Glorious Alpha Two Testers!
Alpha Two Realms are now unlocked for Phase II testing!
For our initial launch, testing will begin on Friday, December 20, 2024, at 10 AM Pacific and continue uninterrupted until Monday, January 6, 2025, at 10 AM Pacific. After January 6th, we’ll transition to a schedule of five-day-per-week access for the remainder of Phase II.
You can download the game launcher here and we encourage you to join us on our for the most up to date testing news.
Alpha Two Realms are now unlocked for Phase II testing!
For our initial launch, testing will begin on Friday, December 20, 2024, at 10 AM Pacific and continue uninterrupted until Monday, January 6, 2025, at 10 AM Pacific. After January 6th, we’ll transition to a schedule of five-day-per-week access for the remainder of Phase II.
You can download the game launcher here and we encourage you to join us on our for the most up to date testing news.
Comments
That's fun
Yes, i now, but you don't understand, if you attack somebody green you don't become red, you become purple. Only if you KILL a green player you become red. So if you start a fight, you become purple, if you kill you enemy and he doesn't even try to fight back, you become red. But if green does fight back, he to becomes a purple and if you kill him you are NOT become a red.
We're talking about the players been Green and Red from the start, my dude. When a Green attacks a Red who STARTED Red (or the 'already Red' attacks a Green), that Green stays Green forever.
In this case i thought green becomes a bounty hunter.
Nope Bounty Hunters are people who sign up for a special "Bounty Hunter" flag in a military node. When THEY fight Reds they are effectively Purple, and the Reds may not experience the usual stat penalties. It's an opt-in state, though. There are quests and everything. It's an entirely separate system.
A normal Green in the field isn't going to be a Bounty Hunter, and no action you can take out in the field can turn you into one. It's a profession of its own.
EDIT: Apparently the Bounty Hunter flag only even lasts for an hour in the first place. You have to go get it again every time. In summary: Almost no normal Green will be a Bounty Hunter.
What is Bounty Hunter then? I thought this is your status if you attack red. Bounty hunter purple for red but green for everyone else, and received a reward if he managed to kill a red.
Nope, nothing to do with the Red/Green/Purple triad. I laid it out in my post above. (Sorry for the quick-succession confusion)
If this is the case, it's just overlooked by developers. It doesn't make any sense.
And now you're caught up. There have been some... heated... discussions on these forums about this topic in the past.
I think the original intent for this is just to punish red some more, but since the video come in, Steven give us some rushed comment on the corruption system and BOOM, system doesn't make sense. It's telling me that's Steven definitely doesn't thought about some issues in the video untill today. This is perfect example why good communication with the playerbase is key to success, and why i believe in AoC so much.
Oh hey, here's that person...
The reasons given are no reason to assume Steven has not thought this through, it is probably BECAUSE Steven and the team have been 'thinking this through' for YEARS that there's still some nuance left.
You don't really want your developers to just 'have an answer to everything and not feel the need to change it' right at the start. Sure we're pretty far in, but we're also 'getting answers' now.
the guy who made the video didnt think things through
he left out many important things, and he was only looking at the flagging mechanics. not the whole system, and not how it interacts with other systems in the game. basically just a few things in isolation
Yeah, and now when we laid down a problem, Steven soon give us some answers to that problem, the answer always been there, but we just doesn't know about it. This is perfectly reasonable position to have, but not the most healthiest. Much more useful is to assume that developers are not omnipotent beings and can overlook some things - this guarantee that when game going to release, everything will be great.
And now you're caught up. 👍
What you're saying is basically what she's been championing all afternoon.
CC effects doesn't work on green, if green attacks red he remains green. So red can't use CC effects in PVP pretty much on anybody except a bounty Hunter. Yes, system is definitely perfect, lol.
Cheers
But this problem has a relatively easy solution, fourth state, orange for example. Green becomes orange when he attack red, red can use any ability on orange, but if red kills orange, he gains more corruption. Orange doesn't receive any reward for killing red,don't drop anything if red kills him and don't losses any EXP. If green attacks orange he becomes purple, if he kills orange he becomes red.
But less than killing a green.
I mean, this would work if players were seriously invested in their characters, and their economic progression during an Alpha.
Without those factors (not remotely present in Alpha 1, for certain), Corruption won't be treated the same as it would in release by a large enough number of players to make it matter.
When you can create a new character, or expect yet more wipes. When you know your new character will just get set to max level for the next siege test, and when there's nothing long-term to DO with your money anyway, the reasons NOT to go red are weaker, and your reasons TO go red are weaker. Which one wins? It might not be the same one as would win out on release.
Not saying you CANT get some information on how Corruption is working. But it's not as straightforward as you might assume.
As for point 1. The reward for killing corrupted players is already greater than the reward for going corrupted. If you go corrupted by killing a green you get a small portion of theaterials they had on them. However if killed when corrupted you lose 300% to 400% more materials then greens and have a chance of dropping non material items. IDK about you but red for me will be KOS because I will operate under the assumption that they are going to drop a lot of something that was worth killing a green for.
As for point 2. There will be instance based dungeons. Don't want to get killed in a dungeon only do the instance based ones.
As for number 3. If you want to help out your fellow citizens or guildies just do so to be a good neighbor or guildy. Hopefully by helping them out they will help you out when you need it. You don't need a quest to help someone.
On to number 4. As of right now we don't know the exact details of the system but killing far lower level players gives you way more corruption and with the negatives that corruption gives you would effectively be making your own character completely in effective for a decent amount of time.
Number 5. this makes no sense why punish a node because no one wants to make a guild to help people??? Also bounty hunters are a thing and can go around killing corrupted so the formation of guilds to do this isn't needed.
Number 6. If you kill low level players they will have low level materials and depending on the market those will most likely be worth less then high level materials. Also with the amount of corruption you get it will more than likely not be worth it.
Number 7. I don't think you need to put low level areas anywhere specific as the nodes that get built up first will be by the gates (low level areas/spawn areas) and as such will have the higher level content.
I believe Atama's opinion is a bit extreme even with its reasonable parts, but i still believe there was either a lack of knowledge in the Lineage 2 side of things or simple purposeful negligence.
As someone who experienced that directly i can assure you it changes the dinamics, let me add a feel more L2 informations to that equation, CC isn't 100% chance to work in L2(throught the versions it varied from 5-20% min chance to 80-95% max chance), Healers had skills to remove said CCs, people could remove their whole gear(or enough pieces of it to not get oneshoted by monsters but possible by players) extremely fast (or even preemptively play without them to purposifully become vulnerable to one shots, Baiting PK was a very common practice sadly disregarded by the youtuber in the video.
I cannot deny that his video had value because of the extra AOC information we received.from Steven.
But without that, i would honestly consider his video worthless.
Aren't we all sinners?
Victims get frustrated when they can't play the game.
PKers get toxic when they lose.
No matter what someone is having a bad day.
In normal PvP it's usually a distinct goal that both parties agree to. So if someone loses they are much more understanding.
what about people annoying, griefing or trying to mob drop you? open world pvp allows you to swiftly dispatch them and go on with your day. ive had the worst experiences in games where i cant kill my "allies" or where there isnt any open world pvp. ow pvp allows me to deal with that.
Both of those things are solved with owpvp.
To your first issue here, just be better than them. If someone is farming an area, and you are taking even 2/5ths of the resources/mobs, that player is probably going to go somewhere else. No PvP doesn't mean no competition - you just need to know how to compete. While it may not seem all that fun - keep in mind that you are in the area to farm, which is the definition of not fun. This competition is ALWAYS going to be more fun than just mindlessly farming.
To your second point, that is just bad PvE design. The best fix to that is good design, not PvP. The bad design there is in the fact that you feel the need to get that one item - that should never be the case other than absolute top end where the item you are after is literally best in slot.
But now, in what is (was?) a game with open world pvp competition over resources/content, you're getting told to just get good at pve bro LOL. Harvest harder bro, press E faster. Which was always going to be the case. Because you're a barbarian, one of those uncivilized pvp lovers. It doesn't matter how conciliatory you are, many people in the other camp have one goal. Any goodwill you build up won't 'make a lick of difference come decision time, if they had the decision making power.
You're probably thinking go fuck yourself Okey. I just think it's funny though lol
you can say the same about pvp. just be better than them and get the spot for yourself (:
also not all players go somewhere else if you are taking half of the mobs..and consider that "somewhere else" might be occupied too. also, what do you do if the other dude starts healing and buffing the mobs you are trying to kill, or starts mob dropping you? or aggro and resetting your mbos before you can kill them? also if you are a melee class, how can you even take more mobs than an archer or a mag by the time you even get halfway to your target mob, the archer will have already killed it. what do you suggest he does in that situation?
how is that bad pve design? fun is subjective. id rather stay in the same farming spot for 10 hours farming the same mob and talking to ppl on discord (or ventrilo/teamspeak back then) than having to spend 10-15 mins walking to a different area every 10 mins cuz of quests or whatever, i dont like running/exploring simulators but other people do. at least id be using my character if im in combat, instead of holding W until i arrive at my destination.
and i cant believe you said that to him after what u replied to me in the other post, "The bad design there is in the fact that you feel the need to get that one item". literally what i asked dygz about why he has to just do open seas and you replied with "yeah basically dont play the game, its what you are saying". what if he really wants that item? maybe he is trying to farm gold? maybe a cosmetic or an end game item or a crafting material? i mean, you could always go somewhere else, farm something else, sell it and buy the item, but you are the one agains tthat idea i guess, because to you, that constitutes as not playing the game (only when its convenient for you to say)
I'm all too familiar with outfarming people because that's how I usually removed people from farming locations in L2. And only when they didn't leave even though I was outfarming them did I start attacking them or straight up PKing them. But how do you balance difficulty against speed of progress then? If a location or a quest immediately gives you what you want, it'd mean that the game would have to have hundreds and hundreds of these locations and quests in order to fill up your gametime.
And if the difficulty of the content, that gives you what you want immediately, is so high that you can't beat it on the first try - we go back to running the dungeon over and over until you get the thing. Which was my issue in the first place.
In other words, I'm just at too far end of the spectrum to be enticed with pve. Yes, I know that you'll say that I just haven't experienced proper pve, but I'd counter that with a "if I was interested in that kind of pve - I would've sought it out in the first place". Nah, it's a good advice in the context of pve competition. It's just that I find pve competition dull. In L2 (at least in my experience with it) barely anyone partook in pve competition. If someone came into a room and saw that someone was already farming it - they'd just attack the farmer.
Yes, there were cases where the pvp didn't start out immediately as 2 people saw each other, but those were way rarer than the immediate pvp. And I liked it that way. The mobs were just a means to the end of fighting another person or getting gear so that I can fight more people.
Even when I had guildmates that wanted to farm the same location, I'd instead try to help them fight over their own room than farming with them (and same applied with party farming too). Nah, I can appreciate some
things too
Indeed you can.
I'm not anti-PvP at all (I wouldn't be here at all). I am anti people not understanding things well. Sure, you can compete with a player in PvP to take over a spot - but you can also do it on PvE, its just harder.
Your suggestion of the other player healing or buffing mobs - that isnt a thing outside of one or two games. It absolutely isnt a thing in a PvE game. As such, what you do in this situation is report the player for hacking.
I have no real idea what you mean by "mob dropping". I assume you mean training, but surely you wouldn't be getting an MMO term that has been around since the 90's wrong. Since the only google reault for "mob drop" in relation to an MMO is loot, I'll leave it at that and wait for you to clarify.
Its bad because the design made people feel a need to do one specific thing for one specific result.
If you want to do one specific thing, it would be bad game design to not allow you to do so. However, it is also bad game design to make people feel they need to do one specific thing.
The above is also a response to tour final paragraph. It is bad game design if players feel the need to do something they would rather not, or are unable to do something they want to do that is a reasonable thing for them to expect to be able to do.
If you like farming one spot for 10 hours, I would consider it bad game design if a game forced you to get up and move every 10 minutes. I'm sure you would consider that bad as well. The above bad game design examples are simply related to people that are not you.