Do you think you are a part of the "Target Audience"? Why or Why not?

akabear wrote: »

in my L2 days experience.

The problem with comparing what players did in L2 to what they will do in Ashes is that there are essentially two entire generations of MMP players that play games vastly different to how L2 players played.

It is normal these days to form in to large, multi-game guilds. That was not a thing back when L2 was played by more than 14 people.

Player organization is far superior to what it was back then as well.

There is also much more of a focus among players these days to "win" the game rather than to "play" the game.

This means that if these organized groups of players don't see any advantage in hanging around for some PvP, they won't.

Expecting an L2 experience in any MMO these days is going to lead to disappointment, because the player base that made that game simply doesn't exist any longer.

Players will always try to steer situations to be advantageous to them. That's a 2 way street though. Both parties involved should be trying to do that. One party will do it better. Pretty much everyone is going to be on both sides of that equation at some point. You win some and lose some.

I don't really see the issue. Even zergs aside, there's going to be times when 6 players come across 3 players and take advantage of their numbers. You can't control all of that, its just pvp happening in a pvp game. The 3 players have the duty of making the best decision in that situation. Run away, evade, hide or maybe fight if they think they're that good to beat 6 people.

The 6 people will be in the same situation if they come across 12 hostile players. Its just the game, pvp happening.

And if you lose, its really not that big of a deal in the first place. Its not like a full loot game. You might not even really have any harvested mats on you for them to even take and you baited them into taking a corruption hit for nothing. If you did have mats, ok you lost some mats. Welcome to ashes, that's part of the game.

Okeydoke wrote: »

Players will always try to steer situations to be advantageous to them. That's a 2 way street though. Both parties involved should be trying to do that. One party will do it better. Pretty much everyone is going to be on both sides of that equation at some point. You win some and lose some.

I don't really see the issue. Even zergs aside, there's going to be times when 6 players come across 3 players and take advantage of their numbers. You can't control all of that, its just pvp happening in a pvp game. The 3 players have the duty of making the best decision in that situation. Run away, evade, hide or maybe fight if they think they're that good to beat 6 people.

The 6 people will be in the same situation if they come across 12 hostile players. Its just the game, pvp happening.

And if you lose, its really not that big of a deal in the first place. Its not like a full loot game. You might not even really have any harvested mats on you for them to even take and you baited them into taking a corruption hit for nothing. If you did have mats, ok you lost some mats. Welcome to ashes, that's part of the game.

6 v 3 is not nearly the same thing as 40 v 8.

I agree that such small scale situations need to further attention - which is why what I suggested would have no impact on them at all.

You don't even lose all your mats, just a percentage of them. I can't wait to lose mats in ashes and stealing them too lol

The pvp isn't supposed to be fair at all times. Only way to make it even numbers is to instance it.

Okeydoke wrote: »

The pvp isn't supposed to be fair at all times. Only way to make it even numbers is to instance it.

Not trying to make it even numbers.

Last thing I want from this game is a L2 clone.. but the mechanics for some elements are very, very similar and the issues some people are raising and discussing were experienced in that game under similar circumstances. That is about the extent of the comment.

L2 & ESO I have seen a skilled team take on 2-5x as many players and win hands down in pvp.

NW recently had plenty of opportunistic pvp, fair fights and a lot of call to action zergs.

Limited to no fast travel and vast area should help to alleviate some of the impact of zergs.. The novelty of zergs soon wears off..

Sure in the past, I have done sweeps with my clan of 10-15 players for perhaps 1-2 buff rounds. then business back as usual.. and equally been caught off guard to be in pvp or pk`d offering little to no resistance.. but soon learned to be a little more aware of the environment.

But any player that creates, joins and/or supports mega guilds, well....

SorianLore on these forums used to kick my clan and my butt on a regular basis back in the day..
Zero issues.. was our issue to get better.. all in a day`s fun!

If not for his clan, I would probably stayed pve.. and looking at past screen shots, I think it took getting to near end game and probably around 2-3,000 pvp fights before was just average!

Dygz

Okeydoke wrote: »

Players will always try to steer situations to be advantageous to them. That's a 2 way street though. Both parties involved should be trying to do that. One party will do it better. Pretty much everyone is going to be on both sides of that equation at some point. You win some and lose some.

I don't really see the issue. Even zergs aside, there's going to be times when 6 players come across 3 players and take advantage of their numbers. You can't control all of that, its just pvp happening in a pvp game. The 3 players have the duty of making the best decision in that situation. Run away, evade, hide or maybe fight if they think they're that good to beat 6 people.

The 6 people will be in the same situation if they come across 12 hostile players. Its just the game, pvp happening.

And if you lose, its really not that big of a deal in the first place. Its not like a full loot game. You might not even really have any harvested mats on you for them to even take and you baited them into taking a corruption hit for nothing. If you did have mats, ok you lost some mats. Welcome to ashes, that's part of the game.

We still have to see how much of a deterrent the Corruption. Steven says Ashes' version is intended to be harsher than the Lineage 2 Karma.
The Sheep are intended to also ae a significant amount of power and influence.

bigepeen

Open world PvP isn't fair. You can be outnumbered, or be caught in a situation where everyone is at low health after killing a group when another group shows up, for example. These situations aren't fair, and it's unlikely that you will fight in completely fair situations in open world.

That's the thing with open PvP, even the most skilled players and guilds can lose battles. Stuff like items and individual skill tend to matter less than sheer numbers in open world PvP. But I like open world PvP or PvX, because even though it's not fair, and doesn't always reward those who played the best, it can still create great stories and experiences that you can never get in PvE. You can be put in unfair situations, or a string of them, and overcome the odds. Plus it never gets boring, because you never know what to expect in open world PvP.

I don't think it's possible for Intrepid to make open world PvP where a larger group has no advantage over a smaller group. If they did, then it would unfairly penalize the larger group. Instead, it's up to the players to figure this out. This is another reason why we need distance to matter in Ashes, so that a large guild can't be everywhere at once. A smaller guild could exploit this fact to even out a numbers advantage. So while Intrepid can't design a game to make every open PvP engagement fair, they can avoid giving large guilds more tools to further exploit number advantage (teleportation). And while communication is better nowadays, this can also be used to coordinate with other guilds against big guilds.

All we know is that the corruption system is not going to be so harsh that its unused and meaningless. It could still end up being fairly harsh though.

akabear wrote: »

Limited to no fast travel and vast area should help to alleviate some of the impact of zergs.. The novelty of zergs soon wears off..

The way I see it, limited fast travel is what will allow for what I am talking about.

Let's say I take my guild out for what ever activity we have planned that day. The general plan will be for everyone to meet at a specific location, and we will all move together to where we need to be from there.

This is fairly standard stuff, and there will be many guilds doing this most days.

When we are all moving along together, if we come across someone that basically just didn't get out of our way, we have no reason to not kill him. We could probably do that without even slowing down.

That player has no recourse, no reasonable action at all that they can take against us, and even if they are a part of a large guild - unless that guild is already assembled and nearby - they can't do anything to us either.

By the time we get to where we are going, that corruption could well have already been worked off.

Literally the only way we would ever face even the slightest penalty for anyone we kill in this manner is if we happen upon another guild basically doing the same thing.

Even the guild summons isn't realistically enough to assist in catching up to a full raid of 40 or more players moving at full speed.

When one player comes across another player, there is a decision that needs to be made as to whether one kills the other and potentially gains corruption. In small scales like this, it really is a risk.

In large scale, that risk - and so that decision - simply isn't there.

This isn't about trying to even out the odds of PvP or anything - if a guild decides that the risk is worth it, go for it.

It is purely, 100% about there needing to be a risk at this level just as there is a risk at the 1v1 level.

We don't know how long its going to take to work off corruption.

That individual player does have recourse, they can get the word out that X guild is formed up and headed in whatever direction, and then other players/guilds can try to locate them and interfere. Is it really worth it for a 40 man group to kill a solo guy who may or may not have loot on them on the way to their raid? Maybe, maybe not, that's for them to decide.

But considering this guild is in the habit of steamrolling solo players 40v1 everywhere they go, they've probably made a lot of enemies. Those enemies would definitely like to know when this guild is going to do some 40 man content.

That is the risk at that level, along with the individual corruption.

Okeydoke wrote: »

That individual player does have recourse, they can get the word out that X guild is formed up and headed in whatever direction, and then other players/guilds can try to locate them and interfere.

With a lack of world wide chat, and fast travel, I don't see how this is possible.

The game is literally designed to prevent spontaneous zergs, meaning the pre-organized zerg is not likely to face any real obstacle.

Again just for a reference to a past system knowing full well that AoC may scale the system differently.

So, to follow the earlier example, yes, I group up in L2 and we pass a group of players that deserved a pk on the way somewhere.

There was usually no means to work off karma there and then unless we were fortunate to be either in an area with suitable level and density mobs and/or almost at the destination we were going to AND that destination included PvE.

What were the consequences, well that varied, if we had cleared our previous pk`s by quest, it was an infinitely better position. If not, then immediately risky, but still did it at the time if it was felt warranted.

Generally there was never just random pk`ing.. it was usually for a purpose.. be that retribution, warning or other political reasons.

Now if red well;

If slightly red, would just continue on with group to destination and group would guard.
If a little more red, would abandon group to solo it off and re-join the group.
A little more red than that, then someone might come to stand point while I worked it off
Quite red, well if I really wanted to continue with the group, I might get my group to kill me to burn off karma there and then and use a high rez from another player (who knows if AoC will have scales on this) or all on point and others prepared to go red to defend me.
And if really red, and heat on tail, may risk going more red for the pursuing fight or log for a while, bring an alt back later to scout and log back on.

To burn off a little karma of 1-2 kills and no previous karma was 15-30min of mobs of good level and density but public area.. to get a quiet area usually meant wrong level mobs and less density so 30-60min.
A good few pk`s could be 45-180min to burn off, so quite alert for a longer period.

So will see how it works.. but I think the fears are way over rated.. and for now other than grouping up for a very large, infrequent raid, I have not seen reason players would group up much beyond a single party or two at most, so no real zergs.. (Happy to be mistaken)

Its not only possible but intended by steven. Global chat and fast travel aren't needed. Discord plus local chat is more than enough for a guild to form up to attack an enemy. Not on the complete other side of the map but regionally. I think you underestimate pvpers.

The game is intended to be competitive and to create rivalries. Guilds will definitely hunt other guilds down if they get intel. And they will sometimes.

Okeydoke wrote: »

I think you underestimate pvpers.

I think you overestimate todays PvP'ers.

There are very, very few people left that PvP for the PvP. For everyone else, it is PvP for what ever is in it for them.

In this case, there really is nothing in it for them.