Azherae wrote: » Myosotys wrote: » Azherae wrote: » Myosotys wrote: » worddog wrote: » How does a PvE server hurt the game exactly? 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)
Myosotys wrote: » Azherae wrote: » Myosotys wrote: » worddog wrote: » How does a PvE server hurt the game exactly? 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.
Azherae wrote: » Myosotys wrote: » worddog wrote: » How does a PvE server hurt the game exactly? 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.
Myosotys wrote: » worddog wrote: » How does a PvE server hurt the game exactly? 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”.
worddog wrote: » How does a PvE server hurt the game exactly? 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.
worddog wrote: » Azherae wrote: » Myosotys wrote: » Azherae wrote: » Myosotys wrote: » worddog wrote: » How does a PvE server hurt the game exactly? 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.
worddog wrote: » Talents wrote: » 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.
Talents wrote: » 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.
Azherae wrote: » worddog wrote: » Azherae wrote: » Myosotys wrote: » Azherae wrote: » Myosotys wrote: » worddog wrote: » How does a PvE server hurt the game exactly? 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.
Talents wrote: » worddog wrote: » Talents wrote: » 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.
worddog wrote: » BlackBrony wrote: » worddog wrote: » Lust69 wrote: » 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.
BlackBrony wrote: » worddog wrote: » Lust69 wrote: » 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.
worddog wrote: » Lust69 wrote: » 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.
Lust69 wrote: » 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.
worddog wrote: » Azherae wrote: » worddog wrote: » Azherae wrote: » Myosotys wrote: » Azherae wrote: » Myosotys wrote: » worddog wrote: » How does a PvE server hurt the game exactly? 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.
wrms wrote: » 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.
worddog wrote: » 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.
worddog wrote: » How does a PvE server hurt the game exactly?
Ironhope wrote: » worddog wrote: » How does a PvE server hurt the game exactly? it's very unlikely griefing will be a serious issue
Beyolf wrote: » worddog wrote: » How does a PvE server hurt the game exactly? 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
worddog wrote: » Beyolf wrote: » worddog wrote: » How does a PvE server hurt the game exactly? 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.
BlackBrony wrote: » guild dominates castl worddog wrote: » Beyolf wrote: » worddog wrote: » How does a PvE server hurt the game exactly? 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
