Greetings, glorious testers!
Check out Alpha Two Announcements here to see the latest news on Alpha Two.
Check out general Announcements here to see the latest news on Ashes of Creation & Intrepid Studios.
To get the quickest updates regarding Alpha Two, connect your Discord and Intrepid accounts here.
Check out Alpha Two Announcements here to see the latest news on Alpha Two.
Check out general Announcements here to see the latest news on Ashes of Creation & Intrepid Studios.
To get the quickest updates regarding Alpha Two, connect your Discord and Intrepid accounts here.
Comments
I think you are right in that a large section of PvEers may find the game interesting and fun, specifically people who may not be as entrenched (Dygz and Co.) in their views. Which is an absolutely understandable position, especially given that a lot of us come from a long history of MMOs (I consider myself young blood at 30 years old and SWG back in 2003) and preferences are what they are. But based on the "promises (subject to change tm)" and the explanation we have been given it sounds like this may be a game for a larger PvE audience. This will also be caveated by the fact that we have seen nothing yet and A2 and beyond will be the decider but again I believe this could find that balance where PvEers can enjoy this space given the severity of the expected corruption penalties.
Whatever degree of PvE you may consider L2 to be... the devs have specifically stated that its successor, Throne and Liberty, will be more PvE-focused.
I don't measure PvP-centric games by time spent in PvP v PvE.
I certainly don't measure PvP-centric games by wealth.
I measure PvP-centric games by the mechanics that prevent non-consensual PvP.
I agree. There is so much fear mongering and worst case scenario talk, that I stopped reading most of the threads.
I see a big potential, that many PvEers will come to enjoy the system. If I look at the open world flagging system, my first thoughts are not about a griefer paradise.
I see situations, where I see someone harassing a gatherer by attacking, but not killing, and me joining with the gatherer and killing that guy together. Or whispering the gatherer to strip, and letting the guy kill him, so I can kill the now red guy and reap the rewards. I'd share with the gatherer, when he's back.
There is also one thing, that isn't mentioned very often. If there are less carebear-PvEers in a game, the ressources become scarcer and more valuable. The game mechanics(random spawns/landmanagement) don't support fixed farming routes. If pure PvE players decide that AoC is not for them, because they want there routine mining routes, that they farm on respawn, without the risk of PvP, thats not a bad thing. Gathering might even become the most profitable activity of the game.
All speculation of course, but not less probable, than the doomsday scenarios.
You realize people can flag and kill you freely at night without penalty, right?
Wouldn't you like that sweet, sweet revenge for everytime you got non-consensually killed in past games?
Imagine you see someone shoutout in chat, that someone just PKed him for no reason. You see the red dot appears near you. You start chasing.....he can't get away(speed debuff)....he's no real challenge(debuffs), but he is full of nice loot....people cheer you on in chat...the mayor announces a bounty...there he is......there he dies....time to dance on his corpse....evil has been defeated.
Did I mention, that there is a game, that promises mechanics like that?
Your take on this is really smart!
This is what I am talking about when I say that devs in many games have hidden the PvP gear behind a wall of PvE grinds and they forced the PvPers to grind for gear for hundreds of hours!
Can you imagine how a PvE carebear would feel if the good crafting materials were hidden behind a wall of hundreds of hours in the arena?
So I like getting materials through PvP too, even if it's small prizes
To me it is interesting the PvP gear is not hidden behind a wall of PvE, I like everything mixed and some stuff completely random
Hmmm.....maybe have them work together....like dungeon crawlers take crafters into the difficult dungeons and have PvPers defend them from other groups. The crafters/gatherers get the ressources and craft the best gear for everyone. You know....like a game, that is focused on social interaction....where the different fractions have to work together.....like......naaaaaah, will never work. Forget it.
The difference is - PvE players wouldn't play that game, they would play one that is better suited to what they want.
PvP players would do well to take heed of the general intelligence of the average PvE player. If the game isnt suited to you, dont play it.
Now, people want just PvP and no PvE will have some real trouble finding that I an MMORPG, but that is because other game genres took that market segment from them. To realize this, even if not understand or accept it, all you need to do is remember how LOL's release decimated the populations of all PvP MMO's at the time (WoW's PvP scene has never recovered, WAR lost so many players they shut the game a few years later,it affected every PvP MMO that could be considered current at the time).
Back when L2 launched, the concept of fighting another person over the internet was new and novel. Not many game genres allowed for it. Now though, FPS, BR and MOBA games have all shown that they are far better suited to facilitating this than an MMORPG could ever be - and so this is where most players wanting just PvP have gone.
This is why the MMO PvP scene has been a sideline in games as a whole, or a major feature of second rate games since 2009.
I agree with almost this entire post as I do believe PvP has been sidelined due to the fact that MMO PvP is not truly the "essence" of player vs player the same way CS:GO - LOL - DOTA - etc capture that better. But I don't think MMO PvP players are the same type of player. Coming from someone with 3-4k hours in DOTA and hundreds in the other games mentioned (am a PvP player). There is something captured in an MMO in terms of having a character that is persistent that has me returning to MMOs time and time again since once the game is over in DOTA my character is as well.
I think as the evolution of games and genres continue, there is a space for PvP players/PvE players in hybrid systems and even games with solely instanced PvP as I have made peace with as I do very much enjoy PvE for what it is. But I think the very narrow population of "PvP and PvP only" would be better suited for other games but again. That is an extremely small demographic.
Yeah, that is what I was hoping Ashes would be.
PvE needs to come first in a PvX MMO, and PvP needs to only be applicable in specific situations. An MMO is never going to compete with a MOBA, BR or FPS for the PvP segment, even people that prefer PvP to PvE will get the bulk of that PvP fix in other genres.
What an MMO needs to do is basically what you say, be the best PvE MMO it can be, and then add in PvP aspects that fit in with this.
Imagine a good PvE MMO, but with Ashes caravan system being an integral aspect of crafting. The sieging component of Ashes could be another good avenue to add PvP to an otherwise PvE game. Make it so theat both siege engines and rewards from top end raids in this game need to be transported via the caravan system, and you have a far more interesting game, with far wider appeal.
It wont appeal to PvP players that want all PvP all the time, but as I've said, those players are better served in other genres.
I dunno what would be enticing me to give chase.
People cheering me on in chat would be irrelevant.
None of what you described appeals to my playstyle.
Yes.
Player stories can also be made through PvE. Which is what I prefer.
I don't agree that describes Steven's vision of PvX.
In Ashes, PvX just means PvPers will need to do some PvE. And that PvE will lead to more PvP.
So... it's really just about supporting more PvP in a PvP-centric game.
EQNext had the better design for what you hope for.
But, that's not going to be a thing in Ashes, as far as I can tell.
I mean 'beating a world boss spawns a Loot Caravan' is one of the most 'obvious' designs for this, right?
Your PvP group leader just immediately takes over from your PvE leader as soon as the mob falls. Instant 'FFA PvP' to deal with, but without the crazy hassles of figuring out how to 'most perfectly grief people'.
Could even give people a delay or spawn it somewhere slightly different to start if it was a boss in a dungeon.
I'm sure someone at Intrepid has thought of this, if they're literally making Artisans have to be there for certain bosses.
And in the usual context of "pvers don't pvp", that raid group would be shit against the same-sized pvp-centric group. Maybe you could assign someone else for the defense and you'd point to your guild's pvp raid group, and maybe they'd be teleported to the picked location of the caravan (same as the newly updated caravan spawn system), but at that point we're so deep into maybes and unknown sides of the mechanics' design that I dunno if it would feel good to play it out.
You'd also have to make those caravans sink-less, or at least I feel like people would hate it if their well-earned loot poofed out of existence after a super difficult boss fight that took a ton of attempts.
Oh, and there's also the potential of the defending side registering their own players (or mercs) for the attack side and filling out the limit so that their enemies couldn't do the same.
And I feel like all of these issues would be non-existent if the game supported some proper agro control of mobs and/or a few different pvp mechanics before the fight for the right to farm the thing (or at least the dibs to farm first).
It may be possible - like you I'm not willing to say definitively in either direction.
However, what is clear is that Intrepid have no desire to do this. Their idea of PvX is everyone else's idea of PvP - in terms of an MMO at least.
That puts Ashea in that corner of the genre that will only really attract PvP players, but wont atteact PvP players that are getting their PvP fix on genres better suited to it.
Bold prediction here - we will see one more generation of PvP MMO's, and that is it. PvP after that will be relegated to the side - where it is the best fit for an MMORPG.
The part about this that is of most interest to me is what that will do to action vs tab in subsequent generations of MMO's.
To establish law and order in your nodes ZoI? To help someone get back his ressources, which where non-consensually taken from him? Strengthening your nodes community/guild community? Getting paid for doing it? Roleplaying? Or maybe just making griefing less profitable and getting toxic game destroyers to chose another game, where that is easier.
Well, I like positive social interaction in an mmo. But that's just me.
If anyone says, that killing someone, who just killed one of mine, or cheering someone on doing that, is griefing, then i beg to differ.
Your answer feels really dismissive. Like alot of things AoC related you commented lately. I really thought, it would be a narrative you could get behind.
Quote Dygz: "I like the Idea of defending and building my city....wether I'm defending it from mobs, or environmental disasters, or from other players"
Isn't defending the area and the gatherers that collect ressources(contribute to growing the city) part of that. I'd say killing/chasing PKers, so that the gatherers feel safer is.
Quote Dygz: " ...if I could choose the asthetics of my towns I might be doing more PvP in New World...that's the kind of PvP that is meaningful to me..."
That wasn't in the example, but you can easyly add it. Your race xy guild gatherer got killed. You can actually influence the building style by defending a certain race, that colllects experience for your node.
Quote Dygz: "...but I don't wanna be involved with PvP all the time and I abhor being autoflagged."
You'd probably mostly be gathering yourself and you wouldn't be autoflagged in your nodes ZoI.
It's kind of confusing to me, when you say those things (2-3 days ago on his podcast/free add yw) and then state none of what I said appeals to your playstyle. The only difference I see, is that all you mentioned could be done as a solo player, or as a solo player with other humans around you, but no real interaction except throwing spells at each other. I'm starting to think, that it's not really the PvP you're on about, but the slim chance, that anyone affects your game in any way, but the way you want/allow them to and benefits you.
I don't play RPGs to PvP and, I'm not particularly interested in hunting down NPC "criminals" either.
I have 0 interest in game mechanics that try to get players to discourage toxic gameplay.
Game mechanics should just prevent that type of gameplay.
Corruption might work to sufficiently discourage that toxic behavior, but I would have to test that to know.
I would not chase players to establish law and order.
I have zero interest in pursuing players to try to retrieve items from them.
There should be other ways to strengthen Node and Guild communities besides chasing down other players.
Payment is not a strong motivator for me in RPGs. I play RPGs to experience a protagonists life in fantasy/sci-fi novels and those plots are rarely about the protagonist striving to get paid. Gandalf isn't really trying to hunt people down for payment.
I would rather play a game where the game mechanics don't allow griefing - and for me griefing is primarily non-consensual PvP.
I would rather choose to play a different game that doesn't allow griefing than try to push griefers out of a game that allows griefing.
I like positive social interaction in MMORPGs, too.
That has nothing to do with PvP or egging people on while they PvP.
PvP really has nothing to do with being social in my view.
Does remind me of when I was a kid.
Some dude on the bus apparently insulted me and my older brother was telling me to kick his ass.
I was all, "Why?"
My brother said, "Because he insulted you so you have to kick his ass."
I was all, "But... I don't care."
My brother said, "If you don't kick his ass, I'm going to kick your ass."
That sounds like mafia and feud mentality.
I don't think anyone would call that griefing.
I understand that PvPers love that motivation loop.
It's not gameplay that appeals to me.
I'd say that's an odd use of the word "dismissive".
Maybe if my only response was "LMFAO", I might agree that is dismissive.
Instead I informed you that none of what you've suggested appeals to my playstyle.
None of what you suggested is a form of PvP that enjoy.
Defending an area could be a form of PvP I would like, but not in the scenarios you've suggested. And being auto-flagged in the area would still be a deal-breaker, but...
If depleting an area of resources could result in a catastrophic Event, I might be motivated to kill players who continue to deplete that region despite my admonishments to stop. Not because I care about the PvP, but because PvP might be necessary to prevent the regional catastrophe. That would still be a last resort.
Similarly, I might be motivated to reclaim an object from an enemy lair - but that would be about a place; not a player. And, that might involve some PvP, but it would still need to be with Non-Combatant as the default mode and Corruption in play.
Or a temporary scenario, like a Siege, rather than a permanent scenario, like the Open Seas.
Again, I understand that killing PKers is a fun motivator for PvPers.
It just has no appeal for me. It's not a form of PvP I enjoy.
The form of PvP I enjoy is already part of the Ashes of Creation Node Siege design.
It includes racial architecture as a motivator. That does appeal to me.
Protecting a gatherer from getting killed really has nothing to do with that.
Definitely has nothing to do with auto-flagging in the Open Seas.
The issue is that players will be auto-flagged in the Open Seas.
That is a deal-breaker for me.
Right. Again. I understand that it's confusing to PvPers.
I've been having these discussions with PvPers and PvEers ever since EQNext chose to exclude PvE-Only servers from its design 9 years ago.
It's common for PvPers to not understand the needs of non-PvPers and for non-PvPers to not understand the needs of PvPers.
It's challenging to get players who typically play on PvE-Only servers to play a game with PvP that does not have a PvE-Only server - precisely because these two playstyles also have opposing perspectives about gameplay.
PvPers hope that Corruption will solve that challenge. Sure.
But, Corruption can't solve the challenge if the game includes permanent zones without Corruption.
The difference in your scenarios has very little to do with solo play v group play.
The difference is that I enjoy objective-based PvP, where I am really focused on completing the objectives. I'm not really interested in the actual combat.
My Bartle Score is Explorer 87%; Socializer 73% ; Achiever 47%; Killer 0%
While the 0% Killer rating is not completely accurate, it's a fairly decent measure of what interests me in RPGs. I kill sometimes. But it is the very least of my interests.
Combat is the least of my interests. I typically use Social Skills in D&D to avoid combat. PvP combat is the very least of my interests, but... when I am interested, I'm usually focused on very specific objectives that don't involve killing.
I'm a carebear, so the scenarios you suggested just aren't going to be motivators for me. You're trying to convince a pacifist to fight. And, while it's not impossible to find scenarios where I will be motivated to fight, it's not going to be over stuff that easily motivate PvPers.
What I've been hoping for group play is that augments will allow us to synergize our attacks with the attacks of other players in the group, so... I have been quite eager for player interaction. I'm not particularly interested in "player interaction" with enemies in PvP combat, but I have been intrigued by the defense of Caravans and Sieges and opportunities to synergize my abilities with the abilities of other player defenders to do so.
Doesn't necessarily matter whether that defense is vs mobs or players or environmental catastrophes, but...
The game having a permanent zone that auto-flags as a Combatant would still be a deal-breaker because I am an explorer first and foremeost - who only enjoys PvP sometimes. Which means I would need to be exploring the Open Seas primarily as a Non-Combatant.
I think it will all be fine, I played WoW for many years and I played WoW when there were PVP servers. Even then people did not attack on sight because they were not in a mood to attack, they just choose PVP to have fight from time to time.
People will be selfish and they won't attack everyone because then they would not be able to play questing/gathering/PvE. If you are purple that does not mean you have to PVP everyone. Trust me it will be fine, only hard core PVPers will attack everyone on sight.
Or a neighbor node sends players to kill lumberjacks, so they can't finish the gathering quest your node needs to progress. BAM, their node grows and yours is blocked. Of course it has. Everything you do in your node's ZoI, like gathering, gathering quests, town quests, etc contributes to the progress of the node. The race of those that contributes most determins the style of the buildings. So if you send out a group of questers/gatherers of a certain race(like guildies from your tulnar guild), it would further your goal to protect them from PKers.
I could fantasize of more examples, but you will find ways to dismiss them anyways. The point is, I can find as many ways to make it fit, as you can to say it doesn't. Flatly dismissing it, just suggests a general unwillingness.
Comparing the situation to the mafia and especially to egging someone on to physically harm someone is really a lowblow. I don't even know what to say to that. I was talking about punishing someone, who did something, that you strongly condemn yourself. I'm sorry, if you have been bullied in your childhood, but please don't suggest, that I fit into that category, or that I'm like your brother. I'm sorry, you have a brother like that. If I'm supporting someone, to punish a corrupted player, I'm supporting a game mechanic, that is designed to minimize toxic behaviour. Mafia....really?
I will try to be more sensible though, regarding your bullying experiences. But please don't compare everyone, who likes any kind of PvP to bullies, toxic griefers or hc PvPers. The confusing part, is not that I don't understand PvPers or the needs of PvEers, but that you constantly contradict yourself sometimes, even in the same post. You talk about EQN, a game that promised alot and delivered even less than Pantheon, and T&L, a game we know even less about than AoC, to explain the game design you like. Didn't T&L already announce a non-consensual autoflagging mechanic with a free night time gank-fest? I suppose it's optional if you stay in the city. Really? You get that from that one dev quote? Do you know anything about, how PvE will feel in AoC? You're even not just talking about you but PvEers in general. Ah.....right you understand the needs of PvEers. What is your obsession with the open sea? I never mentioned it anywhere and nothing I talked about has anything to do with permanent PvP zones or autoflagging.
And yes.....I think being ok with caravans and sieges because they are temporary and the open seas being a deal-breaker is contradictory. I'm still getting autoflagged when I accidentally pass a caravan and can be non-consensually PKed and the content of just watching a siege while it happens is blocked to me because I can't just spectate. How is it possible that you can't construct an objective for yourself to explore the seas, if gathering ressources, or a quest to kill a boss isn't enough narrative for you? I don't think the reason why I'm a bit confused about that, is because I don't understand the needs of PvEers.
I AM A PvEer GODDAMMIT!!!
I don't like the attitude of griefers, hc-PvPers and most self defined PvPers. I don't like the combat(fast paced gear and level dependant), that they like. I hate arenas and duels.
I love gathering, processing and crafting. I don't like dungeon grinding and hate mob grinding, but love exploring and doing dungeons for the first time without guides. I am a PvEer, I am a PvXer and I love a certain type o PvP, that is totally different from what is considered good PvP by self defined PvPers. You described some of it, in your description of enjoyable PvP and I don't want to go into detail here. But...I recognize some of it, when Steven talks about his PvP experiences and that makes me hopeful.
What confuses me is your total aversion to being killled by another player, when you weren't prepared and specifically agreed to it. I loved exploring in WAR, WoW Aion and some other early games. In the newer games however it got stale. It felt like PoI grinding, even in the very beautiful scenery in BDO. The only experience I can remember, is when I died a couple of times climbing the highest tower in that fishing village and the view from up there and the tidelines on the coast. Hmmm....starting to remember more now. Point is, I remember those times, when the world felt alive. You know where I'm going. Yes, I'm with Steven in thinking that the risk of dying makes the world feel alive, like the PvP zones in WAR, the zones where high level mobs had giant aggro radii in WoW and the need to check the horizon for wings in Aion.
I don't care if the risk is from fall damage, roaming field bosses or other players and I don't feel cheated, if there are areas that are too dangerous for me alone.
I played with alot of people, who considered themselfs to be hardcore PvEers and none of them would've considered an autoflag zone, or an occasional non-consensual death to be a deal breaker.