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.

Open world Raid/Boss Possible problems

Hi everyone, I state that I am new to the game and I have recently been interested in it so I do not know if this has been discussed previously or if information has already been provided to circumvent any problems that could arise in the scenarios I am imagining , in case if someone could provide me the link of the post I would be grateful.

But no more chatter and let's get into the heart of my question!

As the title suggests, everything specifically concerns the bosses and dungeons Open World, being that those instantiated I do not think they can be influenced by the PVP.
Exactly, my concern is PVP during these events, or rather the griefing and monopolization that larger guilds can have on this content. (And don't tell me this won't happen, because it can and surely will)

Personally I am of the idea that PVP and PVE do not have to intertwine, if I want to do PVP I go to PVP and if I want to do PVE I go to PVE, generally if one wants to do one of the two things usually does not want to waste time doing it too the other one.
Obviously the game was thought of as the old Linege and the like, and being that it seems interesting to me I am also willing to accept the mixing of these features.
However being that the PVE endgame content should be the one that drops the best gear (from what I have understood at least) I see countless possibilities for griefing and trolling, I think that creating a type of activity that is blocked by other players, and therefore automatically excludes part of the server population, not because that population does not have the requirements, but only because there are stronger or more numerous players to block them out seems to me a fallacious system towards the community and the gameplay in general.

So my question is the following, how do the developers think to prevent the bad behaviors that will surely be created?
(We don't even have to wonder, 100% people will do this).

I wanted to thank those who decided to take the time to read the whole post and I hope to receive some interesting answers, perhaps even from a developer or CM himself who can clarify or give ideas to avoid problems.
«134

Comments

  • AzheraeAzherae Member, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    Hello. This topic is important to some members of this community.

    The most recent discussion was in this topic.

    It is recent, so it is probably okay to add your discussion points to that topic to continue it.
    ♪ One Gummy Fish, two Gummy Fish, Red Gummy Fish, Blue Gummy Fish
  • AsgerrAsgerr Member, Alpha Two
    edited August 2022
    The only thing in place to prevent griefing is the potential corruption which the griefers will accrue, should a group of raiders decide not to fight back.

    Otherwise griefing other raid groups is expected and accepted. Of course not all raids and dungeons will be open world, some 20% of them will be instanced.

    Alternatively some groups can hire other players to run interference against griefers, whilst they focus on the raid.

    If another group comes in to attack the same boss, the loot will be granted to the those who tagged it and/or dealt over X% of damage. After that, it's a free for all PvP scenario either way.

    This sort of player conflict is at the core of the game and the devs don't seem intent on preventing it, save for the odd high level player deciding to kill low level players for shits and giggles.
    Sig-ult-2.png
  • SongcallerSongcaller Member, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    Wow. The amount of people claiming a simple pvp invasion is griefing seem to be too numerous. Why would you consider an invasion to steal a world boss to be griefing exactly? Griefing would be a whole raid stood at the access point not letting anyone attack said boss. Not a second raid turning up and invading said boss to take said boss.
    2a3b8ichz0pd.gif
  • TalentsTalents Member, Intrepid Pack, Alpha Two
    Kardin wrote: »
    Personally I am of the idea that PVP and PVE do not have to intertwine, if I want to do PVP I go to PVP and if I want to do PVE I go to PVE, generally if one wants to do one of the two things usually does not want to waste time doing it too the other one.

    And I personally completely disagree with you on that. I hate how modern MMOs separate PvE and PvP into two separate areas instead of intertwining the systems as they should be.

    Intrepid don't plan to stop people from monopolising bosses. They've answered it before that if a guild does monopolise bosses, then other guilds should band together to stop them. It's a player run world after all.
    nI17Ea4.png
  • AsgerrAsgerr Member, Alpha Two
    Neurath wrote: »
    Wow. The amount of people claiming a simple pvp invasion is griefing seem to be too numerous. Why would you consider an invasion to steal a world boss to be griefing exactly? Griefing would be a whole raid stood at the access point not letting anyone attack said boss. Not a second raid turning up and invading said boss to take said boss.

    I think it more of a: what if someone comes in and kills you, to prevent you from killing the boss. Not so much a case of: I'm coming in and trying to steal the kill.
    Sig-ult-2.png
  • SongcallerSongcaller Member, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    All is fair in love and war. There will be times when the world boss simply won't be of value to a particular raid group/guild. That does not mean said raid group/guild wants potential enemies to benefit from the loot from the world boss. I live by quite free flow rules having played on PvP Servers in most games. I still don't count an invasion as griefing and you've described an invasion. It makes no difference if the invaders are RPers who have declared the world boss their leader, or, if its a local guild who decides they don't want foreigners to take the loot.

    All in all, I still wouldn't count it as griefing. The very words used in the OP shows that the OP just isn't suited to PvX.
    2a3b8ichz0pd.gif
  • Morg7x7Morg7x7 Member, Alpha Two
    The Truth is nobody really knows how any of these systems will play out yet, We don't know how many bosses or raids will be active at one time, how they are triggered, how frequently they respawn or how many times a player can loot them, all these things can dictate how contested the content becomes.

    I'm hoping smaller more casual guilds can hang out in a quiet corner of the map and summon a boss to play with.
  • EdHEdH Member, Alpha Two
    i think the system should be fine as is. any guild looking to take down a world boss will surely have other groups or allies in the area to fight off those who would try to compete for the boss. should be fine.
  • Neurath wrote: »
    Wow. The amount of people claiming a simple pvp invasion is griefing seem to be too numerous. Why would you consider an invasion to steal a world boss to be griefing exactly? Griefing would be a whole raid stood at the access point not letting anyone attack said boss. Not a second raid turning up and invading said boss to take said boss.

    It seems i did not explain myself well, if a open world boss need, for example, 40 ppl do to it, and another 80 ppl (all from another guild) come to fight for it, i think is ok, BUT if 700 ppl camp the boss on respawn just to not let other do it (with "other" i dont mean the enemy of their guild, i mean literally every other ppl on the server) that is a bad choise of design, we are not kid anymore and we are not in L2, i personally work 8h a day (normal timework i think), sleep 8h (otherwise i will not perform at work) and in general i can play maybe 1h to 3h a day, and like me probably 70% of the world, if I (like any other person) need to rally 700 ppl from all across the server all from different guilds and probably from different timezone just to fight for something that at least a try on it should be guaranteed, that will be super difficoult to pull off and even if you manage to do it, only a certain amount of ppl can loot the boss (I think I have read 8/16/40 based on the content).

    Personally I think that a good solution could be for example to make the loot collectible 1 time a week per character and maybe the boss have it spawn 3 to 6 times a day, so that there are no incentives to camp the boss if not to prevent your own enemies to do it. This will reduce the ppl that will stay there since they can gain nothing to do so and will help ppl with less time to play, like me.
  • SongcallerSongcaller Member, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    I believe the world bosses will only spawn in peak times (Can't remember which livestream the notion comes from or indeed if the facts have changed). I do not believe a lot of people will spawn camp the World Bosses because I believe they won't have a static spawn - at least I hope they won't have a static spawn.

    There is nothing to stop people from camping a world boss site though. If they want to waste time you can just enter the local dungeons or even the local raid if you know the toughest guild in the region is sat spawn camping the world boss.

    You can also mobilise a whole alliance to take on a world boss - maximum 900 players. It will almost be impossible for 900 players to camp a world boss 24/7. It would be far easier for 900 players to turn up and wipe the spawn campers aside.
    2a3b8ichz0pd.gif
  • bloodprophetbloodprophet Member, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    They have also said there will be content that only a very small percentage of players will be able to complete.
    Your concern sounds like a community concern not an intrepid concern. If someone is capable of holding a mob of 900 people together to guard a world boss 24/7 then more power to them and more world and world bosses for the rest of us.
    Verra should feel big and take time to get where your going if 900 people are all standing around in one place waiting for something to spawn let them. That just means there is so many others things they are not competing for as they stand around doing a dance party.
    Most people never listen. They are just waiting on you to quit making noise so they can.
  • WarthWarth Member, Alpha Two
    edited August 2022
    @Noaani is this your alt account?

    Kidding aside,
    Talents wrote: »
    Kardin wrote: »
    Personally I am of the idea that PVP and PVE do not have to intertwine, if I want to do PVP I go to PVP and if I want to do PVE I go to PVE, generally if one wants to do one of the two things usually does not want to waste time doing it too the other one.

    And I personally completely disagree with you on that. I hate how modern MMOs separate PvE and PvP into two separate areas instead of intertwining the systems as they should be.

    Intrepid don't plan to stop people from monopolising bosses. They've answered it before that if a guild does monopolise bosses, then other guilds should band together to stop them. It's a player run world after all.

    Perfect answer Talents.
    I don't think i have much to add to this, I'd merely want to point out once more, that what OP proclaims as a problem is indeed an intended possibility by the developers.

    If there is a guild locking you out from the boss, then band together and murder that guild. Its that simple. If you can't do that, then you probably don't deserve the boss kill in the first place.

    @Kardin also, maybe another thing that might be interesting to you.
    Steven mentioned in the Live AMA back in 2020, that there are 12-15 relevant raid bosses planned to be in the world. Regional and Dungeon spawned bosses not included. If some of them are monopolized by a guild, then either contest them or go for another, there is plenty of choice planned. If you can't contest a single one of those bosses, then you might want to surround yourself with better teammates.
  • HathamHatham Member, Alpha Two
    Warth wrote: »
    @Noaani is this your alt account?

    Kidding aside,
    Talents wrote: »
    Kardin wrote: »
    Personally I am of the idea that PVP and PVE do not have to intertwine, if I want to do PVP I go to PVP and if I want to do PVE I go to PVE, generally if one wants to do one of the two things usually does not want to waste time doing it too the other one.

    And I personally completely disagree with you on that. I hate how modern MMOs separate PvE and PvP into two separate areas instead of intertwining the systems as they should be.

    Intrepid don't plan to stop people from monopolising bosses. They've answered it before that if a guild does monopolise bosses, then other guilds should band together to stop them. It's a player run world after all.

    Perfect answer Talents.
    I don't think i have much to add to this, I'd merely want to point out once more, that what OP proclaims as a problem is indeed an intended possibility by the developers.

    If there is a guild locking you out from the boss, then band together and murder that guild. Its that simple. If you can't do that, then you probably don't deserve the boss kill in the first place.

    doesn't even have to be many just a few people going around killing the healers and the raid will wipe.
    - this happened in AA and other pve world bosses where players could pvp.
    - if you separate pvp and pve then it kills the need for one of them in the long run.
  • WarthWarth Member, Alpha Two
    edited August 2022
    Hatham wrote: »
    Warth wrote: »
    @Noaani is this your alt account?

    Kidding aside,
    Talents wrote: »
    Kardin wrote: »
    Personally I am of the idea that PVP and PVE do not have to intertwine, if I want to do PVP I go to PVP and if I want to do PVE I go to PVE, generally if one wants to do one of the two things usually does not want to waste time doing it too the other one.

    And I personally completely disagree with you on that. I hate how modern MMOs separate PvE and PvP into two separate areas instead of intertwining the systems as they should be.

    Intrepid don't plan to stop people from monopolising bosses. They've answered it before that if a guild does monopolise bosses, then other guilds should band together to stop them. It's a player run world after all.

    Perfect answer Talents.
    I don't think i have much to add to this, I'd merely want to point out once more, that what OP proclaims as a problem is indeed an intended possibility by the developers.

    If there is a guild locking you out from the boss, then band together and murder that guild. Its that simple. If you can't do that, then you probably don't deserve the boss kill in the first place.

    doesn't even have to be many just a few people going around killing the healers and the raid will wipe.
    - this happened in AA and other pve world bosses where players could pvp.
    - if you separate pvp and pve then it kills the need for one of them in the long run.

    then bring a second and third raid to protect your healers @Hatham
  • AzheraeAzherae Member, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    Warth wrote: »
    Hatham wrote: »
    Warth wrote: »
    @Noaani is this your alt account?

    Kidding aside,
    Talents wrote: »
    Kardin wrote: »
    Personally I am of the idea that PVP and PVE do not have to intertwine, if I want to do PVP I go to PVP and if I want to do PVE I go to PVE, generally if one wants to do one of the two things usually does not want to waste time doing it too the other one.

    And I personally completely disagree with you on that. I hate how modern MMOs separate PvE and PvP into two separate areas instead of intertwining the systems as they should be.

    Intrepid don't plan to stop people from monopolising bosses. They've answered it before that if a guild does monopolise bosses, then other guilds should band together to stop them. It's a player run world after all.

    Perfect answer Talents.
    I don't think i have much to add to this, I'd merely want to point out once more, that what OP proclaims as a problem is indeed an intended possibility by the developers.

    If there is a guild locking you out from the boss, then band together and murder that guild. Its that simple. If you can't do that, then you probably don't deserve the boss kill in the first place.

    doesn't even have to be many just a few people going around killing the healers and the raid will wipe.
    - this happened in AA and other pve world bosses where players could pvp.
    - if you separate pvp and pve then it kills the need for one of them in the long run.

    then bring a second and third raid to protect your healers @Hatham

    At what point does it stop being a 'raid' and become a 'zerg' at that point?

    This is a genuine question, because I count '3 raids' as between 100 and 120 people.

    But I don't know what people consider 'zerg tactics' levels of people, in modern MMOs, I guess.
    ♪ One Gummy Fish, two Gummy Fish, Red Gummy Fish, Blue Gummy Fish
  • WarthWarth Member, Alpha Two
    Azherae wrote: »
    Warth wrote: »
    Hatham wrote: »
    Warth wrote: »
    @Noaani is this your alt account?

    Kidding aside,
    Talents wrote: »
    Kardin wrote: »
    Personally I am of the idea that PVP and PVE do not have to intertwine, if I want to do PVP I go to PVP and if I want to do PVE I go to PVE, generally if one wants to do one of the two things usually does not want to waste time doing it too the other one.

    And I personally completely disagree with you on that. I hate how modern MMOs separate PvE and PvP into two separate areas instead of intertwining the systems as they should be.

    Intrepid don't plan to stop people from monopolising bosses. They've answered it before that if a guild does monopolise bosses, then other guilds should band together to stop them. It's a player run world after all.

    Perfect answer Talents.
    I don't think i have much to add to this, I'd merely want to point out once more, that what OP proclaims as a problem is indeed an intended possibility by the developers.

    If there is a guild locking you out from the boss, then band together and murder that guild. Its that simple. If you can't do that, then you probably don't deserve the boss kill in the first place.

    doesn't even have to be many just a few people going around killing the healers and the raid will wipe.
    - this happened in AA and other pve world bosses where players could pvp.
    - if you separate pvp and pve then it kills the need for one of them in the long run.

    then bring a second and third raid to protect your healers @Hatham

    At what point does it stop being a 'raid' and become a 'zerg' at that point?

    This is a genuine question, because I count '3 raids' as between 100 and 120 people.

    But I don't know what people consider 'zerg tactics' levels of people, in modern MMOs, I guess.

    Obviously you don't want to bring 120 people. Why would you want to preoccupy 120 people, if really only takes 40 people to clear the content. Those 80 won't see much benefit, but it still tops not getting the boss kill at all. That's pretty much the price of a PvX encounter.

    The only thing I'd like Intrepid to make sure is, that only 40 people are engaged with the raid boss, while the others have guard duty or even better (from my point of view) -> first do the PvP, and the raid that is left standing may challenge the boss for an attempt. That would be my optimal scenario, which unfortunately Intrepid doesn't seem to consider.
  • George_BlackGeorge_Black Member, Intrepid Pack, Alpha Two
    edited August 2022
    The design will not change. It is intended based on previous games. The people back then did not worry about what you seem to be worried about.
    Yes big guilds would camp some times. Then enemy big guilds would attack them and the area would clear for some time. That's life.
    You havent addressed anything that hasn't been done many times alrdy. Go to another raid boss if that one is guarded. The map is big. And no, raids wont drop the best gear EXCLUSIVELY. The best gear is crafted.
  • HathamHatham Member, Alpha Two
    edited August 2022
    Warth wrote: »
    Hatham wrote: »
    Warth wrote: »
    @Noaani is this your alt account?

    Kidding aside,
    Talents wrote: »
    Kardin wrote: »
    Personally I am of the idea that PVP and PVE do not have to intertwine, if I want to do PVP I go to PVP and if I want to do PVE I go to PVE, generally if one wants to do one of the two things usually does not want to waste time doing it too the other one.

    And I personally completely disagree with you on that. I hate how modern MMOs separate PvE and PvP into two separate areas instead of intertwining the systems as they should be.

    Intrepid don't plan to stop people from monopolising bosses. They've answered it before that if a guild does monopolise bosses, then other guilds should band together to stop them. It's a player run world after all.

    Perfect answer Talents.
    I don't think i have much to add to this, I'd merely want to point out once more, that what OP proclaims as a problem is indeed an intended possibility by the developers.

    If there is a guild locking you out from the boss, then band together and murder that guild. Its that simple. If you can't do that, then you probably don't deserve the boss kill in the first place.

    doesn't even have to be many just a few people going around killing the healers and the raid will wipe.
    - this happened in AA and other pve world bosses where players could pvp.
    - if you separate pvp and pve then it kills the need for one of them in the long run.

    then bring a second and third raid to protect your healers @Hatham

    That's the thing your gonna get people that become aware your raid group -> and attack the group or even randoms that wander into the fight.

    Last thing you want is the entire server hearing about the raid and crashing it to steal the kill.
  • SongcallerSongcaller Member, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    I think we went against scaling in the scaling dev discussion. I was ambivalent about it either way < I only remember my stance on the matter because it was so long ago lol.
    2a3b8ichz0pd.gif
  • LudulluLudullu Member, Alpha Two
    Kardin wrote: »
    that is a bad choise of design, we are not kid anymore and we are not in L2, i personally work 8h a day (normal timework i think), sleep 8h (otherwise i will not perform at work) and in general i can play maybe 1h to 3h a day, and like me probably 70% of the world
    Now just a quick question. Back in those L2 days, were you always the oldest kid around? Were there only kids playing the game? Because back when I played L2, I was usually the youngest person in my guild. I talked with 40-50y.o. dudes with wives and kids who, yes, played only for 2-3h a day if that, but they enjoyed the game to the fullest and the guild would just get more people who played during a different time to pad out their spawn camping shifts.

    Yes, you've become old, but instead of being selfish and thinking about only your own benefits, try to think about the current younger people who might want to experience the same thing you did back then. If you have 1h to play the game - do so and enjoy that 1h. If you can't enjoy the game w/o getting everything presented to you on a silver platter - mmos are no longer for you.
  • Mag7spyMag7spy Member, Alpha Two
    Only issue I see is really the zergs, like that will make it difficult to create challenging content as people will just Zerg it down to beat it. I understand they will have some anti zerg stuff for pve. So how effective that will be is definitely a question, but also people could grief you by bringing a ton of people not to beat the boss but to make the raid more challenging and wipe the people doing it.

    I can understand why some people want instanced bosses as it is the easier way if you cant find a solution. Though i don't think that should be the norm.
  • George_BlackGeorge_Black Member, Intrepid Pack, Alpha Two
    This wont be like eso or ff14 where people can teleport everywhere dont worry about dying concequences or marked as trolls. Zerg surfs wont be a thing, just like it wasnt in L2.
    Open world pvp is so different from all the games where you could only interact with other players in raids and BGs.
  • WarthWarth Member, Alpha Two
    Mag7spy wrote: »
    Only issue I see is really the zergs, like that will make it difficult to create challenging content as people will just Zerg it down to beat it. I understand they will have some anti zerg stuff for pve. So how effective that will be is definitely a question, but also people could grief you by bringing a ton of people not to beat the boss but to make the raid more challenging and wipe the people doing it.

    I can understand why some people want instanced bosses as it is the easier way if you cant find a solution. Though i don't think that should be the norm.

    Irregular respawn timers are needed on top of reduced fast travel capabilities.
    If people know the exact time of a respawn, then zergs will indeed form beforehand.
    If the boss has a long window of possibly respawns, then forming raids for it will be reactionary and zergs will naturally be less pronounced.

    I still worry about the Family Summon System, as i feel like its predicated to form Zergs. The Ability to summon 7 other players in a short amount of time will help zergs more than everybody else and feels generally out of place.
  • SongcallerSongcaller Member, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    I doubt IS will remove Family Summons no matter how many of us are against the function.
    2a3b8ichz0pd.gif
  • LudulluLudullu Member, Alpha Two
    Warth wrote: »
    If the boss has a long window of possibly respawns, then forming raids for it will be reactionary and zergs will naturally be less pronounced.
    Nah, the guilds will just get people with staggered playtimes. In L2 you had bosses that had +-5 or more hours, so you could potentially sit there waiting for 10++h for the boss to respawn, yet multiple guilds did just that with several parties at the very least. And with no TP in Ashes, the pressure to always be present at the boss respawn will be even higher.

    The guild that manages to get enough members to be able to wait for a boss for 10+h, w/o losing the guild's effectiveness for both pve and pvp, will be the one who controls said boss. And imo they'd deserve it.
  • AndyAndy Member
    No TP + Multiple outdoor content (PvE) will spread players across the world.

    So, it'll be hard to camp or "grief". But, for sure, you'll have to dedicate 5-8 players in your raid/group only to scout and PvP defense while doing a world boss.

    What's the issue ? It's more like an additional mechanic during a boss encounter.
  • HathamHatham Member, Alpha Two
    NiKr wrote: »
    Warth wrote: »
    If the boss has a long window of possibly respawns, then forming raids for it will be reactionary and zergs will naturally be less pronounced.
    Nah, the guilds will just get people with staggered playtimes. In L2 you had bosses that had +-5 or more hours, so you could potentially sit there waiting for 10++h for the boss to respawn, yet multiple guilds did just that with several parties at the very least. And with no TP in Ashes, the pressure to always be present at the boss respawn will be even higher.

    The guild that manages to get enough members to be able to wait for a boss for 10+h, w/o losing the guild's effectiveness for both pve and pvp, will be the one who controls said boss. And imo they'd deserve it.

    That sounds exactly as ff11 had with its Notorious monsters and hyper notorious monsters where people would wait days at a time for the kill.
  • Mag7spyMag7spy Member, Alpha Two
    Warth wrote: »
    Mag7spy wrote: »
    Only issue I see is really the zergs, like that will make it difficult to create challenging content as people will just Zerg it down to beat it. I understand they will have some anti zerg stuff for pve. So how effective that will be is definitely a question, but also people could grief you by bringing a ton of people not to beat the boss but to make the raid more challenging and wipe the people doing it.

    I can understand why some people want instanced bosses as it is the easier way if you cant find a solution. Though i don't think that should be the norm.

    Irregular respawn timers are needed on top of reduced fast travel capabilities.
    If people know the exact time of a respawn, then zergs will indeed form beforehand.
    If the boss has a long window of possibly respawns, then forming raids for it will be reactionary and zergs will naturally be less pronounced.

    I still worry about the Family Summon System, as i feel like its predicated to form Zergs. The Ability to summon 7 other players in a short amount of time will help zergs more than everybody else and feels generally out of place.

    That is true, you would want to kill it asap. Unless you have a super guild you won't be able to zerg it or worry about other guilds to Zerg and ruin it for you.
  • Mag7spyMag7spy Member, Alpha Two
    edited August 2022
    Neurath wrote: »
    I doubt IS will remove Family Summons no matter how many of us are against the function.

    I think family summon is fine as long as it is balanced, If the cooldown is shared between all family members. else you just show up and teleport 40 people instant from a few families.
  • SongcallerSongcaller Member, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    We were all set to have no fast travel, then we got the node diaries and news that Scientific Node will have a fast travel. Then out of the blue the Family Summons system was announced. All you need is 8 people in a group who are all part of a different family. Even if there was a long cooldown shared between all family members, a group of 8 could rapidly deploy 16 vs 8 when required.
    2a3b8ichz0pd.gif
Sign In or Register to comment.