Greetings, glorious adventurers! If you're joining in our Alpha One spot testing, please follow the steps here to see all the latest test info on our forums and Discord!

Will there be a PvE server?

Wife love's farming and playing house in Archeage. I PvP she will NOT PvP
IF this game is 100% PvP Then the farmers are going to destroy this game
like every game out there. She will wait for the next game to come out.
Asherons call moved to Everquest II then to Archeage

Comments

  • PvP is an integral part of the core game design. There has been no word of a PvE only server and since so many of the game mechanics are built around PvP interactions I wouldn't count on getting a PvE only realm.
  • To expand on that a bit more. PvP is a big factor in the player driven >>change.ing<< of the world.
    It is very unlikely to see a pve dedicated server the way it looks to be intended.(imo at least)

    I recommend reading the blogpost about the flagging system. There are harsh downsides to pk a pve player.
    They certainly have those playstyles in mind while developing the game.
    That said we expect a huge pve part in the game. We are teased with hints about very deep crafting trading and exploring. Not to mention what you can do with housing. Node development looks very pve focused too.
    You wont be able to avoid pvp completly, but it is not a pvp only game.

    Stick around until we know more details. You will be able to make a better decision when the game is fleshed out more i would say.

    Grisu aka. Zekece
  • From what I've read and heard, while PvP is integral to the development of the world itself, it will be a risk&reward player-created situation. Like sieging cities or attacking player caravans. There seems (again, from what I've seen), little to no reward mentioned for openly ganking people out in the world. Which doesn't mean there won't be any of that, of course, but it probably won't be encouraged.
  • Well, I don't want to say this game is 100% PvP but it isn't 100% PvE either. From everything we've been provided you have to "flag" yourself for PvP combat or choose to be part of a caravan should you desire PvP in that way.

    I highly suspect you should be able to PvE in this game with almost no PvP interaction at all should you seek to avoid it.
  • I'm so unsure when it comes to "tagging servers". On one of my previous posts i suggested that they should tag one server as "PvP" so that like minded players in the community will meet on one server and try to have their fun. But then again someone on Discord reminded me that pre-made is never fun and people should make their own way out...

    I wonder what Intrepid thinks about this matter.
  • As one who primarily plays solo PvE, I must say that open world PvP scares me. It simply leads to might makes right scenarios where soloers provide fodder for gank groups.

    I hope Ashes avoids such imbalanced systems. We'll see....
  • [quote quote=5098]As one who primarily plays solo PvE, I must say that open world PvP scares me. It simply leads to might makes right scenarios where soloers provide fodder for gank groups.

    I hope Ashes avoids such imbalanced systems. We’ll see….

    [/quote]

    If they go the way of SWG like flagging systems you will never have to PVP. Even if they have certain areas for PVP you can avoid them. From what I heard you are no going to be forced to PVP, but that does not mean that there might not be a reason for you to engage in PVP. From what I have read on Ashes and what I have heard from the Devs is this will not be gankfest lose gear PVP. It will be PVP with a purpose and people will want to engage in PVP.
  • As an avid PvEer, I certainly hope that I will be able to explore and take part in the world freely, worrying solely about dangers from the environment, without having to worry about other players interfering with my enjoyment of the game.
  • They've said that ganking will be heavily punished, so I'm not too worried about it in all honesty. So long as it isn't a full loot system and you don't get many/any benefits for killing someone random and there are deterrents in place, we should be fine. Maybe we'll get killed from time-to-time, but it shouldn't be a constant bloodbath for those uninvolved in conflicts.
  • I hope there's a PVE server, or yea make sure ganking is heavily punished.
  • "Pvp is the catalyst we use for change to occur in the world. While I appreciate the desire of some players not wanting to participate in that mechanic, I'd be lying if I told you that you could COMPLETELY avoid it. Is it possible to play and avoid PvP? Absolutely, you can focus on PvE, crafting, gathering, city building, farming, animal husbandry, home building, raiding. I want Ashes to be an astounding environment for our players to explore and interact with. To challenge you." - Steven (from discord)


    going by that i doubt that there will be a pve server as it sounds like pvp plays a important role in the world
  • As others already said, guild warfare, city sieges and fights for territory are integral parts of the game and I can't imagine they will change game foundation in order to make PvE servers.

    That said, seems like the goal is to have PvP that is applied in order to achieve a goal, and not freely to grief players. There was a mention of "flagging" for PvP and meaningful penalties for attacking PvE players. Don't think there are any official details on how exactly the system will work.

    I myself am almost exclusively a PvE player, but after reading on how PvP should work in this game I would be interested in defending my city or joining my guild in attacking an enemy city. Maybe even becoming a mercenary and joining a caravan as guard or joining a group attacking a caravan might be interesting.

    What I hope doesn't happen is for PKers being allowed to attack random players just because they feel like it. This sort of behavior is only destructive and will push many potential players away. Even if it is technically possible, the PvP system should be such as to make it the exception and not the rule.
  • [quote quote=5655]As others already said, guild warfare, city sieges and fights for territory are integral parts of the game and I can’t imagine they will change game foundation in order to make PvE servers.

    That said, seems like the goal is to have PvP that is applied in order to achieve a goal, and not freely to grief players. There was a mention of “flagging” for PvP and meaningful penalties for attacking PvE players. Don’t think there are any official details on how exactly the system will work.

    I myself am almost exclusively a PvE player, but after reading on how PvP should work in this game I would be interested in defending my city or joining my guild in attacking an enemy city. Maybe even becoming a mercenary and joining a caravan as guard or joining a group attacking a caravan might be interesting.

    What I hope doesn’t happen is for PKers being allowed to attack random players just because they feel like it. This sort of behavior is only destructive and will push many potential players away. Even if it is technically possible, the PvP system should be such as to make it the exception and not the rule.

    [/quote]

    <strong>Q: What type of flagging system will be used for PvP in Ashes? Something completely open like Free-For-All, or a system limited to certain areas (like caravans and sieges), or maybe an incentivized factional opt-in system tied to established nodes, similar to Star Wars Galaxies’ TEF system?</strong>

    A: We are still developing our flagging system, but I can give you an overview of how it stands now. It is important to keep in mind, that players are not forced into PvP. If you want to influence the world around you through non-pvp methods, it is an equally viable option.

    There are three states that a player can find themselves in: Non-Combatant (Green), Combatant (Purple), and Corrupt (Red). Everyone is a Non-Combatant by default. If a Non-Combatant attacks a Combatant or another non-combatant, then they become a Combatant for a period of time. Similarly, if a Non-Combatant enters a PVP zone (which includes things like Castles, City Sieges and Caravans) they are automatically flagged a Combatant while in the zone, and for a period of time after leaving that zone.

    Players can kill Combatants without repercussions, and are encouraged to do so, since dying while a Combatant means you suffer reduced death penalties. Where this changes is when a Combatant kills a Non-Combatant. In this case, the Combatant is Corrupt, and acquires a Corruption Score (which is accrued based on a number of different parameters, including the level differential of their freshly slain victim). This Corruption Score can be worked off with effort through a few mechanics, but the primary means of getting rid of it is through death.

    While a player is marked as Corrupt, they may be attacked by both Combatants and Non-Combatants. If a non-combatant attacks a corrupt player, the non-combatant will not flag as a combatant. We also have some other ideas that we haven’t formalized yet that will allow players to participate in what we feel could be a fun cat-and-mouse part of the game. As an example, the location of these corrupt players will be displayed on the map, if you have the Bounty Hunter title, which can be obtained through a quest available to a citizen from a Military zoned, Stage 4 (Town) Node. These are systems that we’re still working on, but Corruption is something we want to provide explicit gameplay opportunities for.

    In any case, all this comes to a head via death penalties. A Non-Combatant who dies suffers normal penalties, which includes experience debt, durability loss, as well as dropping a portion of carried raw materials (which can then be looted). A Combatant who dies suffers these same penalties, but at half the Non-Combatant rate. A character who has a Corruption Score on the other hand, suffers penalties at three times the rate of a Non-Combatant, and has a chance to drop *any* carried/equipped items based on their current Corruption Score.

    The idea here is to disincentivizes those who wish to gank or grief others, while rewarding those who engage in consensual PVP. We don’t want Ashes to be a murder box!

    Again, this is the briefest of overviews, and I’m sure this explanation raises as many questions as it answers. It really demands a more thorough explanation, which we’ll get into in a developer blog. Also, keep in mind that Ashes is continually a work in progress – though I’ve given a lot of specifics here, what survives play-testing is anyone’s guess!

    Source: <a href="http://www.mmogames.com/gamearticles/interview-ashes-of-creation-wants-bring-virtual-world-life/">MMO Gamers Interview</a>
  • Thanks, Silv!
    That's a promising way to deal with it. As long as removing corruption is not trivial it should work.

    Seems like a good chunk of info could be stashed away in interviews, I'll have to dig around see if I can find more.
  • I thought that the flagging system worked the opposite way for non combatants and combatants. Why would someone get a greater reward for killing someone unflagged for pvp than killing someone who is flagged for pvp? I realize that all we have to do to be flagged os fight back, but what if a very high lvl player is able to one shot? I'm sure they have more work to do on the system but I am presently confused.
  • [quote quote=5666]I thought that the flagging system worked the opposite way for non combatants and combatants. Why would someone get a greater reward for killing someone unflagged for pvp than killing someone who is flagged for pvp? I realize that all we have to do to be flagged os fight back, but what if a very high lvl player is able to one shot? I’m sure they have more work to do on the system but I am presently confused.

    [/quote]

    If someone flagged for PvP (a combatant) kills someone who is not flagged for PvP (a non-combatant) then they are flagged as corrupted, so they don't get a greater reward (reduced penalties) for killing someone who doesn't fight back, they get increased penalties. PvP flagged players (combatants) only get reduced penalties if they kill PvP flagged players (combatants).

    This discourages combatants from killing non-combatants, because then they will be flagged as corrupt and fair game for anyone with increased penalties.
  • I wait epic pvp and abrupt sieges of locks and fortresses.
    But not poor excuse for sieges from Revelation and Bless.
Sign In or Register to comment.