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
Such sentences as "this game is not for you" imply pushing someone out before he can try the game. It is not respectful at all.
I don't see important to get a high peak at a release which gradually falls over time but and an increase due to a constant influx of players. A peak would even be harmful due to server merge difficulties.
My concern is that the Alpha 2 is very far in the future. How much of the story and all PvE quests are implemented? They cannot stay in Alpha 2 more than one year.
The state of mmos was dire in 2017 but in 2022 we have a lot in production. Mmo population is small compared to other genres. Ashes could succeed with less but the main crux is combat. The game world lives and changes with pve and pvp but combat links pve and pvp together.
I know. I got such replies too on other forums.
In this case, both PvP and PvE sides can be sensitive. Especially because the market generally favors PvE-ers who are more numerous.
This time Nikr used a smiley and I've seen it as half joke.
On my first post on this forum I was called a troll and later accused that I am the alt of a guy who liked the statement that I am a troll
It is interesting to see people get so invested so early.
I'm absolutely fascinated by MMO player psychology. And the thing is, I don't think AoC is getting a lot of attention just because people feel like Intrepid Studios are a bunch of hopium dealers for disillusioned gamers. I think the reason is because people really feel like the devs are "all in." That they don't just want to create the game for professional reasons, but for personal reasons too. They actually want to develop a great game and play it themselves.
The word passion comes up during development updates again and again. (Maybe we could convince someone to count).
I played WoW for years and looking back retrospectively, I can't come up with a single good reason about the actual game for why. The graphics were terrible and cartoony, the combat was unengaging, the PvP was never balanced, the PvE was mediocre, and the story writing for certain expansions in particular were catastrophically bad.
I made a lot of great friends with interesting people while playing though, and the combat was tolerable enough, so it became fun to me. The game was objectively bad in everyway I can imagine, but the perceived value was much higher because of the people playing. My hypothesis is MMO success has a lot more to do with the community, than the actual game, but I digress. It's a topic for another thread.
That's what I assume too, that the lore will not be revealed.
But Alpha 2 once started, will have the servers running all the time until release, through the beta phases too.
That means they cannot enter in Alpha 2 and stay in it a long time until they finish all things. Unless we demand Steven to pay to keep the servers up too or to add subscription for an unfinished game. Or they can limit the number of players who want to "help" testing the game to reduce the costs of those servers.
The chat already started. Welcome to the game. It is still in ASCII like the old Dwarf Fortress
And I did try to explain the reasoning behind this design and then provided direct quotes of that reasoning. If it comes off as disrespectful in text, well, so be it. I don't mean it that way, but there's no way to prove that in this medium (outside of the emoji I used), so I'll just be content with the way I come off
hmm---my guess is not a player in vanilla? but I could be wrong.
so when I played it was all about the server community we formed. Back in vanilla the realm forum was very active. Our realm even had an mIRC channel where people could hang out. The game was conducive to meeting cool people, teaming up for quests/instances, and making friends including in pvp. And there was mystery with the other faction back in the day. Your account could ONLY be horde or alliance, not both. And you had no way to talk to the other side...except the realm forum or mIRC. I do believe this mystery about the other players added some element of attraction to the community.
That being said...when blizzard killed world pvp, made instancing too easy, and people could play either faction it just lost all community cohesion. that's why I stopped playing. And the only reason I came back time to time was because of other players wanting to play....never for the game itself.
I was never one for ganking low lvl players because I didn't find it fun...but there were people who did and were famous for it and would be hunted, lol. Instead I camped in Blackrock Mountain and griefed players that were my level with raid lvl gear---to me this shouldn't be punished. They are on my lvl and have gear often times better than mine...to me that is fair game.
Nah, I played from Vanilla to Cata, and then I jumped ship because so many of my friends stopped caring about the game.
True story: one of my 2v2 and 3v3 arena buddies ending up living a town away from me. We became pretty good friends.
I maintain that whatever "magic" the game had was community created. No one can even vaguely convince me that WoW was close to well designed. You had 3 tank specs in Vanilla, and only one was even close to viable end game. That's a good game? That's good design?
I mean, so many people look back at the earlier days of WoW with rose-tinted glasses and attribute it's success and their positive experiences to the game, when really, the player-base is where it deserved to go.
Right. And yeah, the faction aspect was interesting, there's something about playing for a particular team. I just don't see how anyone who's being honest with themselves, and setting their emotions and biases aside, can say it was a good game.
To me, it was released at the right time, and the community, and social elements propped it up.
WoW PvPers were their own breed of people. There's a reason words like "ruthless," "merciless," "vengeful," "wrathful," etc. were associated with PvP gear and titles. That was very much the culture
With that said - THIS GAME IS NOT FOR YOU
The goal of the system is to encourage people to fight back in that situation so there shouldn't be a penalty. If we equate BRM to a zone with high level mobs that drop good resources, the system is supposed to encourage people to fight in those situations to defend there resources or farming spot.
Right? I've been talking to a group of people from my old KT server for like 15 years---long lasting friendships and acquaintances.
I mean, to be fair, it was released in 2004 so developed in like 2002-2003...so for its time I feel like it was decent. there's rose tinted-glasses but there's also hindsight of ~20 years of gaming since then lol. But definitely agree, it was the community that made people
hmm but I guess we need to circle back to the OP...were they talking about ganking or just killing someone your lvl that's maybe farming mobs in a zone at your level? I guess I need to read more about the pvp system...anyone have a link to a video or post where the devs lay out their vision?
https://ashesofcreation.wiki/PvP
I read through that tonight after you suggested it--that helps a lot, thanks.
What was outlined in that wiki sounds reasonable...but definitely wont really know for sure until I get a chance to try it out. I definitely want to give corruption a try to see exactly how it works....alpha and beta will be the opportune time so the PKs don't stick to my character forever, lol.
Didn't read anybody elses post after yours, so replying directly to this.
It seems as though there will be affiliations(that have a hierarchy of importance) within the game, which create "teams" of sorts, like belonging to the same Node. There will also be policies that mayors can decide to enact, which have been hinted to nudge player decision making in one direction or another.
Since the game is node war based, and players will be harvesting other nodes resources, it would be smart of them to allow options that allow players to defend their own nodal territory from outsiders, without turning the player corrupt. This is what I am expecting to happen, based on everything that I have read or heard in the game so far.
Node wars that would include killing players from the enemy node or any other that is not friendly to your node is quite logical.
Although nothing prevents your enemies from placing a bounty on your head or hitting a killer.
We've come to some sort of consensus here with some of the players regarding corruption.
In my post, I oppose corruption as a PENALTY for gameplay.
In the form of restrictions and harsh consequences for players who choose to play a certain way.
I support corruption as a risk system that makes the gameplay exciting and fun.
At the same time, the corruption prevents the killing of players with impunity.
If you are killed while exposed to corruption, you:
You may lose some of your equipment (weapons or armor)
which other players can plunder, according to the developers, this depends on the level of corruption.
You will also lose a significant part of the accumulated resources.
You will be hung with many different debuffs that reduce the effectiveness of your equipment and character as a whole.
You will respawn in a random location not far from where you died.
These are very severe consequences that are a risk.
And the risk must be justified.
Otherwise, it turns into a PUNISHMENT and not a risk.
And according to some players who actively participated in the discussion under my post, the risk should be justified.
By the way, in order to hang a corruption on a player, it seems like they should identify him (that a specific player committed a murder) and they do it in the church if I'm not mistaken.
Because if the game will automatically hang corruption it will not be as realistic and less exciting in my opinion.
As the saying goes, not caught is not a thief.
Yes, Thanks for the clarification.
This restriction must be stupid and not justified.
In my opinion.
I'll explain why.
The developer added this limitation to prevent the game from turning into a "gank box".
But this only shows the incompetence of the developer in this matter.
Think for yourself.
What is a gank?
People often use such terms without understanding what they mean at all, just starting to label the players.
Which is very primitive and not correct.
A gank is the killing of one player by a GROUP of players.
In this case, the effect of surprise plays an important role.
If you delve into the terminology, a gank is a group of robbers / bandits.
When a group of players attack one defenseless one and kill him while taking his resources - this definitely prevents that player from enjoying the game experience in other words - this is a definition of the game experience.
So what is it bad?
You say yes, it's bad!
Okay.
Let's look at the problem from different angles using logic and critical thinking.
In the context of our game, what we have.
Node wars as one of the main mechanics of the game.
Robbery of caravans, ships and individual players.
Let me ask you a question, when you attack an enemy node with a whole group, won't you prevent the players in that node from enjoying the game?
Of course you will.
But here you don't see it as something negative.
Why is that?
I will answer for you.
Because it's a game.
The same thing happens when one player or group decides to attack one or more defenseless players when they least expect it.
And here and there it all comes down to obtaining advantages in the form of resources, the influence of your node, the implementation of some kind of your game goal, and, finally, fun!
When you kill someone or get killed, it's not a violation, but part of the gameplay and experience you get.
Everything is very simple.
And if a group of people can destroy all the players on the server by seizing power, well, then they turned out to be smarter, faster and more efficient than everyone else.
Is it really necessary to PUNISH them?
You can say that this can damage the game as a whole.
Okay, then I'll say the following.
If the developer is not satisfied with some part of the gameplay in the game THAT HE CREATED, then let the developer MODIFY the game mechanics that, in his opinion, harm the game.
And he doesn’t start hitting the hands of the players who PLAY the game according to the mechanics that the DEVELOPER CREATED.
Or make stupid and ill-conceived "crutches" in the form of various restrictions: the number of kills and the decrease in pvp efficiency, which harm pvp by making it not so exciting and interesting.
I hope that I conveyed my idea to you and was as exhaustive as possible in this matter.
"Gank" is not synonymous with "Gank Box". Gank Box indicates excessive Ganking.
Node Wars are still opt-in... and there's no Corruption and half the death penalties.
PvP penalties and restrictions are already part of the game mechanics the developer is creating.
If you don't like the mechanics... don't play.
Again though, we currently don't know how quickly your stats will start dampening when you gain corruption. If it takes 10 kills of equally-lvled people to start feeling the effects of the corruption stat dampening - I'd say that's more than fair. I still think that PK counter removal should be very costly, but that's a whole different conversation. And even then, there's probably gonna be a range of that dampening, so I doubt it'll just be "you've made your 10th PK and now you literally can't fight any green/purple player".
First, destroying nodes is a pvp part, not a pve one.
And secondly, I'm sorry, but this already sounds completely absurd.
Ignore pvp in the open world, referring to the fact that, supposedly, PVE in all mmo games takes a MORE IMPORTANT part than PVP.
Where did you even get this information, sir?
In this game, where the mechanics are very much tied to the acquisition of spheres of influence in the form of nodes, which include naval battles, caravan robberies and much more!
I defend such a dismissive attitude towards PVP content - with prejudices and ordinary egocentrism.
Not to mention that pvp content has always been much more entertaining and interesting than pve grind.
And again you return to labels.
violent genocide.
What do you call genocide?
Genocide is mass destruction.
And now let's figure it out.
In what context is mass destruction bad, and in what context is it good.
In your opinion.
When do I want to take over a node or destroy a community that I don't like for a variety of reasons?
But in this case, this is, as I explained above, the game process.
What is the problem then?
You cannot know my motives.
So where is the line after which pvp turns into PK, genocide, or as you like to say, big and bad "gank".)
Second of all, pve and pvp are linked in Ashes so one is not more important than another however, pve players are less likely to pvp than a pvp player is likely to pve.
Thirdly, the whole economy is based around crafting and pve. You complain about dropping items but for the most part those items would come from pve somewhere in the chain.
When you're Corrupted enough that the system treats you as a Monster.
It's defined directly by Intrepid, which is the point.
There will always be those who think it is too much and those who think it isn't enough.
In the end the game says 'There is a penalty for a killing spree', and you either go 'there should be none' which to most people comes off as a maniac precisely because the game is trying to simulate CIVILIZATION somewhat and we tend to get rid of people who go on killing sprees there or you live with that penalty.
MMOs are always 'unrealistic' in the sense that you even CAN 'solo kill 20 people without sanctioned reason or declared war and still have a playable character at all'.
Sure, they respawn, and you can argue that means your punishment shouldn't be so severe, but that's just a game mechanic too, so it gets balanced against other game mechanics.
If you are good enough at PvE and few dare fight you in PvP, you will never have a problem with Corruption, you would always cleanse it long before it mattered.