Chicago wrote: » Uncommon Sense wrote: » open pvp games without punishment or deterrents inevitably fail because players that don't want to engage in combat without consequences quit... leaving only griefers without 'victims' so they quit... game dies. So penalties for poor behavior are a must for any long term game survival and viability. actions have consequences... Wow classic is a big example of how they fail? Probably the most played mmo active atm and pvp servers are always the most populat, given their are factions i will admit but definitley dont fail
Uncommon Sense wrote: » open pvp games without punishment or deterrents inevitably fail because players that don't want to engage in combat without consequences quit... leaving only griefers without 'victims' so they quit... game dies. So penalties for poor behavior are a must for any long term game survival and viability. actions have consequences...
Chicago wrote: » Fantmx wrote: » Hard pass. Corruption is a punishment meant to deter unwanted behavior. It is not a mini-game for someone wanting a little more spice in their life. Its suppose to be a pvx game but corruption is just a hard stop for any real world pvp
Fantmx wrote: » Hard pass. Corruption is a punishment meant to deter unwanted behavior. It is not a mini-game for someone wanting a little more spice in their life.
Depraved wrote: » Chicago wrote: » Uncommon Sense wrote: » open pvp games without punishment or deterrents inevitably fail because players that don't want to engage in combat without consequences quit... leaving only griefers without 'victims' so they quit... game dies. So penalties for poor behavior are a must for any long term game survival and viability. actions have consequences... Wow classic is a big example of how they fail? Probably the most played mmo active atm and pvp servers are always the most populat, given their are factions i will admit but definitley dont fail yeah but you cant kill everybody in wow and you dont really lose anything from dying. also people are too busy doing instances to do any ow pvp xddd plus many pvp players play in pve servers because they just want to spend all their time doing arenas and nothing more, so they play on pve servers to level fast and uninterrupted. also didnt wow change to toggle pvp? o-o
Veeshan wrote: » I feel reduction in power from corruption should only be applied when you kill players much lower level than you as a punishment for effectivly greifing lowbies but that part of corruption shouldnt apply when killing people of around your level.
Chicago wrote: » I mean you make your own content, isnt that what a sandbox is all about?
Ashes of Creation is referred to by the developers as a "themebox" or "sandpark"
Noaani wrote: » That is from Steven. If you can point me to meaningful content behind just randomly killing someone out in the world, then sure, that could be meaningful. I can't see it though.
Chicago wrote: » I mean you make your own content, isnt that what a sandbox is all about? most people that dont like this system are not against it because they want to grief someone 10 levels lower than them, they are against it because some of the best memories you can have in a game is thr content you make along the way, having 2v2 3v3 5v5s in the open world with your friends, seeing an old enemy and killing them in the open world, If you put in enough work on your character and practice dueling/pvping enough you should be hard to take down, your stats decreasing just rwmoves this entire aspect of the game
MachadoDeCarvalho wrote: » Noaani wrote: » That is from Steven. If you can point me to meaningful content behind just randomly killing someone out in the world, then sure, that could be meaningful. I can't see it though. Chicago wrote: » I mean you make your own content, isnt that what a sandbox is all about? most people that dont like this system are not against it because they want to grief someone 10 levels lower than them, they are against it because some of the best memories you can have in a game is thr content you make along the way, having 2v2 3v3 5v5s in the open world with your friends, seeing an old enemy and killing them in the open world, If you put in enough work on your character and practice dueling/pvping enough you should be hard to take down, your stats decreasing just rwmoves this entire aspect of the game In my personal view, open world PvP makes more sense in a game with factions. My best memories in MMORPGS are definitely open world PvP, back in 2009 when Aion released (my first MMORPG). It wasn't in the "designed PvP zone" (that was great too), but in my faction's or the other's territory. The thrill of your group being hunted by the entire enemy zone, hiding our respawn points in the mountains, or meeting an invading group in your faction's territory... that was awesome. In AoC's design, though, I really don't see purpose in killing people randomly in the open world. I'll probably just defend myself and attack reds on ocasion. I'm really looking forward to sieges, wars and caravans though! Open seas as well!
Ravicus wrote: » its your opinion that its meaningless pvp.
Noaani wrote: » Ravicus wrote: » Noaani wrote: » Chicago wrote: » Fantmx wrote: » Hard pass. Corruption is a punishment meant to deter unwanted behavior. It is not a mini-game for someone wanting a little more spice in their life. Its suppose to be a pvx game but corruption is just a hard stop for any real world pvp If Ashes didn't have wars, sieges, caravans, naval content and probably other things where corruption isn't applied, I'd agree. With those things in place, corruption simply becomes a reason to not get weighed down by meaningless PvP - it encourages people that want to PvP to do so in those specific areas, but doesn't outright prevent attacking someone. its your opinion that its meaningless pvp. in order for those choices to be meaningful, there must be meaningful content behind the door you choose. That is from Steven. If you can point me to meaningful content behind just randomly killing someone out in the world, then sure, that could be meaningful. I can't see it though.
Ravicus wrote: » Noaani wrote: » Chicago wrote: » Fantmx wrote: » Hard pass. Corruption is a punishment meant to deter unwanted behavior. It is not a mini-game for someone wanting a little more spice in their life. Its suppose to be a pvx game but corruption is just a hard stop for any real world pvp If Ashes didn't have wars, sieges, caravans, naval content and probably other things where corruption isn't applied, I'd agree. With those things in place, corruption simply becomes a reason to not get weighed down by meaningless PvP - it encourages people that want to PvP to do so in those specific areas, but doesn't outright prevent attacking someone. its your opinion that its meaningless pvp.
Noaani wrote: » Chicago wrote: » Fantmx wrote: » Hard pass. Corruption is a punishment meant to deter unwanted behavior. It is not a mini-game for someone wanting a little more spice in their life. Its suppose to be a pvx game but corruption is just a hard stop for any real world pvp If Ashes didn't have wars, sieges, caravans, naval content and probably other things where corruption isn't applied, I'd agree. With those things in place, corruption simply becomes a reason to not get weighed down by meaningless PvP - it encourages people that want to PvP to do so in those specific areas, but doesn't outright prevent attacking someone.
in order for those choices to be meaningful, there must be meaningful content behind the door you choose.
Ravicus wrote: » Noaani wrote: » Ravicus wrote: » Noaani wrote: » Chicago wrote: » Fantmx wrote: » Hard pass. Corruption is a punishment meant to deter unwanted behavior. It is not a mini-game for someone wanting a little more spice in their life. Its suppose to be a pvx game but corruption is just a hard stop for any real world pvp If Ashes didn't have wars, sieges, caravans, naval content and probably other things where corruption isn't applied, I'd agree. With those things in place, corruption simply becomes a reason to not get weighed down by meaningless PvP - it encourages people that want to PvP to do so in those specific areas, but doesn't outright prevent attacking someone. its your opinion that its meaningless pvp. in order for those choices to be meaningful, there must be meaningful content behind the door you choose. That is from Steven. If you can point me to meaningful content behind just randomly killing someone out in the world, then sure, that could be meaningful. I can't see it though. Meaningful content is subjective, and it is the opinion of the player. What you view as meaningful is not neccissarily what I view as meaningful. I could point you to lots of things that I like, but you would not because we are 2 different mindsets.
Dygz wrote: » Ravicus wrote: » Ravicus wrote: » Noaani wrote: » Ravicus wrote: » Noaani wrote: » Chicago wrote: » Fantmx wrote: » Hard pass. Corruption is a punishment meant to deter unwanted behavior. It is not a mini-game for someone wanting a little more spice in their life. Its suppose to be a pvx game but corruption is just a hard stop for any real world pvp If Ashes didn't have wars, sieges, caravans, naval content and probably other things where corruption isn't applied, I'd agree. With those things in place, corruption simply becomes a reason to not get weighed down by meaningless PvP - it encourages people that want to PvP to do so in those specific areas, but doesn't outright prevent attacking someone. its your opinion that its meaningless pvp. in order for those choices to be meaningful, there must be meaningful content behind the door you choose. That is from Steven. If you can point me to meaningful content behind just randomly killing someone out in the world, then sure, that could be meaningful. I can't see it though. Meaningful content is subjective, and it is the opinion of the player. What you view as meaningful is not neccissarily what I view as meaningful. I could point you to lots of things that I like, but you would not because we are 2 different mindsets. Actually, it's relative. If we are talking about how meaningful one item within a set of items (all PvP in Ashes) is, then that one item can only be compared to the other items in that set. Thus, if you want to claim that random open world PvP is meaningful PvP in the context of Ashes, you would have to think that it means about as much as caravan PvP, or siege PvP. You've not offered up a reason as to why you think this to be the case, and I really can't even imagine a situation where it would be the case, so I'm going to stick with my original notion. I mean, if open PvP results in 1% of the outcome of caravan PvP, I don't see how you can call that open PvP meaningful. You are puting the context in the game world, I am talking in general. The general philosophy of pvp. You are trying to pigeonhole it into ashes, when I am not. Thats why I say its subjective. Even if I was talking about Ashes, I would still claim open world pvp is more meaningful to me, as I might not like the siege or caravan system, or working in large groups. You just don't know? I do know that in the past I do like the ability to fight in the open world. Maybe that is foriegn to your beliefs, but thats ok. we can agree to disagree.
Ravicus wrote: » Ravicus wrote: » Noaani wrote: » Ravicus wrote: » Noaani wrote: » Chicago wrote: » Fantmx wrote: » Hard pass. Corruption is a punishment meant to deter unwanted behavior. It is not a mini-game for someone wanting a little more spice in their life. Its suppose to be a pvx game but corruption is just a hard stop for any real world pvp If Ashes didn't have wars, sieges, caravans, naval content and probably other things where corruption isn't applied, I'd agree. With those things in place, corruption simply becomes a reason to not get weighed down by meaningless PvP - it encourages people that want to PvP to do so in those specific areas, but doesn't outright prevent attacking someone. its your opinion that its meaningless pvp. in order for those choices to be meaningful, there must be meaningful content behind the door you choose. That is from Steven. If you can point me to meaningful content behind just randomly killing someone out in the world, then sure, that could be meaningful. I can't see it though. Meaningful content is subjective, and it is the opinion of the player. What you view as meaningful is not neccissarily what I view as meaningful. I could point you to lots of things that I like, but you would not because we are 2 different mindsets. Actually, it's relative. If we are talking about how meaningful one item within a set of items (all PvP in Ashes) is, then that one item can only be compared to the other items in that set. Thus, if you want to claim that random open world PvP is meaningful PvP in the context of Ashes, you would have to think that it means about as much as caravan PvP, or siege PvP. You've not offered up a reason as to why you think this to be the case, and I really can't even imagine a situation where it would be the case, so I'm going to stick with my original notion. I mean, if open PvP results in 1% of the outcome of caravan PvP, I don't see how you can call that open PvP meaningful.
Noaani wrote: » Chicago wrote: » I mean you make your own content, isnt that what a sandbox is all about? No, developers should still be making content - a sandbox simply means you can pick and chose how you do that content rather than having to follow a track or rail system as per a themepark game. That said, Steven has never claimed Ashes is a sandbox. Ashes of Creation is referred to by the developers as a "themebox" or "sandpark" Each of these is a portmanteau of "sandbox" and "themepark", suggesting that this is just another bullshit marketing term that Intrepid came up with like "PvX" so that they can still appeal to players that like both sandbox and themepark MMO's.
Chicago wrote: » Depraved wrote: » Chicago wrote: » Uncommon Sense wrote: » open pvp games without punishment or deterrents inevitably fail because players that don't want to engage in combat without consequences quit... leaving only griefers without 'victims' so they quit... game dies. So penalties for poor behavior are a must for any long term game survival and viability. actions have consequences... Wow classic is a big example of how they fail? Probably the most played mmo active atm and pvp servers are always the most populat, given their are factions i will admit but definitley dont fail yeah but you cant kill everybody in wow and you dont really lose anything from dying. also people are too busy doing instances to do any ow pvp xddd plus many pvp players play in pve servers because they just want to spend all their time doing arenas and nothing more, so they play on pve servers to level fast and uninterrupted. also didnt wow change to toggle pvp? o-o They did yeah but the first version of the game pre arena is still super popular today, and you can be ganked anywhere except starting zones
Ravicus wrote: » Dygz wrote: » You are puting the context in the game world, I am talking in general. The general philosophy of pvp. You are trying to pigeonhole it into ashes, when I am not. Thats why I say its subjective. Even if I was talking about Ashes, I would still claim open world pvp is more meaningful to me, as I might not like the siege or caravan system, or working in large groups. You just don't know? I do know that in the past I do like the ability to fight in the open world. Maybe that is foriegn to your beliefs, but thats ok. we can agree to disagree.
Dygz wrote: » You are puting the context in the game world, I am talking in general. The general philosophy of pvp. You are trying to pigeonhole it into ashes, when I am not. Thats why I say its subjective. Even if I was talking about Ashes, I would still claim open world pvp is more meaningful to me, as I might not like the siege or caravan system, or working in large groups. You just don't know? I do know that in the past I do like the ability to fight in the open world. Maybe that is foriegn to your beliefs, but thats ok. we can agree to disagree.
Ravicus wrote: » Dude you need to check your quotes, I said neither of those. Drinking is bad this early in the morning bud.
Solvryn wrote: » You'll be fighting over the best and most efficient spots in the open world. Sometimes it'll be wiser to flag, other times it'll be wiser to have your guild dec. Personally I like OW PvP better when there are no factions, because then you are suspicious of everyone.
MachadoDeCarvalho wrote: » Solvryn wrote: » You'll be fighting over the best and most efficient spots in the open world. Sometimes it'll be wiser to flag, other times it'll be wiser to have your guild dec. Personally I like OW PvP better when there are no factions, because then you are suspicious of everyone. That will depend on how much scarce resources will be, because I don't mind at all sharing spots with other people. Only if it is extremely scarce I would consider killing another player over it. Maybe if my guild needs them asap... I don't know, we will see how it goes.
Depraved wrote: » Noaani wrote: » Chicago wrote: » I mean you make your own content, isnt that what a sandbox is all about? No, developers should still be making content - a sandbox simply means you can pick and chose how you do that content rather than having to follow a track or rail system as per a themepark game. That said, Steven has never claimed Ashes is a sandbox. Ashes of Creation is referred to by the developers as a "themebox" or "sandpark" Each of these is a portmanteau of "sandbox" and "themepark", suggesting that this is just another bullshit marketing term that Intrepid came up with like "PvX" so that they can still appeal to players that like both sandbox and themepark MMO's. ive been hearing the term pvx for 20 years now, if you havent, thats your fault xD also, here are 2 blogs that mention the term sandpark. they are 10 years old.http://tobolds.blogspot.com/2013/02/whats-sandpark.htmlhttps://www.engadget.com/2014-01-30-defining-sandparks-within-the-mmorpg-space.html intrepid didnt come up with anything. if you didnt know, thats your fault for burying yourself in one game (eq) and thinking nothing outside that game exists or is good.
