Glorious Alpha Two Testers!

Alpha Two Realms are now unlocked for Phase II testing!

For our initial launch, testing will begin on Friday, December 20, 2024, at 10 AM Pacific and continue uninterrupted until Monday, January 6, 2025, at 10 AM Pacific. After January 6th, we’ll transition to a schedule of five-day-per-week access for the remainder of Phase II.

You can download the game launcher here and we encourage you to join us on our for the most up to date testing news.

When is it Rational to go Corrupt? Are there any Loopholes to Player Corruption?

124»

Comments

  • GoalidGoalid Member, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    Noaani wrote: »
    Goalid wrote: »

    I don't believe I've ever heard Steven say, "and a way we intend players to avoid some of the costs of the corruption system is to group up with your friends".

    They haven't said it is intended, but they have talked about it as something that they know could happen.

    That is the reason why death while corrupt gives 4 times the penalty. It means that sure, you can work around the small chance of an item loss with a low level of corruption, but you then have more work to put in to work off the death penalty than you would if you just worked off the corruption.

    On the other hand, if you have a large amount of corruption, being killed by friends then opens you up to being isolated from them while corrupt - this is why there is a random respawn with corrupt deaths.

    Basically, what I am saying is that Intrepid have already considered that people could do what has been suggested, and have already shaped the corruption penalties accordingly.

    I think the disagreement between us is that I'm looking at the bounty hunter system and you're just looking at corruption penalties. Ironically, the bounty hunter system needs corrupted players to function or it's useless, so Intrepid is implicitly intending on there being corrupted players.

    We are both satisfied with the cost of corruption currently preventing people from griefing. But, I'm more concerned about a scenario where corrupted players are just eating the xp debt to ignore the bounty hunters. And you're right, xp debt can be tuned to where it's punishing on its own to prevent griefing, and create some cost to fighting over resources. My worry would be an ultra-rare resource gets camped, and some players just kill each other to avoid bounty hunters, because they think the cost of xp debt is worth the stolen mats. And then there's no room for the bounty hunters in that scenario, so all bounty hunters do is kill the rare, dumb griefer.
    h4iQQYb.png
  • NoaaniNoaani Member, Intrepid Pack, Alpha Two
    Goalid wrote: »
    Intrepid is implicitly intending on there being corrupted players.
    Indeed they do intend for there to be corrupt players.

    They have in the past said that the corruption penalty has built in controls so they can persuade general player activities either towards more or less corruption killing.

    These controls include the amount of corruption gained per kill, the variation for killing lower level players, the threshold of where item drops become a factor, the percent of materials dropped, the ratio at which corruption is worked off, the amount of corruption that is lost when killed, the ratio at which that corruption is converted to experience debt if killed, the ratio at which experience debt is worked off, the stat penalties suffered in PvP while corrupt, and these are just the obvious ones.

    Between these dials, Intrepid can shape player behavior to achieve the amount of corruption gain then want to make the world function.

    As for bounty hunters, they are not a concern unless you have a high enough level of corruption. You don't show up on their map after one kill - you need more corruption than that.

    Once you start getting up to that amount of corruption, you need to consider both the fact that a kill isn't going to remove all corruption, and that you are going to respawn - still corrupt - in a random location.

    If you are really worried about bounty hunters, you want to stay with your friends.
  • DygzDygz Member, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    And you will continue to be concerned about that until we test it and the devs finish tweaking the balance of Corruption.
  • CaerylCaeryl Member, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    Goalid wrote: »
    Noaani wrote: »
    Goalid wrote: »

    I don't believe I've ever heard Steven say, "and a way we intend players to avoid some of the costs of the corruption system is to group up with your friends".

    They haven't said it is intended, but they have talked about it as something that they know could happen.

    That is the reason why death while corrupt gives 4 times the penalty. It means that sure, you can work around the small chance of an item loss with a low level of corruption, but you then have more work to put in to work off the death penalty than you would if you just worked off the corruption.

    On the other hand, if you have a large amount of corruption, being killed by friends then opens you up to being isolated from them while corrupt - this is why there is a random respawn with corrupt deaths.

    Basically, what I am saying is that Intrepid have already considered that people could do what has been suggested, and have already shaped the corruption penalties accordingly.

    I think the disagreement between us is that I'm looking at the bounty hunter system and you're just looking at corruption penalties. Ironically, the bounty hunter system needs corrupted players to function or it's useless, so Intrepid is implicitly intending on there being corrupted players.

    We are both satisfied with the cost of corruption currently preventing people from griefing. But, I'm more concerned about a scenario where corrupted players are just eating the xp debt to ignore the bounty hunters. And you're right, xp debt can be tuned to where it's punishing on its own to prevent griefing, and create some cost to fighting over resources. My worry would be an ultra-rare resource gets camped, and some players just kill each other to avoid bounty hunters, because they think the cost of xp debt is worth the stolen mats. And then there's no room for the bounty hunters in that scenario, so all bounty hunters do is kill the rare, dumb griefer.

    Personally I don’t think those situations will be appearing too often, assuming everyone in the area has started as a non-combatant. PvE/non-combatant deaths have full death penalties applied, while Combatant deaths have half the penalty applied. So if that resource is so incredibly rare, there’s no reason players wouldn’t flag combatant to fighting over it. Inflicting a minor Corruption value on someone is not worth losing the full drop value of rare mats.

    Even assuming the attacking player started Corrupted, then any non-combatant fighting over the resource should kill the Corrupt player the moment they come into the gathering area, as they should be aware that they can’t mitigate their own losses due to being unable to flag Combatant on a Corrupt player. They’ve got nothing to lose by attacking, and a lot to gain if they kill the Corrupt player. Bounty hunters come in to play if the Corrupt player is consistently PK’ing, whether to troll or for profit. They’re not meant to avenge one-off attacks of opportunity around rare resources.
  • DygzDygz Member, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    Better to inflict full Corruption in order to deter futher unwanted interruptions.
    Then go back and gather the resources you wanted.
    Should be better to just gather the rare resource on your own than work off full Corruption.
  • NoaaniNoaani Member, Intrepid Pack, Alpha Two
    Dygz wrote: »
    Better to inflict full Corruption in order to deter futher unwanted interruptions.
    If the attacker has already deemed it worth the corruption gain, then reusing to fight back in order to inflict corruption isn't going to deter any further attacks - as it has already been factored in by said attacker.

    As to it being better to go and get the resources myself - if I am a better PvP'er than I am a miner, I am better off PvP'ing for mined resources than I am going and mining them for myself.
  • CROW3CROW3 Member, Alpha Two
    Noaani wrote: »
    As to it being better to go and get the resources myself - if I am a better PvP'er than I am a miner, I am better off PvP'ing for mined resources than I am going and mining them for myself.

    Agreed. Though it would be much more efficient (with some exceptions) to attack caravans than individual players as a multiplied benefit to offset the corruption. Exceptions that come to mind would be suspected rare minerals, a fully laden (if Intrepid makes it obvious) miner + mule, or if the raid on a caravan is too large which spreads the material gain too much.

    AoC+Dwarf+750v3.png
  • George_BlackGeorge_Black Member, Intrepid Pack, Alpha Two
    You guys are poking holes on your own arguments.....

    There is 0 reasonable cause to farm mats by PKing, while there are sanctioned PvP/farming occassions like caravans.

    The more you talk the more you invalid yet another "PK loopholes" topic. And this guy did a full "analysis" on why people will go red. For mats... hahhahahahhah
  • CaerylCaeryl Member, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    You guys are poking holes on your own arguments.....

    There is 0 reasonable cause to farm mats by PKing, while there are sanctioned PvP/farming occassions like caravans.

    The more you talk the more you invalid yet another "PK loopholes" topic. And this guy did a full "analysis" on why people will go red. For mats... hahhahahahhah

    Materials that travel by caravan are most often going to be bulk, common materials. Rare materials are better moved via characters spec’d for speed and combat-avoidance making unannounced runs, as they’re a much smaller (and quicker) target.

  • GoalidGoalid Member, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    edited April 2022
    You guys are poking holes on your own arguments.....

    There is 0 reasonable cause to farm mats by PKing, while there are sanctioned PvP/farming occassions like caravans.

    The more you talk the more you invalid yet another "PK loopholes" topic. And this guy did a full "analysis" on why people will go red. For mats... hahhahahahhah

    Steven says it'll literally be a reason people do it haha, and it's because the game is going to have ultra-rare material spawns that you probably can't get because you're locked out of mastering that profession
    h4iQQYb.png
  • GoalidGoalid Member, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    Noaani wrote: »
    Goalid wrote: »
    Intrepid is implicitly intending on there being corrupted players.
    Indeed they do intend for there to be corrupt players.

    They have in the past said that the corruption penalty has built in controls so they can persuade general player activities either towards more or less corruption killing.

    These controls include the amount of corruption gained per kill, the variation for killing lower level players, the threshold of where item drops become a factor, the percent of materials dropped, the ratio at which corruption is worked off, the amount of corruption that is lost when killed, the ratio at which that corruption is converted to experience debt if killed, the ratio at which experience debt is worked off, the stat penalties suffered in PvP while corrupt, and these are just the obvious ones.

    Between these dials, Intrepid can shape player behavior to achieve the amount of corruption gain then want to make the world function.

    As for bounty hunters, they are not a concern unless you have a high enough level of corruption. You don't show up on their map after one kill - you need more corruption than that.

    Once you start getting up to that amount of corruption, you need to consider both the fact that a kill isn't going to remove all corruption, and that you are going to respawn - still corrupt - in a random location.

    If you are really worried about bounty hunters, you want to stay with your friends.

    At the end of the day, I can't tell you for certain if players will spend their time killing each other or not, because it's all theoretical. I believe there are costs to grouping up for mats, including that you're now upping the opportunity cost of camping the area the more people are there, as well as the mats now being divided between the entire group. Whereas you can just have 1 friend or alt account kill you. And bounty hunters may have an easier time organizing than corrupted players.


    I believe it will become a problem in Alpha 2, even if they turn the dials on corruption penalties / # of bounty hunters. Because they're two different expected value equations, I don't believe you can optimize for both the loophole and what I believe is their intention of bounty hunters killing corrupted players. If it isn't a problem, then Intrepid should obviously not change anything because it's working as intended.
    h4iQQYb.png
  • DygzDygz Member, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    CROW3 wrote: »
    Noaani wrote: »
    As to it being better to go and get the resources myself - if I am a better PvP'er than I am a miner, I am better off PvP'ing for mined resources than I am going and mining them for myself.

    Agreed. Though it would be much more efficient (with some exceptions) to attack caravans than individual players as a multiplied benefit to offset the corruption. Exceptions that come to mind would be suspected rare minerals, a fully laden (if Intrepid makes it obvious) miner + mule, or if the raid on a caravan is too large which spreads the material gain too much.
    Well, Steven expects us to bring Master Gatherers with our parties and raids, so they can get us the best resources, so, that's going to be better than PKing random Non-Combatants minding their own business.
  • CROW3CROW3 Member, Alpha Two
    Dygz wrote: »
    Well, Steven expects us to bring Master Gatherers with our parties and raids, so they can get us the best resources, so, that's going to be better than PKing random Non-Combatants minding their own business.

    Right, but I’m guessing the majority of those situations wouldn’t involve corruption, just massive pvp battles against the raid. To engage corruption to would mean the ‘robber’ team would have been able to get through and kill the ‘raiding’ team’s master miner before that player fought back.

    I’d venture that master miner would probably flag with the rest of the raiding team to fight off the robber team.

    Pure speculation, however.

    AoC+Dwarf+750v3.png
  • DygzDygz Member, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    edited April 2022
    Depends on how into PvP combat that Master Gatherer is.
    The PvPers "protecting" the Master Gatherer can kill the enemy team and/or let some of them become Corrupt. And then have the Master Gatherer return to do what they do best.
    Works great if the protectors are also able to pick up most of the Master Gatherer's dropped resources.
  • CROW3CROW3 Member, Alpha Two
    Yep. All fair points. I’m looking forward to testing the hell out of this so we can calibrate it effectively.
    AoC+Dwarf+750v3.png
  • NoaaniNoaani Member, Intrepid Pack, Alpha Two
    Dygz wrote: »
    Well, Steven expects us to bring Master Gatherers with our parties and raids, so they can get us the best resources, so, that's going to be better than PKing random Non-Combatants minding their own business.
    If you have a competent raid around you, then you have better things to do than PvP someone for materials.

    We are generally just talking about when people are by themselves or have one or two others with them.

    You can come up with literally infinite possibilities that alter the original premise of this thread, yet none of them actually alter the original premise of this thread - that premise being that there will be times when it is worth attacking other players and gaining corruption in order to make a profit.
Sign In or Register to comment.