The game is designed around pvp it literally wouldn’t work it’s not a case of choose to have no pvp the mechanics wouldn’t work without it.
You still have PvP on PvE servers. Read the post again.
Ok I thought you said just PvE. So you want only PvE in certain areas while keeping PvP alive everywhere else. In theory that could work but I’m not a fan of it because people could just hide away 24/7 in safe zones what could stop someone from doing that? This game is meant to be a challenge and made for PvP everywhere. There is supposed to be a risk at all times. Making a safe zone areas is against the spirit of what the developers want. I see where you’re coming from though but I doubt they will change it. The corruption mechanic is meant to stop people being killed over and over again.
I'll copy and paste my response to this from Reddit.
Ok, here's a few reasons why opt-in would break the game.
Firstly, the dungeons and raids are currently 80%+ open-world with the BiS gear and materials coming from open-world content rather than instanced. If they made PvP opt-in, then you'd just have 1000 people sitting in dungeons trying to snipe the bosses and mobs before the other 1000 people who are PvE only.
Next, the economy. Take the example above of dungeons and raids being open-world, maybe your solution to the above point is making the dungeons instanced, but then they need to redesign all the loot drops since you can't just have people being able to enter an instanced area and kill their own version of these mobs and bosses otherwise it would increase the number of drops coming in to the game 100 fold. And because the large large majority of items in Ashes do not bind to your character, neither on pick up or equip, this means the market will be flooded with these items.
Next is world bosses. World bosses are planned to drop some of the rarest items in the game, such as Flying Mount Eggs. But now without PvP, there's no contesting this stuff. It's just which group can deal the most damage and get lucky enough to get the drops instead of guilds contesting each other and earning the drops.
Next is caravans. Why would anyone use a caravan when they can just run the materials from one end of the map to the other without the risk of losing any of the gatherables/processed goods when they die? Sure it might take longer, but most people would prefer to put on a stream or Netflix and run stuff across the map while chilling. You've now basically made caravans useless.
We're not talking about opt-in PvP
Opt-in is absolutely horrible.
You have either PvE or PvP SERVERS and they never change the rulesets for those servers.
on a pve server caravans are useless. why have that system at all
Caravans are still a faster way of transporting more items. That is still useful in PvE servers. Sure people could just carry stuff around but if you want to spend 100 more hours doing something than that is a big tradeoff.
Moving goods faster means you can reach new markets first and make way more money.
I'll copy and paste my response to this from Reddit.
Ok, here's a few reasons why opt-in would break the game.
Firstly, the dungeons and raids are currently 80%+ open-world with the BiS gear and materials coming from open-world content rather than instanced. If they made PvP opt-in, then you'd just have 1000 people sitting in dungeons trying to snipe the bosses and mobs before the other 1000 people who are PvE only.
Next, the economy. Take the example above of dungeons and raids being open-world, maybe your solution to the above point is making the dungeons instanced, but then they need to redesign all the loot drops since you can't just have people being able to enter an instanced area and kill their own version of these mobs and bosses otherwise it would increase the number of drops coming in to the game 100 fold. And because the large large majority of items in Ashes do not bind to your character, neither on pick up or equip, this means the market will be flooded with these items.
Next is world bosses. World bosses are planned to drop some of the rarest items in the game, such as Flying Mount Eggs. But now without PvP, there's no contesting this stuff. It's just which group can deal the most damage and get lucky enough to get the drops instead of guilds contesting each other and earning the drops.
Next is caravans. Why would anyone use a caravan when they can just run the materials from one end of the map to the other without the risk of losing any of the gatherables/processed goods when they die? Sure it might take longer, but most people would prefer to put on a stream or Netflix and run stuff across the map while chilling. You've now basically made caravans useless.
We're not talking about opt-in PvP
Opt-in is absolutely horrible.
You have either PvE or PvP SERVERS and they never change the rulesets for those servers.
on a pve server caravans are useless. why have that system at all
Caravans are still a faster way of transporting more items. That is still useful in PvE servers. Sure people could just carry stuff around but if you want to spend 100 more hours doing something than that is a big tradeoff.
Moving goods faster means you can reach new markets first and make way more money.
If you want open world PvP you just play on a PvP server.
The game can be designed the exact same way and nothing needs to change other than on a PvE server, open world PvP is just disabled. You'd still have areas where PvP is enabled, just not the entire map.
As a PvP player, I agree with this guy. Better to play on a PvE server than getting corruption for killing a bot or toxic guys finishing all your mobs or stealing your ressources.
In a PvE server, the message would be clear : “No open world PvP”. In the current state of the rules, the message is: “you can open world PvP but don’t do it”.
If you want open world PvP you just play on a PvP server.
The game can be designed the exact same way and nothing needs to change other than on a PvE server, open world PvP is just disabled. You'd still have areas where PvP is enabled, just not the entire map.
As a PvP player, I agree with this guy. Better to play on a PvE server than getting corruption for killing a bot or toxic guys finishing all your mobs or stealing your ressources.
In a PvE server, the message would be clear : “No open world PvP”. In the current state of the rules, the message is: “you can open world PvP but don’t do it”.
The current state of the rules is 'You can Open World PvP but if your opponent doesn't accept your challenge you will face a penalty for killing them'.
If that sounds just like your own interpretation to you, then some might say that Ashes Of Creation is Not For You.
The game is designed around pvp it literally wouldn’t work it’s not a case of choose to have no pvp the mechanics wouldn’t work without it.
You still have PvP on PvE servers. Read the post again.
Ok I thought you said just PvE. So you want only PvE in certain areas while keeping PvP alive everywhere else. In theory that could work but I’m not a fan of it because people could just hide away 24/7 in safe zones what could stop someone from doing that? This game is meant to be a challenge and made for PvP everywhere. There is supposed to be a risk at all times. Making a safe zone areas is against the spirit of what the developers want. I see where you’re coming from though but I doubt they will change it. The corruption mechanic is meant to stop people being killed over and over again.
Soft systems like corruption don't prevent griefing, they only act as a deterrance. That's why safe zones exist in the first place, they are nessacary.
Now games like Rust are constant pure open world PvP at all times, and Rust is an awesome game that I love and have put hundreds of hours into.
But in Rust you can kill even the strongest player with a bow and arrow. In an MMO you cannot kill players who are massively stronger than you.
Greifing guilds will exist, and if they are able to grief, they will. The consequences won't stop them from greifing. They'll have alt accounts, they'll have deals with other guilds where they pay them to help them grief other guilds/players they don't like, you can't report RMT if you're not trading items.
Rust is a toxic game with a toxic community, and it's because that is the whole point of an unregulated pure PvP system. It's fun in Rust, but in an MMO? I don't think so.
I'll copy and paste my response to this from Reddit.
Ok, here's a few reasons why opt-in would break the game.
Firstly, the dungeons and raids are currently 80%+ open-world with the BiS gear and materials coming from open-world content rather than instanced. If they made PvP opt-in, then you'd just have 1000 people sitting in dungeons trying to snipe the bosses and mobs before the other 1000 people who are PvE only.
Next, the economy. Take the example above of dungeons and raids being open-world, maybe your solution to the above point is making the dungeons instanced, but then they need to redesign all the loot drops since you can't just have people being able to enter an instanced area and kill their own version of these mobs and bosses otherwise it would increase the number of drops coming in to the game 100 fold. And because the large large majority of items in Ashes do not bind to your character, neither on pick up or equip, this means the market will be flooded with these items.
Next is world bosses. World bosses are planned to drop some of the rarest items in the game, such as Flying Mount Eggs. But now without PvP, there's no contesting this stuff. It's just which group can deal the most damage and get lucky enough to get the drops instead of guilds contesting each other and earning the drops.
Next is caravans. Why would anyone use a caravan when they can just run the materials from one end of the map to the other without the risk of losing any of the gatherables/processed goods when they die? Sure it might take longer, but most people would prefer to put on a stream or Netflix and run stuff across the map while chilling. You've now basically made caravans useless.
We're not talking about opt-in PvP
Opt-in is absolutely horrible.
You have either PvE or PvP SERVERS and they never change the rulesets for those servers.
on a pve server caravans are useless. why have that system at all
Caravans are still a faster way of transporting more items. That is still useful in PvE servers. Sure people could just carry stuff around but if you want to spend 100 more hours doing something than that is a big tradeoff.
Moving goods faster means you can reach new markets first and make way more money.
does not compute.
Caravans are useful in PvE servers for the exact same reasons they are useful in PvP servers. There isn't any difference.
The game is designed around pvp it literally wouldn’t work it’s not a case of choose to have no pvp the mechanics wouldn’t work without it.
You still have PvP on PvE servers. Read the post again.
Ok I thought you said just PvE. So you want only PvE in certain areas while keeping PvP alive everywhere else. In theory that could work but I’m not a fan of it because people could just hide away 24/7 in safe zones what could stop someone from doing that? This game is meant to be a challenge and made for PvP everywhere. There is supposed to be a risk at all times. Making a safe zone areas is against the spirit of what the developers want. I see where you’re coming from though but I doubt they will change it. The corruption mechanic is meant to stop people being killed over and over again.
Soft systems like corruption don't prevent griefing, they only act as a deterrance. That's why safe zones exist in the first place, they are nessacary.
Now games like Rust are constant pure open world PvP at all times, and Rust is an awesome game that I love and have put hundreds of hours into.
But in Rust you can kill even the strongest player with a bow and arrow. In an MMO you cannot kill players who are massively stronger than you.
Greifing guilds will exist, and if they are able to grief, they will. The consequences won't stop them from greifing. They'll have alt accounts, they'll have deals with other guilds where they pay them to help them grief other guilds/players they don't like, you can't report RMT if you're not trading items.
Rust is a toxic game with a toxic community, and it's because that is the whole point of an unregulated pure PvP system. It's fun in Rust, but in an MMO? I don't think so.
I’ll play the game and decide myself if the game is for me or not )) But thank you for your kind advice.
If you want open world PvP you just play on a PvP server.
The game can be designed the exact same way and nothing needs to change other than on a PvE server, open world PvP is just disabled. You'd still have areas where PvP is enabled, just not the entire map.
As a PvP player, I agree with this guy. Better to play on a PvE server than getting corruption for killing a bot or toxic guys finishing all your mobs or stealing your ressources.
In a PvE server, the message would be clear : “No open world PvP”. In the current state of the rules, the message is: “you can open world PvP but don’t do it”.
The current state of the rules is 'You can Open World PvP but if your opponent doesn't accept your challenge you will face a penalty for killing them'.
If that sounds just like your own interpretation to you, then some might not say that Ashes Of Creation is Not For You.
I will play the game and decide myself if the game is for me or not. But thank you for your kind advice.
If you want open world PvP you just play on a PvP server.
The game can be designed the exact same way and nothing needs to change other than on a PvE server, open world PvP is just disabled. You'd still have areas where PvP is enabled, just not the entire map.
As a PvP player, I agree with this guy. Better to play on a PvE server than getting corruption for killing a bot or toxic guys finishing all your mobs or stealing your ressources.
In a PvE server, the message would be clear : “No open world PvP”. In the current state of the rules, the message is: “you can open world PvP but don’t do it”.
The current state of the rules is 'You can Open World PvP but if your opponent doesn't accept your challenge you will face a penalty for killing them'.
If that sounds just like your own interpretation to you, then some might not say that Ashes Of Creation is Not For You.
I will play the game and decide myself if the game is for me or not. But thank you for your kind advice.
I hope so, I wouldn't agree with those people anyway.
Honestly I just want to understand this perspective. I play OwPvP games where people can just gank me and half my health be gone before I even see them, while I am fighting mobs. Those people get a Penalty.
I also recently had an experience where another player wanted a spot where I was gathering, smacked me for a challenge, and we fought. I guess it was First to 3 because after I beat them 3 times they stopped and went to do something else.
But they COULD have easily just killed me, and taken the penalty, because I was in Gathering gear and would have gone down easy enough. They waited for me to 'change gear', 'flag up', 'ping them back to let them know I was ready'.
Do you have a preference for which of those two experiences happens? I don't, but many others do (and I kinda just ignore the first honestly, even I won't fight back sometimes in that case, takes too long to change gear anyway)
If you want open world PvP you just play on a PvP server.
The game can be designed the exact same way and nothing needs to change other than on a PvE server, open world PvP is just disabled. You'd still have areas where PvP is enabled, just not the entire map.
As a PvP player, I agree with this guy. Better to play on a PvE server than getting corruption for killing a bot or toxic guys finishing all your mobs or stealing your ressources.
In a PvE server, the message would be clear : “No open world PvP”. In the current state of the rules, the message is: “you can open world PvP but don’t do it”.
The current state of the rules is 'You can Open World PvP but if your opponent doesn't accept your challenge you will face a penalty for killing them'.
If that sounds just like your own interpretation to you, then some might not say that Ashes Of Creation is Not For You.
I will play the game and decide myself if the game is for me or not. But thank you for your kind advice.
I hope so, I wouldn't agree with those people anyway.
Honestly I just want to understand this perspective. I play OwPvP games where people can just gank me and half my health be gone before I even see them, while I am fighting mobs. Those people get a Penalty.
I also recently had an experience where another player wanted a spot where I was gathering, smacked me for a challenge, and we fought. I guess it was First to 3 because after I beat them 3 times they stopped and went to do something else.
But they COULD have easily just killed me, and taken the penalty, because I was in Gathering gear and would have gone down easy enough. They waited for me to 'change gear', 'flag up', 'ping them back to let them know I was ready'.
Do you have a preference for which of those two experiences happens? I don't, but many others do (and I kinda just ignore the first honestly, even I won't fight back sometimes in that case, takes too long to change gear anyway)
If basically all open world PvP was a respectful environment that would be sick, I'd love to PvP while gathering, but only if it's an actual fair fight and not just a random guild rolling through me.
If you want open world PvP you just play on a PvP server.
The game can be designed the exact same way and nothing needs to change other than on a PvE server, open world PvP is just disabled. You'd still have areas where PvP is enabled, just not the entire map.
As a PvP player, I agree with this guy. Better to play on a PvE server than getting corruption for killing a bot or toxic guys finishing all your mobs or stealing your ressources.
In a PvE server, the message would be clear : “No open world PvP”. In the current state of the rules, the message is: “you can open world PvP but don’t do it”.
The current state of the rules is 'You can Open World PvP but if your opponent doesn't accept your challenge you will face a penalty for killing them'.
If that sounds just like your own interpretation to you, then some might not say that Ashes Of Creation is Not For You.
I will play the game and decide myself if the game is for me or not. But thank you for your kind advice.
I hope so, I wouldn't agree with those people anyway.
Honestly I just want to understand this perspective. I play OwPvP games where people can just gank me and half my health be gone before I even see them, while I am fighting mobs. Those people get a Penalty.
I also recently had an experience where another player wanted a spot where I was gathering, smacked me for a challenge, and we fought. I guess it was First to 3 because after I beat them 3 times they stopped and went to do something else.
But they COULD have easily just killed me, and taken the penalty, because I was in Gathering gear and would have gone down easy enough. They waited for me to 'change gear', 'flag up', 'ping them back to let them know I was ready'.
Do you have a preference for which of those two experiences happens? I don't, but many others do (and I kinda just ignore the first honestly, even I won't fight back sometimes in that case, takes too long to change gear anyway)
If basically all open world PvP was a respectful environment that would be sick, I'd love to PvP while gathering, but only if it's an actual fair fight and not just a random guild rolling through me.
Right but this is, at least partially, what the current system is for. If you REALLY want to kill someone, take the Penalty. If two 'people who are generally willing to fight' meet at a spot they need to contest, both go Purple, they fight.
So I didn't understand what @Myosotys meant. I'm not gonna 'not challenge people' because of Corruption. I'm not going to 'refuse to fight a fair-enough fight' because of it either. I'm gonna PvP.
I'll copy and paste my response to this from Reddit.
Ok, here's a few reasons why opt-in would break the game.
Firstly, the dungeons and raids are currently 80%+ open-world with the BiS gear and materials coming from open-world content rather than instanced. If they made PvP opt-in, then you'd just have 1000 people sitting in dungeons trying to snipe the bosses and mobs before the other 1000 people who are PvE only.
Next, the economy. Take the example above of dungeons and raids being open-world, maybe your solution to the above point is making the dungeons instanced, but then they need to redesign all the loot drops since you can't just have people being able to enter an instanced area and kill their own version of these mobs and bosses otherwise it would increase the number of drops coming in to the game 100 fold. And because the large large majority of items in Ashes do not bind to your character, neither on pick up or equip, this means the market will be flooded with these items.
Next is world bosses. World bosses are planned to drop some of the rarest items in the game, such as Flying Mount Eggs. But now without PvP, there's no contesting this stuff. It's just which group can deal the most damage and get lucky enough to get the drops instead of guilds contesting each other and earning the drops.
Next is caravans. Why would anyone use a caravan when they can just run the materials from one end of the map to the other without the risk of losing any of the gatherables/processed goods when they die? Sure it might take longer, but most people would prefer to put on a stream or Netflix and run stuff across the map while chilling. You've now basically made caravans useless.
We're not talking about opt-in PvP
Opt-in is absolutely horrible.
You have either PvE or PvP SERVERS and they never change the rulesets for those servers.
The points still apply is the entire point of the post, doesn't matter if it's opt-in or a PvE server. If you make a PvE server you still have to change the entire game.
If you want open world PvP you just play on a PvP server.
The game can be designed the exact same way and nothing needs to change other than on a PvE server, open world PvP is just disabled. You'd still have areas where PvP is enabled, just not the entire map.
As a PvP player, I agree with this guy. Better to play on a PvE server than getting corruption for killing a bot or toxic guys finishing all your mobs or stealing your ressources.
In a PvE server, the message would be clear : “No open world PvP”. In the current state of the rules, the message is: “you can open world PvP but don’t do it”.
The current state of the rules is 'You can Open World PvP but if your opponent doesn't accept your challenge you will face a penalty for killing them'.
If that sounds just like your own interpretation to you, then some might not say that Ashes Of Creation is Not For You.
I will play the game and decide myself if the game is for me or not. But thank you for your kind advice.
I hope so, I wouldn't agree with those people anyway.
Honestly I just want to understand this perspective. I play OwPvP games where people can just gank me and half my health be gone before I even see them, while I am fighting mobs. Those people get a Penalty.
I also recently had an experience where another player wanted a spot where I was gathering, smacked me for a challenge, and we fought. I guess it was First to 3 because after I beat them 3 times they stopped and went to do something else.
But they COULD have easily just killed me, and taken the penalty, because I was in Gathering gear and would have gone down easy enough. They waited for me to 'change gear', 'flag up', 'ping them back to let them know I was ready'.
Do you have a preference for which of those two experiences happens? I don't, but many others do (and I kinda just ignore the first honestly, even I won't fight back sometimes in that case, takes too long to change gear anyway)
If basically all open world PvP was a respectful environment that would be sick, I'd love to PvP while gathering, but only if it's an actual fair fight and not just a random guild rolling through me.
Right but this is, at least partially, what the current system is for. If you REALLY want to kill someone, take the Penalty. If two 'people who are generally willing to fight' meet at a spot they need to contest, both go Purple, they fight.
So I didn't understand what @Myosotys meant. I'm not gonna 'not challenge people' because of Corruption. I'm not going to 'refuse to fight a fair-enough fight' because of it either. I'm gonna PvP.
The thing is though, even if someone gets corrupted by killing you, someone who isn't corrupted can just take their place and kill you, and so on.
I'll copy and paste my response to this from Reddit.
Ok, here's a few reasons why opt-in would break the game.
Firstly, the dungeons and raids are currently 80%+ open-world with the BiS gear and materials coming from open-world content rather than instanced. If they made PvP opt-in, then you'd just have 1000 people sitting in dungeons trying to snipe the bosses and mobs before the other 1000 people who are PvE only.
Next, the economy. Take the example above of dungeons and raids being open-world, maybe your solution to the above point is making the dungeons instanced, but then they need to redesign all the loot drops since you can't just have people being able to enter an instanced area and kill their own version of these mobs and bosses otherwise it would increase the number of drops coming in to the game 100 fold. And because the large large majority of items in Ashes do not bind to your character, neither on pick up or equip, this means the market will be flooded with these items.
Next is world bosses. World bosses are planned to drop some of the rarest items in the game, such as Flying Mount Eggs. But now without PvP, there's no contesting this stuff. It's just which group can deal the most damage and get lucky enough to get the drops instead of guilds contesting each other and earning the drops.
Next is caravans. Why would anyone use a caravan when they can just run the materials from one end of the map to the other without the risk of losing any of the gatherables/processed goods when they die? Sure it might take longer, but most people would prefer to put on a stream or Netflix and run stuff across the map while chilling. You've now basically made caravans useless.
We're not talking about opt-in PvP
Opt-in is absolutely horrible.
You have either PvE or PvP SERVERS and they never change the rulesets for those servers.
The points still apply is the entire point of the post, doesn't matter if it's opt-in or a PvE server. If you make a PvE server you still have to change the entire game.
Disabling PvP in some areas does not require you to make any other changes. Should you make some changes? Possibly, but you do not need to, the game will still function.
Sieges are instanced and consensual, dungeons and world bosses can have PvP enabled in their locations, caravans can have PvP enabled in their vicinity as well. Ruins would still have PvP enabled, and after a siege, freeholds would have PvP enabled. It's literally just turning PvP on and off depending on the context, no actual content needs to be changed. You can even remove the corruption system because greifing wouldn't be possible, so you actually need less work.
You wouldn't have to change anything. The top guilds can just declare guild wars to fight over world bosses if they want to. Caravans would still be risk vs reward, someone who risks using them will get richer, it's not going to be different than on a pvp server where some people wont use them to avoid the risk. Or pve players can just accept that if they want to play without pvp, that means dps races for bosses and a harder time finding gatherables. Some people will accept that tradeoff, and some wont.
Intrepid is also not going to magically transform into some out of touch corporation if they add pve servers. Steven has made his vision pretty clear, that's why a lot of us have faith in the game, and that isnt going to change if they decide to add some pve servers.
So much panic in this thread. If Steven and the team decide that adding some pve servers will help support the game, it isnt going to affect us on our pvp servers. Take a deep breath and relax.
The game is designed around pvp it literally wouldn’t work it’s not a case of choose to have no pvp the mechanics wouldn’t work without it.
You still have PvP on PvE servers. Read the post again.
what about caravans? You get attacked but it's not consensual.
Caravans are optional, so you'd have to consent to PvP to start a caravan route. Some things would of course require PvP like caravans and sieges. PvE players still enjoy PvP just as much as people on PvP servers, they just don't enjoy being level 10 and getting spawn camped by a max level player for 6 hours.
not this again. stat dampening wont make that possible. you literally get killed by a high level when you are level 10 and you yell in chat and bounty hunters will go kill that person. he cant cleanse corruption on time. in fact he will probably get soo much corruption and stat dampening than a level 10 might be able to kill a level 50.
If you want open world PvP you just play on a PvP server.
The game can be designed the exact same way and nothing needs to change other than on a PvE server, open world PvP is just disabled. You'd still have areas where PvP is enabled, just not the entire map.
As a PvP player, I agree with this guy. Better to play on a PvE server than getting corruption for killing a bot or toxic guys finishing all your mobs or stealing your ressources.
In a PvE server, the message would be clear : “No open world PvP”. In the current state of the rules, the message is: “you can open world PvP but don’t do it”.
The current state of the rules is 'You can Open World PvP but if your opponent doesn't accept your challenge you will face a penalty for killing them'.
If that sounds just like your own interpretation to you, then some might not say that Ashes Of Creation is Not For You.
I will play the game and decide myself if the game is for me or not. But thank you for your kind advice.
I hope so, I wouldn't agree with those people anyway.
Honestly I just want to understand this perspective. I play OwPvP games where people can just gank me and half my health be gone before I even see them, while I am fighting mobs. Those people get a Penalty.
I also recently had an experience where another player wanted a spot where I was gathering, smacked me for a challenge, and we fought. I guess it was First to 3 because after I beat them 3 times they stopped and went to do something else.
But they COULD have easily just killed me, and taken the penalty, because I was in Gathering gear and would have gone down easy enough. They waited for me to 'change gear', 'flag up', 'ping them back to let them know I was ready'.
Do you have a preference for which of those two experiences happens? I don't, but many others do (and I kinda just ignore the first honestly, even I won't fight back sometimes in that case, takes too long to change gear anyway)
If basically all open world PvP was a respectful environment that would be sick, I'd love to PvP while gathering, but only if it's an actual fair fight and not just a random guild rolling through me.
Right but this is, at least partially, what the current system is for. If you REALLY want to kill someone, take the Penalty. If two 'people who are generally willing to fight' meet at a spot they need to contest, both go Purple, they fight.
So I didn't understand what @Myosotys meant. I'm not gonna 'not challenge people' because of Corruption. I'm not going to 'refuse to fight a fair-enough fight' because of it either. I'm gonna PvP.
The thing is though, even if someone gets corrupted by killing you, someone who isn't corrupted can just take their place and kill you, and so on.
Sure, but that's intentional. And if Corruption is strong enough, they won't want to. Whereas if one person pings me, and I fight and lose, I move on, and the next person pings me, etc.
If a world where the AVERAGE player doesn't just take the Corruption, exists, it's fine with me, even if I run into a set of them, because I just 'get a PvP fight each time and move on if I lose'. Conflict heavy games always have this 'issue' anyway.
I understand that the person who 'puts PvE first' might not want this, but with strong Corruption, 'Safe Zones' will sort of organically exist, I think.
If Steven and the team decide that adding some pve servers will help support the game, it isnt going to affect us on our pvp servers.
Or in other words "I don't know how the game is actually intended to function but I'll act like I know the repercussions of majorly changing it anyway."
0
HinotoriMember, Leader of Men, Kickstarter, Alpha One
Here's a summary op:
Pvp only is bad. Pve only is bad. Pvx is the way.
The world is beautiful whenever you're here. And all the emptiness inside disappears.
Others are correct that it appears a lot of design is centered around PvP being always on. Most of it is about the economy. With PvP on, a gatherer on average may be able to get 100 things per hour. The rest of the economy, crafting recipes and all that will likely be balanced around how easy it is to get resources and things as one example.
A PvE server would require different balance. A player could on average gather 200 things per hour instead. The rest of the economy would either need to be rebalanced, crafting recipes being twice as much, or they just let things advance much quicker. At the very least, the economy and the rest of the game would be quite a bit different than a PvP server.
Of course they could have different gather respawn rates, rules, recipe costs and such between the PvP and PvE servers, but that's also more development/design cost going to balance another game mode.
They could do that, but it looks like Intrepid wants to focus on just a single experience and make that as good as possible. I think that's the right move at this point, given how closely all of the systems are designed to work together, it will be difficult to get the balance and pacing done right.
I'm personally not much into random PvP, but I'd really like to try this game and see how it works. It's easy to just think of worst case scenarios of griefing guilds and things others have brought up, but it's hard to see how all the systems together will really work without actual practical experience in them.
Sieges are instanced and consensual, dungeons and world bosses can have PvP enabled in their locations, caravans can have PvP enabled in their vicinity as well. Ruins would still have PvP enabled, and after a siege, freeholds would have PvP enabled. It's literally just turning PvP on and off depending on the context, no actual content needs to be changed. You can even remove the corruption system because greifing wouldn't be possible, so you actually need less work.
In other words you think people would be completely fine with literally never doing any type of content in the game, right? Cause all those BIG GUILD scares from the Lucky Ghost video will still remain, except now literally no one can stop such a guild.
They'll have a ton of players at pretty much all times of the day who'll be the first ones to gather valuable mats (either through bots or through cheap labor). They'll have the best gear, because, as you yourself said, dungeons and world bosses would be pvp zones - and that means that the big guild can just obliterate literally everyone who enters the zone w/o a single fucking penalty. All caravans (or at least the important ones) will be dominated by the big guilds so players will have to spend way more time running mules, though I doubt they'd even have enough resources to fill up those mules, because, again, the game is not changed so the resources are still limited and with the big guild gathering up most of them normal players wouldn't have shit.
In other words you think people would be completely fine with playing a nerfed version of the game. So then I gotta ask, how exactly is the current design any different? Hell, current design would at least punish those guilds with corruption if they try to murder people in a dungeon. And the same corruption system would allow smaller guilds to fight off the gathering members of the big guild.
If you want open world PvP you just play on a PvP server.
The game can be designed the exact same way and nothing needs to change other than on a PvE server, open world PvP is just disabled. You'd still have areas where PvP is enabled, just not the entire map.
As a PvP player, I agree with this guy. Better to play on a PvE server than getting corruption for killing a bot or toxic guys finishing all your mobs or stealing your ressources.
In a PvE server, the message would be clear : “No open world PvP”. In the current state of the rules, the message is: “you can open world PvP but don’t do it”.
The current state of the rules is 'You can Open World PvP but if your opponent doesn't accept your challenge you will face a penalty for killing them'.
If that sounds just like your own interpretation to you, then some might not say that Ashes Of Creation is Not For You.
I will play the game and decide myself if the game is for me or not. But thank you for your kind advice.
I hope so, I wouldn't agree with those people anyway.
Honestly I just want to understand this perspective. I play OwPvP games where people can just gank me and half my health be gone before I even see them, while I am fighting mobs. Those people get a Penalty.
I also recently had an experience where another player wanted a spot where I was gathering, smacked me for a challenge, and we fought. I guess it was First to 3 because after I beat them 3 times they stopped and went to do something else.
But they COULD have easily just killed me, and taken the penalty, because I was in Gathering gear and would have gone down easy enough. They waited for me to 'change gear', 'flag up', 'ping them back to let them know I was ready'.
Do you have a preference for which of those two experiences happens? I don't, but many others do (and I kinda just ignore the first honestly, even I won't fight back sometimes in that case, takes too long to change gear anyway)
If basically all open world PvP was a respectful environment that would be sick, I'd love to PvP while gathering, but only if it's an actual fair fight and not just a random guild rolling through me.
Right but this is, at least partially, what the current system is for. If you REALLY want to kill someone, take the Penalty. If two 'people who are generally willing to fight' meet at a spot they need to contest, both go Purple, they fight.
So I didn't understand what @Myosotys meant. I'm not gonna 'not challenge people' because of Corruption. I'm not going to 'refuse to fight a fair-enough fight' because of it either. I'm gonna PvP.
It means that no one wants double punishments. A bot or another player is harassing you so you are the victim. You kill him and you get punished again by corruption. It is totally unfair.
The game is based all around PvX, if we remove something from this - the game will not be playable and such servers will die and then the question remains how to merge this (closed PvE-server players) with PvX servers. Where is gonna be differnt economy, points.
It makes a far inferior version of the game run alongside the quality version of the game resulting in many people playing the low quality (PvE) version and being like ''yeah, this game is a flop''.
If there is no danger out in the world then there is no adeventure and if there is no adventure there is no real fun, just a soulless game and a sterile world.
If there is no real risk, there is no real feeling of reward.
Just a sterile ''this again'' which we've seen take the mmo-rpg janra into the ground.
It would inhbit social bonds (there's less of a need to make friends if you don't need friends to watch your back).
It would ruin economy (no competition = everything ends up worthless, just like in New World which was designed as a PvP mmo-rpg but then changed late development into a Carebear inclusive mmo-rpg).
It ruins the bountyhunter system.
In conclusion, if you give people the option to ruin their experience, to deny themselves lots of fun in the medium-long run for the sake of short-term convenience, they will absolutely do it and do it en mass.
I won't even go into the fact it's a first cataclysmic step towards convenience-nuking this game which is one of the main aspects which ruined the mmo-rpg janra.
Just, no thanks.
No PvE servers.
Keep the system as it is. Reading on how it works, corruptin system and all, it's very unlikely griefing will be a serious issue and if it is, the corruption system can always be buffed.
If you want open world PvP you just play on a PvP server.
The game can be designed the exact same way and nothing needs to change other than on a PvE server, open world PvP is just disabled. You'd still have areas where PvP is enabled, just not the entire map.
Many of the systems are designed around PvPvE/PvX game, so for example Caravans wont work, economy would probably also not work well (As we have seen in NW when a game is designed with PvX mind and at the last minute make it Optional) and etc. Which means that this servers have to be balanced separately which take dev resources which could be used for content and etc
it's very unlikely griefing will be a serious issue
Yeah gamers are a really friendly community that all love and respect each other.
Surely we won't see the giga nuclear griefers of doom turn the game into metagaming trash.
Surely making changes to a system from 2003 will be able to combat one of the sweatiest and most degenerate types of playstyles that has thrived in every system attempting to prevent it.
If you want open world PvP you just play on a PvP server.
The game can be designed the exact same way and nothing needs to change other than on a PvE server, open world PvP is just disabled. You'd still have areas where PvP is enabled, just not the entire map.
Many of the systems are designed around PvPvE/PvX game, so for example Caravans wont work, economy would probably also not work well (As we have seen in NW when a game is designed with PvX mind and at the last minute make it Optional) and etc. Which means that this servers have to be balanced separately which take dev resources which could be used for content and etc
Caravans still work, node sieges still work. If people don't want to use caravans because of the risk of being attacked, they lose out on the main method of transporting goods across long distances.
Yes the economy would be faster, but that just means node sieges happen more often and cities are destroyed sooner. It would just be a faster paced version of a PvP server because there is less of a barrier to reach endgame, but destroying nodes is still the main item sink that would remain untouched.
If you want open world PvP you just play on a PvP server.
The game can be designed the exact same way and nothing needs to change other than on a PvE server, open world PvP is just disabled. You'd still have areas where PvP is enabled, just not the entire map.
Many of the systems are designed around PvPvE/PvX game, so for example Caravans wont work, economy would probably also not work well (As we have seen in NW when a game is designed with PvX mind and at the last minute make it Optional) and etc. Which means that this servers have to be balanced separately which take dev resources which could be used for content and etc
Caravans still work, node sieges still work. If people don't want to use caravans because of the risk of being attacked, they lose out on the main method of transporting goods across long distances.
Yes the economy would be faster, but that just means node sieges happen more often and cities are destroyed sooner. It would just be a faster paced version of a PvP server because there is less of a barrier to reach endgame, but destroying nodes is still the main item sink that would remain untouched.
lies. game wont be same.
How do you dethrone a large guild? you cant harass guild members making them leave. you cant take their resources, notihng
If you want open world PvP you just play on a PvP server.
The game can be designed the exact same way and nothing needs to change other than on a PvE server, open world PvP is just disabled. You'd still have areas where PvP is enabled, just not the entire map.
Many of the systems are designed around PvPvE/PvX game, so for example Caravans wont work, economy would probably also not work well (As we have seen in NW when a game is designed with PvX mind and at the last minute make it Optional) and etc. Which means that this servers have to be balanced separately which take dev resources which could be used for content and etc
Caravans still work, node sieges still work. If people don't want to use caravans because of the risk of being attacked, they lose out on the main method of transporting goods across long distances.
Yes the economy would be faster, but that just means node sieges happen more often and cities are destroyed sooner. It would just be a faster paced version of a PvP server because there is less of a barrier to reach endgame, but destroying nodes is still the main item sink that would remain untouched.
lies. game wont be same.
How do you dethrone a large guild? you cant harass guild members making them leave. you cant take their resources, notihng
You can't do that in a PvP server either. The stronger guild just owns whatever they want.
Comments
Ok I thought you said just PvE. So you want only PvE in certain areas while keeping PvP alive everywhere else. In theory that could work but I’m not a fan of it because people could just hide away 24/7 in safe zones what could stop someone from doing that? This game is meant to be a challenge and made for PvP everywhere. There is supposed to be a risk at all times. Making a safe zone areas is against the spirit of what the developers want. I see where you’re coming from though but I doubt they will change it. The corruption mechanic is meant to stop people being killed over and over again.
Caravans are still a faster way of transporting more items. That is still useful in PvE servers. Sure people could just carry stuff around but if you want to spend 100 more hours doing something than that is a big tradeoff.
Moving goods faster means you can reach new markets first and make way more money.
does not compute.
As a PvP player, I agree with this guy. Better to play on a PvE server than getting corruption for killing a bot or toxic guys finishing all your mobs or stealing your ressources.
In a PvE server, the message would be clear : “No open world PvP”. In the current state of the rules, the message is: “you can open world PvP but don’t do it”.
The current state of the rules is 'You can Open World PvP but if your opponent doesn't accept your challenge you will face a penalty for killing them'.
If that sounds just like your own interpretation to you, then some might say that Ashes Of Creation is Not For You.
Soft systems like corruption don't prevent griefing, they only act as a deterrance. That's why safe zones exist in the first place, they are nessacary.
Now games like Rust are constant pure open world PvP at all times, and Rust is an awesome game that I love and have put hundreds of hours into.
But in Rust you can kill even the strongest player with a bow and arrow. In an MMO you cannot kill players who are massively stronger than you.
Greifing guilds will exist, and if they are able to grief, they will. The consequences won't stop them from greifing. They'll have alt accounts, they'll have deals with other guilds where they pay them to help them grief other guilds/players they don't like, you can't report RMT if you're not trading items.
Rust is a toxic game with a toxic community, and it's because that is the whole point of an unregulated pure PvP system. It's fun in Rust, but in an MMO? I don't think so.
Caravans are useful in PvE servers for the exact same reasons they are useful in PvP servers. There isn't any difference.
I’ll play the game and decide myself if the game is for me or not )) But thank you for your kind advice.
I will play the game and decide myself if the game is for me or not. But thank you for your kind advice.
I hope so, I wouldn't agree with those people anyway.
Honestly I just want to understand this perspective. I play OwPvP games where people can just gank me and half my health be gone before I even see them, while I am fighting mobs. Those people get a Penalty.
I also recently had an experience where another player wanted a spot where I was gathering, smacked me for a challenge, and we fought. I guess it was First to 3 because after I beat them 3 times they stopped and went to do something else.
But they COULD have easily just killed me, and taken the penalty, because I was in Gathering gear and would have gone down easy enough. They waited for me to 'change gear', 'flag up', 'ping them back to let them know I was ready'.
Do you have a preference for which of those two experiences happens? I don't, but many others do (and I kinda just ignore the first honestly, even I won't fight back sometimes in that case, takes too long to change gear anyway)
If basically all open world PvP was a respectful environment that would be sick, I'd love to PvP while gathering, but only if it's an actual fair fight and not just a random guild rolling through me.
Right but this is, at least partially, what the current system is for. If you REALLY want to kill someone, take the Penalty. If two 'people who are generally willing to fight' meet at a spot they need to contest, both go Purple, they fight.
So I didn't understand what @Myosotys meant. I'm not gonna 'not challenge people' because of Corruption. I'm not going to 'refuse to fight a fair-enough fight' because of it either. I'm gonna PvP.
The points still apply is the entire point of the post, doesn't matter if it's opt-in or a PvE server. If you make a PvE server you still have to change the entire game.
The thing is though, even if someone gets corrupted by killing you, someone who isn't corrupted can just take their place and kill you, and so on.
Disabling PvP in some areas does not require you to make any other changes. Should you make some changes? Possibly, but you do not need to, the game will still function.
Sieges are instanced and consensual, dungeons and world bosses can have PvP enabled in their locations, caravans can have PvP enabled in their vicinity as well. Ruins would still have PvP enabled, and after a siege, freeholds would have PvP enabled. It's literally just turning PvP on and off depending on the context, no actual content needs to be changed. You can even remove the corruption system because greifing wouldn't be possible, so you actually need less work.
Safe zones are very simple and easy to implement.
Intrepid is also not going to magically transform into some out of touch corporation if they add pve servers. Steven has made his vision pretty clear, that's why a lot of us have faith in the game, and that isnt going to change if they decide to add some pve servers.
So much panic in this thread. If Steven and the team decide that adding some pve servers will help support the game, it isnt going to affect us on our pvp servers. Take a deep breath and relax.
not this again. stat dampening wont make that possible. you literally get killed by a high level when you are level 10 and you yell in chat and bounty hunters will go kill that person. he cant cleanse corruption on time. in fact he will probably get soo much corruption and stat dampening than a level 10 might be able to kill a level 50.
Ashes of Creation is NOT a PVE GAME - STOP Trying to Make it One
Sure, but that's intentional. And if Corruption is strong enough, they won't want to. Whereas if one person pings me, and I fight and lose, I move on, and the next person pings me, etc.
If a world where the AVERAGE player doesn't just take the Corruption, exists, it's fine with me, even if I run into a set of them, because I just 'get a PvP fight each time and move on if I lose'. Conflict heavy games always have this 'issue' anyway.
I understand that the person who 'puts PvE first' might not want this, but with strong Corruption, 'Safe Zones' will sort of organically exist, I think.
Pvp only is bad. Pve only is bad. Pvx is the way.
A PvE server would require different balance. A player could on average gather 200 things per hour instead. The rest of the economy would either need to be rebalanced, crafting recipes being twice as much, or they just let things advance much quicker. At the very least, the economy and the rest of the game would be quite a bit different than a PvP server.
Of course they could have different gather respawn rates, rules, recipe costs and such between the PvP and PvE servers, but that's also more development/design cost going to balance another game mode.
They could do that, but it looks like Intrepid wants to focus on just a single experience and make that as good as possible. I think that's the right move at this point, given how closely all of the systems are designed to work together, it will be difficult to get the balance and pacing done right.
I'm personally not much into random PvP, but I'd really like to try this game and see how it works. It's easy to just think of worst case scenarios of griefing guilds and things others have brought up, but it's hard to see how all the systems together will really work without actual practical experience in them.
They'll have a ton of players at pretty much all times of the day who'll be the first ones to gather valuable mats (either through bots or through cheap labor). They'll have the best gear, because, as you yourself said, dungeons and world bosses would be pvp zones - and that means that the big guild can just obliterate literally everyone who enters the zone w/o a single fucking penalty. All caravans (or at least the important ones) will be dominated by the big guilds so players will have to spend way more time running mules, though I doubt they'd even have enough resources to fill up those mules, because, again, the game is not changed so the resources are still limited and with the big guild gathering up most of them normal players wouldn't have shit.
In other words you think people would be completely fine with playing a nerfed version of the game. So then I gotta ask, how exactly is the current design any different? Hell, current design would at least punish those guilds with corruption if they try to murder people in a dungeon. And the same corruption system would allow smaller guilds to fight off the gathering members of the big guild.
It means that no one wants double punishments. A bot or another player is harassing you so you are the victim. You kill him and you get punished again by corruption. It is totally unfair.
It makes a far inferior version of the game run alongside the quality version of the game resulting in many people playing the low quality (PvE) version and being like ''yeah, this game is a flop''.
If there is no danger out in the world then there is no adeventure and if there is no adventure there is no real fun, just a soulless game and a sterile world.
If there is no real risk, there is no real feeling of reward.
Just a sterile ''this again'' which we've seen take the mmo-rpg janra into the ground.
It would inhbit social bonds (there's less of a need to make friends if you don't need friends to watch your back).
It would ruin economy (no competition = everything ends up worthless, just like in New World which was designed as a PvP mmo-rpg but then changed late development into a Carebear inclusive mmo-rpg).
It ruins the bountyhunter system.
In conclusion, if you give people the option to ruin their experience, to deny themselves lots of fun in the medium-long run for the sake of short-term convenience, they will absolutely do it and do it en mass.
I won't even go into the fact it's a first cataclysmic step towards convenience-nuking this game which is one of the main aspects which ruined the mmo-rpg janra.
Just, no thanks.
No PvE servers.
Keep the system as it is. Reading on how it works, corruptin system and all, it's very unlikely griefing will be a serious issue and if it is, the corruption system can always be buffed.
Many of the systems are designed around PvPvE/PvX game, so for example Caravans wont work, economy would probably also not work well (As we have seen in NW when a game is designed with PvX mind and at the last minute make it Optional) and etc. Which means that this servers have to be balanced separately which take dev resources which could be used for content and etc
Yeah gamers are a really friendly community that all love and respect each other.
Surely we won't see the giga nuclear griefers of doom turn the game into metagaming trash.
Surely making changes to a system from 2003 will be able to combat one of the sweatiest and most degenerate types of playstyles that has thrived in every system attempting to prevent it.
Surely.
Caravans still work, node sieges still work. If people don't want to use caravans because of the risk of being attacked, they lose out on the main method of transporting goods across long distances.
Yes the economy would be faster, but that just means node sieges happen more often and cities are destroyed sooner. It would just be a faster paced version of a PvP server because there is less of a barrier to reach endgame, but destroying nodes is still the main item sink that would remain untouched.
lies. game wont be same.
How do you dethrone a large guild? you cant harass guild members making them leave. you cant take their resources, notihng
You can't do that in a PvP server either. The stronger guild just owns whatever they want.