Greetings, glorious testers!
Check out Alpha Two Announcements here to see the latest news on Alpha Two.
Check out general Announcements here to see the latest news on Ashes of Creation & Intrepid Studios.
To get the quickest updates regarding Alpha Two, connect your Discord and Intrepid accounts here.
Check out Alpha Two Announcements here to see the latest news on Alpha Two.
Check out general Announcements here to see the latest news on Ashes of Creation & Intrepid Studios.
To get the quickest updates regarding Alpha Two, connect your Discord and Intrepid accounts here.
Comments
And I already see how what you're saying will result in the corruption being overtuned so damn much that there'll be no owpvp outside of GWs (if those will even happen, cause I think they'll get changed too). People won't fight back, which will push others to PK them (or leave cause corruption is insane) and the game will end up w/ 0 owpvp.
If only the seas didn't have forced pvp. That way we'd definitely have Dygz playing the game
I’m a Hardcore Time player, so… you are correct that I have plenty of free time.
If you are tired of my responses, you can place me on ignore.
I don’t care whether people care.
I’m just answering questions.
This particular post had me pondering when non-consensual PvP became an issue for me.
I think in vanilla EQ, it wasn’t an issue because the death penalties were better than the permadeath of TT D&D.
And whatever annoyances there were felt irrelevant compared to being able to adventure through a 3D D&D world 24/7.
So, I shared some of that stuff.
Notice that I am not starting topics.
I’m just responding.
I think for both the reveals of the Open Seas and bag Inventory, he says when you leave the mainland or you leave your home to go Harvesting, you need to think about who is going to mess with you.
And he does not suggest that you should bring a group.
Ashes is designed to push PvP a lot.
Which is why it’s “PvX”. PvP is ubiquitous.
Even when you go out to pick some flowers, Steven wants you thinking about economic warfare.
Steven just tries to always provides a commensurate reward to motivate the PvP, rather than it being “random”.
Yeah, that is true as well. And it's the only part about PvP that's not appealing to me that much.
Though again, I don't expect much PvP to happen on that level, and I expect much more PvP on a group level, where people will fight around dungeons, world bosses, farming spots, etc.
Open-seas are a whole different story, and honestly my gameplay in that area will consist of: "Get the fuck out of there as fast as possible".
Yes, because the game is designed to push for group play. Other than gathering and just questing and exploring on your own, there isn't that much solo content in the open world.
And I’d say… the game is designed to push for group PvP battles. because it is PvP-centric.
Even though Steven likes to say Ashes is not a PvP game.
It definitely is content that you can do solo though, and it would be silly for it not to be, especially the questing and exploration.
The same can't be said about dungeons, world bosses, sieges, etc.
My hope for the crafting/lifeskilling to be complex enough and the markets to be "realistic" enough would be my main-draw. I did enjoy NW's gathering, but I really disliked what they did with the crafting, so in the end it felt meaningless to hunt stuff.
I'm also playing EVE online on and off, but due to how many view the game, it is worth noting that in the 17? years I've had that account I've had 2 PvP-encounters. Once while ratting in 0.4, and once while mining in 0.0, and for the second one I got into warp to our POS just as the enemy popped (or if it was decloaking) into the belt. Either way, it would probably be fair to say that I was originally kinda seeing AoC as a fantasy EVE and was probably hoping to play it much like I play EVE Online. With more details, I'm no longer sure that will be possible, even if the general comparison to EVE Online may still hold true.
It's probably accurate to say that I'm ENDURING owpvp, if the game have other things of interest to me and it doesn't become to overbearing. But it would be wrong to say I ENJOY it.
Returning to the opening question in the thread, the PvP I have truly and fully enjoyed in MMO's in the past is probably Warhammer's PVP-lakes and fighting for the forts in there. As for why, I think it might be a combination of being something you choose, after all the lakes were for PvP only, so unless you wanted it you wouldn't be there and the fact that you could feel like you were useful in the battle even at a lower level of skill.
Also, taking the forts did provide tangible benefits in that it moved the war back and forth between order and chaos, even if Chaos always won in the end due to having 3 times a many warbands as us
At some point I was kinda hoping that Node-sieges and stuff would be used to provide something similar, but at this point in time it doesn't really look like it.
Skill, or lack thereoff, is probably the main-reason I avoid PvP, especially solo... Just like I know i will have a K/D ratio of 0-1 to 50 in any FPS game, I know I will lose 49-50 small PvP encounters out of 50. So there is really no excitement to be had, the outcome is already clear when the fight starts. In fact, I'm pretty sure it's down to lack of reaction-speed most of the times, mine just isn't up to snuff for most types of PvP activities.
In some games, MMO or otherwise, the skill-cap is kept low enough that I can still compete anyway, and those games I can also enjoy. But for obvious reasons, those are not the games that people that are good at and enjoy PvP likes to play
Let’s revisit this after launch…
that's why they call it a PvX game.
I don’t like the Ashes PvP ruleset now that there are permanent zones that don’t punish non-consensual PvP with Corruption.
But that’s the issue that I have with the way PvPers spin it. Because it’s not just people who HATE PvP who don’t like this particular PvP ruleset.
It’s people who HATE non-consensual PvP who will not like Ashes of Creation.
It’s called PvX because the PvPers who play will have to do some PvE.
that and PvErs who play will have to do some PvP - thats why it's called PvX yes - it goes both ways even tho you prefer to only using half the argument
now you can use the argument "PvErs won't play" and I could use the argument "so PvPers also won't play" and we can say no one will play and the game is dead - doesn't make it true.
reality is, there will be both PvPers and PvErs playing, and only the 2 extremes that hate PvP or PvE won't play
(you can say its non-consensual PvP and I can say its the group-based PvE, whatever the reason is, still the extremes)
but same as in EvE, Albion, AA, L2, and every other pvp-centric game - there are plenty of PvErs playing
and also on FF14 and other PvE-centric games - there are tons of PvPers playing
But, the bigger issue is that it's not just the players who HATE PvP who will refuse to play Ashes.
It's also the players who enjoy consensual PvP but hate HATE non-consensual PvP who will refuse to play.
The topic that we typically see is about how to entice players who are afraid of ganking or afraid of PKing to participate in PvP. Which is why we get odd solutions, like "We will protect you..."
The reality is that fear of ganking and PKing is not the issue. The issue is that players who HATE non-consensual PvP aren't going to play on the same servers as people who don't acknowledge non-consensual as a valid concept... And, a significant number of that population are players who enjoy consensual PvP.
That is what is never really talked about.
Anti-griefing is very frequently broached as a solution, but doesn't really solve the problem.
Because the players for whom anti-griefing is the solution will already be willing to play on PvP servers.
The conundrum is how do you entice the players who typically won't play on PvP servers but don't HATE all forms of PvP - to play on a PvP server (and by PvP server, I mean what would essentially be a PvP server on EQ/EQ2/WoW).
so that is your own definition of what a PvEer and PvEer is, and if we start making up definitions I can say PvEer = casual-solo player like some people imply (which is dumb)
I know top-ranked player in Mobas, FPS, and PvP MMORPGs that play PVE games like FF14 and Blue Protocol.
just as I know PvE players that play PvP-centric mmos.
I know people that just pve that will play the game, they also played BDO without a issue and were not interested in fighting people.
I've enjoyed DAoC's battlegrounds more than the mindless zergs running all over Hybernia's frontier zones. Keep sieges, for relics or opening up Darkness Fall were fine (even if insanely laggy on a 56k modem) and the rush when that dungeon changed hands was something great.
In WoW, random open world pvp was ok-ish at best, pointless and frustrating most of the time, and became hellish once the "honor" system was introduce. I quite WoW not long after. Came back on a PvE server and participated in BGs then. I've spent more of my max level time in WoW's battlegrounds than anywhere else in game, it was my endgame. Avoided Warsong Gulch like the plague, but there was something epic in an 8 hours Alterac Valley. Pre BGs Taren Mill vs. South Shore or Crossroad raids could be fun though.
WAR open world was fun at first. Attacking and defending castles with large numbers on both sides. But what I've experienced most was riding my mounts with others from undefended flag to undefended flag. Never saw a city raid happen. Didn't do any BG, don't remember why.
Didn't play Lineage II long enough to see any PvP, levelled to 27-29 without being attacked.
SWTOR on a PvP sever. Didn't see much open world PvP, due mostly to where the factions were levelling, because I know at max level it could be more common, on llum. Wasn't interested in BG for that game too.
SWG. I was a covered imperial/rebel with my characters. Was too scared of the guys running around with their squad of stormtroopers, AT-ST and rancors to dare blow my cover. hehe.
For AoC, I'm interested in the caravan game loop, I see it as a mobile battleground, even if ,technically, it's happening in the open world. Node sieges sound interesting. Competing for fighting spots or resources spawns feels like a waste of time for those involved, not saying it can't be fun, simply that sharing (forgive the blaspheme) is probably more efficient than fighting over it.
Not really the competitive type. If I'm doing something somewhere and someone else prevent me from completing my task, it's frustrating because I'll have to come back later to do so, again, instead of moving on to something else. It's not ego, it's not fear, it's knowing I'll waste even more time on this.
But, the bigger issue is that it's not just the players who HATE PvP who will refuse to play Ashes.
It's also the players who enjoy consensual PvP but hate HATE non-consensual PvP who will refuse to play.
The topic that we typically see is about how to entice players who are afraid of ganking or afraid of PKing to participate in PvP. Which is why we get odd solutions, like "We will protect you..."
The reality is that fear of ganking and PKing is not the issue. The issue is that players who HATE non-consensual PvP aren't going to play on the same servers as people who don't acknowledge non-consensual as a valid concept... And, a significant number of that population are players who enjoy consensual PvP.
That is what is never really talked about.
Anti-griefing is very frequently broached as a solution, but doesn't really solve the problem.
Because the players for whom anti-griefing is the solution will already be willing to play on PvP servers.
The conundrum is how do you entice the players who typically won't play on PvP servers but don't HATE all forms of PvP - to play on a PvP server (and by PvP server, I mean what would essentially be a PvP server on EQ/EQ2/WoW).
but in return, we will get all those players who like open world pvp, plus all those others who dont mind it
so yep, not an issue. if bob doesnt play because he hates open world pvp, its fine, joe will play because he loves open world pvp (:
thats also another thing no one talks about
i wouldnt play if the game had no open world pvp, i know plenty of people who also wouldn't, and those people are more than the people complaining in the forums about owpvp.
To me, mainly because I repect the effort and time other players invest in the game so I wish/hpoe others respect mine. I prefer if encounter any problem talk to me before initiate a fight.
Good PVP players know when is ok to PVP. They know how to play with other people and the importance of communication.
Bad PVP players PVP when they want to PVP, the main reason is just 'because I can'. What they usually do is making troubles/conflicts and escalate it and drag more and more people into troubles/conflicts. Better endings are just create dramas. Bad endings can be players transfer to other server or even losing player base. Those still play the game without realizing the situation always think 'so weak, gaming is too hard for you, you shouldn't play any game.'.
Overall I don't think any kind of player and no matter how much you love PVP, I don't think you would want or like or enoy to be ganked or forced to participate any PVP situation while you can't or you don't feel comfort to.
edit: I like PVP contents if they are good and fun. I not a player who only PVE or PVP.
What’s the worst that can happen, I invest a bunch of money into a game that was not for me but helps a development team that is passionate about this and a partially cool community that loves the way their going. I have invested in worse things.
In Albion, as I'm sure you are aware, you dont lose your long term character progress. Gear is temporary and by design is easy come easy go. Is this kind of gear really progression? As a player who doesn't care about gear score, ilvls, number increases, etc, its hard for me to relate to that mindset.
This is why I asked Steven to compare Ashes PvP to EvE Online PvP and ArcheAge PvP back in 2018.
Because if it is... I know that although I like PvP sometimes, Ashes is not the game for me.
I'm saying the issue is being invited to play by saying Corruption should make playing Ashes comfortable for PvEers except those who never want to encounter PvP.
People who play on PvE-Only servers and like PvP sometimes are then led to believe that they may fall into the camp of people who don't mind it.
And so, I'm saying the issue is how to have a better discussion about who the game is designed for - when it's not true that it's just the PvEers who HATE PvP who won't find Corruption a sufficient deterent.
Yep... I'm not saying anything about changing what the design is.
I'm really talking about how to communicate that better so it's easier for people to understand where they fall.
Or just wait until people can play the game and see if they like it.
They can't tell who is going to like and who isn't. Everyone has there own experiences.
Who's issue is that?
The corruption and bounty hunter systems are designed to limit PKs on people that don't want to fight. Depending on how it is tuned it could be quite effective. How am I detached from reality for waiting to see how a currently implemented system turns out?
People who typically play MMORPGs on PvE-Only servers will very likely not like playing Ashes.
Because, if they would - they would have already been playing MMORPGs on PvP or PvP-Optional servers.
And/or already been interested to play L2.
Liniker's posts today have given me some insight, though.
Now, I I think I understand why PvPers say weird things, like, "no separate PvE-Only Servers because we don't want to split the fanbase." And those of us who play on PvE-Only servers are bewildered, "The fanbase is already split."
Or why PvPers think the offer to protect players who don't want to PvP is a viable solution. If that were a viable solution, we wouldn't be playing on PvE-Only servers. Everyone would just be playing on PvP servers.
(Except maybe the players who play on RP servers.)
Full loot PvP games aren't my cup of tea simply because I don't have the time to constantly rebuild the same character, and it just makes progression feel sort if pointless.
Opt-in PvP kills all PvP simply because if given an option to be more efficient or have an advantage against other players, most if not all players will always choose the path of least resistance. Giving the option to remove the hurdle entirely instead of having players figure out how to jump the hurdle is terrible game design if you want a PvP setting.
Instanced PvP is just as bad a Opt-in. You may as well not even have it if you can't do it in the open world of the game.
What I hope Ashes of Creation will bring to the table.
Risk vs Reward open world PvP with a well thought out system that accounts for many variables so that neither PvE carebears, nor PvP griefers can manipulate the system and exploit it in their favor.
Yeah, its... interesting to say the least. PVPers want the PVEers to be forced to play with them (not just here, but in many titles). It never occurs to them that the PVEers just won't play. That or they just don't care if the PVEers play- in which case they are knowingly handicapping a title that they supposedly want to be successful. Either way it raises an eyebrow.
Because there are "PvEers" who will play on the PvP servers with them...
The gamers who play PvP-centric games with no PvE-Only servers are looking at the situation from one end of the stick.
And the players who play MMORPGs on PvE-Only servers and refuse to play on PvP servers are looking at the situation from the other end of the stick.
And we almost aren't having the same conversation even though we're using the same terms.