Ok, then just for my clarity, Diamaht, was that post moreso just 'expressing frustration that it works that way', and not actually meant as an 'appeal to anyone to stop'?
It's not like I like it either, I just have to accept it because I can't change Intrepid. I'm super frustrated at the way decisions seem to be 'made' about all sorts of aspects of Ashes, but accepting that 'misery' is a literal prerequisite for continuing to be here. My friends can't even, so they just don't.
You said 'precedent set', but for me, who felt like this particular 'precedent' was set quite long ago, I just answered as if you were potentially someone who is actually not familiar 'how it works around here' in terms of Intrepid development.
I'm happy to add you to my list of 'disgruntled stoics', sorry about the answer type.
No worries.
If you don't like it either then you shouldn't just accept it. It your job to voice why its a problem.
That's the actual point of open development. Go after them when it's needed. They ask for it.
I feel like Intrepid knows that my opinion is that their entire Corruption system is entirely flawed and needs to be redone and reconsidered from the ground up.
I've posted to that effect many times in the related threads that constantly pop up, so it's probably just 'fatigue'.
And, like you, I know that the main response I can get in discussion a lot of the time is 'but it worked in L2'. Sometimes I can work through that with the poster (NiKr), and sometimes I can't. In general, I'd be happy to just have people that can articulate why precisely they want something instead of [that thing Mag7 does in conversations].
This didn't seem to be that thread type, so yeah, it's my endurance lapsing. No sarc.
how do you know the system is flawed when you dont have all the information about all the other systems and how they interact with each other, and havent been able to do playtests and tweak or change things based on those playtest?
you must have a crystal ball too.
How do you know the system isn't flawed when you dont have all the information about all the other systems and how they interact with each other?
You must have a crystal ball too.
If you think alpha or beta testing is going to show whether the corruption system works as intended, you are mistaken.
He never stated it won't work nor did he state it will work 100% so there is a pretty big difference there. We don't have all the info and testing is needed before we come to confusions it won't work 100%.
Ii doesn't mean we can't have our doubts which is fine and you base that off reasoning with your points. Same way things were mentioned in this thread on both sides defending or against and giving other solutions that could be used.
Again though we don't know everything so we need to be a bit fair in our takes. With alpha 2 hopefully we have a lot more people focused on pvp and actively wanting and seeking it out. So IS can get the information they need.
There are two ways to use the word "opinion". The first is in a subjective manner, where for example you have an opinion on art - there is no right or wrong as to if a painting is good or not. This is not the meaning at play here.
The second is that you can have an opinion on a factual matter, if you either don't have all the facts, or can't make sense of all those facts. If you do have all the facts and can make sense of them, then what you have is a certainty on the matter - you know a thing to be true, you don't have an opinion on it.
Thus, in saying that it was their opinion that the corruption system is flawed, there is an inherent understanding that they are aware they do not have all the facts, and indeed may be wrong when those last facts become known to them.
You say you were simply asking them how they knew - their specific statement was that they did not know, they had an opinion.
Please learn the meaning of words.
0
Options
DygzMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
I'm not sure Ashes can fail.
Steven's got plenty of money.
Ashes will be niche - but unlikely so niche that Steven chooses to shut down all of the servers.
There are two ways to use the word "opinion". The first is in a subjective manner, where for example you have an opinion on art - there is no right or wrong as to if a painting is good or not. This is not the meaning at play here.
The second is that you can have an opinion on a factual matter, if you either don't have all the facts, or can't make sense of all those facts. If you do have all the facts and can make sense of them, then what you have is a certainty on the matter - you know a thing to be true, you don't have an opinion on it.
Thus, in saying that it was their opinion that the corruption system is flawed, there is an inherent understanding that they are aware they do not have all the facts, and indeed may be wrong when those last facts become known to them.
You say you were simply asking them how they knew - their specific statement was that they did not know, they had an opinion.
Please learn the meaning of words.
If one is aware they don't know all the facts then the statement shouldn't be it needs to be redone and it is all flawed.
If I'm looking at a puzzle and I don't understand it and am missing the function of A + B + C. It be a pretty heavily opinion to not know very important details and say it doesn't work scrap it all. Hence its fair to mention a crystal ball as we have not played it ourselves.
No one is saying they can't have an opinion but there is a clear difference in I feel doubt because of this and I'm unsure if this information will change that because of this. To saying this won't work at all and needs to be redone as an opinion.
If one is aware they don't know all the facts then the statement shouldn't be it needs to be redone and it is all flawed.
No, a statement starting out with "my opinion" is inherently stating they don't know all the facts, and more importantly, that they know they don't know all the facts.
What needs to be redone is someone quoting someone else that is saying they have an opinion on a matter, and then asking how they know.
If Azherae ever said they know the system won't work and so should be scrapped, I'd agree with the two of you. However, stating that their opinion was that it won't work and so should be scrapped is inherently stating that they are aware that there is information they are missing, and that this information could alter their opinion.
All of those details are contained within that word "opinion".
That is what an opinion does - it changes as you gain more information on the matter. Right now, their opinion is that the system won't work.
If you think alpha or beta testing is going to show whether the corruption system works as intended, you are mistaken.
Well hopefully we can vet out a lot of the issues. It needs to be focused testing though, I think. We def won't see them by just playing the game.
For example if I want to test out some of the concerns in this thread I can only test it for a short time before I have no choice but to stop and recover from all the corruption. So by default it will be challenging to drill things down.
I'm sure they have plans for this, but I would suggest in A2 having a sort of planned "Gank Week". For a week or so put Npcs in place that can instantly reset corruption so we can do repetitive tests.
Doing things like this still won't show all the kinks that millions of players will discover, but it will help.
Edit: Also, if it's just the devs doing this on their own I think a lot will be missed. Hundreds of devs won't get close to what tens of thousands of testers can discover.
If you think alpha or beta testing is going to show whether the corruption system works as intended, you are mistaken.
Well hopefully we can vet out a lot of the issues. It needs to be focused testing though, I think. We def won't see them by just playing the game.
For example if I want to test out some of the concerns in this thread I can only test it for a short time before I have no choice but to stop and recover from all the corruption. So by default it will be challenging to drill things down.
I'm sure they have plans for this, but I would suggest in A2 having a sort of planned "Gank Week". For a week or so put Npcs in place that can instantly reset corruption so we can do repetitive tests.
Doing things like this still won't show all the kinks that millions of players will discover, but it will help.
Edit: Also, if it's just the devs doing this on their own I think a lot will be missed. Hundreds of devs won't get close to what tens of thousands of testers can discover.
Alpha and beta can test that the system itself functions as it is intended.
Since players aren't actually playing the game for real though, you cant actually test how players will react to it, or interact with it.
Testing phases cant test social aspects of the game.
10 pages later, I still think HP bars should either be removed like in L2, or not have any more details than 3 segments or 3 colors indicating full hp, damaged and low,
I agree.. although there should be indicators as to how damaged a player is and some classes or skills should have a way to tell how damaged a player is I would love to see a wound system that effects speed/deficits to some skills and persepions under 25percent of mana/health..also a sleep eat drink system as well.
Main reason i see for people wanting to see who they are fighting hp wise is for their execution style skills (ie like the ranger one).
This is mainly my own preference but id rather they be stronger but on a higher cooldown to balance out not knowing the hp and being more reliable for dpsing down a player almost dead.
MorashtakMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
edited March 8
Could a "no health bars" mechanic be exploited by a player not interested in PVP? Let's find out;
Scenario:
Player knows the systems and mechanics so well that they can safely keep their HP at ~25%.
They keep their empty bag slots full of useless junk to them (lowest level mats, practically useless to anyone but the lowest level players) only swapping the junk with quest items (assuming quest items are exempt from drop tables).
Attacker unloads and one-shots the player.
Like Charlie Brown on Halloween, the attacker gets a rock (and corruption).
With a minimalist health bar attackers would know how much potential damage to unleash, giving the target a chance to attack back or type "/sit".
Could a "no health bars" mechanic be exploited by a player not interested in PVP? Let's find out;
Scenario:
Player knows the systems and mechanics so well that they can safely keep their HP at ~25%.
They keep their empty bag slots full of useless junk (rocks, etc.) only swapping the junk with quest items (assuming quest items are exempt from drop tables).
Attacker unloads and one-shots the player.
Like Charlie Brown on Halloween, the attacker gets a rock (and corruption).
With a minimalist health bar attackers would know how much potential damage to unleash, giving the target a chance to attack back or type "/sit".
This is not a exploit, the point is to kill the player be it you do it with one attack or multiple.
If you see someone resting and are trying to kill them than you will do so in one shot if they are almost dead.
If the point is to not kill them and attack them constantly to leave thme almost dead so they can't rest and kill mobs or do content and they die. Again that is the system working as intended as you don't know their HP. Making it so less people are likely to do that knowing the effectives.
You are literarily trying to make a argument for things stopping you from trying to keep someone almost dead....
Granted I don't see you defending this take because it is so bad,again it sounds like this is someone you want to do to people. Keep them below 10% hp and you want to make sure you see all their hp when you are doing so.
People out here with this take like "If i can't see their hp I can't keep them almost dead because i don't know if ill go corrupted or not."
I'd expect there to be no one-shots from 25% hp, considering the ttk should be on the longer side (which might've changed recently, but that's up for a long debate).
But even if there are abilities that do that - the attacker deserves the corruption, cause you're only starting the fight with that kind of ability if you don't care for any kind of fair fight or if you're simply trying to PK a person.
0
Options
MorashtakMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
You are literarily trying to make a argument for things stopping you from trying to keep someone almost dead....
Just the opposite - The argument is in favor of the defender; "Attack me and you'll go instantly corrupted."
Any potential attacker should be given some indication on how much damage to initially unleash to avoid such a player keeping themselves at <25% health.
I'd expect there to be no one-shots from 25% hp, considering the ttk should be on the longer side (which might've changed recently, but that's up for a long debate).
But even if there are abilities that do that - the attacker deserves the corruption, cause you're only starting the fight with that kind of ability if you don't care for any kind of fair fight or if you're simply trying to PK a person.
Yep, yep. Can see some players use a low damage attack in an excuse-me,-are-you-interested-in-pvp style. Similar to dropping a flag in WoW.
Others will understand the corruption system down to the granular level and calculate the risk-reward to maximize gains while minimizing downtime caused by corruption. How does a minimalist health bar play in this? Does such a player need to see a health bar to make an informed decision?
You are literarily trying to make a argument for things stopping you from trying to keep someone almost dead....
Just the opposite - The argument is in favor of the defender; "Attack me and you'll go instantly corrupted."
Any potential attacker should be given some indication on how much damage to initially unleash to avoid such a player keeping themselves at <25% health.
I'd expect there to be no one-shots from 25% hp, considering the ttk should be on the longer side (which might've changed recently, but that's up for a long debate).
But even if there are abilities that do that - the attacker deserves the corruption, cause you're only starting the fight with that kind of ability if you don't care for any kind of fair fight or if you're simply trying to PK a person.
Yep, yep. Can see some players use a low damage attack in an excuse-me,-are-you-interested-in-pvp style. Similar to dropping a flag in WoW.
Others will understand the corruption system down to the granular level and calculate the risk-reward to maximize gains while minimizing downtime caused by corruption. How does a minimalist health bar play in this? Does such a player need to see a health bar to make an informed decision?
I'm guessing you have not played any PvP games so you don't understand the point of what we are talking about. We are talking about how plays can avoid being CORRUPTED and still use the PvP system.
If im a pvper not trying to be corrupted and i can use mobs pulls to kill players, a player that is at 25% life is a perfect target for me to do this against. This is why I need to see HP so i can attack a player until i see them on the red line zone where mobs can kill them in 1 or two hits.
The point is to have a fear that the person is almost dead so you are trying to avoid corruption and not trying to finish them off. By making it so you don't see heath bars tied the with heavy corruption system that fear becomes a general feeling when you look at all players.
If you are almost dead you are not going to be running around mobs as they should be killing you quickly. If the point is to kill someone with mobs and they are "faking" resting which doesn't even make sense cause you would just full heal anyway. You drag a train of mobs onto the players resting to get them killed.
This is the issue when people lack actual owpvp experience and don't understand how players act. What you are saying again isn't benefiting anyone and you lack any sound argument on why a person wanting to avoid corruption doesn't seem someone at low hp as a easy target to be killed by mobs.
How does a minimalist health bar play in this? Does such a player need to see a health bar to make an informed decision?
The informed decision would come from knowledge of the game, rather than just seeing a precise value. And only the highly informed should be able to pull off actions like "keeping someone at low hp w/o killing them".
Others should become corrupted and suffer for being low skill or not touch people if they're not sure that their target is at full hp.
The informed decision would come from knowledge of the game, rather than just seeing a precise value. And only the highly informed should be able to pull off actions like "keeping someone at low hp w/o killing them".
Others should become corrupted and suffer for being low skill or not touch people if they're not sure that their target is at full hp.
Yep, yep.
Re-reading thru the thread and seeing health bars and griefing be intertwined, should the following scenario be tested in Alpha 2?
Scenario - No Health Bars:
PlayerA is beating on similar level mobs and their HP fluctuates from 10-100%.
PlayerB comes along and watches the encounters and, through observation, guesses when PlayerA is at their lowest.
PlayerB waits until PlayerA pulls the "last" mob before engaging but doesn't finish PlayerA off, allowing the mob to get the killing blow. (Quite the delicate feat, seems like.)
Scenario - With Health Bars:
(skip step two above) Quick aside - Helps makes the point that a "No Health Bar Ever" out of combat system (excepting party members, of course) could reduce griefing.
PlayerB pulling packs of mobs to PlayerA falls under a similar scenario.
Possible outcomes to ponder:
PlayerA never retaliates (or never gets a chance to)
- Without getting the killing blow, should PlayerB be allowed any gain from this action?
PlayerA retaliates, dealing minimal damage.
- Even though the mob dealt the killing blow, PlayerB did some damage and is entitled to gain?
Can understand how the No Health Bar Ever scenario allows/forces(?) PlayerA to keep their head on a swivel and watch out for other players loitering nearby. Party members can see each others health bars and assist, of course.
Others have suggested that once combat has been initiated minimalistic health bars (no exact numbers) for attackers are shown to all. But only after combat starts, never before. This would seem to help the griefer out should it happen once the first attack happens and not after a retaliation from the defender.
Not sold on health bars during large scale PvP events as allies should be quick to call out healers and other high value targets. If targets are not being called out and marked then health bars won't matter, visible or not.
Attacking someone out in OW is more about getting an advantage (lowering their health for potential pvp or making them burn a skill/mp) in hopes they will attack back after you have whittled them down. The last thing most want to do is PK someone, the goal is to make them flag when you are at max advantage or keep them low enough to let the mobs do the work for you. Seeing hp will make it much more prevalent imo.
PlayerA never retaliates (or never gets a chance to)
- Without getting the killing blow, should PlayerB be allowed any gain from this action?
PlayerA retaliates, dealing minimal damage.
- Even though the mob dealt the killing blow, PlayerB did some damage and is entitled to gain?
Players drop loot regardless of who killed them. The only thing that changes is the amount of that loot. A random person could simply die to a mob w/o any external player action, and then a random passerby can pick up that player's loot.
I agree.. although there should be indicators as to how damaged a player is and some classes or skills should have a way to tell how damaged a player is I would love to see a wound system that effects speed/deficits to some skills and persepions under 25percent of mana/health..also a sleep eat drink system as well.
An indicator.. Hm, what could that be? What about a health bar?
If we hide hp pools we should probably hide class icons, spell effects, weapon types, gear, etc.
I probably wouldn't mix it, as it might be a topic for a different discussion.[/quo9
It's a joke.
The argument for hiding seems to be either based on a perceived skill in knowing hp values and/or the ability to avoid corruption via using mobs. Hiding gear, spells, etc all achieves the same things things as the arguments for hp, so why not hide all of it!
You say its a joke but you are still going it it even though you know the clear connection people are trying to make keeping people at low hp to escape corruption.
Onto your joke points, yes you shouldn't be able to view some ones gear, skills, build, etc by clicking on them.
Should you even be able to see their gear? How about a clown suit skin shown for every player not in your group?
If someone is keeping you at low hp you can either call a friend to help you kill them or simply move to somewhere else. Frankly it isn't going to be as large of an issue as you are making it out to be. That in addition to the negative effect on group combat make hiding hp values a poor design choice.
You are underestimating pvpers, People make montages of doing this. If it is effective expect people to do this constantly.
Going on the assumption you think people won't remove some piece of gear and keep you low is silly. You drop mats on death, that is easy money.
What percentage of open world kills involves the people making montages? These are cherry picked examples of this and hyperbolic in nature. Again this is easily countered by typing in zone chat, "player x camping me, can I get a bounty hunter."
To design your game around hyperbole is an effort in futility.
If we hide hp pools we should probably hide class icons, spell effects, weapon types, gear, etc.
I probably wouldn't mix it, as it might be a topic for a different discussion.[/quo9
It's a joke.
The argument for hiding seems to be either based on a perceived skill in knowing hp values and/or the ability to avoid corruption via using mobs. Hiding gear, spells, etc all achieves the same things things as the arguments for hp, so why not hide all of it!
You say its a joke but you are still going it it even though you know the clear connection people are trying to make keeping people at low hp to escape corruption.
Onto your joke points, yes you shouldn't be able to view some ones gear, skills, build, etc by clicking on them.
Should you even be able to see their gear? How about a clown suit skin shown for every player not in your group?
If someone is keeping you at low hp you can either call a friend to help you kill them or simply move to somewhere else. Frankly it isn't going to be as large of an issue as you are making it out to be. That in addition to the negative effect on group combat make hiding hp values a poor design choice.
You are underestimating pvpers, People make montages of doing this. If it is effective expect people to do this constantly.
Going on the assumption you think people won't remove some piece of gear and keep you low is silly. You drop mats on death, that is easy money.
What percentage of open world kills involves the people making montages? These are cherry picked examples of this and hyperbolic in nature. Again this is easily countered by typing in zone chat, "player x camping me, can I get a bounty hunter."
To design your game around hyperbole is an effort in futility.
You are only confirming you don't understand how pvpers are lol. Videos is the most easy way to show that isn't a niche concept and to show people do it.
You are giving a lot fo feed bac to confirm lack of pvp experience with current games as well. How is a BH going to help when there are no red players for a BH to fight. So you are going to yell in open world and home someone helps you every time they try to feed you to mobs. That is kind of funny.
As i said before ill repeat, feeding people to mobs was common practice, this is not exclusive to making montages it was a meta to reduce karma loss and to make who you were fighting lose money and XP.
This is the thing where people that have not played pvp mmorpgs in like the last 8 years do not understand how players will be and are naïve to the levels that are goings to happen in the game between large guilds and pvp players.
Comments
He never stated it won't work nor did he state it will work 100% so there is a pretty big difference there. We don't have all the info and testing is needed before we come to confusions it won't work 100%.
Ii doesn't mean we can't have our doubts which is fine and you base that off reasoning with your points. Same way things were mentioned in this thread on both sides defending or against and giving other solutions that could be used.
Again though we don't know everything so we need to be a bit fair in our takes. With alpha 2 hopefully we have a lot more people focused on pvp and actively wanting and seeking it out. So IS can get the information they need.
And Azherae never claimed to know it was.
They claimed to have an opinion.
There are two ways to use the word "opinion". The first is in a subjective manner, where for example you have an opinion on art - there is no right or wrong as to if a painting is good or not. This is not the meaning at play here.
The second is that you can have an opinion on a factual matter, if you either don't have all the facts, or can't make sense of all those facts. If you do have all the facts and can make sense of them, then what you have is a certainty on the matter - you know a thing to be true, you don't have an opinion on it.
Thus, in saying that it was their opinion that the corruption system is flawed, there is an inherent understanding that they are aware they do not have all the facts, and indeed may be wrong when those last facts become known to them.
You say you were simply asking them how they knew - their specific statement was that they did not know, they had an opinion.
Please learn the meaning of words.
Steven's got plenty of money.
Ashes will be niche - but unlikely so niche that Steven chooses to shut down all of the servers.
If one is aware they don't know all the facts then the statement shouldn't be it needs to be redone and it is all flawed.
If I'm looking at a puzzle and I don't understand it and am missing the function of A + B + C. It be a pretty heavily opinion to not know very important details and say it doesn't work scrap it all. Hence its fair to mention a crystal ball as we have not played it ourselves.
No one is saying they can't have an opinion but there is a clear difference in I feel doubt because of this and I'm unsure if this information will change that because of this. To saying this won't work at all and needs to be redone as an opinion.
What needs to be redone is someone quoting someone else that is saying they have an opinion on a matter, and then asking how they know.
If Azherae ever said they know the system won't work and so should be scrapped, I'd agree with the two of you. However, stating that their opinion was that it won't work and so should be scrapped is inherently stating that they are aware that there is information they are missing, and that this information could alter their opinion.
All of those details are contained within that word "opinion".
That is what an opinion does - it changes as you gain more information on the matter. Right now, their opinion is that the system won't work.
Well hopefully we can vet out a lot of the issues. It needs to be focused testing though, I think. We def won't see them by just playing the game.
For example if I want to test out some of the concerns in this thread I can only test it for a short time before I have no choice but to stop and recover from all the corruption. So by default it will be challenging to drill things down.
I'm sure they have plans for this, but I would suggest in A2 having a sort of planned "Gank Week". For a week or so put Npcs in place that can instantly reset corruption so we can do repetitive tests.
Doing things like this still won't show all the kinks that millions of players will discover, but it will help.
Edit: Also, if it's just the devs doing this on their own I think a lot will be missed. Hundreds of devs won't get close to what tens of thousands of testers can discover.
Alpha and beta can test that the system itself functions as it is intended.
Since players aren't actually playing the game for real though, you cant actually test how players will react to it, or interact with it.
Testing phases cant test social aspects of the game.
Still the best idea so far.
+ Make HP bars of your guild members visible
+ (Maybe) Make HP bars of players from your alliance visible
This is mainly my own preference but id rather they be stronger but on a higher cooldown to balance out not knowing the hp and being more reliable for dpsing down a player almost dead.
Scenario:
With a minimalist health bar attackers would know how much potential damage to unleash, giving the target a chance to attack back or type "/sit".
This is not a exploit, the point is to kill the player be it you do it with one attack or multiple.
If you see someone resting and are trying to kill them than you will do so in one shot if they are almost dead.
If the point is to not kill them and attack them constantly to leave thme almost dead so they can't rest and kill mobs or do content and they die. Again that is the system working as intended as you don't know their HP. Making it so less people are likely to do that knowing the effectives.
You are literarily trying to make a argument for things stopping you from trying to keep someone almost dead....
Granted I don't see you defending this take because it is so bad,again it sounds like this is someone you want to do to people. Keep them below 10% hp and you want to make sure you see all their hp when you are doing so.
People out here with this take like "If i can't see their hp I can't keep them almost dead because i don't know if ill go corrupted or not."
Everyone else
But even if there are abilities that do that - the attacker deserves the corruption, cause you're only starting the fight with that kind of ability if you don't care for any kind of fair fight or if you're simply trying to PK a person.
Any potential attacker should be given some indication on how much damage to initially unleash to avoid such a player keeping themselves at <25% health.
Yep, yep. Can see some players use a low damage attack in an excuse-me,-are-you-interested-in-pvp style. Similar to dropping a flag in WoW.
Others will understand the corruption system down to the granular level and calculate the risk-reward to maximize gains while minimizing downtime caused by corruption. How does a minimalist health bar play in this? Does such a player need to see a health bar to make an informed decision?
I'm guessing you have not played any PvP games so you don't understand the point of what we are talking about. We are talking about how plays can avoid being CORRUPTED and still use the PvP system.
If im a pvper not trying to be corrupted and i can use mobs pulls to kill players, a player that is at 25% life is a perfect target for me to do this against. This is why I need to see HP so i can attack a player until i see them on the red line zone where mobs can kill them in 1 or two hits.
The point is to have a fear that the person is almost dead so you are trying to avoid corruption and not trying to finish them off. By making it so you don't see heath bars tied the with heavy corruption system that fear becomes a general feeling when you look at all players.
If you are almost dead you are not going to be running around mobs as they should be killing you quickly. If the point is to kill someone with mobs and they are "faking" resting which doesn't even make sense cause you would just full heal anyway. You drag a train of mobs onto the players resting to get them killed.
This is the issue when people lack actual owpvp experience and don't understand how players act. What you are saying again isn't benefiting anyone and you lack any sound argument on why a person wanting to avoid corruption doesn't seem someone at low hp as a easy target to be killed by mobs.
Others should become corrupted and suffer for being low skill or not touch people if they're not sure that their target is at full hp.
I seriously doubt you are innocent.
Re-reading thru the thread and seeing health bars and griefing be intertwined, should the following scenario be tested in Alpha 2?
Scenario - No Health Bars:
Scenario - With Health Bars:
(skip step two above)
Quick aside - Helps makes the point that a "No Health Bar Ever" out of combat system (excepting party members, of course) could reduce griefing.
PlayerB pulling packs of mobs to PlayerA falls under a similar scenario.
Possible outcomes to ponder:
Can understand how the No Health Bar Ever scenario allows/forces(?) PlayerA to keep their head on a swivel and watch out for other players loitering nearby. Party members can see each others health bars and assist, of course.
Others have suggested that once combat has been initiated minimalistic health bars (no exact numbers) for attackers are shown to all. But only after combat starts, never before. This would seem to help the griefer out should it happen once the first attack happens and not after a retaliation from the defender.
Not sold on health bars during large scale PvP events as allies should be quick to call out healers and other high value targets. If targets are not being called out and marked then health bars won't matter, visible or not.
Players drop loot regardless of who killed them. The only thing that changes is the amount of that loot. A random person could simply die to a mob w/o any external player action, and then a random passerby can pick up that player's loot.
An indicator.. Hm, what could that be? What about a health bar?
I can only think of one Reason why People should have a Health Bar visible.
It allows Players to quickly choose the easiest Target with the lowest HP to kill first in a hectic Mass Battle.
But how would Players know ? Characters will not be bleeding and hurt like People would be in Reallife, when they are badly hurt.
Then again, if a Person is almost halfdead, they wouldn't be able to move around quickly anymore. ^.^;"