We need to test to learn how the devs will be preventing those easy to imagine exploits.
Fair. This isn’t necessarily something I’m concerned about because I’m on the killing people side of this. I just feel this stuff is worth bringing up to make sure the people with your similar mindset on owpvp can be happier with the system so we don’t end up with people screaming till they get a system like TheDarkSorceror suggested.
Right now it seems like the answer is clear - give corruption to people who are on the "threat table" (or however you label it), not just the person with the KB. Otherwise there will just be roving gang of gankers that will rotate KBs, while burning off corruption with killing mobs. (I'm sure there will be bands of gankers regardless, but the current system will allow them to essentially bypass the system, especially if they're stealthed)
1
Options
DygzMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
Fair. This isn’t necessarily something I’m concerned about because I’m on the killing people side of this. I just feel this stuff is worth bringing up to make sure the people with your similar mindset on owpvp can be happier with the system so we don’t end up with people screaming till they get a system like TheDarkSorceror suggested.
The only people screaming are newbies who want a separate PvE-Only server.
Once folks are around long enough to accept that's not going to happen - it's just a wait to test the efficacy of Corruption.
(Well, we also have newbies screaming that Corruption is too harsh - with the same result.)
What would be nice if there was some sort of toggle you could turn on "Don't want to be bothered" or "Busy". A toggle that would make you neutral somewhat so you can go about your day without being interrupted by others. Because sometimes we have things to do and places to be and simply not in the mood to PvX. Because if you are a casual, you most likely lead a busy life and don't have the time to play as much, and you don't want your limited fun time to play to be stuck at one spot being killed over and over by campers. Having this toggle could pretty much just make you non-targetable, like an NPC. I don't see the issue with this at all.
As convenient as that sounds... That's what NW did, and we saw how that turned out for them...
Attacking another player turns you to a combatant which opens you to being killed for free but the act of attacking someone is not supposed to give you a corruption penalty. Yes, it's my fault i didn't specify if you want to get me on that technicality.
I never stated that attacking should give you corruption but if you attack someone and they die shortly after then you should. I see people worried about attacking someone and then having that person go die to give the other person corruption. I'm just surprised they can't see the abuse potential from the victim's side, someone can use low-dmg/no-dmg skills to slow, root, stun, blind you if they see you running away from a group of mobs to get you killed and then loot your corpse without any corruption penalty.
The abuse will happen a lot more from the attacker's side than from the victim's and the attacker has the choice to take the risk or not, the victim doesn't therefore I don't see anything wrong with having a timer since your last attack that decides if you count as a helper in a player's death.
Just because i'm telling you the issue with your solution (at least as i see it) doesn't mean i don't understand the issue you are trying to solve. If they are doing damage, they are risking getting that last hit and gaining corruption. I'm not against someone getting corruption if they CC someone and the person dies in the CC. To me, the issue is the penalty for corruption is steep and because of that, should only be handed out if the person intended to kill someone.
I think most of us are waiting for the testing to see how it plays in game so we can understand the scenario and how it should be handled.
What about some kind of timer after a hit? If you hit me or cc me and then a mob kills me in the next 10-15 seconds you get blamed for it and get corruption.
I just have to post a wall of text about "griefing". If you are killed by someone and they take the 25% or 50%, whatever it is, of your gatherables, you have not been griefed. You are playing a game where that is a purposeful design element. It would be akin to feeling like you're getting griefed by God because you voluntarily walked out into the rain and got wet.
The goal of the corruption system is in part to diminish griefing. Everyone has a kill count of how many non combatants they've killed. You can work that kill count off by grinding mobs and what have you, but in the meantime, that's your kill count. Each kill added to that kill count sends you deeper into corruption with worse consequences. Your character gets weaker, easier to track by bounty hunters, your death penalties are harsher, leading up to even dropping equipped gear.
So to use spawn camping as an example, (we don't even know if it will be possible in Ashes) but just to use it as an example that you can extrapolate out to other scenarios - the PKer knows he has X amount of kills before the consequences become too harsh for his risk tolerance. The idea is that he's not going to spend 5 kills of that kill count to grief a player by spawn killing him 5 times in a row. The consequences are adding up with each kill, yet he's getting nothing tangible for it. Any substantial amount of loot that he got was only from the first kill.
Most players that play the corruption system/kill count game will look to maximize their gains for each finite kill. There will certainly be isolated instances where a player doesn't act like "most players" but that will be a slim minority if the system is done right.
Any actual griefing (not some of the ridiculous definitions of griefing I've seen on this forum) ACTUAL griefing which essentially requires either some form of breaking the rules, or unwarranted, targeted harassment of another player, should be reported and ultimately punished by the devs/GMs.
There's too much we don't know right now. There's a lot of numbers that, depending on how far they're pushed in one direction as opposed to the other, could make the vision of the system Steven has presented feel vastly different from what an individual player is envisioning in their mind.
It all has to be tested and tweaked. The forum warrioring is going to be out of this world when this all goes down lol.
4
Options
mcstackersonMember, Phoenix Initiative, Royalty, Kickstarter, Alpha One
I think most of us are waiting for the testing to see how it plays in game so we can understand the scenario and how it should be handled.
I 100% agree there is a certain level of wait and see to this in the how it feels department, but we do have a clear indication of where Steven is going to set that baseline at with this going off his comments, and that is: if you don’t deal the killing blow, you’re not getting corruption.
Doesn’t matter if you buffed/healed the attacker, dealt any damage to a person yourself, or any other scenario you can think of; if you didn’t get the kill you don’t get corruption.
I don’t need to test that to see the varying ways to exploit it. Of course he could be asked about this on the next live stream and adjust his stance on this, but currently those are the parameters he has set for us.
That isn't an exploit. Someone is still going to deal the killing blow and eat the corruption penalty. Why does it matter if the kill was done with 1 or 5 people, especially if the person isn't going to fight back? It's still a penalty for someone. I don't think it needs to spread for it to have it's intended impact on player behavior.
I think most of us are waiting for the testing to see how it plays in game so we can understand the scenario and how it should be handled.
I 100% agree there is a certain level of wait and see to this in the how it feels department, but we do have a clear indication of where Steven is going to set that baseline at with this going off his comments, and that is: if you don’t deal the killing blow, you’re not getting corruption.
Doesn’t matter if you buffed/healed the attacker, dealt any damage to a person yourself, or any other scenario you can think of; if you didn’t get the kill you don’t get corruption.
I don’t need to test that to see the varying ways to exploit it. Of course he could be asked about this on the next live stream and adjust his stance on this, but currently those are the parameters he has set for us.
That isn't an exploit. Someone is still going to deal the killing blow and eat the corruption penalty. Why does it matter if the kill was done with 1 or 5 people, especially if the person isn't going to fight back? It's still a penalty for someone. I don't think it needs to spread for it to have it's intended impact on player behavior.
5 people beat someone to death. Only one charged with murder because he hit him last.... Yeah that will hold up well...
If all 5 tagged someone and assisted in his death, they should all get a little corruption.
I think it's fair that we have to wait for the Alpha 2 to see how the corruption system works and how, or if, the Devs will deal with loopholes. But I think it's also fair for people to express concerns here and show some skepticism towards the currently planned system.
Assisting in a non-combatant kill shouldn’t flag you corrupt, but it should feed into that invisible body count number so that future Corruption penalties hit them appropriately harder than a player that doesn’t run with groups that go corrupt frequently.
0
Options
mcstackersonMember, Phoenix Initiative, Royalty, Kickstarter, Alpha One
I think most of us are waiting for the testing to see how it plays in game so we can understand the scenario and how it should be handled.
I 100% agree there is a certain level of wait and see to this in the how it feels department, but we do have a clear indication of where Steven is going to set that baseline at with this going off his comments, and that is: if you don’t deal the killing blow, you’re not getting corruption.
Doesn’t matter if you buffed/healed the attacker, dealt any damage to a person yourself, or any other scenario you can think of; if you didn’t get the kill you don’t get corruption.
I don’t need to test that to see the varying ways to exploit it. Of course he could be asked about this on the next live stream and adjust his stance on this, but currently those are the parameters he has set for us.
That isn't an exploit. Someone is still going to deal the killing blow and eat the corruption penalty. Why does it matter if the kill was done with 1 or 5 people, especially if the person isn't going to fight back? It's still a penalty for someone. I don't think it needs to spread for it to have it's intended impact on player behavior.
5 people beat someone to death. Only one charged with murder because he hit him last.... Yeah that will hold up well...
If all 5 tagged someone and assisted in his death, they should all get a little corruption.
This is a game with open pvp. You shouldn't try to compare it's systems to our real life criminal system.
Corruption is only given to someone who executes the killing blow on a noncombatant. People do not get corruption for attacking someone. Someone will suffer the penalty for the kill, i don't think multiply the penalty because more people were present when it has no additional impact on the person who was killed.
If people can trade off corruption gains over an extended period of time while grouped (by simply swapping KBs), then they have an easy advantage over smaller groups of players over an extended period of time. Whether or not you define that as an exploit or simply optimizing the system is up to you, but it does provide an easy way to influence the Risk vs. Reward system, all while earning a bit of notoriety.
0
Options
DygzMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
I just have to post a wall of text about "griefing". If you are killed by someone and they take the 25% or 50%, whatever it is, of your gatherables, you have not been griefed. You are playing a game where that is a purposeful design element. It would be akin to feeling like you're getting griefed by God because you voluntarily walked out into the rain and got wet.
Killing a Non-Combatant is griefing.
The penalty for griefing is Corruption.
That is a purposeful design element.
1
Options
DygzMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
I think it's fair that we have to wait for the Alpha 2 to see how the corruption system works and how, or if, the Devs will deal with loopholes. But I think it's also fair for people to express concerns here and show some skepticism towards the currently planned system.
You can share your skepticism.
And you will still have to wait to test to see if it's a valid concern... just like everyone else.
1
Options
HumblePuffinMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
, i don't think multiply the penalty because more people were present when it has no additional impact on the person who was killed.
I don’t think it should multiply I think it should divide. The idea of multiplying the corruption is another reason I see it worth to get out in front of this issue. I don’t want to see it go the other way and be even more punishing than it is outside of some number tweaks, because I already think it’s pretty punishing.
There’s already lots of planned systems in the game that will utilize a similar system, and even corruption itself is already stated to have a variable effect such as more/less corruption the bigger the level disparity of the person between the combatant and non combatant.
Example using not at all the numbers you’d see in game but: there’s 2 combatants, a non combatant and a mob. The level disparity between them means that at max there is 10 points of corruption to be gained. Non combatant is fighting a mob that dealt 10% of the damage to them, combatant 1 dealt 60% of the damage, combatant 2 dealt 30%. At the end, combatant 1 gets 6 corruption points, combatant 2 gets 3, and 1 point gets thrown to the ethos because of the mob.
Tweak those numbers however you want and then you’re able to look at Atama’s point of a non combatant just suiciding into a pack of elites after you gave them a love tap to see if they would fight back: Non combatant and combatant, 10 corruption points to be gained again. Combatant sends out a basic attack and deals 10% of the non combatants health. Non combatant Leroy Jenkins’ into the elites and dies. The combatant ends up with 1 corruption point and the rest disappear into the ethos. Was it worth it for the non-combatant to do that? To them who knows, maybe, but the guy just trying to feel the other one out isn’t overly punished for participating in the system, and can work off that 1 point they got rather quickly.
Something like that just sounds fair to me, with meaningful risk vs reward decisions made by all parties.
I think most of us are waiting for the testing to see how it plays in game so we can understand the scenario and how it should be handled.
I 100% agree there is a certain level of wait and see to this in the how it feels department, but we do have a clear indication of where Steven is going to set that baseline at with this going off his comments, and that is: if you don’t deal the killing blow, you’re not getting corruption.
Doesn’t matter if you buffed/healed the attacker, dealt any damage to a person yourself, or any other scenario you can think of; if you didn’t get the kill you don’t get corruption.
I don’t need to test that to see the varying ways to exploit it. Of course he could be asked about this on the next live stream and adjust his stance on this, but currently those are the parameters he has set for us.
That isn't an exploit. Someone is still going to deal the killing blow and eat the corruption penalty. Why does it matter if the kill was done with 1 or 5 people, especially if the person isn't going to fight back? It's still a penalty for someone. I don't think it needs to spread for it to have it's intended impact on player behavior.
5 people beat someone to death. Only one charged with murder because he hit him last.... Yeah that will hold up well...
If all 5 tagged someone and assisted in his death, they should all get a little corruption.
This is a game with open pvp. You shouldn't try to compare it's systems to our real life criminal system.
Corruption is only given to someone who executes the killing blow on a noncombatant. People do not get corruption for attacking someone. Someone will suffer the penalty for the kill, i don't think multiply the penalty because more people were present when it has no additional impact on the person who was killed.
If the goal is to minimize the shitty scenarios like 5v1's then applying it to everyone is the best solution. Either to each person or divided up amongst them .
I'm not so much as trying to compare it to the real world as much as just saying it sounds silly
If I wanted to as a guild run around with a murder squad for the sake of being terrible you just have the same person get the last hit each time and the rest of the crew is fine... Where as if corruption goes to all people involved, then it curbs that behavior of running around for the sake of being an asshole by exposing all of them to the risk that comes with corruption..
0
Options
DygzMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
Corruption is only given to someone who executes the killing blow on a noncombatant. People do not get corruption for attacking someone. Someone will suffer the penalty for the kill, i don't think multiply the penalty because more people were present when it has no additional impact on the person who was killed.
It might be a problem.
That means a group can continuously gank with each member taking minimal Corruption.
But... it's the same as always...we really have to test to see how it all works.
I think it's fair that we have to wait for the Alpha 2 to see how the corruption system works and how, or if, the Devs will deal with loopholes. But I think it's also fair for people to express concerns here and show some skepticism towards the currently planned system.
You can share your skepticism.
And you will still have to wait to test to see if it's a valid concern... just like everyone else.
I just don't see any value in dismissing criticism by "we'll see how it works" and "the Devs will assuredly fix it".
0
Options
DygzMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
I don't know that you can meaningfully critique something when you don't know precisely how it works.
You can share your concerns, but you still have to wait to evaluate the actual something to know if your concerns are valid.
I don't know that you can meaningfully critique something when you don't know precisely how it works.
You can share your concerns, but you still have to wait to evaluate the actual something to know if your concerns are valid.
Just like the many recent forums threads about combat animations ... where players want to critique something that Steven has repeatedly said is a "placeholder".
I've always heavily rejected the idea of specific servers for pve only players that want to opt out of pvp. I only really see it as a method to separate the community which could kill off servers eventually and for players to act out a sense of superiority by pretending that their playstyle is better than the others for w/e reason. I mean it's already bad enough seeing the dynamic between NA and EU servers and how one thinks they're better than the other for no reason when we all play the same game. For example PvP players would just call everyone else snowflakes and carebears for not being on a pvp enabled server.
You mentioned that AoC is intended to attract the casual PvE and PvP player alike and that the casual gamer will get frustrated and leave the game once he dies a few times, but in reality the casual pvp player doesn't body camp without reason either. And the planned corruption system absolutely would deter body camping.
Copy and pasted from the wiki below:
A corrupt (red player) suffers penalties at four times[9] the rate of a non-combatant, and has a chance to drop any carried/equipped items based on their current corruption score. This includes:[9][14]
Dropping weapons and gear.[9][17]
These dropped items may be looted by other players.[58]
Corrupt players respawn at random locations in the vicinity of their death, not at regular spawn points.[59]
Non-corrupt players always respawn at the closest active respawn point (to their death).[60]
Dampening (due to corruption) only affects PvP combat.[61]
So right off the bat the idea of losing your gear which in MMOs sometimes take a very long time to acquire and then upgrade even further is the biggest incentive to NOT open world PvP, or at the very least not body camp as that would further stack corruption allowing these harsher penalties to apply. I believe it was said in a past stream that a single kill makes you red/corrupt and these penalties will apply but with a low chance to drop gear that will increase with your corruption level.
Other penalties taken from the wiki as part of being corrupt:
A single kill makes you red
Bounty hunter know where you are, and they WILL hunt you repetitively. You cannot defend yourself from them as far as I know or you become more corrupt, it's an endless cycle.
Non-combatants can freely kill you without being flagged as combatants or going red themselves.
You cannot insta log-out.
Support type classes cannot assist you or they will be flagged as combatants themselves.
The best way to remove corruption is to die, yeah, check those penalties.
Open world PvP seems like it is being HIGHLY DISCOURAGED by intrepid, but the option is there, along with the harsh penalties. So don't expect to get ganked or griefed anytime soon until we know the exact extent of the corruption system and how it works later down the road.
1
Options
DygzMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
edited April 2022
PvE-only is not “better”.
Traditionally, it’s more popular.
Where available, those servers typically have the highest populations.
And, it’s the PvP folk who not only act superior, but also denigrate the PvE-only folk as inferior.
My preference is to play on PvP-Optional servers. Where I can PvP when I’m in the mood to PvP. But I typically rage quit those servers and move to PvE-Only servers.
So, sure, I have PvP-centric friends with whom it would be nice to play with on the same servers. If possible.
But, that means Corruption is going to have to work well enough that I rarely get killed as a Non-Combatant.
I’ve been PKed and corpse camped plenty of times for no reason besides being flagged for PvP. While I’m picking flowers, waiting for the PvP flag to cool down.
There are plenty of people who do that, just as there are plenty of people who stomp on mobs that only give 1xp “because it’s funny”.
Single kill of a Non-Combatant gives Corruption. And, yes, killing Corrupted does not flag people as Combatants.
There are plenty of opportunities to kill Combatants and not gain Corruption.
If Corruption works as intended, griefing should be rare.
Killing a Non-Combatant is griefing.
The penalty for griefing is Corruption.
That is a purposeful design element.
It's not griefing. Just killing someone and taking a portion of their resources in a game that allows you to kill someone and take a portion of their resources doesn't even come close to rising to the true definition of griefing. The killer is doing nothing wrong, not breaking any game rules, not harassing anyone, just playing the game. If you feel grief from it happening to you, then you feel grief, that's normal. But the player that did it to you is just playing the game in one of the ways it can be played. And you who it happens to, could be anyone, anyone who looks like they have a fat stack of resources or whatever their criteria is.
The system in concept is designed to allow these non griefing encounters to happen but ward off what sometimes happens next in an unregulated system, which is griefing. Spawn camping, bullying and so on.
You are supposed to be able to attack people without penalty.
You are not supposed to be able to attack other players with impunity.
Attacking another player turns you to a combatant which opens you to being killed for free but the act of attacking someone is not supposed to give you a corruption penalty. Yes, it's my fault i didn't specify if you want to get me on that technicality.
But there are still other risks.
If I run my low level character to a generally higher level area (I have cosmetics on, you can't see my level and have no idea how many HP I have) your opening attack is very likely to kill me.
Back when Intrepid first talked about jot showing player level or HP values, this was pointed out to them as a thing that will happen. Their response was basically "that's the risk you take in attacking players".
So, it can't really be said that you are apposed to be able to attack other ayers without any risk. There will always be risk. Any time you attack another player you are setting yourself up to potentially gain Corruption- whether that was your intention or not
While one could argue that this is an edge case, so to is a player running in to mobs to kill themself so that you gain corruption.
I should add - once aspects of this game start to get stale, as always happens in MMO's, the above is literally the first thing I plan on doing for entertainment. So, there is literally no doubt at all that the above will happen.
To add to this, Steven said that player target healthbar wont show the excact HP value.
So agressive players may not risk attacking you for too long incase they land a killing strike, making them red.
All in all I see people that either dont understand the proposed system which worked on other game, or simply like only instanced PvP.
It's not griefing. Just killing someone and taking a portion of their resources in a game that allows you to kill someone and take a portion of their resources doesn't even come close to rising to the true definition of griefing. The killer is doing nothing wrong, not breaking any game rules, not harassing anyone, just playing the game. If you feel grief from it happening to you, then you feel grief, that's normal. But the player that did it to you is just playing the game in one of the ways it can be played. And you who it happens to, could be anyone, anyone who looks like they have a fat stack of resources or whatever their criteria is.
That's like saying a foul in basketball is not a foul because it's not breaking any rules.
Killing a Combatant and taking their stuff is not griefing. Which is why it's not penalized with Corruption.
Killing a Non-Combatant is griefing and is penalized with Corruption.
The system in concept is designed to allow these non griefing encounters to happen but ward off what sometimes happens next in an unregulated system, which is griefing. Spawn camping, bullying and so on.
The system, in concept, is designed to penalize people who grief (by PKing Non-Combatants) with Corruption.
Warding off spawn-camping is covered by a different mechanic which is separate from Corruption.
As someone who plans to be primarily a master gatherer, I would like to drop in my 2 cents if that's ok.
I think the PvP systems in the game like sieges, guild wars, and caravans look super cool and might actually get me to try PvP! That being said I'm not really sure who the open world PvP is really targeting. I know Steven mentioned he wants to have the freedom to lash out and PK a person he feels mad at or has bad blood with on the server, or fight over resources with. All that seems very cool but I'm worried the gatherers will be the real prime targets for open world PvP. My reasoning behind that is the fact that only gathered and processed materials drop. That's literally the only loot, no gold or items to be gained. So by that logic who would have a lot of gatherable or processed materials? Mainly the PvE focused gatherers who are out farming all day not wanting to PvP usually. The processors will all be in towns or on freeholds in safety processing. So my worry is that since caravans and sieges aren't really open world PvP, they have their own systems away from the flagging system, then what is going to be going on with open world PvP? I think there will be feuds and fights here and there but I think all those people just looking to kill and make money doing it will just target the PvE people who are wearing gear for artisan skills and not for combat so they wont really stand a chance and they will have the most loot. After all why would you even attack someone who looks well geared or someone who is flagged as combatant when you can easily walk to a ore vein and kill the gatherers for way more loot and no chance they will be able to kill you because they don't have good combat gear. Not many geared or combat oriented people will be walking around with a lot of materials on them so it seems with only gatherables able to drop that it incentivizes killing the PvE oriented crowd.
I know a lot of people have said or will say, "Just fight back" but as a Gatherer even if I fight back I know with my artisan gear I wont stand a chance and I will lose, and then they will get my loot and have 0 accountability for just robbing me when I did nothing to them. So why would I do that when I can just get it over with and let them kill me and then they become corrupt and hopefully someone comes and punishes them. On that note also what is to stop someone who has a freehold near a gathering spot to just camp the area and kill gatherers, then go store the loot inside their house and all their gear, then go let guards or a bounty hunter kill them and clear the corruption and do it again and again?
Also I have seen people saying this game isn't meant for people that just like PvE and that those players should go find another game, but on that note Steven has stated multiple times that he wants many different types of players to be welcome in this game even non combatants saying "Non-Combat playstyles will absolutely be a full-time option" and he has said he wants role players and full time artisans of all types as well. (Also I know he said the game wont be for everyone, but I don't think he was referring to those who enjoy mainly PvE, but I could be mistaken)
Quote is from here: https://ashesofcreation.wiki/images/5/56/CraftingImportance.png
Furthermore I have had this conversation with others and they always say "Just hire a body guard, or get guild mates to protect you" but to that I just think that would be so boring for the other player. Imagine sitting there watching me hit rocks for 12 hours straight. Also how much would it cost to hire someone to protect me for all day while I farm, would it be cheaper to just risk getting killed and robbed? It just sucks knowing that I wont be able to just pick up the game and play, I have to go through the effort of trying to find someone to sit and protect me every time I play the game.
I honestly don't know how the open world PvP will be and I could just be worrying for nothing to be honest, we wont know until we get in the game, but my main point is as a gatherer main I feel like I'm the only one being incentivized to be attacked and robbed daily. In addition, since I spend all my time focusing on mastering Artisan stuff and getting artisan gear that I'm just a big sitting piggy bank and I will have to go through extra effort because I will have to hire protection for anything I do.
In conclusion, I just hope gatherers don't have a big target on their back. I will probably have tons of fun in this game as long as I'm not killed for my loot every day lol
In regards to me mentioning "Artisan gear" I know they haven't stated whether or not artisan and combat gear will be completely separate or not but they have mentioned that there will be gear specifically for artisans to boost their artisan skills. They just didn't mention if that gear could also compete with someone in full PvP gear but I assume not since one is meant for combat specifically and the other probably sacrifices those combat boosts for artisan boosts. I was hoping to ask in a QnA to clarify.
I'm not a basketball expert but I'm pretty sure generally when you get a foul it's because you broke some kind of rule. Whatever the case, I'm not sure how that relates to anything I said.
You can't just voluntarily play a game where you know something is going to happen to you, per the rules, and then when it happens to you, you call it griefing. It's an intended part of the game.
And no the system, in concept (lol), penalizes criminal actions in game with criminal consequences, in game. You don't get banned like you could or should if you were actually griefing people.
Everything we have been told points to a system that is meant to allow you to lash out against someone you believe has wronged you but the only reward is your personal satisfaction and the rush you get as you try to work it off to get away with it, the material gain will be insignificant.
Even in UO with the full-loot and no PK-penalties I did not think it was that bad but that is only if you take the point of view of someone that knows the game. It sucked for everyone else who did not get to that point. The reason I want harsh penalties for PKing to the point that getting PKed is not something you need to worry about is because I want the game to last a long time and for that a lot of players are required.
The only reason I can think when I see people complaining about a harsh corruption system that does not allow them to PK others and smack anyone that dares to raise their head is because they have never played such a game and have no idea what they are talking about.
Comments
Fair. This isn’t necessarily something I’m concerned about because I’m on the killing people side of this. I just feel this stuff is worth bringing up to make sure the people with your similar mindset on owpvp can be happier with the system so we don’t end up with people screaming till they get a system like TheDarkSorceror suggested.
Once folks are around long enough to accept that's not going to happen - it's just a wait to test the efficacy of Corruption.
(Well, we also have newbies screaming that Corruption is too harsh - with the same result.)
As convenient as that sounds... That's what NW did, and we saw how that turned out for them...
What about some kind of timer after a hit? If you hit me or cc me and then a mob kills me in the next 10-15 seconds you get blamed for it and get corruption.
The goal of the corruption system is in part to diminish griefing. Everyone has a kill count of how many non combatants they've killed. You can work that kill count off by grinding mobs and what have you, but in the meantime, that's your kill count. Each kill added to that kill count sends you deeper into corruption with worse consequences. Your character gets weaker, easier to track by bounty hunters, your death penalties are harsher, leading up to even dropping equipped gear.
So to use spawn camping as an example, (we don't even know if it will be possible in Ashes) but just to use it as an example that you can extrapolate out to other scenarios - the PKer knows he has X amount of kills before the consequences become too harsh for his risk tolerance. The idea is that he's not going to spend 5 kills of that kill count to grief a player by spawn killing him 5 times in a row. The consequences are adding up with each kill, yet he's getting nothing tangible for it. Any substantial amount of loot that he got was only from the first kill.
Most players that play the corruption system/kill count game will look to maximize their gains for each finite kill. There will certainly be isolated instances where a player doesn't act like "most players" but that will be a slim minority if the system is done right.
Any actual griefing (not some of the ridiculous definitions of griefing I've seen on this forum) ACTUAL griefing which essentially requires either some form of breaking the rules, or unwarranted, targeted harassment of another player, should be reported and ultimately punished by the devs/GMs.
There's too much we don't know right now. There's a lot of numbers that, depending on how far they're pushed in one direction as opposed to the other, could make the vision of the system Steven has presented feel vastly different from what an individual player is envisioning in their mind.
It all has to be tested and tweaked. The forum warrioring is going to be out of this world when this all goes down lol.
That isn't an exploit. Someone is still going to deal the killing blow and eat the corruption penalty. Why does it matter if the kill was done with 1 or 5 people, especially if the person isn't going to fight back? It's still a penalty for someone. I don't think it needs to spread for it to have it's intended impact on player behavior.
5 people beat someone to death. Only one charged with murder because he hit him last.... Yeah that will hold up well...
If all 5 tagged someone and assisted in his death, they should all get a little corruption.
This is a game with open pvp. You shouldn't try to compare it's systems to our real life criminal system.
Corruption is only given to someone who executes the killing blow on a noncombatant. People do not get corruption for attacking someone. Someone will suffer the penalty for the kill, i don't think multiply the penalty because more people were present when it has no additional impact on the person who was killed.
The penalty for griefing is Corruption.
That is a purposeful design element.
And you will still have to wait to test to see if it's a valid concern... just like everyone else.
I don’t think it should multiply I think it should divide. The idea of multiplying the corruption is another reason I see it worth to get out in front of this issue. I don’t want to see it go the other way and be even more punishing than it is outside of some number tweaks, because I already think it’s pretty punishing.
There’s already lots of planned systems in the game that will utilize a similar system, and even corruption itself is already stated to have a variable effect such as more/less corruption the bigger the level disparity of the person between the combatant and non combatant.
Example using not at all the numbers you’d see in game but: there’s 2 combatants, a non combatant and a mob. The level disparity between them means that at max there is 10 points of corruption to be gained. Non combatant is fighting a mob that dealt 10% of the damage to them, combatant 1 dealt 60% of the damage, combatant 2 dealt 30%. At the end, combatant 1 gets 6 corruption points, combatant 2 gets 3, and 1 point gets thrown to the ethos because of the mob.
Tweak those numbers however you want and then you’re able to look at Atama’s point of a non combatant just suiciding into a pack of elites after you gave them a love tap to see if they would fight back: Non combatant and combatant, 10 corruption points to be gained again. Combatant sends out a basic attack and deals 10% of the non combatants health. Non combatant Leroy Jenkins’ into the elites and dies. The combatant ends up with 1 corruption point and the rest disappear into the ethos. Was it worth it for the non-combatant to do that? To them who knows, maybe, but the guy just trying to feel the other one out isn’t overly punished for participating in the system, and can work off that 1 point they got rather quickly.
Something like that just sounds fair to me, with meaningful risk vs reward decisions made by all parties.
If the goal is to minimize the shitty scenarios like 5v1's then applying it to everyone is the best solution. Either to each person or divided up amongst them .
I'm not so much as trying to compare it to the real world as much as just saying it sounds silly
If I wanted to as a guild run around with a murder squad for the sake of being terrible you just have the same person get the last hit each time and the rest of the crew is fine... Where as if corruption goes to all people involved, then it curbs that behavior of running around for the sake of being an asshole by exposing all of them to the risk that comes with corruption..
That means a group can continuously gank with each member taking minimal Corruption.
But... it's the same as always...we really have to test to see how it all works.
I just don't see any value in dismissing criticism by "we'll see how it works" and "the Devs will assuredly fix it".
You can share your concerns, but you still have to wait to evaluate the actual something to know if your concerns are valid.
Just like the many recent forums threads about combat animations ... where players want to critique something that Steven has repeatedly said is a "placeholder".
Oh damn ... did I just bring that up ... ?
You mentioned that AoC is intended to attract the casual PvE and PvP player alike and that the casual gamer will get frustrated and leave the game once he dies a few times, but in reality the casual pvp player doesn't body camp without reason either. And the planned corruption system absolutely would deter body camping.
Copy and pasted from the wiki below:
A corrupt (red player) suffers penalties at four times[9] the rate of a non-combatant, and has a chance to drop any carried/equipped items based on their current corruption score. This includes:[9][14]
Dropping weapons and gear.[9][17]
These dropped items may be looted by other players.[58]
Corrupt players respawn at random locations in the vicinity of their death, not at regular spawn points.[59]
Non-corrupt players always respawn at the closest active respawn point (to their death).[60]
Dampening (due to corruption) only affects PvP combat.[61]
So right off the bat the idea of losing your gear which in MMOs sometimes take a very long time to acquire and then upgrade even further is the biggest incentive to NOT open world PvP, or at the very least not body camp as that would further stack corruption allowing these harsher penalties to apply. I believe it was said in a past stream that a single kill makes you red/corrupt and these penalties will apply but with a low chance to drop gear that will increase with your corruption level.
Other penalties taken from the wiki as part of being corrupt:
A single kill makes you red
Bounty hunter know where you are, and they WILL hunt you repetitively. You cannot defend yourself from them as far as I know or you become more corrupt, it's an endless cycle.
Non-combatants can freely kill you without being flagged as combatants or going red themselves.
You cannot insta log-out.
Support type classes cannot assist you or they will be flagged as combatants themselves.
The best way to remove corruption is to die, yeah, check those penalties.
Open world PvP seems like it is being HIGHLY DISCOURAGED by intrepid, but the option is there, along with the harsh penalties. So don't expect to get ganked or griefed anytime soon until we know the exact extent of the corruption system and how it works later down the road.
Traditionally, it’s more popular.
Where available, those servers typically have the highest populations.
And, it’s the PvP folk who not only act superior, but also denigrate the PvE-only folk as inferior.
My preference is to play on PvP-Optional servers. Where I can PvP when I’m in the mood to PvP. But I typically rage quit those servers and move to PvE-Only servers.
So, sure, I have PvP-centric friends with whom it would be nice to play with on the same servers. If possible.
But, that means Corruption is going to have to work well enough that I rarely get killed as a Non-Combatant.
I’ve been PKed and corpse camped plenty of times for no reason besides being flagged for PvP. While I’m picking flowers, waiting for the PvP flag to cool down.
There are plenty of people who do that, just as there are plenty of people who stomp on mobs that only give 1xp “because it’s funny”.
Single kill of a Non-Combatant gives Corruption. And, yes, killing Corrupted does not flag people as Combatants.
There are plenty of opportunities to kill Combatants and not gain Corruption.
If Corruption works as intended, griefing should be rare.
It's not griefing. Just killing someone and taking a portion of their resources in a game that allows you to kill someone and take a portion of their resources doesn't even come close to rising to the true definition of griefing. The killer is doing nothing wrong, not breaking any game rules, not harassing anyone, just playing the game. If you feel grief from it happening to you, then you feel grief, that's normal. But the player that did it to you is just playing the game in one of the ways it can be played. And you who it happens to, could be anyone, anyone who looks like they have a fat stack of resources or whatever their criteria is.
The system in concept is designed to allow these non griefing encounters to happen but ward off what sometimes happens next in an unregulated system, which is griefing. Spawn camping, bullying and so on.
But there are still other risks.
If I run my low level character to a generally higher level area (I have cosmetics on, you can't see my level and have no idea how many HP I have) your opening attack is very likely to kill me.
Back when Intrepid first talked about jot showing player level or HP values, this was pointed out to them as a thing that will happen. Their response was basically "that's the risk you take in attacking players".
So, it can't really be said that you are apposed to be able to attack other ayers without any risk. There will always be risk. Any time you attack another player you are setting yourself up to potentially gain Corruption- whether that was your intention or not
While one could argue that this is an edge case, so to is a player running in to mobs to kill themself so that you gain corruption.
I should add - once aspects of this game start to get stale, as always happens in MMO's, the above is literally the first thing I plan on doing for entertainment. So, there is literally no doubt at all that the above will happen.
So agressive players may not risk attacking you for too long incase they land a killing strike, making them red.
All in all I see people that either dont understand the proposed system which worked on other game, or simply like only instanced PvP.
Killing a Combatant and taking their stuff is not griefing. Which is why it's not penalized with Corruption.
Killing a Non-Combatant is griefing and is penalized with Corruption.
The system, in concept, is designed to penalize people who grief (by PKing Non-Combatants) with Corruption.
Warding off spawn-camping is covered by a different mechanic which is separate from Corruption.
I think the PvP systems in the game like sieges, guild wars, and caravans look super cool and might actually get me to try PvP! That being said I'm not really sure who the open world PvP is really targeting. I know Steven mentioned he wants to have the freedom to lash out and PK a person he feels mad at or has bad blood with on the server, or fight over resources with. All that seems very cool but I'm worried the gatherers will be the real prime targets for open world PvP. My reasoning behind that is the fact that only gathered and processed materials drop. That's literally the only loot, no gold or items to be gained. So by that logic who would have a lot of gatherable or processed materials? Mainly the PvE focused gatherers who are out farming all day not wanting to PvP usually. The processors will all be in towns or on freeholds in safety processing. So my worry is that since caravans and sieges aren't really open world PvP, they have their own systems away from the flagging system, then what is going to be going on with open world PvP? I think there will be feuds and fights here and there but I think all those people just looking to kill and make money doing it will just target the PvE people who are wearing gear for artisan skills and not for combat so they wont really stand a chance and they will have the most loot. After all why would you even attack someone who looks well geared or someone who is flagged as combatant when you can easily walk to a ore vein and kill the gatherers for way more loot and no chance they will be able to kill you because they don't have good combat gear. Not many geared or combat oriented people will be walking around with a lot of materials on them so it seems with only gatherables able to drop that it incentivizes killing the PvE oriented crowd.
I know a lot of people have said or will say, "Just fight back" but as a Gatherer even if I fight back I know with my artisan gear I wont stand a chance and I will lose, and then they will get my loot and have 0 accountability for just robbing me when I did nothing to them. So why would I do that when I can just get it over with and let them kill me and then they become corrupt and hopefully someone comes and punishes them. On that note also what is to stop someone who has a freehold near a gathering spot to just camp the area and kill gatherers, then go store the loot inside their house and all their gear, then go let guards or a bounty hunter kill them and clear the corruption and do it again and again?
Also I have seen people saying this game isn't meant for people that just like PvE and that those players should go find another game, but on that note Steven has stated multiple times that he wants many different types of players to be welcome in this game even non combatants saying "Non-Combat playstyles will absolutely be a full-time option" and he has said he wants role players and full time artisans of all types as well. (Also I know he said the game wont be for everyone, but I don't think he was referring to those who enjoy mainly PvE, but I could be mistaken)
Quote is from here: https://ashesofcreation.wiki/images/5/56/CraftingImportance.png
Furthermore I have had this conversation with others and they always say "Just hire a body guard, or get guild mates to protect you" but to that I just think that would be so boring for the other player. Imagine sitting there watching me hit rocks for 12 hours straight. Also how much would it cost to hire someone to protect me for all day while I farm, would it be cheaper to just risk getting killed and robbed? It just sucks knowing that I wont be able to just pick up the game and play, I have to go through the effort of trying to find someone to sit and protect me every time I play the game.
I honestly don't know how the open world PvP will be and I could just be worrying for nothing to be honest, we wont know until we get in the game, but my main point is as a gatherer main I feel like I'm the only one being incentivized to be attacked and robbed daily. In addition, since I spend all my time focusing on mastering Artisan stuff and getting artisan gear that I'm just a big sitting piggy bank and I will have to go through extra effort because I will have to hire protection for anything I do.
In conclusion, I just hope gatherers don't have a big target on their back. I will probably have tons of fun in this game as long as I'm not killed for my loot every day lol
In regards to me mentioning "Artisan gear" I know they haven't stated whether or not artisan and combat gear will be completely separate or not but they have mentioned that there will be gear specifically for artisans to boost their artisan skills. They just didn't mention if that gear could also compete with someone in full PvP gear but I assume not since one is meant for combat specifically and the other probably sacrifices those combat boosts for artisan boosts. I was hoping to ask in a QnA to clarify.
Source on them talking about artisan gear:
1h 6m 50s if timestamp didn't work.
Not that wikipedia is the end all be all of anything but the wikipedia article on griefing is here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Griefer
You can't just voluntarily play a game where you know something is going to happen to you, per the rules, and then when it happens to you, you call it griefing. It's an intended part of the game.
And no the system, in concept (lol), penalizes criminal actions in game with criminal consequences, in game. You don't get banned like you could or should if you were actually griefing people.
Even in UO with the full-loot and no PK-penalties I did not think it was that bad but that is only if you take the point of view of someone that knows the game. It sucked for everyone else who did not get to that point. The reason I want harsh penalties for PKing to the point that getting PKed is not something you need to worry about is because I want the game to last a long time and for that a lot of players are required.
The only reason I can think when I see people complaining about a harsh corruption system that does not allow them to PK others and smack anyone that dares to raise their head is because they have never played such a game and have no idea what they are talking about.