Glorious Alpha Two Testers!
Alpha Two Realms are now unlocked for Phase II testing!
For our initial launch, testing will begin on Friday, December 20, 2024, at 10 AM Pacific and continue uninterrupted until Monday, January 6, 2025, at 10 AM Pacific. After January 6th, we’ll transition to a schedule of five-day-per-week access for the remainder of Phase II.
You can download the game launcher here and we encourage you to join us on our for the most up to date testing news.
Alpha Two Realms are now unlocked for Phase II testing!
For our initial launch, testing will begin on Friday, December 20, 2024, at 10 AM Pacific and continue uninterrupted until Monday, January 6, 2025, at 10 AM Pacific. After January 6th, we’ll transition to a schedule of five-day-per-week access for the remainder of Phase II.
You can download the game launcher here and we encourage you to join us on our for the most up to date testing news.
Comments
I meant that very graciously, mostly the community is small groups of people trying to get the game to fit what they want it to be.
It was a conversation on the discord yeah.
In Asherons Call there was an add on called Pk hunter, this score is very similar to that.
It recorded who you killed, when you killed them, TTK or fast you killed them, how many times you killed them, was pretty cool tbh.
It’s supposed to have a negative connotation to it, but it doesn’t to me. I think PvP/PK metrics are good, not bad. I think something similar would be a bonus to Ashes which I may include in my idea to expand the corruption system.
-There are plenty of PvP opportunities that don't involve Corruption, the entire Deep Sea as example.
-Corruption is a Penalty, not a Playstyle.
-Being attacked by Greens is part of the Corruption Penalty.
-The amount of Corrupt EXP Penalty will not be lowered, or else the Bounty Hunters can't intercept in time.
-If you think the Corruption Penalty is unfair, wait until you hear about being an Enemy Of The State...
My fear is that bounty hunters will be few and far inbetween, as there will be minimal PKing going on.
That'd be fair if I was using my own definition of griefing as my basis. But I am using Steven's definition of griefing. So it's entirely meaningful.
And your point with greens roaming with bounty hunters is another good point as to why greens engaging fights shouldn't give more corruption.
And seeing as nodes envelop the entirety of the game where corruption is viable, I don't see what you're trying to say here?
pve griefing is real and i have mentioned it before. but if i kill you and you come back and i have lready cleansed my corruption and i kill you again, you arent karma bombing me xD
also, if u keep coming back to give me more corruption, that isnt griefing
I didn't say those
Fundamentally, multiplayer games are PVP. PVE is inherently an addition to multiplayer games.
also, couldnt you attack your party in the first version of tabletop dnd?
You'd don't fight for a node in open sea and I'll say it again, corruption is to penalize griefing. Defending yourself isn't griefing so it shouldn't be penalized.
More loot and no Corruption.
prices in the store increase on that node and you also get a quest. @_@
If you kill a Green repeatedly in quick succession, that is griefing by Steven's definition - and it will be punished by rapidly intensified Corruption penalties.
That is not anywhere close to being true.
But, some PvPers wish it were true.
Theoretically, possible to physically attack your party.
Killing someone in your party occurred around .01%.
In 40 years of playing D&D with various groups around the country, someone killed a party member once and someone attacked a party member without killing anyone once.
Dude you need to check your quotes, I said neither of those. Drinking is bad this early in the morning bud.
(Also... these Forums don't have the best reply design.)
Very understandable
u sure?
first video game was Tennis for two, which is pvp.
first online game was maze war, a multiplayer shooter, which is pvp.
first tabletop game was some egyptian game around 5000 years ago for 2 players. again, pvp.
first sport (sports are games as well) were wrestling and boxing. and wrestling has existed for thousands of years as a form of entertainment, you know..we call that a game.
no one killed your party in dnd because you play with carebears. if you play dnd with me (and probably @Arya_Yeshe) we would most likely kill the party and take your loot, then finish the quest ourselves, then he would pvp me and the victor takes all.
What’s an innocent player when you give consent four times before playing?
they have a chance at killing the red player. or literally run before they get engaged. seeing someone red in the distance running towards you its kind of a tell. they might not even be carrying anything and wont drop anything. also, innocent is subjective.
if you change the system and make the disctinction between passive and agressive green, then it will be abused. again, you are just talking from the perspective of how you want to play and you dont care how the system affects other things. you just dont wanna be fked when a red comes and kills you and you dont wanna be fked when you start killing greens.
That's the same as saying "jUsT dOn'T pK". Please stop saying nonsense like that, it adds nothing to the discussion. The viability of escape is irrelevant, otherwise you could just as easily justify a permadeath to a red mechanic: "jUsT RuN aWaY".
It's the other way around, if it's kept as is, it will be abused because aggressive greens have unwarranted advantages against reds that nobody else has.
Except for all the posts where I include green's perspective. The arguments have been provided, you just fail or choose not to see them and how these nuances negatively impact the game. Because hey, a shitty system is no problem if you can just never PK and if you see a red, you can just run away... right?
This thread has ran its course. OP is on point, so far Steven hasn't led me down with his decisions, hopefully it'll be revisited after testing.
What your list truly indicates is that the easiest multiplayer video games to create are PvP.
That's not quite the same thing as multiplayer games being fundamentally PvP.
I was trying to find some way to transition from punishing corruption close to node settlements to lenient corruption further away. But I do not see it anymore a good idea.
There are however corrupted areas. Maybe there the corrupted player could have some protection from greens, to be able to clean his corruption by killing the corrupted monsters like he was about to become. And in the process, he would do a good thing for the node too.
Hunting down is relative. Those greens might be within sight when their friend was killed and keep running after the corrupted player.
I don't say they come from the other side of the map. Which actually can happen with family teleportation.
But even if those are not friends but random greens, the corrupted committed a crime. A punishment must be applied. Just like in RL, you cannot say you wanted to kill just the man and his wife attacked and invoke self defense for one crime.
Asset wars, because it'll all come back to you don't know why someones red and if you don't mind your business you might find everything you worked for getting warred off the map within the confines of the systems in place, then you're just going to quit anyway.
Gotta see the entire picture when talking about any system in Ashes.