Glorious Alpha Two Testers!

Phase I of Alpha Two testing will occur on weekends. Each weekend is scheduled to start on Fridays at 10 AM PT and end on Sundays at 10 PM PT. Find out more here.

Check out Alpha Two Announcements here to see the latest Alpha Two news and update notes.

Our quickest Alpha Two updates are in Discord. Testers with Alpha Two access can chat in Alpha Two channels by connecting your Discord and Intrepid accounts here.

PvE Server

123457»

Comments

  • BlackBronyBlackBrony Member, Alpha Two
    Craiken wrote: »
    I would love to hear Steven's reasons for why a PVE server wouldn't work. He talks a lot about how corruption is supposed to make player killing rare, but player killing must be important for his vision. Otherwise, why allow it at all?

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aNpiuKCX3Dk

    There you go.

    Also PKing might be rare, as in engaging in non consensual PvP. The moment you fight back it's consensual, therefore not subject to corruption.
    PKing will be rare because people won't want to deal with corruption, but they will for sure try to get you engaged in PvP.
  • Mag7spyMag7spy Member, Alpha Two
    At this point i think we just need Steven's quote from the last dev stream.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DZfqaW5klpg
  • CraikenCraiken Member
    I watched the videos. The best point, IMO, was that transporting goods via mule needs to be risky. If it's not risky, people might avoid using caravans which are a core mechanic of the game.
  • DygzDygz Member, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    Strevi wrote: »
    Would be a different game though, with risk provided only by how the developers balance the NPCs who kill players.
    *shrug*


    Strevi wrote: »
    Players would demand NPCs to be nerfed and be upset if developers don't do that. Basically the risk vs reward would be tuned down, would become predictable and the game would reward those players who resist well to mindless grinding, and those who can team up with any strangers they meet using dungen finder tools which brings them together form multiple servers. Who plays such PvE games years long?
    NPCs would not need to be nerfed. Since players will not be in combat with other players, NPCs will be eaiser to defeat. PvE server players would not be asking for NPCs to be nerfed.
    Risk might not be as hardcore. Kardcore PvPers, like Steven, seem to care about that. Sure.
    People who play MMORPGs on PvE-Only servers play for multiple decades. If there is sufficient content.
    And, with players able to choose when they PvP... we can still expect plenty of content.
    For Ashes, even PvE servers would still be abe initiate Caravan and Siege PvP.

    Strevi wrote: »
    On a PvP server, players are typically upset on other players and only indirectly upon the developer, for choosing to create a PvP game.
    I have no idea what you are trying to say or why it would be relevant.
    Maybe rephrase?


    Strevi wrote: »
    The only disadvantage is the difficulty to merge servers and preserve the political balance. But having two continents separated by a large PvP area, makes this easier as the players on low population servers might group on one continent only, where they have a lvl 6 metropolis.
    That is not really a thing.
  • StreviStrevi Member
    Dygz wrote: »
    Strevi wrote: »
    Would be a different game though, with risk provided only by how the developers balance the NPCs who kill players.
    *shrug*

    Strevi wrote: »
    Players would demand NPCs to be nerfed and be upset if developers don't do that. Basically the risk vs reward would be tuned down, would become predictable and the game would reward those players who resist well to mindless grinding, and those who can team up with any strangers they meet using dungen finder tools which brings them together form multiple servers. Who plays such PvE games years long?
    NPCs would not need to be nerfed. Since players will not be in combat with other players, NPCs will be eaiser to defeat. PvE server players would not be asking for NPCs to be nerfed.
    Risk might not be as hardcore. Kardcore PvPers, like Steven, seem to care about that. Sure.
    People who play MMORPGs on PvE-Only servers play for multiple decades. If there is sufficient content.
    And, with players able to choose when they PvP... we can still expect plenty of content.
    For Ashes, even PvE servers would still be abe initiate Caravan and Siege PvP.

    Strevi wrote: »
    On a PvP server, players are typically upset on other players and only indirectly upon the developer, for choosing to create a PvP game.
    I have no idea what you are trying to say or why it would be relevant.
    Maybe rephrase?


    Strevi wrote: »
    The only disadvantage is the difficulty to merge servers and preserve the political balance. But having two continents separated by a large PvP area, makes this easier as the players on low population servers might group on one continent only, where they have a lvl 6 metropolis.
    That is not really a thing.

    I drop my argument. Your initial statement that
    "It would just be too much effort for the devs to keep it working alongside the PvP servers."
    is good enough :)
    September 12. 2022: Being naked can also be used to bring a skilled artisan to different freeholds... Don't summon family!
  • LittleVoidlingLittleVoidling Member, Alpha Two
    Killing Open World PvP means you'll be killing off caravan PvP as there would be no incentive to risk losing your goods when you can guarantee transport by carrying goods on your person.

    Not to mention your ability to defend nodes from becoming barren due to overharvesting will be gone as well.
Sign In or Register to comment.