I don't think we'll know how any of this plays out until we are in it. Alpha/Beta will be when we can see it and experience it live.
I'm honestly fine with not thinking about/worrying about any of the pk stuff until then. At that stage we will have concrete experiences with what they are setting up to tell us if its actually working or not.
Imagine a green comes around and just starts walking through your party's AoE...imagine he comes naked so he can die faster
People only think "griefing" comes from gankers, I say griefing comes only from PvE an ganking is plain PvP and intended gameplay. It doesn't matter if the other guy kills you 1000 times in the spawn, it's just PvP and dev incompetence
True griefing will come from the green horde
PvE means: A handful of coins and a bag of boredom.
Imagine a green comes around and just starts walking through your party's AoE...imagine he comes naked so he can die faster
People only think "griefing" comes from gankers, I say griefing comes only from PvE an ganking is plain PvP and intended gameplay. It doesn't matter if the other guy kills you 1000 times in the spawn, it's just PvP and dev incompetence
True griefing will come from the green horde
Are you using the Force Attack option? If not, the green can wander through there all day. If you're choosing to force your attacks to hit them, then that's on you.
"Q: In the open-world PvP system, will there be a "prevent attacking innocent" option that when turned on will prevent me from accidentally attacking a non-corrupted player? A: The open-world flagging PvP system requires what we call the "Force function" in order to initiate an attack against another player, and by default that's even against players who are already flagged, though not against players who are corrupt; and they're in the settings. You will have options by which you can persist that force function if you wish through another keystroke input. And then additionally you can set your AoEs so that if you initiate an AoE attack against a location and there are flagged players there, you will either- you can set it so that you can automatically hit those flagged players, but by default it doesn't. So, those are options in your in your settings that you will have access to and be able to adjust.[6] – Steven Sharif"
Imagine a green comes around and just starts walking through your party's AoE...imagine he comes naked so he can die faster
People only think "griefing" comes from gankers, I say griefing comes only from PvE an ganking is plain PvP and intended gameplay. It doesn't matter if the other guy kills you 1000 times in the spawn, it's just PvP and dev incompetence
True griefing will come from the green horde
Are you using the Force Attack option? If not, the green can wander through there all day. If you're choosing to force your attacks to hit them, then that's on you.
"Q: In the open-world PvP system, will there be a "prevent attacking innocent" option that when turned on will prevent me from accidentally attacking a non-corrupted player? A: The open-world flagging PvP system requires what we call the "Force function" in order to initiate an attack against another player, and by default that's even against players who are already flagged, though not against players who are corrupt; and they're in the settings. You will have options by which you can persist that force function if you wish through another keystroke input. And then additionally you can set your AoEs so that if you initiate an AoE attack against a location and there are flagged players there, you will either- you can set it so that you can automatically hit those flagged players, but by default it doesn't. So, those are options in your in your settings that you will have access to and be able to adjust.[6] – Steven Sharif"
I think people will come as green and try to find who can attack them, there always be the ex ganker who never turns that off, that's why the best is doing this when there's parties around
It always come to my mind the amount of bandaids of all kinds of shapes and colors, just because the corruption + flagging system is this weird unnatural thing
Bandaids everywhere, to fix any kind of problem that was created by the first two bandaids (flagging and corruption)
PvE means: A handful of coins and a bag of boredom.
Bandaids everywhere, to fix any kind of problem that was created by the first two bandaids (flagging and corruption)
Because the game needs limitations if it wants to have owpvp that won't just devolve into "everyone kills everyone w/o any repercussions". We all know that you'd love to just have ffa pvp with no corruption and everyone just killing any carebear-looking player, but quite a lot of us don't want that
Also, if a ganker is fine with corruption penalties they're free to force attack everything, greens included. But I doubt there'll be dumb people like that. Though I could definitely see someone enabling that and them coming onto forums to whine about karmabombing and that kind of shit.
Bandaids everywhere, to fix any kind of problem that was created by the first two bandaids (flagging and corruption)
Because the game needs limitations if it wants to have owpvp that won't just devolve into "everyone kills everyone w/o any repercussions". We all know that you'd love to just have ffa pvp with no corruption and everyone just killing any carebear-looking player, but quite a lot of us don't want that
Also, if a ganker is fine with corruption penalties they're free to force attack everything, greens included. But I doubt there'll be dumb people like that. Though I could definitely see someone enabling that and them coming onto forums to whine about karmabombing and that kind of shit.
I never said without repercussions or other things, I am a strong believer in repercussions... I love FFA, but things should happen
PvE means: A handful of coins and a bag of boredom.
Bandaids everywhere, to fix any kind of problem that was created by the first two bandaids (flagging and corruption)
Because the game needs limitations if it wants to have owpvp that won't just devolve into "everyone kills everyone w/o any repercussions". We all know that you'd love to just have ffa pvp with no corruption and everyone just killing any carebear-looking player, but quite a lot of us don't want that
Also, if a ganker is fine with corruption penalties they're free to force attack everything, greens included. But I doubt there'll be dumb people like that. Though I could definitely see someone enabling that and them coming onto forums to whine about karmabombing and that kind of shit.
I never said without repercussions or other things, I am a strong believer in repercussions... I love FFA, but things should happen
The problem is that you sometimes champion solutions/repercussions that only work en masse if the game is either PermaDeath or Full Loot (and sometimes not even this one) while calling anyone who disagrees with those (in that specific case) a carebear who isn't listening.
The impression you give is that you're the worst type of person for us 'carebears' to play with, and that you'd prefer we just didn't play at all or had to be functionally subservient to anyone with 'strength'. It's a perspective that should probably be considered, but it's hard to get people I know to take you as anything but a murderhobo, even amongst the strifelords, edgelords and bandits around here (and even my friends who are those things consider you extreme).
I'm not saying to change your stance, but maybe try less hard to make your points.
Bandaids everywhere, to fix any kind of problem that was created by the first two bandaids (flagging and corruption)
Because the game needs limitations if it wants to have owpvp that won't just devolve into "everyone kills everyone w/o any repercussions". We all know that you'd love to just have ffa pvp with no corruption and everyone just killing any carebear-looking player, but quite a lot of us don't want that
Also, if a ganker is fine with corruption penalties they're free to force attack everything, greens included. But I doubt there'll be dumb people like that. Though I could definitely see someone enabling that and them coming onto forums to whine about karmabombing and that kind of shit.
I never said without repercussions or other things, I am a strong believer in repercussions... I love FFA, but things should happen
The problem is that you sometimes champion solutions/repercussions that only work en masse if the game is either PermaDeath or Full Loot (and sometimes not even this one) while calling anyone who disagrees with those (in that specific case) a carebear who isn't listening.
The impression you give is that you're the worst type of person for us 'carebears' to play with, and that you'd prefer we just didn't play at all or had to be functionally subservient to anyone with 'strength'. It's a perspective that should probably be considered, but it's hard to get people I know to take you as anything but a murderhobo, even amongst the strifelords, edgelords and bandits around here (and even my friends who are those things consider you extreme).
I'm not saying to change your stance, but maybe try less hard to make your points.
I am definitely not any of that, I'm just a regular PvPer and I like when the systems are fair for everybody. I have no problems with the humans who are carebears, many are my friends for years.
I'm just against when there is a big outcry that ends up changing a game, just because of outcry even Ultima Online gained safe areas, even EVE now has personal instances where the player can farm loot day and night in his personal instance. So, when the outcry is big, devs instead of making things fair, they tend to obey and deliver unfair systems.
This is what happens, in this specific order:
outcry starts
game is changed
then the same people complain that the game became just a bunch of chores
Just yesterday, Asmongold was reacting to a video saying that MMOs became boring because leveling is just a boring grind and then the game only really starts at max level. This is why people are loving Wow hardcore, because if you die you gotta delete your character, so leveling becomes meaningful again
That's a problem for me, I'm definitely not against people, but I am against unfair one-sided systems which will do that to games
PvE means: A handful of coins and a bag of boredom.
Bandaids everywhere, to fix any kind of problem that was created by the first two bandaids (flagging and corruption)
Because the game needs limitations if it wants to have owpvp that won't just devolve into "everyone kills everyone w/o any repercussions". We all know that you'd love to just have ffa pvp with no corruption and everyone just killing any carebear-looking player, but quite a lot of us don't want that
Also, if a ganker is fine with corruption penalties they're free to force attack everything, greens included. But I doubt there'll be dumb people like that. Though I could definitely see someone enabling that and them coming onto forums to whine about karmabombing and that kind of shit.
I never said without repercussions or other things, I am a strong believer in repercussions... I love FFA, but things should happen
The problem is that you sometimes champion solutions/repercussions that only work en masse if the game is either PermaDeath or Full Loot (and sometimes not even this one) while calling anyone who disagrees with those (in that specific case) a carebear who isn't listening.
The impression you give is that you're the worst type of person for us 'carebears' to play with, and that you'd prefer we just didn't play at all or had to be functionally subservient to anyone with 'strength'. It's a perspective that should probably be considered, but it's hard to get people I know to take you as anything but a murderhobo, even amongst the strifelords, edgelords and bandits around here (and even my friends who are those things consider you extreme).
I'm not saying to change your stance, but maybe try less hard to make your points.
I am definitely not any of that, I'm just a regular PvPer and I like when the systems are fair for everybody. I have no problems with the humans who are carebears, many are my friends for years.
I'm just against when there is a big outcry that ends up changing a game, just because of outcry even Ultima Online gained safe areas, even EVE now has personal instances where the player can farm mobs day and night in his personal instance. So, when the outcry is big, devs instead of making things fair, they tend to obey and deliver unfair systems.
This is what happens, in this specific order:
outcry starts
game is changed
then the same people complain that the game became just a bunch of chores
That's a problem for me, I'm definitely not against people
Right, and I agree. There's a bunch of abuses from both sides if the systems allow for any loopholes. Anything that can be done 'without repercussions' for either side.
But 'green can't be CC'ed' is definitely one of the things where if it exists, the 'loopholes' that greens can use are relatively minor, but it closes huge loopholes that more aggressive players can use, so if one had to choose one of those, you'd choose that one.
The other thing is, as NiKr and the other L2 players will tell you, this isn't really a 'change' at all. This is 'how it worked for them' for some time, and therefore it could easily always have been Steven's intention to strongly consider it.
The game is really not likely to get worse this way than the other way.
The Corruption system itself might have flaws, but the flaws it has are debatable and could easily be 'not flaws' depending on how Steven wants the game to feel. If the game is supposed to feel 'consistent', then sure, it should have instances, and safe areas, and some other stuff.
Something's got to give, but Corruption could just as easily be the basis for changes to economy, as the other way around would be.
Bandaids everywhere, to fix any kind of problem that was created by the first two bandaids (flagging and corruption)
Because the game needs limitations if it wants to have owpvp that won't just devolve into "everyone kills everyone w/o any repercussions". We all know that you'd love to just have ffa pvp with no corruption and everyone just killing any carebear-looking player, but quite a lot of us don't want that
Also, if a ganker is fine with corruption penalties they're free to force attack everything, greens included. But I doubt there'll be dumb people like that. Though I could definitely see someone enabling that and them coming onto forums to whine about karmabombing and that kind of shit.
I never said without repercussions or other things, I am a strong believer in repercussions... I love FFA, but things should happen
The problem is that you sometimes champion solutions/repercussions that only work en masse if the game is either PermaDeath or Full Loot (and sometimes not even this one) while calling anyone who disagrees with those (in that specific case) a carebear who isn't listening.
The impression you give is that you're the worst type of person for us 'carebears' to play with, and that you'd prefer we just didn't play at all or had to be functionally subservient to anyone with 'strength'. It's a perspective that should probably be considered, but it's hard to get people I know to take you as anything but a murderhobo, even amongst the strifelords, edgelords and bandits around here (and even my friends who are those things consider you extreme).
I'm not saying to change your stance, but maybe try less hard to make your points.
I am definitely not any of that, I'm just a regular PvPer and I like when the systems are fair for everybody. I have no problems with the humans who are carebears, many are my friends for years.
I'm just against when there is a big outcry that ends up changing a game, just because of outcry even Ultima Online gained safe areas, even EVE now has personal instances where the player can farm mobs day and night in his personal instance. So, when the outcry is big, devs instead of making things fair, they tend to obey and deliver unfair systems.
This is what happens, in this specific order:
outcry starts
game is changed
then the same people complain that the game became just a bunch of chores
That's a problem for me, I'm definitely not against people
Right, and I agree. There's a bunch of abuses from both sides if the systems allow for any loopholes. Anything that can be done 'without repercussions' for either side.
But 'green can't be CC'ed' is definitely one of the things where if it exists, the 'loopholes' that greens can use are relatively minor, but it closes huge loopholes that more aggressive players can use, so if one had to choose one of those, you'd choose that one.
The other thing is, as NiKr and the other L2 players will tell you, this isn't really a 'change' at all. This is 'how it worked for them' for some time, and therefore it could easily always have been Steven's intention to strongly consider it.
The game is really not likely to get worse this way than the other way.
The Corruption system itself might have flaws, but the flaws it has are debatable and could easily be 'not flaws' depending on how Steven wants the game to feel. If the game is supposed to feel 'consistent', then sure, it should have instances, and safe areas, and some other stuff.
Something's got to give, but Corruption could just as easily be the basis for changes to economy, as the other way around would be.
Now we are on the same page overall.
PvE means: A handful of coins and a bag of boredom.
Imagine a green comes around and just starts walking through your party's AoE...imagine he comes naked so he can die faster
People only think "griefing" comes from gankers, I say griefing comes only from PvE an ganking is plain PvP and intended gameplay. It doesn't matter if the other guy kills you 1000 times in the spawn, it's just PvP and dev incompetence
True griefing will come from the green horde
Are you using the Force Attack option? If not, the green can wander through there all day. If you're choosing to force your attacks to hit them, then that's on you.
"Q: In the open-world PvP system, will there be a "prevent attacking innocent" option that when turned on will prevent me from accidentally attacking a non-corrupted player? A: The open-world flagging PvP system requires what we call the "Force function" in order to initiate an attack against another player, and by default that's even against players who are already flagged, though not against players who are corrupt; and they're in the settings. You will have options by which you can persist that force function if you wish through another keystroke input. And then additionally you can set your AoEs so that if you initiate an AoE attack against a location and there are flagged players there, you will either- you can set it so that you can automatically hit those flagged players, but by default it doesn't. So, those are options in your in your settings that you will have access to and be able to adjust.[6] – Steven Sharif"
learn more you must, young padawan. l2 had that option too. no way you could kill a green without pressing ctrl..guess what? still happened accidentally many times. seen so many epics and gear drop because someone accidentally went red. there are also ways to make someone go red :P but they are a bit complicated and require a lot of timing. so its possible that people accidentally go red in ashes and lose their stuff.
i agree with arya here. I've been griefed by so many pvers lol and I don't mean karma bombing or anything.
Just yesterday, Asmongold was reacting to a video saying that MMOs became boring because leveling is just a boring grind and then the game only really starts at max level. This is why people are loving Wow hardcore, because if you die you gotta delete your character, so leveling becomes meaningful again
Asmon is the pinnacle of what you'd call a carebear. And he says that leveling should be meaningful, but I'd bet money that he'd be complaining throughout the whole experience if it was, even if the game was fun on the low lvls. He hates anything even semidifficult and is very easy to ragequit a game if he find a mechanic or two annoying.
I'm more than certain that he won't be able to survive in Ashes, especially if any of your suggestions get even close to being implemented.
Same thing as in EVE, there is a safety setting (green, yellow, red), but still saw many people gank the wrong targets, or in wrong systems, and they got insta killed by the NPC police, then they were looted by every possible ninja looter LOL
Even me, how many times I came back from low security space with my ship with a flashy skull, blinking like mad, came back to high security space just to find everybody trying to kill me LOL... sometimes nobody dared to touch me because the scene was so ridiculous that made people suspect I was baiting them... !! No, I wasn't baiting anyone, it was just mistakes.... mistakes were made!
How many times I spammed "*TornadoGanker is attacking you*" in Ultima Online, then I walk towards the person while I was saying those words... people entered in combat mode... attacked me... became criminal... i called the guards who insta killed them... then I legally looted them and stored their things in my bank
Just yesterday, Asmongold was reacting to a video saying that MMOs became boring because leveling is just a boring grind and then the game only really starts at max level. This is why people are loving Wow hardcore, because if you die you gotta delete your character, so leveling becomes meaningful again
Asmon is the pinnacle of what you'd call a carebear. And he says that leveling should be meaningful, but I'd bet money that he'd be complaining throughout the whole experience if it was, even if the game was fun on the low lvls. He hates anything even semidifficult and is very easy to ragequit a game if he find a mechanic or two annoying.
I'm more than certain that he won't be able to survive in Ashes, especially if any of your suggestions get even close to being implemented.
Yes, Asmongold is a legendary grindy bear, who is a little clueless about PvP
But recently I am seeing him change, he got very bored in the last years and nowadays he is liking hardcore stuff, permadeath, more risk, more challenge. Asmongold is changing in a better way in 2023
I wonder how Asmongold will react after he farms many dungeons and then put all his shit in a house in the node and then he loses the node... I have no idea how he will react
PvE means: A handful of coins and a bag of boredom.
I'm just against when there is a big outcry that ends up changing a game, just because of outcry even Ultima Online gained safe areas
In a recent interview, a developer from UO (someone that also happened to have worked on Meridian 59) said the worst thing about UO was that it was a PvP sandbox.
They always wanted to put systems in place to curb that, but EA forced them to release the game before they could develop said systems - so they had to be developed post launch.
As such, those "safe areas" you are complaining about that you say are a result of player outcry were actually always intended to be a thing - the developers just never had a chance to implement them pre launch (with their team of 30), and so had to patch them together post launch (with their team of 7).
I'm just against when there is a big outcry that ends up changing a game, just because of outcry even Ultima Online gained safe areas
In a recent interview, a developer from UO (someone that also happened to have worked on Meridian 59) said the worst thing about UO was that it was a PvP sandbox.
They always wanted to put systems in place to curb that, but EA forced them to release the game before they could develop said systems - so they had to be developed post launch.
As such, those "safe areas" you are complaining about that you say are a result of player outcry were actually always intended to be a thing - the developers just never had a chance to implement them pre launch (with their team of 30), and so had to patch them together post launch (with their team of 7).
Thanks, EA!
Lord British is a big carebear, we all know that, one time he banned a player just because this guy pickpocket Lord British... what kind of loser is that, using his admin powers to ban people because other people are better players
I've been banned from private UO servers too for reasons similar as that
If a PvP sandbox fails, its only the devs fault
PvE means: A handful of coins and a bag of boredom.
But recently I am seeing him change, he got very bored in the last years and nowadays he is liking hardcore stuff, permadeath, more risk, more challenge. Asmongold is changing in a better way in 2023
I've only been watching him for a few years, but I've only seen him become an even bigger carebear. And even in that video he kept insisting that only a fraction of the playerbase is interested in hardcore classic. And pretty much 80% of his feedback goes against AoC's core pillars. It will be one of the most uncomfortable games for him and he'll complain non-stop while playing it.
I just hope that Intrepid don't listen to him and his audience too much, cause they'll definitely push for a whole 180 in design.
I'm just against when there is a big outcry that ends up changing a game, just because of outcry even Ultima Online gained safe areas
In a recent interview, a developer from UO (someone that also happened to have worked on Meridian 59) said the worst thing about UO was that it was a PvP sandbox.
They always wanted to put systems in place to curb that, but EA forced them to release the game before they could develop said systems - so they had to be developed post launch.
As such, those "safe areas" you are complaining about that you say are a result of player outcry were actually always intended to be a thing - the developers just never had a chance to implement them pre launch (with their team of 30), and so had to patch them together post launch (with their team of 7).
Thanks, EA!
Lord British is a big carebear, we all know that, one time he banned a player just because this guy pickpocket Lord British... what kind of loser is that, using his admin powers to ban people because other people are better players
I've been banned from private UO servers too for reasons similar as that
If a PvP sandbox fails, its only the devs fault
I'm assuming you dont see the issue with the above.
You state first of all that you didnt like the way developers tried to make a PvP sandbox work in the face of unintended player behavior - and then you state it is the developers fault if said PvP sandbox doesn't work.
You dont get to have it both ways.
You can EITHER state that it is developers fault if they do not work, and then accept their method of trying to make it work, OR you can state it is the players fault that a PvP sandbox doesnt work, and reject their method of trying to make it work, but blame those players instead.
You dont get to perform the actions that cause developers to need to take action and then complain when they do take action.
However, you are mistaken. The player that was banned was only banned from the games beta, and was banned for exploiting bugs rather than reporting them (kind of the point of being in a beta). This ban did happen just after said player killed Lord British, however they did produce evidence at the time of the player exploiting bugs rather than reporting them (the only argument to be made here is that the developers only knew about the exploiting after looking in to the players account after the killing).
The players name, by the way, was Rainz.
You really do need to stop bullshitting. I've told you before I can see through it every time.
I'm just against when there is a big outcry that ends up changing a game, just because of outcry even Ultima Online gained safe areas
In a recent interview, a developer from UO (someone that also happened to have worked on Meridian 59) said the worst thing about UO was that it was a PvP sandbox.
They always wanted to put systems in place to curb that, but EA forced them to release the game before they could develop said systems - so they had to be developed post launch.
As such, those "safe areas" you are complaining about that you say are a result of player outcry were actually always intended to be a thing - the developers just never had a chance to implement them pre launch (with their team of 30), and so had to patch them together post launch (with their team of 7).
Thanks, EA!
Lord British is a big carebear, we all know that, one time he banned a player just because this guy pickpocket Lord British... what kind of loser is that, using his admin powers to ban people because other people are better players
I've been banned from private UO servers too for reasons similar as that
If a PvP sandbox fails, its only the devs fault
I'm assuming you dont see the issue with the above.
You state first of all that you didnt like the way developers tried to make a PvP sandbox work in the face of unintended player behavior - and then you state it is the developers fault if said PvP sandbox doesn't work.
You dont get to have it both ways.
You can EITHER state that it is developers fault if they do not work, and then accept their method of trying to make it work, OR you can state it is the players fault that a PvP sandbox doesnt work, and reject their method of trying to make it work, but blame those players instead.
You dont get to perform the actions that cause developers to need to take action and then complain when they do take action.
However, you are mistaken. The player that was banned was only banned from the games beta, and was banned for exploiting bugs rather than reporting them (kind of the point of being in a beta). This ban did happen just after said player killed Lord British, however they did produce evidence at the time of the player exploiting bugs rather than reporting them (the only argument to be made here is that the developers only knew about the exploiting after looking in to the players account after the killing).
The players name, by the way, was Rainz.
You really do need to stop bullshitting. I've told you before I can see through it every time.
Holy shit, let me burn myself in debunking this, as if I had nothing else to do in life.
It couldn't be two small sentences, right? I has to be a book of arguments about why other people suck.
Reading.... reading... lalala.... reading.
Loading answer:
I double down on that, PvP sandboxes are fantastic and players should do anything they want, if the game fails then it's the devs fault. The player's job is playing and the devs job is developing.
ps: good job in making one Bible everyday about how others suck, you are probably grinding a 1000 bibles achievement. People who don't bring anything to the table are just cowards who are affraid to be criticised, so they stay around in the corners just critizing everybody else everyday... and it's always very personal... forum snipers exist in every forum
PvE means: A handful of coins and a bag of boredom.
I double down on that, PvP sandboxes are fantastic and players should do anything they want, if the game fails then it's the devs fault. The player's job is playing and the devs job is developing.
And this is exactly why you're seen as a murderhobo. Being able to do anything usually devolves into harassment and abuse of other people, so devs have to address that beforehand. But you dislike when they do so in their design.
I double down on that, PvP sandboxes are fantastic and players should do anything they want, if the game fails then it's the devs fault. The player's job is playing and the devs job is developing.
Ok, and so when one player performs unintended actions that will see 100 players quit the game, should the developers just accept that loss in players, or should the developers prevent that one player from performing those actions?
Because what you are describing here is a game with a playerbase that is perhaps a few hundred at the most.
Essentially, you are talking about a product that is not financially viable, and as such will never exist.
I double down on that, PvP sandboxes are fantastic and players should do anything they want, if the game fails then it's the devs fault. The player's job is playing and the devs job is developing.
And this is exactly why you're seen as a murderhobo. Being able to do anything usually devolves into harassment and abuse of other people, so devs have to address that beforehand. But you dislike when they do so in their design.
Anything within the rules of course!
If the game lets me kill the same guy one hundred times in the spawn, then I will do it and I can confirm I did that a lot in the past!
My best memories in Wow are at Booty Bay, all that random PvP and those ships arriving bringing murder crews to reset the stabilishment at Booty Bay. In Ultima Online it was around those ressurection spots, and so on!
PvE means: A handful of coins and a bag of boredom.
Anything within the rules of course!
If the game lets me kill the same guy one hundred times in the spawn, then I will do it and I can confirm I did that a lot in the past!
And corruption has rules to stop you from doing that, because if just a few people do this, hundreds of players will leave. And if there's a few people like that on each server - the game will lose thousands and thousands in revenue.
Anything within the rules of course!
If the game lets me kill the same guy one hundred times in the spawn, then I will do it and I can confirm I did that a lot in the past!
And corruption has rules to stop you from doing that, because if just a few people do this, hundreds of players will leave. And if there's a few people like that on each server - the game will lose thousands and thousands in revenue.
Forcing others out of a game is fine, it's intended gameplay, it is the devs fault this happens!!!!
People don't leave because dying a few times, they leave because of hopelesness and grinds, it's the devs fault if this happens
PvE means: A handful of coins and a bag of boredom.
Devs could do a better job in giving hope and helping the victims not to feel so helpless... but devs don't do that because they are as limited as the victims.
Example:
-if guild members are ganking people non-stop, why not give discounts in declaring war against that entire guild? give so much discount that people will be able to declare war for free... let the entire server declare war on that guild and this will help
The war window could even suggest which guilds you get a discount!!!
HEHEHEEHEHEHEH
Yeap, the war window could give the top 10 of the day, the cheapest war declarations of the day LOL
But because devs try to hide the gankers under the carpet then all devs fail.
If devs have the right view on things, they would put the gankers under the spotlight and let the entire server massacre them.
etc
PvE means: A handful of coins and a bag of boredom.
When someone goes too deep in ganking, then the character gets subscribed to mob facions, now the gankers will work as mobs in the dungeons, they will defend the dungeons against the carebears in those culturally sensitive landmarks!!!!!
The dungeon runners are STEALING cultural heritage of all those races and indigenous minorities, like the goblins, kobolds, etc.
How can't people see?
Who the dungeon runners think they are? The French Empire looting all the cultural riches from exotic countries? Just to hoard all that in the bank/museum?
Well, gankers could protect such culturally sensitive landmarks and cultural riches
PvE means: A handful of coins and a bag of boredom.
Forcing others out of a game is fine, it's intended gameplay, it is the devs fault this happens!!!!
This is a perfectly valid opinion to have.
What you then can not do - not if you want to be considered a reasonable person - is complain when developers add systems to a game to prevent this happening.
I mean, if you want to say it is the developers fault if they allow players to perform actions that cause others to leave a game, and if you then complain that developers add systems to games to prevent this from happening, what is it you actually expect from developers?
I mean, you are literally saying it is their fault, and then complaining when they try to do something about it.
*weep weep* I got killed *weep weep* I'm out of the game. and why do the project need such players? useless crowd? who will always complain, that player is strong, that player killed my mob, they shouldn’t kill me in this location, the damage is high during the siege, my class is weak, give green players bonuses against pk, let the greens not be stunned, let the greens when they are attacked turn into a giant robot and by pressing one button they kill all PKs within a radius of 50 killometers.
I understand why players are trying to get themselves more protection from "bad" players, I understand why such topics are created "no pvp in freehold", "Greens unable to be CCd". You are a little confusing game genres.
If I played a solo game where I am relaxed, I want to play lounging on an armchair or sofa, I want to watch the plot and from time to time some kind of NPC came running to me and killed me, then I would just be angry and demand that the developers remove this crap . But we're talking about an MMORPG, a competitive game, a game where you're not alone, where thousands of people try to be better than you at everything, and you try to stop them and become even better. every day, every minute, every second you are trying to become stronger than others, and it doesn’t matter if you kill the dragon better than others, or you kill better than others in the arena. Recently, mmo game developers have been trying to attract solo players to their games, so they are introducing restrictions on pvp players in every possible way. I want to give athletics as an example. You see, there is professional running, where everything is tied to the competition. There is amateur running, everything is tied to relaxation, health and joy. And now imagine that amateur and professional running have been mixed for many years. Where amateurs were the priority. And finally, the competition was announced as a priority for professional players. It seems that everyone should understand what this means, but messages began to appear on the forum "what do these professionals allow themselves?" ,"make it so that they can't run fast", "I want to feel safe from professionals" and so on. No, I'm not saying that amateur running is bad, it's great, but it's different. I just think that if amateurs decide to participate in professional running, then they should accept the rules, not run around complaining and begging for bonuses from the sports committee. And just collect your balls in a fist and start competing for an honest without bonuses for yourself. It will be difficult, there will be defeats, but in the end victory will come
ps I'm sorry, I don't know how to depict tears in English. In no way did I mean to offend runners. I want to believe that intrepid will continue to support free pvp in his project without any restrictions, despite letters from amateur running
I want to believe that intrepid will continue to support free pvp in his project without any restrictions, despite letters from amateur running
That has literally never been a thing Intrepid were doing with Ashes.
PvP has had restrictions since the kickstarter.
On the 12th of May, 2017 (very nearly 6 years ago), Intrepid said that the intention of Ashes was to not be a gank box. That right there tells you that PvP will be restricted, because unrestricted PvP will always be a gank box.
I want to believe that intrepid will continue to support free pvp in his project without any restrictions, despite letters from amateur running
That has literally never been a thing Intrepid were doing with Ashes.
PvP has had restrictions since the kickstarter.
On the 12th of May, 2017 (very nearly 6 years ago), Intrepid said that the intention of Ashes was to not be a gank box. That right there tells you that PvP will be restricted, because unrestricted PvP will always be a gank box.
We are talking about different things. by free pvp i mean that there will be no system restrictions on pvp. I understand that there will be safe zones in cities
Comments
People only think "griefing" comes from gankers, I say griefing comes only from PvE an ganking is plain PvP and intended gameplay. It doesn't matter if the other guy kills you 1000 times in the spawn, it's just PvP and dev incompetence
True griefing will come from the green horde
Are you using the Force Attack option? If not, the green can wander through there all day. If you're choosing to force your attacks to hit them, then that's on you.
"Q: In the open-world PvP system, will there be a "prevent attacking innocent" option that when turned on will prevent me from accidentally attacking a non-corrupted player? A: The open-world flagging PvP system requires what we call the "Force function" in order to initiate an attack against another player, and by default that's even against players who are already flagged, though not against players who are corrupt; and they're in the settings. You will have options by which you can persist that force function if you wish through another keystroke input. And then additionally you can set your AoEs so that if you initiate an AoE attack against a location and there are flagged players there, you will either- you can set it so that you can automatically hit those flagged players, but by default it doesn't. So, those are options in your in your settings that you will have access to and be able to adjust.[6] – Steven Sharif"
I think people will come as green and try to find who can attack them, there always be the ex ganker who never turns that off, that's why the best is doing this when there's parties around
It always come to my mind the amount of bandaids of all kinds of shapes and colors, just because the corruption + flagging system is this weird unnatural thing
Bandaids everywhere, to fix any kind of problem that was created by the first two bandaids (flagging and corruption)
Also, if a ganker is fine with corruption penalties they're free to force attack everything, greens included. But I doubt there'll be dumb people like that. Though I could definitely see someone enabling that and them coming onto forums to whine about karmabombing and that kind of shit.
I never said without repercussions or other things, I am a strong believer in repercussions... I love FFA, but things should happen
The problem is that you sometimes champion solutions/repercussions that only work en masse if the game is either PermaDeath or Full Loot (and sometimes not even this one) while calling anyone who disagrees with those (in that specific case) a carebear who isn't listening.
The impression you give is that you're the worst type of person for us 'carebears' to play with, and that you'd prefer we just didn't play at all or had to be functionally subservient to anyone with 'strength'. It's a perspective that should probably be considered, but it's hard to get people I know to take you as anything but a murderhobo, even amongst the strifelords, edgelords and bandits around here (and even my friends who are those things consider you extreme).
I'm not saying to change your stance, but maybe try less hard to make your points.
I am definitely not any of that, I'm just a regular PvPer and I like when the systems are fair for everybody. I have no problems with the humans who are carebears, many are my friends for years.
I'm just against when there is a big outcry that ends up changing a game, just because of outcry even Ultima Online gained safe areas, even EVE now has personal instances where the player can farm loot day and night in his personal instance. So, when the outcry is big, devs instead of making things fair, they tend to obey and deliver unfair systems.
This is what happens, in this specific order:
Just yesterday, Asmongold was reacting to a video saying that MMOs became boring because leveling is just a boring grind and then the game only really starts at max level. This is why people are loving Wow hardcore, because if you die you gotta delete your character, so leveling becomes meaningful again
That's a problem for me, I'm definitely not against people, but I am against unfair one-sided systems which will do that to games
Right, and I agree. There's a bunch of abuses from both sides if the systems allow for any loopholes. Anything that can be done 'without repercussions' for either side.
But 'green can't be CC'ed' is definitely one of the things where if it exists, the 'loopholes' that greens can use are relatively minor, but it closes huge loopholes that more aggressive players can use, so if one had to choose one of those, you'd choose that one.
The other thing is, as NiKr and the other L2 players will tell you, this isn't really a 'change' at all. This is 'how it worked for them' for some time, and therefore it could easily always have been Steven's intention to strongly consider it.
The game is really not likely to get worse this way than the other way.
The Corruption system itself might have flaws, but the flaws it has are debatable and could easily be 'not flaws' depending on how Steven wants the game to feel. If the game is supposed to feel 'consistent', then sure, it should have instances, and safe areas, and some other stuff.
Something's got to give, but Corruption could just as easily be the basis for changes to economy, as the other way around would be.
Now we are on the same page overall.
learn more you must, young padawan. l2 had that option too. no way you could kill a green without pressing ctrl..guess what? still happened accidentally many times. seen so many epics and gear drop because someone accidentally went red. there are also ways to make someone go red :P but they are a bit complicated and require a lot of timing. so its possible that people accidentally go red in ashes and lose their stuff.
i agree with arya here. I've been griefed by so many pvers lol and I don't mean karma bombing or anything.
I'm more than certain that he won't be able to survive in Ashes, especially if any of your suggestions get even close to being implemented.
Same thing as in EVE, there is a safety setting (green, yellow, red), but still saw many people gank the wrong targets, or in wrong systems, and they got insta killed by the NPC police, then they were looted by every possible ninja looter LOL
Even me, how many times I came back from low security space with my ship with a flashy skull, blinking like mad, came back to high security space just to find everybody trying to kill me LOL... sometimes nobody dared to touch me because the scene was so ridiculous that made people suspect I was baiting them... !! No, I wasn't baiting anyone, it was just mistakes.... mistakes were made!
How many times I spammed "*TornadoGanker is attacking you*" in Ultima Online, then I walk towards the person while I was saying those words... people entered in combat mode... attacked me... became criminal... i called the guards who insta killed them... then I legally looted them and stored their things in my bank
It's kinda funny safety settings... NPC guards... keyboard shotcuts and mistakes
Yes, Asmongold is a legendary grindy bear, who is a little clueless about PvP
But recently I am seeing him change, he got very bored in the last years and nowadays he is liking hardcore stuff, permadeath, more risk, more challenge. Asmongold is changing in a better way in 2023
I wonder how Asmongold will react after he farms many dungeons and then put all his shit in a house in the node and then he loses the node... I have no idea how he will react
In a recent interview, a developer from UO (someone that also happened to have worked on Meridian 59) said the worst thing about UO was that it was a PvP sandbox.
They always wanted to put systems in place to curb that, but EA forced them to release the game before they could develop said systems - so they had to be developed post launch.
As such, those "safe areas" you are complaining about that you say are a result of player outcry were actually always intended to be a thing - the developers just never had a chance to implement them pre launch (with their team of 30), and so had to patch them together post launch (with their team of 7).
Thanks, EA!
Lord British is a big carebear, we all know that, one time he banned a player just because this guy pickpocket Lord British... what kind of loser is that, using his admin powers to ban people because other people are better players
I've been banned from private UO servers too for reasons similar as that
If a PvP sandbox fails, its only the devs fault
I just hope that Intrepid don't listen to him and his audience too much, cause they'll definitely push for a whole 180 in design.
I'm assuming you dont see the issue with the above.
You state first of all that you didnt like the way developers tried to make a PvP sandbox work in the face of unintended player behavior - and then you state it is the developers fault if said PvP sandbox doesn't work.
You dont get to have it both ways.
You can EITHER state that it is developers fault if they do not work, and then accept their method of trying to make it work, OR you can state it is the players fault that a PvP sandbox doesnt work, and reject their method of trying to make it work, but blame those players instead.
You dont get to perform the actions that cause developers to need to take action and then complain when they do take action.
However, you are mistaken. The player that was banned was only banned from the games beta, and was banned for exploiting bugs rather than reporting them (kind of the point of being in a beta). This ban did happen just after said player killed Lord British, however they did produce evidence at the time of the player exploiting bugs rather than reporting them (the only argument to be made here is that the developers only knew about the exploiting after looking in to the players account after the killing).
The players name, by the way, was Rainz.
You really do need to stop bullshitting. I've told you before I can see through it every time.
Holy shit, let me burn myself in debunking this, as if I had nothing else to do in life.
It couldn't be two small sentences, right? I has to be a book of arguments about why other people suck.
Reading.... reading... lalala.... reading.
Loading answer:
I double down on that, PvP sandboxes are fantastic and players should do anything they want, if the game fails then it's the devs fault. The player's job is playing and the devs job is developing.
ps: good job in making one Bible everyday about how others suck, you are probably grinding a 1000 bibles achievement. People who don't bring anything to the table are just cowards who are affraid to be criticised, so they stay around in the corners just critizing everybody else everyday... and it's always very personal... forum snipers exist in every forum
Ok, and so when one player performs unintended actions that will see 100 players quit the game, should the developers just accept that loss in players, or should the developers prevent that one player from performing those actions?
Because what you are describing here is a game with a playerbase that is perhaps a few hundred at the most.
Essentially, you are talking about a product that is not financially viable, and as such will never exist.
Anything within the rules of course!
If the game lets me kill the same guy one hundred times in the spawn, then I will do it and I can confirm I did that a lot in the past!
My best memories in Wow are at Booty Bay, all that random PvP and those ships arriving bringing murder crews to reset the stabilishment at Booty Bay. In Ultima Online it was around those ressurection spots, and so on!
Forcing others out of a game is fine, it's intended gameplay, it is the devs fault this happens!!!!
People don't leave because dying a few times, they leave because of hopelesness and grinds, it's the devs fault if this happens
Example:
-if guild members are ganking people non-stop, why not give discounts in declaring war against that entire guild? give so much discount that people will be able to declare war for free... let the entire server declare war on that guild and this will help
The war window could even suggest which guilds you get a discount!!!
HEHEHEEHEHEHEH
Yeap, the war window could give the top 10 of the day, the cheapest war declarations of the day LOL
But because devs try to hide the gankers under the carpet then all devs fail.
If devs have the right view on things, they would put the gankers under the spotlight and let the entire server massacre them.
etc
When someone goes too deep in ganking, then the character gets subscribed to mob facions, now the gankers will work as mobs in the dungeons, they will defend the dungeons against the carebears in those culturally sensitive landmarks!!!!!
The dungeon runners are STEALING cultural heritage of all those races and indigenous minorities, like the goblins, kobolds, etc.
How can't people see?
Who the dungeon runners think they are? The French Empire looting all the cultural riches from exotic countries? Just to hoard all that in the bank/museum?
Well, gankers could protect such culturally sensitive landmarks and cultural riches
What you then can not do - not if you want to be considered a reasonable person - is complain when developers add systems to a game to prevent this happening.
I mean, if you want to say it is the developers fault if they allow players to perform actions that cause others to leave a game, and if you then complain that developers add systems to games to prevent this from happening, what is it you actually expect from developers?
I mean, you are literally saying it is their fault, and then complaining when they try to do something about it.
I understand why players are trying to get themselves more protection from "bad" players, I understand why such topics are created "no pvp in freehold", "Greens unable to be CCd". You are a little confusing game genres.
If I played a solo game where I am relaxed, I want to play lounging on an armchair or sofa, I want to watch the plot and from time to time some kind of NPC came running to me and killed me, then I would just be angry and demand that the developers remove this crap . But we're talking about an MMORPG, a competitive game, a game where you're not alone, where thousands of people try to be better than you at everything, and you try to stop them and become even better. every day, every minute, every second you are trying to become stronger than others, and it doesn’t matter if you kill the dragon better than others, or you kill better than others in the arena. Recently, mmo game developers have been trying to attract solo players to their games, so they are introducing restrictions on pvp players in every possible way. I want to give athletics as an example. You see, there is professional running, where everything is tied to the competition. There is amateur running, everything is tied to relaxation, health and joy. And now imagine that amateur and professional running have been mixed for many years. Where amateurs were the priority. And finally, the competition was announced as a priority for professional players. It seems that everyone should understand what this means, but messages began to appear on the forum "what do these professionals allow themselves?" ,"make it so that they can't run fast", "I want to feel safe from professionals" and so on. No, I'm not saying that amateur running is bad, it's great, but it's different. I just think that if amateurs decide to participate in professional running, then they should accept the rules, not run around complaining and begging for bonuses from the sports committee. And just collect your balls in a fist and start competing for an honest without bonuses for yourself. It will be difficult, there will be defeats, but in the end victory will come
ps I'm sorry, I don't know how to depict tears in English. In no way did I mean to offend runners. I want to believe that intrepid will continue to support free pvp in his project without any restrictions, despite letters from amateur running
PvP has had restrictions since the kickstarter.
On the 12th of May, 2017 (very nearly 6 years ago), Intrepid said that the intention of Ashes was to not be a gank box. That right there tells you that PvP will be restricted, because unrestricted PvP will always be a gank box.
We are talking about different things. by free pvp i mean that there will be no system restrictions on pvp. I understand that there will be safe zones in cities