PVP , will fight or die be our only choices?

Songcaller

novercalis wrote: »

103 nodes

83 nodes and 5 castles since the map revamp.

Ludullu

novercalis wrote: »

As stated else where - people shouldnt be expecting a lot out of the Bounty Hunter system. That is just a little side dish - nothing deep. They don't intent to incentives Reds and there will be very little corrupted players to begin with. There is many avenues for pvp - so the corrupted will be few and far between. They are not looking to incentives BH either - it's literally a mini-game. If the AoC as is corruption system (not including my version) works at deterring - people wont be going corrupt like you imagine it to be. Thus making BH just a side activity. People needs to stop banking on the idea you can be a full time BH and play within that system - its barebones.

Then I'd rather this system to be gone completely. I don't want a useless system that exists for no real reason. Either the tuning of corruption is already a big enough deterrent or the BH system is there to do something more than just exist.

Greens will have more opportunities and better chances of punishing a red, so why even have the BH system in its current form.

Settite

novercalis wrote: »

Settite wrote: »

You are getting griefed by someone even 5 lvls lower than you? Too bad that's 5hrs of Grinding so they know you won't do anything about it. And since there is collision in the grange you know people will do dumb shit.

I guess f* bounty hunters too since there won't be any reds to kill.

Just my 21 cents on the matter.

1) if someone griefing you - they must be flagged right? so free kill no corruption.

2) someone 5 levels below you - killing them gives you 10% of max corruption (600).

600 /10 = 60 minutes. 1 hour.. not 5 hours.

---

As stated else where - people shouldnt be expecting a lot out of the Bounty Hunter system. That is just a little side dish - nothing deep. They don't intent to incentives Reds and there will be very little corrupted players to begin with. There is many avenues for pvp - so the corrupted will be few and far between. They are not looking to incentives BH either - it's literally a mini-game. If the AoC as is corruption system (not including my version) works at deterring - people wont be going corrupt like you imagine it to be. Thus making BH just a side activity. People needs to stop banking on the idea you can be a full time BH and play within that system - its barebones.

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.

Ludullu

Settite wrote: »

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.

https://ashesofcreation.wiki/Collision
There's inertia against this.

Settite wrote: »

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.

Yep.

Settite

novercalis wrote: »

Settite wrote: »

What i would personally like is a sort of "rolling" pvp zone. I.e within the area of about 5 connected nodes, there will be no corruption penalties however there may be an increase in gatherables, xp gain and an increase to gear degradation maybe. It could be written in lore wise as a "blanket" of corruption that moves across the land. I enjoyed the open nature of pvp in cyridill on eso, so something like this sounds appealing. Obviously this isn't in the current design goal, just something I'd like in a game.

As corruption is not, either I will attack a green because the penalty won't be severe enough, or what they have will be worth the risk. Or the penalty will b so severe that I will never attack a green simply because I will lose too much time removing corruption thus defeating the purpose. If I would recieve 5k worth of resources off of them but it will take me 5hrs to clear corruption and I generate 1k per crafting or whatever then I might aswell craft. Especially since I won't b risking everything I have on me to bounty hunters.
(Just rough thoughts)

I guess we won't know till A2 however. We will see which way the system leans.

going with this concept. While I've been coming off as "anti pk" is mainly because im a PK/Griefer at heart when given the chance. I hunt and prey on potential ppl who will ragequit and laugh. Like a Whitehat hacker - I know how to hack and give you the potential solutions go prevent those hacks. With that said - this idea you mention is a PK dream for me.

I would love to see, 5 random nodes out of the 103 nodes turn into a Hot zone. Every 24 hours it changes. It gives me the Japanese movie "Battle Royal" vibe. This now brings PKers and BH to the scenes and create world pvp fights that might be very fun and interested, utilizing and using the environments. Unique combats.
These hot zones are noticeable on the map for everyone to see and can be tweeted daily. Ya can tweet / drop a post for a full week lineup of hot zones, so players can act accordingly. So beside Sea combat, 3-5 in-land nodes become hot zones sounds very fun to me.

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.

Songcaller

Not sure how a harsher system than l2 would be viable. It worked in l2 precisely because there were shades of grey. Corruption has become the sword used by non pvp players to slay pvp players without pvp being involved at all.

Dolyem

novercalis wrote: »

1) if someone griefing you - they must be flagged right? so free kill no corruption.

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.

Dygz

Body blocking might affect me negatively.
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.

Dolyem

Dygz wrote: »

Body blocking might affect me negatively.
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.

Dygz

Right. I'm not just replying for you.
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.

Dolyem

Dygz wrote: »

Right. I'm not just replying for you.
I'm just sharing for everyone 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.

Dygz

For Ashes, I think most of what you listed is within the scope of the game design - which is one of the reasons I don't consider it griefing.

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.

Dolyem

Dygz wrote: »

For Ashes, I think most of what you listed is within the scope of the game design - which is one of the reasons I don't consider it griefing.

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.

Strevi

NiKr wrote: »

Azherae wrote: »

The more I see people talk about this, the more interested (but less excited) I am to TEST it.

Because I don't want to judge the corruption system beforehand, but the simplistic explanation we got, means that after literally years of thinking about it and seeing the discussions, I've finally come to the conclusion that it's definitely innately flawed and should be done better.

Basically, I no longer feel like 'just tweaking the numbers' is going to achieve the goal of even Ashes itself unless the goal is to stop people from PK-ing generally.

I'm actually fine with that, I like that game type too, but if they want the 'Dynamic world of risk', I am getting the feeling the current Corruption system ain't gonna be it.

Yeah, I feel like that's one of the reasons why Steven added the seas and the ruins (and might add more).

Variation is better than a uniform game rule everywhere.
It could help playing for a long time.

novercalis

Dolyem wrote: »

novercalis wrote: »

1) if someone griefing you - they must be flagged right? so free kill no corruption.

I can think of many ways to grief without flagging.

-tagging mobs when a player attempts to pull
It becomes a DPS race - do it constantly and intentionally - It may be reportable for harassment since you're literally following me around

-pulling more mobs to a player fighting so they aggro and die
has a potential to break TOS - reportable, your ban im not.

-camping resources they are after
Is this really griefing if you beat me to it? lol

-body blocking
Inertia and momentum physics will help prevent blocking doorways/access points.

-with the environment management system I can just gather everything in sight to affect the nodes resource spawn.
In it's current form, yes. We need to wait and see how this gets resolved as this is a topic everyone had a month ago

-camping specific mobs preventing others from getting them
I will contest you. DPS Race - just cause you tagged it doesnt mean I can outdps you and claim loot rights. Once again, you might have gotten to the camp before me anyways - I might just move on.

-triggering negative raid mechanics on purpose
Might be breach of ToS - intended game play / intentional griefing

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.

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.

Ludullu

novercalis wrote: »

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.

Doesn't ninjalooting only works with random groups or shittyly comprised guilds who also let anyone pick loot up? The reputation will work within/among guilds and maybe in nodes. So unless you have the time/resources to level up a full account of characters that can be accepted into a strong guild that would be farming bosses worth ninjalooting - ya ain't really escaping your reputation.

Okeydoke

Settite wrote: »

That's how you kill any pvp against a green; making pvp essentially toggle. I'd never want to take the risk and I have a decent amount of free time so I can only imagine what someone who has a 9-5 and a family would think when reading that.

Yeah that's the same thing I see.

Azherae wrote: »

I'm actually fine with that, I like that game type too, but if they want the 'Dynamic world of risk', I am getting the feeling the current Corruption system ain't gonna be it.

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.

Dolyem

novercalis wrote: »

Dolyem wrote: »

novercalis wrote: »

1) if someone griefing you - they must be flagged right? so free kill no corruption.

I can think of many ways to grief without flagging.

-tagging mobs when a player attempts to pull
It becomes a DPS race - do it constantly and intentionally - It may be reportable for harassment since you're literally following me around

-pulling more mobs to a player fighting so they aggro and die
has a potential to break TOS - reportable, your ban im not.

-camping resources they are after
Is this really griefing if you beat me to it? lol

-body blocking
Inertia and momentum physics will help prevent blocking doorways/access points.

-with the environment management system I can just gather everything in sight to affect the nodes resource spawn.
In it's current form, yes. We need to wait and see how this gets resolved as this is a topic everyone had a month ago

-camping specific mobs preventing others from getting them
I will contest you. DPS Race - just cause you tagged it doesnt mean I can outdps you and claim loot rights. Once again, you might have gotten to the camp before me anyways - I might just move on.

-triggering negative raid mechanics on purpose
Might be breach of ToS - intended game play / intentional griefing

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.

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.

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.

akabear

Hope AoC throw in a wildcard or two

https://youtube.com/shorts/-xybfNp0jCk