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.
corruption system(a party ganking 1 possible?)
Caez
Member, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
a question just came to my mind about the corruption system, if 2 or more players attack to 1 player alone they corruption will split between they 2 or will they get the same corruption that they would if if there were alone killing to non combatants?(if the corruption get divided wouldn´t if be better for the corrupted)
0
Comments
If you spread the penalty, you are multiplying it. Yes, ganging up on someone isn't the nicest thing to do but as it said, they aren't suffering a greater death penalty for it so i'm not sure why the corruption penalty should be multiplied. All you really are doing by ganging up on them is increasing your chance of victory and possibly decreasing the likely hood of them fighting back.
It means that all those that were involved in killing the non-combatant suffer a punishment for it. They'll all go Corrupted, and if they do it enough, they'll all take penalties for it. And they'll all be on the Bounty Hunter radar.
Let's say, for example, that it takes 10 kills before a PKer takes a penalty. In a PKer group of 10, that can be spread out so that it takes 50 kills before everyone has that penalty.
If that's the intention, then fair dos. But it seems like an easy way to game the system.
The moment they get any amount of corruption, they are corrupted and will suffer the increased death penalty if they die.
To your first point, they didn't all kill the non-combatant, the one who scored the killing blow killed the non-combatant. The game doesn't penalize you for attacking someone, it penalizes you for killing them.
As i said, it's not gaming the system. The killer is still gaining corruption and it's penalties, all the group did was make it easier to kill the non-combatant.
I like the idea of corruption being spread across the group, and the mechanics would be fun to solution as long as it’s easy for players to understand.
The system is there to stop the random killing of multiple non-combatants. Part of the system is that the more you kill, the more you're hit with stats and skill dampening. If you can spread that out over a wide group, you're gaming the system.
If you've done 99% of the damage to a non-combatant, it shouldn't matter that someone else made the killing blow. You've done your part in it, and you should also take the credit for it.
The system would would still stop them and does things to deter this.
I also don't think this is as good for the group as you think. The more corruption you get, the more deaths it will take to get rid of it. In addition to that, the more kills you get, more corruption you get for each kill. So even if they try a kill funnel strat, that person will start to get more and more corruption for each kill which will also mean they are easier to kill. Remember, non-combatants don't become combatants when they attack corrupted so someone can still attack the person. On top off all that, the longer they stick around an area, the more time a group has to form to counter them, that is if they don't happen to come across one that is already formed doing something else.
This is also one of those frustrating things to argue where it's something that is possible but how likely is it. Technically the whole server could decide they hate one person and never let that person kill any mobs or get any resources. That's an exaggeration but to illustrate a point. You have a scenario where 10 people decide they want to pk and are assuming that they will be able to max out everyones corruption without encountering any resistance. I rarely see gank groups with more then 2 people if even that and you assume 10 people are going to want to run around killing people until they max out corruption and are finally brought down so they can eat that penalty?
How likely/often do you actually think it is that 10 people will want to do that and then how long would they really be able to do it before they are stopped? This is a hard part to understand but this is part of the system, yes it allows this but with the deterrents in place, how often will it happen.
And as a side note, keep in mind what you are recommending would make it so that if you attacked someone but backed off because they weren't fighting back, i could then kill that non-combatant to make you corrupted..
But as it's been said, testing.
The big issue with this is that the ganking group will most likely be 1 corrupt playerc escorted by many combatants. Meaning any combatants that try to deal with the group can just be openly attacked by the full force of gankers without any penalties, so your only "good" option for getting to that corrupted player is to attack while green or as a bounty hunter and green. (For those that dont know green players do not flag when attacking corrupted players. And bounty hunters are only flagged directly with corrupted players.)
This means you are not being rewarded for choosing to do consensual pvp like the corruption system was originally designed to do while also promoting said ganking squads that can easily grief.
If you fight back 1v1 the other guy doesnt get corrupted.
If you dont fight back a 1v1, the other guy gets corrupted.
Wanting to spread the punishment to 20 people, because 20 people attacked you and you DIDNT fight back just seems like a petty, vengeful wish.
This proposition will only lead to abuse.
If 20 people want you dead, they can easily sit and watch as one of them leaves the group and starts killing you.
If you fight back they can still jump you.
Become social
Become useful
Make friends
Find a guild
Extract revenge instead of advocating for "group pk".
So you want me to toggle as combatant, while 10 people are nuking me from 20 meters away?
While would I give them a hassle free death?
Another stupid arguement for the stupid toggle discussion.
im just confused as to how you think 1 person can fight back against 20. Fighting back or not, you will die.
It's not about the "fight back"
It's about the "I want them ALL to pay for killing meeee".
The OP will still die. They just want more people to pay for their death.
I mean, they all stuck their hands in the cookie jar... Why is the last one the only one punished?
Read my following posts about scamming the proposition of group pk.
so the solution to roving bands of griefers... is to make roving bands of anti-griefers?
Idk man, I think the corruption system has a flaw here and wishes to prevent this sort of delinquent gameplay.
If you help kill a non-combatant player you should gain a percentage of the corruption. Since its a small percentage it would be pretty easy to get rid of but they should still have the risk of gaining it if they are going to be playing in this manner.
Too many sctructures hurt the game either by leading to abuse of systems or by making the game lame.
Some people used to call for no trade of gold between players, to address gold sellers. That suggestion would make the game lame.
The suggestion of this topic will lead to abuse.
I will say it for the second time, if 20 people want to PK you, all it takes is one person to leave their group and pk you. The other 19 can sit there and wait in case you fight back.
This is life.
You seem to also be confused on a few parts that I have already explained as well. You cannot become a combatant against a corrupted player as a green player currently.
My suggestion does not require players to be in the same group for them to gain the corruption from helping to kill a green player.
Alright, what's the play now?
Let's imagine that if a group of 20 people atks 1 person, they all share the corruption, as suggested, right?
Play 1.
The group of 20 people arrive near this one person. One of the group /leaves the group and starts killing the victim. The others DONT atk.
a)The victim dies, 1 person got corrupted, the other 19 didnt.
b)The victim fights back the attacker. All 20 people kill the victim, nobody gets corrupted.
Play 2.
I am a troll. I join a group of 5 people. Some random player is also there.
I PK that player. My group gets corrupted.
My friends show up, kill my group and take the loot.
I just trolled a group.
I cant make it any more simple.
How does the proposed system make the game any better?
You cant troll the group if they didn't help you. Again, if you didn't help kill them you wouldn't gain corruption.
If you contribute to a green players death you getting corrupted gives out a proportional risk to each player participating in the system that is built to deter griefing. If you all gain corruption then instead of continuing to farm players you will be incentivized to go do pve for a while. This is how it works on an individual level, and how it should work on a group level.
Let's assume that corruption goes from 0 to 1,000 and that normal corruption gain for killing someone of the same level is 100.
Let's also assume all players are green and same level at the start of the scenario.
Players 1 through 5 are not necessarily in a group together.
If players 1, 2 ,3, 4 and 5 attack player 6.
Immediately players 1 through 5 become flagged (purple).
Player 6 doesn't fight back and players 1 through 5 end up killing him with player 4 getting the killing blow.
Players 1 through 5 all get 100 corruption because they all participated in the kill.
That's how I expect corruption system to work, and possibly have each of those players get say 150 corruption instead of 100 because even though they are all same level, it was a 1 v 5.
do note that the corruption system is there to prevent these specific kinds of situations where someone is just unable to play the game at all because it's too unfair. Remember that by having more corruption your character becomes weaker in combat. It's done for a reason so I would be very surprised if Intrepid did not implement a system where more corruption was gained by each individual player than normal if they ganked in groups, whether they were partied up or not. I would also expect there to be a timer to decide if a player would get corruption from another players death. For anyone confused let me give you an example.
Let's say that from the group above, player 2 had attacked player 6 but stopped attack right away. Player 6 remained alive for more than a minute after player 2 stopped attacking. In that case I'd expect player 2 to receive little to no corruption. If anything instead of getting 100 corruption he might receive only 15 corruption for example, or none at all.
The corruption need to correspond with pk looting system, only those flagged corrupted is/are allowed to loot. Risk and reward need to be balanced.