Greetings, glorious adventurers! If you're joining in our Alpha One spot testing, please follow the steps here to see all the latest test info on our forums and Discord!

Corruption/pvp

1356718

Comments

  • tautautautau Member, Alpha One, Adventurer
    If someone risks their valuable personal gear because they went red because another player irritated them, it appears to me to be a personal issue with the player going red ~ their lack of personal self-control is potentially costing them their valuable item(s).

    They should not blame the game rules, they would be better served learning to tame their emotions and learn to master themselves.
  • hleVhleV Member
    edited May 2023
    Funny how it's always the same few individuals on the forums that just can't seem to comprehend the simplest things.

    It's not about an individual being able or unable to control their urge to PK, it's about the severity of the punishment. Switch "gear drop RNG" with "ban for a month" and you could bring the same nonsensical argument "don't PK". It's not about that, it's about why is the potential punishment so darn extreme. The fact that you can avoid something doesn't justify just any sort of punishment. That's like saying that sentencing people to death for any crime whatsoever is okay, because they could've avoided doing the crime.
  • Song_WardenSong_Warden Member, Alpha One, Adventurer
    I haven't heard of the ban for a month. I doubt it will happen...
    2a3b8ichz0pd.gif
  • AzheraeAzherae Member, Alpha One, Adventurer
    hleV wrote: »
    Funny how it's always the same few individuals on the forums that just can't seem to comprehend the simplest things.

    It's not about an individual being able or unable to control their urge to PK, it's about the severity of the punishment. Switch "gear drop RNG" with "ban for a month" and you could bring the same nonsensical argument "don't PK". It's not about that, it's about why is the potential punishment so darn extreme. The fact that you can avoid something doesn't justify just any sort of punishment. That's like saying that sentencing people to death for any crime whatsoever is okay, because they could've avoided doing the crime.

    The point is that the punishment is proportional. It's only severe to a specific type of person.

    If I go red in my best gear, the punishment is severe.

    If I go red in my backup/test gear, the punishment is smaller.

    By that reasoning, Intrepid is either 'not controlling the punishment at all', 'discouraging people from wearing their good gear to PK', or 'discouraging well geared players from PK-ing' at 'worst', but this doesn't lead to 'PK won't happen' except for a specific type of person. That's the point that, from my perspective, 'you' are missing. Intrepid has a goal, whether you consider it reasonable or not, that 'players who have gear that is worth hundreds of hours of effort do not use that gear against noncombatants in the open world regardless of being annoyed by them'.

    So that's the deal. Some people don't consider 'you may drop gear if Corrupted' as severe because they 'understand' that the game is telling them 'don't beat a person who isn't fighting back to death with your best hammer'.
    Sorry, my native language is Erlang.
    
  • NiKrNiKr Member
    hleV wrote: »
    That's like saying that sentencing people to death for any crime whatsoever is okay, because they could've avoided doing the crime.
    Except this is not some random crime. It's a murder. Losing an item (we don't even know the rng chances btw)
    is not even that big of a punishment. We also don't know the details of how those items will be chosen or how they'll track what exactly can be dropped. There might be several ways to circumvent the system.

    And while I'd support a sort of threshold of PKs before which you can't drop items, considering how harsh the currently planned punishments will be - I highly doubt this will change all that much.
  • Taleof2CitiesTaleof2Cities Member
    edited May 2023
    Solvryn wrote: »
    We won’t see bounty hunting if the system completely deters PvP interactions.

    Bounty hunting has its own section of the Wiki, @Solvryn.

    Don't try to fool yourself into thinking it won't be a thing. More specifically, corruption will at least be tuned to allow for this mechanic.

    https://ashesofcreation.wiki/Bounty_hunters
  • hleVhleV Member
    edited May 2023
    Azherae wrote: »
    If I go red in my best gear, the punishment is severe.

    If I go red in my backup/test gear, the punishment is smaller.
    You don't find it silly at all that somehow, the severity of punishment for committing murder somehow depends on what gear you have on you? Like "yeah I don't have much to lose, let's commit some crime for fun!" seems so stupid to me and I don't think a good system would "discriminate" like that.
  • AzheraeAzherae Member, Alpha One, Adventurer
    hleV wrote: »
    Azherae wrote: »
    If I go red in my best gear, the punishment is severe.

    If I go red in my backup/test gear, the punishment is smaller.
    You don't find it silly at all that somehow, the severity of punishment for committing murder somehow depends on what gear you have on you?

    No.

    And I understand that you do, but that's the thing we can consider the 'crucial difference'. I don't think this is bad design, I don't think it's silly. I think it is normal because that's what the game is trying to achieve, to make it so that 'those in very good gear don't randomly PK'.
    Sorry, my native language is Erlang.
    
  • MyosotysMyosotys Member
    edited May 2023
    This has been debated millions of time but I still think that too strict corruption will make some servers without PvP and full of bots…

    I would prefer a soft corruption where you can Fpk and clean your corruption quickly (2 hours to get clean MAXIMUM).

    Then introduce some more RP punishments, with some guards. These guards could be NPC but also anti pk guilds with a title of guards. These guildes could get pay by the mayor for protecting the node.

    There are millions of interesting things to do other than corruption to limit fpk :
    - Reduce groups (4 - 6 - 8 players max out of raids/events).
    - Make more difficult to meet each other (random pop when you go somewhere, to avoid fpk to gather themselves too fast
    - Multi itinerary to go somewhere to avoid camping
    - Escape scrolls/spells
    - Sanctuary spell (you take 0 damage for 1 min for example but you cannot attack and then you must rest for 10 min to use sanctuary again.
    - Make corrupted visible on the map (already done and cool idea)
    - etc.




  • AzheraeAzherae Member, Alpha One, Adventurer
    Azherae wrote: »
    hleV wrote: »
    Azherae wrote: »
    If I go red in my best gear, the punishment is severe.

    If I go red in my backup/test gear, the punishment is smaller.
    You don't find it silly at all that somehow, the severity of punishment for committing murder somehow depends on what gear you have on you?

    No.

    And I understand that you do, but that's the thing we can consider the 'crucial difference'. I don't think this is bad design, I don't think it's silly. I think it is normal because that's what the game is trying to achieve, to make it so that 'those in very good gear don't randomly PK'.

    Actually, to clarify, I'm only taking issue with one point here.

    Any implication that the game is 'too carebear' and 'no one will PK'.

    People 'should' take off their best gear and PK if they wanna PK. If you meet some random person in the open world and that person annoys you "one time", I think it's better for the game if the reaction is 'I should try to either reason with this person or put them on a list' not 'I'm just gonna kill this person right away and take the exp debt'.

    If you want to walk around in your best gear, which I totally understand, the game then 'says' to you 'You should respond to irritation/opportunity differently than if you went out in less invested gear'. I therefore can only see the problem as 'I would like to be in my best gear, but I would also like to opportunistically PK people without risking that gear'.

    There is a specific type of person for whom this is a serious problem. There is another type of person for whom 'walking around in less than their best gear in case they find a target' is acceptable. Since the game still only puts Corruption on the last hitter, it extends it even further. If you are in your best gear and solo and randomly performing PK, the game potentially punishes you.

    Whereas for me, it would be 'Hey Guildmate there is someone out here annoying me, gear up appropriately and come kill them please'. With the intention of helping them do so. In MY best gear. And coordinating the kill so that they are the last hit.

    I barely see the 'can drop gear from one PK' as an obstacle to anything.
    Sorry, my native language is Erlang.
    
  • hleVhleV Member
    Azherae wrote: »
    Actually, to clarify, I'm only taking issue with one point here.

    Any implication that the game is 'too carebear' and 'no one will PK'.

    People 'should' take off their best gear and PK if they wanna PK. If you meet some random person in the open world and that person annoys you "one time", I think it's better for the game if the reaction is 'I should try to either reason with this person or put them on a list' not 'I'm just gonna kill this person right away and take the exp debt'.

    If you want to walk around in your best gear, which I totally understand, the game then 'says' to you 'You should respond to irritation/opportunity differently than if you went out in less invested gear'. I therefore can only see the problem as 'I would like to be in my best gear, but I would also like to opportunistically PK people without risking that gear'.

    There is a specific type of person for whom this is a serious problem. There is another type of person for whom 'walking around in less than their best gear in case they find a target' is acceptable. Since the game still only puts Corruption on the last hitter, it extends it even further. If you are in your best gear and solo and randomly performing PK, the game potentially punishes you.

    Whereas for me, it would be 'Hey Guildmate there is someone out here annoying me, gear up appropriately and come kill them please'. With the intention of helping them do so. In MY best gear. And coordinating the kill so that they are the last hit.

    I barely see the 'can drop gear from one PK' as an obstacle to anything.
    As someone who's normally not gonna randomly PK a player that doesn't fight back, I'd have no reason to not be in my best gear. Yet I can totally see someone pissing me off to the extent where I would go for that one PK. Apparently in this rare case I'd either have to not do it, or do it at the risk of losing precious gear piece. And I absolutely hate this. I don't find it reasonable whatsoever. RNG gear drop is not the way. Punish appropriately, not RNG it.
  • AzheraeAzherae Member, Alpha One, Adventurer
    hleV wrote: »
    Azherae wrote: »
    Actually, to clarify, I'm only taking issue with one point here.

    Any implication that the game is 'too carebear' and 'no one will PK'.

    People 'should' take off their best gear and PK if they wanna PK. If you meet some random person in the open world and that person annoys you "one time", I think it's better for the game if the reaction is 'I should try to either reason with this person or put them on a list' not 'I'm just gonna kill this person right away and take the exp debt'.

    If you want to walk around in your best gear, which I totally understand, the game then 'says' to you 'You should respond to irritation/opportunity differently than if you went out in less invested gear'. I therefore can only see the problem as 'I would like to be in my best gear, but I would also like to opportunistically PK people without risking that gear'.

    There is a specific type of person for whom this is a serious problem. There is another type of person for whom 'walking around in less than their best gear in case they find a target' is acceptable. Since the game still only puts Corruption on the last hitter, it extends it even further. If you are in your best gear and solo and randomly performing PK, the game potentially punishes you.

    Whereas for me, it would be 'Hey Guildmate there is someone out here annoying me, gear up appropriately and come kill them please'. With the intention of helping them do so. In MY best gear. And coordinating the kill so that they are the last hit.

    I barely see the 'can drop gear from one PK' as an obstacle to anything.
    As someone who's normally not gonna randomly PK a player that doesn't fight back, I'd have no reason to not be in my best gear. Yet I can totally see someone pissing me off to the extent where I would go for that one PK. Apparently in this rare case I'd either have to not do it, or do it at the risk of losing precious gear piece. And I absolutely hate this. I don't find it reasonable whatsoever. RNG gear drop is not the way. Punish appropriately, not RNG it.

    Understandable to me and I sympathize(? not sure if this is the right word for the feeling) with disliking this.

    Because yes, for you, the game is saying 'You! Don't PK, you have to control yourself and call in someone else to do it even though you're pissed off at this player and probably could take them'.

    But like most frustrating things in games, it's not necessarily a design flaw, it's something you just really don't personally like. Sometimes those things are necessary for the goals of the game (and sometimes that means you don't like those either). But in the end, this isn't a case of 'Intrepid choosing something that no one wants' or 'this design type is flawed'. It's just not your preference.
    Sorry, my native language is Erlang.
    
  • SolvrynSolvryn Member, Alpha One, Adventurer
    Solvryn wrote: »
    We won’t see bounty hunting if the system completely deters PvP interactions.

    Bounty hunting has its own section of the Wiki, @Solvryn.

    Don't try to fool yourself into thinking it won't be a thing. More specifically, corruption will at least be tuned to allow for this mechanic.

    https://ashesofcreation.wiki/Bounty_hunters

    I’ve read the wiki plenty to understand what the bounty hunter system states, I also have a very good grasp of human behavior.

    And if the corruption system successfully deters most people from killing others from “PKing”, there won’t be a high need for a bounty hunter.

    That’s the reality of it.
  • OkeydokeOkeydoke Member, Alpha One, Adventurer
    @hleV

    I agree with you. If I was designing the game I wouldn't start loot drop chance until after the first kill. I think the pros of it outweigh the cons. But I'm not designing the game and that decision has been made. Fairly recently too, as you can see in the discord snapshot that Unknown posted. Doesn't mean that decision can't change through testing, but I doubt it will.

    And like Solvryn said earlier, lol, this forum is...I don't even know how to put this. Not the best place to discuss things like what you've been trying to discuss. You're going to get mobbed. But you should post your thoughts regardless. There's discord too, kinda ehh, blabber mostly. Reddit is a cesspool in it's own right but probably your best chance of actually discussing things that this forum immediately tries to shut down. Aoc Reddit has been pretty dead lately though.
  • SolvrynSolvryn Member, Alpha One, Adventurer
    edited May 2023
    Okeydoke wrote: »
    @hleV

    I agree with you. If I was designing the game I wouldn't start loot drop chance until after the first kill. I think the pros of it outweigh the cons. But I'm not designing the game and that decision has been made. Fairly recently too, as you can see in the discord snapshot that Unknown posted. Doesn't mean that decision can't change through testing, but I doubt it will.

    And like Solvryn said earlier, lol, this forum is...I don't even know how to put this. Not the best place to discuss things like what you've been trying to discuss. You're going to get mobbed. But you should post your thoughts regardless. There's discord too, kinda ehh, blabber mostly. Reddit is a cesspool in it's own right but probably your best chance of actually discussing things that this forum immediately tries to shut down. Aoc Reddit has been pretty dead lately though.

    A good portion of the extremely vocal part of the community tries to screech and scream the loudest and try to drown out any dialogue they don't like.

    Just gotta keep those receipts when A2 rolls around and justify their screeching.

    I'll be open and honest but as soon as that olive branch gets snapped then its good old fashion might makes right, those types elected to make sure their forum names are not the same as their names in game and they can live on server 34 as a farmer.
  • NoaaniNoaani Member, Intrepid Pack
    hleV wrote: »
    Noaani wrote: »
    The point you are making - from my understanding- is that you dont want to have the risk of losing gear for killing one player that is either in a spot you want to farm, or has pissed you off in some way.
    Bravo. Now, I expect you to address this one thing specifically, instead of generalizing and pretending that gear piece drop RNG at low corruption level is the only punishment for going red, and that I wish to remove all punishment for going red.

    I'm not sure you understood what just happened.

    We were discussing the topic at hand, and you made the assumption that I didn't grasp the point you were making.

    I then went and stated what I assumed to be the point you were making, and you agreed that I was right with that.

    What this then means is that YOU failed to understand the point that I was making. You failed to understand it so badly that you didn't think I was even addressing the points you were talking about.

    to reiterate, the point I am making is that before you attack someone, perform a risk analysis. Things like the farming spot in question you may be fighting over come in to play with that, as does the potential that a player may have pissed you off.

    Against that, you weight up the risk you put yourself in, the value of gear you stand to lose, the likelihood of running in to another player while working off any potential corruption, the chance you have of winning or losing the fight etc.

    If that risk analysis isn't acceptable to you, but you still want to attack, you make an effort to swing that analysis more in to your favor. This could be by putting on less valuable gear, by attempting to move the location of the fight to somewhere that is less populated, or what ever else.

    Right from the start of this games development, this is what Steven wanted. He wanted players to have to consider whether to attack someone else or not, he wanted some weight behind that decision. Even if some of the specifics around corruption may change, that point of there being some weight to the decision is the point.

    A key part of that is that when you want to fight someone, and the risk analysis comes up as being not in your favor, sometimes you have to opt to simply not attack that player. There is no weight behind that decision if the result of said decision is to always attack when you want to attack - the point of corruption is that there will be times when you want to fight, but simply do not.

    That is corruption working as it should. If you attack a player every time you want to attack a player, corruption is not working.

    So, as I said back on the previous page, your objections here are proving that corruption will have the desired effect.
  • KorelaKorela Member
    PK-ing is way too hardly punished. Bounty hunters, stats reduction, x4 death penalty, etc. I see no risk-reward balance unless I have time to sustain lvls on secondary PK-character on my second PC (seems very unlikely).

    So I'll just teamup with the monsters or do my best to die "green" if opponent do the same. Do we really need an eqiup-drop-punishment thing right after 1 PK? Or do we have a good option to control the spot without PK-ing carebears? Is there any hopes for PvP with this system? :/
  • DepravedDepraved Member
    edited May 2023
    Depraved wrote: »

    we dunno yet..maybe you will be able to pk a few times before you start dropping...

    One more time since people like to just pick their own info and run with it......
    oxfsc90k9kym.png

    I wasn't talking about corruption. I was talking about PK count. any amount of corruption after your pk count limit will make it so that you can drop gear, but not before you go over that limit

  • Song_WardenSong_Warden Member, Alpha One, Adventurer
    The reason it is tagged to corruption rather than kill count is because you get different amounts of corruption for different kills, such as killing a level 1 at level 50 compared to a level 50 at level 50.

    Changing this to allow a kill would mean level 1s will be ganked far more frequently.
    2a3b8ichz0pd.gif
  • Neurath wrote: »
    The reason it is tagged to corruption rather than kill count is because you get different amounts of corruption for different kills, such as killing a level 1 at level 50 compared to a level 50 at level 50.

    Changing this to allow a kill would mean level 1s will be ganked far more frequently.

    no. the higher your pk count, the more corruption you can get when you gain corruption. its basically a multiplier. obviously, if you kill a low level, you get more corruption (that's also a multiplier) and that will also increase the higher your pk count is.

    there will be ways to lower your pk count.

    killing a level 1 as a level 50 is pointless even if you are still in the safe pk count threshold, because you will gain too much corruption, and it will potentially make the game unplayable for you, while getting nothing from killing a level 1...also, you will quickly go over the threshold. also, your pvp stats will diminish...

    how many high level people did you see in l2 killing level 1-10?
  • Song_WardenSong_Warden Member, Alpha One, Adventurer
    You didn't get my point at all. You want to change the dynamics to be kill count only which is false. You get varied amounts of corruption based on activity, thus, the risk of losing gear is different depending on the action taken. More accumulated corruption means higher chance to drop an item.
    2a3b8ichz0pd.gif
  • hleVhleV Member
    edited May 2023
    Noaani wrote: »
    hleV wrote: »
    Noaani wrote: »
    The point you are making - from my understanding- is that you dont want to have the risk of losing gear for killing one player that is either in a spot you want to farm, or has pissed you off in some way.
    Bravo. Now, I expect you to address this one thing specifically, instead of generalizing and pretending that gear piece drop RNG at low corruption level is the only punishment for going red, and that I wish to remove all punishment for going red.

    I'm not sure you understood what just happened.

    We were discussing the topic at hand, and you made the assumption that I didn't grasp the point you were making.

    I then went and stated what I assumed to be the point you were making, and you agreed that I was right with that.

    What this then means is that YOU failed to understand the point that I was making. You failed to understand it so badly that you didn't think I was even addressing the points you were talking about.

    to reiterate, the point I am making is that before you attack someone, perform a risk analysis. Things like the farming spot in question you may be fighting over come in to play with that, as does the potential that a player may have pissed you off.

    Against that, you weight up the risk you put yourself in, the value of gear you stand to lose, the likelihood of running in to another player while working off any potential corruption, the chance you have of winning or losing the fight etc.

    If that risk analysis isn't acceptable to you, but you still want to attack, you make an effort to swing that analysis more in to your favor. This could be by putting on less valuable gear, by attempting to move the location of the fight to somewhere that is less populated, or what ever else.

    Right from the start of this games development, this is what Steven wanted. He wanted players to have to consider whether to attack someone else or not, he wanted some weight behind that decision. Even if some of the specifics around corruption may change, that point of there being some weight to the decision is the point.

    A key part of that is that when you want to fight someone, and the risk analysis comes up as being not in your favor, sometimes you have to opt to simply not attack that player. There is no weight behind that decision if the result of said decision is to always attack when you want to attack - the point of corruption is that there will be times when you want to fight, but simply do not.

    That is corruption working as it should. If you attack a player every time you want to attack a player, corruption is not working.

    So, as I said back on the previous page, your objections here are proving that corruption will have the desired effect.
    And here you go again, explaining the current system and giving tips on how to play in it, when literally nobody asked, and pretending like moving gear drop RNG to higher corruption somehow removes any and all punishment for getting low corruption, never really addressing my concerns about the system being bad. That's what you've been doing all this time, which means you're not grasping what's being discussed here. I honestly don't see why you'd put so much effort into writing all this crap if you actually understood what this is about.

    I really, really made myself clear. It's evident that several others understood what I wrote. You're just hopeless, but then I'm hopeless as well if I keep replying to you, so I'll just stop.

    Feel free to explain the current system and give tips for the 100th time if you wish.
  • Neurath wrote: »
    You didn't get my point at all. You want to change the dynamics to be kill count only which is false. You get varied amounts of corruption based on activity, thus, the risk of losing gear is different depending on the action taken. More accumulated corruption means higher chance to drop an item.

    you could kill 3 people safely in l2 before dropping gear if you died red. that's your kill count.

    aoc has a kill count, and the higher it is, the more corruption you will get whenever you get corruption. check the wiki.

    also, IIRC steven himself said that you will have a safe threshold for pk count, not for corruption
  • NiKrNiKr Member
    Depraved wrote: »
    also, IIRC steven himself said that you will have a safe threshold for pk count, not for corruption
    Unless you manage to find a quote for this - this isn't true. That screenshot people posted before is supported by several voice quotes of "as long as you have corruption on you - you can drop full items". Steven just, yet again, made the system harsher than it was in L2. I personally disagree with it quite a lot, but until we test it there's not much point in discussing it.
  • NiKr wrote: »
    Depraved wrote: »
    also, IIRC steven himself said that you will have a safe threshold for pk count, not for corruption
    Unless you manage to find a quote for this - this isn't true. That screenshot people posted before is supported by several voice quotes of "as long as you have corruption on you - you can drop full items". Steven just, yet again, made the system harsher than it was in L2. I personally disagree with it quite a lot, but until we test it there's not much point in discussing it.

    I'm 100% sure he said it during a stream, but hey maybe he can drop by and clarify.

    it also makes sens. sometimes you might pk by accident, or sometimes you really need to get rid of someone. giving players 1-3 free pk seems reasonable, as long as the quest to lower your pk count isn't too easy / fast
  • tautau wrote: »
    If someone risks their valuable personal gear because they went red because another player irritated them, it appears to me to be a personal issue with the player going red ~ their lack of personal self-control is potentially costing them their valuable item(s).

    They should not blame the game rules, they would be better served learning to tame their emotions and learn to master themselves.

    what if a pve player is harassing and griefing you? how are you going to deal with that? report and wait 3 days for a gm to check the ticket?
  • NiKrNiKr Member
    Depraved wrote: »
    I'm 100% sure he said it during a stream, but hey maybe he can drop by and clarify.
    100% sure is great but I cannot find any indication of this being the case.
    Depraved wrote: »
    what if a pve player is harassing and griefing you? how are you going to deal with that?
    In what way are they harassing and griefing? Any verbal stuff is just muted and any flagged advances get pvped. So that pretty much only leaves mob manipulation and we don't know how that'll work and if it will even work in the first place.

    If they're fighting your mobs better than you - you're the weakling in this situation and you should go find a better-suiting place for yourself. And if they're just helping you get your loot (because they're always below 40% dmg) - all the better for you.
  • Song_WardenSong_Warden Member, Alpha One, Adventurer
    Depraved wrote: »
    Neurath wrote: »
    You didn't get my point at all. You want to change the dynamics to be kill count only which is false. You get varied amounts of corruption based on activity, thus, the risk of losing gear is different depending on the action taken. More accumulated corruption means higher chance to drop an item.

    you could kill 3 people safely in l2 before dropping gear if you died red. that's your kill count.

    aoc has a kill count, and the higher it is, the more corruption you will get whenever you get corruption. check the wiki.

    also, IIRC steven himself said that you will have a safe threshold for pk count, not for corruption

    Free kills literally negates the whole point of the punishment. L2 was far more lenient than the planned system here and you only went red in l2 if you had a good reason.
    2a3b8ichz0pd.gif
  • NiKr wrote: »
    Depraved wrote: »
    I'm 100% sure he said it during a stream, but hey maybe he can drop by and clarify.
    100% sure is great but I cannot find any indication of this being the case.
    Depraved wrote: »
    what if a pve player is harassing and griefing you? how are you going to deal with that?
    In what way are they harassing and griefing? Any verbal stuff is just muted and any flagged advances get pvped. So that pretty much only leaves mob manipulation and we don't know how that'll work and if it will even work in the first place.

    If they're fighting your mobs better than you - you're the weakling in this situation and you should go find a better-suiting place for yourself. And if they're just helping you get your loot (because they're always below 40% dmg) - all the better for you.

    trying to mob drop you all the time. pulling a nearby boss next to you, pulling mobs you are trying to fight and resetting them so that you cant kill them. buffing the mobs (at least they cant heal them, according to steven, not sure about buffing tho), etc. sure you can deal with all that but it usually involves going purple or red. they might even let you kill them so you go red and his 3 buddies jump outta nowhere and kill you. gear farming this way isn't the intended gameplay, IMO.

    having 1-3 pk count protection seems fair. or how do you guys propose we deal with pve griefer? so far pve griefers arent getting punished in any way, only pvp griefers.
  • NoaaniNoaani Member, Intrepid Pack
    hleV wrote: »
    And here you go again, explaining the current system and giving tips on how to play in it, when literally nobody asked, and pretending like moving gear drop RNG to higher corruption somehow removes any and all punishment for getting low corruption, never really addressing my concerns about the system being bad. That's what you've been doing all this time, which means you're not grasping what's being discussed here. I honestly don't see why you'd put so much effort into writing all this crap if you actually understood what this is about.

    I really, really made myself clear. It's evident that several others understood what I wrote. You're just hopeless, but then I'm hopeless as well if I keep replying to you, so I'll just stop.

    Feel free to explain the current system and give tips for the 100th time if you wish.

    And here you go again not actually understanding what I said.

    Sure, I explained to you how you *could* go about playing based on the current system, but I also explained that playing the game in exactly that manner was literally the point of corruption. It is literally what Steven wants you to do.

    As such, you saying that you think the system is bad is actually you saying you disagree with the design goals Steven has for the game.

    The concerns you have literally amount to you not wanting the same design goal Steven has. That is what I have *ACTUALLY* been telling you.
Sign In or Register to comment.