Glorious Alpha Two Testers!
Phase I of Alpha Two testing will occur on weekends. Each weekend is scheduled to start on Fridays at 10 AM PT and end on Sundays at 10 PM PT. Find out more here.
Check out Alpha Two Announcements here to see the latest Alpha Two news and update notes.
Our quickest Alpha Two updates are in Discord. Testers with Alpha Two access can chat in Alpha Two channels by connecting your Discord and Intrepid accounts here.
Phase I of Alpha Two testing will occur on weekends. Each weekend is scheduled to start on Fridays at 10 AM PT and end on Sundays at 10 PM PT. Find out more here.
Check out Alpha Two Announcements here to see the latest Alpha Two news and update notes.
Our quickest Alpha Two updates are in Discord. Testers with Alpha Two access can chat in Alpha Two channels by connecting your Discord and Intrepid accounts here.
Comments
I don't know the answer to this, but it is not at all hard to imagine a few reasons as to why they would need to add a toggle until they have the full system working. What I do know is that we are talking about the pre-alpha version of the game - one that is missing wholesale systems (such as the corruption system), and so how it plays should not be assumed to be anything like the final game - especially in areas around those systems that are not at all in place.
Again, you are taking the pre-alpha version of the game - a version we know doesn't have the corruption system - and assuming that what we see there is what we will get, regardless of the fact that we have been told how they want to do it. Some of the mods may indeed be pre-alpha players. Most aren't, but sure, some may be.
Thing is, that pre-alpha is that same version of the game that doesn't have the corruption system built in yet.
And yes, reducing death penalties to non-combatants if killed by a corrupt player would be a more elegant solution. The system is designed around the notion that a non-combatant need not flag up to take on a corrupt player, so there should be no incentive at all for them to flag up.
It completely follows the logic and purpose of the system, and so is an elegant solution.
How is it soft? Lol it seems like you don't think anyone should want to be flagged constantly, it seems like the more hardcore approach to game play not the opposite.
Master Assassin
(Yes same Tyrantor from Shadowbane)
Book suggestions:
Galaxy Outlaws books 1-16.5, Metagamer Chronicles, The Land litrpg series, Ready Player One, Zen in the Martial Arts
So you're argument is simply since I don't know the state of the game that all video and feedback we've seen that states my point, it therefor makes me incorrect just because you don't know the answer? Or is it more likely you're just wrong and refusing to accept it?
The term "elegant" has zero relevance in the discussion. The logic is that if a player attacks a non combatant and does not fight back they become corrupt - if they continue to kill non combatants they gain additional corruption.
The logic immediately fails when applied to a non-combatant attacking a corrupt player as they are no longer a non combatant. If your argument is non-combatants should get a free roll on corrupt players it seems to go against the reason for the corrupt system to begin with.
Not everyone is going to be so concerned about causing corruption on other people compared to just fighting other players.
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
See this is what my point was all about. Ashes encourages you to do consensual pvp and the bonuses of being a combatant upon death reinforce that. Now, the issue is that if a non combatant cannot flag as a combatant vs an already corrupted player they will be forced to die with that extra penalty even though they fought back.
This actually makes going corrupted profitable, and I mean really profitable when you do it against players of your level.
I feel that it makes more sense for there to be a toggle for the flagging system so that you can have agency un that situation rather than being forced to lose more of your loot because a corrupted player is on a murder spree.
Trust me though if this is all by design you will see a hell of a lot of corrupted pvp.
Oh? Is that Fuppoheadhunter there in the siege video from the recent livestream? You know, that random guy that has absolutely no credibility that I referenced earlier?
Looks like rubber meeting the road to me.
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
I see ganking and non-consensual pvp in very different categories.
Ganking
As using an unfair advantage to overcome another player.. substantially better gear and/or level gap most usual means. Ganking of this kind I would like to see penalties and prevention means in-game than non-consensual pvp.
Non-consensual pvp
One side not participating in the pvp, be that intentional or not.
L2
But sometimes it is that very unfair advantage that provides challenges, reward in the game. I remember when L2 was in its infancy. Some players that were working together, high level and well geared were blocking new players from leaving the beginning island by boat. They guarded the port. At that time, if you fought you dropped gear with a similar potential if you didn't. It was unfair, they were working in a team and they were substantially better and were profiting off the new players that could not compete. For a while, leaving the beginner island was a no-go. Each time to venture out resulted in death and a need to go back, earn more money and gear up again.. UNTIL the newbs grouped up, pulled in friends and worked together to give some of their own. There was a great sense of achievement to have overcome the strong few. For the short term player that wanted a quick fix then sure they might have been disheartened, I wouldn't change it. Payback was sweet.
The way I see it from my limited experience is many (not all) of the issues of ganking or even non-consensual pvp are often overcome by playing the game as a MMORPG and not a solo game. Making/changing friends, joining clans, making clan alliances. Changing where or how one play, play more, get better and sometimes even how one communicates with other players.
If they follow the L2 model, then that is more than sufficient.
A player in alpha now is more likely to belive that this toggle will be in the final game than someone not in alpha due to the fact that it is in alpha right now (see previous posts), even though we have no reason to assume it will be in the game.
So yes, still just some random guy.
But then, when has having the facts wrong ever stopped you?
wow its amazing how slippery you are with words. The dudes testing the game and you say he has no credibility but hey we should believe you have credibility?
Why should I believe your words over him?
He has given us a complete list of the ways they intend players to become combatants in the final version of the game, and until he says otherwise, that is what we should assume is still the intention. If we are not going to work on the assumption that what Steven has told us is valid until he tells us otherwise, then that means we basically can't discuss the game at all because we are all able to make what ever assumptions we want about the game.
I mean, if we had not been given that list, then we would be having a debate on whether or not it is a good idea. Since we have that list, you are arguing that the best information we have from Steven is invalid.
I am simply saying that we have a list from Steven, and you are chosing to believe "some guy". That guy may be testing in alpha and telling you that there is a toggle there, but as we have said, there is a toggle in alpha for a very good reason.
And yes, compared to the creative director of Ashes, the person you are talking about literally is just some guy.
There is nothing in there at all about slippery words or anything. I am saying that Steven is who we should be assuming is correct, you are saying that some random guy is - it is you that is trying to justify the totally illogical position here, not me.
You talk of assumptions and illogical crap when someone testing the game has confirmed there is a toggle. Anything else you say is pointless rambling and self-rationalization.
Convenient if you can't prove that.
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
You know how I do these kinds of things.
I'll wait a few weeks for you guys to get even deeper in to it, and then give you the video.
As is always the case, you will then say "but that was so long ago, it doesn't mean anything any more" and ignore the fact that it is what was said.
Edit to add, if you look at the wiki on corruption, it says it will be tested in alpha 1. Thing is, if you then go to the reference it has for that and listen to it, Steven specifically says that corruption will not be tested in alpha 1, but will be tested in phase 2 (which is why I am unsure if it is alpha 2 or beta).
This is not the quote where he said there will be a toggle for alpha testing, I just want to see how far you are willing to go along your current path.
Which is why people see you as a troll. If you were willing to save four or five pages of discussion by showing a quote or a link, then people might have a little more respect for what you post!
Noanni makes me really lament the lack of an ignore feature on this forum.
Cool story bro. I won't hold my breath.
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
To be fair, I only do that when people argue rather than question.
If I mention something that was said in a livestream or interview many years ago, that has not been documented otherwise, I don't expect people to just take my word for it - but if they are going to argue and say that it is not how things are or was never what was said - rather than saying they must have missed that livestream or interview (which is what reasonable people would do), then yeah, I'm not going to spend an hour or two searching through to find it (again, it is an otherwise undocumented comment).
If the person replying is reasonable and says they must have missed it, but would I be able to find it, then when I have a few hours free, I likely would - but that has not happened yet, so...
This is you literally asking people to kiss your angelic feet so that you will grace us with your "magnanimous" words of wisdom.
Yeah.... No. Not gonna happen.
Literally have an entire thread dedicated to the topic that you've replied in 50+ times where my OP suggests it, asks what people think and states reasons for it. So to be fair lie more.
Of course when someone posted a video to support my post you then proceed to fail and prove it with this video when of course I asked you to. Not sure who you're trying to fool with your post(s).
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
Basic civility and "kissing my angelic feet" are not exactly synonymous. I thought I was quite clear in pointing out that I reply to civility in kind - and I'll go even further than that and state that I keep it to within the confines of a specific thread.
On the other hand, if someone were kissing my feet, I'm not sure how I would react. I'd probably be a little freaked out, and likely think that person was a bit weird, with some slightly odd kinks. I think I'd likely just walk away.