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.
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.
0
Options
akabearMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
Way too much fear about the pk system.. should be making easier to pk not harder.
I would much rather see less mechanics to protect players and freer mechanics to allow players to police the sever themselves.. (lawful good vs chaotic evil)
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.
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.
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.
September 12. 2022: Being naked can also be used to bring a skilled artisan to different freeholds... Don't summon family!
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Yeah, that's already the case. Lvl difference influences corruption gain but we got no clue what's gonna be the relation between how much stat dampening you can get and how hard you can hit if you're lvl 50 fighting a lvl 10. Unless that stat dampening is % based you might be able to go on for quite some time killing lowbies.
But even outside of that, people can still make their own lowbie alts, give them good gear for their lvl (while it's still super cheap for a high lvl player) and go on a rampage, while barely getting any corruption (relatively speaking). In theory, lowbie players would be less used to fighting others so they might not even fight back and just die to the attacker. And if the attacker can then go on a killing spree for a long period of time, those lowbies could start disliking the owpvp mechanic before they got to know its better parts.
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.
I'm pretty sure no concrete numbers have been stated (outside of the "flagged person drops half as much"). The 50% thing came from alpha1 and iirc even there people were already disliking it. I can't even imagine what kind of uproar casual players would make if they lose half their shit after dying to a mob.
Now there's a chance that Intrepid doesn't care about that, but that's up for debate.
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.
I said what I said in that thread and still stand by it. You seemingly come from a faction-based game where genociding your enemies is a normal thing and can sometimes even be rewarded. I come from a game where those actions would be punished. Steven comes from the same game and he has already increased said punishment (mainly the stat dampening).
You said in that thread that you'll be the most hated ganker on your server. That would indicate that you're not planning on doing your PKing on your alt, so I see no way how my suggestion impacts your life in any way.
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.
The characters may see a larger penalty, but the player will probably find it easier - working on the assumption they want to work off corruption quickly.
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.
@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.
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.
Have they states this anywhere? Cause I don't think I've seen that. I assumed the game would see you as a flagged player and would still give you halved penalties.
edit: if anything, the last time we've heard any info on this, Steven said that there's no difference between pve and pvp deaths. Though that was in 2017 so who knows if they've changed it.
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.
Have they states this anywhere? Cause I don't think I've seen that. I assumed the game would see you as a flagged player and would still give you halved penalties.
I base it on the parallel XP loss while dying to a mob in L2 even if you fight a warring guild. And common sense.
Imagine your party losing your healer during pve. "Everybody flag on each other so that before we die we save 50% of our materials"
I base it on the parallel XP loss while dying to a mob in L2 even if you fight a warring guild. And common sense.
Imagine your party losing your healer during pve. "Everybody flag on each other so that before we die we save 50% of our materials"
I mean that's exactly why Steven made it so that you can't flag on your party/raid/guild/ally-mates But yeah, I get what you're saying.
I base it on the parallel XP loss while dying to a mob in L2 even if you fight a warring guild. And common sense.
Imagine your party losing your healer during pve. "Everybody flag on each other so that before we die we save 50% of our materials"
I mean that's exactly why Steven made it so that you can't flag on your party/raid/guild/ally-mates But yeah, I get what you're saying.
The flagging on pt/guild rule isnt final.
A lot of good times comes when you fck around with your own friends.
And a bypass is to flag on someone outside your pt.
Either the nearby players will fight back or let you die to the mobs.
Same result.
I loved stunning my tank during PvE dangers. We even PKed each other for being cocky or starting trouble with innocent strangers.
I will be very against non attacking mechanisms when the time comes.
It's an unecessary mechanic that ruins the sense that you can interact with the game world.
There must be some very very very serious loopholes that they want to address in order to implement the "no pt/guild flag".
The flagging on pt/guild rule isnt final.
A lot of good times comes when you fck around with your own friends.
And a bypass is to flag on someone outside your pt.
Either the nearby players will fight back or let you die to the mobs.
Same result.
I loved stunning my tank during PvE dangers. We even PKed each other for being cocky or starting trouble with innocent strangers.
I will be very against non attacking mechanisms when the time comes.
Oh I know that it's super fun I've killed countless Destroyers while trying to bring them down to rage+frenzy hp values. But maybe Steven's against that kind of gameplay or the potential exploit of "we lose less shit because we flagged against each other". We'll have to see his stance on it during alpha2's feedback.
I could go either way, but would probably lean towards the current design if given the choice.
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.
Yeah, that's already the case. Lvl difference influences corruption gain but we got no clue what's gonna be the relation between how much stat dampening you can get and how hard you can hit if you're lvl 50 fighting a lvl 10. Unless that stat dampening is % based you might be able to go on for quite some time killing lowbies.
But even outside of that, people can still make their own lowbie alts, give them good gear for their lvl (while it's still super cheap for a high lvl player) and go on a rampage, while barely getting any corruption (relatively speaking). In theory, lowbie players would be less used to fighting others so they might not even fight back and just die to the attacker. And if the attacker can then go on a killing spree for a long period of time, those lowbies could start disliking the owpvp mechanic before they got to know its better parts.
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.
I'm pretty sure no concrete numbers have been stated (outside of the "flagged person drops half as much"). The 50% thing came from alpha1 and iirc even there people were already disliking it. I can't even imagine what kind of uproar casual players would make if they lose half their shit after dying to a mob.
Now there's a chance that Intrepid doesn't care about that, but that's up for debate.
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.
I said what I said in that thread and still stand by it. You seemingly come from a faction-based game where genociding your enemies is a normal thing and can sometimes even be rewarded. I come from a game where those actions would be punished. Steven comes from the same game and he has already increased said punishment (mainly the stat dampening).
You said in that thread that you'll be the most hated ganker on your server. That would indicate that you're not planning on doing your PKing on your alt, so I see no way how my suggestion impacts your life in any way.
You "said what you said" yet here you are doing what I said, trying to find a better solution. So we agree. Good to know.
Most of what you say about me are baseless assumptions. Why would you ever think I didn't play games that were factionless? I am an equal opportunity killer. Factions don't matter. If the game had factions I would switch to an alt to go after anyone I needed to. FYI, there's no point in ganking lowbies. They never have anything good.
Your ideas to add extra punishment to a player doesn't equal good game play. I see what you are getting at and agree there's an issue that needs to be addressed but doing it by increasing punishment leads to questioning why pvp should even exist at that point.
Other options -
1) The practical steps would be to lower the amount of items dropped. Less incentive = less motivation, for most people anyways. Plus, like you said, casuals wont last long when they keep losing items. The loot dropping concept is a great deterrent to play a game.
2) Another thing they could do, and I would definitely argue for, is to have a large capacity bag that is a safety bag so to speak. Anything in that bag can not be dropped. It's up to the player to make sure the most valuable items are in that bag. If they carry anything out of that bag it's free game. Don't know about you but I rarely go back to a town unless my bags are loaded.
3) Don't know the full extent of how bounty hunters work but have the player "swear out an affidavit" and put a reward on the individual that killed him. Thus increasing the odds you will find someone willing to go after him. Not so great for the green guy as he lost loot and has to put up more gold but it raises the incentive. This does have the potential to be abused by killers friends to farm cash.
4) Eye for an Eye. Again "swear out an affidavit" but this time it allows you to kill that player on sight with no corruption charge regardless of his current combat status.
Maybe, a big maybe, depending on the number of times you have been killed by the same individual you could opt for a "special affidavit" and when you attack him it turns him to corrupted with an accumulated score from all the times he killed you. You could end up with a push over fight and some tasty loot.
What ever the results are it needs to be an in game solution that doesn't span accounts or characters.
Most of what you say about me are baseless assumptions. Why would you ever think I didn't play games that were factionless? I am an equal opportunity killer. Factions don't matter. If the game had factions I would switch to an alt to go after anyone I needed to. FYI, there's no point in ganking lowbies. They never have anything good.
And if you'd give examples from factionless games I wouldn't have assumed that you based your assumptions about how this system would work off of WoW's dumbass pvp system (imo that is).
Your ideas to add extra punishment to a player doesn't equal good game play. I see what you are getting at and agree there's an issue that needs to be addressed but doing it by increasing punishment leads to questioning why pvp should even exist at that point.
Again, my suggestion would only impact people who try to go around the corruption system on their main by PKing only on their alts. Nothing that I've suggested has any impact on those who'd want to be a huge PKer on their main.
Hell, my suggestion doesn't even touch people who'd only be PKing on one character. As long as you don't PK people on your main, you'll suffer 0 consequences from your alt's genocides.
1) The practical steps would be to lower the amount of items dropped.
Again, we don't know how much stuff will be dropped. What we do know is that the game promotes flagging up against your attackers to lessen the death penalties, whichever they are.
2) Another thing they could do, and I would definitely argue for, is to have a large capacity bag that is a safety bag so to speak. Anything in that bag can not be dropped. It's up to the player to make sure the most valuable items are in that bag. If they carry anything out of that bag it's free game. Don't know about you but I rarely go back to a town unless my bags are loaded.
If the bag is limited in slots or weight, people will just play it safe and max out this bag instead of their inventory. If the bag is the same as your inventory, the whole "move stuff from inventory into the bag" would just become a chore.
But even outside of that, we have no clue how exactly Intrepid will balance inventory limitations. Existence of mules could push Intrepid to limit the inventory by a lot, so that players who like to do big gathering sessions would just move their stuff onto the mule.
And if PKing the mule gives the same amount of corruption as PKing a player (I hope so but we got no concrete confirmation) - killing players for resources will be the last thing people will do, because getting just a few mats would not be worth the risk of huge penalties on your character.
We haven't heard much about the BH system recently so I dunno if they've reworked it or not, but I agree that it's one of the weaker parts of the corruption system overall.
What ever the results are it needs to be an in game solution that doesn't span accounts or characters.
Again, my main goal with my first suggestion is to limit the capabilities of people who'd create alts just to PK people.
As you yourself said, you see no point in ganking lowbies, so my suggestion wouldn't even impact you. If you want to have the reputation of the worst ganker on the server I'd assume you'd want to do that on just one character so that everyone knows your name. Ganking people on different alts kinda defeats that purpose.
And if you want to PK just on your alt, you're free to do so. But you'll still need to cleanse the PK counter if you want to be able to PK on your other character. But I'd assume you'd do that either way, considering the stat dampening on your PKing alt.
0
Options
akabearMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
edited October 2022
There should be the capability to kill, pk own guild / party member.
I'm personally against this mechanic because it stands directly in the way of BHs working as a profession. If any group of people that are from the same guild can just easily cleanse their mate's corruption, BHs would be completely useless.
But if your mates can't remove your corruption directly and can only help you grind mobs, it creates a much better cat&mouse gameplay between your group and a group with a BH. It would also prevent the obvious exploit of "I go red and my mate reaps a BH reward from me".
This obviously doesn't stop unguilded players, but I dunno how many people would go into the game as just a duo/trio w/o joining a guild. It's not like they'd be able to do much content as just a small group.
0
Options
akabearMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
Own experience in L2, there was little to no greifing / pk of newbies after the game had matured a few months after beta. After then any pk`s were quite strategic and came with political consequence. Behaviour was regulated by guild code of conduct / expectations and inter-guild alliances and relationships.. the server community created the base line.. those that played the game could go unscathed, those that didn`t paid the price. L2`s more simple system was more than enough to keep it interesting and within boundaries.
And with L2 there were a multitude of reasons to pk that were justified.
Own experience in L2, there was little to no greifing / pk of newbies after the game had matured a few months after beta. After then any pk`s were quite strategic and came with political consequence. Behaviour was regulated by guild code of conduct / expectations and inter-guild alliances and relationships.. the server community created the base line.. those that played the game could go unscathed, those that didn`t paid the price. L2`s more simple system was more than enough to keep it interesting and within boundaries.
And with L2 there were a multitude of reasons to pk that were justified.
Yeah, and that was more than a decade ago. Servers felt like a huge community because they really were. Now it's way less about being a part of the community and more about "beating" the game on your own asap. Obviously Steven wants to bring back those old times but I'm not sure it'll ever be the same as back then.
L2 also got "solved" and minmaxed to all hell, at which point people started playing around those simple systems and stopped caring about them less and less.
But even outside of that, Steven decided to add the BH system because he wanted the PKers to get hunted. Imo that whole concept breaks apart if your mates can cleanse your corruption immediately after you PK a person. If Intrepid decides to completely remove the BH system, I'd be completely fine if your mates could cleanse you. And I'll just hope that the game's community will be as tightknit as L2's were back in the day.
0
Options
akabearMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
edited October 2022
That`s where I beg to differ. With AoC developing so many reasons to be part of a larger group, a guild, an alliance and a node member with needs and consequences and being 20-25x the population of L2.. I think ones actions on a server will me measured and regulated by the community.. be that the righteous or the mightly
What’s stopping me from signing up on two different email accounts?
Nothing. If you want to spend the money for different accounts, multi-boxing is explicitly allowed, as long as you don't use extra macros/tools as well. You could log out for a while, get your other account to the spot, and kill yourself, if you really wanted.
That`s where I beg to differ. With AoC developing so many reasons to be part of a larger group, a guild, an alliance and a node member with needs and consequences and being 20-25x the population of L2.. I think ones actions on a server will me measured and regulated by the community.. be that the righteous or the mightly
What you are assuming here is that these communities will care - a community (group, guild, alliance or node) isnt going to care about the actions of an individual if, well, if they just dont care.
If you have a large alliance on your server that just dont care about how its members behave while on their own, what are you going to do about it?
Comments
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. 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.
I would much rather see less mechanics to protect players and freer mechanics to allow players to police the sever themselves.. (lawful good vs chaotic evil)
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.
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.
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.
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.
But even outside of that, people can still make their own lowbie alts, give them good gear for their lvl (while it's still super cheap for a high lvl player) and go on a rampage, while barely getting any corruption (relatively speaking). In theory, lowbie players would be less used to fighting others so they might not even fight back and just die to the attacker. And if the attacker can then go on a killing spree for a long period of time, those lowbies could start disliking the owpvp mechanic before they got to know its better parts. I'm pretty sure no concrete numbers have been stated (outside of the "flagged person drops half as much"). The 50% thing came from alpha1 and iirc even there people were already disliking it. I can't even imagine what kind of uproar casual players would make if they lose half their shit after dying to a mob.
Now there's a chance that Intrepid doesn't care about that, but that's up for debate. I said what I said in that thread and still stand by it. You seemingly come from a faction-based game where genociding your enemies is a normal thing and can sometimes even be rewarded. I come from a game where those actions would be punished. Steven comes from the same game and he has already increased said punishment (mainly the stat dampening).
You said in that thread that you'll be the most hated ganker on your server. That would indicate that you're not planning on doing your PKing on your alt, so I see no way how my suggestion impacts your life in any way.
The characters may see a larger penalty, but the player will probably find it easier - working on the assumption they want to work off corruption quickly.
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.
What perspective and quotes are you going by?
edit: if anything, the last time we've heard any info on this, Steven said that there's no difference between pve and pvp deaths. Though that was in 2017 so who knows if they've changed it.
I base it on the parallel XP loss while dying to a mob in L2 even if you fight a warring guild. And common sense.
Imagine your party losing your healer during pve. "Everybody flag on each other so that before we die we save 50% of our materials"
The flagging on pt/guild rule isnt final.
A lot of good times comes when you fck around with your own friends.
And a bypass is to flag on someone outside your pt.
Either the nearby players will fight back or let you die to the mobs.
Same result.
I loved stunning my tank during PvE dangers. We even PKed each other for being cocky or starting trouble with innocent strangers.
I will be very against non attacking mechanisms when the time comes.
It's an unecessary mechanic that ruins the sense that you can interact with the game world.
There must be some very very very serious loopholes that they want to address in order to implement the "no pt/guild flag".
I could go either way, but would probably lean towards the current design if given the choice.
You "said what you said" yet here you are doing what I said, trying to find a better solution. So we agree. Good to know.
Most of what you say about me are baseless assumptions. Why would you ever think I didn't play games that were factionless? I am an equal opportunity killer. Factions don't matter. If the game had factions I would switch to an alt to go after anyone I needed to. FYI, there's no point in ganking lowbies. They never have anything good.
Your ideas to add extra punishment to a player doesn't equal good game play. I see what you are getting at and agree there's an issue that needs to be addressed but doing it by increasing punishment leads to questioning why pvp should even exist at that point.
Other options -
1) The practical steps would be to lower the amount of items dropped. Less incentive = less motivation, for most people anyways. Plus, like you said, casuals wont last long when they keep losing items. The loot dropping concept is a great deterrent to play a game.
2) Another thing they could do, and I would definitely argue for, is to have a large capacity bag that is a safety bag so to speak. Anything in that bag can not be dropped. It's up to the player to make sure the most valuable items are in that bag. If they carry anything out of that bag it's free game. Don't know about you but I rarely go back to a town unless my bags are loaded.
3) Don't know the full extent of how bounty hunters work but have the player "swear out an affidavit" and put a reward on the individual that killed him. Thus increasing the odds you will find someone willing to go after him. Not so great for the green guy as he lost loot and has to put up more gold but it raises the incentive. This does have the potential to be abused by killers friends to farm cash.
4) Eye for an Eye. Again "swear out an affidavit" but this time it allows you to kill that player on sight with no corruption charge regardless of his current combat status.
Maybe, a big maybe, depending on the number of times you have been killed by the same individual you could opt for a "special affidavit" and when you attack him it turns him to corrupted with an accumulated score from all the times he killed you. You could end up with a push over fight and some tasty loot.
What ever the results are it needs to be an in game solution that doesn't span accounts or characters.
Hell, my suggestion doesn't even touch people who'd only be PKing on one character. As long as you don't PK people on your main, you'll suffer 0 consequences from your alt's genocides. Again, we don't know how much stuff will be dropped. What we do know is that the game promotes flagging up against your attackers to lessen the death penalties, whichever they are. If the bag is limited in slots or weight, people will just play it safe and max out this bag instead of their inventory. If the bag is the same as your inventory, the whole "move stuff from inventory into the bag" would just become a chore.
But even outside of that, we have no clue how exactly Intrepid will balance inventory limitations. Existence of mules could push Intrepid to limit the inventory by a lot, so that players who like to do big gathering sessions would just move their stuff onto the mule.
And if PKing the mule gives the same amount of corruption as PKing a player (I hope so but we got no concrete confirmation) - killing players for resources will be the last thing people will do, because getting just a few mats would not be worth the risk of huge penalties on your character. As for these 2, I had this suggestion on reddit
https://www.reddit.com/r/AshesofCreation/comments/u8s4kc/idea_for_corrupted_vs_bounty_hunters_balance/
We haven't heard much about the BH system recently so I dunno if they've reworked it or not, but I agree that it's one of the weaker parts of the corruption system overall. Again, my main goal with my first suggestion is to limit the capabilities of people who'd create alts just to PK people.
As you yourself said, you see no point in ganking lowbies, so my suggestion wouldn't even impact you. If you want to have the reputation of the worst ganker on the server I'd assume you'd want to do that on just one character so that everyone knows your name. Ganking people on different alts kinda defeats that purpose.
And if you want to PK just on your alt, you're free to do so. But you'll still need to cleanse the PK counter if you want to be able to PK on your other character. But I'd assume you'd do that either way, considering the stat dampening on your PKing alt.
I have own guild kill me to reduce karma
But if your mates can't remove your corruption directly and can only help you grind mobs, it creates a much better cat&mouse gameplay between your group and a group with a BH. It would also prevent the obvious exploit of "I go red and my mate reaps a BH reward from me".
This obviously doesn't stop unguilded players, but I dunno how many people would go into the game as just a duo/trio w/o joining a guild. It's not like they'd be able to do much content as just a small group.
Own experience in L2, there was little to no greifing / pk of newbies after the game had matured a few months after beta. After then any pk`s were quite strategic and came with political consequence. Behaviour was regulated by guild code of conduct / expectations and inter-guild alliances and relationships.. the server community created the base line.. those that played the game could go unscathed, those that didn`t paid the price. L2`s more simple system was more than enough to keep it interesting and within boundaries.
And with L2 there were a multitude of reasons to pk that were justified.
L2 also got "solved" and minmaxed to all hell, at which point people started playing around those simple systems and stopped caring about them less and less.
But even outside of that, Steven decided to add the BH system because he wanted the PKers to get hunted. Imo that whole concept breaks apart if your mates can cleanse your corruption immediately after you PK a person. If Intrepid decides to completely remove the BH system, I'd be completely fine if your mates could cleanse you. And I'll just hope that the game's community will be as tightknit as L2's were back in the day.
Nothing. If you want to spend the money for different accounts, multi-boxing is explicitly allowed, as long as you don't use extra macros/tools as well. You could log out for a while, get your other account to the spot, and kill yourself, if you really wanted.
If you have a large alliance on your server that just dont care about how its members behave while on their own, what are you going to do about it?