You're aware of it probably even more than I was. If I'd known the precise mechanics of ArcheAge before, I wouldn't have assumed that 'Risk' and 'Reward' meant the same thing to Steven as they do to me, for example. I don't think it's outside of the scope. There's a consistent thread of 'not considering the effects of (or on) a single Actor to be relevant' in that game, and similarly if you read Steven's statements about the game through that lens, they all make more sense, a lot of 'contradictions' disappear.
Of course, that's why I asked Steven to compare Ashes PvP with ArcheAge PvP back in 2018. I chose not to play ArcheAge specifically due to its naval combat.
And his answer was it doesn't relate because Ashes doesn't have zones with different PvP mechanics, but rather has just the one flagging PvP mechanic (with Corruption) globally.
I think the change makes sense given the games Steven likes to play. It's not surprising.
It's only unexpected because I specifically asked him in order to gauge, then, whether I would be playing Ashes. You'll notice by my questions that I'm trying to get him to say that the naval combat in Ashes is similar to the naval combat in Ashes. That's why my third question asks him about ArcheAge ships.
Now that I know that Ashes' Open Seas is similar to the naval content in ArcheAge, it's clear Ashes is not the game for me.
And that's OK.
It's great to finally have that confirmation.
And the people who love(d) the naval combat in ArcheAge should have tons of fun in the Open Seas.
That's awesome!
LMFAO
It's a dealbreaker.
Like EvE and ArcheAge, that's too PvP-centric for me.
I won't be playing.
Unless we can use the Divine Gateways to port to starting areas on other continents.
Ahhh come on, your basically a legend in the community. Just try not to pay much mind to it and I'm sure we can get together to escort you across the sea when you need it.
Let us worry about the combat you wish not to partake in.
0
Options
DygzMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
This is why I'm fine if the Open Sea is just 'useless', personally. Some trophy fish no one really needs, some strong but not interesting enemies, nothing of value to explore? No longer matters if auto-flagging happens or not.
My Bartle Score is: Explorer 87%; Socializer 73% ; Achiever 47%; Killer 0%
The value is in the exploration. Especially where there are unique NPCs and unique treasure-FINDING opportunities. I don't even necessarily care about the treasure acquiring.
So, yeah, having zones that auto-flag as Combatant does matter to me.
But otherwise, explorers will probably 'get on someone's boat', possibly even paying someone with a good boat, then when a PvP crew spots that boat and goes to take it out, they arrive and find... players with no intention of a battle, who will then not even be worth killing/sinking.
I mean...I'd be happy to just explore on my aquatic mount. I don't think I need a ship.
But... I have an inkling that could be exploited.
Then people would just be trying to ambush ships however they can from their aquatic mounts.
But at least then, if the Ocean were 'useless', they would not need to 'worry' about it. In the standard system, you couldn't know that those 'explorers' weren't really 'people who had found cool content that they were on their way to'. You'd have to follow them, etc, using up all your PvP time just to 'make sure' they didn't get something before you if the Ocean had good stuff in it.
In the current proposed system, just sink them for being there and solve the problem.
Yep.
0
Options
DygzMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
You don't feel there should be any systems or places in the game for PvP content? Seems short sighted to me.
The entire game includes systems and places for PvP content.
Prior to the news a week ago, it was said that the global flagging system was deafult flagged Non-Combatant w/ the Corruption mechanic.
I wasn't even sure I'd be comfortable with that since I typically move from PvP-Optional servers to PvE-Only servers. Even though I like objective-based, opt-in, manual-flagging PvP sometimes.
I was willing to hold judgment on whether I play Ashes until I test Corruption as a deterrent to unwanted PvP in Alpha 2.
With the announcement of zones that auto-flag as Combatant, I have my answer already.
1
Options
DygzMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
The only reason I don't agree with you fully is that Coastal Waters actually ARE 'a place where a player might be just existing', and therefore the 'You can still play the game in the vicinity of stronger players' should still apply. Peaceful or less-leveled players who want to just be fishers or divers or such on a coastline.
It's easy to make the distinction between this and Open Seas, in my mind. So:
"Strong ship/crew in an area where weaker players are supposed to feel like they get to play the game is subject to Corruption."
"Strong ship/crew in an area where weaker players are not considered in the same way are not subject to Corruption."
For me... "vicinity of stronger players" is irrelevant.
I don't want to have a flag that says, "I'm in the mood for PvP combat! Come at me!" when I'm most likely there to be doing other stuff - like exploring. In order for me to play, I would need to be able to have the flag that says, "I'm a Non-Combatant. I'm not really here for PvP. If you kill me when I'm not in combat, expect severe penalties."
Since I am an explorer first and foremost, I at least need to have that as my flag in all zones across the map. 95% of my time in the Open Seas, I would be a Non-Combatant. Maybe 5% of the time, I would be willing to be a Combatant.
So, I just won't play a game that has zones where I'm auto-flagged to show that I'm in the mood to be a Combatant.
(Safe zones don't necessarily resolve that issue, but with safe zones, I might agree that Ashes is PvX. I currently consider the Ashes "PvP server ruleset" to be 1 small step away from a PvP server. And I never play on PvP servers.)
In the end, the real punishment of the curruption system is that greens can attack you without flagging. Its the social pressure of, am i willing to fight everyone? Thats the true down side.
I don't agree with this.
Only reason people have an issue with greens attacking without being flagging is they can't defend themselves without gaining more corruption, which leads to a higher penalty.
Yes. But you have already decided that curruption was worth taking on for some reason...
And the alternative is greens can't defend themselves without giving you the right to kill them one after the other. And i perfer the player not looking to ruin anyones day having the advantage over they guy willing to kill players that wont fight back.
The biggest reasons im against the change, is because:
1. It is pointless. Anyone can attack you anytime anyways.
2. Runescape wilds as an example. People will just set on the sidelines, just outside of "open water" and then swarm whoever actually goes in. Without the line, people come and go and are opportunistic. With the line, people just set there and wait. Like its a "feature"
I need the reasons for the change to know more about having a strong opinion either way tho.
I have no idea why this would even be decided without any practical testing before hand, that shows the curruption system itself isnt appropriate for the type of game play they are aiming for in international waters...
There is a big difference between being punished to disincentivize pvp and actual open fights to incentivize it.
I dont see the curruption system as disincentivizing pvp. Pvp is incentivized in fact with less death penalties. Curruption disincentivizes killing those who dont fight back.... who is not going to fight back when everything stored on their ship, and their ship is going to be lost? Simply being at sea further incentives pvp.
those who dont fight back have more goodies i hear :P even more urge to kill them :P just gotta manage the corruption :P
The biggest reasons im against the change, is because:
1. It is pointless. Anyone can attack you anytime anyways.
2. Runescape wilds as an example. People will just set on the sidelines, just outside of "open water" and then swarm whoever actually goes in. Without the line, people come and go and are opportunistic. With the line, people just set there and wait. Like its a "feature"
I need the reasons for the change to know more about having a strong opinion either way tho.
I have no idea why this would even be decided without any practical testing before hand, that shows the curruption system itself isnt appropriate for the type of game play they are aiming for in international waters...
There is a big difference between being punished to disincentivize pvp and actual open fights to incentivize it.
I dont see the curruption system as disincentivizing pvp. Pvp is incentivized in fact with less death penalties. Curruption disincentivizes killing those who dont fight back.... who is not going to fight back when everything stored on their ship, and their ship is going to be lost? Simply being at sea further incentives pvp.
those who dont fight back have more goodies i hear :P even more urge to kill them :P just gotta manage the corruption :P
And that is an option, i support the ability to decide to attack and kill anyone. I support the curruption system existing for that purpose. Imo the curruption system is a system in place to protect greens enough that pking can be a game mechanic, not just greifing.... people intending to just greif, or not be punished at all by the curruption system, dont want an mmo game to play, they want a hack and slash power fantasy.
0
Options
DygzMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
Personally, what I would have prefered is the corruption system still being applicable in the open seas, but having everything the ship is transporting be stealable.
The attacker would risk gaining corruption and the defender would risk losing everything their ship is transporting.
LMFAO
It's a dealbreaker.
Like EvE and ArcheAge, that's too PvP-centric for me.
I won't be playing.
Unless we can use the Divine Gateways to port to starting areas on other continents.
Did you think this was a pve game?
Pretty sure he is still going to play the game. They have said there will be safe/alternative ways to travel.
This is why I'm fine if the Open Sea is just 'useless', personally. Some trophy fish no one really needs, some strong but not interesting enemies, nothing of value to explore? No longer matters if auto-flagging happens or not.
My Bartle Score is: Explorer 87%; Socializer 73% ; Achiever 47%; Killer 0%
The value is in the exploration. Especially where there are unique NPCs and unique treasure-FINDING opportunities. I don't even necessarily care about the treasure acquiring.
So, yeah, having zones that auto-flag as Combatant does matter to me.
But otherwise, explorers will probably 'get on someone's boat', possibly even paying someone with a good boat, then when a PvP crew spots that boat and goes to take it out, they arrive and find... players with no intention of a battle, who will then not even be worth killing/sinking.
I mean...I'd be happy to just explore on my aquatic mount. I don't think I need a ship.
But... I have an inkling that could be exploited.
Then people would just be trying to ambush ships however they can from their aquatic mounts.
But at least then, if the Ocean were 'useless', they would not need to 'worry' about it. In the standard system, you couldn't know that those 'explorers' weren't really 'people who had found cool content that they were on their way to'. You'd have to follow them, etc, using up all your PvP time just to 'make sure' they didn't get something before you if the Ocean had good stuff in it.
In the current proposed system, just sink them for being there and solve the problem.
Yep.
I don't see aquatic mounts as a exploit, it just be more of a tactic.
Personally, what I would have prefered is the corruption system still being applicable in the open seas, but having everything the ship is transporting be stealable.
The attacker would risk gaining corruption and the defender would risk losing everything their ship is transporting.
That, to me, would be enough to incentivize PvP.
Haha! Yes. I wonder how well that would solve my issue.
Because, then, I would probably just use my aquatic mount to explore, instead of a ship. Make myself even less of a target.
Unless there are technical limitations, or issues with implementation. The change is pointless at best. If anything its just a single step towards saying the curruption system wouldnt work, and i dont know why we are this late in development, just now admitting that after all the conversation about it all these years.
Unless there are technical limitations, or issues with implementation. The change is pointless at best. If anything its just a single step towards saying the curruption system wouldnt work, and i dont know why we are this late in development, just now admitting that after all the conversation about it all these years.
Even if this were true, it would not be in the interests of Intrepid to 'admit' anything, and technically, afaik, they have basically never done this about even a single system. They have some serious upcoming competition, mostly because the game did not hit its (implied) target dates due to pandemic and other factors.
I mean, they have to 'race' with RIOT of all people now.
Sorry, my native language is Erlang.
0
Options
DygzMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
edited September 2022
Jeffrey is not there. The Lead Game Designer position has not been filled.
Steven finaly decided to make Ashes naval combat more similar to ArcheAge naval combat.
(could be some programming challenges with having a mix of flagged players on a ship.)
I mean, they have to 'race' with RIOT of all people now.
The population has been losing hope in every company in the industry.... i think the "competition" isnt a major factor for Intrepid. Unless theu start making a bunch of weird decisions... like changing their stance on having a singular pvp system active globally in game to something else after all this time...
Having different elements of PvP does not = to something not working. That is like saying corruption system doesn't work in battlegrounds where its removed because there is a different kind of content there. That is like saying corruption system doesn't work because guilds can dec on you and kill you without corruption.
Corruption works fine is reducing overall PvP between singular people and having pvp more focused on group nodes/guilds.
I mean, they have to 'race' with RIOT of all people now.
The population has been losing hope in every company in the industry.... i think the "competition" isnt a major factor for Intrepid. Unless theu start making a bunch of weird decisions... like changing their stance on having a singular pvp system active globally in game to something else after all this time...
I meant it relative to only 'admitting things' and such.
Once games come out, people judge them by what they are. Until then, 'hype' matters just as much if not more. At this point going 'yeah we were wrong about some core systems that you were looking forward to' is a seismic shift in perception.
"We finalized a decision we've been thinking on for a long time" or "Everything is working with slight changes to the original plan" works way better.
If so many of us react this way to this change, you can imagine how it might be if they admitted to needing to change something else that didn't seem within their originally laid out concepts.
Only reason I'm not up-in-arms about 'flight routes by Coastal Nodes' is that they'll probably have those take you on a hot air balloon or something and it take just as long as walking. I don't much like being able to fly from one Node to another, whether the travel is 'faster' or not, but I was just gonna Family Summon half the time anyway, so I'm appreciating them saving me that.
In the end, the real punishment of the curruption system is that greens can attack you without flagging. Its the social pressure of, am i willing to fight everyone? Thats the true down side.
I don't agree with this.
Only reason people have an issue with greens attacking without being flagging is they can't defend themselves without gaining more corruption, which leads to a higher penalty.
Yes. But you have already decided that curruption was worth taking on for some reason...
And the alternative is greens can't defend themselves without giving you the right to kill them one after the other. And i perfer the player not looking to ruin anyones day having the advantage over they guy willing to kill players that wont fight back.
Yes, in the current system, this is something you need to think about and some want it changed so it isn't. They would prefer that if they kill someone, they only have to think about the penalty they gained for killing that one person.
The larger point of this was that being attacked by green players isn't the real risk of the corruption system. The risk of the corruption system is the increased death penalty. Being attacked by greens just has a chance of increasing the penalty further.
Personally, what I would have prefered is the corruption system still being applicable in the open seas, but having everything the ship is transporting be stealable.
The attacker would risk gaining corruption and the defender would risk losing everything their ship is transporting.
That, to me, would be enough to incentivize PvP.
Haha! Yes. I wonder how well that would solve my issue.
Because, then, I would probably just use my aquatic mount to explore, instead of a ship. Make myself even less of a target.
Can't you still just do all this in coastal waters?
Personally, what I would have prefered is the corruption system still being applicable in the open seas, but having everything the ship is transporting be stealable.
The attacker would risk gaining corruption and the defender would risk losing everything their ship is transporting.
That, to me, would be enough to incentivize PvP.
Haha! Yes. I wonder how well that would solve my issue.
Because, then, I would probably just use my aquatic mount to explore, instead of a ship. Make myself even less of a target.
Can't you still just do all this in coastal waters?
Yes, he could. But that still leaves an area of the game he can not do all this is, and up until now there was statments from steven saying he could do everythijg everywhere without flagging
LMFAO
It's a dealbreaker.
Like EvE and ArcheAge, that's too PvP-centric for me.
I won't be playing.
Unless we can use the Divine Gateways to port to starting areas on other continents.
Did you think this was a pve game?
Pretty sure he is still going to play the game. They have said there will be safe/alternative ways to travel.
Good because I think its silly to write off the entire game because of a zone that's catered to some content you don't enjoy.
LMFAO
It's a dealbreaker.
Like EvE and ArcheAge, that's too PvP-centric for me.
I won't be playing.
Unless we can use the Divine Gateways to port to starting areas on other continents.
Did you think this was a pve game?
Pretty sure he is still going to play the game. They have said there will be safe/alternative ways to travel.
Good because I think its silly to write off the entire game because of a zone that's catered to some content you don't enjoy.
I can be wrong though that is just my guess since mmorpgs these days are rare to come by and its nto much investment to try even more so if you put money into it already. But people only stay if the game is fun for them, or fun in general. A issue for a lot of mmorpgs recently.
LMFAO
It's a dealbreaker.
Like EvE and ArcheAge, that's too PvP-centric for me.
I won't be playing.
Unless we can use the Divine Gateways to port to starting areas on other continents.
Just move on man. I've seen you complaining many many times in this forums. This game is not for you.
PvE players just gotta complain till somone changes the game to PvE just for them :P new world tried this and we all know how well that went :P haha
You are quite clueless, if you think the change is what killed New World.
Josh Strife Says has a video, explaining why the really aren't any hardcore PvP mmo's
@Dygz , I appreciate your requirements for what type of games you like to play. As I understand it your issue is with the auto-flagging of combat in naval areas that has the potential of limiting your ability to explore those areas due to knowing that anyone who kills you will experience a penalty via corruption. There seems to be an inconsistency in regards to other areas that will permit other players to engage you in PvP without penalty, such as: castle siege zones, moving caravan zones, even having war being declared on your guild by another, or being declared as an enemy of the state for a region. All these things, and there may be more, can have unpenalized PvP repercussions.
Comments
And his answer was it doesn't relate because Ashes doesn't have zones with different PvP mechanics, but rather has just the one flagging PvP mechanic (with Corruption) globally.
I think the change makes sense given the games Steven likes to play. It's not surprising.
It's only unexpected because I specifically asked him in order to gauge, then, whether I would be playing Ashes. You'll notice by my questions that I'm trying to get him to say that the naval combat in Ashes is similar to the naval combat in Ashes. That's why my third question asks him about ArcheAge ships.
Now that I know that Ashes' Open Seas is similar to the naval content in ArcheAge, it's clear Ashes is not the game for me.
And that's OK.
It's great to finally have that confirmation.
And the people who love(d) the naval combat in ArcheAge should have tons of fun in the Open Seas.
That's awesome!
Ahhh come on, your basically a legend in the community. Just try not to pay much mind to it and I'm sure we can get together to escort you across the sea when you need it.
Let us worry about the combat you wish not to partake in.
The value is in the exploration. Especially where there are unique NPCs and unique treasure-FINDING opportunities. I don't even necessarily care about the treasure acquiring.
So, yeah, having zones that auto-flag as Combatant does matter to me.
I mean...I'd be happy to just explore on my aquatic mount. I don't think I need a ship.
But... I have an inkling that could be exploited.
Then people would just be trying to ambush ships however they can from their aquatic mounts.
Yep.
Prior to the news a week ago, it was said that the global flagging system was deafult flagged Non-Combatant w/ the Corruption mechanic.
I wasn't even sure I'd be comfortable with that since I typically move from PvP-Optional servers to PvE-Only servers. Even though I like objective-based, opt-in, manual-flagging PvP sometimes.
I was willing to hold judgment on whether I play Ashes until I test Corruption as a deterrent to unwanted PvP in Alpha 2.
With the announcement of zones that auto-flag as Combatant, I have my answer already.
I don't want to have a flag that says, "I'm in the mood for PvP combat! Come at me!" when I'm most likely there to be doing other stuff - like exploring. In order for me to play, I would need to be able to have the flag that says, "I'm a Non-Combatant. I'm not really here for PvP. If you kill me when I'm not in combat, expect severe penalties."
Since I am an explorer first and foremost, I at least need to have that as my flag in all zones across the map. 95% of my time in the Open Seas, I would be a Non-Combatant. Maybe 5% of the time, I would be willing to be a Combatant.
So, I just won't play a game that has zones where I'm auto-flagged to show that I'm in the mood to be a Combatant.
(Safe zones don't necessarily resolve that issue, but with safe zones, I might agree that Ashes is PvX. I currently consider the Ashes "PvP server ruleset" to be 1 small step away from a PvP server. And I never play on PvP servers.)
Yes. But you have already decided that curruption was worth taking on for some reason...
And the alternative is greens can't defend themselves without giving you the right to kill them one after the other. And i perfer the player not looking to ruin anyones day having the advantage over they guy willing to kill players that wont fight back.
Leave no witnesses then no one know your deeds :P
those who dont fight back have more goodies i hear :P even more urge to kill them :P just gotta manage the corruption :P
And that is an option, i support the ability to decide to attack and kill anyone. I support the curruption system existing for that purpose. Imo the curruption system is a system in place to protect greens enough that pking can be a game mechanic, not just greifing.... people intending to just greif, or not be punished at all by the curruption system, dont want an mmo game to play, they want a hack and slash power fantasy.
The attacker would risk gaining corruption and the defender would risk losing everything their ship is transporting.
That, to me, would be enough to incentivize PvP.
Pretty sure he is still going to play the game. They have said there will be safe/alternative ways to travel.
I don't see aquatic mounts as a exploit, it just be more of a tactic.
Because, then, I would probably just use my aquatic mount to explore, instead of a ship. Make myself even less of a target.
Even if this were true, it would not be in the interests of Intrepid to 'admit' anything, and technically, afaik, they have basically never done this about even a single system. They have some serious upcoming competition, mostly because the game did not hit its (implied) target dates due to pandemic and other factors.
I mean, they have to 'race' with RIOT of all people now.
Steven finaly decided to make Ashes naval combat more similar to ArcheAge naval combat.
(could be some programming challenges with having a mix of flagged players on a ship.)
The population has been losing hope in every company in the industry.... i think the "competition" isnt a major factor for Intrepid. Unless theu start making a bunch of weird decisions... like changing their stance on having a singular pvp system active globally in game to something else after all this time...
Corruption works fine is reducing overall PvP between singular people and having pvp more focused on group nodes/guilds.
Battlegrounds are still manual, opt-in.
I meant it relative to only 'admitting things' and such.
Once games come out, people judge them by what they are. Until then, 'hype' matters just as much if not more. At this point going 'yeah we were wrong about some core systems that you were looking forward to' is a seismic shift in perception.
"We finalized a decision we've been thinking on for a long time" or "Everything is working with slight changes to the original plan" works way better.
If so many of us react this way to this change, you can imagine how it might be if they admitted to needing to change something else that didn't seem within their originally laid out concepts.
Only reason I'm not up-in-arms about 'flight routes by Coastal Nodes' is that they'll probably have those take you on a hot air balloon or something and it take just as long as walking. I don't much like being able to fly from one Node to another, whether the travel is 'faster' or not, but I was just gonna Family Summon half the time anyway, so I'm appreciating them saving me that.
Yes, in the current system, this is something you need to think about and some want it changed so it isn't. They would prefer that if they kill someone, they only have to think about the penalty they gained for killing that one person.
The larger point of this was that being attacked by green players isn't the real risk of the corruption system. The risk of the corruption system is the increased death penalty. Being attacked by greens just has a chance of increasing the penalty further.
Can't you still just do all this in coastal waters?
Yes, he could. But that still leaves an area of the game he can not do all this is, and up until now there was statments from steven saying he could do everythijg everywhere without flagging
Good because I think its silly to write off the entire game because of a zone that's catered to some content you don't enjoy.
I can be wrong though that is just my guess since mmorpgs these days are rare to come by and its nto much investment to try even more so if you put money into it already. But people only stay if the game is fun for them, or fun in general. A issue for a lot of mmorpgs recently.
You are quite clueless, if you think the change is what killed New World.
Josh Strife Says has a video, explaining why the really aren't any hardcore PvP mmo's