Overall you are right, that on the SURFACE there is no reason at all to PvP before max Level.
Using only the design principles we know right now, if you can level quickly, that's what you should always do, especially if levels are a meaningful contributor to PvP success. It would always be in your best interest to get levels high and simply fight anyone who tried to explicitly prevent that.
I'm not saying this is what will happen, but I am confirming for you that based ONLY on what we know RIGHT NOW, there is no good reason to ever have 'sensible' PvP before max level except that max level will take long to achieve and some reasons for PvP might come up on their own before then.
Didnt read all answers, so maybe what i will said was already pointed out.
The game is PvX,
If the leveling is too easy thru PvP, it will induce a far more behaviour of players towards PvP, and make the game more a "PvP with PvE part" than "PvX".
Also, PvE being the way to gets level, leveling remains where PvP can become a thing. You could group up with dudes already farming an area... but also prefer to kill them to have those monsters all for you and your firends (so more efficient for leveling... )
I'm not saying this is what will happen, but I am confirming for you that based ONLY on what we know RIGHT NOW, there is no good reason to ever have 'sensible' PvP before max level except that max level will take long to achieve and some reasons for PvP might come up on their own before then.
I think everything's said ! Let's see what the next alpha will get for that ! But it feel more a PvE game than a PvX game right now
To me it looks like trying to gain experience purely in PvP is going to result in possibly insurmountable experience debt. Even if you do manage to level, the grind is going to be nuts. This is a game that is already intended to take 45 days at 4-6 hours playtime a day to hit max level. Trying to do this only in PvP while dying against the faster progressing superior geared PvE nerds sounds like something that only the most extreme gaming masochist would do.
According to recent studies (https://www.misterspex.fr/l/mix/101099), the average amount of time a U.S. citizen spends gaming per day is estimated to be between 3 and 6 hours per day.
So to reach the maximum level in 45 days, currently the PvE/PvP ratio does not seem to be 50/50, 60/40 or even 70/30. It seems closer to 95/5.
I don't think it's required to have 100% of one and 100% of the other. But if we stay on a PvX game. A ratio as close to 50/50 as possible seems logical to me.
There'll be seasonal ladders in arenas, node/castle sieges, bounty hunting and caravan raiding - all of those will have some form of reward and will progress your character and its reputation on the server.
I think that 50% of the players won't have the patience to reach max level and thus enjoy the PvP activities you mention since players will spend the minimum possible time doing pvp during the first 45 days of the release.
And I'm afraid - although I understand why, I don't endorse it - these same 50% will destroy the game with unfounded criticisms but enough to give a very precise opinion of Ashes Of Creation : a niche game !
They should remove the leveling up phase and let players start with lvl 50.
But that first character should fill an experience buffer to be able to create an alt, to prevent players creating many max lvl alts instantly.
September 12. 2022: Being naked can also be used to bring a skilled artisan to different freeholds... Don't summon family!
0
Options
FuryBladeborneMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
To me it looks like trying to gain experience purely in PvP is going to result in possibly insurmountable experience debt. Even if you do manage to level, the grind is going to be nuts. This is a game that is already intended to take 45 days at 4-6 hours playtime a day to hit max level. Trying to do this only in PvP while dying against the faster progressing superior geared PvE nerds sounds like something that only the most extreme gaming masochist would do.
According to recent studies (https://www.misterspex.fr/l/mix/101099), the average amount of time a U.S. citizen spends gaming per day is estimated to be between 3 and 6 hours per day.
So to reach the maximum level in 45 days, currently the PvE/PvP ratio does not seem to be 50/50, 60/40 or even 70/30. It seems closer to 95/5.
I agree. It seems like a PVE game to level and also build the world followed by a large increase in PVP at endgame.
I don't think it's required to have 100% of one and 100% of the other. But if we stay on a PvX game. A ratio as close to 50/50 as possible seems logical to me.
I agree with you here.
I assume you will then agree that the end game needs more PvE when we all realize that 95% of end game is PvP - especially since the level cap is where no less than 75% if all in game time will be spent.
---
There is an essential point still to be made for the leveling process that I can't see any mention of in this thread. That point is that there isn't one level cap, there are probably 3 or 4 soft level caps, and one hard level cap.
Experience gain is largely tied to content level, and content level is tied to node level. As such, most players will level up to the point where there is no more content to level on, and then work on leveling up a node in order to get more level appropriate content to level up on.
These periods will be absolutely FULL of PvP. While some of these may only last an hour or so (getting a node from level 2 to level 3 perhaps), some will last days or weeks where people are at the current soft level cap. Add in a strategic node siege, and that period could well be extended to months (assuming we are able to siege at this stage of the game - we do not know what the cost is or how hard it will be to make siege equipment).
What this means is that when you get to the level cap, if you look back over the whole process, you probably spent almost as much time looking for PvP as you did looking for PvE.
There is an essential point still to be made for the leveling process that I can't see any mention of in this thread. That point is that there isn't one level cap, there are probably 3 or 4 soft level caps, and one hard level cap.
Experience gain is largely tied to content level, and content level is tied to node level. As such, most players will level up to the point where there is no more content to level on, and then work on leveling up a node in order to get more level appropriate content to level up on.
These periods will be absolutely FULL of PvP. While some of these may only last an hour or so (getting a node from level 2 to level 3 perhaps), some will last days or weeks where people are at the current soft level cap. Add in a strategic node siege, and that period could well be extended to months (assuming we are able to siege at this stage of the game - we do not know what the cost is or how hard it will be to make siege equipment).
What this means is that when you get to the level cap, if you look back over the whole process, you probably spent almost as much time looking for PvP as you did looking for PvE.
I was about to write something like this. People are super used to playing at endgame (and yes, in the long run you only play there), but properly designed games have all kind of content throughout the whole leveling process.
L2 had pvp from the very start. And then had pvp at pretty much most lvls because leveling locations were the same for everyone. And with nodes working how they will, there's definitely a high chance you'll have to fight for your farm spots or quest mobs and then on top of that you'll have all the node leveling, which will probably include early caravan runs and stuff like that. And sieges (both node and castle) will also start asap because powerful people will want to change the landscape to their benefit and that might require some restructuring.
And we'll most likely see early guild wars and stuff like that, because low lvl bosses will definitely be limited in their amounts and people will want their loot because farming them will most likely provide you with best gear way faster than just farming mobs or doing quests.
I assume you will then agree that the end game needs more PvE when we all realize that 95% of end game is PvP - especially since the level cap is where no less than 75% if all in game time will be spent.
It's exactly what i can't understand in the leveling process ?! If the end game is like 95% PvP activities, then it's a PvP Game. A paradoxical PvP game that puts you through a test of patience in PvE for 45 days!
There is an essential point still to be made for the leveling process that I can't see any mention of in this thread. That point is that there isn't one level cap, there are probably 3 or 4 soft level caps, and one hard level cap.
The subject remains the same, how to reach these different soft cap?
Experience gain is largely tied to content level, and content level is tied to node level. As such, most players will level up to the point where there is no more content to level on, and then work on leveling up a node in order to get more level appropriate content to level up on.
This is very interesting! So if I understand correctly, the node level determines the zone level. A Tier 2 Node will unlock Tier 2 quests, monsters and dungeons. Tier 2 can be equal to lvl 10-20 for example?
These periods will be absolutely FULL of PvP. While some of these may only last an hour or so (getting a node from level 2 to level 3 perhaps), some will last days or weeks where people are at the current soft level cap. Add in a strategic node siege, and that period could well be extended to months (assuming we are able to siege at this stage of the game - we do not know what the cost is or how hard it will be to make siege equipment).
I don't know the details of the leveling mechanics of the Nodes at all. But why will FULL PvP be required during this period?
L2 had pvp from the very start. And then had pvp at pretty much most lvls because leveling locations were the same for everyone. And with nodes working how they will, there's definitely a high chance you'll have to fight for your farm spots or quest mobs and then on top of that you'll have all the node leveling, which will probably include early caravan runs and stuff like that. And sieges (both node and castle) will also start asap because powerful people will want to change the landscape to their benefit and that might require some restructuring.
And we'll most likely see early guild wars and stuff like that, because low lvl bosses will definitely be limited in their amounts and people will want their loot because farming them will most likely provide you with best gear way faster than just farming mobs or doing quests.
Anyway, a concrete test in alpha 2 will be necessary to see if fighting in PvP only in order to protect some resources is enough to keep players in suspense.
I understand now the will of the developers to create a PvX game but the balance of this system is essential in my opinion. And this from the beginning of the leveling phase!
This is very interesting! So if I understand correctly, the node level determines the zone level. A Tier 2 Node will unlock Tier 2 quests, monsters and dungeons. Tier 2 can be equal to lvl 10-20 for example?
This is correct - based our current understanding.
I don't know the details of the leveling mechanics of the Nodes at all. But why will FULL PvP be required during this period?
If you cant PvE for any real progress, you may as well PvP to attempt to stop the progress of others. Fight for resources, slow progress of other nodes, block others trying to fight in your nodes ZoI to allow your nodes lower level players an easier path to continue leveling.
It isn't that PvP will be required, it is that PvP will be the most advantageous thing to do.
There wont be xp received for killing a player, it's been said so by the devs because they dont want players to ignore PvE.
Are you asking for a TINY xp received for killing a player? It's not worth coding. End of discussion.
PvP will negativelly affect progression, by making players upon death occur xp debt (let's call it what it is.... xp loss without the possibility of manipulated deleveling).
So PvP is affecting progress in this "pvx" mmo.
Players will kill each other for areas in which they can grind xp, mats and certificates (gold). This is a thousand tes more meaningful than having PvP progress options and PvE progress avenues. You have never experienced it. I have. I know it doesnt even "need testing". Way more meaningful approach to mmos. Oldschool.
XP from use is just bad! It just is! Even if you get a bit extra XP on kill in PvE and a bit less kill XP in PvP but with extra XP from bash!
Then people would play the way they want to and progress as well!
For the very large camp of players that don't want to do boring shit but would rather PvP and Duel for their levels!
Who ever heard of getting stronger from doing the work?
Reducing Weapon SKill XP from bashing when using training weapons sounds fine though. Still allows unarmed.
There wont be xp received for killing a player, it's been said so by the devs because they dont want players to ignore PvE. Are you asking for a TINY xp received for killing a player? It's not worth coding. End of discussion.
Again, for lack of repeating myself, I just wonder if the pve/pvp ratio will be respected during leveling. If the game design feels that giving exp kills the PvX system that's one thing. But with no obligation to PvP and no reward, PvP players will be demotivated.
PvP will negativelly affect progression, by making players upon death occur xp debt (let's call it what it is.... xp loss without the possibility of manipulated deleveling).
So PvP is affecting progress in this "pvx" mmo.
I'm just already glad that we will need to PvP at one point ! Was afraid of only bashing mobs for 45 days straight.
Players will kill each other for areas in which they can grind xp, mats and certificates (gold). This is a thousand tes more meaningful than having PvP progress options and PvE progress avenues. You have never experienced it. I have. I know it doesnt even "need testing". Way more meaningful approach to mmos. Oldschool.
If this system does not need to be tested because it has been proven, can you give us examples of MMOs that have worked with this system? I'd like to see some examples of this kind to make my own idea.
As for Oldschool, you can also add the tag: niche game!
If this system does not need to be tested because it has been proven, can you give us examples of MMOs that have worked with this system? I'd like to see some examples of this kind to make my own idea.
Lineage 2 had this exact flagging system and had a shitton of pvp.
If any dev is reading: XP from PvP is huge. It's a pass/fail for a lot of people. If there is no XP from PvP or simply "from use" rather than "on kill" then a lot of people aren't interested.
I don't know the numbers but if the combat is engaging, if the action combat is good and the tab stuff is generally less impactful than action combat or niche, the game will probably draw in A Lot of PvPers that enjoy 1v1 or team vs team games.
Falling behind from playing the game just doesn't make sense.
The corruption penalties are also way out of tune and have the opposite effect.
Whenever you have a mechanic that can be dispersed with groups and stacks up to crush individuals when you attack said group; you've created a way for individuals to get fucked and groups to own them.
GROUPS ALREADY have a way to mitigate problems and crush individuals --> there are more of them.
I can already see how any local group can own a region simply by having no repercussions to their actions. They can share the burden of corruption while pushing anyone out. LOL
If a few individuals can fight and kill or otherwise push out their group, that person becomes corrupted. Their skills and abilities are dampened. They lose their stuff if they die at any point. They probably can't kill or fight-off the last few because of the stacking corruption and predictably die.
I understand the need for some balance; so how about increase Corruption cap to 90, have killing citizens
[from a Node within the Node influence that one's Node is part of]
be worth 3 corruption, killing citizens from one's Node be worth 6 corruption, and killing citizens from outside of one's local Influence Zone and non-citizens be 2 corruption?
And have further attacks of the same person not increase corruption beyond baseline? no BS. And how about 1/2 the corruption from Attacking and not Killing?
If the corruption cap is higher and varies in accord with citizenship it's at least manageable and serves much of its intended purpose.
More on-topic:
PvE players already get reagents and possibly reputation gains, and progress the world. They get a benefit from playing that way.
PvP players get nothing. They lose everything. There is nothing but punishments going their way.
Not even DUELS will grant XP. No progression. No nothing.
So please just make the right decision and allow the rest of the world to enjoy the game lmao. XP on Use.
PvErs can slap trees while running by them. They can shoot spells into the air. They can all get their custom 'training abilities' that simply make leveling easier while having a short-term cost, thus unviable for dangerous dungeon crawling and makes one vulnerable to PvP, simply adding more depth and texture to Progression.
PvPers can duel. They can fight. They can harass. They can bully. Who gives af. PvErs like to organize when threatened anywho. Nodes provide NPC support to any unlawfully assaulted individuals.
In any case, I think we've covered everything and I have the answers to the main topic.
The direct answer is no! It will not be possible to do only PvP to reach the Max level.
It's a unique world with its own progression system. This will require the players to vary the activities in order to progress his character as well as his Node. This is a PvX game!
Players will still be able to activate the PvP mode at any time in the game, but it will not be a viable method of progression to level up.
PvP during leveling will be a "choice" or an approach for players. In order to determine which group will be able to take advantage of a quest, farm or dungeon area.
At each Soft Cap during leveling, leveling up will require leveling up the Node. This will be good for PvP activities because PvE activities do not allow leveling up anymore.
@Zazariel
The part where the current system makes monopolies guaranteed. Removing repercussion for groups while crushing individuals and gatekeeping their progression.
All the worse if players can literally bodyblock lol.
@Sapiverenus
The monopoly system and the 1 vs X don't bother me at all considering the logic of the Nodes concept.
Moreover, AOC is not a casualized theme park where the content can be cleaned in solo, if I understand the will of the devs, it is an mmo. If you want to accomplish exploits in solo you'll have to be very good because it sounds impossible to do. So, it creates stakes! And that's very important!
Besides, there are no PvP players and no PvE players. There are only players!
The game is a PvX, so the activities proposed by the game are "mandatory". If this is the case from the beginning of the adventure, it will be quite varied.
We lack however of concrete example but that without return of the alpha 1 or the alpha 2 it is complicated to have some.
Finally, I don't understand the corruption system at all and therefore it doesn't help me to visualize the game design proposed by AOC at the moment, which prevents me from debating properly on the content of this thread.
The corruption system seems to work based on attack rather than kill. I am not sure but maybe after a certain # attacked, I think it was 3, the shortcomings start. It might be after 1.
I'm not sure exactly what to think of it but if the combat allowed individuals to overcome large groups through skill or something, then Corruption would hurt those individuals.
If XP were on Use then there'd be no reason to kill someone for tagging the mobs you're about to attack to troll you. There'd be much much less reason to do something about a group tagging and DPSing down every creature in a mile radius. I don't think Training Dummies should be DPS Meters but Training Dummies that get destroyed as you use it; or just use a tree.
There's no real reason to have XP on just kill anyway. At least with XP on Use, kill XP can be smaller and go to whoever gets killing blow. Kill XP is usually arbitrary.
Groups can tag every mob in an area especially if they have more than 1 Ranger, gather every resource, and a person is left completely out of options.
There's no real reason to not have XP on Use and 'Training' methods, along with a diminished XP on Kill overall, with PvP kills offering even lower XP than PvE kills.
If you are a low level with only 1 low level Node anywhere near you, that area can be monopolized and individuals shut out. Same for any specific Node level.
The server capacity is 10k+ and competition for PvE will be fierce. Given the harsh punishments for PvP and said PvE competition it just makes sense to make XP 'On Use'. Everything is on a Global Cooldown so there's not much XP gain tuning that has to occur; use ability/ attack, get half XP. Use ability/ attack and hit/ block/ whatever something, get full XP.
Maybe a Miss, Glancing Blow, getting Parried, et cetera offers diminished XP, and progresses one in "Not Missing", "Not Glancing", "not getting Parried", et cetera at the same time. A bit of extra common sense depth. Fight real opponents with 'real difficulty' (or advanced training implements), get more out of it.
Just seems common good sense to me.
EDIT: Reading over the wiki more closely, prompted by Bullvinne's comments in the "OPT-IN PvP" thread, I am reminded that Combatant only progresses to Corruption on Kill of a Non-combatant. Fortunately when a Non-combatant fights a Combatant they also turn into Combatants.
As well, death is more punishing for Non-combatants than Combatants.
The system seems pretty good but the Corruption punishment seems a bit too harsh.
If I kill someone after they kill me and take loot, but they refuse to fight to force Corruption on me next time around, I might be F'd for a long long time.
Hopefully someone that kills me is a 'Combatant' to me for 1 hour or something. 30 minutes? 24 hours? 12 hours in-game?
0
Options
DygzMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
edited September 2022
Corruption works on PK; not attack.
"Too harsh" will be determined once players test Corruption.
If any dev is reading: XP from PvP is huge. It's a pass/fail for a lot of people. If there is no XP from PvP or simply "from use" rather than "on kill" then a lot of people aren't interested.
Handing out experience on use rather than on result is one of the easiest to exploit mechanics in an MMORPG, and it is damn near impossible to detect said exploiting.
MMO developers learned this well over a decade ago - an MMO with on use experience is little more than a clear sign of an incompetent MMO developer these days. It will keep any experienced MMO player away.
@Dygz
Yes it took another thread about PvP for me to read the wiki more closely and be reminded of how it works.
Hopefully the choice to make it on-kill is not changed to punish PvP.
It's like any PvP game [such as Battle Royales and MOBAs], except death penalties if that's part of the game.
At least with XP gain from it you can play the game and still be able to compete and fight and do whatever other content.
Pvp only leveling sounds miserable. Who does that? haha
Me.
And i don't think that people doing only PvE are miserable...We're humans, we have different tastes and that's good !
Fair enough.
0
Options
OnyStyleMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
I don't see an issue with giving people experience in Arena. I don't think it should be the most efficient way to level, but I see no reason that it can't be A way to level. If it takes 2x the playtime to level via arena pvp than it does regular I see no issue.
I am a pvp player and enjoyed being able to level like that in Blade and Soul. Was it efficient? No. But I was able to play the game the way I wanted and that was nice.
Heck, I see no reason people can't earn exp in the bounty system. Give bounty hunters exp rewards for killing red players too. Efficient? No. Possible? Sure, why not.
As of right now, I do not think they have it designed this way. But I see no reason they can't or shouldn't add it.
0
Options
bloodprophetMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
Each PvP death counts as a death and incurs xp penalties.
I don't see an issue with giving people experience in Arena. I don't think it should be the most efficient way to level, but I see no reason that it can't be A way to level. If it takes 2x the playtime to level via arena pvp than it does regular I see no issue.
I am a pvp player and enjoyed being able to level like that in Blade and Soul. Was it efficient? No. But I was able to play the game the way I wanted and that was nice.
Heck, I see no reason people can't earn exp in the bounty system. Give bounty hunters exp rewards for killing red players too. Efficient? No. Possible? Sure, why not.
As of right now, I do not think they have it designed this way. But I see no reason they can't or shouldn't add it.
Main reason not to add xp to arena's. It removes players from the world. Arenas are a side show and should sty that way. Keep all forward progress in the open world.
Most people never listen. They are just waiting on you to quit making noise so they can.
I don't see an issue with giving people experience in Arena. I don't think it should be the most efficient way to level, but I see no reason that it can't be A way to level. If it takes 2x the playtime to level via arena pvp than it does regular I see no issue.
I am a pvp player and enjoyed being able to level like that in Blade and Soul. Was it efficient? No. But I was able to play the game the way I wanted and that was nice.
Heck, I see no reason people can't earn exp in the bounty system. Give bounty hunters exp rewards for killing red players too. Efficient? No. Possible? Sure, why not.
As of right now, I do not think they have it designed this way. But I see no reason they can't or shouldn't add it.
I mean, if you put experience in the arena, then people are going to trade kills.
Comments
Overall you are right, that on the SURFACE there is no reason at all to PvP before max Level.
Using only the design principles we know right now, if you can level quickly, that's what you should always do, especially if levels are a meaningful contributor to PvP success. It would always be in your best interest to get levels high and simply fight anyone who tried to explicitly prevent that.
I'm not saying this is what will happen, but I am confirming for you that based ONLY on what we know RIGHT NOW, there is no good reason to ever have 'sensible' PvP before max level except that max level will take long to achieve and some reasons for PvP might come up on their own before then.
The game is PvX,
If the leveling is too easy thru PvP, it will induce a far more behaviour of players towards PvP, and make the game more a "PvP with PvE part" than "PvX".
Also, PvE being the way to gets level, leveling remains where PvP can become a thing. You could group up with dudes already farming an area... but also prefer to kill them to have those monsters all for you and your firends (so more efficient for leveling... )
I think everything's said ! Let's see what the next alpha will get for that ! But it feel more a PvE game than a PvX game right now
According to recent studies (https://www.misterspex.fr/l/mix/101099), the average amount of time a U.S. citizen spends gaming per day is estimated to be between 3 and 6 hours per day.
So to reach the maximum level in 45 days, currently the PvE/PvP ratio does not seem to be 50/50, 60/40 or even 70/30. It seems closer to 95/5.
I don't think it's required to have 100% of one and 100% of the other. But if we stay on a PvX game. A ratio as close to 50/50 as possible seems logical to me.
I think that 50% of the players won't have the patience to reach max level and thus enjoy the PvP activities you mention since players will spend the minimum possible time doing pvp during the first 45 days of the release.
And I'm afraid - although I understand why, I don't endorse it - these same 50% will destroy the game with unfounded criticisms but enough to give a very precise opinion of Ashes Of Creation : a niche game !
But that first character should fill an experience buffer to be able to create an alt, to prevent players creating many max lvl alts instantly.
I assume you will then agree that the end game needs more PvE when we all realize that 95% of end game is PvP - especially since the level cap is where no less than 75% if all in game time will be spent.
---
There is an essential point still to be made for the leveling process that I can't see any mention of in this thread. That point is that there isn't one level cap, there are probably 3 or 4 soft level caps, and one hard level cap.
Experience gain is largely tied to content level, and content level is tied to node level. As such, most players will level up to the point where there is no more content to level on, and then work on leveling up a node in order to get more level appropriate content to level up on.
These periods will be absolutely FULL of PvP. While some of these may only last an hour or so (getting a node from level 2 to level 3 perhaps), some will last days or weeks where people are at the current soft level cap. Add in a strategic node siege, and that period could well be extended to months (assuming we are able to siege at this stage of the game - we do not know what the cost is or how hard it will be to make siege equipment).
What this means is that when you get to the level cap, if you look back over the whole process, you probably spent almost as much time looking for PvP as you did looking for PvE.
L2 had pvp from the very start. And then had pvp at pretty much most lvls because leveling locations were the same for everyone. And with nodes working how they will, there's definitely a high chance you'll have to fight for your farm spots or quest mobs and then on top of that you'll have all the node leveling, which will probably include early caravan runs and stuff like that. And sieges (both node and castle) will also start asap because powerful people will want to change the landscape to their benefit and that might require some restructuring.
And we'll most likely see early guild wars and stuff like that, because low lvl bosses will definitely be limited in their amounts and people will want their loot because farming them will most likely provide you with best gear way faster than just farming mobs or doing quests.
The subject remains the same, how to reach these different soft cap?
This is very interesting! So if I understand correctly, the node level determines the zone level. A Tier 2 Node will unlock Tier 2 quests, monsters and dungeons. Tier 2 can be equal to lvl 10-20 for example?
I don't know the details of the leveling mechanics of the Nodes at all. But why will FULL PvP be required during this period?
Anyway, a concrete test in alpha 2 will be necessary to see if fighting in PvP only in order to protect some resources is enough to keep players in suspense.
I understand now the will of the developers to create a PvX game but the balance of this system is essential in my opinion. And this from the beginning of the leveling phase!
It isn't that PvP will be required, it is that PvP will be the most advantageous thing to do.
Are you asking for a TINY xp received for killing a player? It's not worth coding. End of discussion.
PvP will negativelly affect progression, by making players upon death occur xp debt (let's call it what it is.... xp loss without the possibility of manipulated deleveling).
So PvP is affecting progress in this "pvx" mmo.
Players will kill each other for areas in which they can grind xp, mats and certificates (gold). This is a thousand tes more meaningful than having PvP progress options and PvE progress avenues. You have never experienced it. I have. I know it doesnt even "need testing". Way more meaningful approach to mmos. Oldschool.
https://forums.ashesofcreation.com/discussion/comment/367201/#Comment_367201
XP from use is just bad! It just is! Even if you get a bit extra XP on kill in PvE and a bit less kill XP in PvP but with extra XP from bash!
Then people would play the way they want to and progress as well!
For the very large camp of players that don't want to do boring shit but would rather PvP and Duel for their levels!
Who ever heard of getting stronger from doing the work?
Reducing Weapon SKill XP from bashing when using training weapons sounds fine though. Still allows unarmed.
I'm just already glad that we will need to PvP at one point ! Was afraid of only bashing mobs for 45 days straight.
If this system does not need to be tested because it has been proven, can you give us examples of MMOs that have worked with this system? I'd like to see some examples of this kind to make my own idea.
As for Oldschool, you can also add the tag: niche game!
It's just that the reward isn't experience.
I don't know the numbers but if the combat is engaging, if the action combat is good and the tab stuff is generally less impactful than action combat or niche, the game will probably draw in A Lot of PvPers that enjoy 1v1 or team vs team games.
Falling behind from playing the game just doesn't make sense.
The corruption penalties are also way out of tune and have the opposite effect.
Whenever you have a mechanic that can be dispersed with groups and stacks up to crush individuals when you attack said group; you've created a way for individuals to get fucked and groups to own them.
GROUPS ALREADY have a way to mitigate problems and crush individuals --> there are more of them.
I can already see how any local group can own a region simply by having no repercussions to their actions. They can share the burden of corruption while pushing anyone out. LOL
If a few individuals can fight and kill or otherwise push out their group, that person becomes corrupted. Their skills and abilities are dampened. They lose their stuff if they die at any point. They probably can't kill or fight-off the last few because of the stacking corruption and predictably die.
I understand the need for some balance; so how about increase Corruption cap to 90, have killing citizens
[from a Node within the Node influence that one's Node is part of]
be worth 3 corruption, killing citizens from one's Node be worth 6 corruption, and killing citizens from outside of one's local Influence Zone and non-citizens be 2 corruption?
And have further attacks of the same person not increase corruption beyond baseline? no BS.
And how about 1/2 the corruption from Attacking and not Killing?
If the corruption cap is higher and varies in accord with citizenship it's at least manageable and serves much of its intended purpose.
More on-topic:
PvE players already get reagents and possibly reputation gains, and progress the world. They get a benefit from playing that way.
PvP players get nothing. They lose everything. There is nothing but punishments going their way.
Not even DUELS will grant XP. No progression. No nothing.
So please just make the right decision and allow the rest of the world to enjoy the game lmao. XP on Use.
PvErs can slap trees while running by them. They can shoot spells into the air. They can all get their custom 'training abilities' that simply make leveling easier while having a short-term cost, thus unviable for dangerous dungeon crawling and makes one vulnerable to PvP, simply adding more depth and texture to Progression.
PvPers can duel. They can fight. They can harass. They can bully. Who gives af. PvErs like to organize when threatened anywho. Nodes provide NPC support to any unlawfully assaulted individuals.
I would like a PvX game and many others do too.
Have I forgotten anything?
The part where the current system makes monopolies guaranteed. Removing repercussion for groups while crushing individuals and gatekeeping their progression.
All the worse if players can literally bodyblock lol.
The monopoly system and the 1 vs X don't bother me at all considering the logic of the Nodes concept.
Moreover, AOC is not a casualized theme park where the content can be cleaned in solo, if I understand the will of the devs, it is an mmo. If you want to accomplish exploits in solo you'll have to be very good because it sounds impossible to do. So, it creates stakes! And that's very important!
Besides, there are no PvP players and no PvE players. There are only players!
The game is a PvX, so the activities proposed by the game are "mandatory". If this is the case from the beginning of the adventure, it will be quite varied.
We lack however of concrete example but that without return of the alpha 1 or the alpha 2 it is complicated to have some.
Finally, I don't understand the corruption system at all and therefore it doesn't help me to visualize the game design proposed by AOC at the moment, which prevents me from debating properly on the content of this thread.
I'm not sure exactly what to think of it but if the combat allowed individuals to overcome large groups through skill or something, then Corruption would hurt those individuals.
If XP were on Use then there'd be no reason to kill someone for tagging the mobs you're about to attack to troll you. There'd be much much less reason to do something about a group tagging and DPSing down every creature in a mile radius. I don't think Training Dummies should be DPS Meters but Training Dummies that get destroyed as you use it; or just use a tree.
There's no real reason to have XP on just kill anyway. At least with XP on Use, kill XP can be smaller and go to whoever gets killing blow. Kill XP is usually arbitrary.
Groups can tag every mob in an area especially if they have more than 1 Ranger, gather every resource, and a person is left completely out of options.
There's no real reason to not have XP on Use and 'Training' methods, along with a diminished XP on Kill overall, with PvP kills offering even lower XP than PvE kills.
If you are a low level with only 1 low level Node anywhere near you, that area can be monopolized and individuals shut out. Same for any specific Node level.
The server capacity is 10k+ and competition for PvE will be fierce. Given the harsh punishments for PvP and said PvE competition it just makes sense to make XP 'On Use'. Everything is on a Global Cooldown so there's not much XP gain tuning that has to occur; use ability/ attack, get half XP. Use ability/ attack and hit/ block/ whatever something, get full XP.
Maybe a Miss, Glancing Blow, getting Parried, et cetera offers diminished XP, and progresses one in "Not Missing", "Not Glancing", "not getting Parried", et cetera at the same time. A bit of extra common sense depth. Fight real opponents with 'real difficulty' (or advanced training implements), get more out of it.
Just seems common good sense to me.
EDIT: Reading over the wiki more closely, prompted by Bullvinne's comments in the "OPT-IN PvP" thread, I am reminded that Combatant only progresses to Corruption on Kill of a Non-combatant. Fortunately when a Non-combatant fights a Combatant they also turn into Combatants.
As well, death is more punishing for Non-combatants than Combatants.
The system seems pretty good but the Corruption punishment seems a bit too harsh.
If I kill someone after they kill me and take loot, but they refuse to fight to force Corruption on me next time around, I might be F'd for a long long time.
Hopefully someone that kills me is a 'Combatant' to me for 1 hour or something. 30 minutes? 24 hours? 12 hours in-game?
"Too harsh" will be determined once players test Corruption.
MMO developers learned this well over a decade ago - an MMO with on use experience is little more than a clear sign of an incompetent MMO developer these days. It will keep any experienced MMO player away.
Yes it took another thread about PvP for me to read the wiki more closely and be reminded of how it works.
Hopefully the choice to make it on-kill is not changed to punish PvP.
At least with XP gain from it you can play the game and still be able to compete and fight and do whatever other content.
Me.
And i don't think that people doing only PvE are miserable...We're humans, we have different tastes and that's good !
Fair enough.
I am a pvp player and enjoyed being able to level like that in Blade and Soul. Was it efficient? No. But I was able to play the game the way I wanted and that was nice.
Heck, I see no reason people can't earn exp in the bounty system. Give bounty hunters exp rewards for killing red players too. Efficient? No. Possible? Sure, why not.
As of right now, I do not think they have it designed this way. But I see no reason they can't or shouldn't add it.
Main reason not to add xp to arena's. It removes players from the world. Arenas are a side show and should sty that way. Keep all forward progress in the open world.
I mean, if you put experience in the arena, then people are going to trade kills.
Same for bounty hunters.