Greetings, glorious testers!

Check out Alpha Two Announcements here to see the latest news on Alpha Two.
Check out general Announcements here to see the latest news on Ashes of Creation & Intrepid Studios.

To get the quickest updates regarding Alpha Two, connect your Discord and Intrepid accounts here.

PvP - Corrupted/Corruption

13»

Comments

  • ThokanThokan Member, Alpha Two
    Enigmatic Sage wrote: »
    Thokan wrote: »
    Enigmatic Sage wrote: »
    daveywavey wrote: »
    Enigmatic Sage wrote: »
    This way it reduces the probability of players logging on alts to sabotage caravans and pk etc.

    But, this is a legitimate part of the intended game design.

    yes and no.

    if your main is in one node (citizenship) and you log onto an alt near or in the same node after you find out the caravan from your node is leaving, does that not defeat the purpose of integrity in game design. Seems counter productive and contradictive.

    Thats because you ignore the mechanics in place to counter PKers and the social and emergent gameplay when it comes to PvP.

    First, you think youre just gonna log unto one alt and defeat a caravan by yourself? If you do, its on them.

    Secondly, why do you ignore there are plenty of ways for the players you attack to counter you? Enemy of the state, War declaration if youre in a guild, or just put on a damned KoS.txt list.

    It is not the "integrity" of game design that caravans should not be attacked by whoever is willing.

    That's definitely an opinion. You're not looking at the bigger picture unfortunately.
    Yup.. totally going to solo a caravan..... :wink: Imagine if the game was that poorly "balanced".

    If you got an alt clan with several members leveled properly to be able to raid caravans successfully, how is it different from doing it on your main lol? You got tunnel vision.
    9eeys75uiggx.gif
    Among The Shadows
  • Enigmatic SageEnigmatic Sage Member
    Thokan wrote: »
    Enigmatic Sage wrote: »
    Thokan wrote: »
    Enigmatic Sage wrote: »
    daveywavey wrote: »
    Enigmatic Sage wrote: »
    This way it reduces the probability of players logging on alts to sabotage caravans and pk etc.

    But, this is a legitimate part of the intended game design.

    yes and no.

    if your main is in one node (citizenship) and you log onto an alt near or in the same node after you find out the caravan from your node is leaving, does that not defeat the purpose of integrity in game design. Seems counter productive and contradictive.

    Thats because you ignore the mechanics in place to counter PKers and the social and emergent gameplay when it comes to PvP.

    First, you think youre just gonna log unto one alt and defeat a caravan by yourself? If you do, its on them.

    Secondly, why do you ignore there are plenty of ways for the players you attack to counter you? Enemy of the state, War declaration if youre in a guild, or just put on a damned KoS.txt list.

    It is not the "integrity" of game design that caravans should not be attacked by whoever is willing.

    That's definitely an opinion. You're not looking at the bigger picture unfortunately.
    Yup.. totally going to solo a caravan..... :wink: Imagine if the game was that poorly "balanced".

    If you got an alt clan with several members leveled properly to be able to raid caravans successfully, how is it different from doing it on your main lol? You got tunnel vision.

    Shills are getting angry today... so mean... lol
  • ThokanThokan Member, Alpha Two
    Enigmatic Sage wrote: »
    Thokan wrote: »
    Enigmatic Sage wrote: »
    Thokan wrote: »
    Enigmatic Sage wrote: »
    daveywavey wrote: »
    Enigmatic Sage wrote: »
    This way it reduces the probability of players logging on alts to sabotage caravans and pk etc.

    But, this is a legitimate part of the intended game design.

    yes and no.

    if your main is in one node (citizenship) and you log onto an alt near or in the same node after you find out the caravan from your node is leaving, does that not defeat the purpose of integrity in game design. Seems counter productive and contradictive.

    Thats because you ignore the mechanics in place to counter PKers and the social and emergent gameplay when it comes to PvP.

    First, you think youre just gonna log unto one alt and defeat a caravan by yourself? If you do, its on them.

    Secondly, why do you ignore there are plenty of ways for the players you attack to counter you? Enemy of the state, War declaration if youre in a guild, or just put on a damned KoS.txt list.

    It is not the "integrity" of game design that caravans should not be attacked by whoever is willing.

    That's definitely an opinion. You're not looking at the bigger picture unfortunately.
    Yup.. totally going to solo a caravan..... :wink: Imagine if the game was that poorly "balanced".

    If you got an alt clan with several members leveled properly to be able to raid caravans successfully, how is it different from doing it on your main lol? You got tunnel vision.

    Shills are getting angry today... so mean... lol

    Angry? Why am I laughing then? Answer the question, Von Oben
    9eeys75uiggx.gif
    Among The Shadows
  • Enigmatic SageEnigmatic Sage Member
    Thokan wrote: »
    Enigmatic Sage wrote: »
    Thokan wrote: »
    Enigmatic Sage wrote: »
    Thokan wrote: »
    Enigmatic Sage wrote: »
    daveywavey wrote: »
    Enigmatic Sage wrote: »
    This way it reduces the probability of players logging on alts to sabotage caravans and pk etc.

    But, this is a legitimate part of the intended game design.

    yes and no.

    if your main is in one node (citizenship) and you log onto an alt near or in the same node after you find out the caravan from your node is leaving, does that not defeat the purpose of integrity in game design. Seems counter productive and contradictive.

    Thats because you ignore the mechanics in place to counter PKers and the social and emergent gameplay when it comes to PvP.

    First, you think youre just gonna log unto one alt and defeat a caravan by yourself? If you do, its on them.

    Secondly, why do you ignore there are plenty of ways for the players you attack to counter you? Enemy of the state, War declaration if youre in a guild, or just put on a damned KoS.txt list.

    It is not the "integrity" of game design that caravans should not be attacked by whoever is willing.

    That's definitely an opinion. You're not looking at the bigger picture unfortunately.
    Yup.. totally going to solo a caravan..... :wink: Imagine if the game was that poorly "balanced".

    If you got an alt clan with several members leveled properly to be able to raid caravans successfully, how is it different from doing it on your main lol? You got tunnel vision.

    Shills are getting angry today... so mean... lol

    Angry? Why am I laughing then? Answer the question, Von Oben

    #6 "congratulations"?
  • ThokanThokan Member, Alpha Two
    Mistiti wrote: »
    With the curent pk penalty, even if i like pvp, i will never fight back if i'm not 100% sur to win.

    I will just wait they make mistake and get corruption, and then crush them..

    The actual penalty of loosing stat will not help the pvp part of the game.

    Ofc we need to get penalty to stop zerg and some grief, but not too hard, and not touching stat. Just up the looting table on corruption ppl (L2 systèm is perfect)

    But this is situational, isnt it?

    Sure, I would definitely consider just not flagging and feeding someone corruption points if there's a PKer I wanna get back at.

    There are two extra considerations though.

    1. What are you carrying. Do you want to lose some of it or a lot of it? This is the main incentive for you to flag up and fight back by design, you'll lose less stuff. It will be a plausible reason if youve gathered tons or youre carrying something worthful.

    2. How many are they? If its you solo getting ganked by a full group, thats 8 players that can share corruption points griefing you. Thats 8 times the work to get back at them. Worth considering.


    All in all, Im thinking and hoping the incentives will be enough in either direction to promote "some" Open World PvP and griefing. Im also hoping it will punish the zergs attacking smaller groups alot.

    Lastly, people like to stare blindly at the corruption system, as people are very used to it being the only PvP in-game. Im certain there will be plenty of other, corruption-less, outlets for PvP to keep one busy all day.

    9eeys75uiggx.gif
    Among The Shadows
  • DygzDygz Member, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    Enigmatic Sage wrote: »
    You're wrong about that. Gamers have different reasons to play an MMORPG which I have acknowledged.
    Not really. You just made up a scenario in your own head which you assert with no evidence for support.

  • LinikerLiniker Member, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    edited January 5
    Enigmatic Sage wrote: »
    Guess we just gear up multiple toons and just pretend the purpose of the game matters?
    Enigmatic Sage wrote: »
    Seems like we just gear ourselves out to just have that edge on the content we choose that has no real goal..

    Hollowed Goals and Purposes.
    Enigmatic Sage wrote: »
    Wrong.
    Enigmatic Sage wrote: »
    Still wrong.
    Enigmatic Sage wrote: »
    You're wrong about that.

    jesus, what is this guy on about...
    img]
    Recrutamento aberto - Nosso Site: Clique aqui
  • Enigmatic SageEnigmatic Sage Member
    edited January 5
    Dygz wrote: »
    Enigmatic Sage wrote: »
    You're wrong about that. Gamers have different reasons to play an MMORPG which I have acknowledged.
    Not really. You just made up a scenario in your own head which you assert with no evidence for support.

    nope.
    Liniker wrote: »
    Enigmatic Sage wrote: »
    Guess we just gear up multiple toons and just pretend the purpose of the game matters?
    Enigmatic Sage wrote: »
    Seems like we just gear ourselves out to just have that edge on the content we choose that has no real goal..

    Hollowed Goals and Purposes.
    Enigmatic Sage wrote: »
    Wrong.
    Enigmatic Sage wrote: »
    Still wrong.
    Enigmatic Sage wrote: »
    You're wrong about that.

    jesus, what is this guy on about...

    thanks for selectively replying out of context?
  • NoaaniNoaani Member, Intrepid Pack, Alpha Two
    Enigmatic Sage wrote: »
    Ever wonder what the actual purpose of the game is or any MMORPG for that matter?
    monthly subscription retention? profits? they all seem to be similarly designed.
    All MMORPG's are time sinks. That is the purpose of them - players give developers and/or publishers money in exchange for a means to consume time.

    There is no reason for any player to play an MMORPG other than the above, and there is no reason for an MMORPG to exist other than the above.
    Enigmatic Sage wrote: »

    So I am pay a monthly subscription to attack local caravans on an alt to sell the corrupted loot and glint for money so I can gear my main without repercussions using in-game currency through crafters/crafting.
    If this is how you want to spend your time in a game like Ashes when all of the other avenues of content are available to you, all that does is speak volumes about you as a player.

    Honestly, you could play like this if you want. But if that is how you want to play, why would you complain about it? If you are complaining because that is not how you would want to play, then why are you assuming you would play that way?

    An MMORPG like Ashes gives you many paths with which to waste your time. Pick one you enjoy instead of complaining that you are on a path you do not enjoy.

    Honestly, this is 100% a you issue - it isn't an issue with the game at all.
  • GurzGurz Member, Alpha Two
    NiKr wrote: »
    Gurz wrote: »
    That way you can still defend yourself, but clearly die easy for a lower level that you are trying to abuse.
    Except you can't defend yourself against the people who're not BHs. And the pvp penalties already don't apply in fights with BH.

    What is BHs?
  • NoaaniNoaani Member, Intrepid Pack, Alpha Two
    Gurz wrote: »
    NiKr wrote: »
    Gurz wrote: »
    That way you can still defend yourself, but clearly die easy for a lower level that you are trying to abuse.
    Except you can't defend yourself against the people who're not BHs. And the pvp penalties already don't apply in fights with BH.

    What is BHs?

    Bounty Hunter.
  • GurzGurz Member, Alpha Two
    Noaani wrote: »
    Gurz wrote: »
    NiKr wrote: »
    Gurz wrote: »
    That way you can still defend yourself, but clearly die easy for a lower level that you are trying to abuse.
    Except you can't defend yourself against the people who're not BHs. And the pvp penalties already don't apply in fights with BH.

    What is BHs?

    Bounty Hunter.

    oh ok if pvp penalty dont apply to BH could be fine i guess.
  • MistitiMistiti Member, Alpha Two
    Thokan wrote: »
    But this is situational, isnt it?

    Sure, I would definitely consider just not flagging and feeding someone corruption points if there's a PKer I wanna get back at.

    There are two extra considerations though.

    1. What are you carrying. Do you want to lose some of it or a lot of it? This is the main incentive for you to flag up and fight back by design, you'll lose less stuff. It will be a plausible reason if youve gathered tons or youre carrying something worthful.

    2. How many are they? If its you solo getting ganked by a full group, thats 8 players that can share corruption points griefing you. Thats 8 times the work to get back at them. Worth considering.


    All in all, Im thinking and hoping the incentives will be enough in either direction to promote "some" Open World PvP and griefing. Im also hoping it will punish the zergs attacking smaller groups alot.

    Lastly, people like to stare blindly at the corruption system, as people are very used to it being the only PvP in-game. Im certain there will be plenty of other, corruption-less, outlets for PvP to keep one busy all day.

    Yes we miss some info, and if i do this topic is to identify the missing part and mb some ppl will ask them to @StevenSharif :p

    The (1) is a good question, what we will lost if we are kill white or purple or red. And if it is worth to loose some item to keep the spot.


    I look at the bribery system because even if you have other things to do than pvp, it's a big part of the game.
    You're going to farmer a few hours in spots/donjons, you'll see other players right next to you, you'll interact with them. The corruption system will tell you how you can do it.

    I don't like organized pvp in arenas or the like. I prefer when pvp is fully blended with pve.

    When when you farm your spot/dungeon you can respond without fear of being punished too heavily for simply defending "your" space.

    Or when you're looking for a spot, you can engage without fear of the defenders using a poorly calibrated game feature to push you away.
  • daveywaveydaveywavey Member, Alpha Two
    Mistiti wrote: »
    Yes we miss some info, and if i do this topic is to identify the missing part and mb some ppl will ask them to @StevenSharif :p

    The (1) is a good question, what we will lost if we are kill white or purple or red. And if it is worth to loose some item to keep the spot.

    This link may help you: https://ashesofcreation.wiki/Death_penalties
    This link may help you: https://ashesofcreation.wiki/


    giphy-downsized-large.gif?cid=b603632fp2svffcmdi83yynpfpexo413mpb1qzxnh3cei0nx&ep=v1_gifs_gifId&rid=giphy-downsized-large.gif&ct=s
Sign In or Register to comment.