Oh, I knew it was a joke. I'm just too boring not to point out that some people take that joke seriously and will fail cause it is a joke to attempt this.
And get x1.5 more corruption for no additional value? If the owner was a fighter he'd probably try to keep the mule alive in the first place. But even if he does try to kill me afterwards, I'll just have to try and outskill him in combat.
We also don't know whether your party/guild mates can loot the mule that you PKed, cause if they can then you can pretty much lose nothing but gain a ton.
I would think the additional value would be survival. If you are in a group then i doubt you would all focus the mule unless the mule is ridden. I doubt loot will be shared across a group due to corruption coming from the killing blow. Mules aren't caravans.
You would probably compete for the mule kill in a group.
You can join mine. Though mine is for testing, so you have to actually put effort into that (compile experiences that go beyond just statistics for Intrepid, etc).
I'm short a person or two due to some recent design decisions.
@Azherae
Thank you for the offer, but as much as I like the rush I get from pvp, I'm not very good at it.
Believe it or not, that's exactly what I need right now.
Speaking more seriously, if 'only people who are actually good at it' are willing to PvP in this way in Ashes, I foresee 'bad things', so I'm interested in collecting the data from all levels of skill.
(don't consider this 'seriously doubling down', I got the joke, just figured I might as well option-select the offer)
If only the PKer can loot their victim (no matter if player or mule), then the loot can just be shared later, there'd be no competition for it.
But I would definitely prefer if that was the case cause it'd support the corruption and BH systems much better.
Yeah. I'm not sure how it will work because a mule can carry 100 times the amount of a player unless its changed so 25% drop would be too much for one player to receive. I'm not sure how it will work really.
Yeah. I'm not sure how it will work because a mule can carry 100 times the amount of a player unless its changed so 25% drop would be too much for one player to receive. I'm not sure how it will work really.
Mule is x10 not x100. So even if the drop is 10%, you'd be getting a full inventory from a fully stacked mule. And any higher percentage would just let you kill mules that are not fully stacked.
So the amount has dropped but you would have to run with an empty inventory to get the full inventory's worth. You might even have to use a mule to carry the excess stuff if a corrupted player can use a mule. Thus, you could still get away with 60% of 10% if you died and lost 40%.
So the amount has dropped but you would have to run with an empty inventory to get the full inventory's worth. You might even have to use a mule to carry the excess stuff if a corrupted player can use a mule. Thus, you could still get away with 60% of 10% if you died and lost 40%.
We don't know the amount. My 10% were just for an example of the lower beneficial limit. But no matter what the values are, I don't think that using a mule as a red player would be viable.
The point is, PKing the mule is more beneficial cause it gives you less corruption and more loot.
Yes I agree. But, corruption is still corruption and the green player can still defend the mule. You flag against the mule and while you are flagged you are free game to be countered.
I don't actually know much about mule health though but the point remains that a dude or dudette with a mule isn't just going to stand there and lose percentages of 10 times the usual capacities.
I'm not saying a mule will always be full but a mule indicates at least more than one inventory's worth of resources unless its an rp player who prefers mules and pvp.
Yes I agree. But, corruption is still corruption and the green player can still defend the mule. You flag against the mule and while you are flagged you are free game to be countered.
I don't actually know much about mule health though but the point remains that a dude or dudette with a mule isn't just going to stand there and lose percentages of 10 times the usual capacities.
I'm not saying a mule will always be full but a mule indicates at least more than one inventory's worth of resources unless its an rp player who prefers mules and pvp.
Yeah, I brought that up before. If the rider is a fighter they'll just fight back. And if the attackers had more than one person then they'll just deal with them. And if the drop percentages are higher than 20% then even a flagged fully stacked mule would give more than a player's inventory loot.
But I think we've gone too far from the topic. Mules will most likely be slower than player sprinting speeds so no one would be able to run away using them, at which point it'll always be a "fight or die" situation.
@Azherae
Thank you for the offer, but as much as I like the rush I get from pvp, I'm not very good at it.
Believe it or not, that's exactly what I need right now.
Speaking more seriously, if 'only people who are actually good at it' are willing to PvP in this way in Ashes, I foresee 'bad things', so I'm interested in collecting the data from all levels of skill.
(don't consider this 'seriously doubling down', I got the joke, just figured I might as well option-select the offer)
Again, I really do appreciate the offer, but I don't think I am a good match for your guild at this time. Maybe my thoughts will change after we start playing. Until then good luck with your recruiting.
New plan, Lets start a PK guild and start working out how we can take advantage of the system.
haha
have a low level player run around hitting people if u happen to kill somone o well it was a throw away character anyway, if they fight back run a high level character or your main over to kill them once they go purple to bypass the system
New plan, Lets start a PK guild and start working out how we can take advantage of the system.
haha
have a low level player run around hitting people if u happen to kill someone o well it was a throw away character anyway, if they fight back run a high level character or your main over to kill them once they go purple to bypass the system
HAHA, If that worked. Get two people, One person make a low level alt that will entice the victim to try and fight back, while the second person with a high level character waiting in the wings to finish him off as soon as he turns purple.
I mean, I doubt it's a "cannot escape" kind of situation, but it'd definitely be easier to run away as a green than as a purple or red.
Yeah thats moreso what I meant, I generally make statements in terms of what is optimal rather than what is "possible", so it can come off confusing to the reader sometimes. In terms of that statement you were referencing- I meant the design would not allow for it to be optimal to retreat when both players are flagged and already engaged in combat, even though it might technically be possible if the pursuing player messes up- while still allowing for retreat to be a viable strategy for a non-combatant to retreat even if the pursing combatant plays well.
Also, if those ambushers really wanted to PK the green - I'd assume they could just hit their victim all together and bring the ttk from 30s-1m down to mere seconds. A lot of things will depend on a lot of other things. The attackers might've been glass cannons, while the victim barely had any defense stats. There could be just one attacker against a green tank or there could be 10 attackers against a weak support. In other words, it's not as easy as just saying "these types of players will always live and these will always die", but I think that the currently proposed ttk is good and that green players should in fact have higher chances of running away.
Yeah I agree- my suggestions are intended to be within the context of assuming the rest of the systems work coherently to achieve the desired goal- so even though those things could potentially affect the topic, I would consider that an oversight if they allow that to happen. In other words even though the idea that "these types of players will always live and these will always die" can be impacted by many factors- those factors should be accounted for in order to result in "these types of players will always live and these will always die" if that is what the intent in the design is trying to accomplish.
You would kill the mule get a stat decrease and be killed by the green dropping 4x more.
In such a circumstance you should kill the green and then the mule as the mule can't fight back.
Where did you get the info that the mule can't fight back? New to me. Interesting.
Or maybe I read it wrong. You assume that attacking a mule first means it just stands there as long as the player is flagged green and doesn't use its combat abilities to attack back, or that after the player is dead, the mule AI just has it stand there as it is green and can't go purple on its own? Since mount skins can go on any T1, wouldn't I just disguise my mules as what people perceive as combat mounts, since those are a thing? Confused or maybe I read it wrong.
It's complex scenario because you might have to attack the mule when the player is mounted or you might be able to hit the mule in isolation.
If the mule can also fight then I think its more important to hit the player first. The reason would be because of the damage and delay the mule would cause whilst the owner then counters too.
I think a mount skin can't go on a mule. The mules have their own skins which are rare in the cosmetic shop (still on my to buy list). The old streams didn't show a mule could fight. They just showed off the mule skin one time.
It's an interesting facet which I want to test in a2.
The below video from the Intrepid YouTube channel might be from 5 years ago, but it very well could be the same direction they're still going with stealth. It looks pretty close to true invisibility if you stop moving. Though the "indicators of stealth" is just a bit of wiggly vision around the person hiding, almost like a heat shimmer. Moving makes the wiggles stand out. Someone trying to hide as a rogue just needs to keep their cool and pick their spot carefully.
Hiding with that type of stealth can be very effective if you hide near some foliage and just don't move. Anyone running around the area (or maybe even walking and not perfectly observing their surroundings) would be highly likely to just not see this person:
The below video from the Intrepid YouTube channel might be from 5 years ago, but it very well could be the same direction they're still going with stealth. It looks pretty close to true invisibility if you stop moving. Though the "indicators of stealth" is just a bit of wiggly vision around the person hiding, almost like a heat shimmer. Moving makes the wiggles stand out. Someone trying to hide as a rogue just needs to keep their cool and pick their spot carefully.
Hiding with that type of stealth can be very effective if you hide near some foliage and just don't move. Anyone running around the area (or maybe even walking and not perfectly observing their surroundings) would be highly likely to just not see this person:
I agree, I think this would be effective stealth...because if the person isn't paying attention or isn't facing your direction, they're less likely to spot you. To me that's better than 100% invisibility because then there's no chance of seeing them. At least with this way if you're looking around and the person is moving you have a chance
New plan, Lets start a PK guild and start working out how we can take advantage of the system.
haha
I really don't like corruption system.
I think punishing players for pvp without consent is stupid.
Why then give such an opportunity at all?
After all, minuses due to the corruption outweigh all the possible pluses.
I'm not talking about roleplaying some robbers or monsters.
Idiocy in one word.
Comments
I would think the additional value would be survival. If you are in a group then i doubt you would all focus the mule unless the mule is ridden. I doubt loot will be shared across a group due to corruption coming from the killing blow. Mules aren't caravans.
You would probably compete for the mule kill in a group.
But I would definitely prefer if that was the case cause it'd support the corruption and BH systems much better.
You can join mine. Though mine is for testing, so you have to actually put effort into that (compile experiences that go beyond just statistics for Intrepid, etc).
I'm short a person or two due to some recent design decisions.
Thank you for the offer, but as much as I like the rush I get from pvp, I'm not very good at it.
Believe it or not, that's exactly what I need right now.
Speaking more seriously, if 'only people who are actually good at it' are willing to PvP in this way in Ashes, I foresee 'bad things', so I'm interested in collecting the data from all levels of skill.
(don't consider this 'seriously doubling down', I got the joke, just figured I might as well option-select the offer)
Yeah. I'm not sure how it will work because a mule can carry 100 times the amount of a player unless its changed so 25% drop would be too much for one player to receive. I'm not sure how it will work really.
The point is, PKing the mule is more beneficial cause it gives you less corruption and more loot.
I don't actually know much about mule health though but the point remains that a dude or dudette with a mule isn't just going to stand there and lose percentages of 10 times the usual capacities.
I'm not saying a mule will always be full but a mule indicates at least more than one inventory's worth of resources unless its an rp player who prefers mules and pvp.
But I think we've gone too far from the topic. Mules will most likely be slower than player sprinting speeds so no one would be able to run away using them, at which point it'll always be a "fight or die" situation.
It's all up in the air until a2 anyway. Even the corruption system has to be tested.
I think we just fleshed out the fight or die theories around mules so no need for us to be off topic really.
One thing for sure is you won't be able to hide/stealth a mule so it would be fight or die in such a confrontation i believe.
Again, I really do appreciate the offer, but I don't think I am a good match for your guild at this time. Maybe my thoughts will change after we start playing. Until then good luck with your recruiting.
have a low level player run around hitting people if u happen to kill somone o well it was a throw away character anyway, if they fight back run a high level character or your main over to kill them once they go purple to bypass the system
HAHA, If that worked. Get two people, One person make a low level alt that will entice the victim to try and fight back, while the second person with a high level character waiting in the wings to finish him off as soon as he turns purple.
Yeah thats moreso what I meant, I generally make statements in terms of what is optimal rather than what is "possible", so it can come off confusing to the reader sometimes. In terms of that statement you were referencing- I meant the design would not allow for it to be optimal to retreat when both players are flagged and already engaged in combat, even though it might technically be possible if the pursuing player messes up- while still allowing for retreat to be a viable strategy for a non-combatant to retreat even if the pursing combatant plays well.
Yeah I agree- my suggestions are intended to be within the context of assuming the rest of the systems work coherently to achieve the desired goal- so even though those things could potentially affect the topic, I would consider that an oversight if they allow that to happen. In other words even though the idea that "these types of players will always live and these will always die" can be impacted by many factors- those factors should be accounted for in order to result in "these types of players will always live and these will always die" if that is what the intent in the design is trying to accomplish.
I hope that's not the case. I think a PVX game needs to be more than that.
Where did you get the info that the mule can't fight back? New to me. Interesting.
Or maybe I read it wrong. You assume that attacking a mule first means it just stands there as long as the player is flagged green and doesn't use its combat abilities to attack back, or that after the player is dead, the mule AI just has it stand there as it is green and can't go purple on its own? Since mount skins can go on any T1, wouldn't I just disguise my mules as what people perceive as combat mounts, since those are a thing? Confused or maybe I read it wrong.
If the mule can also fight then I think its more important to hit the player first. The reason would be because of the damage and delay the mule would cause whilst the owner then counters too.
I think a mount skin can't go on a mule. The mules have their own skins which are rare in the cosmetic shop (still on my to buy list). The old streams didn't show a mule could fight. They just showed off the mule skin one time.
It's an interesting facet which I want to test in a2.
Fight, PvPers
Flight, PvEers
Seems like PvX options to me.
The below video from the Intrepid YouTube channel might be from 5 years ago, but it very well could be the same direction they're still going with stealth. It looks pretty close to true invisibility if you stop moving. Though the "indicators of stealth" is just a bit of wiggly vision around the person hiding, almost like a heat shimmer. Moving makes the wiggles stand out. Someone trying to hide as a rogue just needs to keep their cool and pick their spot carefully.
Hiding with that type of stealth can be very effective if you hide near some foliage and just don't move. Anyone running around the area (or maybe even walking and not perfectly observing their surroundings) would be highly likely to just not see this person:
Predators are so noisy, they can't sneak up on anyone!
I agree, I think this would be effective stealth...because if the person isn't paying attention or isn't facing your direction, they're less likely to spot you. To me that's better than 100% invisibility because then there's no chance of seeing them. At least with this way if you're looking around and the person is moving you have a chance
You're late.
I really don't like corruption system.
I think punishing players for pvp without consent is stupid.
Why then give such an opportunity at all?
After all, minuses due to the corruption outweigh all the possible pluses.
I'm not talking about roleplaying some robbers or monsters.
Idiocy in one word.