna grief ppl!"
It’s not griefing to fight over resources. You will have to PvP if you want to succeed because it’s a PvX game.
If that’s a deal breaker for you, well, Ashes isn’t being made for everyone. You’re free to not play it.
Player servers from other games has loot dropped turned off for a good reason, not because you lose the items, but it's to prevent toxic greifing behavior, and no the curruption system is not going to be enough to deter from this, since you will lose more if you don't fight back, and they don't currupt upon your death as fighting back turns you combatant.
Player theft is not excusable, and games that forces that upon it's player base has historically failed, with the exeption of EQ, but EQ wasn't originally made to be like MMO's of today.
/fixed for you