STEVEN: What type of player do we want?
Our game is designed for a PvX mentality. It is a lot of both worlds. And what we just described in the Node system as a way to develop the world - the 2nd pillar being Meaningful Conflict is our catalyst for change.
So if a world has Nodes that are starting to get developed, and citizens start claiming areas and they have their Freeholds out in the realm and there ar Castles that have been taken and dungeons that lay claimed to...all those types of things... PvP in our game has meaning to it based on the systems it's involved with.
So, when we have Castle sieges, when we have Node sieges, when we have Caravans, when we have battlegrounds and arenas, there's a purpose for that performance on the players' end in participating with those events. And it has real world effects.
We're not creating a gankbox. We're not creating a murderbox.
There is a flagging system that is in place that highly dis-incentivizes just outright murder.
We, however, do want to see conflict erupt and we do want to see that conflict have a system to see out what the result will be.
JEFF: Yeah. The design of the game really doesn't function to well unless there's a way for the players to destroy it. And, that's where the PvP comes in. Where, if a Node is built, that's cool. And then another Node is built, that's cool. Eventually all the Nodes that can be built will be built and then...our game is just a static themepark at that point. We need the ability for people to have conflict, to have a reason to tear things down, and to pit players against each other.
It's definitely a part of the game.
We realize that people are concerned about it but, again, I don't think we're gonna see guilds coming in and just wrecking a bunch of newbies because that's going to be hard to do.
STEVEN: They won't be able to. No.
JEFF: The flagging system does a lot to prevent that. There will be people who do gank other people. That's going to happen. They're going to find ways to do it. But, it's not going to be widespread and we're going to do a lot of testing to make sure it isn't.
The numbers we're using right now are just test numbers but Alphas and Betas will bring us closer to something that is close to perfect. It will never be perfect. There will always be situations where you find yourself on the wrong end of a sword. But, that's also part of the game.
STEVEN: But, the best way we can say, at this stage is:
Our intent is to make sure that Ashes of Creation is not a gankbox.
Who cares if pvp is "consensual" or not, it's a video game. Nobody whines about this in other games. Getting ganked is part of MMOs, go play a singleplayer RPG like the Witcher 3 if you don't like the classic hallmarks of the genre. This isn't real life, and I will absolutely hurt your feelings by killing your flower-gathering character as I please.
You shouldn't be able to just roam around and gather while marked green with impunity and zero risk of being killed by other players. And before some halfwit chimes in to say "well uhhh actually there is risk because you can still get killed", the corruption system heavily punishes that, so I'd say green players will be safe 90% of the time.
0
Options
ThexBlackxKnightMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
They can call it a pvx game all they want but most pve players will not play this game since they don't want pvp to effect their gameplay whatsoever. Players like you will be the minority , not the majority, this game will be very cut throat by game design which will appeal a lot more to pvp players.
Penalty systems don't always work (or more so, they don't deter some, who really just want to PK). Lineage 1 and 2 had Karma systems (Lawful/Chaotic). Full Lawful in Lineage 1 actually meant you wouldn't drop gear (I don't recall if this was the same in L2). One of the ways people got around this was using DPS classes with just a weapon (in Lineage mages were best, in L2, early on dagger classes and archers worked well.). Sure you might not hit as hard or have as high defenses, but the person being PK'ed is not prepared, often happening at lower than 50% hp due to mobs, or purely just out leveled. Or do the same, but in a pack of 3 or more.
Another way used to be, be lawful in full gear, then kill someone and palm your gear off to a friend and farm back law points with a group or in an out of the way place.
Another trick in Lineage 1 was, when you attacked someone you went pink, so you were actively engaged in PvP and the other person would go pink as well if they attacked you back. But if you didn't attack back, you would go back to normal after a period of time. If you timed this right, you could get people to kill you and go red themselves, then you have your friends kill them for gear.
I haven't looked into the system in Ashes yet, so the above scenarios might not even work.
In Lineage 2 I spent about 2 months just killing PKs in the newbie area as a Bounty Hunter. I dressed in newbie gear and a low level bow, I could stun a PK with bow then kill them in no gear or swap in high level gear after stun. My name (Hawkeye, from M*A*S*H not avengers, but I'm maybe showing my age now haha) also made it seem like I was a archer not a dagger toon, so people would let me get close. So systems can work well for anti-PKs as well. We used to say "If it's red, it's dead".
I will say, in Lineage 1 and 2 PKs weren't rampant, or even regular. You might see 1 in a day if you were lucky, most likely not even fight them, as they were already running away from someone else. Newbie areas tended to have a couple running around now and then, as it was easy to level high enough to kill newbs without gear. But for the vast majority of the time, you were never bothered by a PK and if there was 1 or a group, people tended to band together and take them out, or a higher level person would come and just crush them.
Penalty systems don't always work (or more so, they don't deter some, who really just want to PK). Lineage 1 and 2 had Karma systems (Lawful/Chaotic). Full Lawful in Lineage 1 actually meant you wouldn't drop gear (I don't recall if this was the same in L2). One of the ways people got around this was using DPS classes with just a weapon (in Lineage mages were best, in L2, early on dagger classes and archers worked well.). Sure you might not hit as hard or have as high defenses, but the person being PK'ed is not prepared, often happening at lower than 50% hp due to mobs, or purely just out leveled. Or do the same, but in a pack of 3 or more.
Another way used to be, be lawful in full gear, then kill someone and palm your gear off to a friend and farm back law points with a group or in an out of the way place.
Another trick in Lineage 1 was, when you attacked someone you went pink, so you were actively engaged in PvP and the other person would go pink as well if they attacked you back. But if you didn't attack back, you would go back to normal after a period of time. If you timed this right, you could get people to kill you and go red themselves, then you have your friends kill them for gear.
I haven't looked into the system in Ashes yet, so the above scenarios might not even work.
In Lineage 2 I spent about 2 months just killing PKs in the newbie area as a Bounty Hunter. I dressed in newbie gear and a low level bow, I could stun a PK with bow then kill them in no gear or swap in high level gear after stun. My name (Hawkeye, from M*A*S*H not avengers, but I'm maybe showing my age now haha) also made it seem like I was a archer not a dagger toon, so people would let me get close. So systems can work well for anti-PKs as well. We used to say "If it's red, it's dead".
I will say, in Lineage 1 and 2 PKs weren't rampant, or even regular. You might see 1 in a day if you were lucky, most likely not even fight them, as they were already running away from someone else. Newbie areas tended to have a couple running around now and then, as it was easy to level high enough to kill newbs without gear. But for the vast majority of the time, you were never bothered by a PK and if there was 1 or a group, people tended to band together and take them out, or a higher level person would come and just crush them.
Can confirm:
- going red locks disables p2p trading/storage
- going red puts a 60 second timer for logging off on your character
everything else is pretty much the same as L2
---
also corrupted players can fight bounty hunters without penalty - but killing any extra greens increases their corruption.
I agree with those saying pretty much all of pvp will only happen in one of the pvp themes of the game. Stat dampening and the murder counts only being clearable by tedious questing is the real corruption penalty. It cannot be xp or gear loss because there's no deleveling and why would someone go pking using their best gear?.
I also do not see pking as a viable option to prevent ppl from gathering whatever gatherables you consider being yours. This would mean the penalty for killing a non-combatant is low enough that you would do it for that piece of wood they are trying to gather.
I have never viewed reds as being much of a problem. They are easy to deal with pk penalties. Having to worry about being pked because you went to hunt/gather into what somebody else considers their turf is a problem. Having to constantly run around in a group for the most mundane of activies such as gathering wood because you want to try out the crafting system is a problem.
If a non-combatant has to worry about anyone killing them at all outside any of the pvp themes that means the corruption system is not working. I don't see how ppl can expect a working corruption system and at the same time have the atmosphere of the game be one where ppl are constantly watching their backs, you cannot have both, one cancels out the other.
1
Options
DygzMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
ThexBlackxKnight does not expect a working Corruption system.
0
Options
ThexBlackxKnightMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
ThexBlackxKnight does not expect a working Corruption system.
Its not red players that will be ganking you the most. In fact the guilds can declare wars on yours just for the sole purpose of killing you because they dont like you, corruption free. If you think pvp players are not petty enough to do so , good luck.
ThexBlackxKnight does not expect a working Corruption system.
Its not red players that will be ganking you the most. In fact the guilds can declare wars on yours just for the sole purpose of killing you because they dont like you, corruption free. If you think pvp players are not petty enough to do so , good luck.
It is an open world mmorpg.
Not instanced raiding, not battlegrounds.
@JustVine
A traditional flagging system is the best compromise and would actually make it a true pvx game because you will have free will in consenting to pvp or not and that solution would draw in a lot more pve players to the game.
You just caved bro. I was following your arguments and then bam you just cave. You can't do that. You somehow just got talked into agreeing to exactly what they want. You were doing pretty good too lol.
0
Options
ThexBlackxKnightMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
You just caved bro. I was following your arguments and then bam you just cave. You can't do that. You somehow just got talked into agreeing to exactly what they want. You were doing pretty good too lol.
Not something I would want in the game , just using it as a example of what a real compromise looks like. My argument is that Ashes is really a "pvp" game and pvx term is being used to sugarcoat the game to make it look not as bad to the eye of a pve player.
Yeah I know you don't want it. They just brow beat you into saying it'd actually be a good compromise. It wouldn't be a compromise at all. It'd be them getting exactly what they want.
They will never stop. It will continue up until launch and even after. Don't give an inch. The game is being designed to where many of their concerns will not be warranted anyway. They just don't realize it yet. To hell with a pvp toggle though. Hard to think of a worse idea for the type of game Ashes is trying to be.
0
Options
ThexBlackxKnightMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
Yeah I know you don't want it. They just brow beat you into saying it'd actually be a good compromise. It wouldn't be a compromise at all. It'd be them getting exactly what they want.
They will never stop. It will continue up until launch and even after. Don't give an inch. The game is being designed to where many of their concerns will not be warranted anyway. They just don't realize it yet. To hell with a pvp toggle though. Hard to think of a worse idea for the type of game Ashes is trying to be.
Oh yeah you can expect the crying to start for full immunity to pvp in Alpha 2 maybe.
0
Options
akabearMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
I would hope that the lands are large and wide enough that there will be hostile zones and peaceful zones and zones in-between and not too much challenge to find one`s own sweet spot to reside.
0
Options
akabearMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
I can`t see the economy running terribly well if there is too much conflict to enable pve.
Pve usually fuels the economy, provides the substance for levelling, privides the mats for crafters to make gear etc without which there is no pvp, surely?
0
Options
ThexBlackxKnightMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
I can`t see the economy running terribly well if there is too much conflict to enable pve.
Pve usually fuels the economy, provides the substance for levelling, privides the mats for crafters to make gear etc without which there is no pvp, surely?
Periods of peace can still happen , but the pve focus players will need to be protected as they will be prime targets not just by red players but enemy guilds/alliances and enemy nodes.
Never forget the 34th rule of acquisition: War is good for business.
or...
The 35th rule: Peace is good for business.
Verra is going to be a great place to make money.
If I had more time, I would write a shorter post.
2
Options
akabearMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
I see the first few weeks perhaps even months for random and possibly even senseless ganking happening but once guilds form up and determine objectives then unless the game has other means to obtain levels, gear and prosperity, then they will have to either settle down, make peace/friends reach agreements and/ or protect their activities.
0
Options
ThexBlackxKnightMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
I see the first few weeks perhaps even months for random and possibly even senseless ganking happening but once guilds form up and determine objectives then unless the game has other means to obtain levels, gear and prosperity, then they will have to either settle down, make peace/friends reach agreements and/ or protect their activities.
The problem with that is that the pve is not static, its tied to the destruction of nodes , if you want new content , you have take the other node down to unlock it. If your node is destroyed any agreements you had with other guilds in that node is lost too. On top of that , the looting rights, this will be a endless source of drama between guilds. The game is being made for peace to not last very long.
A node will be destroyed but the other nodes in the influence zone will then emerge and level up (If it is a Metro Node then a new Metro Node will spawn). I do not see the dungeons in a zone of influence changing much unless the node on the periphery becomes a Metro and the zone of influence shifts beyond the dungeons in question.
0
Options
ThexBlackxKnightMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
A node will be destroyed but the other nodes in the influence zone will then emerge and level up (If it is a Metro Node then a new Metro Node will spawn). I do not see the dungeons in a zone of influence changing much unless the node on the periphery becomes a Metro and the zone of influence shifts beyond the dungeons in question.
They did say that node destruction will lock out raid spots and open new ones elsewhere. Gives the whole motivation of breaking the lock down of a node and guild alliances have on raiding spots and provides new opportunities for other guilds to get their shot at the good loot.
0
Options
DygzMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
Dungeons change based on what buildings and services are constucted. And are also based on what's happening in other Nodes besides just the local Metro.
They did say that node destruction will lock out raid spots and open new ones elsewhere. Gives the whole motivation of breaking the lock down of a node and guild alliances have on raiding spots and provides new opportunities for other guilds to get their shot at the good loot.
They have said that but they aren't going to make over 100 raids on the off chance some nodes will reach metro while other nodes aren't a metro. It takes more than Metro Stance to open up the dungeons but it might take a Metro to open up a raid. With the events linked in to node evolution then any Node can influence a dungeon, with some opening deeper delves or influencing what mobs will spawn.
I think Guilds/Alliances will have a hard time locking down open world raids/world bosses/open world dungeons. There might be set times for world bosses but I believe open world raids and open world dungeons can be deep dived around the clock. A guild/alliance aiming to lock down PvE will soon enter several Guild Wars in my opinion.
0
Options
ThexBlackxKnightMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
. A guild/alliance aiming to lock down PvE will soon enter several Guild Wars in my opinion.
I think that is pretty much the idea of looting rights to cause such things. Everyone playing nice to wait in a line for raid bosses in a pvp game is very unlikely.
I think that is pretty much the idea of looting rights to cause such things. Everyone playing nice to wait in a line for raid bosses in a pvp game is very unlikely.
Yeah, I agree with you. I would also say that in a PvP Game then tactics and close calls will be paramount. You will probably face contestation and weird time schedules to counter act the issues we will face without instanced raids. I do not expect Guilds to wait in line except those Guilds in Alliances when the whole alliance decides to raid at the same time. It is one thing to PvP and Raid at set times, it is another act entirely to try and lock out that content for the rest of the server.
0
Options
ThexBlackxKnightMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
Yeah, I agree with you. I would also say that in a PvP Game then tactics and close calls will be paramount. You will probably face contestation and weird time schedules to counter act the issues we will face without instanced raids. I do not expect Guilds to wait in line except those Guilds in Alliances when the whole alliance decides to raid at the same time. It is one thing to PvP and Raid at set times, it is another act entirely to try and lock out that content for the rest of the server.
I think nighttime guilds will have big advantage , less people to contend with.
I think nighttime guilds will have big advantage , less people to contend with.
Hmm that depends entirely on the respawn times. If we’re talking about bosses anyway, if there is a long respawn on bosses then there’s also a chance they miss out every night.
I imagine it will be prime time for resource grinding.
0
Options
akabearMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
I see the first few weeks perhaps even months for random and possibly even senseless ganking happening but once guilds form up and determine objectives then unless the game has other means to obtain levels, gear and prosperity, then they will have to either settle down, make peace/friends reach agreements and/ or protect their activities.
The problem with that is that the pve is not static, its tied to the destruction of nodes , if you want new content , you have take the other node down to unlock it. If your node is destroyed any agreements you had with other guilds in that node is lost too. On top of that , the looting rights, this will be a endless source of drama between guilds. The game is being made for peace to not last very long.
I see your point but again, I cannot see it happening so much...if the nodes change hands too often or too quickly then they the change of territory will become as banal and meaningless as ESO`s cyrodiil. To give meaning and value, they need to achieve value, with the input of time and resources as that measure.
So surely there would be built for longer time to achieve?
0
Options
DygzMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
Castles will be a source of guild drama every week they are occupied by guilds.
Nodes have cooldowns for when siege declarations can happen, so...specific Nodes will have some relative peace.
Just to add another anecdotal experience in L2. I didn't play for a long time (2-3 months), but I did so when the game opened for NA. I never reached max level but in all the time I've played I don't remember ever being attacked by another player. It might have happened, but if I don't even remember it, it certainly wasn't a big issue. Maybe everyone was simply too busy leveling, maybe it was because there were no defined factions marking anyone as an enemy, or maybe it was a server thing. I don't know.
The only PK story from my time in that game is from a friend. He got tired of Chinese gold farmers and killed one or two, and then he had four or five on his tail.
People will be attacked. Some will be ganked. But I'd be surprised if it was a bloodbath.
And for a better analogy of consensuality for this game. If you know you're allergic to dogs and you adopt a dog, you can't blame your dog if you get itchy eyes and a runny nose.
Comments
STEVEN: What type of player do we want?
Our game is designed for a PvX mentality. It is a lot of both worlds. And what we just described in the Node system as a way to develop the world - the 2nd pillar being Meaningful Conflict is our catalyst for change.
So if a world has Nodes that are starting to get developed, and citizens start claiming areas and they have their Freeholds out in the realm and there ar Castles that have been taken and dungeons that lay claimed to...all those types of things... PvP in our game has meaning to it based on the systems it's involved with.
So, when we have Castle sieges, when we have Node sieges, when we have Caravans, when we have battlegrounds and arenas, there's a purpose for that performance on the players' end in participating with those events. And it has real world effects.
We're not creating a gankbox. We're not creating a murderbox.
There is a flagging system that is in place that highly dis-incentivizes just outright murder.
We, however, do want to see conflict erupt and we do want to see that conflict have a system to see out what the result will be.
JEFF: Yeah. The design of the game really doesn't function to well unless there's a way for the players to destroy it. And, that's where the PvP comes in. Where, if a Node is built, that's cool. And then another Node is built, that's cool. Eventually all the Nodes that can be built will be built and then...our game is just a static themepark at that point. We need the ability for people to have conflict, to have a reason to tear things down, and to pit players against each other.
It's definitely a part of the game.
We realize that people are concerned about it but, again, I don't think we're gonna see guilds coming in and just wrecking a bunch of newbies because that's going to be hard to do.
STEVEN: They won't be able to. No.
JEFF: The flagging system does a lot to prevent that. There will be people who do gank other people. That's going to happen. They're going to find ways to do it. But, it's not going to be widespread and we're going to do a lot of testing to make sure it isn't.
The numbers we're using right now are just test numbers but Alphas and Betas will bring us closer to something that is close to perfect. It will never be perfect. There will always be situations where you find yourself on the wrong end of a sword. But, that's also part of the game.
STEVEN: But, the best way we can say, at this stage is:
Our intent is to make sure that Ashes of Creation is not a gankbox.
You shouldn't be able to just roam around and gather while marked green with impunity and zero risk of being killed by other players. And before some halfwit chimes in to say "well uhhh actually there is risk because you can still get killed", the corruption system heavily punishes that, so I'd say green players will be safe 90% of the time.
They can call it a pvx game all they want but most pve players will not play this game since they don't want pvp to effect their gameplay whatsoever. Players like you will be the minority , not the majority, this game will be very cut throat by game design which will appeal a lot more to pvp players.
Another way used to be, be lawful in full gear, then kill someone and palm your gear off to a friend and farm back law points with a group or in an out of the way place.
Another trick in Lineage 1 was, when you attacked someone you went pink, so you were actively engaged in PvP and the other person would go pink as well if they attacked you back. But if you didn't attack back, you would go back to normal after a period of time. If you timed this right, you could get people to kill you and go red themselves, then you have your friends kill them for gear.
I haven't looked into the system in Ashes yet, so the above scenarios might not even work.
In Lineage 2 I spent about 2 months just killing PKs in the newbie area as a Bounty Hunter. I dressed in newbie gear and a low level bow, I could stun a PK with bow then kill them in no gear or swap in high level gear after stun. My name (Hawkeye, from M*A*S*H not avengers, but I'm maybe showing my age now haha) also made it seem like I was a archer not a dagger toon, so people would let me get close. So systems can work well for anti-PKs as well. We used to say "If it's red, it's dead".
I will say, in Lineage 1 and 2 PKs weren't rampant, or even regular. You might see 1 in a day if you were lucky, most likely not even fight them, as they were already running away from someone else. Newbie areas tended to have a couple running around now and then, as it was easy to level high enough to kill newbs without gear. But for the vast majority of the time, you were never bothered by a PK and if there was 1 or a group, people tended to band together and take them out, or a higher level person would come and just crush them.
Can confirm:
- going red locks disables p2p trading/storage
- going red puts a 60 second timer for logging off on your character
everything else is pretty much the same as L2
---
also corrupted players can fight bounty hunters without penalty - but killing any extra greens increases their corruption.
I also do not see pking as a viable option to prevent ppl from gathering whatever gatherables you consider being yours. This would mean the penalty for killing a non-combatant is low enough that you would do it for that piece of wood they are trying to gather.
I have never viewed reds as being much of a problem. They are easy to deal with pk penalties. Having to worry about being pked because you went to hunt/gather into what somebody else considers their turf is a problem. Having to constantly run around in a group for the most mundane of activies such as gathering wood because you want to try out the crafting system is a problem.
If a non-combatant has to worry about anyone killing them at all outside any of the pvp themes that means the corruption system is not working. I don't see how ppl can expect a working corruption system and at the same time have the atmosphere of the game be one where ppl are constantly watching their backs, you cannot have both, one cancels out the other.
Its not red players that will be ganking you the most. In fact the guilds can declare wars on yours just for the sole purpose of killing you because they dont like you, corruption free. If you think pvp players are not petty enough to do so , good luck.
It is an open world mmorpg.
Not instanced raiding, not battlegrounds.
You just caved bro. I was following your arguments and then bam you just cave. You can't do that. You somehow just got talked into agreeing to exactly what they want. You were doing pretty good too lol.
Not something I would want in the game , just using it as a example of what a real compromise looks like. My argument is that Ashes is really a "pvp" game and pvx term is being used to sugarcoat the game to make it look not as bad to the eye of a pve player.
They will never stop. It will continue up until launch and even after. Don't give an inch. The game is being designed to where many of their concerns will not be warranted anyway. They just don't realize it yet. To hell with a pvp toggle though. Hard to think of a worse idea for the type of game Ashes is trying to be.
Oh yeah you can expect the crying to start for full immunity to pvp in Alpha 2 maybe.
Pve usually fuels the economy, provides the substance for levelling, privides the mats for crafters to make gear etc without which there is no pvp, surely?
Periods of peace can still happen , but the pve focus players will need to be protected as they will be prime targets not just by red players but enemy guilds/alliances and enemy nodes.
or...
The 35th rule: Peace is good for business.
Verra is going to be a great place to make money.
If I had more time, I would write a shorter post.
The problem with that is that the pve is not static, its tied to the destruction of nodes , if you want new content , you have take the other node down to unlock it. If your node is destroyed any agreements you had with other guilds in that node is lost too. On top of that , the looting rights, this will be a endless source of drama between guilds. The game is being made for peace to not last very long.
They did say that node destruction will lock out raid spots and open new ones elsewhere. Gives the whole motivation of breaking the lock down of a node and guild alliances have on raiding spots and provides new opportunities for other guilds to get their shot at the good loot.
They have said that but they aren't going to make over 100 raids on the off chance some nodes will reach metro while other nodes aren't a metro. It takes more than Metro Stance to open up the dungeons but it might take a Metro to open up a raid. With the events linked in to node evolution then any Node can influence a dungeon, with some opening deeper delves or influencing what mobs will spawn.
I think Guilds/Alliances will have a hard time locking down open world raids/world bosses/open world dungeons. There might be set times for world bosses but I believe open world raids and open world dungeons can be deep dived around the clock. A guild/alliance aiming to lock down PvE will soon enter several Guild Wars in my opinion.
I think that is pretty much the idea of looting rights to cause such things. Everyone playing nice to wait in a line for raid bosses in a pvp game is very unlikely.
Yeah, I agree with you. I would also say that in a PvP Game then tactics and close calls will be paramount. You will probably face contestation and weird time schedules to counter act the issues we will face without instanced raids. I do not expect Guilds to wait in line except those Guilds in Alliances when the whole alliance decides to raid at the same time. It is one thing to PvP and Raid at set times, it is another act entirely to try and lock out that content for the rest of the server.
I think nighttime guilds will have big advantage , less people to contend with.
Hmm that depends entirely on the respawn times. If we’re talking about bosses anyway, if there is a long respawn on bosses then there’s also a chance they miss out every night.
I imagine it will be prime time for resource grinding.
I see your point but again, I cannot see it happening so much...if the nodes change hands too often or too quickly then they the change of territory will become as banal and meaningless as ESO`s cyrodiil. To give meaning and value, they need to achieve value, with the input of time and resources as that measure.
So surely there would be built for longer time to achieve?
Nodes have cooldowns for when siege declarations can happen, so...specific Nodes will have some relative peace.
The only PK story from my time in that game is from a friend. He got tired of Chinese gold farmers and killed one or two, and then he had four or five on his tail.
People will be attacked. Some will be ganked. But I'd be surprised if it was a bloodbath.
And for a better analogy of consensuality for this game. If you know you're allergic to dogs and you adopt a dog, you can't blame your dog if you get itchy eyes and a runny nose.