Death penalty seem too harsh?

Caeryl

Great Brae wrote: »

once that resource is in your bags, it's yours, racing to it or even fighting before that resource is clicked is fine, but player theft is a line not to be crossed.

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and games that forces that upon it's player base has historically failed, with the exeption of EQ, but EQ wasn't originally made to be like MMO's of today.
< Snipped your smarmy “fix” since it had no value to the conversation>

Both sides think the penalties are too harsh/not harsh enough, so clearly IS has done something right.

People who enjoy free for all PvP see corruption as a deal breaker to open world PvP (it isn’t), people who refuse to PvP claim it’s not fair to half the penalties for combatants (it’s perfectly fair), and then there people who go so far as to argue the mere existence of PvP makes the game toxic (wrong).

Like I said, if you don’t want to have any consequence to dying to players, then Ashes will not cater to you nor should it. You’re entitled not to play, but you’re not entitled to stomp your feet and demand the game change to suit you because you might, god forbid, have to fight players to defend your stuff. Open world PvP, especially with such impactful anti-griefing measures, will not hurt the game. Trying to appeal to everyone and their mother, however, does make a game worse.

MountainKingUK

Imo I think the penalties seem about right and fairly well balanced. Encourages cautious gameplay along with making players want to play as a group but not overly cautious where you will not want to do anything. The Risk/Reward factor here is decent enough.

Great Brae

Caeryl wrote: »

Great Brae wrote: »

once that resource is in your bags, it's yours, racing to it or even fighting before that resource is clicked is fine, but player theft is a line not to be crossed.

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.
< Snipped your smarmy “fix” since it had no value to the conversation>

Both sides think the penalties are too harsh/not harsh enough, so clearly IS has done something right.

People who enjoy free for all PvP see corruption as a deal breaker to open world PvP (it isn’t), people who refuse to PvP claim it’s not fair to half the penalties for combatants (it’s perfectly fair), and then there people who go so far as to argue the mere existence of PvP makes the game toxic (wrong).

Like I said, if you don’t want to have any consequence to dying to players, then Ashes will not cater to you nor should it. You’re entitled not to play, but you’re not entitled to stomp your feet and demand the game change to suit you because you might, god forbid, have to fight players to defend your stuff. Open world PvP, especially with such impactful anti-griefing measures, will not hurt the game. Trying to appeal to everyone and their mother, however, does make a game worse.

I think you have the wrong idea, I want death penalties, I do not want to encourage theft as a means to "encourage" pvp. There is other ways to encourage pvp theft, which is a factor of greifing. Theft, even in a video game, is wrong, pvp or no.

Ventharien

Great Brae wrote: »

I think you have the wrong idea, I want death penalties, I do not want to encourage theft as a means to "encourage" pvp. There is other ways to encourage pvp theft, which is a factor of greifing. Theft, even in a video game, is wrong, pvp or no.

No one will agree with you on that point. And all of the idea's you used to encourage pvp involved not having open world pvp. And make no mistake, pivoting to battlegrounds and arenas, is the decision to kill your open world pvp. So if nothing happens in the over world, your world is stagnant, and unchanging. Welcome to far to many of our recent mmo's. The idea is to try something different, not copy paste and fail. Also from most of your statements, you are WAAAAYYY too ignorant of the current stated systems to have this level of stubbornness. There are several resources around the community to get easy explanations of systems, and the restrictions and protections in place to keep the world chugging and not a murder hobo field.

Great Brae

oh ok, so nodes being conquered or destroyed, dungeons being unlocked baised on node levels, castles constantly changing hands of control is not enough of a evolving world for you?

Either you've haven't been playing often or long enough, or haven't seen communities or played on servers with world pvp on by default, to think that no one would abuse the system to a point where the game is unplayable or seen as unenjoyable by the majority, failed to see pvp baised mmo's always failing because of allowing greif systems to exist to think, even for a bit, that allowing this to exist, is ok.

Ventharien

According to your definitions nodes being destroyed are griefing. If Castles have storage, then this too is griefing if you are gonna be consistent. And i've played thousands of hours on full drop pvp grief fests, thanks. And what i've seen time and time again, (and what is really very simple if you think about it for 2 seconds) is the second you add restrictions, penalties to deaths, and incentives to not ALWAYS murder and steal everything, the systems improve. This sadly comes most times, too little too late, after a larger audience has lost interest.

Tyrantor

Great Brae wrote: »

once that resource is in your bags, it's yours, racing to it or even fighting before that resource is clicked is fine, but player theft is a line not to be crossed.

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.

Well the good news for most of us is AoC isn't made to be like the MMO's of today, you may have missed the memo on why Steven in particular put this development team together - in summary MMO's of today are shit.

You are a Arena PvP expert I'm sure a little open world pvp isn't going to ruin your day. Also you likely do not understand how a game build around a player based economy is supposed to work. Mostly the items you lose/loot from other people are going to be fairly abundant and have limited value unless of course you get some massive quantity and then risk exposure via a Caravan to treck it across the map for the best return at time of sale.

I'm fairly certain at this point you would rather hear yourself complain about losing items to another player than actually sit back and think about how the PvP system is going to work and why it will discourage constant griefing. I'll admit it is much easier to tell the rest of us your opinion constantly than having to use some deduction and reason to figure out why a developer may be doing it this way and not "How MMO's are".

Great Brae

The only real thing you lose on a destroyed node is your house, and you get a blueprint to help mitigate it, so that is acceptable.

Castle seiges you know you must fight for ahead of time and don't give permenant items anyways besides a flying mount, which to be honest shouldn't be a thing anyways, I disagree it should provide item storage for players beyond ways to defend the castle for the title of king/queen

your last point is what I'm trying to avoid, by making the death penalty not drop (but delete) for the opponent it helps remove the need to greif.

Tyrantor

Great Brae wrote: »

oh ok, so nodes being conquered or destroyed, dungeons being unlocked baised on node levels, castles constantly changing hands of control is not enough of a evolving world for you?

Either you've haven't been playing often or long enough, or haven't seen communities or played on servers with world pvp on by default, to think that no one would abuse the system to a point where the game is unplayable or seen as unenjoyable by the majority, failed to see pvp baised mmo's always failing because of allowing greif systems to exist to think, even for a bit, that allowing this to exist, is ok.

By the way - see how you speak to people/us who do not agree with you? It's going to encourage people to "Grief" you. In game this constant high opinion would likely result in the death penalty. It's a great reason on why MMOs need it open world pvp.

Great Brae

I'm only simply stating that it won't be enough to stop greifing and it should not be rewarded. I do not see how that is wrong unless your intent itself is to target and greif players.

Warth

Great Brae wrote: »

The only real thing you lose on a destroyed node is your house, and you get a blueprint to help mitigate it, so that is acceptable.

Castle seiges you know you must fight for ahead of time and don't give permenant items anyways besides a flying mount, which to be honest shouldn't be a thing anyways, I disagree it should provide item storage for players beyond ways to defend the castle for the title of king/queen

these are both incorrect. A part of the materials a d gatherables inside the bank/warehouse will be lootable by the people destroying your node. So your collected stuff isn't even safe when you have it there.

They can afterwards also loot your freehold.

Castle Siege winners also gain a % of the taxes the previous owner stored

Ventharien

Great Brae wrote: »

The only real thing you lose on a destroyed node is your house, and you get a blueprint to help mitigate it, so that is acceptable.

Wrong, you also lose any stored gatherables and processed goods (but not finished crafted goods) which are locked upon declaration of a siege. You also lose the same if your freehold is destroyed in the vulnerable period after a successful siege. These become loot for the invaders.

Great Brae wrote: »

Castle seiges you know you must fight for ahead of time and don't give permenant items anyways besides a flying mount, which to be honest shouldn't be a thing anyways, I disagree it should provide item storage for players beyond ways to defend the castle for the title of king/queen

While we don't have any solid soundbytes about it, considering castles will be the fortress and base of operations for their owning guilds, there is no reason to think they won't have storage. They also offer way more than just a flying mount to the king/queen.

Great Brae wrote: »

your last point is what I'm trying to avoid, by making the death penalty not drop (but delete) for the opponent it helps remove the need to greif.

There is no NEED to grief. Trying to hunt down people to get the gatherables you want will be a pretty inefficient way to get those materials. Not only could they force you to become corrupt, Which bring into play bounty hunters, you yourself could be killed as a flagged player. In addition there are plenty of other systems incentivizing you to leave gatherers alone around your play area, and hunt down anyone messing with crafters/gatherers in the area. It's only meant to be a slight bonus for a personal attack. Not to mention all you have to do is flag once, and you keep half the goods you would have dropped as a companion. So once again, you seem to be unaware of a bunch of systems you need to look into if you want to throw an informed opinion up.

Ventharien

Great Brae wrote: »

I'm only simply stating that it won't be enough to stop greifing and it should not be rewarded. I do not see how that is wrong unless your intent itself is to target and greif players.

You are wrong because you are assuming it will be this driving need. It simply isn't enough of a viable incentive to drag the number of people into it you seem to think will be. Either they people would have killed those people anyway because they felt like it, or they had a valid reason, and it's a slight bonus, and slight deterrence from people treating their deaths like they mean nothing. If i kill you because you are gathering silver in a node that is enemies with mine, or just a viable threat to mine, I am not greifing you, i am playing the game. If ihunt you down repeatedly because i have an overwhelming advantage, and have no other purpose then why not, then i am greifing you.

Great Brae

Anyone that defends player stealing = We want a game catered to greifing! dur hur! "Greifing of creation" meme calling it now.

Preacher

Great Brae wrote: »

oh ok, so nodes being conquered or destroyed, dungeons being unlocked baised on node levels, castles constantly changing hands of control is not enough of a evolving world for you?

Either you've haven't been playing often or long enough, or haven't seen communities or played on servers with world pvp on by default, to think that no one would abuse the system to a point where the game is unplayable or seen as unenjoyable by the majority, failed to see pvp baised mmo's always failing because of allowing greif systems to exist to think, even for a bit, that allowing this to exist, is ok.

This, and if you think that someone is ignorant to today's MMO's over this? I would have you look at New World for example who had "open-world" PVP. Know why it is back in development and did not release? That was why. People were constantly griefing everyone. I have a bunch of money in this game past my Kickstarter pledge. I want to be able to play the game not worry about getting rolled by a couple of kiddies who want to do nothing but ruin other's game time. Most PVP players in open-world games are toxic. Yes, I said most and it is true. Many years of gameplay experience has taught me this.
As for the death penalty, I am glad that it has a "bite" to it. I hate that most of the games nowadays have no penalties for dying. It takes away from the "fear" factor of decisions we make.

Preacher

Ventharien wrote: »

Great Brae wrote: »

I'm only simply stating that it won't be enough to stop greifing and it should not be rewarded. I do not see how that is wrong unless your intent itself is to target and greif players.

You are wrong because you are assuming it will be this driving need. It simply isn't enough of a viable incentive to drag the number of people into it you seem to think will be. Either they people would have killed those people anyway because they felt like it, or they had a valid reason, and it's a slight bonus, and slight deterrence from people treating their deaths like they mean nothing. If i kill you because you are gathering silver in a node that is enemies with mine, or just a viable threat to mine, I am not greifing you, i am playing the game. If ihunt you down repeatedly because i have an overwhelming advantage, and have no other purpose then why not, then i am greifing you.

I would have to agree with this IF and I mean a big IF the area you happen to be in is another enemy faction territory. Then yes, you should be attacked, as that is defending your "turf" I will admit I am not versed in how they plan to do open-world PVP, but if it is via factions, then I am all for that. I am not however for just plain old open-world PVP, and if they do that, it won't be long after before they open PVE servers due to the outrage it will cause. Mark my words, I do not care how "firm" a stance the Devs may have on it right now. I know other games that had this type of stance bend when it came to pride over money.

Tyrantor

Great Brae wrote: »

Anyone that defends player stealing = We want a game catered to greifing! dur hur! "Greifing of creation" meme calling it now.

If I see you in game we could rename that meme to "Griefing Great Brae" after you show off those arena skills (or) your running ability i'll msg you to let you know I left everything on your corpse because I'm only there to PK you and not loot you - this way it wont infringe on your morals of theft. You see so no reason to fret my man you can get griefed with loot or not. Get the game, would love to see you out there gathering I'm sure it will literally make my day.

Great Brae

Preacher wrote: »

Great Brae wrote: »

oh ok, so nodes being conquered or destroyed, dungeons being unlocked baised on node levels, castles constantly changing hands of control is not enough of a evolving world for you?

Either you've haven't been playing often or long enough, or haven't seen communities or played on servers with world pvp on by default, to think that no one would abuse the system to a point where the game is unplayable or seen as unenjoyable by the majority, failed to see pvp baised mmo's always failing because of allowing greif systems to exist to think, even for a bit, that allowing this to exist, is ok.

This, and if you think that someone is ignorant to today's MMO's over this? I would have you look at New World for example who had "open-world" PVP. Know why it is back in development and did not release? That was why. People were constantly griefing everyone. I have a bunch of money in this game past my Kickstarter pledge. I want to be able to play the game not worry about getting rolled by a couple of kiddies who want to do nothing but ruin other's game time. Most PVP players in open-world games are toxic. Yes, I said most and it is true. Many years of gameplay experience has taught me this.
As for the death penalty, I am glad that it has a "bite" to it. I hate that most of the games nowadays have no penalties for dying. It takes away from the "fear" factor of decisions we make.

oh yeah, I do like the death penalty, as long as it's balanced in a way for ppl to learn from there mistake or for appropiate pvp areas/instances can be fun.

Exp. loss isn't new to me so I don't really mind it as long as it's not crazy.

Ventharien

Preacher wrote: »

I would have to agree with this IF and I mean a big IF the area you happen to be in is another enemy faction territory. Then yes, you should be attacked, as that is defending your "turf" I will admit I am not versed in how they plan to do open-world PVP, but if it is via factions, then I am all for that. I am not however for just plain old open-world PVP, and if they do that, it won't be long after before they open PVE servers due to the outrage it will cause. Mark my words, I do not care how "firm" a stance the Devs may have on it right now. I know other games that had this type of stance bend when it came to pride over money.

AGAIN. First off, i haven't seen you around so welcome to the forums and the game. Second, before assuming Ashes says it's going to do something, and you throw up the disapproval because you played this one game one time, actually look into the game systems and wait till you have a complete picture to judge it for yourself. I would strongly suggest you check out the wiki and Ashes101.com, both great resources.

To give you some broad stroke info, there are no solid factions, so no Horde v Alliance if you're a wow player. As people do anything; explore, gather, kill mobs etc., exp is gathered in the area. Eventually, as we all play, the areas will grow into centers of civilization, from a crossroad, to a camp, to a village, a town, and finally a metropolis. These are called Nodes, and eventually, bigger nodes tie smaller nodes to them, in effect creating a country of sorts. You may become a citizen of these places at the village level on up, at which point this is your "Faction". You may leave, and join another cluster of nodes, or switch to another node in your cluster if you have the capacity. If i am walking in my node clusters area of control, or ZOI (zone of influence) and i see a guy mining or fishing, I'm not going to mess with him. He is actively growing my home, and i want my home to be the biggest and best it can be (there are many bonuses to this). However if someone from another node group comes in and starts messing with that gathering guy, i'm going to hunt the intruder down so my node isn't being slowed.

This is the central pillar of Ashes, and you really should look into it if you are interested in the game. It's way more detailed than i can explain here typing.

Ventharien

Great Brae wrote: »

oh yeah, I do like the death penalty, as long as it's balanced in a way for ppl to learn from there mistake or for appropiate pvp areas/instances can be fun.

There will be almost no instanced pvp areas as they are commonly held. No battlegrounds. On this alone i can tell you if you don't enjoy this idea, this game will never be for you.

Great Brae

Ventharien wrote: »

Great Brae wrote: »

oh yeah, I do like the death penalty, as long as it's balanced in a way for ppl to learn from there mistake or for appropiate pvp areas/instances can be fun.

There will be almost no instanced pvp areas as they are commonly held. No battlegrounds. On this alone i can tell you if you don't enjoy this idea, this game will never be for you.

"I don't like your suggestions in my game, shut up and leave!"

btw I am aware of this.

And you are incorrect, they did announced there will be battleground areas.

Ventharien

Correct, if you listened, to five seconds more than that you would understand they are not reffering to alterac valley or arathi basin. It is a literal ground of battle. Caravan zones, sieges, areas in which you will immediately be flagged as combatant, for or against. Notice the "as they are commonly held".

And no, it has nothing to do with what i want, there are several things i would change about the game if i could. It's about how they have said they are designing the game. If you have a problem with that, and don't think you will enjoy the game because of it, then yes, shut up and leave.

Great Brae

Nope. Sorry to disappoint, but I will continue to state my opinions, like it or not.

player theft is a gaming sin, pvp or no.

Ventharien

https://ashesofcreation.wiki/Open_world_battlegrounds There for citation

Great Brae

and? your assuming I haven't read it already?

Ventharien

Great Brae wrote: »

Nope. Sorry to disappoint, but I will continue to state my opinions, like it or not.

player theft is a gaming sin, pvp or no.

No one will care as they take the mats and laugh.

Ventharien

Great Brae wrote: »

and? your assuming I haven't read it already?

Yes that is the easy assumption since you are incorrectly stating the information.

Great Brae

and no one will care when the game dies? No one plays greif happy games

Ventharien

People play grief happy games all the time. You are again incorrect.

Great Brae

actually no, I am not. at this point your just trying to troll.