Greetings, glorious adventurers! If you're joining in our Alpha One spot testing, please follow the steps here to see all the latest test info on our forums and Discord!
Options
Non-Combatant attacking Corrupted
hleV
Member
The thread was split and then merged back. The actual topic:
Non-Combatants can attack Corrupted and remain Non-Combatants, therefore if the Corrupted defend themselves and kill the aggressor Non-Combatant, their corruption score increases (as if killing an innocent player).
How do you feel about adding this additional penalty for something that is not technically griefing?
Apparently, Greens can freely attack a Red and remain green? So if Greens are out to get him and Red fights back and kills a Green, their corruption is increased even more? Isn't that nonsensical?
EDIT: The issue is that it's more beneficial to attack Red as a Green than as a Purple, because then the Red might hesitate to fight back and gain more corruption. Red should be allowed to defend themselves without repercussions.
EDIT2: The thread was based on misinformation, that people can willingly stay flagged up (Purple/Combatant) 24/7. Essentially scenarios where Red are being attacked by Purples are going to be non-existent, because everyone is Green by default and Purple status is very temporary for when you PvP a non-Red player. The system just wants you to die and discourages fighting back when you go Red.
EDIT: The issue is that it's more beneficial to attack Red as a Green than as a Purple, because then the Red might hesitate to fight back and gain more corruption. Red should be allowed to defend themselves without repercussions.
EDIT2: The thread was based on misinformation, that people can willingly stay flagged up (Purple/Combatant) 24/7. Essentially scenarios where Red are being attacked by Purples are going to be non-existent, because everyone is Green by default and Purple status is very temporary for when you PvP a non-Red player. The system just wants you to die and discourages fighting back when you go Red.
0
Comments
Going red is a bad idea.
If you're looking for RP/realism: In some worlds, murderers (the requirement to become red) receive the death penalty.
It adds nothing to the game if Reds are punished for fighting back. It's abusable even - Greens harass someone, get killed, gank him back.
Greens should turn Purple if they engage in PvP. If you're gonna PvP someone, they shouldn't be punished for fighting back. Isn't the whole system against griefing Greens? Why are Greens allowed to grief, then?
Keep in mind, you respawn. It's not like there is perma-death or anything.
Really, death isnt death, it is in accumulation of small penalties.
Purple killing green is not a fair fight. There are consequences for that.
Exactly, it's abusable. Attacking a player, regardless if they're red or not, should make you Purple.
You dont like it? Why? That is the risk that you take in order to kill a peaceful player. You will be hunt down as you try to remove your corruption.
This system so far is a copy paste from another mmo back in 2003 and worked perfect. Nobody was complaining. Its aim is to prevent people from going on killing sprees of peaceful players.
I for one dont want or need any changes to it to accomodate your personal logic of how it should work.
I'm fine with all of that, I get hunted down and I get increased death penalty because I'm red. The issue is that if Purples are hunting me, I can still fight back and try to recover from corruption without dying, but if Greens are hunting me, I can't.
Unless there are good ways to escape, but I doubt?
Players turn purple if the hit a green player. Why would there be any purple players near you, the red?
Dont you see how meaningless the system would be if green players became purple for touching you, the red?
Dont think of it in terms of 1v1. There will be other players around, groups of players. Perhaps you the red will be in a group.
Green players shouldnt become purple for attacking you, the red. That would make them fair game for your group, or the bystanders.
You did the murder, you need to pay.
If you are red and somebody heals you they become purple for assistint you. If the green players target that healer and attack they become purple. Then kill them all you want without gaining more corruption.
People should examine the systems as part of the big picture. Some clown goes on and on about how "nobody will ever go red" and for 10 pages they keep defending how it wont work.
You here say greens should turn purple for touching a red.
Think of it a bit better. This game wont be a gankfest. People will need good reasons to kill a peaceful player. It's all about group play and serious goals.
Should Greens turn Purple every time they attack a random mob?
Just following on that line of thought:
Why should a monster get additional corruption? Monsters don't get corruption.
While i agree with the message, i do think the argument/comparison is flawed.
Nobody will hunt you as a purple. There is only greens who will whip you till you are dead.
Killing a green for pety reason just isn't a good idea in the current system.
If you want to hurt/annoy a green, then just keep throwing cc's, and pumch them down to 25-33% constantly without killing them.
If you want their ressources, then kill them, loot them and get killed by a friend afterwards who picks up the stuff you drop
The big loser from this is the Bounty Hunter imo. With greens being very free in attacking the red, they will inevitably receive less of the action, which is sad considering thats their entire purpose/gameplay mechanic.
I dont like this sysrem for the sole reason, that it takes away from the Bounty Hunter system. Imo, the overwhelming amount of dead corrupted should happen through BHs.
Not really. Greens still die. Bounty hunters are not just "players who turn on bounty hunting mode", they're the TYPE of player that turns on bounty hunting mode. Not all greens are gonna go after every red they see, risk XP debt, material drops, etc. If they're in the area and prepared to specifically hunt reds, they're a bounty hunter type of person whether they flagged the quest or not.
This isn't "bounty hunters lose out on the action", it's just "a different bounty hunter got there first".
imo though
If a red player gets attacked by a green player first there shouldnt be a further penalty for the red player
If a red player attacks a green player who then fights back i also dont think there should be a further penalty for the red players since that would be the same as to 2 purple players going at it so it therefor consenial pvp
if a red player kills a green player that doesnt fight back that would then increase corruption further
Corruption system there to punish non consential pvp so if 2 players no matter if there purple red or green are activly attacking each other it should offer corruption penalty to the winner.
However green players attacked red players should remain green because otherwise ull have a red player act as bait for a greenie to hit to go purple then other purple will kill him. I feel they might need a fourth colour tbh like yellow that basicly shows that there considered green still but there wont be a penalty for red players who attack them cause they hit them and so on.
If somone accidently goes red or out of anger of KSing their mobs and what not they should be further compounded to additional corruption penalty just for defending themselfs.
So, yes - greens may hunt you.
No, there’s not a lot of sympathy for Reds.
The point is corrupteds griefed first, so they're free game. That being said, I do think greens should have to combat flag to attack a corrupted.
He never said you can defend yourself as a red against greens and not get corruption.
He said vs a bounty hunter you dont get more corruption. (And purples ofc..)
In any "open war" environment, you have designations of people. Largely, we'll split them into enlisted, and civilians. If two enlisted fighters attack each other, no problem. Those are the rules of combat. If a civilian kills another civilian, that's murder. If an enlisted person attacks a civilian, that's also murder.
What do we do with murderers when we find them guilty? Well, in most places nowadays, we arrest them if they don't fight back and put them in jail, potentially for the rest of their lives. You don't want your character deleted, or unavailable for several in-game years (probably two months each) do you? No? So then, surrendering to "the law", which isn't even really an established concept in this case, is out of the question.
What's the only other option for dealing with murderers? Execution. Execution, in this case, is a legally and socially acceptable punishment for murder, because there's no other equivalent option available. It does not constitute an act of "combat". If a civilian does their civic duty and puts a murderer six feet under, does that make them an enlisted combatant in an open war environment? No. It makes them a badass civilian. And it makes the dead murderer rethink their life choices when they respawn.
If the red is actively fleeing, then all greens can attack him at will, as he clearly isnt interested in accumulating any more corruption. He cant really fight back anyway, as that would just throw him deeper into corruption. A green barely has any threat of dying to somebody that already red. The clowns, that just want to go on a murder spree wont remain in Ashes very long, seeing how they will have lost most of their Gear, their Level and their combat strength within a short period of time.
Most of the reds are those, that will go red occasionally, when they think the reward will outweigh the risk.
Those kill a player, loot the player (or mule) and then try to work of the corruption in order to actually obtain the reward from what they just did. Those will never fight back and kill a green as doubling, tripling, quadrupling the corruption you have to work off will be a never ending cycle.
Killing someone and gaining corruption is a very specific act in Ashes. It cant be done on accident, it has to be an actual decision a ayer makes. If you dont want to deal with the penalties of corruption (which includes greens being able to attack you without flagging), dont gain corruption.
As such, no one can complain about the penalties, because you literally have to buy in to it.