Could limiting the PK count to "per server" instead of "per account" be an acceptable compromise?
Imo no. Mainly cause it would still let more PKing to happen in the game, rather than limiting it. Spreading it over servers could only lead to worse things, cause at that point the person PKing would have even less of an incentive to limit their bad behavior in scope.
As tautau mentioned, social pressure might be involved when a person tries to use their PK alt on the same server. With a server-bound PK count people would instead be encouraged to go to those other servers to mess with people. Not only are you not punished through in-game systems, but even the social pressure is gone now, because no one knows your main there and could never even link the two of you together.
The only issue i see with corruption system more the flagging system is low level player say lvl 20 attacks a lvl 30 harvesters, lvl 30 person be like yeah i can win this attacks the lvl 20 marks himself as combatant only to be a bait for the lvl 50 hiding nearby to come out and kill the level 30 for no penalty since he was nor a combatant.
So this leaves the level 30 with no real option die running away slowly and loose more stuff and giving corruption to a character that is disposable to a degree, or fighting abck only to die to the 50 they have no chance against but loose less.
you lose less stuff as a combatant compared to a non combatant. So in this situation sure your death is more assured, but going combatant means you drop less loot.
The penalty for not fighting back is dropping more loot
As far as the outcome of the fight goes, I'm not going to feel bad if a player only participates in a fight they think they can win, and then the added bonus is they lose less stuff even if they lose.
The system as a whole is designed to give you choices in game. Choices for dealing with pve or pvp griefers, choices on how you want to interact in the world. With the open seas being 24/7 pvp it's my assumption that the scale for punishment for corruption will be very, very high.
The reasoning will be that 2/3rds of the world already has full on pvp, why make corruption easier. Just my opinion though and it will really depend on the developers.
Could limiting the PK count to "per server" instead of "per account" be an acceptable compromise?
For me it would be. I wonder if players will really do that. If it is viable to have high PK count on a server, it makes no sense to have a lawful playing style on another.
Jokes aside, I feel tying this back into economic pain for corrupted or boosts for non-corrupted would go further than other methods.
And since we use our alts to boost our economic efficiency, no reason corrupted economic pain shouldnt also apply to alts.
PK with any corruption? Take some penalty, accountwide, to money gains.
Get killed while corrupted? The money you drop is drawn from your total account money, not just inventory money (you are a monster after all, not a person anymore, no reason why person rules should apply), amount determined by how corrupted you are. More corruption = more % money dropped.
Make it have some cost associated with trading with the corrupted player or it using basic bank services, or straight up not allow trading or NPC use.
afaik, currency pain is the only real way to deter PKing. If I can use my other characters to regear my PK alt over and over inexpensively, then it doesnt matter how red that alt goes because I can keep it supplied. Conversely if it starts to get silly amounts of expensive to me, I aint gonna PK randomly for fun.
afaik, currency pain is the only real way to deter PKing. If I can use my other characters to regear my PK alt over and over inexpensively, then it doesnt matter how red that alt goes because I can keep it supplied. Conversely if it starts to get silly amounts of expensive to me, I aint gonna PK randomly for fun.
Gear has nothing to do with this. You don't even need gear to PK people, because PKing implies that the victim didn't fight back in the first place.
Losing your entire inventory wouldn't deter PKers, because there's whole damn games where that is already the case.
PK count is what determines how much corruption you'll get for a new kill from a green state. High amounts of corruption will, supposedly, dampen your stats to such a degree that you can't go on PKing anymore.
And also, my suggestion already supports your "capitalistic" idea, because I want people to only be able to reduce their PK count on their mains, which in turn, I hope, would scale the things you need to do in order to reduce the count. So even if you PK someone as a lvl1 alt - you'll still have to pay a ton of time/money/mats if you have a lvl50 on the same account. So yes, currency pain would still apply as well.
Don't see the need. The situation still stands that the corruption system is harsh enough. We will test the system in a2 but it will be an artificial test because testers test systems and do not act naturally.
Don't see the need. The situation still stands that the corruption system is harsh enough. We will test the system in a2 but it will be an artificial test because testers test systems and do not act naturally.
Definitely gonna do the exact abuse I'm talking about when Intrepid says it's ok to PK people We'll see how many complains they get.
Don't see the need. The situation still stands that the corruption system is harsh enough. We will test the system in a2 but it will be an artificial test because testers test systems and do not act naturally.
Definitely gonna do the exact abuse I'm talking about when Intrepid says it's ok to PK people We'll see how many complains they get.
There were complaints in the last tests. Didn't change anything except Maggie stepping in to stop it.
There were complaints in the last tests. Didn't change anything except Maggie stepping in to stop it.
That's why I said "when Intrepid says it's ok". Afaik A1 wasn't meant to test the corruption system. A2 will be at one point and that's when I'm gonna be flagging on every person I see and killing anyone who doesn't fight back. And once I reach the "can no longer kill people cause stat dampened" - I'll do it again and again on alts. Ideally against the same people to drive the point home (and cause I'd know that the chance of them fighting back is lower).
If Steven is fine with that setup - I'll live with it, cause that's exactly what I lived with in L2. But considering how much harsher the Ashes system seems to be - we'll see if how it ends up in the end, when it comes to PK count balancing.
I don't think you will meet a lot of people who don't fight back in a2.
If that is the case, while release does have some - Intrepid will have way more problems on their hands
It depends what is classed a problem and what is classed a situation. In my mind, bounty hunters need targets so more targets mean more bounty hunters.
It depends what is classed a problem and what is classed a situation. In my mind, bounty hunters need targets so more targets mean more bounty hunters.
This is why I want the kills themselves not to give too much corruption. That way, theoretically, more people would be willing to go red because they'd think that they can get away with it.
In other words, I want PKing to be more widespread and shallow rather then more restricted but deep.
There were complaints in the last tests. Didn't change anything except Maggie stepping in to stop it.
That's why I said "when Intrepid says it's ok". Afaik A1 wasn't meant to test the corruption system. A2 will be at one point and that's when I'm gonna be flagging on every person I see and killing anyone who doesn't fight back. And once I reach the "can no longer kill people cause stat dampened" - I'll do it again and again on alts. Ideally against the same people to drive the point home (and cause I'd know that the chance of them fighting back is lower).
If Steven is fine with that setup - I'll live with it, cause that's exactly what I lived with in L2. But considering how much harsher the Ashes system seems to be - we'll see if how it ends up in the end, when it comes to PK count balancing.
u probably wont be able to level up alts with the constant wipes in a2 xDDDDD but who knows. also max level is gonna be 30 so maybe we can get from 1-30 in 3 weeks?
u probably wont be able to level up alts with the constant wipes in a2 xDDDDD but who knows. also max level is gonna be 30 so maybe we can get from 1-30 in 3 weeks?
Perfect time to test out my theory of "you don't need a strong char to PK"
I don't think you will meet a lot of people who don't fight back in a2.
Neither in the released game.
Solo players will team up if needed.
The fact that a corrupt player is at disadvantage against greens, makes greens to want to cooperate even by staying close to each other. It is the weakest form of teamplay which can transition easily into a proper team.
But once they are in a group, they feel stronger and will fight back against smaller groups.
We might see guilds which will declare and require as main play style to stay green as long as possible, maybe always..
How many greens can a player kill?
It's impossible to prevent. It just is a fact. At what level ranges these facets happen is the only denominator.
I personally think, Playerkilling SHOULD be - impossible to prevent.
What however should ALSO be impossible to prevent -> is the Bounty Hunter System and that other Players can then search and hunt the Playerkilling Folks.
All i can see here, is Opportunity. Chance for more Content. Chance for more Action - more Fun - more Livelihood and Business inside the Game.
Part of me REALLY misses the Zombie-Event from WoW back then. And this is why i for Example also like the Monster Coin System.
We don't need to be able to do this absolutely everywhere - like for Example killing harmless, Lowlevel Players who just happen to be at some Trader- and Vendor-NPC's and looking to improve their Characters.
Just the Possibility of making the World feel alive and full of Action, Content, Conflict and Events. Imagine being able to get flagged for PvP, or confronting those flagged for PvP, wherever and whenever you want to participate.
At least in most Area's. It will be awesome, i bet.
What punishment do you refer to? You want to tarnish the public reputation of an honour based toon with that of a dishonourable toon.
Alts should be separate enough to let you have those separate RP experiences, but not let you kill x2 people because your chars are completely separated. Especially considering that bad actors won't just do it x2, but instead will do xY, where Y is the amount of chars you can have on your account.
This is why I dislike "family" names on characters. Each alt should be its own thing.
In an RPG, characters should be completely separate rather than suffer account-wide consequences.
Comments
As tautau mentioned, social pressure might be involved when a person tries to use their PK alt on the same server. With a server-bound PK count people would instead be encouraged to go to those other servers to mess with people. Not only are you not punished through in-game systems, but even the social pressure is gone now, because no one knows your main there and could never even link the two of you together.
you lose less stuff as a combatant compared to a non combatant. So in this situation sure your death is more assured, but going combatant means you drop less loot.
The penalty for not fighting back is dropping more loot
As far as the outcome of the fight goes, I'm not going to feel bad if a player only participates in a fight they think they can win, and then the added bonus is they lose less stuff even if they lose.
The system as a whole is designed to give you choices in game. Choices for dealing with pve or pvp griefers, choices on how you want to interact in the world. With the open seas being 24/7 pvp it's my assumption that the scale for punishment for corruption will be very, very high.
The reasoning will be that 2/3rds of the world already has full on pvp, why make corruption easier. Just my opinion though and it will really depend on the developers.
For me it would be. I wonder if players will really do that. If it is viable to have high PK count on a server, it makes no sense to have a lawful playing style on another.
Jokes aside, I feel tying this back into economic pain for corrupted or boosts for non-corrupted would go further than other methods.
And since we use our alts to boost our economic efficiency, no reason corrupted economic pain shouldnt also apply to alts.
PK with any corruption? Take some penalty, accountwide, to money gains.
Get killed while corrupted? The money you drop is drawn from your total account money, not just inventory money (you are a monster after all, not a person anymore, no reason why person rules should apply), amount determined by how corrupted you are. More corruption = more % money dropped.
Make it have some cost associated with trading with the corrupted player or it using basic bank services, or straight up not allow trading or NPC use.
afaik, currency pain is the only real way to deter PKing. If I can use my other characters to regear my PK alt over and over inexpensively, then it doesnt matter how red that alt goes because I can keep it supplied. Conversely if it starts to get silly amounts of expensive to me, I aint gonna PK randomly for fun.
Losing your entire inventory wouldn't deter PKers, because there's whole damn games where that is already the case.
PK count is what determines how much corruption you'll get for a new kill from a green state. High amounts of corruption will, supposedly, dampen your stats to such a degree that you can't go on PKing anymore.
And also, my suggestion already supports your "capitalistic" idea, because I want people to only be able to reduce their PK count on their mains, which in turn, I hope, would scale the things you need to do in order to reduce the count. So even if you PK someone as a lvl1 alt - you'll still have to pay a ton of time/money/mats if you have a lvl50 on the same account. So yes, currency pain would still apply as well.
There were complaints in the last tests. Didn't change anything except Maggie stepping in to stop it.
If Steven is fine with that setup - I'll live with it, cause that's exactly what I lived with in L2. But considering how much harsher the Ashes system seems to be - we'll see if how it ends up in the end, when it comes to PK count balancing.
It depends what is classed a problem and what is classed a situation. In my mind, bounty hunters need targets so more targets mean more bounty hunters.
In other words, I want PKing to be more widespread and shallow rather then more restricted but deep.
u probably wont be able to level up alts with the constant wipes in a2 xDDDDD but who knows. also max level is gonna be 30 so maybe we can get from 1-30 in 3 weeks?
Solo players will team up if needed.
The fact that a corrupt player is at disadvantage against greens, makes greens to want to cooperate even by staying close to each other. It is the weakest form of teamplay which can transition easily into a proper team.
But once they are in a group, they feel stronger and will fight back against smaller groups.
We might see guilds which will declare and require as main play style to stay green as long as possible, maybe always..
How many greens can a player kill?
I personally think, Playerkilling SHOULD be - impossible to prevent.
What however should ALSO be impossible to prevent -> is the Bounty Hunter System and that other Players can then search and hunt the Playerkilling Folks.
All i can see here, is Opportunity. Chance for more Content. Chance for more Action - more Fun - more Livelihood and Business inside the Game.
Part of me REALLY misses the Zombie-Event from WoW back then. And this is why i for Example also like the Monster Coin System.
We don't need to be able to do this absolutely everywhere - like for Example killing harmless, Lowlevel Players who just happen to be at some Trader- and Vendor-NPC's and looking to improve their Characters.
Just the Possibility of making the World feel alive and full of Action, Content, Conflict and Events. Imagine being able to get flagged for PvP, or confronting those flagged for PvP, wherever and whenever you want to participate.
At least in most Area's. It will be awesome, i bet.
Sounds actually very reasonable and logical. 👍
There could be enough space, not unlimited but enough. If Eve Online had enough space why AoC cannot?
Ashes is just part of one planet with open world housing.
Enemy level and HP.
So it's always a mystery what's gonna happen.