Glorious Alpha Two Testers!
Alpha Two Realms are now unlocked for Phase II testing!
For our initial launch, testing will begin on Friday, December 20, 2024, at 10 AM Pacific and continue uninterrupted until Monday, January 6, 2025, at 10 AM Pacific. After January 6th, we’ll transition to a schedule of five-day-per-week access for the remainder of Phase II.
You can download the game launcher here and we encourage you to join us on our for the most up to date testing news.
Alpha Two Realms are now unlocked for Phase II testing!
For our initial launch, testing will begin on Friday, December 20, 2024, at 10 AM Pacific and continue uninterrupted until Monday, January 6, 2025, at 10 AM Pacific. After January 6th, we’ll transition to a schedule of five-day-per-week access for the remainder of Phase II.
You can download the game launcher here and we encourage you to join us on our for the most up to date testing news.
Comments
83 nodes and 5 castles since the map revamp.
Greens will have more opportunities and better chances of punishing a red, so why even have the BH system in its current form.
1. I can think of many ways to grief someone without being flagged. Considering there is player collision, one way to do it would be to simply block a door to a quest giver.
2. My apologies I must have misread the numbers.
3. People should be going red if the risk is worth it though. To have players go red once in a blue moon would defeat the purpose of having the bounty hunter system in the game at all. It might aswell be toggle pvp if the penalties are too great.
There's inertia against this. Yep.
Yea it would be a dream come true but I doubt it'd even be considered unless there is only an extremely small% of players who go red. I don't care much for pking but I will do it if there is something good enough to be gained, i.e a stack of mithril ore since I myself won't be a gatherer. If it happened to be used to make the best weapons and armor then I'd risk it for the biscuit. Personally I'd much rather have a world that "feels" real and for that to work there needs to be good and bad people.
I can think of many ways to grief without flagging.
-tagging mobs when a player attempts to pull
-pulling more mobs to a player fighting so they aggro and die
-camping resources they are after
-body blocking
-with the environment management system I can just gather everything in sight to affect the nodes resource spawn.
-camping specific mobs preventing others from getting them
-triggering negative raid mechanics on purpose
All of these warrant an ass kicking in game. Make the punishment too high for dealing with them, and then it's a shitshow. And I can do many of these as a low level player.
None of the other stuff you listed would affect me the way non-consensual PvP does. I would not experience any of that as griefing.
Oh I'm familiar with what you're cool with and what you're not cool with hahaha.
My whole point is that these could all be used in ways to grief people without directly attacking someone. These are how I would provoke someone to attack me if I didn't want to attack them first, and especially if I was just aiming to get them corrupted in general. If the corruption is hours of grinding off the first kill, that's potentially a big game design issue.
I'm replying to share with everyone who reads this thread that different players have different ideas of griefing entails.
And a lot of that depends on playstyle.
Yea that's fair and true, but we should be going off of Steven's recent definition of griefing when it comes down to designing the game.
Triggering negative raid mechanics on purpose might be.... but it would have to be repetitive, according to Steven's definition - and really only counts it's a member of the raid... in which case you can kick them out of the raid, so... then would not count as griefing.
It all comes down to repetition. Even with PKing. Doing anything just a few times and leaving wouldn't be griefing. It's when you keep doing it over and over to be a nuisance to someone.
Variation is better than a uniform game rule everywhere.
It could help playing for a long time.
See Answers in BOLD.
Honestly each of those I countered. The only viable "grief" would have been Ninja Looting, as there isnt anything IS can do to punish a player AFIAK. This comes down to Reputation and in a server of 10k... no one is gonna give a shit and remember your name. Had it been a 2-3k, maybe 5k server - People will remember.
10k online players with a potential 50k pool - ninjalooting might be rampart.
hence on a different topic - 1 character per server - in the event your name gets remembered or on a list, you're fucked.
Yeah that's the same thing I see.
I have almost completely lost sight of their vision. "Dynamic world of risk," "Risk vs reward, " "Contesting of resources." Like, how? Who? Based on recent statements, corruption system is going to be so harsh it's going to be a non factor, very very rarely used, and only useable by elites/no lifers.
Soo...guild and node wars will add these things? We don't know how restrictive those systems are. We don't even know if there is loot drop in those systems.
Caravans? We don't know if caravans are going to be the type of thing that happens dozens of times on a given server in a given week, or hundreds. Or single digits. Literally no idea. And why would anyone caravan with the risk of losing 100%, when you can just mule things with virtually no risk of being attacked, and even if you are killed, only 25-50% loss. Like what.
And then you have the lawless open sea, which if you have any experience with sea based pvp, you know that pvp can be hard to come by on the sea. Very slow, very plodding, can potentially be hours in between fights. I mean who knows what Intrepid's implementation will be like, we'll see.
Honestly, in a very technical sense just based off what we know, I can't even say how much pvp will actually be in this game, much less "dynamic world of risk and contesting of resources."
I think the corruption system may be on it's way out, with a more themeparkesque framework of pvp on the way in. Or I'm just missing something in their vision. Really not sure.
All of your claims to bans could also be applied to PKing... the whole point is to make it so the playerbase can prevent it instead of relying on Intrepid to intervene. Corruption deters rampant PK griefing. The non rampant PKs allow for management of the rest of the things I listed. And as I said before, none of these things are griefing unless they are done repeatedly with the intention of causing grief, including PKing. So still, causing someone who gets corrupted to have to spend days grinding is a terrible idea, it may very well be in retaliation for one of the things I listed.
https://youtube.com/shorts/-xybfNp0jCk