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 think players are more flexible to adapt to a corruption system than the system to be adjusted for specific cases.
One can grief by playing music in voice chat or causing some game sounds repeatedly or using rp emotes.
Players can move away.
What other kind of griefing you can see where they are green? Harvesting resources in places you do not want them to harvest? I think that is intended by Steven. Therefore he doesn't offer the tools to stop them unless you start a war.
People trying to destroy others guilds, sabotaging, being a political candyass and being underhanded.
There’s a litany of ways to grief someone.
Should we punish an entire guild for the whims of a single player?
I don’t think so.
I have chronic tinnitus if someone does annoying shit like blast music over in game comms you’re damn right Im going to kill them.
Killing the mobs he kills?
I think negative behavior happens more often when a game is very popular and a huge number of players join. Most likely in free to play games.
Where players have to pay monthly subscription the community will be smaller.
And there will be GMs you can contact for specific cases.
I remember sending a PM to the the guild leader of a player who did something I didn't liked.
He apologized and said he will look into it.
Reputation of a guild can be important when you try to recruit new members or even retain the existing ones.
By killing them very systematically?
Hence where the system makes sense.
That didn’t stop anyone in WoW from killing lowbies, just part of PvP.
I told a guild leader to handle his dude or Id war dec. That’s *after* I handed dude his head.
There's already ways of punishing shitbags and griefers. There's node wars, guild wars, enemy of the state mechanic, general annoyance and intrusion in their gameplay. None of those include PKing.
I get that you're oldschool and want to just kill people w/o any punishment for doing so, but this is not that kind of game.
Actually I have no idea how leveling will happen in AoC
If there will be some adjustments to the corruption system, I doubt that those will be made in a way to allow players to kill other players to punish them because a low level was not protected by the corruption itself.
Possibly they will go through some story quests to level up which might confer them some protection too.
Anyway, there will be players who need protection also at max level. Especially if they go into the deep sea.
Why not build a honor of being a trustworthy companion in such areas?
No, I’m going to kill shitbags and griefers regardless.
And that’s where the current proposed system lacks context. PKing isn’t bad, griefing is. Not all pking is griefing.
Those low level players could tag the NPC and do a little bit of damage and each time this high level kills them, he could get a bar filled which could eventually make him corrupt.
Would this be ok?
By all means, let the higher level suffer the proposed penalties.
It’s when someone kills someone their own level or near it is when I don’t really see it as griefing.
Nothing passive aggressive.
Sometimes you just gotta go with the joke.
MMORPGs attract a wide variety of playstyles.
But... the Kickstarter defines what Meaningful Conflict means for Ashes.
Just as the term Class has a specific definition for Ashes.
Rather it was "honor PKers" who want to mark a difference between "legit" PvP among equals and Gankers who prey on the weak.
PKing became synonymous with Ganking. I think especially with international gamers.
Japanese has adopted the term PK as a loan word for Ganker.
"Mac is the best. Windows sucks."
"WIndows is the best. Mac sucks."
I once worked for an IT person who was an OS2 user.
"OS2 is the best! Windows and Mac sucks"
Same for Linux.
"Linux is the best. WIndows and Mac suck."
If you wish to be an honor PKer who kills griefers without gaining Corruption become a Bounty Hunter.
Non-Combatant attacking Corrupted
well, how can you identify what are the good reasons to kill another player? to me, a good reason is im farming and they are too close to me. if we dont get penalties by pking for good reasons, people will abuse that.
no. low levels need to go somewhere else and level up then.
what if a low level kills a high level? should the low level get a penalty then?
Language does change over time, there's no doubt about that. It's interesting to see how carebear went from anything non full loot to, people who dislike PvP.
It's also interesting to see the international perception, again PKing just meant the oldstyle "you're red, you're dead" attitude and full loot. It's definitely interesting to see Eastern Games define a PKer as someone who griefs or ganks.
Ganking has always been killing someone out of stealth with zero time to react or retaliate where as, griefing always meant a dickhead out to ruin peoples enjoyment of a game. So it makes a bit more sense as a lot of people who play eastern games vs western games and how they use the terminology. I suppose it changes with oldschool and new school too.
You read these forums and everyone says a "Pker" is a bad person, where as the distinction for me is no, a griefer is a griefer and it doesn't matter if they PvP or not, they're still gonna catch hell.
Honor PKers are going to be Honor PKers or I guess in this day and age an "Honor PvPer" regardless of the loot rules. I suppose Ashes of creation it's back to PKing because of the soft loot rules.
Still don't think an honor PvPer should be heavily penalized for taking out the trash, the system still lacks context.
The bounty system will not have bounties on all types of griefing and because the system is contextless, just because someone is corrupted doesn't mean they did it to grief. They may have PK'd the guys who like to kill the level 1 who wants to roam around minding his business staring at the butterflies and exploring things.
And that may not be just you, I imagine there will be many people who are just minding their own business getting shit on for no reason. Those people will eventually go green.
I'm still going to kill them if I know they're a griefer. If someone is a scam artist and griefs some new player out of their loot, I'm still going to kill that scammer.
I'm still going to kill the asshole who jumps people at 20% health and doesn't give them a fair shake at a fight.
I'm not going to wait for open waters to do so.
When is a low level ever going to have an opportunity to kill a high level? In a high level zone? The mobs will kill them.
In a town? The guards will kill them.
Hows a low level going to kill a high level with 40%-50% of gear being player power?
If you're farming and someone is next to you and you attack them, there's a high chance they're going to fight back - especially if you're at the same level.
Good reasons? Killing a griefer is a great reason for - camping lowbies, scamming people out of their loot, causing unneeded tension in a guild, trying to cuck another player (yes this has happened in some of the games I've played), killing the guy who always attacks people at 20% of their health while they're buried in mobs, killing the politiprick who always politics and schemes their way in a dishonorable fashion.
There's more than one way to prey on others and the answer is to always bury them no matter where they are.
I'm not saying git rid of the core idea of the system, I'm saying it needs to be greatly expanded upon beyond, because its contextless.
and the fish takes the bait ;3
according to you, in the ideal system:
scenario 1:
me and my 2-3 other buddies want to kill you, no reason, just for fun. or maybe we want the farming spot, but we dont want to go red or be penalized. maybe we just want to grief you a bit.
we bring a low level alt, not super low, but definitely lower than you and attack you with it. you cant attack it or you will turn purple then we will kill you. the lower level character can kill you without any consequence now, since there wont be any penalty.
you could make it so that the lower levels do 0 damage to higher levels with better gear, but now people who are 1 or 2 tier of gears below wont have a chance at pvp and the game will become gear based, not skill based.
i think i saw you talking about that in another thread and complaining it shouldnt be gear based.
so what do we do now? the meta will be having low level alts to grief people, unless they would get corruption for killing greens hmm...
scenario 2:
my friend joined the game, or he is leveling an alt. people his own level start griefing him because they are assholes. he cant win 3 vs 1 and asks me to help since im high level. should i get penalized for chasing away lower levels or killing them? we have a contradiction here. they are evil and im not, so i shouldnt be penalized, however, they are lower levels and i should be penalized. what do we do? someone even suggested i should get corruption if i kill the mobs near them lmao...
any system that allows you to kill someone without corruption will be abused. corruption isnt a desirable state, but you can still go for it if there arent people nearby who will kill you before you drop karma, and people are incentivized to fight back anyways, since they will lose less if they die.
If you can kill 10 equal level players by yourself, that's a game design problem. In a much more realistic view of that situation, 10 players grouped together would curb stomp a single player attacking them, giving them plenty of safety to flag as combatants. If it's 10 low levels, the initial corruption that player would get would be exponentially higher from what we know, and that's not even taking into account for potentually gaining even more corruption for killing a green players mule. Either way, that player is significantly weakened, and can theoretically now be engaged by the others.
In a more realistic encounter you'd have 2 equal level players, 1 kills the other and becomes corrupt and dips out. Along his way to reduce his corruption another random player attacks him, he defends himself and now his corruption is doubled. This also increases the time, therefore the chance of it happening again, so this continues. 1 gank turns into 10 separate unrelated corruption kills. That's not a good design.