Corruption should not reduce your characters attack power/ stats

CROW3

Agreed. I try to avoid crap these days, especially when piled.

Depraved

Dygz wrote: »

Depraved wrote: »

by beat pve i mean the challeneges, mobs, dungeons, puzzles, bosses, etc.

So... playing on a WoW PvP server is PvX?

Depraved wrote: »

by 50-50 i meant in content distribution, not separating them, but yeah i probably worded that badly.

I think this would be way better than what Steven hopes to do with Ashes.
Reciprocal relationship would be better (for me) than symbiotic relationship..

Depraved wrote: »

wow and gw are a pvp and a pve game 2 in one. you could say 3 since gw has a pvx map.

I have never heard anyone label WoW or GW as a "PvP and PvE game 2 in One".
Pretty sure that is not a term people use, so... it's not at all helpful. And especially not helpful when Steven says Ashes is PvX.
So... it's confusing because people can't seem to give consistent, clear examples of a PvX MMORPG.
Which is why PvX is meaningless. And does nothing to help people who play on PvE-Only servers but like PvP sometimes determine if Ashes is a comfortable fit.

um...you dont need to beat players to beat the dungeon!! the challenge is pve.

also doesnt matter if its not a term people use. i live in reality, not in people's minds
imagine you remove all pvp fro mwow, you can do dungeons and beat challenges. thats the pve game.
now imagine if you remove all the pve from wow. you can do bg and arenas. thats the pvp game.

people dont refer as 2 games in one because people just refer as wow.

back go lol example. is the 5v5 moba the same as the tft? are those 2 games or just 1? game modes? game modes count as games, different rules etc.

Noaani

Depraved wrote: »

Noaani wrote: »

Depraved wrote: »

i understand it and im a mmorpg player. many others do as well.

You may understand it as it related to Ashes, but only due to following Ashes.

Here is proof of that actual fact. I am thinking of an MMORPG, calling it PvX is valid, based on just that, explain what players should expect from this game.

then we should just use solo, cooperative, competitive and cooperative-competitive, and not even bother with pvp, pve, themepark and sandbox. why dont we?

Because these terms are less explanatory than basic PvP and PvE.

Depraved wrote: »

lets say you are hunting deer. thats pve
lets say you are hunting another person, and you can both shoot each other. thats pvp
lets say you are both hunting deer, but the other person pushes you so you miss the shoot and he can get the deer. or you can both shoot each other or / and the deer. thats pvx, you could say theres softcore and hardcore as well

In the context of MMORPG's -

You are hunting a deer - PvE.
You are hunting a player - PvP.
You are hunting a deer and a player - PvP.

The reason for this is simple - the existence or absence of PvP has a bigger impact on expected gameplay than any other facet of a game (not hyperbole).

As such, if it is possible that another player can attack you, that is the major facet of the game, making the game PvP.

You can say there are other elements to this, but this is the basics of it.

see those terms are the root of game types, which is your argument. so im just going one step deeper but somehow that isnt valid. just using your own logic here.

That doesn't are rhem very descriptive when talking about MMORPG's.

you arent hunting a deer and a player. you are hunting a deer but another player is interfering with you. you dont necessarily have to shoot th e other player. maybe he could just be pushing you so you miss, or he could be scaring the deer. pvx means another player will interfere with your pve win condition. the goal isnt to beat the other player. the goal is to beat the pve, just have pve obstacles and player obstacles together.

See, now you are calling any MMORPG with player collision a PvX game.

See how meaningless that term is?

That is probably why you didn't provide an answer as to what the expected gameplay of the "PvX" game I had in mind is.

Spif

On the topic of combat penalties for being red, they are necessary. Otherwise it's too easy to setup a character where you don't care if it dies a few times while red (3x of each piece of good but not great gear, and nothing else to drop), and go on a murder spree. Even worse, a group of people setup this way.

The downward spiral of corruption and killing needs combat penalties to function.

How much combat penalty? Well, that needs to be worked out. Keep in mind, any system will be gamed to the fullest extent possible.

I see something like this: Killing a green at the same level as you or higher gives 100 corruption. Each 50 corruption lowers your damage by 1% and increase your damage taken by 1%

Killing a player half your level gives 200 corruption. Killing a player 1/4 your level gives 400 corruption, and that's the cap of corruption that can be gained per kill.

Death removes 100 corruption (death penalties apply, including xp debt). Not sure how much xp gain would wipe out 100 corruption, but at a guess, 3-4% of your level's xp.

Dygz

Depraved wrote: »

um...you dont need to beat players to beat the dungeon!! the challenge is pve.

Why did you mention that?

Depraved wrote: »

also doesnt matter if its not a term people use. i live in reality, not in people's minds

This means the concept only lives in your mind.
So, useless to others.

Gurz

Chicago wrote: »

Im all for corruption adding death penalties or dropping more on death, but reducing the combat abilities of the corrupted player seems a bit boring? I like the idea of a powerful enemy needing a group to take down or atleast give them a fighting chance but a corrupted player just being an easy kill essentially bottlenecking them into going into hiding till they work off the corruption sounds a bit lame,

Whats everyones thoughts

I too think it is unecessary to diminish the power output of a corrupted player. But i would think that the corrupted player could take double damage from players and even double time in stuns, snares and other ccs.
But to negate damage output is very boring indeed.

Maybe good punishment like:
- Double Damage Received
- Double Time in CCs
- Can't use AoE Spells
- Can't targetted spells (so since it is tab + action maybe will need to rely in action combat and aim your target manually, dont really know, something in between could be nice).
- Drop Everything if die
- +% drop in xp
- 15 minutes longer time to logout the game (then 60 seconds)
- more harder to remove corruption and player kill count

Now i accept all punishment above and at same time... Then having my damage reduced as a corrupted player.
And prolly can add... damage reduced to 80% against non combatant IF they dont retaliate if they retaliate then damage back to 100% while their damage would be doubled against us. And the combatant and corrupted we attack would work accordingly 100% and doubled if corrupted vs corrupted xD.

Just trying to say there are more ways then just flat out reduce damage to avoid pk abusing.
Which yes pk abusing low level is bad and also boring i won't kill any low level for fun and never did.
So hope Steven can flesh and polish out better ideas in alpha 2 about this punishment, because i myself, just because it is open world i would love to be a corrupted player and always be on edge for other high levels i encounter and start a fight because they want to kill me, it is a fun way of living and unpredictable and always adapting to new encounters and strategies.