So, show me one confirmed situation where you can PvP for an item (weapon, armor or accessory) of your choice.
I don't offer up links to people that just ask for them, I wait until they are fully committed to their error.
So, commit.
I already laid out a scenario above, you pvp for caravans, that brings you income - clearly confirmed by Steven. The income you use to buy gear from crafters which can craft gear as strong as gear dropped from PVE- clearly confirmed by Steven.
Is that a way to play the game or not?
I didn't ask you for a link to help me, I asked you to prove your point where Steven said that he clearly does not want PVP only to be a way of progression.
I think you should check one of the latest Q&A where he said that the game is planned in such a way so it lets you progress whichever way you want. It take character to admit when wrong .
So, what you are saying is that there is no way you can PvP to gain a reward that you can chose. All you can do is sell the rewards you get in order to buy an item that you can use. That is like saying mining iron ore is a valid way to progress - as I can just sell iron to buy items. Since we know the best gear in the game comes from a combination of raid dropped materials and crafting, and there is not much chance of players or guilds selling those top end materials (assuming they are needed for repairs), then your assumption of relying on buying your item progression is severely capped.
Now let's look at how items and resources are bought in to the world. Is there any confirmed method by which PvP actually created new resources for the server, or is PvP just about leeching rewards from others?
Since it's confirmed that items made by legendary crafters will be at the same level as items dropped in raids you won't be severely capped. there will be a market for said items as there will be a lot of people/guilds playing for crafting. I m not argguing that it s an efficient way to progress, don't forget this argument started because you said the OP's idea is not in line with the view of the game because you should not be able to gear up from PVP and my example which is so far confirmed does give you such option making OP's idea a viable feature of military nodes and your argument void. the fact of the matter is that you can gear up from PVP (you still need crafters and traders but you would need them even if you'd gear up from PVE) and if they would be to add OP's idea (ofcourse with the necessary balance and testing) it would not deviate the slightest bit from the view of ashes.
1
Options
NagashMember, Leader of Men, Kickstarter, Alpha One
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
Since it's confirmed that items made by legendary crafters will be at the same level as items dropped in raids you won't be severely capped.
While this is confirmed, it is also confirmed that those top end items crafters make will use drops from raids - that is where the cap is.
You can't make a top end item without the materials to make it, and the materials to make it come in part from PvE content, and are unlikely to be put up for sale while still top end.
the fact of the matter is that you can gear up from PVP
No, you can not gear up from PvP.
You can accrue wealth via PvP (via any form of PvP other than arenas, currently), and you can use wealth to gear up. You can not, however, gear up via PvP.
The suggestion is asking for players to be able to gear up via PvP - not via accruing wealth and then spending it. Again, that goes against the notion of what Ashes is - even PvE content will only reward players with materials with which to make items (for the most part).
While this may seem like a subtle, semantic distinction to some - this subtle semantic distinction is where all of harvesting, processing and crafting lies, including all potential progression within those spheres. As such, I would debate the suggestion that it is either subtle or semantic.
If either of you had a brain, you would have suggested that the arena destroy some (not all) of the equipment the losers are wearing, and provide a portion of the materials of that to the winners. However, since neither of you are that smart, and I am the one that decided to bring it up, obviously you can't use that suggestion now as agreeing with it would mean agreeing with essentially every point I have made in relation to gear in this thread.
However, it still doesn't address the issue that the gambling aspect of the suggestion poses - and I'd just like to reiterate, I have not even mentioned the biggest issue with that specific suggestion.
You can accrue wealth via PvP (via any form of PvP other than arenas, currently), and you can use wealth to gear up. You can not, however, gear up via PvP.
you are literally pulling the context out of the argument and stating bare-face facts that literally say nothing new. THE ACT OF KILLING A PLAYER GETS YOU RESOURCES AND THOSE RESOURCES CAN BE USED TO GEAR UP. This is how the normal pvp will work, alright keeping up? Lets go to my suggestion.
THE ACT OF KILLING A PLAYER GETS YOU GEAR PIECES AND GOLD THAT CAN BE USED TO GEAR UP.
Oh damn, its almost like they mean the same thing but are just different paths to the same goal.
The suggestion is asking for players to be able to gear up via PvP - not via accruing wealth and then spending it.
I would love to see you try and queue into my suggestion wearing no gear and win a fight. If you can pull that off then your argument might have some value.
Again, that goes against the notion of what Ashes is - even PvE content will only reward players with materials with which to make items (for the most part).
The current system that is being trotted out with open world pvp can and WILL be used to solely gear up players that would rather kill someone else for materials instead of farming it themselves. Thinking that people will not do this is simply being ignorant to how hard-core many pvpers can get when they get addicted to hunting other players down.
While this may seem like a subtle, semantic distinction to some - this subtle semantic distinction is where all of harvesting, processing and crafting lies, including all potential progression within those spheres. As such, I would debate the suggestion that it is either subtle or semantic.
This "distinction" is your stubborn side showing and has no bearing on the conversation. We are saying the same thing but you contrive insane guesses and fairy tale stories to try and prove your point.
If either of you had a brain, you would have suggested that the arena destroy some (not all) of the equipment the losers are wearing, and provide a portion of the materials of that to the winners. However, since neither of you are that smart, and I am the one that decided to bring it up, obviously you can't use that suggestion now as agreeing with it would mean agreeing with essentially every point I have made in relation to gear in this thread.
... What? Then are you saying bounty hunters go against the spirit of the game since they will be the ones focused on hunting down corrupted players?
No, I'm saying bounty hunters are not going to expect to gear up from killing corrupt players.
Not every corrupt player is going to drop an item, and most people that gain corruption regularly are likely going to hold on to random trash items in their inventory that have as much of a chance of dropping as any useful item they may be using.
Why wouldn't Bounty hunters be able to gear up from this? If thats your WHOLE issue with the idea just make the arena gear have the same percentage chance to trash as if the player was corrupted. There now you cant complain anymore.
Admit it, you are trolling at this point. When I offered up that suggestion you said this:
You did not agree, you went on to complain that even with that change bounty hunters would still not get as much loot and blah blah blah.
However, it still doesn't address the issue that the gambling aspect of the suggestion poses - and I'd just like to reiterate, I have not even mentioned the biggest issue with that specific suggestion.
Oh glorious god-spawn of the forums we beseech your divine scripture to bless our eyes.
...a bounty hunter risks nothing but the combatant's death penalties when they go out to kill corrupted players. Unless im missing something, where as my suggestion has both parties risking *all* of the gear. Meaning it is High risk High reward in a consensual pvp setting rather than an open world scenario that can be exploited by bringing in combatants to help a bounty hunter kill a corrupted player.
I need to list some points but I don't want to go off topic. If you want to talk about any of the points, I will make another post.
Corrupted players have generally become corrupted by killing several or more players that are too weak to stand a chance in a fight.
Corruption is essentially a punishment system for repeatedly killing defenseless players.
Any type of reward system that can be accessed only by corrupted encourages becoming corrupted.
Ashes is not being designed to cater to killing low level players. It is particularly against repetitive killing of low levels.
Reducing corrupted stats in PvP to the point of being combat ineffective and sending bounty hunters after corrupted are both systems to forcibly stop the corrupted from killing players that do not stand a chance in fight.
You do not have to use the corruption system in your Murder Pits. There are already open world PvP zones (caravans, etc.) where corruption is not gained and your Murder Pits could be as well.
All that being said, the ability for corrupted to loot gear (especially equipped gear) off of bounty hunters is a reward system that encourages becoming corrupted and corruption is designed for the opposite.
Additionally, the possibility for bounty hunters to lose gear is a deterrent from hunting corrupted and directly counters the point of eliminating players that repetitively kill lowbies.
...I would be fine with it giving cosmetics instead as its not really a form of pvp that can be spammed...
So, I am not really trying to sway you on rewards or how to create your system. You were in a deadlocked debate over whether gear can be rewarded for PvP. I simply showed the quotes that allow the possibility for such a system. The reason I showed the arena system was to point out that some type of gear related PvP reward system exists and that a viewership of combat does exist in the game so it could be implemented in other ways such as your suggestions.
The gear enhancement rewards for PvP indicate that you could get creative with your reward system or simply attach it to the PvP gear enhancement system already intended.
Sorry I got off track, let me tell you about the ideas i had. If they really wish for there to be a pve element, We could mix into these fights random elite creatures instead of players that can be fought for... you thought id say resources right? Nah son! They would give you a trophy that can be used to increase the certificates or experience (your choice) from killing creatures of that same race for an extended amount of time. This could maybe even be a trophy that you can place inside an inn for players to get a very minor bonus when visiting and gazing upon the trophy at your place.
This would create more incentive to sign up for these arena fights as you dont know if you will get a monster or a player until a little bit of time before the fight, then once you win against a creature you get something that promotes going out into the world for PvE content.
The idea sounds like fun
You could possibly even build on it using the monster coin system to have players fight as monsters without requiring the coin. https://ashesofcreation.wiki/Monster_coins
Just in case you are not aware, Steven spends a lot of time reading the forums and IS also makes a list of the ideas on the forums for Steven. So, if you get a lot of support for your idea Steven will be paying attention to it.
Oh damn, its almost like they mean the same thing but are just different paths to the same goal.
See, here's the thing.
The discussion I am having with Snyx is going in a slightly different direction than the one I had with you. With you, we are talking about your proposal, and only your proposal. When Synx, we are talking about mroe general design of the game. While there is obviously some cross over, there isn't all that much.
You should either stick to the conversation that the two of us are having or join in on the one that Snyx and I are having, rather than trying to ram the two conversations together.
Feel free to go back to any of the previous two times I have quoted you in this thread if you would like to pick up our conversation, or otherwise feel free to join in on our more general design discussion - but just pick one.
Oh glorious god-spawn of the forums we beseech your divine scripture to bless our eyes.
@FuryBladeborne Thanks for getting back to me and for the support. I am a bit confused for your reasoning on posting the list below.
Corrupted players have generally become corrupted by killing several or more players that are too weak to stand a chance in a fight.
Corruption is essentially a punishment system for repeatedly killing defenseless players.
Any type of reward system that can be accessed only by corrupted encourages becoming corrupted.
Ashes is not being designed to cater to killing low level players. It is particularly against repetitive killing of low levels.
Reducing corrupted stats in PvP to the point of being combat ineffective and sending bounty hunters after corrupted are both systems to forcibly stop the corrupted from killing players that do not stand a chance in fight.
You do not have to use the corruption system in your Murder Pits. There are already open world PvP zones (caravans, etc.) where corruption is not gained and your Murder Pits could be as well.
Did you think I was asking for bounty hunters to drop gear too when killed by a corrupted? The last part as well about corruption being in the murder pits. I never suggested having it be applied there, perhaps you were thinking of the suggestion I made where a player dying would drop loot as if they were corrupted?
So, I am not really trying to sway you on rewards or how to create your system. You were in a deadlocked debate over whether gear can be rewarded for PvP. I simply showed the quotes that allow the possibility for such a system. The reason I showed the arena system was to point out that some type of gear related PvP reward system exists and that a viewership of combat does exist in the game so it could be implemented in other ways such as your suggestions.
Understood, I thank you for the links. Look if things need to be more uniform I am down for changes and suggestions. My issue was a person flat out refusing the ideas placed before them and suggesting an option that was already in the game as an alternative. So I am happy that you stepped in.
The idea sounds like fun
You could possibly even build on it using the monster coin system to have players fight as monsters without requiring the coin. https://ashesofcreation.wiki/Monster_coins
You know you just fixed the wires that were going haywire in my brain yesterday when I was thinking of the elite monsters for the murder pits. I tried and tried to figure out what to do with monster tokens but the obvious answer was right in front of me! Thank you!
Having the monsters be controlled by players would be an awesome addition without putting too much stress on the AI development to back this task. Just have a separate queue that people can sign up for to become one of these elite monsters! This role would not get the enemy player's loot as a reward but they would still get a cut of any bets placed for them to win. Maybe they could create a "monster lab" tree similar to the champion for the battle royales that can be geared out and augmented as you gain ranking in this system?
What a flurry of ideas, I think I like you! XD
Just in case you are not aware, Steven spends a lot of time reading the forums and IS also makes a list of the ideas on the forums for Steven. So, if you get a lot of support for your idea Steven will be paying attention to it.
Oh boy, I am worried he would have a rough time sloughing through this thread. maybe I can continue to consolidate the suggestions into the original post so that its easier for him
You can accrue wealth via PvP (via any form of PvP other than arenas, currently), and you can use wealth to gear up. You can not, however, gear up via PvP.
I'm actually speechless..
You can't gear up through PVE because you need a crafter to craft the items with the resources you got in PVE. You can't gear up through crafting either because you need PVE in order to obtain the resources. So following your logic, because you don't actually gear up using only one system but a mix of two (in my example using PVP and traiding) it means you can't gear up through PVE or crafting either. So f**k it, let's not gear up at all.. Fist fights everyone!
Edit 2: The elite monsters mentioned above could instead be player-controlled similarly to monster tokens. They could further develop this by having these monsters be given "gear" or augments that you gain by ranking up in this arena. There is a potential for these to be combat-created animal husbandry creatures. If a player driven creature wins the match they do not cause the enemy team to drop their gear and will only gain a reward in rank as well as the winner's prize of gold.
You can accrue wealth via PvP (via any form of PvP other than arenas, currently), and you can use wealth to gear up. You can not, however, gear up via PvP.
I'm actually speechless..
You can't gear up through PVE because you need a crafter to craft the items with the resources you got in PVE. You can't gear up through crafting either because you need PVE in order to obtain the resources. So following your logic, because you don't actually gear up using only one system but a mix of two (in my example using PVP and traiding) it means you can't gear up through PVE or crafting either. So f**k it, let's not gear up at all.. Fist fights everyone!
There is a distinct and important step in there.
That step is what keeps the economy turning. The economy in Ashes is more important than PvP - because the economy (wealth) is what people PvP over.
You can't bypass that step. It is absolutely key to every aspect of Ashes.
The issue isn't about getting wealth from PvP, every form of PvP offers that, and wealth can always be turned in to character power in various ways. I've never once said that there shouldn't be some form of reward on offer, I've just said it shouldn't be a finished item.
The issue is about not being a part of the servers economy, and getting finished items directly from PvP is circumventing that economy - even if the item in question was already player made, when it transfers hands, it should do so in the form of raw materials.
You can accrue wealth via PvP (via any form of PvP other than arenas, currently), and you can use wealth to gear up. You can not, however, gear up via PvP.
I'm actually speechless..
You can't gear up through PVE because you need a crafter to craft the items with the resources you got in PVE. You can't gear up through crafting either because you need PVE in order to obtain the resources. So following your logic, because you don't actually gear up using only one system but a mix of two (in my example using PVP and traiding) it means you can't gear up through PVE or crafting either. So f**k it, let's not gear up at all.. Fist fights everyone!
There is a distinct and important step in there.
That step is what keeps the economy turning. The economy in Ashes is more important than PvP - because the economy (wealth) is what people PvP over.
You can't bypass that step. It is absolutely key to every aspect of Ashes.
The issue isn't about getting wealth from PvP, every form of PvP offers that, and wealth can always be turned in to character power in various ways. I've never once said that there shouldn't be some form of reward on offer, I've just said it shouldn't be a finished item.
The issue is about not being a part of the servers economy, and getting finished items directly from PvP is circumventing that economy - even if the item in question was already player made, when it transfers hands, it should do so in the form of raw materials.
K. All items dropped need to be repaired. No more complaining.
You can accrue wealth via PvP (via any form of PvP other than arenas, currently), and you can use wealth to gear up. You can not, however, gear up via PvP.
I'm actually speechless..
You can't gear up through PVE because you need a crafter to craft the items with the resources you got in PVE. You can't gear up through crafting either because you need PVE in order to obtain the resources. So following your logic, because you don't actually gear up using only one system but a mix of two (in my example using PVP and traiding) it means you can't gear up through PVE or crafting either. So f**k it, let's not gear up at all.. Fist fights everyone!
There is a distinct and important step in there.
That step is what keeps the economy turning. The economy in Ashes is more important than PvP - because the economy (wealth) is what people PvP over.
You can't bypass that step. It is absolutely key to every aspect of Ashes.
The issue isn't about getting wealth from PvP, every form of PvP offers that, and wealth can always be turned in to character power in various ways. I've never once said that there shouldn't be some form of reward on offer, I've just said it shouldn't be a finished item.
The issue is about not being a part of the servers economy, and getting finished items directly from PvP is circumventing that economy - even if the item in question was already player made, when it transfers hands, it should do so in the form of raw materials.
K. All items dropped need to be repaired. No more complaining.
If we are talking about the drop rate we discussed earlier that is comparible to that of bounty hunters, that would be all good.
If we are still talking about items every fight, or the winner of every fight getting rewards, then I would say that those rewards are still too high, and it would be more appropriate if the lower had an item destroyed, and the winner gained a portion (around 10%) of the materials needed to make that item.
K. All items dropped need to be repaired. No more complaining.
If we are talking about the drop rate we discussed earlier that is comparible to that of bounty hunters, that would be all good.
If we are still talking about items every fight, or the winner of every fight getting rewards, then I would say that those rewards are still too high, and it would be more appropriate if the lower had an item destroyed, and the winner gained a portion (around 10%) of the materials needed to make that item.[/quote]
I have already updated the specifics on the amount of fights that happen. There will be a set amount each day that you basically sign up for a time slot and hope to get chosen once that time comes around. This new idea means that you will fight random opponents. Thus making it random, the thing you wanted the gambling to be in the first place. We happy yet?
I have already updated the specifics on the amount of fights that happen. There will be a set amount each day that you basically sign up for a time slot and hope to get chosen once that time comes around. This new idea means that you will fight random opponents. Thus making it random, the thing you wanted the gambling to be in the first place. We happy yet?
Gambling will still be fixed when either the novelty wears off, the server is quiet, the node is quiet or any other number of reasons.
Also, you still won't get that past the EU - which is the real hurdle to the gambling aspect. As I said earlier, Intrepid may have trouble getting the parlor games gambling past the EU, even with them being random.
This is the reason the casino in Archeage wasn't used by Trion - gambling laws in the EU are strict.
I have already updated the specifics on the amount of fights that happen. There will be a set amount each day that you basically sign up for a time slot and hope to get chosen once that time comes around. This new idea means that you will fight random opponents. Thus making it random, the thing you wanted the gambling to be in the first place. We happy yet?
Gambling will still be fixed when either the novelty wears off, the server is quiet, the node is quiet or any other number of reasons.
Also, you still won't get that past the EU - which is the real hurdle to the gambling aspect. As I said earlier, Intrepid may have trouble getting the parlor games gambling past the EU, even with them being random.
This is the reason the casino in Archeage wasn't used by Trion - gambling laws in the EU are strict.
Sounds like im not gonna have a problem then. It will work out perfectly. Why should I care what the EU dictate when the game is being built here in the US? If its an issue then EU can do without it -just- like your example above with archeage being brought across the seas.
"Gambling will still be fixed when either the novelty wears off, the server is quiet, the node is quiet or any other number of reasons."
Yeah and a meteor could hit the earth and kill us all. Pointing out extremes is easy to do. Each of your supposed issues can be solved by server merging or only having the arena matches at prime-time.
Also, you still won't get that past the EU - which is the real hurdle to the gambling aspect. As I said earlier, Intrepid may have trouble getting the parlor games gambling past the EU, even with them being random.
This is the reason the casino in Archeage wasn't used by Trion - gambling laws in the EU are strict.
Gear/material wise it won't be considered gambling because your input (how good you are at the game / skill) will have an impact on the outcome of the fight. It won't be anything similar to loot boxes / gambling where you have no way of chaining the odds in your favour.
EDIT:
Currency wise it's a bit of a grey area as there is no form of getting in game currency with outside money but not sure since EU does not impose laws but only guidelines and each country can choose to be stricter or looser on said guidelines. Anyway this is going down to politics so I'm gonna back out
0
Options
FuryBladeborneMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
Did you think I was asking for bounty hunters to drop gear too when killed by a corrupted? The last part as well about corruption being in the murder pits. I never suggested having it be applied there...
...my suggestion has both parties risking *all* of the gear. Meaning it is High risk High reward in a consensual pvp setting rather than an open world scenario that b cane exploited by bringing in combatants to help a bounty hunter kill a corrupted player.
I guess you meant all gear in the murder pit being risked rather than a reference to the open world fights. Since you did not mean that bounty hunters should be able to drop gear, its all good
maybe I can continue to consolidate the suggestions into the original post so that its easier for him
I think you should. I would write the current version at the top and leave the previous version (perhaps with a strikethrough) for references to posts already made. That way, everyone that comes in can easily see the current state of the idea.
Star Trek Online has in-game casinos. I played Dabo there frequently, and live(d) in the EU - stupid fricking Brexit BS.......
The EU gambling laws didn't prevent it, cos it's just an in-game betting system. There's no reason they'd prevent this in-game betting system, either. You're clutching at straws, now...
Star Trek Online has in-game casinos. I played Dabo there frequently, and live(d) in the EU - stupid fricking Brexit BS.......
The EU gambling laws didn't prevent it, cos it's just an in-game betting system. There's no reason they'd prevent this in-game betting system, either. You're clutching at straws, now...
I mean, that's why i suggested the gambling in the first place. I didn't expect someone to actually argue that gambling with gold in the game would be like real gambling.
Star Trek Online has in-game casinos. I played Dabo there frequently, and live(d) in the EU - stupid fricking Brexit BS.......
The EU gambling laws didn't prevent it, cos it's just an in-game betting system. There's no reason they'd prevent this in-game betting system, either. You're clutching at straws, now...
I mean, that's why i suggested the gambling in the first place. I didn't expect someone to actually argue that gambling with gold in the game would be like real gambling.
Star Trek Online has in-game casinos. I played Dabo there frequently, and live(d) in the EU - stupid fricking Brexit BS.......
The EU gambling laws didn't prevent it, cos it's just an in-game betting system. There's no reason they'd prevent this in-game betting system, either. You're clutching at straws, now...
You mean, that completely 100% random based gambling that they did have some issues getting past the EU 10 years ago, but that was through before the EU changed their laws in relation to in game gambling based on the recent issues with loot boxes?
Is that the STO gambling you are talking about?
So yeah, that was basically grandfathered in, as I said above, under what are now old laws (actually, old interpretations of the same laws). Additionally, it is purely random, which I have said may assist Intrepid in getting their parlor games though in the EU, but better in player fights is absolutely not random.
Interestingly, if you were paying attention, I specifically said that the completely lack of randomization in this suggestion is the aspect of it that will cause issues.
I know it's hard to follow conversations sometimes, but do try. When someone says that there will be issues with getting a non-randomized gambling system in a computer game through a particular legislative body, pointing out a fully random system that got through a that same body before recent changes is disingenuous at best, and an attempt at outright deception at worst (I am assuming disingenuous).
Trion cut the casino from all servers that they ran for Archeage, not just the EU ones. This is because EU citizens could play on any server.
What you are now suggesting is a hard block so that people living in the EU are unable to log in to NA servers. The amount of work that would involve is nighmareish - even companies like Facebook roll out changes needed for the EU to a world wide audience due to the resources needed to attempt to region block things.
If Facebook, Microsoft, Google and Amazon don't have the resources to do this, I doubt Intrepid would either.
Also, you still won't get that past the EU - which is the real hurdle to the gambling aspect. As I said earlier, Intrepid may have trouble getting the parlor games gambling past the EU, even with them being random.
This is the reason the casino in Archeage wasn't used by Trion - gambling laws in the EU are strict.
Gear/material wise it won't be considered gambling because your input (how good you are at the game / skill) will have an impact on the outcome of the fight. It won't be anything similar to loot boxes / gambling where you have no way of chaining the odds in your favour.
EDIT:
Currency wise it's a bit of a grey area as there is no form of getting in game currency with outside money but not sure since EU does not impose laws but only guidelines and each country can choose to be stricter or looser on said guidelines. Anyway this is going down to politics so I'm gonna back out
This is the area here - it is the currency aspect.
The gear part of it isn't an issue at all - and based on the previous few posts in relation to gear, I see no real issues with gear if done in that way.
When it comes to gambling gold though, and more importantly when it comes to third parties gambling gold with other third parties, that is where the issue is.
Most countries have a fairly straight forward set of laws in regards to randomized gambling of non-transferrable currency (ie, anything that can not be directly trasnferred for fiat currency in either direction outside of black markets).
However, many countries do have much tighter laws when that gambling is no longer randomized.
This is why many countries (and even many states) allow lotteries, but don't allow sports betting. That is the difference we are talking about here.
Although it is a non-transferrable currency, there are many countries and jurisdictions that don't actually distinguish things like that at all, as it opens up loopholes for bookies to operate under.
I will say again though, the general idea in this thread is good, and I support that. The issue I had with gear is resolved, which is great. If the gambling part of this was dropped, I would see nothing at all wrong with the suggestion.
I should also say, there is nothing at all to stop someone from taking on the role of a bookie, if they wanted to. That is something Intrepid are unlikely to be able to stop, but as long as there are no specific systems in game that are built around making this possible, Intrepid are in no way liable for any laws that may be broken - the player in question is.
This would mean that the player taking on the role of bookie would likely need to have a somewhat decent reputation (you wouldn't make a bet with a bookie unless you knew he would pay out), but player reputation is also a key aspect of Ashes, and so this kind of plays in to the idea of the game even better.
@Noaani Im so confused at this point. Whats all this about a bookie? I have never once said that a player would be given this power. The system itself would take in all the bets and then after the fight is over re-distribute it out to the winners. Also, why are you suddenly ok with the gear dropping? 5 seconds ago you were still against it. What part changed that made you accept it?
Go read the initial post again now that it has been updated a few times. The idea is to have people sign up for a timeslot, and of that group of sign ups 2 random teams will be chosen to face off. In the event that the server somehow has issue with low population/participation the timeslots should be moved to purely during primetime. This change could be done for individual servers and would reduce the chance of two RMT teams clashing.
While I am at it, what are your thoughts on the monster coin idea?
Edit:
This isn't how it works.
Trion cut the casino from all servers that they ran for Archeage, not just the EU ones. This is because EU citizens could play on any server.
What you are now suggesting is a hard block so that people living in the EU are unable to log in to NA servers. The amount of work that would involve is nighmareish - even companies like Facebook roll out changes needed for the EU to a world wide audience due to the resources needed to attempt to region block things.
If Facebook, Microsoft, Google and Amazon don't have the resources to do this, I doubt Intrepid would either.
Disable the ability to gamble. thats the only thing they would need to change. You just disable the button or npc that is used for the function. very simple,
Noaani Im so confused at this point. Whats all this about a bookie? I have never once said that a player would be given this power. The system itself would take in all the bets and then after the fight is over re-distribute it out to the winners.
That is the problem.
If the system is doing it, then the system is a bookie.
If a player were doing it (and had no specific systems to support it), then the game is in no way responsible.
Also, why are you suddenly ok with the gear dropping? 5 seconds ago you were still against it. What part changed that made you accept it?
The conclusion to the gear issue that I saw is in one of two possible things (depending on exactly which conversation you were following).
Either an item drops at random ever so slightly less frequently than a bounty hunter would expect to see items drop (my assumption is that this will be once every few hours of active hunting). If this were the case, and players in the arena are able to take the same steps to mitigate loss as corrupt players are, then this is perfectly fine with me. There is also the possibility that this system could be set to happen at the same rate as a bounty hunter would expect to see - rather than being slightly lower - and the item dropped would be broken and need to be repaired.
The other possibility is that when players lose in the arena, they lose an equipped item at random, which is destroyed. Rather than the winner getting this item, they get around 10% of the materials needed to craft the item.
This isn't me suddenly being ok with it, this is what I would have suggested on the first page, if someone had have asked what I would do to resolve the two issues I mentioned in my first post in this thread, rather than being all combatative.
Disable the ability to gamble. thats the only thing they would need to change. You just disable the button or npc that is used for the function. very simple,
It isn't that simple.
You can't just take this feature out of servers hosted in the EU, you have to take it out of all servers EU residents are able to access - which is all of the servers.
In order to make this happen, Intrepid would need to completely region block every server, and they would need to take all possible precautions to ensure that servers stay segrigated - not just minimal percautions.
Again, this is something that the biggest companies in the world don't consider to be worth the effort. If it were as simple as turning off a setting, then that is what everyone would do.
Feel free to start up a thread asking what players think about the idea of requiring EU players to play on EU servers, NA players staying on NA servers, OCE players on OCE servers, etc. That is a great way to guarantee a negative thread - people like being able to play with friends, even if those friends live half a world away.
If the system is doing it, then the system is a bookie.
If a player were doing it (and had no specific systems to support it), then the game is in no way responsible.
Why does it matter who is the bookie?
It isn't that simple.
You can't just take this feature out of servers hosted in the EU, you have to take it out of all servers EU residents are able to access - which is all of the servers.
In order to make this happen, Intrepid would need to completely region block every server, and they would need to take all possible precautions to ensure that servers stay segrigated - not just minimal percautions.
Again, this is something that the biggest companies in the world don't consider to be worth the effort. If it were as simple as turning off a setting, then that is what everyone would do.
No it really should be that simple. They release it in EU without the button enabled. If someone circumvents this by going onto an NA server that is them breaking the law, not the game. All intrepid should have to do is show that the EU version of the game cannot gamble. The whole issue with vpns is an entirely different conversation that the old morons in parliament probably dont even understand nor should it be apart of the reasoning for banning the game from play as intrepid did not invent vpns or force the players to use it. If EU wants to be stupid about it they can ban vpns, see how that fares.
Feel free to start up a thread asking what players think about the idea of requiring EU players to play on EU servers, NA players staying on NA servers, OCE players on OCE servers, etc. That is a great way to guarantee a negative thread - people like being able to play with friends, even if those friends live half a world away.
No it really should be that simple. They release it in EU without the button enabled. If someone circumvents this by going onto an NA server that is them breaking the law, not the game.
That right there is the bit that isn't how it works.
You may think it should work that way, but it doesn't.
If Intrepid has an office in the EU (which they need to have in order to be able to offer services in the EU), then they are responsible for any service that any EU resident is able to reasonably access. If an EU resident accesses an NA server by use of a VPN, that is still on Intrepid, as it is reasonable to assume that people would do this, thus they must prevent it from happening.
The reason it matters who the "bookie" is, is because that is the person or entity that is to be held accountable. If that is Intrepid, they are liable. If that is some random person in the game, then that random person is to be held accountable. This aspect of it should be fairly easy to understand.
No
I agree, it is not a thread these forums need - and the outcome is fairly obvious.
Comments
Now let's look at how items and resources are bought in to the world. Is there any confirmed method by which PvP actually created new resources for the server, or is PvP just about leeching rewards from others?
You can't make a top end item without the materials to make it, and the materials to make it come in part from PvE content, and are unlikely to be put up for sale while still top end.
No, you can not gear up from PvP.
You can accrue wealth via PvP (via any form of PvP other than arenas, currently), and you can use wealth to gear up. You can not, however, gear up via PvP.
The suggestion is asking for players to be able to gear up via PvP - not via accruing wealth and then spending it. Again, that goes against the notion of what Ashes is - even PvE content will only reward players with materials with which to make items (for the most part).
While this may seem like a subtle, semantic distinction to some - this subtle semantic distinction is where all of harvesting, processing and crafting lies, including all potential progression within those spheres. As such, I would debate the suggestion that it is either subtle or semantic.
If either of you had a brain, you would have suggested that the arena destroy some (not all) of the equipment the losers are wearing, and provide a portion of the materials of that to the winners. However, since neither of you are that smart, and I am the one that decided to bring it up, obviously you can't use that suggestion now as agreeing with it would mean agreeing with essentially every point I have made in relation to gear in this thread.
However, it still doesn't address the issue that the gambling aspect of the suggestion poses - and I'd just like to reiterate, I have not even mentioned the biggest issue with that specific suggestion.
THE ACT OF KILLING A PLAYER GETS YOU GEAR PIECES AND GOLD THAT CAN BE USED TO GEAR UP.
Oh damn, its almost like they mean the same thing but are just different paths to the same goal.
I would love to see you try and queue into my suggestion wearing no gear and win a fight. If you can pull that off then your argument might have some value.
The current system that is being trotted out with open world pvp can and WILL be used to solely gear up players that would rather kill someone else for materials instead of farming it themselves. Thinking that people will not do this is simply being ignorant to how hard-core many pvpers can get when they get addicted to hunting other players down.
This "distinction" is your stubborn side showing and has no bearing on the conversation. We are saying the same thing but you contrive insane guesses and fairy tale stories to try and prove your point. Oh you mean like i said here? Admit it, you are trolling at this point. When I offered up that suggestion you said this: You did not agree, you went on to complain that even with that change bounty hunters would still not get as much loot and blah blah blah.
Oh glorious god-spawn of the forums we beseech your divine scripture to bless our eyes.
- Corrupted players have generally become corrupted by killing several or more players that are too weak to stand a chance in a fight.
- Corruption is essentially a punishment system for repeatedly killing defenseless players.
- Any type of reward system that can be accessed only by corrupted encourages becoming corrupted.
- Ashes is not being designed to cater to killing low level players. It is particularly against repetitive killing of low levels.
- Reducing corrupted stats in PvP to the point of being combat ineffective and sending bounty hunters after corrupted are both systems to forcibly stop the corrupted from killing players that do not stand a chance in fight.
- You do not have to use the corruption system in your Murder Pits. There are already open world PvP zones (caravans, etc.) where corruption is not gained and your Murder Pits could be as well.
All that being said, the ability for corrupted to loot gear (especially equipped gear) off of bounty hunters is a reward system that encourages becoming corrupted and corruption is designed for the opposite.Additionally, the possibility for bounty hunters to lose gear is a deterrent from hunting corrupted and directly counters the point of eliminating players that repetitively kill lowbies. So, I am not really trying to sway you on rewards or how to create your system. You were in a deadlocked debate over whether gear can be rewarded for PvP. I simply showed the quotes that allow the possibility for such a system. The reason I showed the arena system was to point out that some type of gear related PvP reward system exists and that a viewership of combat does exist in the game so it could be implemented in other ways such as your suggestions.
The gear enhancement rewards for PvP indicate that you could get creative with your reward system or simply attach it to the PvP gear enhancement system already intended. The idea sounds like fun
You could possibly even build on it using the monster coin system to have players fight as monsters without requiring the coin.
https://ashesofcreation.wiki/Monster_coins
Just in case you are not aware, Steven spends a lot of time reading the forums and IS also makes a list of the ideas on the forums for Steven. So, if you get a lot of support for your idea Steven will be paying attention to it.
The discussion I am having with Snyx is going in a slightly different direction than the one I had with you. With you, we are talking about your proposal, and only your proposal. When Synx, we are talking about mroe general design of the game. While there is obviously some cross over, there isn't all that much.
You should either stick to the conversation that the two of us are having or join in on the one that Snyx and I are having, rather than trying to ram the two conversations together.
Feel free to go back to any of the previous two times I have quoted you in this thread if you would like to pick up our conversation, or otherwise feel free to join in on our more general design discussion - but just pick one.
It will never get past the EU.
Did you think I was asking for bounty hunters to drop gear too when killed by a corrupted? The last part as well about corruption being in the murder pits. I never suggested having it be applied there, perhaps you were thinking of the suggestion I made where a player dying would drop loot as if they were corrupted?
Understood, I thank you for the links. Look if things need to be more uniform I am down for changes and suggestions. My issue was a person flat out refusing the ideas placed before them and suggesting an option that was already in the game as an alternative. So I am happy that you stepped in.
You know you just fixed the wires that were going haywire in my brain yesterday when I was thinking of the elite monsters for the murder pits. I tried and tried to figure out what to do with monster tokens but the obvious answer was right in front of me! Thank you!
Having the monsters be controlled by players would be an awesome addition without putting too much stress on the AI development to back this task. Just have a separate queue that people can sign up for to become one of these elite monsters! This role would not get the enemy player's loot as a reward but they would still get a cut of any bets placed for them to win. Maybe they could create a "monster lab" tree similar to the champion for the battle royales that can be geared out and augmented as you gain ranking in this system?
What a flurry of ideas, I think I like you! XD
Oh boy, I am worried he would have a rough time sloughing through this thread. maybe I can continue to consolidate the suggestions into the original post so that its easier for him
I'm actually speechless..
You can't gear up through PVE because you need a crafter to craft the items with the resources you got in PVE. You can't gear up through crafting either because you need PVE in order to obtain the resources. So following your logic, because you don't actually gear up using only one system but a mix of two (in my example using PVP and traiding) it means you can't gear up through PVE or crafting either. So f**k it, let's not gear up at all.. Fist fights everyone!
There is a distinct and important step in there.
That step is what keeps the economy turning. The economy in Ashes is more important than PvP - because the economy (wealth) is what people PvP over.
You can't bypass that step. It is absolutely key to every aspect of Ashes.
The issue isn't about getting wealth from PvP, every form of PvP offers that, and wealth can always be turned in to character power in various ways. I've never once said that there shouldn't be some form of reward on offer, I've just said it shouldn't be a finished item.
The issue is about not being a part of the servers economy, and getting finished items directly from PvP is circumventing that economy - even if the item in question was already player made, when it transfers hands, it should do so in the form of raw materials.
K. All items dropped need to be repaired. No more complaining.
If we are talking about the drop rate we discussed earlier that is comparible to that of bounty hunters, that would be all good.
If we are still talking about items every fight, or the winner of every fight getting rewards, then I would say that those rewards are still too high, and it would be more appropriate if the lower had an item destroyed, and the winner gained a portion (around 10%) of the materials needed to make that item.
If we are talking about the drop rate we discussed earlier that is comparible to that of bounty hunters, that would be all good.
If we are still talking about items every fight, or the winner of every fight getting rewards, then I would say that those rewards are still too high, and it would be more appropriate if the lower had an item destroyed, and the winner gained a portion (around 10%) of the materials needed to make that item.[/quote]
I have already updated the specifics on the amount of fights that happen. There will be a set amount each day that you basically sign up for a time slot and hope to get chosen once that time comes around. This new idea means that you will fight random opponents. Thus making it random, the thing you wanted the gambling to be in the first place. We happy yet?
Also, you still won't get that past the EU - which is the real hurdle to the gambling aspect. As I said earlier, Intrepid may have trouble getting the parlor games gambling past the EU, even with them being random.
This is the reason the casino in Archeage wasn't used by Trion - gambling laws in the EU are strict.
Sounds like im not gonna have a problem then. It will work out perfectly. Why should I care what the EU dictate when the game is being built here in the US? If its an issue then EU can do without it -just- like your example above with archeage being brought across the seas.
Yeah and a meteor could hit the earth and kill us all. Pointing out extremes is easy to do. Each of your supposed issues can be solved by server merging or only having the arena matches at prime-time.
Go ahead, name more issues.
Gear/material wise it won't be considered gambling because your input (how good you are at the game / skill) will have an impact on the outcome of the fight. It won't be anything similar to loot boxes / gambling where you have no way of chaining the odds in your favour.
EDIT:
Currency wise it's a bit of a grey area as there is no form of getting in game currency with outside money but not sure since EU does not impose laws but only guidelines and each country can choose to be stricter or looser on said guidelines. Anyway this is going down to politics so I'm gonna back out
I guess you meant all gear in the murder pit being risked rather than a reference to the open world fights. Since you did not mean that bounty hunters should be able to drop gear, its all good
I think you should. I would write the current version at the top and leave the previous version (perhaps with a strikethrough) for references to posts already made. That way, everyone that comes in can easily see the current state of the idea.
The EU gambling laws didn't prevent it, cos it's just an in-game betting system. There's no reason they'd prevent this in-game betting system, either. You're clutching at straws, now...
I mean, that's why i suggested the gambling in the first place. I didn't expect someone to actually argue that gambling with gold in the game would be like real gambling.
Did you take a shot?! Cheers!
You mean, that completely 100% random based gambling that they did have some issues getting past the EU 10 years ago, but that was through before the EU changed their laws in relation to in game gambling based on the recent issues with loot boxes?
Is that the STO gambling you are talking about?
So yeah, that was basically grandfathered in, as I said above, under what are now old laws (actually, old interpretations of the same laws). Additionally, it is purely random, which I have said may assist Intrepid in getting their parlor games though in the EU, but better in player fights is absolutely not random.
Interestingly, if you were paying attention, I specifically said that the completely lack of randomization in this suggestion is the aspect of it that will cause issues.
I know it's hard to follow conversations sometimes, but do try. When someone says that there will be issues with getting a non-randomized gambling system in a computer game through a particular legislative body, pointing out a fully random system that got through a that same body before recent changes is disingenuous at best, and an attempt at outright deception at worst (I am assuming disingenuous).
Trion cut the casino from all servers that they ran for Archeage, not just the EU ones. This is because EU citizens could play on any server.
What you are now suggesting is a hard block so that people living in the EU are unable to log in to NA servers. The amount of work that would involve is nighmareish - even companies like Facebook roll out changes needed for the EU to a world wide audience due to the resources needed to attempt to region block things.
If Facebook, Microsoft, Google and Amazon don't have the resources to do this, I doubt Intrepid would either.
This is the area here - it is the currency aspect.
The gear part of it isn't an issue at all - and based on the previous few posts in relation to gear, I see no real issues with gear if done in that way.
When it comes to gambling gold though, and more importantly when it comes to third parties gambling gold with other third parties, that is where the issue is.
Most countries have a fairly straight forward set of laws in regards to randomized gambling of non-transferrable currency (ie, anything that can not be directly trasnferred for fiat currency in either direction outside of black markets).
However, many countries do have much tighter laws when that gambling is no longer randomized.
This is why many countries (and even many states) allow lotteries, but don't allow sports betting. That is the difference we are talking about here.
Although it is a non-transferrable currency, there are many countries and jurisdictions that don't actually distinguish things like that at all, as it opens up loopholes for bookies to operate under.
I will say again though, the general idea in this thread is good, and I support that. The issue I had with gear is resolved, which is great. If the gambling part of this was dropped, I would see nothing at all wrong with the suggestion.
I should also say, there is nothing at all to stop someone from taking on the role of a bookie, if they wanted to. That is something Intrepid are unlikely to be able to stop, but as long as there are no specific systems in game that are built around making this possible, Intrepid are in no way liable for any laws that may be broken - the player in question is.
This would mean that the player taking on the role of bookie would likely need to have a somewhat decent reputation (you wouldn't make a bet with a bookie unless you knew he would pay out), but player reputation is also a key aspect of Ashes, and so this kind of plays in to the idea of the game even better.
@Noaani Im so confused at this point. Whats all this about a bookie? I have never once said that a player would be given this power. The system itself would take in all the bets and then after the fight is over re-distribute it out to the winners. Also, why are you suddenly ok with the gear dropping? 5 seconds ago you were still against it. What part changed that made you accept it?
Go read the initial post again now that it has been updated a few times. The idea is to have people sign up for a timeslot, and of that group of sign ups 2 random teams will be chosen to face off. In the event that the server somehow has issue with low population/participation the timeslots should be moved to purely during primetime. This change could be done for individual servers and would reduce the chance of two RMT teams clashing.
While I am at it, what are your thoughts on the monster coin idea?
Edit:
Disable the ability to gamble. thats the only thing they would need to change. You just disable the button or npc that is used for the function. very simple,
If the system is doing it, then the system is a bookie.
If a player were doing it (and had no specific systems to support it), then the game is in no way responsible. The conclusion to the gear issue that I saw is in one of two possible things (depending on exactly which conversation you were following).
Either an item drops at random ever so slightly less frequently than a bounty hunter would expect to see items drop (my assumption is that this will be once every few hours of active hunting). If this were the case, and players in the arena are able to take the same steps to mitigate loss as corrupt players are, then this is perfectly fine with me. There is also the possibility that this system could be set to happen at the same rate as a bounty hunter would expect to see - rather than being slightly lower - and the item dropped would be broken and need to be repaired.
The other possibility is that when players lose in the arena, they lose an equipped item at random, which is destroyed. Rather than the winner getting this item, they get around 10% of the materials needed to craft the item.
This isn't me suddenly being ok with it, this is what I would have suggested on the first page, if someone had have asked what I would do to resolve the two issues I mentioned in my first post in this thread, rather than being all combatative. It isn't that simple.
You can't just take this feature out of servers hosted in the EU, you have to take it out of all servers EU residents are able to access - which is all of the servers.
In order to make this happen, Intrepid would need to completely region block every server, and they would need to take all possible precautions to ensure that servers stay segrigated - not just minimal percautions.
Again, this is something that the biggest companies in the world don't consider to be worth the effort. If it were as simple as turning off a setting, then that is what everyone would do.
Feel free to start up a thread asking what players think about the idea of requiring EU players to play on EU servers, NA players staying on NA servers, OCE players on OCE servers, etc. That is a great way to guarantee a negative thread - people like being able to play with friends, even if those friends live half a world away.
No it really should be that simple. They release it in EU without the button enabled. If someone circumvents this by going onto an NA server that is them breaking the law, not the game. All intrepid should have to do is show that the EU version of the game cannot gamble. The whole issue with vpns is an entirely different conversation that the old morons in parliament probably dont even understand nor should it be apart of the reasoning for banning the game from play as intrepid did not invent vpns or force the players to use it. If EU wants to be stupid about it they can ban vpns, see how that fares.
No
That right there is the bit that isn't how it works.
You may think it should work that way, but it doesn't.
If Intrepid has an office in the EU (which they need to have in order to be able to offer services in the EU), then they are responsible for any service that any EU resident is able to reasonably access. If an EU resident accesses an NA server by use of a VPN, that is still on Intrepid, as it is reasonable to assume that people would do this, thus they must prevent it from happening.
The reason it matters who the "bookie" is, is because that is the person or entity that is to be held accountable. If that is Intrepid, they are liable. If that is some random person in the game, then that random person is to be held accountable. This aspect of it should be fairly easy to understand. I agree, it is not a thread these forums need - and the outcome is fairly obvious.