Corruption system and getting "the jump" in wpvp

Otr

blat wrote: »

Otr wrote: »

I seen Steven describing the corruption as a bad thing but also as a thrilling experience in the context of bounty hunter trying to catch the corrupted player before that manages to clear the corruption.
So for both red and BH, this can be a thrilling experience.
Your system prevents that.

It doesn't, at all.

For you no, that's why you invent a new flagging system to protect you from the corruption.
Yet that is part of the risk and you cannot escape the risk in AoC as long as Steven keeps his word the design pillar.

blat wrote: »

Otr wrote: »

You just want a different game and you think you can make it happen 3 months before Alpha 2 by bringing a parallel flagging system and incentivizing to players to use it.

I really don't. It was a good faith discussion, assume what you like.

Otr wrote: »

What if everyone will switch to your system? Then throw away the other one?

Yet again I repeat, the suggestion was a small opt-in addition to the existing corruption system. A simple option to pre-flag as combatant, is all.

Any thread that goes anywhere near "PvX"... be warned!

I seen before the "small change" argument with a big impact.
You simply don't care and you want your game mechanic.
But you will not get it because all players are the same, by default green and for a short time purple.
Remains to be seen how often we see reds. Maybe quite often, if their guild helps them.

Dygz

blat wrote: »

If that's a "primary reason" then I really couldn't be less convinced.

Convinced of what?

CROW3

@blat - just to be clear (cause there are 12 pages I skimmed), are you arguing for the current corruption system with the option to remain perma-purple?

If, so - I'd back that. My long standing perspective on Ashes is that you give consent to be attacked upon login, being perma-purple is just an extension of that agreement. I'm open to modifying the drop penalty though for folks that choose this option.

Ludullu

CROW3 wrote: »

If, so - I'd back that. My long standing perspective on Ashes is that you give consent to be attacked upon login, being perma-purple is just an extension of that agreement. I'm open to modifying the drop penalty though for folks that choose this option.

I'm assuming making the drop penalty lower, cause you'd be presumably dying more often, right?

So I'm curious to see your opinion on it. What about WARS... The penalty is already pre-lowered, the pvp flag doesn't go away during it and the people on both sides of the flag are all too happy to kill each other over and over again

CROW3

NiKr wrote: »

I'm assuming making the drop penalty lower, cause you'd be presumably dying more often, right?

So I'm curious to see your opinion on it. What about WARS... The penalty is already pre-lowered, the pvp flag doesn't go away during it and the people on both sides of the flag are all too happy to kill each other over and over again

Actually, my first thought was to raise the death penalty. Perma-purple is a true commitment to owpvp, so I'd want it to walk the walk. It might also sway players away from attacking greens because they might be able to get the same loot % from a perma-flag player without the threat of corruption. The added risk being that you're fighting someone who is probably quite skilled and may pose a greater chance of you dying.

I don't think I'd feel any additional changes to node wars, or other pvp-centric phases would be necessary.

Ludullu

CROW3 wrote: »

Actually, my first thought was to raise the death penalty. Perma-purple is a true commitment to owpvp, so I'd want it to walk the walk. It might also sway players away from attacking greens because they might be able to get the same loot % from a perma-flag player without the threat of corruption. The added risk being that you're fighting someone who is probably quite skilled and may pose a greater chance of you dying.

That's an interesting idea. Though I'd imagine we'd need a new color for the perma-flagged people, otherwise they wouldn't be pulling as many hits away from the greens. But then this new color would immediately attract the abusers that I mentioned here before.

Though having higher penalties would definitely detract any potential megaguilds that would be trying to use the xp boost (if you support that part of the suggestion that is). Probably not stop them outright, but if there's even a slight opposition here and there, the chance to lose too much stuff would probably be too high to be optimal.

CROW3

NiKr wrote: »

That's an interesting idea. Though I'd imagine we'd need a new color for the perma-flagged people, otherwise they wouldn't be pulling as many hits away from the greens. But then this new color would immediately attract the abusers that I mentioned here before.

Though having higher penalties would definitely detract any potential megaguilds that would be trying to use the xp boost (if you support that part of the suggestion that is). Probably not stop them outright, but if there's even a slight opposition here and there, the chance to lose too much stuff would probably be too high to be optimal.

idk - you could probably keep the same colors, and now it adds an additional unknown to target selection. All things being equal you have a 100% chance to gain corruption with a green to get 100% of the loot, and a 0% chance of corruption for a purple with 50% chance of 100% loot.

The question would be whether there is any additional benefit to perma-flag beyond the philosophical commitment to owpvp (or not wanting to 'flag up' as a green)?

Ludullu

CROW3 wrote: »

idk - you could probably keep the same colors, and now it adds an additional unknown to target selection. All things being equal you have a 100% chance to gain corruption with a green to get 100% of the loot, and a 0% chance of corruption for a purple with 50% chance of 100% loot

Lootboxesssss! As an avid Genshin enjoyer I'm all for it

blat

CROW3 wrote: »

@blat - just to be clear (cause there are 12 pages I skimmed), are you arguing for the current corruption system with the option to remain perma-purple?

If, so - I'd back that. My long standing perspective on Ashes is that you give consent to be attacked upon login, being perma-purple is just an extension of that agreement. I'm open to modifying the drop penalty though for folks that choose this option.

That's exactly right. It's simply an early opt-in to the existing combatant state.

The thread context was initially about certain scenarios where the existing system "gets in the way" of purer wpvp. IE: where getting the jump, taking situational advantage can be punished by using (exploiting) corruption as a threat.

The suggestion was an attempt to fix that for those willing, without affecting PvEers / those who hate non-consensual PvP.

blat

CROW3 wrote: »

The question would be whether there is any additional benefit to perma-flag beyond the philosophical commitment to owpvp (or not wanting to 'flag up' as a green)?

Increased loot drops are an interesting one.
Whichever way you go with that, there'd need to be an incentive to perma-flag otherwise it would effectively become a sort've niche "hardcore mode" rather than actually achieve what it sets out to (due to low adoption rates even amongst PvPers).

Personally right now I think perma-purples would attract so much extra attention over the course of their character's life that the additional drop penalties wouldn't be necessary, provided a reasonable incentive.
But yeah all details that would be up for discussion.