Glorious Alpha Two Testers!
Phase I of Alpha Two testing will occur on weekends. Each weekend is scheduled to start on Fridays at 10 AM PT and end on Sundays at 10 PM PT. Find out more here.
Check out Alpha Two Announcements here to see the latest Alpha Two news and update notes.
Our quickest Alpha Two updates are in Discord. Testers with Alpha Two access can chat in Alpha Two channels by connecting your Discord and Intrepid accounts here.
Phase I of Alpha Two testing will occur on weekends. Each weekend is scheduled to start on Fridays at 10 AM PT and end on Sundays at 10 PM PT. Find out more here.
Check out Alpha Two Announcements here to see the latest Alpha Two news and update notes.
Our quickest Alpha Two updates are in Discord. Testers with Alpha Two access can chat in Alpha Two channels by connecting your Discord and Intrepid accounts here.
Comments
Experience debt (negative experience).[74]
Skill and stat dampening.[32]
Lower health and mana.[32]
Lower gear proficiency.[32]
Reduction in drop rates from monsters.[27]
Durability loss.[75][76][32]
I was too focused on the “you” aspect of this discussion, but I’m sure as long as they keep all these criteria and tune them appropriately it will provide enough incentive for the larger majority of people who would stay with the game to just participate and avoid the penalties.
Death penalty for combatants is half-normal death penalty.
And, no. People who don't like forced PvP simply won't play Ashes unless Corruption greatly deters PKing, as Steven intends it to.
mark 1:20:51
"No I don't think so either. And the reason why is we want to deter it, but we don't want to make the system meaningless; and if the deterrent becomes too heavy-handed then it's a system without a purpose. And I think that the intent behind the corruption is that like during a rise in passion and like anger and whatever you want to make this decision and do something and you'll suffer the repercussions later. But if those repercussions are just overwhelmingly bad and even anti-social in the sense that like your guild is like hey man you went corrupted and this gives us like corruption points on the guild, and like you're out of here, then people just aren't going to choose to use it; and then at which point might as well just take it out. So I think there's a healthy balance between the type of deterrent used."
---Steven
Agreed. Also currently if you’re attacking a non combatant and then they accidentally run into a mob and the mob gets the final hit the combatant won’t get corruption which I also think is pretty abusable.
I think in the end they’re going to need to go with a similar system they have planned for “tagging” in regards to group PKing and mobs getting the final kill. Something where that decision is based on how much other people contributed to the non-combatant kill. The killer can get what the full corruption would be with a percentage being distributed to other group members based on their percentage of contribution. Don’t want to blanket do the full group so people don’t get griefed by other people if they didn’t contribute in anyway to the PK.
Otherwise you’ll end up with corrupted players having pocket healers who have zero consequences, or people griefing people by dragging mobs to them, or groups where one person is labeled the PKer and the rest only contribute till they’re almost dead.
That quote Dyggz pulled was from a question regarding guild corruption:
Q: If my guild has no one corrupted and your guild is like always killing people and always corrupted, will your guild have repercussions because they're corrupted versus my guild?
What he posted was the answer to that. I was curious about exactly what you asked the other day and was unable to find any concrete comment on the wiki regarding the exact kind of situation you’re referring to. Everything just refers to “the player that got the kill” so what he pulled is definitely a pretty fair assumption based on the info we have, and hopefully adjusted as testing occurs.
I'm not sure why someone accidentally running into mobs should penalize a person who attacked them?
If we had tagging then if you tag me, i could intentionally get killed by a mob or jump off a cliff, give you corruption, and have a chance at your gear. Another way someone could use tagging is if i see you attack someone, i could kill them to give you corruption and then kill you for a chance at your gear.
Healing/buffing a corrupted player or combatant turns you into a combatant.
If you can drag mobs onto players then you could do that without attacking them.
Yeah that was poorly worded. A better example of what I’m trying to explain is: non-combatant is attacking mob that’s an on level fight they would kill unless they disconnected or something, another player comes up, blasts them down to low health and the monster they were fighting kills them. The second player gets no corruption currently, and the normal mat drop from non combatants.
I know you won’t see exact health, but within a couple days I’m sure we will have people that figure out what the degraded name plate looks like at certain percents.
A lot of the other arguments in the thread revolve around personal preference, this one is an actual hole in the system for griefers to abuse.
That won't be a thing.
Green players killed by mobs (the mob deals the killing blow) do not flag attacking players as corrupt, but since the exact health of another player is not known (outside of the same party, raid, alliance, or guild), attackers run the risk of killing the player and becoming corrupt.[41]
His statement was:
“ It's important to note that the idea is going to be that, unless a player is in your party, alliance, guild, or raid that you will not have definitive knowledge of their exact hit point values. So when you do something that's sketchy like that, where you want to bring them close to death and let a monster finish him off, you are taking the risk of overhitting and actually gaining the corruption.”[41] – Steven Sharif
And that’s one of the few things on this topic where I definitely agree with you, something like that is where I would even go “yeah that’s pretty messed up, I understand why people would complain given the other parameters set by the system”.
Personally I find it funny, and have certainly done it plenty in games with no penalty/no consequence pvp, but I don’t think it fits within the other ways they’ve said they want the system to work.
Taggin someone and them dying to mobs or falling to their deaths should give you full corruption.
Tagging someone and someone else killing them should give both parties full corruption.
Taggin someone while in a group and if someone tries to heal/buff you, they should get a prompt warning them and if they accept then they should get full corruption after that person is killed.
Its pretty simple really, if you attack or help in the attack of someone in real life and they run and get killed by traffic, falling or someone else you will also be held responsible. This system is simple and cannot be abused unlike the "final hit", "most dmg" "corruption split based on damage" which are both more complicated and easy to abuse.
You cannot accidentally tag or help kill someone. The moment you attack you should be willing to take the corruption hit or else don't do it, no pussy footing allowed.
Otherwise, the Corruption mechanic is broken and tons of people won't play.
Testing will solve that issue.
Okay, so let's say that I am out running around as a non-combatant. Someone attacks me to see if I'll fight back. I don't, so they back off. They weren't trying to PK me or anything, they just wanted to see what I'd do.
I yell out, "Enjoy your corruption you cheesehead!" Then I run into a pack of mobs above my level and shoot an AoE. They jump on me and rip me to shreds. The guy who backed off to avoid corruption gets corrupted.
That system allows for exploits that the planned system doesn't allow. I don't like it at all.
Those 3 examples are completely ludicrous and would completely break the corruption system, at that point open-world pvp in general would be completely disregarded, as merely tagging someone could lead you to the harsh penalities of corruption without the possible rewards that comes with it. Basically all stick no carrot which would go straight up against one of the main aspects of Ashes..
Aren't we all sinners?
Also their systems regarding tagging bosses.
If their planning things to add nuance in other aspects of the game why not apply it in other ways to help lessen griefing from both sides; combatants to non combatants, and non combatants to combatants.
I think I'd rather have this... Because that story is hilarious...
You slap someone... They get so mad they feed themselves to the wolves... I mean, I'd laugh...
The corruption system is not meant to be used to promote open-world pvp. It serves as the "crime of passion" in AoC for when you want to get revenge against someone. It should always be a bad move because there are no benefits to it other than personal satisfaction.
Its not there just so you can get an ego boost by slapping people around hoping to get a rise out of them. If you want to pvp in the open world there will be plenty of avenues for that.
"there are no benefits to it other than personal satisfaction"
What are you even on about with this completely false statement mate,
you can loot peoples bodies by Pking them.
The corruption system isn't about "promoting" open-world pvp, the lootable material dropped in the pvp interactions are the Reward, the corruption system is the Risk in the Risk vs Reward Ashes core principle applied over the open world pvp.
If you break the balance of the Risk vs Reward equation the whole system falls apart.
Aren't we all sinners?
True, even tho Griefing for Griefing sake without taking the risk factors in consideration will most likely prove to not be a very smart move.
Aren't we all sinners?
This is true and not true, as often it is complicated.
Yes, when you PK someone, there is a short-term reward. The person you kill will drop money, gathering materials, and potentially hunting certificates (items you can loot which have a certain amount of value in the game). And since the person you killed was a non-combatant, they suffer double the penalties of a combatant, which means they drop twice as much stuff as usual. It is very lucrative. There is a tangible reason to PK someone aside from wanting to be a griefer.
However, corruption is supposed to be pretty nasty. Killing non-combatants is not at all intended to be a supported playstyle. This is not supposed to be the "Risk vs Reward Ashes core principle". This is an immense risk that heavily outweighs the reward. If the system works, PKing people is a losing activity that will not be worth it. You aren't going to have wealthy bandits running around killing off hapless victims and reaping the rewards. The penalties will be nasty enough that you find yourself heavily weakened, the prey for anyone vindictive enough to take you out (even non-combatants can attack you without becoming combatants, you're effectively another monster). Your death penalties are very high; you gain a lot of XP debt and lose many resources on death, and you can even permanently lose gear. (Normally, gear can be damaged but can always be repaired, even when fully broken, only a corrupted individual risks permanently losing equipment.)
Corruption should be something that is the result of a temporary bad decision on someone's part, or a short-sighted thrill ride from someone who doesn't care about the consequences. It will not be something that people just shrug off or consider the cost of doing business. If it ever gets to that point, it will not be effective, and open PvP on Verra will become a toxic gankfest that will kill the game as frustrated players quit.
Non-Combatants drop the usual amount - normal death penalty.
It's not very lucrative.
And yet, sometimes you just need to kill someone to get your point across. 🤨
I believe it is important that people comprehend that all PK actions don't have the same risk nor the same reward and that risk has tons of variable and varying degrees of risk.
Even tho mindlessly murdering people around will definitely have terrible results, there is strategic ways to increase your reward vs your risk
I believe the main risk assessment questions will be:
Is the target alone?
How strong is the target?
How much valuable resources do you believe the target have?
Is the area very populated or isolated?
Do you have back up?
Are you already corrupted or in a killing spree?
Are there monsters nearby for you to clean out your corruption?
Depending on the answers your risk vs reward equation drastically varies, but in the end there is a question you definitely have to ask yourself.
"Am i feeling lucky today?"
Aren't we all sinners?
Would you mind providing some examples?
Aren't we all sinners?
Well, some people just wanna watch the world burn. 🤡
Aren't we all sinners?