I am talking about the fact that if a player experiences enough loss, they will leave.
I 100% get what you're saying and agree in principle that losers are more likely to quit, but I don't see it as that black and white.
Neither do I. Everyone else thinks I am claiming it is a black and white issue.
I see it as an issue that every MMO needs to address, and in terms of PvP MMO's it is a major issue rather than just an issue.
I also don't see it as an issue that needs to be fixed by removing the loss players can experience - because the loss itself isn't the issue. The issue is that the loss means they are able to do less, or at the very least they feel they are able to do less.
So, the solution to me - or at least the best solution for Ashes - is to make sure players always feel like they have plenty to do that they want to do, despite the loss they may suffer.
Basically, if the game is compelling even with that loss, people will care about it a lot less, and so stay in the game a lot longer.
0
Options
DygzMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
People ragequit after repeated losses and after feeling like they don't stand any chance. Or after a really big quantifiable loss (which in this case would be them losing their caravan carrying all of their owned loot, essentially losing all their progress or some similar scenario).
That's only true for PvP-lovers.
People who aren't much into that activity will rage-quit fairly qucikly because there's other stuff they would rather do in the game besides PvP.
Winning or losing is irrelevant for those players.
Now sure there will be people who will ragequit if they get ganked every time they leave the town, but is that kind of scenario really likely? I personally think it's a little ridiculous to think that's going to be the case.
Doesn't have to be every time a player leaves town. It only has to be more often than the player cares to be forced into PvP combat when there's other stuff they would rather be doing in the game.
0
Options
DygzMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
My point was that people have the wrong idea as it stands right now about how much players will be harrassed pvp-wise and how easily it will cause them to ragequit.
It's of my opinion that pvp isn't going to be as common as people are thinking because of the corruption mechanic along with people usually not trying to start fights.
Seems to me that most of the conversation over the last several pages have been about PvP in MMORPGs in general, rather than about how often PvP encounters will cause people to ragequit in Ashes specifically.
I'm pretty sure most of the people in this thread either believe Corruption will sufficiently curtail PvP such that traditionally-non-PvPers won't be overly negatively impacted or are in a wait-and-see mode to determine whether the proposed Corruption mechanic will be sufficient.
Specifically, McStakerson stated "In a MMO...." here are a couple of possible things players could do to avoid getting ganked too often. I added to that the option of ragequitting. And I added that because I haven't found his options to be helpful in other MMOs I've played.
Being in a group does not prevent PvP combat. It's more likely to encourage PvP combat.
In those moments when I've exhausted my interest in PvP combat, I am trying to move away from groups that are involved in PvP combat, so joining a group doesn't resolve anything.
I do go find a quieter spot and attempt to wait for the PvP flag to go on cool-down - and when some asshat comes and finds me and insists on attacking me, that just causes the cool-down flag to reset. So, it doesn't matter to me whether I win or lose - engaging in battle just prolongs the amount of time I'm flagged for PvP. That is what causes me to ragequit.
How much that will be an issue in Ashes, I don't know.
If I can just let the person kill me and then continue to go about my business without being flagged or further accosted, fine. If I get killed multiple times and that adds extra time to fulfilling my non-PvP goals due to xp debt. I'm likely to ragequit.
If Corruption actually works the way Steven envisions it will work - could be OK.
But...I have to play the game to truly know. Which is actually true for all of us.
0
Options
mcstackersonMember, Phoenix Initiative, Royalty, Kickstarter, Alpha One
I am talking about the fact that if a player experiences enough loss, they will leave.
Before I even bother trying to carry on with this conversation I will ask - is that a point you agree with, or do you think that players are happy to carry on losing their stuff in a game endlessly?
Yes, i think the person who responded to you kind of covered it but what i feel like this comment ignores that the lose mechanic will also be a reason some people will stay which is why you are losing me. There will be people who don't like it and people who do.
So, the solution to me - or at least the best solution for Ashes - is to make sure players always feel like they have plenty to do that they want to do, despite the loss they may suffer.
Basically, if the game is compelling even with that loss, people will care about it a lot less, and so stay in the game a lot longer.
Yes, their goal is to have plenty for people to do. Even without instanced content and specific progression paths for more casual play (which they have planned), the fact that most things can be bought and traded means that the only thing people need to progress is gold which they should be able to farm anywhere.
Yes, more valuable resources will be more contested, possibly with direct pvp conflict, but at the very least, you should still be able to make money farming in less popular spots. Combine that with the size of the world and lack of fast travel, there should be a variety of places to farm with varying levels of competition.
I'd also like to add that just because things might be this way doesn't mean you can never do more competitive content in the open world. You can always get a group together and go do it. Depending how things are, you may fail at time but you should always have a way of progressing that you can lean on.
0
Options
DygzMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
Yes, i think the person who responded to you kind of covered it but what i feel like this comment ignores that the lose mechanic will also be a reason some people will stay which is why you are losing me. There will be people who don't like it and people who do.
Mmmmn. So what I've been responding to are the implications that people in general will respond like hardcore PvPers will. "Join a group" works great for people who enjoy PvP combat but suck at it.
"Join a group" is not a solution for people who don't enjoy PvP combat or who rarely enjoy PvP combat.
Which is something PvPers seem to not understand.
PvPers tend to be stuck on win or lose.
Non-PvPers just don't want to be forced into PvP combat when they aren't in the mood for PvP combat. It has nothing to do with winning or losing. Other than, again, the loss of time associated with being forced into undesirable gameplay.
So, yes, for some people the lose mechanic will also be a reason some people will stay.
I'm pretty sure everyone here agrees with that.
I think what's trying to be conveyed is that the notion that non-PvPers will be more willing to engage in PvP if they lose the fight less often is a fallacy. Because losing the fight isn't the primary problem. Even losing stuff isn't necessarily a primary problem - especially when it's just the normal death penalty. That's the same as losing a fight with a mob.
The problem there is that it is infinitely easier, for me, to avoid mobs bent on attacking me than it is to avoid players who are bent on attacking me.
If someone ganks me once or twice in an 8-hour game session - I'm OK with that.
If I get ganked 5 times in 30 minutes, I'm going to ragequit. Even if I win all 5 battles.
I think we're just trying to get you to acknowledge that you comprehend that part: the negativity from a non-PvPer perception isn't really about who wins or loses the battle(s).
I am talking about the fact that if a player experiences enough loss, they will leave.
Before I even bother trying to carry on with this conversation I will ask - is that a point you agree with, or do you think that players are happy to carry on losing their stuff in a game endlessly?
Yes
Good, now that we both know you actually agree with what I am saying (it is fairly clear you are not aware what I am saying), we can get to the next step.
I am saying that since risk vs reward is a key aspect of Ashes, that potential loss in PvP in Ashes needs to stay in the game. This is non-negotiable as far as I am concerned (I have said this at least a half dozen times - which is how I know you are not aware of what I am saying - the entire post of yours above other than the one word I quoted seems to suggest you are not aware of this basic point of what I am saying).
So, we agree that people will leave a game over PvP loss, and we agree (I assume) that PvP loss in Ashes is a key aspect of the game.
Now, what I am saying from this point is that it is in the best interests of Intrepid, Ashes and the player community if Intrepid did something to stop the people that would leave the game over that PvP loss from doing so.
Not stop that PvP loss, as it seems everyone is assuming I am saying despite me saying many times that this is not what I am saying. They need to do what they can to stop people leaving because of that loss, not stop that loss.
Non-PvPers just don't want to be forced into PvP combat when they aren't in the mood for PvP combat.
Then Ashes may not be for them. It CAN be, for many of them. The size of the world, the abundance of activities that an individual player can work on at any given time, alliances, the fact that you're going to spend a lot of time in your own node around friendly people, the corruption system - all of that will mitigate just how often the average player is randomly killed. All of that should be enough for most people.
But at the end of the day, it may just not be the game for some people. Luckily for them, in the vast majority of video games they don't have to worry about being killed by other players, or even seeing other players at all. Plenty of single player games, co op games, and mmo's where pvp is a non factor.
I don't want to see players ganked 5 times in 30 minutes. If that was the vision for the game, I wouldn't even be here. Same as I wouldn't be here if the vision was a pvp neutering opt in opt out system.
2
Options
DygzMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
edited April 2021
Ashes may not be for them. We shall have to see.
And we shall also have to see, if it's not for them, whether Ashes can sustain sufficient player population without them to be successful.
Getting ganked 5 times in 30 minutes is not really the vision for Ashes. Although, my use of gank, here, includes being forced into unwanted PvP combat - which is technically possible to happen in Ashes.
We have to see whether Corruption is as much of a deterrent, in general, as is envisioned by the devs.
(I don't understand why you introduced opt in opt out system for Ashes into this discussion.)
I am talking about the fact that if a player experiences enough loss, they will leave.
Before I even bother trying to carry on with this conversation I will ask - is that a point you agree with, or do you think that players are happy to carry on losing their stuff in a game endlessly?
Yes
Good, now that we both know you actually agree with what I am saying (it is fairly clear you are not aware what I am saying), we can get to the next step.
I am saying that since risk vs reward is a key aspect of Ashes, that potential loss in PvP in Ashes needs to stay in the game. This is non-negotiable as far as I am concerned (I have said this at least a half dozen times - which is how I know you are not aware of what I am saying - the entire post of yours above other than the one word I quoted seems to suggest you are not aware of this basic point of what I am saying).
So, we agree that people will leave a game over PvP loss, and we agree (I assume) that PvP loss in Ashes is a key aspect of the game.
Now, what I am saying from this point is that it is in the best interests of Intrepid, Ashes and the player community if Intrepid did something to stop the people that would leave the game over that PvP loss from doing so.
Not stop that PvP loss, as it seems everyone is assuming I am saying despite me saying many times that this is not what I am saying. They need to do what they can to stop people leaving because of that loss, not stop that loss.
Is this a point you agree with?
Please go in more detail of what you have in mind but conceptually, i don't think i agree. If people don't like an aspect of the game and it's a big enough deal to them that they don't want to play, then they probably shouldn't. I don't think that is a bad thing. Games are allowed to be different and appeal to different people.
The problems stem from it being forced on people who are too low level. I don't care too much about other instances of it. Corruption should be looked into how it applies across parties though. All members in one probably should take the same amount for the members who took part in a kill.
I can see it being a problem if it is treated like a resource that is split instead of applied equally across the entire party. The penalties have to be utterly crippling to make it a deterrent from doing it as well. That way it will properly kill zerging parties who just run across the world murdering random players for no reason. If the punishment for that isn't high enough then it is just going to repeat the same problems in every other MMO that allows free form PvP.
The problems stem from it being forced on people who are too low level. I don't care too much about other instances of it. Corruption should be looked into how it applies across parties though. All members in one probably should take the same amount for the members who took part in a kill.
I can see it being a problem if it is treated like a resource that is split instead of applied equally across the entire party. The penalties have to be utterly crippling to make it a deterrent from doing it as well. That way it will properly kill zerging parties who just run across the world murdering random players for no reason. If the punishment for that isn't high enough then it is just going to repeat the same problems in every other MMO that allows free form PvP.
A single person going corrupt while in party should not affect the corruption levels of the other players in those parties. The reason I say this, is because the party members are already put into a sticky situation just by being in the party.
They have a choice.. defend their party member... Which will cause healers to turn purple if they heal the corrupt player, and DPS party members to turn purple if they attack anyone trying to kill the corrupt player. If the DPS players keep at it, they themselves will go corrupt, compounding the issue at hand.
Or, they can ignore their corrupt friend and cause internal strife which will alienate the player who decided to go corrupt in the first place. Seen many of people quit guilds because they went corrupt, their friends stayed out of it as to not risk their corruption level and drama ensued.
In the end, corruption causes many more issues than just chances of dropping gear and losing XP.. you can lose in game friends over it. You can lose party spots because of it.. I mean... if Player A has a habit of raging on people and going corrupt, every couple of outings, who will want to invite that guy along next time?
The penalties stretch way beyond just the corruption penalties. But people will find out on their own over the course of the first year or so of the game. People will experiment with the corruption system and see if it is worth it, if it is fun and so on... and after a time, people will realize that going corrupt is a far more serious decision to make and not to take it lightly.
If people don't like an aspect of the game and it's a big enough deal to them that they don't want to play, then they probably shouldn't.
The issue with this as a point in relation to player loss in a PvP game is that while some people may like the idea, as soon as they are at the tail end of enough losses, they wont like it any more and will leave. Everyone has their limit.
There are some people that just straight up dont like it. Ashes is not for them, and I am not suggesting otherwise.
Conversely, if they have enough losses and would otherwise leave, but find a reason to stay and then start winning, they will have gone from liking the idea of player loss to disliking it, and back to liking it.
Basically, for most people, their opinion on what they think of player loss in an MMO, especially in relation to PvP, fluctuates with how much loss they have experienced. These are the people and the situations where I think the games content can help.
It needs to bridge that time period from when players suffer multiple losses and decide that they dont like the idea of it, to when they decide that actually, player loss is fine.
It isn't anything to change peoples opinion, or anything to change the game. The idea is to bridge that gap, make it so individual players, or entire guilds even, know that there is still something enjoyable they can do in Ashes, even after a string of losses.
0
Options
mcstackersonMember, Phoenix Initiative, Royalty, Kickstarter, Alpha One
If people don't like an aspect of the game and it's a big enough deal to them that they don't want to play, then they probably shouldn't.
The issue with this as a point in relation to player loss in a PvP game is that while some people may like the idea, as soon as they are at the tail end of enough losses, they wont like it any more and will leave. Everyone has their limit.
There are some people that just straight up dont like it. Ashes is not for them, and I am not suggesting otherwise.
Conversely, if they have enough losses and would otherwise leave, but find a reason to stay and then start winning, they will have gone from liking the idea of player loss to disliking it, and back to liking it.
Basically, for most people, their opinion on what they think of player loss in an MMO, especially in relation to PvP, fluctuates with how much loss they have experienced. These are the people and the situations where I think the games content can help.
It needs to bridge that time period from when players suffer multiple losses and decide that they dont like the idea of it, to when they decide that actually, player loss is fine.
It isn't anything to change peoples opinion, or anything to change the game. The idea is to bridge that gap, make it so individual players, or entire guilds even, know that there is still something enjoyable they can do in Ashes, even after a string of losses.
You are losing me again so can you say what you want. There are already things they can do to bridge the gap, like go to a quieter area, craft, etc. There is also the fact that you don't lose everything when you die so you are still gaining when you go out. You gain less if you die but you are still gaining.
0
Options
DygzMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
There are already things they can do to bridge the gap, like go to a quieter area, craft, etc. There is also the fact that you don't lose everything when you die so you are still gaining when you go out. You gain less if you die but you are still gaining.
You keep asserting that, but it's not really true.
I ragequit because I've gone to a quieter, secluded place and either been followed or discovered and forced into PvP combat multiple times within 20-30 minutes.
Ashes doesn't have fast travel, so I don't think we can just port back to our home and start crafting. I think we're going to have to run or use a mount/caravan and hope we aren't attacked en route to safety.
And, again, you are focused on loss of material stuff - whereas I am focused on the amount of time lost forced in game play that some other player likes, but I don't like. I ragequit over loss of time being able to play the activities I want to play just because some asshat wants to force me to play what they like to play.
That is why, in Ashes, those people are punished with Corruption, but I don't necessarily care about the revenge aspects.
If, I'm dying multiple times, that means I'm losing time gaining xp efficiently due to xp debt. If I'm winning multiple times, that is more time lost flagged for a gameplay mode I'm not in the mood to play.
So, that is a lose/lose situation.
The average player is probably going to be killed and harassed FAR more during node and guild wars than they will by random corrupted players. Node/guild wars have been a feature since the beginning as far as I can see. I'm looking at the kickstarter right now, it's all in there.
There will be days, that due to a node war being declared, the enemy node harasses that node all day, killing multiple people, multiple times.
I don't mean to get personal, and I mean no offense, but you KNEW that whenever you became a braver of worlds (I'm assuming that's some kind of pre order package.) So you KNEW that there would be times when you're kept from doing what you want to do. But now you're saying it's going to make you rage quit.
Edit: I also think mcstackerson's points will generally hold true. Experiences will vary, and there will be exceptions to this. But the way it looks now, there will be such a wide variety of activities and things to do on such a large map, that many people will be able to mostly avoid pvp on any given day.
There are already things they can do to bridge the gap, like go to a quieter area, craft, etc. There is also the fact that you don't lose everything when you die so you are still gaining when you go out. You gain less if you die but you are still gaining.
You keep asserting that, but it's not really true.
I ragequit because I've gone to a quieter, secluded place and either been followed or discovered and forced into PvP combat multiple times within 20-30 minutes.
Ashes doesn't have fast travel, so I don't think we can just port back to our home and start crafting. I think we're going to have to run or use a mount/caravan and hope we aren't attacked en route to safety.
And, again, you are focused on loss of material stuff - whereas I am focused on the amount of time lost forced in game play that some other player likes, but I don't like. I ragequit over loss of time being able to play the activities I want to play just because some asshat wants to force me to play what they like to play.
That is why, in Ashes, those people are punished with Corruption, but I don't necessarily care about the revenge aspects.
If, I'm dying multiple times, that means I'm losing time gaining xp efficiently due to xp debt. If I'm winning multiple times, that is more time lost flagged for a gameplay mode I'm not in the mood to play.
So, that is a lose/lose situation.
There will be asshats like that in game. They know wasting your time is the easiest way to make people leave an area, or just leave the game for a spell, fight back... and in your case rage quit. This type of treatment happened quite a bit in Lineage 2.. nothing game breaking, but annoying to the point, that some nights you would just log off and do something else.
That is the nature of this type of game. The corruption part is one thing, the constant flagging on you while you try to do what you are doing is the annoying part.. They only have to hit you once and stop... do it again... again... again.... again.... and wait for you to react. They are wanting you to go purple, so you can be a free PvP target with no risk of going corrupt. This will happen...
Choices on how to deal with this...
1. Rage quit.. lol... this should be the last option, just thought it was funny.
2. Just ignore them. They will either move on or go corrupt... nothing you can do about it.
3. Fight back. They get what they want, and you never know, you may win... of course if you do win and it is a close fight... they will want a rematch... so... there is that.
4. Go to town, drop off your materials you got while out. Give it a few minutes and head to a new spot.
5. Call friends to help out.. People like this tend to move on when more people they do not know show up.
6. Start doing funny emotes.. never know, it might appeal to their human side for a second and they move on.
7. Log off and do something else when you get a chance.
This game is not a care bear game, but it is not a total bloodshed game either.. it is a little of both. And you will 100% see both side of it. Some days will be better or worse than others. It is just that type of game.
You are losing me again so can you say what you want. There are already things they can do to bridge the gap, like go to a quieter area, craft, etc. There is also the fact that you don't lose everything when you die so you are still gaining when you go out. You gain less if you die but you are still gaining.
I'm not stating what it is I think will fill this gap, because many people are unable to handle two steps at once.
In this thread I've had to fight against people blindly stating that known, discussed, objective facts about MMO's aren't true, just because it paints their preferred content type in a bad light.
I'm not about to say what I think this content could be I am still arguing for the need for this type of content to keep people in the fame - oddly, let alone how I think it could loom.
I am not willing to discuss what it could look like until there are jo real doubts left as to why it is needed - and the fact that you said someone on the verge of leaving the game due to loss could just go and do an activity that puts them at that same risk of loss tells me you dont understand the point.
Also, while a player may only lose a portion of the materials they have on hand when killed out in the open, the materials they gather are of limited use/value to them without moving them via caravan.
Essentially, harvesting is the first step to organizing a caravan.
If you lose while running a caravan, you lose everything - as far as we know.
So, you basically said that if someone is on the verge of quitting due to PvP inflicted loss, they should start again from the bottom of putting themself in a place where they are putting everything at risk again.
When I think of the potential actual problems the game can have it's usually because of the PvP aspect of the game. xD I know a lot of people don't know when to chill. So it might be awfully annoying for a lot longer than a day or two. xD
I hope there are at least videos online of it so I can watch those karens who yell at state cops in RL get murdered in a video game because they called the dwarf mugging them gay.
U.S. East
0
Options
DygzMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
The average player is probably going to be killed and harassed FAR more during node and guild wars than they will by random corrupted players. Node/guild wars have been a feature since the beginning as far as I can see. I'm looking at the kickstarter right now, it's all in there.
Yeah, I guess for me, that is a non-issue and I really don't even understand what the point is supposed to be.
Battlegrounds are objective-based PvP. I can prep for those. It's unlikely that I will have resources on me during any kind of siege. I'm also unlikely to have resources on me when I choose to attack a caravan.
The only way to harass me in an MMORPG is to force me into PvP combat when I'm not in the mood.
If I've chosen to participate in PvP combat, you can kill me as many times as you want because my goals are completing whatever the specific objectives are: I'm going to be focused on the objectives; not kills.
There will be days, that due to a node war being declared, the enemy node harasses that node all day, killing multiple people, multiple times.
I don't agree that a node war is harassment. Also, because node wars are scheduled, if I really don't want to participate in defending my node in PvP combat, I can just schedule my game session for a different time that day.
Currently, in WoW, I have no issue with PvP combat. I spend the vast majority of my time not flagged for PvP combat. If I want to get bonus rewards from completing World Quests while flagged for PvP, I schedule my play session for 1AM to 3AM - which is very low population on my server - port to Orgrimmar to flag for PvP, finish the quests, port back to Orgrimmar and unflag. If someone attacks me, I let them kill me. But, I almost never run into enemy players during those hours. At most, the total time I spend engaging in PvP combat during that session is going to be 6 minutes. The bonus rewards are not so important to me that I absolutely have to get them all so, if I did feel like I reached my threshold of PvP combat, it's easy enough to port to Orgrimmar, unflag and forgo the bonus rewards. The bonus rewards are icing on the cake. I like cake, so I'm not going to complain about cake with no icing.
The way PvP combat currently works in WoW, I have almost complete control over when I participate. I don't have to wait for my PvP flag to cool down. When I'm not in the mood for PvP combat, I can unflag for PvP within about 2 minutes and then I can play the rest of my game session not having to deal with being attacked by other players. I decide when I want to participate in PvP combat. Other players do not decide that for me.
The PvP combat feels largely irrelevant. And I can't be harassed in WoW these days.
I don't mean to get personal, and I mean no offense, but you KNEW that whenever you became a braver of worlds (I'm assuming that's some kind of pre order package.) So you KNEW that there would be times when you're kept from doing what you want to do. But now you're saying it's going to make you rage quit.
Uh. So....
I became Braver of Worlds because I consider Ashes game design to be the successor of EQNext.
I think players building cities and defending cities are pretty much crucial to the future of MMORPGs.
It allows players to change the world rather than having the world primarily remain static.
And I think building and defending a home city inherently forges stronger bonds among the players helping each other with both. I am a PvP-sometimes player. So, it seems very likely that if anything is attacking the city that I've built, I'm going to try to defend the city. Even though I'm a carebear - and prefer to avoid combat, if I'm defending the city I've built, that is objective-based. Doesn't matter to me whether the it's a PvE attack or whether it's a PvP attack. I'm not really focused on any of the kills. I'm focused on the city itself. So, really that mostly feels like PvE rather than PvP, but it will have me participating in PvP.
There are several MMORPG design concepts from EQNext that I want to ensure devs continue to work on so years down the road, it's quicker and easier for devs to design a game similar to EQNext. I'm willing to invest money to support game devs while they hone those skills - even if it turns out that those games become vaporware - like Revival. And even if it turns out that Ashes is too PvP-centric for me to want to play it - I've helped the game devs hone the skills I want them to have for when they move on to there next MMORPGs.
My monetary investment in Ashes really has very little to do with whether I will play the game when it launches. If I feel during Alpha and Beta that Ashes is too PvP-centric I will stop playing it after Beta.
And then we will just have to see how many Alpha/Beta testers make the same decision I did - and whether that leaves sufficient pop of PvP-lovers to sustain the game for long. If Ashes becomes a WoW-killer even though it's too PvP-centric for me to play - that will be great.
I also think mcstackerson's points will generally hold true. Experiences will vary, and there will be exceptions to this. But the way it looks now, there will be such a wide variety of activities and things to do on such a large map, that many people will be able to mostly avoid pvp on any given day.
If Corruption is actually the deterrent the devs hope and claim it will be, sure. But, we have to play to truly know.
0
Options
DygzMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
There will be asshats like that in game. They know wasting your time is the easiest way to make people leave an area, or just leave the game for a spell, fight back... and in your case rage quit. This type of treatment happened quite a bit in Lineage 2.. nothing game breaking, but annoying to the point, that some nights you would just log off and do something else.
So....
I work in IT helpdesk. Multiple times per day, I am told, "You have the patience of Job! I don't know how you stay so calm. Those people you help would be driving me crazy! I would be cursing!" That's from coworkers in other departments overhearing my side of the call.
Or, "Thank you, thank you, thank you! I know I'm horrible with PCs. You are a great teacher. You've helped me so much and you were so calm and patient you calmed me down. And you didn't make me feel like an idiot. Normally people would be yelling at me at this point."
Every other person in my department says, "I'm glad you're the one doing those calls instead of me because when I was doing them, I would be screaming at them. And cursing at them. And I would have to put the phone down, walk away and come back after I've calmed down."
I am rarely even angry. Anything that can get me to rage - I'm done with.
I'm not going to play a game that can make me rage. Raging is not fun. And I play games to have fun.
That is the nature of this type of game.
If the nature of the game is that it can make you rage some nights, I am not playing that game.
Which is probably why I haven't played Lineage 2.
If Ashes is as PvP-centric as what you describe, I won't be playing Ashes.
And, if Ashes can be that PvP-centric and as popular as Lineage 2, I think I would consider that a success.
GG
Oh boy, i can almost see the future, where there will be a huge pile of PvE elitists Threads crying out loud, because xXPKMachine42069Xx Rekt their caravan, Killed them in their favorite farm spot and stole their candy.
Aren't we all sinners?
0
Options
NagashMember, Leader of Men, Kickstarter, Alpha One
Oh boy, i can almost see the future, where there will be a huge pile of PvE elitists Threads crying out loud, because xXPKMachine42069Xx Rekt their caravan, Killed them in their favorite farm spot and stole their candy.
We have had that for the past 2 years and the game is not even out yet
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
5
Options
DygzMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
Oh boy, i can almost see the future, where there will be a huge pile of PvE elitists Threads crying out loud, because xXPKMachine42069Xx Rekt their caravan, Killed them in their favorite farm spot and stole their candy.
No. I think we won't be complaining - we just won't be playing.
Oh boy, i can almost see the future, where there will be a huge pile of PvE elitists Threads crying out loud, because xXPKMachine42069Xx Rekt their caravan, Killed them in their favorite farm spot and stole their candy.
No. I think we won't be complaining - we just won't be playing.
If you atleast could speak for all the PvElitists.
There will be asshats like that in game. They know wasting your time is the easiest way to make people leave an area, or just leave the game for a spell, fight back... and in your case rage quit. This type of treatment happened quite a bit in Lineage 2.. nothing game breaking, but annoying to the point, that some nights you would just log off and do something else.
So....
I work in IT helpdesk. Multiple times per day, I am told, "You have the patience of Job! I don't know how you stay so calm. Those people you help would be driving me crazy! I would be cursing!" That's from coworkers in other departments overhearing my side of the call.
Or, "Thank you, thank you, thank you! I know I'm horrible with PCs. You are a great teacher. You've helped me so much and you were so calm and patient you calmed me down. And you didn't make me feel like an idiot. Normally people would be yelling at me at this point."
Every other person in my department says, "I'm glad you're the one doing those calls instead of me because when I was doing them, I would be screaming at them. And cursing at them. And I would have to put the phone down, walk away and come back after I've calmed down."
I am rarely even angry. Anything that can get me to rage - I'm done with.
I'm not going to play a game that can make me rage. Raging is not fun. And I play games to have fun.
That is the nature of this type of game.
If the nature of the game is that it can make you rage some nights, I am not playing that game.
Which is probably why I haven't played Lineage 2.
If Ashes is as PvP-centric as what you describe, I won't be playing Ashes.
And, if Ashes can be that PvP-centric and as popular as Lineage 2, I think I would consider that a success.
GG
I think you understand where I am coming from, but the frequency of the events described are playing out more often in your mind than what they will actually be.
Lineage 2 at launch .. from level 1 to 20... I maybe had 10 PvP encounters, and half were started by me. From 20 - 40, that number dropped to maybe (high estimate) 5 encounters... most of those were seeing other guilds fighting, and me jumping in to help the guild I liked. I could have just watched or went somewhere else.. but I chose to participate.
The one thing AoC does that Lineage 2 did not, is to give PvP players more outlets for their PvP wants. So while it will still happen in open world, most of it will happen during events when players have less to lose and more to gain. Someone who is serious about PvP will be planning caravan raids, not harassing Dygz because he is alone. Also they will be in the Arena, practicing their rotations and learning how other classes fight...
I personally think most Open world PvP will happen in locations like Dungeons or sweet spot leveling areas that are being contested by multiple groups.
This is not to say you will not get attacked... chances are you will.. just not at the frequency you are thinking.
0
Options
DygzMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
edited April 2021
I only need to ragequit 3 times to be completely through with a game.
So, frequency is kind of meaningless.
If you say that ragequitting sometimes is the nature of the game - I'm not playing that game.
If I anticipate that a game could cause me to ragequit once - I'm not playing that game.
I'm not overly worried about it in Ashes at the moment. We need to play to know whether Corruption will be the deterrent the devs claim it will be.
I'm just saying the suggestions you've provided haven't been adequate in previous MMORPGs.
You just have no problem playing games that cause you to ragequit sometimes.
Whereas that is a dealbreaker for me...and for lots of other players who don't enjoy PvP combat much.
I only need to ragequit 3 times to be completely through with a game.
So, frequency is kind of meaningless.
If you say that ragequitting sometimes is the nature of the game - I'm not playing that game.
If I anticipate that a game could cause me to ragequit once - I'm not playing that game.
I'm not overly worried about it in Ashes at the moment. We need to play to know whether Corruption will be the deterrent the devs claim it will be.
I'm just saying the suggestions you've provided haven't been adequate in previous MMORPGs.
You just have no problem playing games that cause you to ragequit sometimes.
Whereas that is a dealbreaker for me...and for lots of other players who don't enjoy PvP combat much.
Sorta, I guess...
I did not enjoy PvP in Lineage 2 until late game... had I left after my first few times... I would have missed out on all the friends I made after the fact. But I do 100% understand where you are coming from.. I just did not want you turn away from ashes before giving it a shot. From everything I have read from you, you would be the type of player I enjoy playing with.. minus the rage quitting part lol.
1
Options
DygzMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
edited April 2021
Nope.
I think there's a good chance Corruption will be sufficient.
Also, in the last few years, PvP mechanics have been fairly watered down enough in the games I've played, including WoW that even random PK encounters are mostly meaningless. 6 minutes total out of an 8-hour game session. These days in WoW, I have enough control over when I'm susceptible to PvP combat - it's a non-issue.
Also, I've now played two games where, even though I'm typically a carebear and I avoid combat as much as possible, I revel in slaughtering stuff because I feel totally immersed in my "class". I love Stealth. And In KOA: Reckoning and Valheim, I love sneaking up behind mobs and eviscerating them. It's like uber-Hunter mode.
And, it's glorious!!!
I think I recently posted the EQNext scenario: Dark Elves from Serpentspine Mountains are farming Dryads in Kithicor Forest, stealing their Life magic and transmuting it into Shadow magic to power their spells and augment gear and abilities, like Stealth.
Players who rely on Shadow magic will go into Kithicor to farm NPC dryads, but the players in Kithicor will want to prevent that because as Life is drained from the region, blight spreads and eventually the bonds which hold the Shadow Demons at bay will break.
The Shadow Demons destroy anything living...even the Dark Elves should the Shadow Demons encounter them (unbeknownst to the Dark Elves).
When I heard that scenario, I thought, "Oh! I'm going to do whatever I need to do to maximize my Stealth. If I have to kill some Dryads to power my Stealth, I'm going to kill some Dryads. And if Kithicor players insist on stopping me, well, they will just have to die! I will try to talk them out of it, but if they have to die, they have to die!"
That flip in mindset fascinates me. I'm curious to see if there will be scenarios like that in Ashes.
I'm very interested to wade through the game mechanics, so I'm totally in for the testing.
We already have lots of friends in this community - some from other games; some new ones - should be fun to explore how we might interact in the world.
While, I greatly prefer to play on PvE servers where I can't be forced into PvP combat when I'm not in the mood, I eventually realized that I do have some PvPer friends I would like to interact with in EQNext, and, now, in Ashes. I'm fairly skeptical about having all the playstyles on one server, but... it should be a grand experiment to participate in.
Oh! I just remembered! I also had a lot of fun in the BR. I mostly focused on exploring, completing task objectives and staying hidden until the end of the match. It wasn't too difficult to frequently be among the last 4 remaining.
So... while I haven't found that the specific suggestions you posited are as easy to resolve the concerns non-PvPers have with playing on the same server as hardcore PvPers, I think there's a pretty good chance the devs will be able to pull this off.
We just have to play to know for sure. Which means... I at least have to give it a try.
Comments
I see it as an issue that every MMO needs to address, and in terms of PvP MMO's it is a major issue rather than just an issue.
I also don't see it as an issue that needs to be fixed by removing the loss players can experience - because the loss itself isn't the issue. The issue is that the loss means they are able to do less, or at the very least they feel they are able to do less.
So, the solution to me - or at least the best solution for Ashes - is to make sure players always feel like they have plenty to do that they want to do, despite the loss they may suffer.
Basically, if the game is compelling even with that loss, people will care about it a lot less, and so stay in the game a lot longer.
People who aren't much into that activity will rage-quit fairly qucikly because there's other stuff they would rather do in the game besides PvP.
Winning or losing is irrelevant for those players.
Doesn't have to be every time a player leaves town. It only has to be more often than the player cares to be forced into PvP combat when there's other stuff they would rather be doing in the game.
Engaging in an activity for which I have no interest.
I'm pretty sure most of the people in this thread either believe Corruption will sufficiently curtail PvP such that traditionally-non-PvPers won't be overly negatively impacted or are in a wait-and-see mode to determine whether the proposed Corruption mechanic will be sufficient.
Specifically, McStakerson stated "In a MMO...." here are a couple of possible things players could do to avoid getting ganked too often. I added to that the option of ragequitting. And I added that because I haven't found his options to be helpful in other MMOs I've played.
Being in a group does not prevent PvP combat. It's more likely to encourage PvP combat.
In those moments when I've exhausted my interest in PvP combat, I am trying to move away from groups that are involved in PvP combat, so joining a group doesn't resolve anything.
I do go find a quieter spot and attempt to wait for the PvP flag to go on cool-down - and when some asshat comes and finds me and insists on attacking me, that just causes the cool-down flag to reset. So, it doesn't matter to me whether I win or lose - engaging in battle just prolongs the amount of time I'm flagged for PvP. That is what causes me to ragequit.
How much that will be an issue in Ashes, I don't know.
If I can just let the person kill me and then continue to go about my business without being flagged or further accosted, fine. If I get killed multiple times and that adds extra time to fulfilling my non-PvP goals due to xp debt. I'm likely to ragequit.
If Corruption actually works the way Steven envisions it will work - could be OK.
But...I have to play the game to truly know. Which is actually true for all of us.
Yes, i think the person who responded to you kind of covered it but what i feel like this comment ignores that the lose mechanic will also be a reason some people will stay which is why you are losing me. There will be people who don't like it and people who do.
Yes, their goal is to have plenty for people to do. Even without instanced content and specific progression paths for more casual play (which they have planned), the fact that most things can be bought and traded means that the only thing people need to progress is gold which they should be able to farm anywhere.
Yes, more valuable resources will be more contested, possibly with direct pvp conflict, but at the very least, you should still be able to make money farming in less popular spots. Combine that with the size of the world and lack of fast travel, there should be a variety of places to farm with varying levels of competition.
I'd also like to add that just because things might be this way doesn't mean you can never do more competitive content in the open world. You can always get a group together and go do it. Depending how things are, you may fail at time but you should always have a way of progressing that you can lean on.
Mmmmn. So what I've been responding to are the implications that people in general will respond like hardcore PvPers will. "Join a group" works great for people who enjoy PvP combat but suck at it.
"Join a group" is not a solution for people who don't enjoy PvP combat or who rarely enjoy PvP combat.
Which is something PvPers seem to not understand.
PvPers tend to be stuck on win or lose.
Non-PvPers just don't want to be forced into PvP combat when they aren't in the mood for PvP combat. It has nothing to do with winning or losing. Other than, again, the loss of time associated with being forced into undesirable gameplay.
So, yes, for some people the lose mechanic will also be a reason some people will stay.
I'm pretty sure everyone here agrees with that.
I think what's trying to be conveyed is that the notion that non-PvPers will be more willing to engage in PvP if they lose the fight less often is a fallacy. Because losing the fight isn't the primary problem. Even losing stuff isn't necessarily a primary problem - especially when it's just the normal death penalty. That's the same as losing a fight with a mob.
The problem there is that it is infinitely easier, for me, to avoid mobs bent on attacking me than it is to avoid players who are bent on attacking me.
If someone ganks me once or twice in an 8-hour game session - I'm OK with that.
If I get ganked 5 times in 30 minutes, I'm going to ragequit. Even if I win all 5 battles.
I think we're just trying to get you to acknowledge that you comprehend that part: the negativity from a non-PvPer perception isn't really about who wins or loses the battle(s).
I am saying that since risk vs reward is a key aspect of Ashes, that potential loss in PvP in Ashes needs to stay in the game. This is non-negotiable as far as I am concerned (I have said this at least a half dozen times - which is how I know you are not aware of what I am saying - the entire post of yours above other than the one word I quoted seems to suggest you are not aware of this basic point of what I am saying).
So, we agree that people will leave a game over PvP loss, and we agree (I assume) that PvP loss in Ashes is a key aspect of the game.
Now, what I am saying from this point is that it is in the best interests of Intrepid, Ashes and the player community if Intrepid did something to stop the people that would leave the game over that PvP loss from doing so.
Not stop that PvP loss, as it seems everyone is assuming I am saying despite me saying many times that this is not what I am saying. They need to do what they can to stop people leaving because of that loss, not stop that loss.
Is this a point you agree with?
Then Ashes may not be for them. It CAN be, for many of them. The size of the world, the abundance of activities that an individual player can work on at any given time, alliances, the fact that you're going to spend a lot of time in your own node around friendly people, the corruption system - all of that will mitigate just how often the average player is randomly killed. All of that should be enough for most people.
But at the end of the day, it may just not be the game for some people. Luckily for them, in the vast majority of video games they don't have to worry about being killed by other players, or even seeing other players at all. Plenty of single player games, co op games, and mmo's where pvp is a non factor.
I don't want to see players ganked 5 times in 30 minutes. If that was the vision for the game, I wouldn't even be here. Same as I wouldn't be here if the vision was a pvp neutering opt in opt out system.
And we shall also have to see, if it's not for them, whether Ashes can sustain sufficient player population without them to be successful.
Getting ganked 5 times in 30 minutes is not really the vision for Ashes. Although, my use of gank, here, includes being forced into unwanted PvP combat - which is technically possible to happen in Ashes.
We have to see whether Corruption is as much of a deterrent, in general, as is envisioned by the devs.
(I don't understand why you introduced opt in opt out system for Ashes into this discussion.)
I was just saying I don't want to see either of the extremes, neither an opt in system, nor an unmitigated gank fest.
Please go in more detail of what you have in mind but conceptually, i don't think i agree. If people don't like an aspect of the game and it's a big enough deal to them that they don't want to play, then they probably shouldn't. I don't think that is a bad thing. Games are allowed to be different and appeal to different people.
I can see it being a problem if it is treated like a resource that is split instead of applied equally across the entire party. The penalties have to be utterly crippling to make it a deterrent from doing it as well. That way it will properly kill zerging parties who just run across the world murdering random players for no reason. If the punishment for that isn't high enough then it is just going to repeat the same problems in every other MMO that allows free form PvP.
U.S. East
A single person going corrupt while in party should not affect the corruption levels of the other players in those parties. The reason I say this, is because the party members are already put into a sticky situation just by being in the party.
They have a choice.. defend their party member... Which will cause healers to turn purple if they heal the corrupt player, and DPS party members to turn purple if they attack anyone trying to kill the corrupt player. If the DPS players keep at it, they themselves will go corrupt, compounding the issue at hand.
Or, they can ignore their corrupt friend and cause internal strife which will alienate the player who decided to go corrupt in the first place. Seen many of people quit guilds because they went corrupt, their friends stayed out of it as to not risk their corruption level and drama ensued.
In the end, corruption causes many more issues than just chances of dropping gear and losing XP.. you can lose in game friends over it. You can lose party spots because of it.. I mean... if Player A has a habit of raging on people and going corrupt, every couple of outings, who will want to invite that guy along next time?
The penalties stretch way beyond just the corruption penalties. But people will find out on their own over the course of the first year or so of the game. People will experiment with the corruption system and see if it is worth it, if it is fun and so on... and after a time, people will realize that going corrupt is a far more serious decision to make and not to take it lightly.
There are some people that just straight up dont like it. Ashes is not for them, and I am not suggesting otherwise.
Conversely, if they have enough losses and would otherwise leave, but find a reason to stay and then start winning, they will have gone from liking the idea of player loss to disliking it, and back to liking it.
Basically, for most people, their opinion on what they think of player loss in an MMO, especially in relation to PvP, fluctuates with how much loss they have experienced. These are the people and the situations where I think the games content can help.
It needs to bridge that time period from when players suffer multiple losses and decide that they dont like the idea of it, to when they decide that actually, player loss is fine.
It isn't anything to change peoples opinion, or anything to change the game. The idea is to bridge that gap, make it so individual players, or entire guilds even, know that there is still something enjoyable they can do in Ashes, even after a string of losses.
You are losing me again so can you say what you want. There are already things they can do to bridge the gap, like go to a quieter area, craft, etc. There is also the fact that you don't lose everything when you die so you are still gaining when you go out. You gain less if you die but you are still gaining.
I ragequit because I've gone to a quieter, secluded place and either been followed or discovered and forced into PvP combat multiple times within 20-30 minutes.
Ashes doesn't have fast travel, so I don't think we can just port back to our home and start crafting. I think we're going to have to run or use a mount/caravan and hope we aren't attacked en route to safety.
And, again, you are focused on loss of material stuff - whereas I am focused on the amount of time lost forced in game play that some other player likes, but I don't like. I ragequit over loss of time being able to play the activities I want to play just because some asshat wants to force me to play what they like to play.
That is why, in Ashes, those people are punished with Corruption, but I don't necessarily care about the revenge aspects.
If, I'm dying multiple times, that means I'm losing time gaining xp efficiently due to xp debt. If I'm winning multiple times, that is more time lost flagged for a gameplay mode I'm not in the mood to play.
So, that is a lose/lose situation.
There will be days, that due to a node war being declared, the enemy node harasses that node all day, killing multiple people, multiple times.
I don't mean to get personal, and I mean no offense, but you KNEW that whenever you became a braver of worlds (I'm assuming that's some kind of pre order package.) So you KNEW that there would be times when you're kept from doing what you want to do. But now you're saying it's going to make you rage quit.
Edit: I also think mcstackerson's points will generally hold true. Experiences will vary, and there will be exceptions to this. But the way it looks now, there will be such a wide variety of activities and things to do on such a large map, that many people will be able to mostly avoid pvp on any given day.
There will be asshats like that in game. They know wasting your time is the easiest way to make people leave an area, or just leave the game for a spell, fight back... and in your case rage quit. This type of treatment happened quite a bit in Lineage 2.. nothing game breaking, but annoying to the point, that some nights you would just log off and do something else.
That is the nature of this type of game. The corruption part is one thing, the constant flagging on you while you try to do what you are doing is the annoying part.. They only have to hit you once and stop... do it again... again... again.... again.... and wait for you to react. They are wanting you to go purple, so you can be a free PvP target with no risk of going corrupt. This will happen...
Choices on how to deal with this...
1. Rage quit.. lol... this should be the last option, just thought it was funny.
2. Just ignore them. They will either move on or go corrupt... nothing you can do about it.
3. Fight back. They get what they want, and you never know, you may win... of course if you do win and it is a close fight... they will want a rematch... so... there is that.
4. Go to town, drop off your materials you got while out. Give it a few minutes and head to a new spot.
5. Call friends to help out.. People like this tend to move on when more people they do not know show up.
6. Start doing funny emotes.. never know, it might appeal to their human side for a second and they move on.
7. Log off and do something else when you get a chance.
This game is not a care bear game, but it is not a total bloodshed game either.. it is a little of both. And you will 100% see both side of it. Some days will be better or worse than others. It is just that type of game.
In this thread I've had to fight against people blindly stating that known, discussed, objective facts about MMO's aren't true, just because it paints their preferred content type in a bad light.
I'm not about to say what I think this content could be I am still arguing for the need for this type of content to keep people in the fame - oddly, let alone how I think it could loom.
I am not willing to discuss what it could look like until there are jo real doubts left as to why it is needed - and the fact that you said someone on the verge of leaving the game due to loss could just go and do an activity that puts them at that same risk of loss tells me you dont understand the point.
Also, while a player may only lose a portion of the materials they have on hand when killed out in the open, the materials they gather are of limited use/value to them without moving them via caravan.
Essentially, harvesting is the first step to organizing a caravan.
If you lose while running a caravan, you lose everything - as far as we know.
So, you basically said that if someone is on the verge of quitting due to PvP inflicted loss, they should start again from the bottom of putting themself in a place where they are putting everything at risk again.
I hope there are at least videos online of it so I can watch those karens who yell at state cops in RL get murdered in a video game because they called the dwarf mugging them gay.
U.S. East
Battlegrounds are objective-based PvP. I can prep for those. It's unlikely that I will have resources on me during any kind of siege. I'm also unlikely to have resources on me when I choose to attack a caravan.
The only way to harass me in an MMORPG is to force me into PvP combat when I'm not in the mood.
If I've chosen to participate in PvP combat, you can kill me as many times as you want because my goals are completing whatever the specific objectives are: I'm going to be focused on the objectives; not kills.
I don't agree that a node war is harassment. Also, because node wars are scheduled, if I really don't want to participate in defending my node in PvP combat, I can just schedule my game session for a different time that day.
Currently, in WoW, I have no issue with PvP combat. I spend the vast majority of my time not flagged for PvP combat. If I want to get bonus rewards from completing World Quests while flagged for PvP, I schedule my play session for 1AM to 3AM - which is very low population on my server - port to Orgrimmar to flag for PvP, finish the quests, port back to Orgrimmar and unflag. If someone attacks me, I let them kill me. But, I almost never run into enemy players during those hours. At most, the total time I spend engaging in PvP combat during that session is going to be 6 minutes. The bonus rewards are not so important to me that I absolutely have to get them all so, if I did feel like I reached my threshold of PvP combat, it's easy enough to port to Orgrimmar, unflag and forgo the bonus rewards. The bonus rewards are icing on the cake. I like cake, so I'm not going to complain about cake with no icing.
The way PvP combat currently works in WoW, I have almost complete control over when I participate. I don't have to wait for my PvP flag to cool down. When I'm not in the mood for PvP combat, I can unflag for PvP within about 2 minutes and then I can play the rest of my game session not having to deal with being attacked by other players. I decide when I want to participate in PvP combat. Other players do not decide that for me.
The PvP combat feels largely irrelevant. And I can't be harassed in WoW these days.
Uh. So....
I became Braver of Worlds because I consider Ashes game design to be the successor of EQNext.
I think players building cities and defending cities are pretty much crucial to the future of MMORPGs.
It allows players to change the world rather than having the world primarily remain static.
And I think building and defending a home city inherently forges stronger bonds among the players helping each other with both. I am a PvP-sometimes player. So, it seems very likely that if anything is attacking the city that I've built, I'm going to try to defend the city. Even though I'm a carebear - and prefer to avoid combat, if I'm defending the city I've built, that is objective-based. Doesn't matter to me whether the it's a PvE attack or whether it's a PvP attack. I'm not really focused on any of the kills. I'm focused on the city itself. So, really that mostly feels like PvE rather than PvP, but it will have me participating in PvP.
There are several MMORPG design concepts from EQNext that I want to ensure devs continue to work on so years down the road, it's quicker and easier for devs to design a game similar to EQNext. I'm willing to invest money to support game devs while they hone those skills - even if it turns out that those games become vaporware - like Revival. And even if it turns out that Ashes is too PvP-centric for me to want to play it - I've helped the game devs hone the skills I want them to have for when they move on to there next MMORPGs.
My monetary investment in Ashes really has very little to do with whether I will play the game when it launches. If I feel during Alpha and Beta that Ashes is too PvP-centric I will stop playing it after Beta.
And then we will just have to see how many Alpha/Beta testers make the same decision I did - and whether that leaves sufficient pop of PvP-lovers to sustain the game for long. If Ashes becomes a WoW-killer even though it's too PvP-centric for me to play - that will be great.
If Corruption is actually the deterrent the devs hope and claim it will be, sure. But, we have to play to truly know.
I work in IT helpdesk. Multiple times per day, I am told, "You have the patience of Job! I don't know how you stay so calm. Those people you help would be driving me crazy! I would be cursing!" That's from coworkers in other departments overhearing my side of the call.
Or, "Thank you, thank you, thank you! I know I'm horrible with PCs. You are a great teacher. You've helped me so much and you were so calm and patient you calmed me down. And you didn't make me feel like an idiot. Normally people would be yelling at me at this point."
Every other person in my department says, "I'm glad you're the one doing those calls instead of me because when I was doing them, I would be screaming at them. And cursing at them. And I would have to put the phone down, walk away and come back after I've calmed down."
I am rarely even angry. Anything that can get me to rage - I'm done with.
I'm not going to play a game that can make me rage. Raging is not fun. And I play games to have fun.
If the nature of the game is that it can make you rage some nights, I am not playing that game.
Which is probably why I haven't played Lineage 2.
If Ashes is as PvP-centric as what you describe, I won't be playing Ashes.
And, if Ashes can be that PvP-centric and as popular as Lineage 2, I think I would consider that a success.
GG
Aren't we all sinners?
We have had that for the past 2 years and the game is not even out yet
If you atleast could speak for all the PvElitists.
Aren't we all sinners?
I think you understand where I am coming from, but the frequency of the events described are playing out more often in your mind than what they will actually be.
Lineage 2 at launch .. from level 1 to 20... I maybe had 10 PvP encounters, and half were started by me. From 20 - 40, that number dropped to maybe (high estimate) 5 encounters... most of those were seeing other guilds fighting, and me jumping in to help the guild I liked. I could have just watched or went somewhere else.. but I chose to participate.
The one thing AoC does that Lineage 2 did not, is to give PvP players more outlets for their PvP wants. So while it will still happen in open world, most of it will happen during events when players have less to lose and more to gain. Someone who is serious about PvP will be planning caravan raids, not harassing Dygz because he is alone. Also they will be in the Arena, practicing their rotations and learning how other classes fight...
I personally think most Open world PvP will happen in locations like Dungeons or sweet spot leveling areas that are being contested by multiple groups.
This is not to say you will not get attacked... chances are you will.. just not at the frequency you are thinking.
So, frequency is kind of meaningless.
If you say that ragequitting sometimes is the nature of the game - I'm not playing that game.
If I anticipate that a game could cause me to ragequit once - I'm not playing that game.
I'm not overly worried about it in Ashes at the moment. We need to play to know whether Corruption will be the deterrent the devs claim it will be.
I'm just saying the suggestions you've provided haven't been adequate in previous MMORPGs.
You just have no problem playing games that cause you to ragequit sometimes.
Whereas that is a dealbreaker for me...and for lots of other players who don't enjoy PvP combat much.
Sorta, I guess...
I did not enjoy PvP in Lineage 2 until late game... had I left after my first few times... I would have missed out on all the friends I made after the fact. But I do 100% understand where you are coming from.. I just did not want you turn away from ashes before giving it a shot. From everything I have read from you, you would be the type of player I enjoy playing with.. minus the rage quitting part lol.
I think there's a good chance Corruption will be sufficient.
Also, in the last few years, PvP mechanics have been fairly watered down enough in the games I've played, including WoW that even random PK encounters are mostly meaningless. 6 minutes total out of an 8-hour game session. These days in WoW, I have enough control over when I'm susceptible to PvP combat - it's a non-issue.
Also, I've now played two games where, even though I'm typically a carebear and I avoid combat as much as possible, I revel in slaughtering stuff because I feel totally immersed in my "class". I love Stealth. And In KOA: Reckoning and Valheim, I love sneaking up behind mobs and eviscerating them. It's like uber-Hunter mode.
And, it's glorious!!!
I think I recently posted the EQNext scenario:
Dark Elves from Serpentspine Mountains are farming Dryads in Kithicor Forest, stealing their Life magic and transmuting it into Shadow magic to power their spells and augment gear and abilities, like Stealth.
Players who rely on Shadow magic will go into Kithicor to farm NPC dryads, but the players in Kithicor will want to prevent that because as Life is drained from the region, blight spreads and eventually the bonds which hold the Shadow Demons at bay will break.
The Shadow Demons destroy anything living...even the Dark Elves should the Shadow Demons encounter them (unbeknownst to the Dark Elves).
When I heard that scenario, I thought, "Oh! I'm going to do whatever I need to do to maximize my Stealth. If I have to kill some Dryads to power my Stealth, I'm going to kill some Dryads. And if Kithicor players insist on stopping me, well, they will just have to die! I will try to talk them out of it, but if they have to die, they have to die!"
That flip in mindset fascinates me. I'm curious to see if there will be scenarios like that in Ashes.
I'm very interested to wade through the game mechanics, so I'm totally in for the testing.
We already have lots of friends in this community - some from other games; some new ones - should be fun to explore how we might interact in the world.
While, I greatly prefer to play on PvE servers where I can't be forced into PvP combat when I'm not in the mood, I eventually realized that I do have some PvPer friends I would like to interact with in EQNext, and, now, in Ashes. I'm fairly skeptical about having all the playstyles on one server, but... it should be a grand experiment to participate in.
Oh! I just remembered! I also had a lot of fun in the BR. I mostly focused on exploring, completing task objectives and staying hidden until the end of the match. It wasn't too difficult to frequently be among the last 4 remaining.
So... while I haven't found that the specific suggestions you posited are as easy to resolve the concerns non-PvPers have with playing on the same server as hardcore PvPers, I think there's a pretty good chance the devs will be able to pull this off.
We just have to play to know for sure. Which means... I at least have to give it a try.