Greetings, glorious testers!

Check out Alpha Two Announcements here to see the latest news on Alpha Two.
Check out general Announcements here to see the latest news on Ashes of Creation & Intrepid Studios.

To get the quickest updates regarding Alpha Two, connect your Discord and Intrepid accounts here.

Combatant Opt-In

17810121318

Comments

  • InfamouseInfamouse Member, Alpha Two
    Interesting thread, couple things.
    One this is my first post, what initially attracted me to Ashes of Creation is the Open world PVP flagging system that is identical to L2. (Im a 10+ year L2 player).
    Assuming AoC's pvp is similar to L2s in the sense that open world PVP is a constant threat you would never ever ever want to run around constantly flagged, culturally if it follows the same path as L2 (which the system itself kind of dictates/invites) being flagged is inviting people to attack you, and also a combat disadvantage.

    In L2, flagging order (especially in the early years, not so much in the later ones) was a HUGE part of pvp.
    What I mean by this is your tanks, heavy warrior classes, and tanky bard-buffers (Swordsingers and Bladedancers in L2) would be flagging in a pvp encounter, generally in that order, with your high DPS Mages, Rogues, Archers and most of all, healers trying to stay non-combatant as long as humanly possible, or until a soft target (Another healer, or your enemy parties top DPS who you desperately want to knock out of the fight early) flag.

    This was one of the joys of L2 PVP. Coordinated, skilled parties could absolutely decimate their (better geared/higher leveled) opponents by communicating more effectively.
    I played at the high end of pvp in L2 (Castle owning/pvp dominating top 3 guilds) most of my career there (Sieghardt in the early years, took a break, came back to Chronos if theres any other L2 players around :D), and my excitement for this game is completely off the charts compared to anything else ive played/seen since then. Issues like what the OP are talking about assuming the system stays as-is are actually not issues, what I mean by that is not accidentally going corrupted is a very real thing that your players/pvpers will have to manage, and they should have to manage it. It makes the open world PVP encounters a delicate game of chess that has to be played in real time at high speed. There will be times where not properly managing these things will cost you a fight to a weaker opponent who you should have otherwise beaten, because they were smarter/more patient/paid more attention to what was going on. It adds an entire element of tactical play to open world PVP that is woefully lacking in other games (been playing wow for a while now, including classic). WOW is a great example of that. I hear people talk about enjoying PVP in that game, and for me, who grew up in L2 pvp, WoW PVP is essentially worthless. Its a mini-game at a carnival at best. Something to be enjoyed for a split second and then forgotten about. I have a feeling that AOC is going to be more of the meaningful, tactical, drama filled PVP that I love.

    You will never want to run around flagged for PVP in AOC, needlessly giving up a huge tactical advantage of getting to choose when/where/how to enter a fight. If you do, players like me (and im sure many others) will take advantage of your stupidity and carelessness and punish you, repeatedly, and you will stop doing that. A toggle in a game like this will also be worthless. Fast-travel is limited. Zone/area management via PVP means will be a real thing. Clans and guilds will work to control the best zones and spots. Only the absolute top players/guilds would ever want to be always flagged for PVP. I promise you that there will be guilds that form that declare war on every other guild in the game, and fight all takers at every opportunity. In real life terms, for the average player in AOC, being always toggled for PVP would be the equivalent of dropping your pants to your feet, then handcuffing your wrists to your ankles, and THEN challenging every person you come across on the street to a fight. My old L2 players who are used to this system know this.
    If you never played L2 and are not used to this flagging system, youll understand that a toggle completely defeats the purpose of this for open-world PVP. Sieges, caravans, guild wars, etc where everyone involved is a combatant will be treated/handled completely differently. Everyone involved will be ready, on-guard, buffed and paying attention, and the style/way the fights play out will be entirely different than the large open world pvp encounters. Parties will be organized differently, min-maxed to the absolute bleeding edge/limit of the current game knowledge. Your open world encounters wont be like this (unless of course you leave town explicitly to pvp and you prepare for it). Open world will be alot dirtier, grittier, and full of twists. So before you beg for a toggle, play the game first XD
  • daveywaveydaveywavey Member, Alpha Two
    Infamouse wrote: »
    Assuming AoC's pvp is similar to L2s in the sense that open world PVP is a constant threat you would never ever ever want to run around constantly flagged, culturally if it follows the same path as L2 (which the system itself kind of dictates/invites) being flagged is inviting people to attack you, and also a combat disadvantage.

    Going off his posts, that's exactly what he wants. He wants to be attacked at random as he goes about his business, cos he enjoys it.
    This link may help you: https://ashesofcreation.wiki/


    giphy-downsized-large.gif?cid=b603632fp2svffcmdi83yynpfpexo413mpb1qzxnh3cei0nx&ep=v1_gifs_gifId&rid=giphy-downsized-large.gif&ct=s
  • TyrantorTyrantor Member, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    Infamouse wrote: »

    You will never want to run around flagged for PVP in AOC, needlessly giving up a huge tactical advantage of getting to choose when/where/how to enter a fight. If you do, players like me (and im sure many others) will take advantage of your stupidity and carelessness and punish you, repeatedly, and you will stop doing that.

    I can appreciate the fact you think being in combatant state would be stupid from your experience in L2 I would likely agree with you if this was L2 considering the grind that game involved. However based on the current level grind intended for this game I do not view it the same way. Furthermore I come from games that had no corruption system, no level restrictions on attacking other players etc. What I mean by this is I've played games with full open world pvp without restrictions that also involved death penalties, loot and durability loss no safe zones, no insta kill guards etc etc.

    In my opinion I would prefer the pvp to come to me, if I'm going to flag for it myself then i'll be prepared for that to happen. So yes please attack me, it's the entire point of me flagging for combat. I'm not trying to play a cat and mouse game tip toeing around a corruption system that has no business preventing or impacting open world pvp from players who want to participate in it.
    Infamouse wrote: »
    In L2, flagging order (especially in the early years, not so much in the later ones) was a HUGE part of pvp.
    What I mean by this is your tanks, heavy warrior classes, and tanky bard-buffers (Swordsingers and Bladedancers in L2) would be flagging in a pvp encounter, generally in that order, with your high DPS Mages, Rogues, Archers and most of all, healers trying to stay non-combatant as long as humanly possible, or until a soft target (Another healer, or your enemy parties top DPS who you desperately want to knock out of the fight early) flag.

    This is a flat out bad design. The corruption system impacting your ability to attack or not attack because of it is wrong. Again the corruption system has no place in pvp unrelated to ganking/griefing players who unwillingly get attacked and killed. There is absolutely no reason two groups fighting each other should risk or become flagged for corruption in this situation or the one I explained in the OP. It's not skillful play having to limit who in your group can attack until XYZ because corruption. It would be more skillful if all players could attack and be attacked at will as there would be no outside concerns and restrictions put on the players.
    Tyrantor
    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
  • InfamouseInfamouse Member, Alpha Two
    edited October 2020
    Tyrantor wrote: »
    Infamouse wrote: »
    I can appreciate the fact you think being in combatant state would be stupid from your experience in L2 I would likely agree with you if this was L2 considering the grind that game involved. However based on the current level grind intended for this game I do not view it the same way. Furthermore I come from games that had no corruption system, no level restrictions on attacking other players etc. What I mean by this is I've played games with full open world pvp without restrictions that also involved death penalties, loot and durability loss no safe zones, no insta kill guards etc etc.

    In my opinion I would prefer the pvp to come to me, if I'm going to flag for it myself then i'll be prepared for that to happen. So yes please attack me, it's the entire point of me flagging for combat. I'm not trying to play a cat and mouse game tip toeing around a corruption system that has no business preventing or impacting open world pvp from players who want to participate in it.


    This is a flat out bad design. The corruption system impacting your ability to attack or not attack because of it is wrong. Again the corruption system has no place in pvp unrelated to ganking/griefing players who unwillingly get attacked and killed. There is absolutely no reason two groups fighting each other should risk or become flagged for corruption in this situation or the one I explained in the OP. It's not skillful play having to limit who in your group can attack until XYZ because corruption. It would be more skillful if all players could attack and be attacked at will as there would be no outside concerns and restrictions put on the players.

    The corruption/flagging system is designed for PVP and PVE players to be able to co-exist (and sometimes for players to shift between mindstates) fluidly. Maybe today im fired up and ready to go for pvp and thats all i want, running around and giving people an open-handed slap will provoke pvp 90% of the time on these days. Or I could simply go to the best exp zone, start killing some mobs, and wait for someone to try and push me out of it. Or I could go push someone out. But tomorrow I want to work on my animal husbandry, which requires me to focus on resource gathering/farming. Its time consuming as it is, and adding in the element to be ganked repeatedly is not what I want today. Having the ability to choose when to enter combat is a lot of fun. From your stand-point, what your saying is you just want to be attacked. Thats easy. Slap everyone who comes near you and that will happen no problem. The flagging isnt a barrier to regular pvp encounters. Two aggressive players/guilds/alliances wont struggle to PVP each other. It will however let hyper aggressive PVP-only players live side by side with cow-farmers and miners, and these two activities being non-preventative to each other. Also, by being not flagged, you have the ability to enter a chase on a red player and do so without being attacked by other players while you do it. I understand your concerns are it limiting PVP, but previous experience (10+ years) in the system tells me that in and of itself, that wont be the issue. I can extensively tell you all the bad things that can come as a result of this system but thats a text wall for another day, or DM me lol.
  • TyrantorTyrantor Member, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    You think attacking random players to find pvp is better than just allowing players who are open to pvp to flag themselves? I get that people will fight back (sometimes and sometimes not) - again the point isn't so I have to randomly attack people. The toggle would be my (our) way of saying we forfeit the corruption system. It has no impact on the PvE player as they wouldn't flag themselves correct? This means we would be co-existing with less intrusion on the PvE player. If we are all green as L2 played, then I have to attack random green players to find the "fight" versus if some are willingly green and some are willingly purple I no longer have to guess who is who.

    The toggle would give everyone the option to play the game as they want without fear of corruption or of course having to play around it. If you want to go tame some animals no one is forcing you to toggle it on.
    Tyrantor
    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
  • InfamouseInfamouse Member, Alpha Two
    Tyrantor wrote: »
    You think attacking random players to find pvp is better than just allowing players who are open to pvp to flag themselves? I get that people will fight back (sometimes and sometimes not) - again the point isn't so I have to randomly attack people. The toggle would be my (our) way of saying we forfeit the corruption system. It has no impact on the PvE player as they wouldn't flag themselves correct? This means we would be co-existing with less intrusion on the PvE player. If we are all green as L2 played, then I have to attack random green players to find the "fight" versus if some are willingly green and some are willingly purple I no longer have to guess who is who.

    The toggle would give everyone the option to play the game as they want without fear of corruption or of course having to play around it. If you want to go tame some animals no one is forcing you to toggle it on.

    Totally get your line of thinking, and its completely valid. I understand where you are coming from a bit better, and only basing it off previous experience, very very few people would do this, atleast in L2 on the servers I played on, youd be condeming yourself to death to the point where youd be better of just standing outside of the town gate and attacking everyone who walks by then trying to be in the world that way. Even the players who WOULD do this and be PVP flagged all of the time, were also the players whos own reputations or guilds were already a standing invitation to attack them. In short, it would be an entire system that would be sparsely used, at absolute best.
  • NoaaniNoaani Member, Intrepid Pack, Alpha Two
    Tyrantor wrote: »
    The toggle would be my (our) way of saying we forfeit the corruption system.
    That is not something you should get to pre-decide.

    If you want to decide that every time, cool - I'm sure PvP players on your server will know you are always up for a fight, and will attack you regardless of how much they outnumber you. However, since corruption is a key aspect to the game, and it being acquired at a reasonable rate is actually key to other systems in the game functioning, the wide scale ability to opt out of it is simply not a good fit for this game.
  • TyrantorTyrantor Member, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    edited October 2020
    Look the game is going to be extremely regionalized. Just based on rough averages there will be approximately 9,000 people per Metro ZOI (based on server capacity of 50k and spread evenly across all 5 Metros) which would then equate to roughly 90 people per node so lets say based on this that approximately 3 nodes would likely share general hunting grounds +/- 270 players at peak hours (assuming max online capacity of 10k). If there are roughly 3-4 hunting zones immediately adjacent to each of those 3 nodes we'll be looking at an average of about 25 players per hunting ground near the nodes. I imagine it will likely scale down the further from the nodes you go especially during the early node leveling days of game release.

    So now lets put this into further review, 25 people spread across a zone that may take roughly 10-15 minutes to run (or longer) it's likely there won't be that much "risk" with being in combatant state at nearly all times. This would equate to roughly 3 full parties per hunting ground. Sprinkle in a few solos, smaller groups etc it seems like the average risk level won't be that high.

    Add in the fact we do not currently know if there are any tracking type classes and of course we always have the option to tuck tail and run when players or groups pop on screen.

    Anyway this is some what irrelevant to the OP but it may add some transparency to how spread out the world is going to be with 100+ nodes and all the accompanying leveling areas.
    Tyrantor
    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
  • TyrantorTyrantor Member, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    edited October 2020
    Noaani wrote: »
    Tyrantor wrote: »
    The toggle would be my (our) way of saying we forfeit the corruption system.
    That is not something you should get to pre-decide.

    If you want to decide that every time, cool - I'm sure PvP players on your server will know you are always up for a fight, and will attack you regardless of how much they outnumber you. However, since corruption is a key aspect to the game, and it being acquired at a reasonable rate is actually key to other systems in the game functioning, the wide scale ability to opt out of it is simply not a good fit for this game.

    What world do you live in? Why should that not be something I get to pre-determine? Where is corruption listed as a "key aspect" to the game in the sense that it's incentivized to become corrupt? It's a deterrent and allowing players to flag for combat has absolutely no impact on the corruption system for it's intended purpose.
    Tyrantor
    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
  • CROW3CROW3 Member, Alpha Two
    Still a good idea. 😉
    AoC+Dwarf+750v3.png
  • DolyemDolyem Member, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    Infamouse wrote: »
    Interesting thread, couple things.
    One this is my first post, what initially attracted me to Ashes of Creation is the Open world PVP flagging system that is identical to L2. (Im a 10+ year L2 player).
    Assuming AoC's pvp is similar to L2s in the sense that open world PVP is a constant threat you would never ever ever want to run around constantly flagged, culturally if it follows the same path as L2 (which the system itself kind of dictates/invites) being flagged is inviting people to attack you, and also a combat disadvantage.

    In L2, flagging order (especially in the early years, not so much in the later ones) was a HUGE part of pvp.
    What I mean by this is your tanks, heavy warrior classes, and tanky bard-buffers (Swordsingers and Bladedancers in L2) would be flagging in a pvp encounter, generally in that order, with your high DPS Mages, Rogues, Archers and most of all, healers trying to stay non-combatant as long as humanly possible, or until a soft target (Another healer, or your enemy parties top DPS who you desperately want to knock out of the fight early) flag.

    This was one of the joys of L2 PVP. Coordinated, skilled parties could absolutely decimate their (better geared/higher leveled) opponents by communicating more effectively.
    I played at the high end of pvp in L2 (Castle owning/pvp dominating top 3 guilds) most of my career there (Sieghardt in the early years, took a break, came back to Chronos if theres any other L2 players around :D), and my excitement for this game is completely off the charts compared to anything else ive played/seen since then. Issues like what the OP are talking about assuming the system stays as-is are actually not issues, what I mean by that is not accidentally going corrupted is a very real thing that your players/pvpers will have to manage, and they should have to manage it. It makes the open world PVP encounters a delicate game of chess that has to be played in real time at high speed. There will be times where not properly managing these things will cost you a fight to a weaker opponent who you should have otherwise beaten, because they were smarter/more patient/paid more attention to what was going on. It adds an entire element of tactical play to open world PVP that is woefully lacking in other games (been playing wow for a while now, including classic). WOW is a great example of that. I hear people talk about enjoying PVP in that game, and for me, who grew up in L2 pvp, WoW PVP is essentially worthless. Its a mini-game at a carnival at best. Something to be enjoyed for a split second and then forgotten about. I have a feeling that AOC is going to be more of the meaningful, tactical, drama filled PVP that I love.

    You will never want to run around flagged for PVP in AOC, needlessly giving up a huge tactical advantage of getting to choose when/where/how to enter a fight. If you do, players like me (and im sure many others) will take advantage of your stupidity and carelessness and punish you, repeatedly, and you will stop doing that. A toggle in a game like this will also be worthless. Fast-travel is limited. Zone/area management via PVP means will be a real thing. Clans and guilds will work to control the best zones and spots. Only the absolute top players/guilds would ever want to be always flagged for PVP. I promise you that there will be guilds that form that declare war on every other guild in the game, and fight all takers at every opportunity. In real life terms, for the average player in AOC, being always toggled for PVP would be the equivalent of dropping your pants to your feet, then handcuffing your wrists to your ankles, and THEN challenging every person you come across on the street to a fight. My old L2 players who are used to this system know this.
    If you never played L2 and are not used to this flagging system, youll understand that a toggle completely defeats the purpose of this for open-world PVP. Sieges, caravans, guild wars, etc where everyone involved is a combatant will be treated/handled completely differently. Everyone involved will be ready, on-guard, buffed and paying attention, and the style/way the fights play out will be entirely different than the large open world pvp encounters. Parties will be organized differently, min-maxed to the absolute bleeding edge/limit of the current game knowledge. Your open world encounters wont be like this (unless of course you leave town explicitly to pvp and you prepare for it). Open world will be alot dirtier, grittier, and full of twists. So before you beg for a toggle, play the game first XD

    I personally dont see corruption as a big enough deterrent to wait for a healer of an attacking group to engage. But I do like the points you make of a tactical viewpoint that evolved from a games system. I have actually been wondering whether or not they might flag a n entire group if one person flags, but I don't think they are going for that direction. It would definitely remove the problem of people using the corruption system as a shield in open world team fights though.
    GJjUGHx.gif
  • DolyemDolyem Member, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    Noaani wrote: »
    Tyrantor wrote: »
    The toggle would be my (our) way of saying we forfeit the corruption system.
    However, since corruption is a key aspect to the game, and it being acquired at a reasonable rate is actually key to other systems in the game functioning, the wide scale ability to opt out of it is simply not a good fit for this game.

    The corruption system is in place to protect people from griefing, not PvP. Why shouldn't a person be able to opt out of a system that protects them? It gives them zero advantage, and actually puts themselves at a disadvantage in the world, and seeing as it is already an implementation in the pre alpha, no resources would be lost in development of the feature. To me its more like a hardcore mode being turned on, makes the risk factor way higher which could be very fun.
    GJjUGHx.gif
  • daveywaveydaveywavey Member, Alpha Two
    It's not "opting out of Corruption", per se, more like skipping the first stage. If someone using this toggle to go purple goes and kills a green, they'll go Corrupted as normal.
    This link may help you: https://ashesofcreation.wiki/


    giphy-downsized-large.gif?cid=b603632fp2svffcmdi83yynpfpexo413mpb1qzxnh3cei0nx&ep=v1_gifs_gifId&rid=giphy-downsized-large.gif&ct=s
  • TyrantorTyrantor Member, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    daveywavey wrote: »
    It's not "opting out of Corruption", per se, more like skipping the first stage. If someone using this toggle to go purple goes and kills a green, they'll go Corrupted as normal.

    Yes 100% just meant opting out of the protection the corruption system offers.
    Tyrantor
    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
  • NoaaniNoaani Member, Intrepid Pack, Alpha Two
    Tyrantor wrote: »
    Where is corruption listed as a "key aspect" to the game
    In the bounty hunter system.

    Any system that has another system built entierly on top of it is a key system.
  • NoaaniNoaani Member, Intrepid Pack, Alpha Two
    Dolyem wrote: »
    Why shouldn't a person be able to opt out of a system that protects them?
    Because it alters the entier feel of the game.

    A game where almost all players are walking around as non-combatants has a different feel to it than a game where 10% of the population is walking around as a combatant.

    You are looking at it from the very narrow perspective of someone that wants to PvP all the time (a small segment of the playerbase), where as I am looking at it from the perspective of the actual game - not even of a player in the game, but the actual game.

    A game that has groups roaming around the world that are flagged as combatants is absolutely a different game to one that doesn't have groups flagged as combatants roaming around the world.
  • daveywaveydaveywavey Member, Alpha Two
    Noaani wrote: »
    You are looking at it from the very narrow perspective of someone that wants to PvP all the time (a small segment of the playerbase), where as I am looking at it from the perspective of the actual game - not even of a player in the game, but the actual game.

    He didn't want to "PvP all the time". His examples included being attacked while he's out farming/gathering/etc. He just wants it to be a more inviting and more likely prospect at any time.
    This link may help you: https://ashesofcreation.wiki/


    giphy-downsized-large.gif?cid=b603632fp2svffcmdi83yynpfpexo413mpb1qzxnh3cei0nx&ep=v1_gifs_gifId&rid=giphy-downsized-large.gif&ct=s
  • NerrorNerror Member, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    In the beginning of this thread I thought I knew what was being discussed, but I am not sure anymore...

    The current system, based on that video, is that players can toggle the combatant flag on and off at any time, but there is a timer after it's toggled off before it takes effect and the player becomes a non-combatant again.

    Are you guys arguing about whether or not that's a good system?
  • daveywaveydaveywavey Member, Alpha Two
    Nerror wrote: »
    In the beginning of this thread I thought I knew what was being discussed, but I am not sure anymore...

    The current system, based on that video, is that players can toggle the combatant flag on and off at any time, but there is a timer after it's toggled off before it takes effect and the player becomes a non-combatant again.

    Are you guys arguing about whether or not that's a good system?

    Before the video, Tyrantor said he'd like a toggle to be able to get Combatant status. After the video, Noaani suggested it might just be there to aid in the testing process before the full Corruption system was implemented.

    It's true, it's gone on a pretty long time...
    This link may help you: https://ashesofcreation.wiki/


    giphy-downsized-large.gif?cid=b603632fp2svffcmdi83yynpfpexo413mpb1qzxnh3cei0nx&ep=v1_gifs_gifId&rid=giphy-downsized-large.gif&ct=s
  • TyrantorTyrantor Member, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    Noaani wrote: »
    Tyrantor wrote: »
    Where is corruption listed as a "key aspect" to the game
    In the bounty hunter system.

    Any system that has another system built entierly on top of it is a key system.

    How would this be impacted exactly? Again the toggle would have no impact on this.
    Tyrantor
    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
  • CROW3CROW3 Member, Alpha Two
    Has there been any dev discussion on the default purple flag duration after a pvp encounter?
    AoC+Dwarf+750v3.png
  • NoaaniNoaani Member, Intrepid Pack, Alpha Two
    Nerror wrote: »
    Are you guys arguing about whether or not that's a good system?

    I'm saying that this is a system that was implemented for alpha because they are not developing the corruption system just yet, and that we were told a long time ago that this would be the case.

    They are all saying that a system we were told a long time ago was going to be put in place temporarily for alpha is proof that there will be a toggle in the final game.
  • NoaaniNoaani Member, Intrepid Pack, Alpha Two
    CROW3 wrote: »
    Has there been any dev discussion on the default purple flag duration after a pvp encounter?

    To my knowledge, it is still at "a few minutes" or a variation thereof.

    While it is an assumption, I would assume it will end up lasting either 3 or 5 minutes.
  • NoaaniNoaani Member, Intrepid Pack, Alpha Two
    Tyrantor wrote: »
    Noaani wrote: »
    Tyrantor wrote: »
    Where is corruption listed as a "key aspect" to the game
    In the bounty hunter system.

    Any system that has another system built entierly on top of it is a key system.

    How would this be impacted exactly? Again the toggle would have no impact on this.

    If there are more people running around as combatants, then there are fewer ways in which people can gain corruption.

    There are people in this thread that have said they would never turn this flag off, meaning there will absolutely be fewer people in the game over all by which players can gain corruption.

    This means fewer people with corruption, and those with corruption will have less of it. In turn, that means the bounty hunter system - which is a progression path in Ashes - is significantly less valuable as a path on which to spend time.
  • daveywaveydaveywavey Member, Alpha Two
    Noaani wrote: »
    If there are more people running around as combatants, then there are fewer ways in which people can gain corruption.

    There are people in this thread that have said they would never turn this flag off, meaning there will absolutely be fewer people in the game over all by which players can gain corruption.

    This means fewer people with corruption, and those with corruption will have less of it. In turn, that means the bounty hunter system - which is a progression path in Ashes - is significantly less valuable as a path on which to spend time.

    The Corruption system is to deter griefing. If there are less players being griefed, then surely that's a good thing?
    This link may help you: https://ashesofcreation.wiki/


    giphy-downsized-large.gif?cid=b603632fp2svffcmdi83yynpfpexo413mpb1qzxnh3cei0nx&ep=v1_gifs_gifId&rid=giphy-downsized-large.gif&ct=s
  • NagashNagash Member, Leader of Men, Kickstarter, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    I do wonder how much of the pvp thread would be solved if people read the wiki for a bit. we may never know
    nJ0vUSm.gif

    The dead do not squabble as this land’s rulers do. The dead have no desires, petty jealousies or ambitions. A world of the dead is a world at peace
  • NerrorNerror Member, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    edited November 2020
    As always with these discussions, people also have to agree on a definition of terminology. :)

    Griefing, for example, in a non-consensual PvP enabled game: What is that exactly?

    To me, being killed a few times by the same person while out gathering is certainly not griefing, not matter how much stronger they are. It is expected gameplay you sign up for by playing the game. I can choose to go somewhere else. However, if that person follows me around and starts spawn camping and harass me no matter what I am doing, we enter griefing territory after the 10th death perhaps.

    That completely goes away if it's a node or guild war though. Then it is to be expected that lower level, weaker players will be KOS anytime, anywhere. Unless the offending player is using exploits or similar (or verbally harassing obviously), there is no such thing as griefing in a guild or node war.
  • TyrantorTyrantor Member, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    Noaani wrote: »
    Tyrantor wrote: »
    Noaani wrote: »
    Tyrantor wrote: »
    Where is corruption listed as a "key aspect" to the game
    In the bounty hunter system.

    Any system that has another system built entierly on top of it is a key system.

    How would this be impacted exactly? Again the toggle would have no impact on this.

    If there are more people running around as combatants, then there are fewer ways in which people can gain corruption.

    There are people in this thread that have said they would never turn this flag off, meaning there will absolutely be fewer people in the game over all by which players can gain corruption.

    This means fewer people with corruption, and those with corruption will have less of it. In turn, that means the bounty hunter system - which is a progression path in Ashes - is significantly less valuable as a path on which to spend time.

    Less corruption sounds like a win-win how do you not understand this? The only reason they have to put a bounty hunter system in the game is to further disincentivize going corrupt. What it means is that the corruption system will work more efficiently by only applying corruption to people who do not accept the risk of pvp. The bounty hunter path doesn't lose value for it's intended purpose, which should be the point of both corruption and BH quest line.
    Tyrantor
    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
  • NoaaniNoaani Member, Intrepid Pack, Alpha Two
    daveywavey wrote: »
    Noaani wrote: »
    If there are more people running around as combatants, then there are fewer ways in which people can gain corruption.

    There are people in this thread that have said they would never turn this flag off, meaning there will absolutely be fewer people in the game over all by which players can gain corruption.

    This means fewer people with corruption, and those with corruption will have less of it. In turn, that means the bounty hunter system - which is a progression path in Ashes - is significantly less valuable as a path on which to spend time.

    The Corruption system is to deter griefing. If there are less players being griefed, then surely that's a good thing?

    I'm not sure what you are saying here.

    The kind of people that would be griefed in a game like Ashes are not the kind of people that would use a toggle like this.
  • TyrantorTyrantor Member, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    Noaani wrote: »
    daveywavey wrote: »
    Noaani wrote: »
    If there are more people running around as combatants, then there are fewer ways in which people can gain corruption.

    There are people in this thread that have said they would never turn this flag off, meaning there will absolutely be fewer people in the game over all by which players can gain corruption.

    This means fewer people with corruption, and those with corruption will have less of it. In turn, that means the bounty hunter system - which is a progression path in Ashes - is significantly less valuable as a path on which to spend time.

    The Corruption system is to deter griefing. If there are less players being griefed, then surely that's a good thing?

    I'm not sure what you are saying here.

    The kind of people that would be griefed in a game like Ashes are not the kind of people that would use a toggle like this.

    It's obvious you don't know what any of us are saying.
    Tyrantor
    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
Sign In or Register to comment.