Messagng has shifted a bit since Jeffrey Bard left.
In the first few years, we would often say on The Ashen Forge that Steven seems to be trying to support every playstyle. Steven would say stuff kinda like, "Ashes needs PvEers and casuals and even solo players...and RPers."
Shortly after Jeffrey left, Steven began to stress that the game is not for everyone.
@dygz you are literally lying - because you have followed this project long enough and you Know this is something Steven Always said, all the way back to 2017 long before Jeff left - as you can see from this Clip
Steven literally says there, in that 2017 clip, the same things he says now - the game won't appeal to everyone and not everyone will be winners and that's OK, and man.... Jeff Bard himself in the clip says that ignoring PvP would kill the game - and they are NOT keeping PvP and PvE separately that's NOT their system.
You need to stop lying and changing narratives to try to justify your own misconceptions about the project.
Messagng has shifted a bit since Jeffrey Bard left.
In the first few years, we would often say on The Ashen Forge that Steven seems to be trying to support every playstyle. Steven would say stuff kinda like, "Ashes needs PvEers and casuals and even solo players...and RPers."
Shortly after Jeffrey left, Steven began to stress that the game is not for everyone.
@dygz you are literally lying - because you have followed this project long enough and you Know this is something Steven Always said, all the way back to 2017 long before Jeff left - as you can see from this Clip
Steven literally says there, in that 2017 clip, the same things he says now - the game won't appeal to everyone and not everyone will be winners and that's OK, and man.... Jeff Bard himself in the clip says that ignoring PvP would kill the game - and they are NOT keeping PvP and PvE separately that's NOT their system.
You need to stop lying and changing narratives to try to justify your own misconceptions about the project.
Dygz only says a bit, mainly based on his thoughts and maybe some bias. I think this point applies more so to Noaani who is hard pushing they are not clear on their messaging (which his point is false).
LMAO
That clip does not contradict what I wrote.
The devil is in the details.
It 100% contradicts what you wrote in every possible scenario. This is a textbook example of it.
You said "Messagng has shifted a bit since Jeffrey Bard left." and "Shortly after Jeffrey left, Steven began to stress that the game is not for everyone."
the clip from 2017 - 4 years before Jeff left, literally has Steven saying that the game is not for everyone and both Steven and Jeff make it Clear as water that this is their design and always has been.
LMAO
That clip does not contradict what I wrote.
The devil is in the details.
It 100% contradicts what you wrote in every possible scenario. This is a textbook example of it.
You said "Messagng has shifted a bit since Jeffrey Bard left." and "Shortly after Jeffrey left, Steven began to stress that the game is not for everyone."
the clip from 2017 - 4 years before Jeff left, literally has Steven saying that the game is not for everyone and both Steven and Jeff make it Clear as water that this is their design and always has been.
No. It doesn't contradict what I wrote.
Again... the devil is in the details.
If you paraphrase what I actually wrote, there might be a contradiction.
But... you be you, Boo.
It sounds a lot like Dygz is IMPLYING 'the messaging has shifted from 'we need all forms of content' as the CORE focus of the messaging to 'This game will not be for everyone' as the CORE MESSAGING. You can't play a singular clip and go 'gotchyah he said the thing! Therefore you are WRONG'. It's about aggregate messaging.
I don't know if Dygz is correct or incorrect here. I haven't been watching the development process for as long as he has. But I can say that this entire argument is arguing about the wrong thing, possibly on both sides.
If you really want to argue 'Steven has always emphasized MORE that 'this game will not be for everyone' than he has 'we need all players of all types' go ahead an make that argument. I don't know if you are right or wrong. Take it up with Dygz.
It sounds a lot like Dygz is IMPLYING 'the messaging has shifted from 'we need all forms of content' as the CORE focus of the messaging to 'This game will not be for everyone' as the CORE MESSAGING. You can't play a singular clip and go 'gotchyah he said the thing! Therefore you are WRONG'. It's about aggregate messaging.
I don't know if Dygz is correct or incorrect here. I haven't been watching the development process for as long as he has. But I can say that this entire argument is arguing about the wrong thing, possibly on both sides.
If you really want to argue 'Steven has always emphasized MORE that 'this game will not be for everyone' than he has 'we need all players of all types' go ahead an make that argument. I don't know if you are right or wrong. Take it up with Dygz.
This was just one random clip that took me 5 minutes to find, I could get many other clips and quotes here from over the years saying the same, he knows what I'm talking about, and he knows that the messaging has been consistent over the years, and anyone with a little research can get to the same conclusion.
I just wanted to share something here, in my thread, because I hate when people shift narratives so they can "be right". There is no messaging shift after Jeff left, this has always been Steven's game and vision.
It sounds a lot like Dygz is IMPLYING 'the messaging has shifted from 'we need all forms of content' as the CORE focus of the messaging to 'This game will not be for everyone' as the CORE MESSAGING. You can't play a singular clip and go 'gotchyah he said the thing! Therefore you are WRONG'. It's about aggregate messaging.
I don't know if Dygz is correct or incorrect here. I haven't been watching the development process for as long as he has. But I can say that this entire argument is arguing about the wrong thing, possibly on both sides.
If you really want to argue 'Steven has always emphasized MORE that 'this game will not be for everyone' than he has 'we need all players of all types' go ahead an make that argument. I don't know if you are right or wrong. Take it up with Dygz.
Well, more that Steven used to say MMORPGs need all types of players and playstyles.
The shared clip doesn't really even address player types and playstyles, for one thing.
But, yes, you correctly understood the details of what I wrote.
It sounds a lot like Dygz is IMPLYING 'the messaging has shifted from 'we need all forms of content' as the CORE focus of the messaging to 'This game will not be for everyone' as the CORE MESSAGING. You can't play a singular clip and go 'gotchyah he said the thing! Therefore you are WRONG'. It's about aggregate messaging.
I don't know if Dygz is correct or incorrect here. I haven't been watching the development process for as long as he has. But I can say that this entire argument is arguing about the wrong thing, possibly on both sides.
If you really want to argue 'Steven has always emphasized MORE that 'this game will not be for everyone' than he has 'we need all players of all types' go ahead an make that argument. I don't know if you are right or wrong. Take it up with Dygz.
Well, more that Steven used to say MMORPGs need all types of players and playstyles.
The shared clip doesn't really even address player types and playstyles, for one thing.
But, yes, you correctly understood the details of what I wrote.
I believe they still believe that, but at the same time it's not meant for EVERYONE.
It will allow many people to play the game of their style, but not EVERY style.
There are just some rules in the game that they won't change for the sake of the aforementioned "EVERYONE".
1
Options
DygzMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
Correct, but still in the context the changes aren't meant for "everyone". No matter which way it swings.
If they decide to remove corruption, and cant attack freely, it's a change that doesnt fit everyone. Also if they change always on PvP in open seas to a flagging system. It will still not be for everyone.
if the node is upgraded by pve activities and that turns your node into a slave node and you can't freely gank your masters... then it's still a game which the carebears will oppress people who can't play 12 hours a day farming pve over and over
.. what?
Yeap, carebears with their bot aspirant behaviour will level up any node they want as fast as possible and become a master node... then all the enslaved nodes will be capped and will not level above the master node, also the slave nodes can not declare war...
on top of that there is this Corruption system which only protects the same bot aspirant carebears farming non stop... so the Corruption will ruin the game for the slaves who won't be able to halt their master's endless farminng so the master node will never be deleveled
PvE means: A handful of coins and a bag of boredom.
Again, a community for a game that counts people like Dygz and people like George Black as members simply can not be getting their messaging right. Those two players simply will not enjoy the same game.
Noaani This is simply not true.There are plenty of PvP players that are playing games like FF14 or WoW, you are under the wrong assumption that the only people that will play a game is the exact target audience for that game.
Let me tell you that I played Mortal Online 2 recently, and there Are still PLENTY of roleplaying and PvE guilds - on a hardcore full loot PvP game - because of the immersion of the game.
I even know a guy there that plays as a photographer! all he does is take screenshots of other players and events and gets gold as payment.
and a lot of PvE and Replaying guilds quit MO2 because the Game had a lot of other issues at launch - Not because of the pvp.
So saying a guy like Dygz following Ashes is proof for the company not having a clear messaging is simply wrong. It's his fault assuming PvX meant 50% PvP and 50% safe PvE.
Dygz has never assumed the game would have safe PvE. In fact, he pointed out to others on many occasions that the game has no safety to it at all. That isn't what the issue was.
He accepted the balance the corruption system provided, and then after 5 years was told that the corruption system was only in effect some of the time.
To your comments on MO2, yeah, many games attract people that aren't really playing the game. That isn't the point. Dygz isn't/wasn't in the Ashes community because he wanted to be an in game photographer, he was here because he wanted to play the actual game - or at least, he wanted to play the game he was led to believe Ashes was.
I'm not really sure what to say about your comments on WoW PvP players. Let's just say that there is a reason neither Dygz nor George are interested in that game
Edit to add: MO2 will be free to play before Ashes launches.
Again, a community for a game that counts people like Dygz and people like George Black as members simply can not be getting their messaging right. Those two players simply will not enjoy the same game.
Noaani This is simply not true.There are plenty of PvP players that are playing games like FF14 or WoW, you are under the wrong assumption that the only people that will play a game is the exact target audience for that game.
Let me tell you that I played Mortal Online 2 recently, and there Are still PLENTY of roleplaying and PvE guilds - on a hardcore full loot PvP game - because of the immersion of the game.
I even know a guy there that plays as a photographer! all he does is take screenshots of other players and events and gets gold as payment.
and a lot of PvE and Replaying guilds quit MO2 because the Game had a lot of other issues at launch - Not because of the pvp.
So saying a guy like Dygz following Ashes is proof for the company not having a clear messaging is simply wrong. It's his fault assuming PvX meant 50% PvP and 50% safe PvE.
Dygz has never assumed the game would have safe PvE. In fact, he pointed out to others on many occasions that the game has no safety to it at all. That isn't what the issue was.
He accepted the balance the corruption system provided, and then after 5 years was told that the corruption system was only in effect some of the time.
To your comments on MO2, yeah, many games attract people that aren't really playing the game. That isn't the point. Dygz isn't/wasn't in the Ashes community because he wanted to be an in game photographer, he was here because he wanted to play the actual game - or at least, he wanted to play the game he was led to believe Ashes was.
I'm not really sure what to say about your comments on WoW PvP players. Let's just say that there is a reason neither Dygz nor George are interested in that game
Could you tell me what he was expecting and what did he get? I've loosely followed the KS because at the time it looked interesting, and KS are notoriously bad at coming through. Only last 2 years did I start paying close attention because they finally started showing progress.
I haven't been surprised by what the KS sold me to what I see today.
0
Options
DygzMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
Correct, but still in the context the changes aren't meant for "everyone". No matter which way it swings.
If they decide to remove corruption, and cant attack freely, it's a change that doesnt fit everyone. Also if they change always on PvP in open seas to a flagging system. It will still not be for everyone.
Subjective to balance tweaks.
The game isn't meant for everyone; not changes aren't meant for everyone.
Adding an FFA PvP Zone supports PvPers more and PvEers less.
And, yeah, if they had chosen to make Corruption harsher, that might be supporting PvEers more and PvPers less. And would also be a bit of a change in the messaging.
But, since, Steven is a PvPer...it's unlikely that Steven would change the design to be less favorable for PvPers before Alpha 2 testing.
This is Ashes biggest issue - it seems to not quite know what it wants to be. It wants to be a PvX game, but seems to only be focusing on PvP.
I think this is incredibly, objectively incorrect. They talk about PVE ALL the time (all the cosmetics are developing PVE, they just revealed the outside of giant vertical dungeon in the last live stream, etc.)... you just don't get worked up or worried about the PVE stuff.
The PvX part means that both PVE and PVP are ESSENTIAL core elements woven together... that is how the AoC world works... not that they are both distinctly separate independent content elements which can be enjoyed ala cart.
I follow Ashes pretty aggressively and have never thought anything but this... the changes they have made, and yes, I agree there have been changes (buckle up because there will be more changes to be sure), seem in line to me with the game Stephen sold...perhaps not in specifics, but in spirit.
I can certainly understand being skeptical, but anyone that claims to have been following the game and is up in arms about these 'changes' is not being honest (at least with themselves) about their initial intent to back the game. (They were hoping they could find a way to support their play style in a game not really for them)
Let's test the game and see if it is fun. If not, lets fix it, rather than just saying, "If you don't build the game exactly as I want it, it will certainly fail."
OK, so, the outside of a dungeon and some cosmetics.
That isn't what PvE players care about.
That is like Intrepid showing PvP players the UI for the arena system, and me claiming they showed you PvP stuff, why aren't you excited about it?
If you don't know what kind of things PvE players want to see, don't go bullshitting that Intrepid are showing PvE things. It makes you look a little stupid, to be honest.
To be very clear, we are not interested in base population, we are not interested in how an encounter looks, we are not interested in what the outside of a dungeon looks like (seriously?). We want to know what systems and mechanics are in place to support PvE, we want to know what top end encounters are going to be like to fight.
That is what PvE is - not fucking cosmetics. So far, we have seen very close to absolutely nothing in regards to actual PvE for Ashes. And believe me, I have been looking.
We all get that PvX means both PvE and PvP together, we are just waiting to see what that PvE will be. If that PvE takes the form it did in games like L2 and Archeage (a game I spent years in, as a refresher), then the game is PvP, not PvX. Such content does not require PvE skill, only PvP. If you win at PvP, you will win at that PvE as well.
A PvX game would surely need to put some weight on players having skill in both PvP and PvE, a feat that no game has yet managed - and yet we see nothing at all to that end.
He was HOPING the corruption system would be enough to make the pvp 'endurable' despite him not liking it. Just because he has the most forum posts does not mean he is the poster child for the game.
He doesn't have the most posts on the forums here.
A game like this will drive the innovation of other games and give every future MMO a look into what they could do. It should drive several new titles with similar but improved mechanics.
There is not much innovation actually. Other games offer more when trying to play just a limited time, a few hours a week.
Ya.... you should really hop into the networking side of the code they are implementing and tell me what you think isn't innovative, ya the idea wasn't an insane one, but ideas in video games have NEVER been a problem.
Correct, but still in the context the changes aren't meant for "everyone". No matter which way it swings.
If they decide to remove corruption, and cant attack freely, it's a change that doesnt fit everyone. Also if they change always on PvP in open seas to a flagging system. It will still not be for everyone.
Subjective to balance tweaks.
Doesn't support every playstyle.
Adding an FFA PvP Zone supports PvPers more and PvEers less.
And, yeah, if they had chosen to make Corruption harsher, that would be supporting PvEers more and PvPers less. And would also be a bit of a change in the messaging.
But, since, Steven is a PvPer...it's unlikely that Steven would change the design to be less favorable for PvPers before Alpha 2 testing.
Ok I understand where you're coming from on the bullet points.
I will say having a node that's left in rubble has no PvE content to battle to obtain the left over goods, so the goods should be contested. How would you address that? First come first serve?
Corruption is definitely the LARGE unknown. And I highly doubt this is its final form. We clearly have to test.
But, i do have to say I'm not surprised on the systems being presented was not out of my expectations. I've always felt with the corruption system, PvP was always a risk to all forms of gameplay, with little limitations on WHEN it could happen.
I'm a PvX player, and not a PK. Spent ten thousand hours over 25 years, raiding, crafting, gathering, socializing, and thousands of hours in PvP. As long as corruption does its job I wont have much to complain about.
0
Options
DygzMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
Yeah, but for years Dygz thought this game was for him.
No, for years Dygz was hoping this game was for him. He openly says he "does not play games with open world non-consensual" pvp... something this game clearly had from the beginning.
He was HOPING the corruption system would be enough to make the pvp 'endurable' despite him not liking it. Just because he has the most forum posts does not mean he is the poster child for the game.
I won't play MMORPGs with permanent zones that auto-flag me for PvP combat.
"Hope" might be too strong of a word.
I was thinking Ashes might be a game for me - if Corruption works sufficiently for my comfort.
But, that has always been a fairly strong if.
Permanent zones with no Corruption alleviates the "if" - that does not work sufficiently for me.
And... that's OK.
if the node is upgraded by pve activities and that turns your node into a slave node and you can't freely gank your masters... then it's still a game which the carebears will oppress people who can't play 12 hours a day farming pve over and over
I'm a PvX player, and not a PK. Spent ten thousand hours over 25 years, raiding, crafting, gathering, socializing, and thousands of hours in PvP. As long as corruption does its job I wont have much to complain about.
I am personally in a similar position.
Despite many people here thinking I am a PvE player, I've spent thousands of hours in MMO's in PvP settings - I just prefer PvE because at it's top end it is MUCH harder (though it is dead easy until you get to that top end).
I'm personally fine with my understanding of the corruption system. I think it will do it's job just fine, and it has enough levers for Intrepid to pull so as to ensure they don't actually need to change the system at all to get the result they want - they merely need to adjust a few levers.
That isn't my point in this thread though, my point is that while everyone has an idea of exactly what they think the game is going to be, when you start talking to enough people, those opinions vary widely, yet all of them are consistent with what Intrepid have said about the game at one point or another.
Literally any MMO player that is at least somewhat accepting of both PvE and PvP will be able to look at what Intrepid have said about this game, and assume it is exactly the game they want. It may be someone that only really wants to PvP but will accept some PvE along the way (George), or it may be someone that loves PvE but will accept some PvP along the way (Dygz).
As the game stands today, it should be referred to as a PvP game akin to L2 and Archeage, not a PvX game. If they want to continue to consider the game a PvX game, they need to start talking about the PvE part of that - and not cosmetics, outsides of dungeons, or base level population.
I won't play MMORPGs with permanent zones that auto-flag me for PvP combat.
Your logic is.... interesting. You definitely did a great job backing Ashes - it's totally intrepid's fault they are the ones that changed the design! sure
He doesn't have the most posts on the forums here.
I do.
Ya gosh darn spammer
Technically, @ArchivedUser has the most posts on the forums with 176k posts. I have no intention of catching up, as I only have 10.4k posts at this stage.
1
Options
DygzMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
edited October 2022
Yep. Pretty much.
In the green is all temporary and...
You can be in the location of a PvP battle and choose not to flag as Combatant.
And for Enemy of the State. You could play an alt and still explore wherever you want. (Prior to the Open Seas revelation)
And... yes. Permanent zone that auto-flags is an automatic deal-breaker for me.
Yep. Pretty much.
In the green...
You can be in the location and choose not to flag as Combatant.
And for Enemy of the State. You could play an alt and still explore wherever you want. (Prior to the Open Seas revelation)
And... yes. Permanent zone that auto-flags is an automatic deal-breaker for me.
Wrong.
The green shows AUTO-FLAGGING systems. You can not be in the location and chose not to flag - you are AUTO flagged in Guild Wars, Caravans, Node Wars, Node Sieges, Freehold attacks after siege and enemy of the state.
It was never a PvE game. Always had plenty of forced PvP stuff.
Comments
@dygz you are literally lying - because you have followed this project long enough and you Know this is something Steven Always said, all the way back to 2017 long before Jeff left - as you can see from this Clip
Steven literally says there, in that 2017 clip, the same things he says now - the game won't appeal to everyone and not everyone will be winners and that's OK, and man.... Jeff Bard himself in the clip says that ignoring PvP would kill the game - and they are NOT keeping PvP and PvE separately that's NOT their system.
You need to stop lying and changing narratives to try to justify your own misconceptions about the project.
Dygz only says a bit, mainly based on his thoughts and maybe some bias. I think this point applies more so to Noaani who is hard pushing they are not clear on their messaging (which his point is false).
That clip does not contradict what I wrote.
The devil is in the details.
by details he usually means semantics. <sigh>
It 100% contradicts what you wrote in every possible scenario. This is a textbook example of it.
You said "Messagng has shifted a bit since Jeffrey Bard left." and "Shortly after Jeffrey left, Steven began to stress that the game is not for everyone."
the clip from 2017 - 4 years before Jeff left, literally has Steven saying that the game is not for everyone and both Steven and Jeff make it Clear as water that this is their design and always has been.
Again... the devil is in the details.
If you paraphrase what I actually wrote, there might be a contradiction.
But... you be you, Boo.
I don't know if Dygz is correct or incorrect here. I haven't been watching the development process for as long as he has. But I can say that this entire argument is arguing about the wrong thing, possibly on both sides.
If you really want to argue 'Steven has always emphasized MORE that 'this game will not be for everyone' than he has 'we need all players of all types' go ahead an make that argument. I don't know if you are right or wrong. Take it up with Dygz.
https://youtube.com/watch?v=Yhr9WpjaDzw
This was just one random clip that took me 5 minutes to find, I could get many other clips and quotes here from over the years saying the same, he knows what I'm talking about, and he knows that the messaging has been consistent over the years, and anyone with a little research can get to the same conclusion.
I just wanted to share something here, in my thread, because I hate when people shift narratives so they can "be right". There is no messaging shift after Jeff left, this has always been Steven's game and vision.
The shared clip doesn't really even address player types and playstyles, for one thing.
But, yes, you correctly understood the details of what I wrote.
I believe they still believe that, but at the same time it's not meant for EVERYONE.
It will allow many people to play the game of their style, but not EVERY style.
There are just some rules in the game that they won't change for the sake of the aforementioned "EVERYONE".
Correct, but still in the context the changes aren't meant for "everyone". No matter which way it swings.
If they decide to remove corruption, and cant attack freely, it's a change that doesnt fit everyone. Also if they change always on PvP in open seas to a flagging system. It will still not be for everyone.
Subjective to balance tweaks.
Yeap, carebears with their bot aspirant behaviour will level up any node they want as fast as possible and become a master node... then all the enslaved nodes will be capped and will not level above the master node, also the slave nodes can not declare war...
on top of that there is this Corruption system which only protects the same bot aspirant carebears farming non stop... so the Corruption will ruin the game for the slaves who won't be able to halt their master's endless farminng so the master node will never be deleveled
Dygz has never assumed the game would have safe PvE. In fact, he pointed out to others on many occasions that the game has no safety to it at all. That isn't what the issue was.
He accepted the balance the corruption system provided, and then after 5 years was told that the corruption system was only in effect some of the time.
To your comments on MO2, yeah, many games attract people that aren't really playing the game. That isn't the point. Dygz isn't/wasn't in the Ashes community because he wanted to be an in game photographer, he was here because he wanted to play the actual game - or at least, he wanted to play the game he was led to believe Ashes was.
I'm not really sure what to say about your comments on WoW PvP players. Let's just say that there is a reason neither Dygz nor George are interested in that game
Edit to add: MO2 will be free to play before Ashes launches.
Could you tell me what he was expecting and what did he get? I've loosely followed the KS because at the time it looked interesting, and KS are notoriously bad at coming through. Only last 2 years did I start paying close attention because they finally started showing progress.
I haven't been surprised by what the KS sold me to what I see today.
Adding an FFA PvP Zone supports PvPers more and PvEers less.
And, yeah, if they had chosen to make Corruption harsher, that might be supporting PvEers more and PvPers less. And would also be a bit of a change in the messaging.
But, since, Steven is a PvPer...it's unlikely that Steven would change the design to be less favorable for PvPers before Alpha 2 testing.
OK, so, the outside of a dungeon and some cosmetics.
That isn't what PvE players care about.
That is like Intrepid showing PvP players the UI for the arena system, and me claiming they showed you PvP stuff, why aren't you excited about it?
If you don't know what kind of things PvE players want to see, don't go bullshitting that Intrepid are showing PvE things. It makes you look a little stupid, to be honest.
To be very clear, we are not interested in base population, we are not interested in how an encounter looks, we are not interested in what the outside of a dungeon looks like (seriously?). We want to know what systems and mechanics are in place to support PvE, we want to know what top end encounters are going to be like to fight.
That is what PvE is - not fucking cosmetics. So far, we have seen very close to absolutely nothing in regards to actual PvE for Ashes. And believe me, I have been looking.
We all get that PvX means both PvE and PvP together, we are just waiting to see what that PvE will be. If that PvE takes the form it did in games like L2 and Archeage (a game I spent years in, as a refresher), then the game is PvP, not PvX. Such content does not require PvE skill, only PvP. If you win at PvP, you will win at that PvE as well.
A PvX game would surely need to put some weight on players having skill in both PvP and PvE, a feat that no game has yet managed - and yet we see nothing at all to that end. He doesn't have the most posts on the forums here.
I do.
As far as I can tell, Dygz has the third most.
Ya.... you should really hop into the networking side of the code they are implementing and tell me what you think isn't innovative, ya the idea wasn't an insane one, but ideas in video games have NEVER been a problem.
Ok I understand where you're coming from on the bullet points.
I will say having a node that's left in rubble has no PvE content to battle to obtain the left over goods, so the goods should be contested. How would you address that? First come first serve?
Corruption is definitely the LARGE unknown. And I highly doubt this is its final form. We clearly have to test.
But, i do have to say I'm not surprised on the systems being presented was not out of my expectations. I've always felt with the corruption system, PvP was always a risk to all forms of gameplay, with little limitations on WHEN it could happen.
I'm a PvX player, and not a PK. Spent ten thousand hours over 25 years, raiding, crafting, gathering, socializing, and thousands of hours in PvP. As long as corruption does its job I wont have much to complain about.
"Hope" might be too strong of a word.
I was thinking Ashes might be a game for me - if Corruption works sufficiently for my comfort.
But, that has always been a fairly strong if.
Permanent zones with no Corruption alleviates the "if" - that does not work sufficiently for me.
And... that's OK.
You, my friend, are misinformed.
Despite many people here thinking I am a PvE player, I've spent thousands of hours in MMO's in PvP settings - I just prefer PvE because at it's top end it is MUCH harder (though it is dead easy until you get to that top end).
I'm personally fine with my understanding of the corruption system. I think it will do it's job just fine, and it has enough levers for Intrepid to pull so as to ensure they don't actually need to change the system at all to get the result they want - they merely need to adjust a few levers.
That isn't my point in this thread though, my point is that while everyone has an idea of exactly what they think the game is going to be, when you start talking to enough people, those opinions vary widely, yet all of them are consistent with what Intrepid have said about the game at one point or another.
Literally any MMO player that is at least somewhat accepting of both PvE and PvP will be able to look at what Intrepid have said about this game, and assume it is exactly the game they want. It may be someone that only really wants to PvP but will accept some PvE along the way (George), or it may be someone that loves PvE but will accept some PvP along the way (Dygz).
As the game stands today, it should be referred to as a PvP game akin to L2 and Archeage, not a PvX game. If they want to continue to consider the game a PvX game, they need to start talking about the PvE part of that - and not cosmetics, outsides of dungeons, or base level population.
Your logic is.... interesting. You definitely did a great job backing Ashes - it's totally intrepid's fault they are the ones that changed the design! sure
I have been waiting for more PvE details for awhile. That was why my QA question was to expand on what dungeons will actually be like.
I dont care if there is PvP is involved. I just want meaningful PvE mixed in.
It's also why I dont get what people outside of the community want a PvE server when they dont even know what AoC has for PvE.
Technically, @ArchivedUser has the most posts on the forums with 176k posts. I have no intention of catching up, as I only have 10.4k posts at this stage.
In the green is all temporary and...
You can be in the location of a PvP battle and choose not to flag as Combatant.
And for Enemy of the State. You could play an alt and still explore wherever you want. (Prior to the Open Seas revelation)
And... yes. Permanent zone that auto-flags is an automatic deal-breaker for me.
Wrong.
The green shows AUTO-FLAGGING systems. You can not be in the location and chose not to flag - you are AUTO flagged in Guild Wars, Caravans, Node Wars, Node Sieges, Freehold attacks after siege and enemy of the state.
It was never a PvE game. Always had plenty of forced PvP stuff.
Again...especially with alts.