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.
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.
Comments
But on the off chance that you do in fact understand it, if you're such a good pvper that you're ready to fight anyone, why do you even care about the corrupted death penalty? If you never die to BHs - you'll never suffer the penalties. And you'll just need to avoid the stronger green players while you grind off your corruption. Seems like an easy life for a good pvper.
No, but I think it'll be okay for corrupted to keep gaining the corruption at a more rapid rate until they get hunted into rerolling or working it off.
The fact is that I'm not trying to suggest removing corruption.
Just to make it not so deadly for the players.
Due to the loss of their equipment and the limitation of kills.
Players must be held accountable for their actions!
Loss of resources, game experience (which already takes a lot of time), debuffs after death - isn't that enough?
Why do you need to go to super punishment?
Otherwise, world pvp will be very lame.
If you kill 10 people and you loot from them the maximum amount of resources the game allocates, you may have a chance to loot way above the value of your current inventory.
Why is it unreasonable to you, that you shouldn't risk your inventory for that?
Yes, I wholeheartedly hope so and will try to support the project as much as I can.
In the end this game is a revolution and it needs support and feedback which will undoubtedly make it the best mmo rpg in the world!
If I kill more than 10 players can I loot something very cool from them?
Wow, I did not know about that!
I think it's too cruel to other players.
Losing resources and getting debuffs after i kill em, is already a lot.
Don't you think so?
If you kill 10 players the resources you loot are in greater value than what your risking. Then you have been rewarded for your efforts. Should you die, not only are you going to lose the percentage of your pillage; but you may also lose what you started with.
Ashes was built on Risk vs Reward, so I am not seeing the problem why you shouldn't risk your gear for a potentially greater profit.
I just hope that the system of corruption will be balanced and fair in relation not only to the victims but also to the gankers.
I had to read this three or four times before I realized you had to be trolling.
"Balanced and Fair .... to the gankers?"
Look, Corruption is a pineapple, shoved not so nicely up your ass when you ruin the playtime and experience of someone who didn't want to PvP. There isn't going to be a "balanced and fair" to the gankers.
Its a punishment. It is going to be harsh, and nasty, and miserable. Because that's what punishments are supposed to be. Deterrents.
I'll sign you up for the pineapple of the hour club.
Players versus Pineapples.
In all seriousness, I'm not sure that's the right read of the mechanic. My impression is that it's main purpose is to deter griefing, specifically. But it seems like when you venture out in the world of Verra you accept the fact that there's inbuilt risk, and that there will be PvP.
I guess my point is, if simply ganking someone is considered griefing, then it wouldn't be in the game. I think Steven commented recently about what constitutes griefing, but maybe we can get him to clarify because the response wasn't black-and-white, and it seems to me like there's confusion and concern around this topic
You think I care about your cheap jokes mate?
And I do not agree with the system that you described to me here.
You understood me?
Killing players in the open world is part of the roleplaying.
This is an RPG game.
And next time, try to take not only one side, but try to offer a solution to the problem that would satisfy everyone.
To do this, I will advise you to use your head after all.
Not what you used when you wrote me the answer.
At best both sides will have to endure the compromise, and neither will like it.
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/tal9UO0PUhw
And while Steven's talking about the pve extremists here, the same applies to the pvp extremists too, as pointed out in the clarification of the griefing rules in one of the recent streams.
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/IUGrCOhURvU
That's what your argument should be, how harsh you think the system should be. How fast should the risk and penalties scale up for corrupted players with each successive kill they commit.
It's kind of hard to debate it until we feel it and experience it in the game in my opinion, but I guess some academic arguments could be made one way or the other.
To little penalty on kill it a gank fest to hard on kill penalty value then we get 0 pvp at all so. Its realy finding a balance inbetween these 2 where most people are happy with it or find it acceptable.
but till we get in game with the system we wont realy know.
if i can kill people a few people a day that dont fight back im fine with it, 1 a day isnt enough though but to many then game gonna die from lack of players after awhile from what ive seen. So realy need a balance and these kill will vary too depending on guild/node wars and thing since they dont carry a penalty from my understanding.
So if my guild/node can war dec a neighbouring node so there some meaningful pvp fairly consistantly then ill be happy with the system.
These throwaway threads are only going to increase as we get closer to game release.
But, at the same time, these threads will become easier to dismiss as the game designs are getting presented and official. At the moment there is still some wiggle room and everyone tug on the sheets to express how they want the vagueness to set.
If there is anyone for whom this game is not intended, it should be you.
Every MMO forums has its old-timer, who is not a member of the staff, but who is always talking about nothing on everything and who also decides who is allowed to play and who is not.
This game is for whoever will buy it ) Stop pushing future players away please.
As Steven said in the video I posted, he has a vision for his game and that vision won't suit every player out there. And that vision has barely changed since the start of the development (though those god damn open seas definitely make my argument weaker).
So when I see the 10th thread about "removing pvp" or "removing any punishment for PKing", my first reply is usually "this game is not for you", mainly because out of those previous 9 threads the OP rarely understands why the game is designed the way that it is. I'm glad that Jinro is seemingly in the minority of people who has grasped the design and can at least wait till later testing to see if it works out.
But I'd rather put a big filter at the start of such threads, which would keep the true extremists away from the game while also letting through anyone who's at least willing to try and understand the game's design and then make a decision whether they agree with it or not.
Whatever the reason for your reaction, everyone has the right to play AOC. If they don't like the game, they will naturally stop playing.
If you are annoyed by a suggestion, you may not respond to it either. But I use the conditional tense here because everyone has the right to respond to any post.
But with respect. And I find it disrespectful to say to someone "this game is not for you".
You have to spend time acclimating yourself to what this game is, to what the world that you're part of is; and that's an investment- a time investment; and that plays towards our ideas of risk-versus-reward; and I've always said our game's not going to be for everybody and that's okay.[9] – Steven Sharif
We're very clear with our objective and philosophy on the game and we understand that they may not appeal to everybody. But you know it is an important reciprocal relationship between the content that's related to PvE and the content that's related to PvP and they feed off of each other. They're catalysts for change: Their progression, their development. It's things that people can value when they see something earned and they see something lost. That elicits an emotional response from the player: That they've invested time in to either succeed or fail; and PvP allows for that element to be introduced into gameplay. And we're very clear that is our objective: That risk versus reward relationship, that achievement-based mentality. Not everybody's going to be a winner and that's okay.[22] – Steven Sharif
So if you say Seven will lose customers, it seems that he values the game pillars more.