Glorious Alpha Two Testers!
Alpha Two Phase II testing is currently taking place 5+ days each week. More information about testing schedule can be found here
If you have Alpha Two, you can download the game launcher here, and we encourage you to join us on our Official Discord Server for the most up to date testing news.
Alpha Two Phase II testing is currently taking place 5+ days each week. More information about testing schedule can be found here
If you have Alpha Two, you can download the game launcher here, and we encourage you to join us on our Official Discord Server for the most up to date testing news.
Comments
But if you force attack (Ctrl+F or whatever) the same way you would normally do if attacking a purple or green, then you turn yourself purple. This is then a choice; stay green and if you die they get corrupted but risk regular death penalties. Or go purple, and if you lose you only take on half the penalties, but if you die they don’t get corrupted, and since you’re purple others can now attack without corruption either.
The idea of halving the death penalty as a PvP combatant is to encourage PvP, but let's be honest, they’re punishing people who are wimps and don’t fight back. Whatever the intention, that’s the result. I don’t like the idea of fighting back and still getting punished.
Walk away. You wont get killed.
If you do get killed it should have concequences. And by getting yourself killed it means you wanted some of that sweet red loot. You made your choice. You took the risk.
I don't consider it forcing the green to die with normal penalties, but I can understand why you would want to have the option to halve the death penalty.
I think Steven's perception will be that people just need to get used to the normal death penalty being the normal death penalty.
What's also interesting to me is that dying green means that the Corrupted attacker gains even more Corruption. PvPers tell PvEers they should just be content that PKers will be punished with Corruption or by Bounty Hunters, whatever. Seems the same applies here.
Also, people have said that if you consent to play the game, knowing the rules...you get what you consented to. If that's true, there is no forcing to die with the normal death penalties. That's automatic consent when you choose to play the game. Just as there is no forced/non-consensual PvP.
Yet here you are, trying yo introduce a whole system change so that you can benefit by losing less as s nom combatant.
You are creating the loophole atama, not the reds.
We had this discussion a month or so ago.
My simple solution to this, the solution that I think fits the ideals of the game the best, is that any player killed by a corrupt character only takes the combatant death penalty, regardless of flag state.
This does a few things. The first is that it eliminates the situation you are talking about here - a situation that should never happen.
The second thing it does is it lowers the incentive (even if only a little) for a corrupt player to continue to kill. If you are out hunting resources from players, you would probably want to try and rid yourself of corruption as soon as you gained any in order to have a chance to gain more resources.
When I suggested this, there were people that put up some fairly weak opposition to the idea - but I think it is a fairly elegant solution to the situation, and one that fits in with what we have been told is the general idea behind corruption and such.
Um, you call someone engaging in PvP a “non combatant”?!
Maybe if they hit the force attack combo it let's them flag vs corrupted players? Idk, just feels odd that they cant flag up against corrupted players but hey maybe that will be explained sometime.
The idea behind it is from the perspective of the corrupt player.
If they made it so that players needed to flag as non-combatants in order to not take the full death penalty against corrupt players, they would also then need to make it so corrupt players gained corruption for killing combatants.
The idea is, as I explained in the other thread, that corruption is supposed to snowball. This won't happen if the best option for other players you attack is an option that sees said corrupt player not gain additional corruption.
Edit; a lot of double negatives in that, sorry it's a bit hard to read - though I assume you understand what I'm saying.
If the drops are lucrative, it may be worth the risk.
If staying red for too long is just too challenging then perhaps the incentive won't be there..
Oh well, if anime does it, then it must be correct.
All hail anime!
Where do you derive your lexicon from? Divine Intellect?
This is my personal feedback, shared to help the game thrive in its niche.
So, you're honestly sticking to the "Anime knows best" thing....?!
You've "proven" nothing except your misunderstanding of a very basic gaming term. You might want to quit while you're so far behind already...
Well no, you didn't. All you did was say what YOU thought niche meant and I would beg to differ with you. Prove to me, with actual numbers or percentages what qualifies as "niche" in an MMO. Show me some official statement because just like your cherry picked statement, all you have is an opinion, not fact.
And if you, yourself believe EVE is PvP centered then I hate to break it to you but EVE has PLENTY of PvE content. This backs up my statement that all the games I mentioned ARE just as PvP centric. Still waiting on your proof that most of the highly successful MMOs now a days are PvE only.
Of course you are being very closed minded and unwilling to discuss anything. I see now that you think the world revolves around you and your opinions and only you are right. If you want to voice more than an opinion however and want others to listen to you, you need to bring something more to the table.
You are the one that used the word "coding" to refer to all development, and when called out on it still took several posts worth of blaming others for not understanding before getting around to begrudingly giving your definition - though without admitting that you were in the wrong by using your own definition.
It isn't the first time it has happened, either. You have a long history of poor communication in general - all anyone needs to do is listen to any of your interviews with Steven to understand that.
I did not blame anyone for not understanding, I blamed you for assuming you knew what I meant and then going on a rant about that. I happily gave my definition, I did not begrudgingly do so.
This is just more of you projecting your own twisted perspective so that you can troll.
Here's my list...
I would PK:
1. Someone who burnt my toast
2. Someone who stole all my butter
3. Someone who thinks that rye is better than sourdough
Valid reasons. Good thing that AoC let's us kill toast burners out in the open world. Imagine not being able to...
- null list
I'm a nice guy
I wish to add another reason! People saying they are nice guys!
There were a small number of "sweet spots" across the map, within each general area, for solo, small groups, large groups at different levels brackets. From memory, the level grind was often more the focus than the drops.
For the most part, players respected each other in PvE and possession of a space. But vying for those areas means that either you were conspicuous for pvp (when in clan wars) or a possible target for contesting the spot.
I see the same potential for the hot spots, and also for those gathering materials of high value if there is a chance to drop.
Try to explain that to people being used to mmos offering single player questing experience (main way to lv up and gear up), with only instanced BG pvp.
Meh, from a WoW vanilla/classic on PvE server point of view, it's not much different than having a group or a higher level player (from either faction) coming in your area and killing all the mobs you need for your quest or picking the resources you're looking for. You have to wait or move elsewhere.
In both scenarios, your progression is slowed/halted.
But having the possibility to fight over these spots gives the illusion of choice. If you have to constantly fight people for these spots, your progression is slowed/halted while you do so. The more contested they are, the less advantageous they become.
That being said, if fighting for them is what the fun is all about, their value is secondary