You only gain corruption for killing a green, not damaging
Steven already told us the reasons why this will very possibly be the case.
He said mechanisms in game were created to serve a function. He said if they did not serve their intended function that they would be tweaked or reworked until they did.
He also said that corruptions intended purpose was to massively curb griefing.
Corruptions and non visble healthbars do nothing to keep people from keeping other peoples health constantly low and griefing in this regard.
It's also very fitting, fair and solves a serious problem that adds no enjoyment to the game but to griefers.
It's to deter griefers yes, while also not preventing PvP. Corruption can't be too strict nor too lenient. Simply damaging to gain corruption is too strict.
Make note of the comment of mine right above this. If you attack a green twice then you intend to get corruption.
And if you dont then you're just griefing.
Its not too strict, it serves exactly the intended function.
It does nothing to prevent Steven from getting that 2% of corrupted players he wants, it just curbs full on griefing.
There will be plenty of players like me who intend to get corruption and not grief.
Killing a green a few times isnt griefing, intentionally camping a specific player for an hour+, that could be considered griefing.
With your logic, we may as well have opt-in PvP which is a horrible idea
I didnt say killing a green a few times was griefing.. how'd you come to that conclusion?
I said hitting a green twice means you intend on gaining corruption, and if you dont, then youre griefing.
Maybe anyways, if youre just attacking someone to keep their health low you're griefing.
Also, you know who this is right? Its ChipsAhoy, i changed my name so I didnt have to be a cookie no more.
If IM saying this about corruption then you know it aint nothing about opt in PvP or wanting to shift the game to PvE lol.
What that means is if you hit a green twice, and dont intend on killing them, knowing killing a green means corruption, then you're just attacking them to attack them.
Or I'm attacking them to make them leave the farming location. I'm increasing their risk vs the same reward.
If Steven didn't want us attacking other players he could've not copied L2's flagging system.
You only gain corruption for killing a green, not damaging
It's also very fitting, fair and solves a serious problem that adds no enjoyment to the game but to griefers.
no its not for the reason some of us have already explained. you dont want someone attacking you and keeping you low? kill them. cant kill them? find a party. cant find a party? no problem, take your gear off and dance on their face. they wont attack you since they dont want to get corruption and they will get bored and leave.
You only gain corruption for killing a green, not damaging
Steven already told us the reasons why this will very possibly be the case.
He said mechanisms in game were created to serve a function. He said if they did not serve their intended function that they would be tweaked or reworked until they did.
He also said that corruptions intended purpose was to massively curb griefing.
Corruptions and non visble healthbars do nothing to keep people from keeping other peoples health constantly low and griefing in this regard.
It's also very fitting, fair and solves a serious problem that adds no enjoyment to the game but to griefers.
It's to deter griefers yes, while also not preventing PvP. Corruption can't be too strict nor too lenient. Simply damaging to gain corruption is too strict.
Make note of the comment of mine right above this. If you attack a green twice then you intend to get corruption.
And if you dont then you're just griefing.
Its not too strict, it serves exactly the intended function.
It does nothing to prevent Steven from getting that 2% of corrupted players he wants, it just curbs full on griefing.
There will be plenty of players like me who intend to get corruption and not grief.
Killing a green a few times isnt griefing, intentionally camping a specific player for an hour+, that could be considered griefing.
With your logic, we may as well have opt-in PvP which is a horrible idea
I didnt say killing a green a few times was griefing.. how'd you come to that conclusion?
I said hitting a green twice means you intend on gaining corruption, and if you dont, then youre griefing.
What that means is if you hit a green twice, and dont intend on killing them, knowing killing a green means corruption, then you're just attacking them to attack them
That is definitely in line with griefing. Just hitting someone to keep their health low is griefing, the first time, the second time, ect.
Also, you know who this is right? Its ChipsAhoy, i changed my name so I didnt have to be a cookie no more.
If IM saying this about corruption then you know it aint nothing about opt in PvP or wanting to shift the game to PvE lol.
I feel like this is fixed by simply crediting the attacking player with a corrupted kill if the green players dies to a mob within a certain amount of time. Corruption per hit is just too much.
You only gain corruption for killing a green, not damaging
Steven already told us the reasons why this will very possibly be the case.
He said mechanisms in game were created to serve a function. He said if they did not serve their intended function that they would be tweaked or reworked until they did.
He also said that corruptions intended purpose was to massively curb griefing.
Corruptions and non visble healthbars do nothing to keep people from keeping other peoples health constantly low and griefing in this regard.
It's also very fitting, fair and solves a serious problem that adds no enjoyment to the game but to griefers.
It's to deter griefers yes, while also not preventing PvP. Corruption can't be too strict nor too lenient. Simply damaging to gain corruption is too strict.
Make note of the comment of mine right above this. If you attack a green twice then you intend to get corruption.
And if you dont then you're just griefing.
Its not too strict, it serves exactly the intended function.
It does nothing to prevent Steven from getting that 2% of corrupted players he wants, it just curbs full on griefing.
There will be plenty of players like me who intend to get corruption and not grief.
Killing a green a few times isnt griefing, intentionally camping a specific player for an hour+, that could be considered griefing.
With your logic, we may as well have opt-in PvP which is a horrible idea
I didnt say killing a green a few times was griefing.. how'd you come to that conclusion?
I said hitting a green twice means you intend on gaining corruption, and if you dont, then youre griefing.
Maybe anyways, if youre just attacking someone to keep their health low you're griefing.
Also, you know who this is right? Its ChipsAhoy, i changed my name so I didnt have to be a cookie no more.
If IM saying this about corruption then you know it aint nothing about opt in PvP or wanting to shift the game to PvE lol.
how is attacking someone twice griefing? maybe im trying to see if they fight back and now they arent at full health, or maybe they use a powerful heal to get back to full and then fight. some people do that.
or, maybe i just want to keep you low enough so that a mob kills you, and that also isnt griefing, thats just me beating you when we compete for a spot. you have the option to attack me back, not kill mobs until i get bored or leave.
if i followed you around the whole map making sure you dont do anything, then that could be considered griefing.
You only gain corruption for killing a green, not damaging
Steven already told us the reasons why this will very possibly be the case.
He said mechanisms in game were created to serve a function. He said if they did not serve their intended function that they would be tweaked or reworked until they did.
He also said that corruptions intended purpose was to massively curb griefing.
Corruptions and non visble healthbars do nothing to keep people from keeping other peoples health constantly low and griefing in this regard.
It's also very fitting, fair and solves a serious problem that adds no enjoyment to the game but to griefers.
It's to deter griefers yes, while also not preventing PvP. Corruption can't be too strict nor too lenient. Simply damaging to gain corruption is too strict.
Make note of the comment of mine right above this. If you attack a green twice then you intend to get corruption.
And if you dont then you're just griefing.
Its not too strict, it serves exactly the intended function.
It does nothing to prevent Steven from getting that 2% of corrupted players he wants, it just curbs full on griefing.
There will be plenty of players like me who intend to get corruption and not grief.
Killing a green a few times isnt griefing, intentionally camping a specific player for an hour+, that could be considered griefing.
With your logic, we may as well have opt-in PvP which is a horrible idea
I didnt say killing a green a few times was griefing.. how'd you come to that conclusion?
I said hitting a green twice means you intend on gaining corruption, and if you dont, then youre griefing.
What that means is if you hit a green twice, and dont intend on killing them, knowing killing a green means corruption, then you're just attacking them to attack them
That is definitely in line with griefing. Just hitting someone to keep their health low is griefing, the first time, the second time, ect.
Also, you know who this is right? Its ChipsAhoy, i changed my name so I didnt have to be a cookie no more.
If IM saying this about corruption then you know it aint nothing about opt in PvP or wanting to shift the game to PvE lol.
I feel like this is fixed by simply crediting the attacking player with a corrupted kill if the green players dies to a mob within a certain amount of time. Corruption per hit is just too much.
Sorry, i make a really quick edit to that right after i posted.
Ohhhh, you just misunderstood this post. Okay, no we are in agreement.
I didnt say corruption per hit, i said exactly what you just did essentially.
You only gain corruption for killing a green, not damaging
It's also very fitting, fair and solves a serious problem that adds no enjoyment to the game but to griefers.
no its not for the reason some of us have already explained. you dont want someone attacking you and keeping you low? kill them. cant kill them? find a party. cant find a party? no problem, take your gear off and dance on their face. they wont attack you since they dont want to get corruption and they will get bored and leave.
You dont understand AoC then. Everyone is not purple by default for a reason.
Corruption exists for a reason.
Either way I didnt really come here to argue about it. I came to tell you all what we're most likely going to see.
This is all really funny though because it's like people think its some travesty that a person who double swings on a green would get corruption if that player dies to a mob or commits suicide.
Wtf do you think is gonna happen lol. You wanna exploit the corruption system you're gonna have a baddddd time
I said hitting a green twice means you intend on gaining corruption, and if you dont, then youre griefing.
No. Hitting a green twice is going to be the Ashes invitation to pvp where you opt-in by throwing down.
If the green just wants to be left alone, and you kill them you gain corruption. Just hitting them isn’t a corruptible offense.
It is, by Stevens own words unless they can find another way to stop people exploiting the game and griefing without gaining corrupt.
Im not going to say there isnt another way, but I cant possibly imagine what that is.
There is a very high likelyhood we'll see this in the game.
The community wants to talk about meaningful conflict and PvP then lets talk about the most meaningless conflict, someone constantly attacking a green but not killing on purpose and exploiting the intented purpose of corruption.
Why anyone would argue against this or think it wouldnt be in the game is beyond me.
You only gain corruption for killing a green, not damaging
Steven already told us the reasons why this will very possibly be the case.
He said mechanisms in game were created to serve a function. He said if they did not serve their intended function that they would be tweaked or reworked until they did.
He also said that corruptions intended purpose was to massively curb griefing.
Corruptions and non visble healthbars do nothing to keep people from keeping other peoples health constantly low and griefing in this regard.
It's also very fitting, fair and solves a serious problem that adds no enjoyment to the game but to griefers.
It's to deter griefers yes, while also not preventing PvP. Corruption can't be too strict nor too lenient. Simply damaging to gain corruption is too strict.
Make note of the comment of mine right above this. If you attack a green twice then you intend to get corruption.
And if you dont then you're just griefing.
Its not too strict, it serves exactly the intended function.
It does nothing to prevent Steven from getting that 2% of corrupted players he wants, it just curbs full on griefing.
There will be plenty of players like me who intend to get corruption and not grief.
Killing a green a few times isnt griefing, intentionally camping a specific player for an hour+, that could be considered griefing.
With your logic, we may as well have opt-in PvP which is a horrible idea
I didnt say killing a green a few times was griefing.. how'd you come to that conclusion?
I said hitting a green twice means you intend on gaining corruption, and if you dont, then youre griefing.
Maybe anyways, if youre just attacking someone to keep their health low you're griefing.
Also, you know who this is right? Its ChipsAhoy, i changed my name so I didnt have to be a cookie no more.
If IM saying this about corruption then you know it aint nothing about opt in PvP or wanting to shift the game to PvE lol.
how is attacking someone twice griefing? maybe im trying to see if they fight back and now they arent at full health, or maybe they use a powerful heal to get back to full and then fight. some people do that.
or, maybe i just want to keep you low enough so that a mob kills you, and that also isnt griefing, thats just me beating you when we compete for a spot. you have the option to attack me back, not kill mobs until i get bored or leave.
if i followed you around the whole map making sure you dont do anything, then that could be considered griefing.
Well, not always, it isnt always griefieng. You know it could be 2 or 3 or 4 hits.
But at a certain point the game needs to decide either you're fighting them or you're constantly attacking trying to keep their health low.
Game: You're attacking them, theyre still green, you're going to get corruption if they die.
Player: Okay.
Player: hit #2 hit #3 hit #4
Game: *awknowledges green doesn't want to fight back and attacker is trying to get corruption by killing him*
And there you go, game gives you the debuff that prevents you from keep attacking them to keep their health low while escaping corruption and its intended purpose of discouraging griefing.
But you say you want to do that, you want to kill a green with a mob, and you think you shouldnt get corruption for it? So if someone kills a green they get corruption, but you think you should be able to cheese the games corruption system and its intended purpose?
I mean.. I commend your efforts, but you're sadly mistaken if you think you'll be able to do that. You intend to kill a green, youre need to be getting corruption. The system was designed to serve a purpose and Steven will make sure that happens.
No. Hitting a green twice is going to be the Ashes invitation to pvp where you opt-in by throwing down.
If the green just wants to be left alone, and you kill them you gain corruption. Just hitting them isn’t a corruptible offense.
I mean... that's just a quibble over whether the magic number to understand the target intends to remain a Non-Combatant is 2 or 3 (or 4).
The point of the statement is keeping the target's health low with no intention of killing the target.
I mean... that's just a quibble over whether the magic number to understand the target intends to remain a Non-Combatant is 2 or 3 (or 4).
The point of the statement is keeping the target's health low with no intention of killing the target.
How many licks hits does it take to get to the center of a pver
1
Options
DygzMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
I would say that killing a Green once is not griefing.
Non-consensual PKing is punished with Corruption.
Griefing is intended to be minimized due to Corruption penalties ramping up as Corruption Score builds up.
To a point where it's better for the griefer to take a break from griefing.
Here I was thinking this is some new person. After all this time you still bang about the PK chips?
🤣 Well, figured I'd kill some hype for any griefers and give a little hope to those who wish to play and stay green.
Im not tripping on it though. I'll still be out stacking up those kills. Red, green, purple, dont make a difference to me, corruption exploit or not, I'm gonna go ham.
I mean... that's just a quibble over whether the magic number to understand the target intends to remain a Non-Combatant is 2 or 3 (or 4).
The point of the statement is keeping the target's health low with no intention of killing the target.
How many licks hits does it take to get to the center of a pver
Honestly Nikr, this isnt about PvE vs PvP.
This is about PvX and how that works properly. This is about Stevens vision and the intended purpose of corruption.
Corruption sucks for normal PvPers, I know it will, better than 90% of the playerbase I imagine.
People like me who intend on not body camping, waiting for fullish health/mana, trying to stay away from real low levels, corruption sucks.
For those people that want to swat the human bot farming their area, corruption sucks.
But it exists for a purpose, cause this game wouldn't be PvX without it. And it cant be exploitable, its one of the most core mechanisms in the game.
i think its the opposite. corruption is great for normal pvpers and sucks for people who wanna camp low levels for no reason (maybe cuz they are too bad and cant pvp at their own level hahaha).
4
Options
DygzMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
My dude, I've told you a few times that most of your posts are coming across as over emotional.
We've also talked a few times about how players look at games differently now than they did 20 years ago.
20 years ago, people were just thrilled with the ability to play an MMO. Even mediocre games were loved by people due to how new it was.
Some things from back then will still work today, but some things simply wont.
One of the ways people look at games differently now is that they play to win, rather than 20 years ago when people were playing for the joy of it. As such, things that could have been abused back then but weren't absolutely will be abused now.
While I'm not saying this is the case here, what I am saying is that the argument of "it worked in a game 20 years ago" doesnt mean shit.
i know this may be an inappropriate question, so if it offends you, i apologize in advance, but I am trying to understand your perspective.
In what decade of life are you in? 30's 40's 50's 20's?
I would say that killing a Green once is not griefing.
Non-consensual PKing is punished with Corruption.
Griefing is intended to be minimized due to Corruption penalties ramping up as Corruption Score builds up.
To a point where it's better for the griefer to take a break from griefing.
i think its the opposite. corruption is great for normal pvpers and sucks for people who wanna camp low levels for no reason (maybe cuz they are too bad and cant pvp at their own level hahaha).
It sucks for anyone getting it I'm sure. But I think it sucks especially bad for normal PvPers cause I know for me personally I think the way I WPvP adds something interesting in the world.
I think a large chunk of PvEers dont like PvP cause theyve got gankd by high levels, body camped, taken while fighting a mob, ect. Too many times. I think they would find it interesting if none of that was an issue.
If it was just people being semi respectable. You know.. if someone messages me after I kill them in WPvP and is like "can you not dude, im not having a good day", I'd leave him alone(I would anyways cause I dont camp people) and probably even help him out with something if he seemed like he was really struggling.
I think PvX could exists without corruption if some people just put a cap on it ya know, acted with just a little class. But alas, all we have now is bickering back and forth between PvPers and PvEers. A seemingly never ending battle.
Shared xp and loot doesnt shut down open world pvp, now does it?
You want to have entire groups go red for a silly reason like that? Nobody will be able to flag anyone with your suggestion. The abuse would be like this:
Group shows up in zone, flags one guy. Guy runs into mobs, dies, group goes red. Group has to get out of there.
0 contest for the zone.
The dead guy is rezed by his friend. Keep farming unopposed.
I dont care about your AA experience, plain and simply because your reasoning is one of overexagerration. You are not credible anymore.
Your solution would create big problems, plus it leans on the side of restricting pvp even more. Plus.... it worked fine in L2. Done.
The broken nameplate doesnt help attackers bring the hp of the victim tp 95%. The attacker risks going red in this system.
Your solution gives all the power to the victim. Which will be abused.
IS is thinking things through.
You cant see one step further than your position/desire, nor do you see the ties to the rest of the game design.
Stop the victimhood mentality.
If the entire group attacks the one green all at once, and kills him... Well it depends if they hit the green more than 3 or 4 times times(the amount of hits I'd imagine it'd be tuned to before you get the debuff). If everyone hit once and took him down it'd be only the killing blow that gave corruption.
One guy should probably hit the green a few times to decide if the green wants to flag himself and fight back or not first. If you cant one or two shot him with your group that is.
Either way its not less WPvP, it changes hardly anything for PvPers, only griefers does it really effect. Griefers and PvPers looking to exploit corruption.
0
Options
DygzMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
It sucks for anyone getting it I'm sure. But I think it sucks especially bad for normal PvPers cause I know for me personally I think the way I WPvP adds something interesting in the world.
I think a large chunk of PvEers dont like PvP cause theyve got gankd by high levels, body camped, taken while fighting a mob, ect. Too many times. I think they would find it interesting if none of that was an issue.
A large chunk of PvEers hate non-consensual PvP.
A large chunk of PvEers don't want other player to be able to disrupt their PvE game session goals and force them into an activity they are not in the mood for.
A large chunk of PvEers are Casual Challenge, rather than Hardcore Challenge.
And a large chunk of PvEers are cooperative players rather than competitive players.
If it was just people being semi respectable. You know.. if someone messages me after I kill them in WPvP and is like "can you not dude, im not having a good day", I'd leave him alone(I would anyways cause I dont camp people) and probably even help him out with something if he seemed like he was really struggling.
LMAO
Has nothing to do with whether I'm "having a good day".
If I'm not in the mood to PvP, I'm not in the mood to PvP.
If I'm in the mood to PvP, you can kill me as much as you want.
If I'm not in the mood to PvP, I don't want to be bothered by PvP.
If I ask you to leave me alone but you force me to kill you, I'm still going to be pissed off that you made me PvP when I'm not in the mood to PvP.
Especially if I'm just out in the middle of nowhere picking flowers.
I think PvX could exists without corruption if some people just put a cap on it ya know, acted with just a little class. But alas, all we have now is bickering back and forth between PvPers and PvEers. A seemingly never ending battle.
If I understand what Steven means by PvX correctly, that would be way too much PvP for me to be interested in truly playing on that server. That's even with Corruption.
Some PvPers do "put a cap on it..."
There's always a significant amount who won't... and that's enough to push people to play on PvE-Only servers.
And... without any restrictions... we typically have devs saying, "OMG! We did not realize it would turn into a murder-box!"
Comments
I didnt say killing a green a few times was griefing.. how'd you come to that conclusion?
I said hitting a green twice means you intend on gaining corruption, and if you dont, then youre griefing.
Maybe anyways, if youre just attacking someone to keep their health low you're griefing.
Also, you know who this is right? Its ChipsAhoy, i changed my name so I didnt have to be a cookie no more.
If IM saying this about corruption then you know it aint nothing about opt in PvP or wanting to shift the game to PvE lol.
If Steven didn't want us attacking other players he could've not copied L2's flagging system.
no its not for the reason some of us have already explained. you dont want someone attacking you and keeping you low? kill them. cant kill them? find a party. cant find a party? no problem, take your gear off and dance on their face. they wont attack you since they dont want to get corruption and they will get bored and leave.
I feel like this is fixed by simply crediting the attacking player with a corrupted kill if the green players dies to a mob within a certain amount of time. Corruption per hit is just too much.
how is attacking someone twice griefing? maybe im trying to see if they fight back and now they arent at full health, or maybe they use a powerful heal to get back to full and then fight. some people do that.
or, maybe i just want to keep you low enough so that a mob kills you, and that also isnt griefing, thats just me beating you when we compete for a spot. you have the option to attack me back, not kill mobs until i get bored or leave.
if i followed you around the whole map making sure you dont do anything, then that could be considered griefing.
Model match only 84% huh...
Could you make a post about RMT for me so I can run it again?
Sorry, i make a really quick edit to that right after i posted.
Ohhhh, you just misunderstood this post. Okay, no we are in agreement.
I didnt say corruption per hit, i said exactly what you just did essentially.
I was explaining the mechanism of that credit.
No. Hitting a green twice is going to be the Ashes invitation to pvp where you opt-in by throwing down.
If the green just wants to be left alone, and you kill them you gain corruption. Just hitting them isn’t a corruptible offense.
You dont understand AoC then. Everyone is not purple by default for a reason.
Corruption exists for a reason.
Either way I didnt really come here to argue about it. I came to tell you all what we're most likely going to see.
This is all really funny though because it's like people think its some travesty that a person who double swings on a green would get corruption if that player dies to a mob or commits suicide.
Wtf do you think is gonna happen lol. You wanna exploit the corruption system you're gonna have a baddddd time
It is, by Stevens own words unless they can find another way to stop people exploiting the game and griefing without gaining corrupt.
Im not going to say there isnt another way, but I cant possibly imagine what that is.
There is a very high likelyhood we'll see this in the game.
The community wants to talk about meaningful conflict and PvP then lets talk about the most meaningless conflict, someone constantly attacking a green but not killing on purpose and exploiting the intented purpose of corruption.
Why anyone would argue against this or think it wouldnt be in the game is beyond me.
Must be griefers.
Don't open that can of worms, please..
That shit makes me loose my &$#@!?$ mind. RMT has got to be in the top 2 biggest scourges of gaming.
Well, not always, it isnt always griefieng. You know it could be 2 or 3 or 4 hits.
But at a certain point the game needs to decide either you're fighting them or you're constantly attacking trying to keep their health low.
Game: You're attacking them, theyre still green, you're going to get corruption if they die.
Player: Okay.
Player: hit #2 hit #3 hit #4
Game: *awknowledges green doesn't want to fight back and attacker is trying to get corruption by killing him*
And there you go, game gives you the debuff that prevents you from keep attacking them to keep their health low while escaping corruption and its intended purpose of discouraging griefing.
But you say you want to do that, you want to kill a green with a mob, and you think you shouldnt get corruption for it? So if someone kills a green they get corruption, but you think you should be able to cheese the games corruption system and its intended purpose?
I mean.. I commend your efforts, but you're sadly mistaken if you think you'll be able to do that. You intend to kill a green, youre need to be getting corruption. The system was designed to serve a purpose and Steven will make sure that happens.
And no, you getting someone killed by a mob is not griefing. But killing a green gets you corruption.
Corruption exists so people don't grief. And that applies to you the same as everyone. It has to
The point of the statement is keeping the target's health low with no intention of killing the target.
Non-consensual PKing is punished with Corruption.
Griefing is intended to be minimized due to Corruption penalties ramping up as Corruption Score builds up.
To a point where it's better for the griefer to take a break from griefing.
Not always. But you do get corruption to try and prevent griefing when you kill a green.
Forgive me, i got some words mixed around and had a hard time trying to talk earlier.
I had so much going on when I was trying to type all that
🤣 Well, figured I'd kill some hype for any griefers and give a little hope to those who wish to play and stay green.
Im not tripping on it though. I'll still be out stacking up those kills. Red, green, purple, dont make a difference to me, corruption exploit or not, I'm gonna go ham.
Honestly Nikr, this isnt about PvE vs PvP.
This is about PvX and how that works properly. This is about Stevens vision and the intended purpose of corruption.
Corruption sucks for normal PvPers, I know it will, better than 90% of the playerbase I imagine.
People like me who intend on not body camping, waiting for fullish health/mana, trying to stay away from real low levels, corruption sucks.
For those people that want to swat the human bot farming their area, corruption sucks.
But it exists for a purpose, cause this game wouldn't be PvX without it. And it cant be exploitable, its one of the most core mechanisms in the game.
i know this may be an inappropriate question, so if it offends you, i apologize in advance, but I am trying to understand your perspective.
In what decade of life are you in? 30's 40's 50's 20's?
Do you have a family? partner, children?
Are you full time employed?
im proud of you Dygz.
It sucks for anyone getting it I'm sure. But I think it sucks especially bad for normal PvPers cause I know for me personally I think the way I WPvP adds something interesting in the world.
I think a large chunk of PvEers dont like PvP cause theyve got gankd by high levels, body camped, taken while fighting a mob, ect. Too many times. I think they would find it interesting if none of that was an issue.
If it was just people being semi respectable. You know.. if someone messages me after I kill them in WPvP and is like "can you not dude, im not having a good day", I'd leave him alone(I would anyways cause I dont camp people) and probably even help him out with something if he seemed like he was really struggling.
I think PvX could exists without corruption if some people just put a cap on it ya know, acted with just a little class. But alas, all we have now is bickering back and forth between PvPers and PvEers. A seemingly never ending battle.
If the entire group attacks the one green all at once, and kills him... Well it depends if they hit the green more than 3 or 4 times times(the amount of hits I'd imagine it'd be tuned to before you get the debuff). If everyone hit once and took him down it'd be only the killing blow that gave corruption.
One guy should probably hit the green a few times to decide if the green wants to flag himself and fight back or not first. If you cant one or two shot him with your group that is.
Either way its not less WPvP, it changes hardly anything for PvPers, only griefers does it really effect. Griefers and PvPers looking to exploit corruption.
A large chunk of PvEers don't want other player to be able to disrupt their PvE game session goals and force them into an activity they are not in the mood for.
A large chunk of PvEers are Casual Challenge, rather than Hardcore Challenge.
And a large chunk of PvEers are cooperative players rather than competitive players.
LMAO
Has nothing to do with whether I'm "having a good day".
If I'm not in the mood to PvP, I'm not in the mood to PvP.
If I'm in the mood to PvP, you can kill me as much as you want.
If I'm not in the mood to PvP, I don't want to be bothered by PvP.
If I ask you to leave me alone but you force me to kill you, I'm still going to be pissed off that you made me PvP when I'm not in the mood to PvP.
Especially if I'm just out in the middle of nowhere picking flowers.
If I understand what Steven means by PvX correctly, that would be way too much PvP for me to be interested in truly playing on that server. That's even with Corruption.
Some PvPers do "put a cap on it..."
There's always a significant amount who won't... and that's enough to push people to play on PvE-Only servers.
And... without any restrictions... we typically have devs saying, "OMG! We did not realize it would turn into a murder-box!"