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.
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.
PK Corruption in Ashes of Creation: Should You Fight Back or Not?
XanderSlaze
Member, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
Hey everyone!
I've been diving into the PvP mechanics in Ashes of Creation and wanted to get your thoughts on dealing with Player Killers (PKs) or unprovoked PvP. Specifically, is it better to fight back or just let them kill you? Here’s what I’ve learned about the corruption system and the outcomes of each choice. One surprising thing I discovered is that if you fight back and die, the PK won’t get corruption points.
Your Options When Attacked:
Fight Back:
Don’t Fight Back:
What Happens to Corrupted Players:
So, what will you do? Does your decision depend on whether you have valuable items you don’t want to lose? Do you fight back to avoid giving the PK more corruption points, or do you let them kill you to ensure they get penalized? I’d love to hear your strategies and thoughts on this!
I've been diving into the PvP mechanics in Ashes of Creation and wanted to get your thoughts on dealing with Player Killers (PKs) or unprovoked PvP. Specifically, is it better to fight back or just let them kill you? Here’s what I’ve learned about the corruption system and the outcomes of each choice. One surprising thing I discovered is that if you fight back and die, the PK won’t get corruption points.
Your Options When Attacked:
Fight Back:
- You might win and fend off the attacker.
- If you die while fighting, the PK doesn’t get corruption points since it’s a fair fight.
- Fighting back can help you get better at PvP.
- You will drop less resources if you die.
Don’t Fight Back:
- The PK gets corruption points for killing you.
- You will drop more resources if you die.
- Your gear might take a durability hit.
What Happens to Corrupted Players:
- They can’t go into towns without getting attacked by guards.
- They can't interact with NPCs.
- They’re also attacked by patrolling guards out in the world.
- They risk losing more items and experience when they die.
- The more corrupted they are, the worse the penalties get.
- They can be tracked by bounty hunters
So, what will you do? Does your decision depend on whether you have valuable items you don’t want to lose? Do you fight back to avoid giving the PK more corruption points, or do you let them kill you to ensure they get penalized? I’d love to hear your strategies and thoughts on this!
0
Comments
I personally will always be fighting back, because something to note is whether you are a none-combatant or a combatant you will potentially drop materials. If I recall, if you are none-combatant you actually drop more than if you were a combatant, basically making it so it's better to try fight back. I could be mistaken tho.
Besides, I'd rather not deal with the death penalty and XP loss when I might win anyway.
If you don't fight back the AOE and CC if I recall won't hit none combatants anyway, I remember something on the wiki mentioned that they wanted to avoid stunning players on a pull for combat. So you'd be able to just run off or hop on your mount assuming they don't have something to dismount you.
Wrong.While you are green, you cant be CC-ed. This means you are the first one who can CC the attacker. Which i would say will compensate for the first hit he did.
Conclusion: to win this sudden attack, the defender must have superior to the attacker skills. With equal skills the victim will loose in most cases.
So either the game mechanics should implement something to make the chances more fair. Otherwise, to surrender and not going to combatant is preferred strategy in most cases
Why not dragging others into the Chaos as well ?
✓ Occasional Roleplayer
✓ Kinda starting to look for a Guild right now. (German)
As it is I would likely have an alt bounty hunter or guildy bounty hunter just convey the whereabouts of my killer, and go kill them to get 4x the reward as opposed to fighting back right then and there. And as far as PKing, the current set up seems so punishing for just even a single PK that I would rather use work-arounds like training mobs around to kill players encroaching on areas I am gathering as opposed to outright engaging and risking corruption.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1OhNVD43t_4qUGuR1gG8cv5VXIlyKTopw0MbD7tMVVF8/edit?usp=sharing
"Potentially saves time" is also a pro on the victim's side if they fight back. I've saved way more gameplay time by fighting back and securing my spot than by dying, rebuffing, coming back to the same spot, trying to attack the PK (who could potentially no longer even be a PKer), and either try to outfarm him or pull mobs onto him.
And if you prove through pvp that the attacker is weaker than you - the chance of them coming back is way lower than you just dying to him in the hopes of him remaining a PKer when you manage to come back.
Also, don't forget that quite a lot of PKing for spots will be happening in group vs group fights, which would make it even harder to easily kill the PKer.
The list is purely measuring the risk vs reward of gaining corruption, mostly to try to measure the worth of risking any PK, griefing or not.
Killing bots is definitely a good one I will add. Saving time I dont see applying to gaining corruption in any way?
PKing would remove all of that time wasting. Especially in a group setting. And dying as a Red is never assured either, so half of the cons depend on a possibility rather than a 100% situation. And the probability of death highly depends on the final balancing of the system and the location where the PK happened.
Yes but this is a measurement of risking corruption being gained, not engaging in PvP in general. And the time you are saying that you are saving is negated by the time it would take to remove the corruption. I'll add them both to the list
What is funnier ?
I am not kidding or trolling here. It depends on the Circumstances. But what would get me the bigger Laugh out of it ? No matter if i fight back or let my Attackers slaughter me like a good atta-boy (lol),
any sane Player should always choose the more entertaining and funny Experience. Nobody sane plays a VideoGame to get bored or annoyed after all.
What would get me the craziest Laugh, possibly even dragging my Gankers into the Chaos as well ?
✓ Occasional Roleplayer
✓ Kinda starting to look for a Guild right now. (German)
If the PK was for a mobless location - yeah, the situation is completely different. But both still depend on your ultimate goal. If you wanted to get the resource and PKing let you get it - you still saved time, because both searching for another resource spawn and trying to bring mobs to the mobless location would've taken longer.
Removing corruption wouldn't go towards the goal's timer calculation, because it happens after the fact, rather than before it.
potentially, but if its an area with high traffic youd likely have to go somewhere less populated to remove your corruption and return, in which case you will likely have to do it again. Its too niche of a situation to really call a benefit without also considering the negative. I tossed them on the list regardless, but they cancel each other out.
This assumption also depends on gameplay loops in Ashes, of which we know nothing, so I might be completely incorrect here. We'll have to see.
Oh I agree, but like I said, this spreadsheet is purely to weigh against whether or not its worth to PK at all. For me personally it isn't as it is currently explained with the information we are given. I could go into more detail and actually score each individual thing listed based on severity but at that point there would likely be a MASSIVE disparity in the scoring, and I didn't want to seem biased in doing so. We will see how it ends up after enough testing.
Group Dynamics and Guild Support: The decision to fight or avoid PKs can significantly change if you're with a group or guild. Being in a group can provide a tactical advantage, making it riskier for PKs to engage. Guild alliances can also offer protection and act as a deterrent.
Bounty Hunter Mechanic: The corruption system makes PKs susceptible to bounty hunters. Choosing not to fight and allowing the PK to accumulate corruption points could strategically invite bounty hunters to target them, serving as a form of indirect retaliation. This can deter PKs from further aggressive behavior.
Resource Protection: In high-value areas or during events where rare resources are at stake, players might be more inclined to fight to protect these valuable assets. The risk of losing rare items might push players to confront PKs despite the potential danger.
Impact on Future PK Behavior: The corruption system not only penalizes current actions but may also influence future behaviors. Highly corrupted players might adopt a more cautious approach in subsequent interactions, aware of the heightened risks.
Dynamic PvP Mechanics: The game's evolving mechanics mean that strategies may shift over time. Intrepid Studios might introduce updates or balance changes affecting corruption or PvP, which could alter the decision-making process for dealing with PKs.
xcept you cant be CCed by players unless ur a combatant or corrupted last i checked, which means u get the first oppotunity to CC if u fight back and if they used a skill that had a CC tied to it while attacking initially thats now on CD for them.
You lose more droppable items when you are not fighting back have item repairs to pay for, a stat debuff to deal with and collect the lost items again , but the attacker gets corruption which is a big(ger?) debt to pay off.
The most significant variable here is the amount of droppable items in your inventory. The fewer items you have, the more "viable" the option of just letting them kill you becomes as your losses will be lower with fewer items lost.
This can be further adjusted / "min maxed" by having a lower quality set of gear thats cheaper to repair. You would put that on when you are going for a farming session.
This brings me to a sidenote: Steven has said that just like with the limited spaces in the action bar, that the intent here is to force players to make a conscious choice as to what skills they want to have prepared when going into the wilderness and he wants us to select those based on what we are setting out to do. I think the same could be applied to gear.
If I'm planning on gathering low level mats (let's say "rocks") in a low level area populated with mobs I can easily defeat with my fists while wearing a tattered robe, an adversary will waste little of my time by defeating my character and looting some rocks.
As the rarity and risk rises I'll be more likely to be better armed and armored as well as gathering with a group. Therefor an attacker can expect more resistance in higher level areas where rare mats can be found.
I am fully expecting the equivalent of WoW's Devilsaur Mafia in AoC.
If you don’t have anything particularly valuable, or you have buddies nearby ready to get immediate vengeance, you could let them PK while you’re still Green and then they suffer double the consequences you did, and you/your group recover most if not all of your materials anyway.
All signs point to punch back.
It is guaranteed that the killer will turn red
Will you think twice if there are two of them? Keep in mind that if you fight back you will be flagged to the second player and it will straight up be a 2v1.
What about if there are 3 of them?
There are so many more ways to give incentive to fight back, but making you an open target for the world to gank you with ease is not working towards that end.
Well no, the situation has changed then. I should have added context that I would always fight back if it just remains that one person attacking me (I'd rather not get the death penelty, seen as being a combatant death penelty is better than a none combatant death penelty), if its 2,3,4 or more etc. Then the only option is to retreat as that's almost certain death unless they are noobs, then alert the guildies to see who's near by to help or just get away in general.
All depends on the situation is suppose as most of the time I'll probably in a full or close to full group as apposed to being on my own, if I'm with others then fighting back against multiple is an option. If I'm not then retreat or try using the Mobs to my advantage if I have the skills to do so, then that could turn the tables. Entirely unlikely and probably just retreat but still a possibility.