NiKr wrote: » First one is super simple. Account-wide PK count. This would not impact the lives of normal players, but would somewhat limit the PKing abilities of anyone who wants to have a PKing alt on their account. What do you think about this kind of design? Is this too much hassle? Not enough? Do you have other ideas to balance out the PKing in the grand scheme of things?
Strevi wrote: » To increase the chance of revenge, when the player gets corrupted, should pass some essence in a material form to the killed gatherer. That essence could be a resource too, which artisans may use to craft enhanced invisibility buffs usable by bounty-hunters against that particular character. Preferably those should work only when that character is in corrupted state. This would ensure that a player who becomes frequently corrupted to eventually be defeated. The enhanced invisibility potion should render the character completely invisible against that specific corrupted player and maybe be dispelled only after the 2nd attack.
George_Black wrote: » I disagree. I dont think there will be such a concept as a PK alt. You can have a red character moving around to find greens to kill without worrying about losing your gear upon death, nor will such a character go far without being jumped on like some pinata. Remember, Steven said there will be activities that will enable a char to redeem themselves, lowering the PK count (not talking about corruption points here) to zero. Such a suggestion will make PKing easier. It will be a lot easier to do the redemption activities with one char and reduce the PK count of the account, rather than doing it painstakingly with all chars. Why is it important to reduce the PK count, some might ask. Because if you are a red player and your PK count is 4+ (or whatever the devs decide) there is 100% chance that you will drop inventory items as well as equiped (gear) items. I see no reason for this suggestion. Understand that the concept of "pk char" isnt realistic as I explained above. Not one bit.
Strevi wrote: » I don't know if should be account wide, to affect even characters on a different server. Seems too much. But I understand the intention.
NiKr wrote: » First one is super simple. Account-wide PK count. This would not impact the lives of normal players, but would somewhat limit the PKing abilities of anyone who wants to have a PKing alt on their account.Second one PK count removal quest should send you to the node whose citizen you PKed and have you do a node quest there (ideally one of the harder more massive ones). If you PKed a citizen of your own node, you can't remove that counter tick until you change nodes. Nomads can obviously PK anyone and then just do a quest in their victim's nodes. I think this approach would force people to travel around (which imo is a good thing), would push people to try and be friendlier with their node mates, and would provide nomadic players with a small benefit (considering that they ain't got much of that in other aspects of the game). Neither of these suggestions increase the penalties of the currently described system. The first one just reinforces the main goal of reducing genocidal actions, while the second one gives a counterbalance to the action of murdering someone. Obviously the victim would still feel bad about the situation and the PKer might still suffer death penalties, but in the long run those who PKed other players will have to pay back to the community of their victims. In case the victim's node got destroyed and citizenship removed, the PKer can just do a quest for their own node to remove a tick. What do you think about this kind of design? Is this too much hassle? Not enough? Do you have other ideas to balance out the PKing in the grand scheme of things?
Rhorden wrote: » Your entire paragraph relates to increasing the amount of time needed to do "payback" for killing someone. That's a direct increase to a penalty.
NiKr wrote: » Rhorden wrote: » Your entire paragraph relates to increasing the amount of time needed to do "payback" for killing someone. That's a direct increase to a penalty. We have no clue how long/difficult the current quest is. My suggestion might be way easier than what they currently have planned. I just suggested making it a "give back to the community" quest rather than "I just do this and get the benefit of cleansing myself w/o anyone else seeing that benefit". And my first suggestion is targeted at the same "exploit" as the corruption stat dampening change from L2's system. So no, this is not some new exploit that I discovered that Intrepid didn't know about. I just prefer it to curb the dicks, who'd use alts to attack lowbies, even more than the currently suggested system will already do. In other words, I didn't increase the punishment for we don't even know how hard it was in the first place, nor did I change anything in the current design that would go against its direction.
Rhorden wrote: » You are literally wanting to tie the penalties from one character to another. That is a huge increase as now ALL characters are at a disadvantage until the penalty is cleared. That kind of action is typically reserved for GMs taking action against someone for stepping way past a line. Applying a penalty account wide is a bad idea. Applying a penalty from one character to another is a bad idea. At this point why not remove pvp entirely?
NiKr wrote: » Rhorden wrote: » You are literally wanting to tie the penalties from one character to another. That is a huge increase as now ALL characters are at a disadvantage until the penalty is cleared. That kind of action is typically reserved for GMs taking action against someone for stepping way past a line. Applying a penalty account wide is a bad idea. Applying a penalty from one character to another is a bad idea. At this point why not remove pvp entirely? It only effects those who'd go PKing on alts in huge amounts. And considering that usually alts are reserved for additional professions or "to just chill", the majority of people wouldn't even care that their PK counter is account-wide. While all the dicks who'd want to kill lowbies on their newly made alt would get fucked over. As others here said, this is a commonly seen practice so I'd imagine Steven and Intrepid are well aware of it. They might've even thought up a better way to address it or, alternatively, they think it's completely fine, in which case I'll just work a bit harder to defend my node from those dicks.
akabear wrote: » Guess if the cleansing of pk`s is anything like the "sin eater" quest in L2, then players will become quite selective of who and when to pk... as that quest was a good half hour to couple of hours to repeat until clean of ok count. then combine that with stat dampening.. pk`ing will be rare!
Rhorden wrote: » Where are you getting your facts from? Can you link that stats to prove what you are saying? My alts, and I had a bunch, were used frequently for crafting, dungeons, raiding and pvp, they didn't just chill. What info are you using that shows how people play their characters and what they use them for?
Rhorden wrote: » The problem isn't pvp, it is the quantity of loot dropped. Intrepid wanted people to drop a large amount of loot, which is a really, really bad idea, and in doing so they created a large incentive to gank people. The development of large squads farming everyone they see was the only possible evolution to this design.
akabear wrote: » Way too much fear about the pk system.. should be making easier to pk not harder.
NiKr wrote: » akabear wrote: » Way too much fear about the pk system.. should be making easier to pk not harder. My fear is only about lowbies getting genocided by other players, be it through alts or on their main. Steven seems to have the same fear which is why he added the stat dampening mechanic to the L2's system. But I've seen a lot of people just make PKing alts to avoid L2's karma system so I'm sure people will do the same in Ashes. I personally prefer to remove the dicks who'd attack lowbies from the game. It'd help the game's reputation quite a bit. My suggestion doesn't influence a normal pvper or even PKer in any way. It only punishes people who want to PK weaker people for no reason w/o any consequences for their main char. If you want to keep those people in the game - well I guess we just disagree on that point.
NiKr wrote: » Rhorden wrote: » Where are you getting your facts from? Can you link that stats to prove what you are saying? My alts, and I had a bunch, were used frequently for crafting, dungeons, raiding and pvp, they didn't just chill. What info are you using that shows how people play their characters and what they use them for? And compared to your main, were those alts doing more content or less? Cause in my experience people usually do much less on their alts than on their main chars, unless they completely switched between them. And if there were any concrete numbers on this topic I'd love to see them myself, but I'm not sure if anyone has done even semi-scientific studies on what people do on their mmo alts when compared to their main chars. Rhorden wrote: » The problem isn't pvp, it is the quantity of loot dropped. Intrepid wanted people to drop a large amount of loot, which is a really, really bad idea, and in doing so they created a large incentive to gank people. The development of large squads farming everyone they see was the only possible evolution to this design. Their victims can always flag up and give up less stuff. Or they could give their attackers corruption until that gank group just can't "farm" people anymore. We also don't know how much mats people will drop on death, so killing people just for resources might be the weakest reason for PKing.
Strevi wrote: » The game could restrict pvp between players when the level difference is high. But is more fun to give increased corruption to these high level players. Balancing can be done in many ways, even switching between different strategies dynamically depending on context.
Rhorden wrote: » They said not fighting back drops 50% of your loot. Fighting back drops 25% of your loot. Obviously that's subject to change but even 25% is a good incentive.
Rhorden wrote: » I stated before the flaws in this system and you acted like I didn't know what I was talking about. What changed? Why are you advocating for an increase to penalties? The real problem to all of this is that dropping loot is a flawed system.
Rhorden wrote: » You are literally wanting to tie the penalties from one character to another. That is a huge increase as now ALL characters are at a disadvantage until the penalty is cleared.
George_Black wrote: » @Rhorden the perspective of the developers should always be used to assess the system. Not our personal perspectives. When a mob kills a green player they drop X amount raw materials. When a player PKs a green player that player drops the same X amount of raw materials (and the red player has a high risk to lose WHOLE equipment items due to the near certainty that nearby green players will attack without turning purple). A player that fights back (flagging purple) against another player saves 50% of the raw materials they drop if they lose. If during that fight a mob lands the killing blow to one of the two purple players, that player drops the original X amount of raw materials.
