It's only been specified that healing a Combatant flags you for combat, so I'd assume healing a Non-Combatant doesn't alter your flag state, since you can cast a heal on anyone whenever you want.
This is correct. Healing/buffing a purple player makes you purple. Healing/buffing a red player also makes you purple.
As for sharing corruption, I don't think it should flag anyone but the last-hitter with the Corrupted state, but it should count into the backend tracking of PK score if you assist in a PK so you can't just have a group of PKers slip by with just one dedicated Corruption dump character while the rest have no consequence.
"Corrupted dump character" will suffer from progressive stat dampening and progressively increasing chances and quantity of items he drops upon death.
Also, any group punishment might be an issue when it comes to PUG groups. If one person does it for whatever reason, why should others bear responsibility for that?
If they're buffing/healing the person while they attack a non-combatant, that's an active choice to take part in the PK. Likewise if they were damaging the player but didn't get the last hit, they're contributing.
But if they weren't doing either of those things to facilitate a PK, then I don't see how the system would flag them with a corruption score. Same way you don't become a combatant just by being grouped with one, you have to contribute to the fighting first.
It's only been specified that healing a Combatant flags you for combat, so I'd assume healing a Non-Combatant doesn't alter your flag state, since you can cast a heal on anyone whenever you want.
Thanks for that info. It's what I would think as well.
As for sharing corruption, I don't think it should flag anyone but the last-hitter with the Corrupted state, but it should count into the backend tracking of PK score if you assist in a PK so you can't just have a group of PKers slip by with just one dedicated Corruption dump character while the rest have no consequence.
I tend to agree to a certain extent. I'm not sure how the tracking on the backend would work, but I assume it could.
It makes me think of another question: If the attacker is in a party, would it flag the party for attacking a non combatant that ended up dying.
In this case it would be from a mob they where fighting. But it should apply to either actually. Dying from the mob or from the aggressor. So does the whole party get flagged if in group?
As a rule, no. Just being in combat with them when they die doesn't necessarily qualify as something worth assigning corruption (much less a full flag red) unless they get the last hit, but at certain thresholds it should start factoring in even in the case of a PvE mob getting the last-hit. Ex. If your group did 90% of their hp before a mob smacked them, the lifetime PK score of those involved should definitely go up, but if it was only 5%? If that wasn't the killing blow, they definitely shouldn't get an increased PK score.
As an aside, backend tracking of PK scores is already planned, and is stated that it will have a ramping consequence to future PKing as a deterrence feature.
What I meant by healing the non-aggressor I meant the non-aggressors party healing the non-aggressor. NOT the aggressor healing the non-aggressor. So when the aggressor attacks the non aggressor, and the non aggressors party heals him is what I was talking about.
In another thought that I had in addition, I would make attacking the non aggressor give the aggressor "Soft Corruption". I know that there is no such thing as that, but I have the IDEA of it. Soft corruption in my opinion should take away any leniency for corruption to be applied if the non-aggressor dies. Some people are speculating that sometimes the first kill does not give corruption so this would theoretically take that leniency away.
Some people are speculating that sometimes the first kill does not give corruption so this would theoretically take that leniency away.
To make sure it's clear, there's been no word on this ever being the case. The only reason some people started believing this was because during the ranger showcase the first kill didn't make Steven red.
But in the bard showcase (which is the more recent one) the first kill did in fact make him immediately red. So, as I said at the time, the ranger showcase's build simply had a bug with the corruption system.
Yep, it'll be much better. But it would need to keep its current core pillars to be a better L2, while it definitely won't become a better WoW cause it never aimed to be that.
Oh sure, in several topics and features, that's true.
In any fight. But that wasn't the context of what I said.
So, in a 8 man group (unit) against a 8 man group (unit) - me, as cleric, can heal the other rogue being in that different group unit?
Waiting and interested in your answer
So, in a 8 man group (unit) against a 8 man group (unit) - me, as cleric, can heal the other rogue being in that different group unit?
Yes. Nothing is stopping you from using a heal on another player.
So far this is the only heal that doesn't specify a difference in effect between "allies" and "enemies", but I definitely expect more of them, purely because variety in abilities is good. https://ashesofcreation.wiki/Cleric Divine FlarePlace a targeted area heal on the ground that heals all targets within after several seconds. Total healing is split between all targets hit.[36][37]
https://ashesofcreation.wiki/Player_flagging
Non-combatants who heal, buff, or otherwise interact with combatants or corrupted players will be flagged as combatants.[21][22][23][24]
Players who heal, buff, or otherwise support corrupted players will flag as combatants.[21][22][23][24]
And again, I was talking about this in the context of 2 attackers interacting with a green player that's not flagging up. This green player would be seen as an "ally" by the game, so you'd be able to use even more heals than just Divine Flare.
So, in a 8 man group (unit) against a 8 man group (unit) - me, as cleric, can heal the other rogue being in that different group unit?
Yes. Nothing is stopping you from using a heal on another player.
So you can target an enemy player of that group and get him a single (target) heal?
Please answer this precise question. It's essential. And you know that.
Lot of "target ally" in that cleric spells, hm? But answer my question first, without evading it, please. It makes the discussion childish.
Nobody talks about AoE heals (but even for them the best design would be: Only my group members are healed of course, the rest makes no sense at all), but okay.
And again, I was talking about this in the context of 2 attackers interacting with a green player that's not flagging up. This green player would be seen as an "ally" by the game, so you'd be able to use even more heals than just Divine Flare.
But not me. And you got "factions" in it, so we will go on the ground of that topic now, because two groups are nothing different than two factions, but only smaller.
So you can target an enemy player of that group and get him a single (target) heal?
Please answer this precise question. It's essential. And you know that
After double checking this precise interaction, which was not what I was talking about in the initial thing you responed to - no, you cannot use a single target heal on them, because right now all of those heals have a separation of ally and enemy imbedded into them.
Also, it was you who brought factions into this discussion because you mentioned that WoW's healers couldn't heal enemies (which are only of the opposite faction).
Which simply means that you either didn't understand what kind of situation I was talking about, or you don't understand how the system itself works.
And considering that Ayevee understood me just fine and cleared up what he meant - I'm leaning towards you not understanding the system
I know that already. It was only a rhetorical question. It's obvious. It would make absolutely no sense if that would work and be allowed from the game mechanics.
OF COURSE it's not possible. What the hell are you "double checking"
Also, it was you who brought factions into this discussion
No, that's a lie.
And you really don't know that Ashes doesn't have factions, right?
At this time you were even not aware if I'm talking about instanced pvp, duels or whatever. I only refered to some classes that can heal.
You know what? Search for cross-faction pvp to enlarge your experience a bit.
You alone started with factions, and a faction is nothing more than an enemy grouping. If you have 5 raid-groups in Ashes, so 200 players, you have 5 factions in that fight. Laborious that I've to explain that, but I shouldn't be suprised as plenty of other postings already confirmed.
I know that already. It was only a rhetorical question. It's obvious. It would make absolutely no sense if that would work and be allowed from the game mechanics.
OF COURSE it's not possible. What the hell are you "double checking"
Also, it was you who brought factions into this discussion
No, that's a lie.
And you really don't know that Ashes doesn't have factions, right?
At this time you were even not aware if I'm talking about instanced pvp, duels or whatever. You know what? Search for cross-faction pvp to enlarge your experience a bit.
You alone started with factions, and a faction is nothing more than an enemy grouping. If you have 5 raid-groups in Ashes, so 200 players, you have 5 factions in that fight. Laborious that I've to explain that, but I shouldn't be suprised as plenty of other postings already confirmed.
You came into the discussion of "people attacking a green player in the open world". Brought up WoW in THAT context. And now you're trying to defend yourself by saying "well, you didn't even know if I was talking about instanced pvp".
As I've said already. You seem to not understand how AoC's system will work, or you have went out of your way to misconstrue what I was saying. And Ayevee easily understanding exactly what I meant just goes to show that I'm right in my assumption here.
You came into the discussion of "people attacking a green player in the open world".
I came in asking whether an _enemy player_ can be attacked and healed at the same time. Nothing more, nothing less.
To heal a target-1enemy with an active heal spell in your action bar is not possible in WoW (because of metagroups - factions; but - as mentioned - just learn about cross faction please first, before talking) and not possible in Ashes (because of groups). It's not possible, would be stupid and is completely pointless. And you confirmed that already. Thanks for that.
If you (-> factions) want to compare things, it must be the same comparison (-> groups). That's like "metal" and "MMO", you are not getting your comparions right.
That you evaded the question in between with a placed AoE heal (one ) is not changing that result and fact.
Would you please provide me some heal spells that work like the ONE you mentioned? There are a lot of "target ally" spells (what I'm talking about). Thanks in advance. Or do we - again - talk about expections that prove the rule?
Healing Touch maybe?
Flash Cure? No?
Soothing Glow? So a nice HoT? Hm? Yes?
To heal a target-enemy with an active heal spell in your action bar is not possible in WoW (because of metagroups - factions; but - as mentioned - just learn about cross faction please first, before talking) and not possible in Ashes (because of groups). It's not possible, would be stupid and is completely pointless. And you confirmed that already. Thanks for that.
If you (-> factions) want to compare things, it must be the same comparison (-> groups). That's like "metal" and "MMO", you are not getting your comparions right.
That you evaded the question in between with a placed AoE heal (one ) is not changing that result and fact.
Would you please provide me some heal spells that work like the ONE you mentioned? There are a lot of "target ally" spells (what I'm talking about). Thanks in advance. Or do we - again - talk about expections that prove the rule?
Healing Touch maybe?
Flash Cure? No?
Soothing Glow? So a nice HoT? Hm? Yes?
You keep thinking that this is WoW, and I keep telling you this is L2. But you refuse to listen.
Again incorrect and a lie. You don't understand due to a lack of experience. It's quite simple. WoW was just an example, I've already mentioned that several times to you in this thread an others. It's common MMO pvp behaviour, that you cannot heal your target-enemy, because it makes no sense.
You still lack providing me examples, spells, facts.
You are incorrect and you know it but refuse to accept it. That's childish. That's exactly the players I dont want in a MMO. And I'm not alone with this opinion and sooner or later you will understand this. Release will come, sometime, hopefully.
You keep thinking that this is WoW, and I keep telling you this is L2. But you refuse to listen.
Again incorrect and a lie. You don't understand due to a lack of experience. It's quite simple. WoW was just an example, I've already mentioned that several times to you in this thread an others. It's common MMO pvp behaviour, that you cannot heal your target-enemy, because it makes no sense.
You still lack providing me examples, spells, facts.
You are incorrect and you know it but refuse to accept it. That's childish. That's exactly the players I dont want in a MMO. And I'm not alone with this opinion and sooner or later you will understand this. Release will come, sometime, hopefully.
There was one game that I know of that you could heal your enemy or even boss's. In UO you could do this. The reason for healing the boss is because when you raid a champ spawn and take over, you need to get the boss back to full health. you can wait for the boss to heal of course but who wants to wait when people are coming back to kill you. But you need to heal the boss back to 100% because of looting rights. If you do not heal the boss then the people previously that you raided would get some looting rights. I just wanted to share this example is all.
edit: Also the reason you could res/heal your enemy is because you can be a nice guy after the battle and not a dick.
There was one game that I know of that you could heal your enemy or even boss's. In UO you could do this. The reason for healing the boss is because when you raid a champ spawn and take over, you need to get the boss back to full health. you can wait for the boss to heal of course but who wants to wait when people are coming back to kill you. But you need to heal the boss back to 100% because of looting rights. If you do not heal the boss then the people previously that you raided would get some looting rights. I just wanted to share this example is all.
Healing a NPC is something completely different. Also in mechanics of other MMOs, not only UO.
This has nothing to do with the current "conversion" I have with our L2 cultist.
1
Ayeveegaming1Member, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
There was one game that I know of that you could heal your enemy or even boss's. In UO you could do this. The reason for healing the boss is because when you raid a champ spawn and take over, you need to get the boss back to full health. you can wait for the boss to heal of course but who wants to wait when people are coming back to kill you. But you need to heal the boss back to 100% because of looting rights. If you do not heal the boss then the people previously that you raided would get some looting rights. I just wanted to share this example is all.
Healing a NPC is something completely different. Also in mechanics of other MMOs, not only UO.
This has nothing to do with the current "conversion" I have with our L2 cultist.
Yes, I understand. I was editing to add more info as you posted this.
I already did. Watch the time of the video that I posted
No, not really. Answer my questions, please. Don't evade my questions with no answers.
I want to learn from your experience, so please provide the answers to me.
Here they are again for you: - Are those players in a group at this time?
- Would you please explain "target ally" to me?
- Is Bucky targeted by Steven?
Additionally still missing: - Would you please provide me some heal spells that work like the ONE you mentioned?
Again incorrect and a lie. You don't understand due to a lack of experience. It's quite simple. WoW was just an example, I've already mentioned that several times to you in this thread an others. It's common MMO pvp behaviour, that you cannot heal your target-enemy, because it makes no sense.
You still lack providing me examples, spells, facts.
You are incorrect and you know it but refuse to accept it. That's childish. That's exactly the players I dont want in a MMO. And I'm not alone with this opinion and sooner or later you will understand this. Release will come, sometime, hopefully.
This has already aged like spoiled milk, even though it was posted after the thing that spoiled the milk
There was one game that I know of that you could heal your enemy or even boss's. In UO you could do this. The reason for healing the boss is because when you raid a champ spawn and take over, you need to get the boss back to full health. you can wait for the boss to heal of course but who wants to wait when people are coming back to kill you. But you need to heal the boss back to 100% because of looting rights. If you do not heal the boss then the people previously that you raided would get some looting rights. I just wanted to share this example is all.
L2 had this function as well. Steven disliked the ability to heal bosses and removed it. But he kept the ability to heal any non-combatant.
This has already aged like spoiled milk, even though it was posted after the thing that spoiled the milk
For sure not No answers are just more confirmation. So do yourself a favour and answer them and provide facts.
Here they are again for you: - Are those players in a group at this time?
- Would you please explain "target ally" to me?
- Is Bucky targeted by Steven?
Additionally still missing: - Would you please provide me some heal spells that work like the ONE you mentioned?
No, not really. Answer my questions, please. Don't evade my questions with no answers.
I want to learn from your experience, so please provide the answers to me.
Here they are again for you:
- Are those players in a group at this time?
- Would you please explain "target ally" to me?
- Is Bucky targeted by Steven?
https://ashesofcreation.wiki/Cleric
Wings of Salvation Wings of Salvation.png Sprout phoenix-like wings and leap to target ally, then grant a small amount of temporary health to that target on arrival.[60][61] An ally is defined as any non-combatant player or non-mob NPC.[62]
An ally is defined as any non-combatant player or non-mob NPC.
An ally is defined as any non-combatant player or non-mob NPC.
AN ALLY IS DEFINED AS ANY NON-COMBATANT PLAYER OR NON-MOB NPC.
ALLY = ANY (I REPEAT, ANY) NON-COMBATANT PLAYER
Is that enough for you? Is that clear enough of an answer?
Yes! The WoW comparion (that started) was talking about a pvp server, so pvp (active combatant) players "fighthing" each other. You read that for sure. This was replied with faction input from your side, taking the conversion into "group vs group" (only in different scale).
I talked about enemy player.
You can attack and heal an _enemy player_ at the same time?
That means two combatants are actively fighting each other. No other scenario was meant FROM ME.
In this scenario you cannot heal your enemy. So entire conversation I was talking about is fine.
To attack AND heal a non-combatant at the same time moreover is bad design and nonsense, and leads to disadvantages for the attacked (and healed) player. There is no current mechanic in the game that avoids this situation? Why is it allowed than?
What happens if this attacked (and healed) non-combatant player attacks back? He is combatant then, right? Can he still be healed from that bad cleric harassing him?
Why is a non-combatant player an "ally" but not an "enemy"? Talking about competion and all-pvp the whole day but than all other players are allies?
What's the workflow if a corrupted player is involved (as the one being attacked and healed) or the one doing the heals?
Yes! The WoW comparion started was talking about a pvp server, so combatant players fighthing each other. This was replied with faction input from your side, taking the conversion into "group vs group" (only in different scale).
I replied about factions because that's what WoW is to me and what it had been for over a decade - horde vs alliance, so they're free to murder each other, which is why you immediately thought about a random green person as "an enemy". So I was ultimately correct in perceiving your mention of WoW as "the other player is my enemy, cause we're in different factions".
And if WoW doesn't allow you to heal someone from your own faction - holy fuck that's a shitty design. I believe that WoW wouldn't have that kind of shitty design, which is why I immediately thought that you were talking about different factions. And in that specific context I reiterated that "greens are not an enemy".
To attack AND heal a non-combatant at the same time moreover is bad design and nonsense, and leads to disadvantages for the attacked (and healed) player.
My question was literally about 2 people doing this to one person. One would be attacking and the other healing, if needed. Also, where exactly did I say this would be happening at the same exact moment? I explicitly said that the victim would be healed if the harassers thought they might get corrupted if the victim wasn't healed.
What happens if this attacked (and healed) non-combatant player attacks back? He is combatant then, right? Can he still be healed from that bad cleric harassing him?
We don't have concrete info, but I'd imagine that it's gonna be seen as an "enemy".
But that doesn't matter for the context of attacking a non-combatant and corruption that might result from that.
Why is a non-combatant player an "ally" but not an "enemy"? Talking about competion and all-pvp the whole day but than all other players are allies?
Because this is not a faction-based game, so you don't have default enemies, unless you both agree to be each other's enemies (either by wardeccing or by flagging up).
Competition starts when both sides agree to compete. When one side refuses - that's where PKing can happen, if the side that agreed is too weak to achieve their goal w/o resorting to PKing.
What's the workflow if a corrupted player is involved (as the one being attacked and healed) or the one doing the heals?
I already told you this https://ashesofcreation.wiki/Player_flagging Non-combatants who heal, buff, or otherwise interact with combatants or corrupted players will be flagged as combatants.[21][22][23][24]
And the "ally" nomenclature implies that this combatant or corrupted player needs to be in your party, for you to be able to heal them.
A corrupted healer has no impact on the heals, because being corrupted doesn't mean that non-combatants are not your allies (in the eyes of the system that is), even though they'll most likely all attack you. But a corrupted healer should be free to heal any green player w/o any problems.
We don't have concrete info, but I'd imagine that it's gonna be seen as an "enemy".
That was the scenario I was in / talking about. Precisly only this and "at the same time"
You can attack and heal an _enemy player_ at the same time?
So, if I'm talking about an enemy player and you answer with an ally/non-combatant...
Also, where exactly did I say this would be happening at the same exact moment?
Maybe you not, but ME. Read my quote. I wrote it exactly like this. This is the entire scenario we are talking about. Combatants fighting and healing each other. And this is still pointless and nonsense and will not be possible or implemented in the future.
Why is a non-combatant player an "ally" but not an "enemy"? Talking about competion and all-pvp the whole day but than all other players are allies?
Because this is not a faction-based game, so you don't have default enemies,
This makes no sense for me in the definition in a so called pvp game. Firstly, everybody is an enemy. For me the definition is weird.
Non-combatants who heal, buff, or otherwise interact with combatants or corrupted players will be flagged as combatants.
As mentioned, that was the scenario I was in and talking about entirely.
And the "ally" nomenclature implies that this combatant or corrupted player needs to be in your party, for you to be able to heal them.
Which is why I was focussed on "ally" and "groups" and referred to that in the video (where a group of three players was shown and Steven healed the targeted Bucky).
A corrupted healer has no impact on the heals, because being corrupted doesn't mean that non-combatants are not your allies (in the eyes of the system that is), even though they'll most likely all attack you. But a corrupted healer should be free to heal any green player w/o any problems.
Not sure if I should find this crazy or fine, but it's already late, so maybe I know tomorrow.
So, I was right on the other point as well. You misunderstood what I was talking about. Started talking about not being able to heal enemies, while I only talked about healing non-combatants, and then you started telling me that I'm wrong all the while you were arguing against your own misunderstanding.
Well, at least I'm glad to be right in the end
As for not understanding what an enemy and an ally is in a factionless game - that just goes to show that you do not have the proper experience to understand how and why Ashes is designed this way. You base your entire approach to the situation on WoW-like designs where there's always a predetermined enemy and everyone else is untouchable because they're in your default faction.
L2 did not work like that and Steven copied its design. And even faction-having AA let you attack people of your own faction, so had you played the other "non-dead" Steven's inspiration - you would've understood the design much better.
This is one of the reasons why us L2 players keep arguing for this design, because people who've never played with it simply don't understand how it works. But we do. And we liked it. And we want Ashes to have it as well, because it's a great design that leads to much deeper inter-player interactions than just "there's dev-dictated enemies and everyone else who I can do nothing about".
So, I was right on the other point as well. You misunderstood what I was talking about. Started talking about not being able to heal enemies, while I only talked about healing non-combatants, and then you started telling me that I'm wrong all the while you were arguing against your own misunderstanding.
I see it completely different, because I clearly talked about _enemy_ players attacking and healing at the same time. This scenario cannout be misunderstood. Its clearly stated with both aspects: enemy and same time.
It's not my fault that you are not using this scenario that I've stated (two combatants fighting each other) but something else. You would have had the right to answer to THIS scenario I was talking to you to do a conversion about the same situation, and that was: Enemy players attacking and healing each other at the same time
Your simple answer should have been: This is not possible. As you confirmed already above.
So I'm glad to be right in the end (and between) when talking about "enemys attacking and healing each other at the same time." - And I was never talking about something different - and that's why I brought in WoW (or other MMOs), because of exactly THIS scenario - and this is the same in Ashes so I'm fully right here.
Well, at least I'm glad to be right in the end
Not really, see above
because it's a great design that leads to much deeper inter-player interactions
And follow up issues leading to workarounds over workounds over next weird workarounds and "designs". Sometimes just based on doubtufl base decisions.
I see it completely different, because I clearly talked about _enemy_ players attacking and healing at the same time. This scenario cannout be misunderstood. Its clearly stated with both aspects: enemy and same time.
It's not my fault that you are not using this scenario that I've stated (two combatants fighting each other) but something else. You would have had the right to answer to THIS scenario I was talking to you to do a conversion about the same situation, and that was: Enemy players attacking and healing each other at the same time
You quoted me first and asked a question in relation to what I was talking about.
I thought you were asking a question in the context of what I was talking about, where healing the victim is as easy as using a skill, which is why I memed the answer and didn't pay attention to the "enemy" part of the comment, cause in the context it could be seen as "attackers see the victim as the enemy" kind of deal.
Trying to discuss what's an enemy and what's an ally wasn't even on my mind at the time, because to me the answer is super obvious, within the context that I was talking about.
You saw my initial question only through the window of WoW-like design, which is why you immediately thought that only "an enemy" could be attacked. And in a wow-like design, if they're an enemy - well, shit, you can't heal an ENEMY. So you simply couldn't comprehend how the 2 actions could be happening to the same person.
You then said that I didn't understand your high and might point of 15 mmo experience (none of which apparently had the same design as the one that Ashes has, which makes all of that experience useless for the context of my question) and we went into a downward spiral of talking about a completely different topic than the one you quoted.
I was definitely wrong in this post, which I later corrected after double-checking the info on how exactly Ashes treats non-combatants
But my main point of "greens can be healed and attacked in order to harass them" was still correct. And all throughout this exchange I kept reiterating my initial question to keep the context same, but you obviously didn't care about that context from the start (either by choice or due to the wow-brainrot-driven misunderstanding).
I thought you were asking a question in the context of what I was talking about, where healing the victim is as easy as using a skill, which is why I memed the answer and didn't pay attention to the "enemy" part of the comment
This started the misunderstanding, unfortunately.
Trying to discuss what's an enemy and what's an ally wasn't even on my mind at the time, because to me the answer is super obvious,
And that explains my "LOL" and Smiley - because also for me that was just unbelievable. No MMO design would be that shitty. It makes no sense.
Up from this we started to insist on .. something.
I press my hand towards your hand, if you still want to take it.
I excuse for being impolite and offensive to you. It was a huge misunderstanding.
I thank you for providing me some insights to Ashes designs I'm not yet so familiar like you - but I want to learn, because I still will give Ashes a try, although I don't like all design decisions and content offers.
I've talked about combatant vs combatant - of cousre or "what else" (from my perspective).
Comments
What I meant by healing the non-aggressor I meant the non-aggressors party healing the non-aggressor. NOT the aggressor healing the non-aggressor. So when the aggressor attacks the non aggressor, and the non aggressors party heals him is what I was talking about.
In another thought that I had in addition, I would make attacking the non aggressor give the aggressor "Soft Corruption". I know that there is no such thing as that, but I have the IDEA of it. Soft corruption in my opinion should take away any leniency for corruption to be applied if the non-aggressor dies. Some people are speculating that sometimes the first kill does not give corruption so this would theoretically take that leniency away.
But in the bard showcase (which is the more recent one) the first kill did in fact make him immediately red. So, as I said at the time, the ranger showcase's build simply had a bug with the corruption system.
In group vs group fights?
Screaming, alright. Good mirror about the behaviour that will be transfered form L2 players to Ashes. What a shame.
Discussion closed from my side.
Health bars: Yes, defenitley needed, as indication or precisley ofc.
In any fight. But that wasn't the context of what I said.
So, in a 8 man group (unit) against a 8 man group (unit) - me, as cleric, can heal the other rogue being in that different group unit?
Waiting and interested in your answer
So far this is the only heal that doesn't specify a difference in effect between "allies" and "enemies", but I definitely expect more of them, purely because variety in abilities is good.
https://ashesofcreation.wiki/Cleric
Divine Flare Place a targeted area heal on the ground that heals all targets within after several seconds. Total healing is split between all targets hit.[36][37]
https://ashesofcreation.wiki/Player_flagging
Non-combatants who heal, buff, or otherwise interact with combatants or corrupted players will be flagged as combatants.[21][22][23][24]
Players who heal, buff, or otherwise support corrupted players will flag as combatants.[21][22][23][24]
And again, I was talking about this in the context of 2 attackers interacting with a green player that's not flagging up. This green player would be seen as an "ally" by the game, so you'd be able to use even more heals than just Divine Flare.
Please answer this precise question. It's essential. And you know that.
Lot of "target ally" in that cleric spells, hm? But answer my question first, without evading it, please. It makes the discussion childish.
Nobody talks about AoE heals (but even for them the best design would be: Only my group members are healed of course, the rest makes no sense at all), but okay.
But not me. And you got "factions" in it, so we will go on the ground of that topic now, because two groups are nothing different than two factions, but only smaller.
Also, it was you who brought factions into this discussion because you mentioned that WoW's healers couldn't heal enemies (which are only of the opposite faction).
Which simply means that you either didn't understand what kind of situation I was talking about, or you don't understand how the system itself works.
And considering that Ayevee understood me just fine and cleared up what he meant - I'm leaning towards you not understanding the system
OF COURSE it's not possible. What the hell are you "double checking"
No, that's a lie.
At this time you were even not aware if I'm talking about instanced pvp, duels or whatever. I only refered to some classes that can heal.
You know what? Search for cross-faction pvp to enlarge your experience a bit.
You alone started with factions, and a faction is nothing more than an enemy grouping. If you have 5 raid-groups in Ashes, so 200 players, you have 5 factions in that fight. Laborious that I've to explain that, but I shouldn't be suprised as plenty of other postings already confirmed.
As I've said already. You seem to not understand how AoC's system will work, or you have went out of your way to misconstrue what I was saying. And Ayevee easily understanding exactly what I meant just goes to show that I'm right in my assumption here.
To heal a target-1enemy with an active heal spell in your action bar is not possible in WoW (because of metagroups - factions; but - as mentioned - just learn about cross faction please first, before talking) and not possible in Ashes (because of groups). It's not possible, would be stupid and is completely pointless. And you confirmed that already. Thanks for that.
If you (-> factions) want to compare things, it must be the same comparison (-> groups). That's like "metal" and "MMO", you are not getting your comparions right.
That you evaded the question in between with a placed AoE heal (one
Would you please provide me some heal spells that work like the ONE you mentioned? There are a lot of "target ally" spells (what I'm talking about). Thanks in advance. Or do we - again - talk about expections that prove the rule?
Healing Touch maybe?
Flash Cure? No?
Soothing Glow? So a nice HoT? Hm? Yes?
24:17
Or enemys (combatants)?
Would you please explain "target ally" to me?
Is Bucky targeted by Steven?
You now the expression to beat someone at his own game? (I'm no native speaker so I hope that's the correct wording for this phrase)
Again incorrect and a lie. You don't understand due to a lack of experience. It's quite simple. WoW was just an example, I've already mentioned that several times to you in this thread an others. It's common MMO pvp behaviour, that you cannot heal your target-enemy, because it makes no sense.
You still lack providing me examples, spells, facts.
You are incorrect and you know it but refuse to accept it. That's childish. That's exactly the players I dont want in a MMO. And I'm not alone with this opinion and sooner or later you will understand this. Release will come, sometime, hopefully.
There was one game that I know of that you could heal your enemy or even boss's. In UO you could do this. The reason for healing the boss is because when you raid a champ spawn and take over, you need to get the boss back to full health. you can wait for the boss to heal of course but who wants to wait when people are coming back to kill you. But you need to heal the boss back to 100% because of looting rights. If you do not heal the boss then the people previously that you raided would get some looting rights. I just wanted to share this example is all.
edit: Also the reason you could res/heal your enemy is because you can be a nice guy after the battle and not a dick.
This has nothing to do with the current "conversion" I have with our L2 cultist.
Yes, I understand. I was editing to add more info as you posted this.
I want to learn from your experience, so please provide the answers to me.
Here they are again for you:
- Are those players in a group at this time?
- Would you please explain "target ally" to me?
- Is Bucky targeted by Steven?
Additionally still missing:
- Would you please provide me some heal spells that work like the ONE you mentioned?
L2 had this function as well. Steven disliked the ability to heal bosses and removed it. But he kept the ability to heal any non-combatant.
Here they are again for you:
- Are those players in a group at this time?
- Would you please explain "target ally" to me?
- Is Bucky targeted by Steven?
Additionally still missing:
- Would you please provide me some heal spells that work like the ONE you mentioned?
Wings of Salvation Wings of Salvation.png Sprout phoenix-like wings and leap to target ally, then grant a small amount of temporary health to that target on arrival.[60][61] An ally is defined as any non-combatant player or non-mob NPC.[62]
An ally is defined as any non-combatant player or non-mob NPC.
An ally is defined as any non-combatant player or non-mob NPC.
AN ALLY IS DEFINED AS ANY NON-COMBATANT PLAYER OR NON-MOB NPC.
ALLY = ANY (I REPEAT, ANY) NON-COMBATANT PLAYER
Is that enough for you? Is that clear enough of an answer?
I talked about enemy player.
That means two combatants are actively fighting each other. No other scenario was meant FROM ME.
In this scenario you cannot heal your enemy. So entire conversation I was talking about is fine.
To attack AND heal a non-combatant at the same time moreover is bad design and nonsense, and leads to disadvantages for the attacked (and healed) player. There is no current mechanic in the game that avoids this situation? Why is it allowed than?
What happens if this attacked (and healed) non-combatant player attacks back? He is combatant then, right? Can he still be healed from that bad cleric harassing him?
Why is a non-combatant player an "ally" but not an "enemy"? Talking about competion and all-pvp the whole day but than all other players are allies?
What's the workflow if a corrupted player is involved (as the one being attacked and healed) or the one doing the heals?
And if WoW doesn't allow you to heal someone from your own faction - holy fuck that's a shitty design. I believe that WoW wouldn't have that kind of shitty design, which is why I immediately thought that you were talking about different factions. And in that specific context I reiterated that "greens are not an enemy".
My question was literally about 2 people doing this to one person. One would be attacking and the other healing, if needed. Also, where exactly did I say this would be happening at the same exact moment? I explicitly said that the victim would be healed if the harassers thought they might get corrupted if the victim wasn't healed.
We don't have concrete info, but I'd imagine that it's gonna be seen as an "enemy".
But that doesn't matter for the context of attacking a non-combatant and corruption that might result from that.
Because this is not a faction-based game, so you don't have default enemies, unless you both agree to be each other's enemies (either by wardeccing or by flagging up).
Competition starts when both sides agree to compete. When one side refuses - that's where PKing can happen, if the side that agreed is too weak to achieve their goal w/o resorting to PKing.
I already told you this
https://ashesofcreation.wiki/Player_flagging
Non-combatants who heal, buff, or otherwise interact with combatants or corrupted players will be flagged as combatants.[21][22][23][24]
And the "ally" nomenclature implies that this combatant or corrupted player needs to be in your party, for you to be able to heal them.
A corrupted healer has no impact on the heals, because being corrupted doesn't mean that non-combatants are not your allies (in the eyes of the system that is), even though they'll most likely all attack you. But a corrupted healer should be free to heal any green player w/o any problems.
That was the scenario I was in / talking about. Precisly only this and "at the same time"
So, if I'm talking about an enemy player and you answer with an ally/non-combatant...
Maybe you not, but ME. Read my quote. I wrote it exactly like this. This is the entire scenario we are talking about. Combatants fighting and healing each other. And this is still pointless and nonsense and will not be possible or implemented in the future.
This makes no sense for me in the definition in a so called pvp game. Firstly, everybody is an enemy. For me the definition is weird.
As mentioned, that was the scenario I was in and talking about entirely.
Which is why I was focussed on "ally" and "groups" and referred to that in the video (where a group of three players was shown and Steven healed the targeted Bucky).
Not sure if I should find this crazy or fine, but it's already late, so maybe I know tomorrow.
Well, at least I'm glad to be right in the end
As for not understanding what an enemy and an ally is in a factionless game - that just goes to show that you do not have the proper experience to understand how and why Ashes is designed this way. You base your entire approach to the situation on WoW-like designs where there's always a predetermined enemy and everyone else is untouchable because they're in your default faction.
L2 did not work like that and Steven copied its design. And even faction-having AA let you attack people of your own faction, so had you played the other "non-dead" Steven's inspiration - you would've understood the design much better.
This is one of the reasons why us L2 players keep arguing for this design, because people who've never played with it simply don't understand how it works. But we do. And we liked it. And we want Ashes to have it as well, because it's a great design that leads to much deeper inter-player interactions than just "there's dev-dictated enemies and everyone else who I can do nothing about".
It's not my fault that you are not using this scenario that I've stated (two combatants fighting each other) but something else. You would have had the right to answer to THIS scenario I was talking to you to do a conversion about the same situation, and that was: Enemy players attacking and healing each other at the same time
Your simple answer should have been: This is not possible. As you confirmed already above.
So I'm glad to be right in the end (and between) when talking about "enemys attacking and healing each other at the same time." - And I was never talking about something different - and that's why I brought in WoW (or other MMOs), because of exactly THIS scenario - and this is the same in Ashes so I'm fully right here.
Not really, see above
And follow up issues leading to workarounds over workounds over next weird workarounds and "designs". Sometimes just based on doubtufl base decisions.
I thought you were asking a question in the context of what I was talking about, where healing the victim is as easy as using a skill, which is why I memed the answer and didn't pay attention to the "enemy" part of the comment, cause in the context it could be seen as "attackers see the victim as the enemy" kind of deal.
Trying to discuss what's an enemy and what's an ally wasn't even on my mind at the time, because to me the answer is super obvious, within the context that I was talking about.
You saw my initial question only through the window of WoW-like design, which is why you immediately thought that only "an enemy" could be attacked. And in a wow-like design, if they're an enemy - well, shit, you can't heal an ENEMY. So you simply couldn't comprehend how the 2 actions could be happening to the same person.
You then said that I didn't understand your high and might point of 15 mmo experience (none of which apparently had the same design as the one that Ashes has, which makes all of that experience useless for the context of my question) and we went into a downward spiral of talking about a completely different topic than the one you quoted.
I was definitely wrong in this post, which I later corrected after double-checking the info on how exactly Ashes treats non-combatants
But my main point of "greens can be healed and attacked in order to harass them" was still correct. And all throughout this exchange I kept reiterating my initial question to keep the context same, but you obviously didn't care about that context from the start (either by choice or due to the wow-brainrot-driven misunderstanding).
And that explains my "LOL" and Smiley - because also for me that was just unbelievable. No MMO design would be that shitty. It makes no sense.
Up from this we started to insist on .. something.
I press my hand towards your hand, if you still want to take it.
I excuse for being impolite and offensive to you. It was a huge misunderstanding.
I thank you for providing me some insights to Ashes designs I'm not yet so familiar like you - but I want to learn, because I still will give Ashes a try, although I don't like all design decisions and content offers.
I've talked about combatant vs combatant - of cousre or "what else" (from my perspective).
Can we close it like this?