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.
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.
Comments
Plenty of reason to aim at the people that you are fighting.
Why are you assuming them are aiming at greens, when they are doing combat they are aiming at the boat and hitting whatever they can. Based on where people are on the boat they are bound to get hit or try to get hit. I don't know why you are thinking this as a shooter like someone is going to be trying to hit a certain part of a moving ship and not just trying to get any damage they can on who they are fighting.
You are purpose trying to skew information to benefit your point and ignore clear facts even without all the information about navel combat being available. Doesn't sound like a good way to convince someone if you ae going to purposely be bias about it.
Group play will be active at sea - even more so than on land.
You have one person that can see what is going on, one person that is steering the ship, several people that are able to fire the weapons, and some people running around patching the ship up. And that is just the basics - I expect to see a few more roles than that.
The idea with naval combat in Ashes is that it has it's own classes and specialties - not that it relies on your combat class. You may well be a tank as your primary class, but on a ship you could be the navigator, or a gunner, or what ever else they have. The two spheres are totally independent of each other.
The only way to make that work is to remove the benefit of players fighting players, and boost the benefit of ships fighting ships.
When I was thinking about dealing with naval corruption with the ship as a unit, there were a few states I thought would be necessary:
- Functioning in combat / out of combat
- Disabled in combat / out of combat
- Destroyed
Mainly the disabled state v. the destroyed state have very different corruption implications. I'm pulling this from naval combat in AC;Odyssey - if I disable a ship I don't have to board it. I don't have to destroy it. But can I loot a disabled ship for a smaller % of gain? There are combinations of loot / corruption in there, but thought I would toss it out there while I had a minute.
I was addressing his tier proposal of larger ships suffering more corruption killing smaller ships
Currently, i'd' imagine that fighting on the coast line would come with the risk of corruption and not be encouraged.
I'd imagine whoever killed the the noncombatant would get the corruption if they jumped off and attacked a fisher that wasn't out in the open sea.
1. only aim to hit the boat and don't hit the players....
2. People don't be able to do anything on the boat so there is no reason for them to deal damage. Game will have a lack of mechanics to support group play for navel combat.
What are these points? You are aiming to hit whatever you can. Why is there arguments being made with an expectation of navel combat to be extremes simple? no mechanics and only person driving and shooting? Thinking there isn't a benefit to less people shooting at your boat when you take out the driver or people using the weapon on the boat.
Actual weird arguments to make for this.
Well, this makes sense to me as it is literally the essence of piracy. Pirates don't want to fight, they want you to agree to hand over some amount of resources so that neither side takes damage, and they threaten if they think you want the same thing.
Now, this doesn't work well in a world with magical healing and MP that ticks back up because the crew is still going strong 'indefinitely', but it points to something else. "Pirate" gameplay, if even meant to be remotely 'realistic', should have to involve ways of resupply and 'hostile and friendly ports' and all that.
If it doesn't, we're not really 'playing Pirates' at all, we're just sailing around blasting, even if the ships need repairs and ammunition resupply. If you can just 'sail into a harbor and restock safely' after killing off a bunch of people, I feel like the experience is diminished.
Does a Pirate Ship turn green 90s after entering coastal waters?
Then every person on the ship is a threat you want to take out, and there for you want to work together to keep each other alive. (Doesn't mean aoes are one shotting people on the ship id expect hugely reduced damage but you still need to be conscious of the damage you may take at times.)
Corruption is supposed to be a deterrent, not a weapon. You get more corruption for attacking a lower level player because they want to deter you from doing that. When it comes to ships, this isn't necessarily the case since ships server different roles. A smaller ship isn't the same as a lower level player.
Please clarify if your basis for this is that you perceive that boats cannot be attacked and sunk in coastal waters, or if your basis is that you see no reason for destroying/stealing a boat to grant corruption.
Different gameplay loops
I think you are missing the point that Intrepid want to make naval combat it's own thing, not a subset of regular combat.
Sure, you and those on your ship want to work together to keep each other alive. That is why you have people running around patching up the ship. These people are essentially healers in naval combat. They are who is keeping you alive.
See, I'm all for it as well.
However, I would suggest to Intrepid the following;
You laid down a base PvP experience in Ashes with corruption.
This statement about open sea combat (even if expected) skews the game more towards PvP than that base that was laid down would suggest.
As such, add in content that skews things back (in terms of the game as a whole) to where it was.
I want to say neither. You are free to do this and potentially punished for this. Even with the potential punishment, you may still have a reason.
I'm not sure what you are trying to get at with this scenario.
Which is a threat lol, everyone knows in a mmorpg you kill the healer.
My assumption is that attacking a boat will function the same as attacking a mount or combat pet.
Yeah, but naval combat is supposed to be it's own thing. It is not supposed to be just normal combat on water. It is supposed to have it's own paradigm.
The paradigm shift is that rather than looking at a group as a bunch of individual players as in regular combat, you need to look at the group as the ship - not as the individual component players that make it up.
Another approach. Ships (as whole units) have their own corruption, with no cascading corruption to individual players, but red ships become more vulnerable and drop more loot the more 'innocent' ships it destroys. Emphasis on destroys, instead of disabling.
Player corruption would still be in play if a player swings over to another ship and starts murdering greens, or pelting greens floating in the water until they're dead.
I figure if a purple boat is carrying greens and is destroyed, all the green players go in the water, as long as they aren't actively picked off, they do not give the attacking ship or its crew corruption. Green players that drown in the water are collateral damage. Have the devs create life-jackets or something.
If a green boat is destroyed the corruption goes to the ship, but as long as the green crew isn't murdered while they're floating around, the crew of the attacking boat likewise get no corruption.
Edit: It's rare when @Noaani and I agree on something, even more rare when we're saying pretty much the same thing. I dig it.
I would consider the land content enough for what the game is intending to be, but do you have any suggestions that maintain the PVX mindset of the game?
I definitely want to test it but it seems at least like a simpler effective approach.
Yeah, things I have already talked about in the past.
Add in some instanced PvE (which brings the PvE balance back, and potentially past where it was), but then add in an additional journey where the PvP is heightened. My suggestion in the past has been to make it so the raid needs to carry the spoils of their encounter back home via the caravan system - but to also send out an announcement to attract would be attackers. (ie, PvE is free from PvP, but getting worth out of the rewards attracts even more PvP).
Another option could be to have instanced content on islands. You need to sail there and sail back - though the increased PvP aspects of naval content. While there though, you are assured of having content (lock out based), and are free from PvP prevention.
I'm not entirely convinced. While I personally enjoy instanced PVE content such as dungeons and raids, it just seems more like PVE and PVP events happening separately. Where I see PVX as having both be capable of being experienced at the same time. But I do love the concept of instanced raids and the loot being caravan driven and exposed
I also don't see the issue of having PvP and PvE separate at times. I mean, if I am walking down the road and see a corrupt player and attack them, there isn't any PvE happening at the same time - it's just PvP.
Players fighting over a PvE spot are PvP'ing and then PvE'ing. They are not usually happening together (though sometimes are, obviously).
I literally see no reason at all why the two can't be occasionally separated, as long as the activity as a whole involves both (looking at you - military node Mayoral competition).
You are nothing if not consistent Noaani. lol. Like a drug dealer...or a used car salesman....hey hey hey have you seen these instances. Or one of those religious people that tap you on the shoulder on the street, "Do you have a moment to talk about instances?"
So because the ocean is lawless, we need more instances. I respect the hustle. I'd hire you to sell my ideas.
1. Boss / Raid content (and rewards)
2. Crafting recipes / mats / tools
3. Node contributions (influence, advancement, resources, special control access of deep sea node?)
4. Exploration (achievements, hints about other areas, treasure hunting)
5. RP/Story (open new / rare hooks for story-driven impact to any and all of the above)
6. Pirate costumes & cosmetics & pets
Any and all can be connected to the system we're riffing on.
It it is its own thing it makes sense that it has different gameplay mechanics and why they went with open flagging. Its different game and systems for people that enjoy that kind of thing.
Though I'm not going to assume how its going to be different and why people can't be on a boat to heal it until they show how navel combat will work.
Of all of these, I only consider the first one to be PvE.
Everything else is as applicable to a PvE player as a PvP player.
You can't just assume actual PvP combat is PvP, and everything else is PvE. If you were to do that, then I would be able to assume that just PvE combat is PvE, and everything else is PvP.
Since I'm on the side of PvX above everything else. I agree.
However, if I just look at it from a PvE perspective, those all have value to the solely PvE segment.
Otherwise, it's literally a flag proclaiming you're in the area to PvP.
And it's not possible to flag to indicate you are there for PvE.