Poison Pill - PVP Loot

Mag7spy

People need to get out the idea that all those rare mats they have on them is their property to never lose. Moment you walk out those gates and gather mats they do not belong to you until you make it back to town and put those in your storage. It is part of the game and why crafting will be so important to the game.

AlmostDead

NiKr wrote: »

Again though, what's the attacker's goal in this situation?

Was it his resources?

Yes

NiKr wrote: »

If the victim fights back... If victim dies - you only got half as much as they had on them.

Correct. With very little risk. This is the scenario I am referring to.

Ludullu

mcnasty wrote: »

Correct. With very little risk. This is the scenario I am referring to.

And as I already said, this is not a PK. This is a pvp kill. And the green got rewarded with lessened drops for fighting back.

AlmostDead

NiKr wrote: »

mcnasty wrote: »

Correct. With very little risk. This is the scenario I am referring to.

And as I already said, this is not a PK. This is a pvp kill. And the green got rewarded with lessened drops for fighting back.

The issue is not reward for the gatherer so much as the lack of risk for the attacker. The idea is to increase risk for the attacker to ensure balanced risk/reward for both parties.

itsRyanB

But the game is meant to encourage PvP, the risk the aggressor takes is loosing the fight. Correct me if I am wrong but isn’t the game meant to incentivize PvP not griefing? Aren’t players going to be allowed to wear PvP and PvE gear on top of each other. So the only disadvantage of that farmer is not being aware and loosing.

Ludullu

mcnasty wrote: »

The issue is not reward for the gatherer so much as the lack of risk for the attacker. The idea is to increase risk for the attacker to ensure balanced risk/reward for both parties.

I've already listed the risks. The smallest risk was in case of the victim only hitting the attacker once and then dying. I think that this will be the least likely situation in the game. The victim will either fight back as much as they can (risk of dying for the attacker or being at low hp so someone else can finish him off) or they'll just run away to keep all of their stuff.

Ludullu

itsRyanB wrote: »

Aren’t players going to be allowed to wear PvP and PvE gear on top of each other. So the only disadvantage of that farmer is not being aware and loosing.

There's only gear, no separation. You'll have your artisan stuff, but as Steven said, that's a separate set of gear that got nothing to do with the combat stuff. And if you were talking about artisan gear, then you're right.

AlmostDead

itsRyanB wrote: »

But the game is meant to encourage PvP, the risk the aggressor takes is loosing the fight. Correct me if I am wrong but isn’t the game meant to incentivize PvP not griefing? Aren’t players going to be allowed to wear PvP and PvE gear on top of each other. So the only disadvantage of that farmer is not being aware and loosing.

For sure. It's a good point. But ofc there need to be sensible measures taken to ensure players want to log in. Unrestricted PVP without some mitigation would cause the game to fail. That is the whole reason for the corruption system. And as I mentioned, it seems like IS also sees the potential for a problem with gatherers being hunted. Obviously there is a need for ideas to address it.

AlmostDead

NiKr wrote: »

I've already listed the risks.

I have too.

NiKr wrote: »

or they'll just run away to keep all of their stuff.

Again, hard to imagine you believe this. But as I said, I agree with your escape mechanism comment. It will be interesting to test and see how it works in practice. My current view is that the attacker has much less risk in the scenario we're discussing.

itsRyanB

mcnasty wrote: »

itsRyanB wrote: »

But the game is meant to encourage PvP, the risk the aggressor takes is loosing the fight. Correct me if I am wrong but isn’t the game meant to incentivize PvP not griefing? Aren’t players going to be allowed to wear PvP and PvE gear on top of each other. So the only disadvantage of that farmer is not being aware and loosing.

For sure. It's a good point. But ofc there need to be sensible measures taken to ensure players want to log in. Unrestricted PVP without some mitigation would cause the game to fail. That is the whole reason for the corruption system. And as I mentioned, it seems like IS also sees the potential for a problem with gatherers being hunted. Obviously there is a need for ideas to address it.

But that is the game? Steven isn’t making a WoW clone or Arch-age clone. He is making AoC taking the *best* of each system.

He wants a game with PvP and PvE in the same universe where player agency is priority. While I agree those who take the farming route will face those who grief or PvP them but that is intended. The point of a MMO is to be a social experience and that means playing within a group. I come from games that are so much more hardcore that this game feels casual.

While I can see PvE players getting frustrated and I do understand that they are needed for the game to survive. I just do not see the current systems as issues and that’s my opinion. The fact you can gain corruption and or loose to someone farming is enough to discourage unchecked PvP. Also given that the alpha 2 wipes PvP will be happening frequently and will be able to tell how good the corruption system is in terms of limiting a player.

AlmostDead

itsRyanB wrote: »

But that is the game?

You're referring to open world PVP with some mitigation to ensure the game can thrive for many years with a large and diverse player base? Agree, that's the game. Also the context in which IS is looking for ideas to protect gatherers within the context of maintaining balanced risk/reward. Also the point of my original post.

AlmostDead

itsRyanB wrote: »

While I can see PvE players getting frustrated and I do understand that they are needed for the game to survive. I just do not see the current systems as issues and that’s my opinion. The fact you can gain corruption and or loose to someone farming is enough to discourage unchecked PvP. Also given that the alpha 2 wipes PvP will be happening frequently and will be able to tell how good the corruption system is in terms of limiting a player.

Absolutely fair position here. It's hard to know if it will be an issue until we test it. Can't wait for that!

CROW3

Heh. This suggestion reminds me of that COD/MW perk that allowed you to drop a live grenade at death.

Fun in an FPS, not great for Ashes.

Depraved

@mcnasty

you areonly considering one scenario of someone gathering and someone attacking them out of nowhere for no reason. what about all the other scenarios? what about white pve griefers? if you put more penalties into the pvp system, then pve griefers can run rampant griefing everybody without even attacking them. why no one ever considers that? because the pve griefers will not talk about it so that theres no implementation of a system that can stop them

AlmostDead

@depraved what is a white pve griefer?

Ludullu

mcnasty wrote: »

what is a white pve griefer?

Change white to green. L2's "greens" were white.

Depraved

oh shit oops, yeah i meant green player. change white to green hahaha

Sathrago

I find it quite baffling that someone can look at the corruption penalties and say what amounts to: "Wow they get off scot free for murderhoboing! I wish there was a way to just like, make them die randomly for looting someone they kill."
Corruption is already extremely punishing at a face value. The amount of time required to get rid of the corruption tag and the penalties associated with death sound to be extremely annoying to take care of.

There is no need for a poison pill of any sort to curb corruption. That's what bounty hunters and the corruption penalties are for.