Glorious Alpha Two Testers!
Phase I of Alpha Two testing will occur on weekends. Each weekend is scheduled to start on Fridays at 10 AM PT and end on Sundays at 10 PM PT. Find out more here.
Check out Alpha Two Announcements here to see the latest Alpha Two news and update notes.
Our quickest Alpha Two updates are in Discord. Testers with Alpha Two access can chat in Alpha Two channels by connecting your Discord and Intrepid accounts here.
Phase I of Alpha Two testing will occur on weekends. Each weekend is scheduled to start on Fridays at 10 AM PT and end on Sundays at 10 PM PT. Find out more here.
Check out Alpha Two Announcements here to see the latest Alpha Two news and update notes.
Our quickest Alpha Two updates are in Discord. Testers with Alpha Two access can chat in Alpha Two channels by connecting your Discord and Intrepid accounts here.
Comments
Now, heal me, dammit! I need succor, and you stand there, hand outstretched, pontificating! And take that hat off! It attracts monsters...and looks stupid! j/k :)
Now, heal me, dammit! I need succor, and you stand there, hand outstretched, pontificating! And take that hat off! It attracts monsters…and looks stupid! j/k <img alt="????" src="https://s.w.org/images/core/emoji/2.2.1/svg/1f642.svg" />
[/quote]
I charge 10 gp. per heal , though I do sell buy one get one free healing specials, every sunday...
One major problem with PVP, lol -- healers ALWAYS die first!
<div class="d4p-bbt-quote-title"><a href="https://www.ashesofcreation.com/forums/topic/free-pvp/page/4/#post-16482" rel="nofollow">freespiryt wrote:</a></div>
Fair enough, friend Kyrios, fair enough.
Now, heal me, dammit! I need succor, and you stand there, hand outstretched, pontificating! And take that hat off! It attracts monsters…and looks stupid! j/k <img alt="????" src="https://s.w.org/images/core/emoji/2.2.1/svg/1f642.svg" />
</blockquote>
I charge 10 gp. per heal , though I do sell buy one get one free healing specials, every sunday…
[/quote]
lol Now I see why you have your hand stretched out, like that. Reaching for people's coin purses!
One major problem with PVP, lol — healers ALWAYS die first!
[/quote]
True, true. And, if they don't die first, their definitely high priority targets. Kyrios may need all that gold for repairs, poor guy.
[/quote]
Just one? Alright. You have probably watched lots of the video, right? You must have seen them talking about how important the Economy is to the design. Without threat and sometimes reality of random PVP, you have nothing but reward for PVE and gathering players. Anyone can go out and increase their wealth without the slightest REAL risk. They can bring home materials for themselves or for sale and market prices artificially tank, take a nose dive, etc... When there is risk spread through the acquisition part of the economy the rest of the economy has a great chance to be healthy. No RISK = very high supply = very low returns for your time.
Crafting for sale or yourself, gathering, selling materials or products... that is also all PVP. All the players that do that as an enjoyable game aught to appreciate non consensual PVP too. If they want a more interesting game anyway.
<div class="d4p-bbt-quote-title"><a href="https://www.ashesofcreation.com/forums/topic/free-pvp/page/3/#post-15922" rel="nofollow">Happycadaver wrote:</a></div>
Just name me a single reason to push people to PvP while they don’t want to. The Open PvP loving people can do it among themselfs, they don’t need people who only want to PvE as their targets. The only thing archived here is to make just another game only attractive exclusive for the PvP loving crowd, while everyone else gets just turned away without any understandable reasons.
</blockquote>
Just one? Alright. You have probably watched lots of the video, right? You must have seen them talking about how important the Economy is to the design. Without threat and sometimes reality of random PVP, you have nothing but reward for PVE and gathering players. Anyone can go out and increase their wealth without the slightest REAL risk. They can bring home materials for themselves or for sale and market prices artificially tank, take a nose dive, etc… When there is risk spread through the acquisition part of the economy the rest of the economy has a great chance to be healthy. No RISK = very high supply = very low returns for your time.
Crafting for sale or yourself, gathering, selling materials or products… that is also all PVP. All the players that do that as an enjoyable game aught to appreciate non consensual PVP too. If they want a more interesting game anyway.
[/quote]
Wow. Explained this way better than I did, and a whole lot more succinctly, too. Thanks!
Dying to another player in game rarely results in you losing anything and don’t get why people get so mad or nervous about it. [/quote]
What you wrote really doesn't make any sense.
1: You completely leave out the key aspect of the specific genre : the <ul><strong>RP</strong></ul> in MMORPG.
Many of the people who don't want PvP don't want PvP because D&D didn't have PvP. We played RPGs decades before anything online -especially multiplayer online- to cooperate with other players; not be competitive against and kill other players. And those are the kinds of interactions we hope to relive with masses of players online. Cooperative play against NPCs rather than competitive play against other players. Those are the types of bonds we hope to forge. Danger is fine. What we don't want is to be stabbed in the back by our "friends".
More specifically, playing a role in the world is more important than having a challenging game. The focus is on story-telling with other players rather than on hardcore gameplay.
2: Dying to other people inherently results in loss -in games with xp dept we lose real world time - which is more precious and valuable than any in-game loot. The time I've invested working to level or obtain gear should not be able to be stolen at the whim of other players. That theft is the most despicable, in my view.
I don't play games in order to cause other people grief. I'm not interested in ruining the play session of another player.
I don't play games so I can price gouge and personally become rich in the game.
I play MMORPGs because I enjoy roleplaying with other people - specifically, working together to aid other players achieve common goals as we live in a fantasy or sci-fi world.
3: The whole point of an MMOFPS might be PvP. And FPS is all about shooting stuff. An MMORPG should mostly be focused on roleplaying - and there should be a wide variety of roles beyond kill everything in sight. Character built for stealth and avoidance should be able to avoid killers that aren't built to trap and track.
4: MMORPGs should not involve PvP -player v player. Players should be courteous enough to leave people not interested in PvP combat alone and, instead attack players who are interested in combat with other players. The focus should be on Character v Character.
If I have planned my play session to harvest 50 trees, my time should not be stolen by other players who wish to force me into battling them - killing me, leaving me with xp debt and potentially looting tools or other items I use to make harvesting easier.
Ruining the play session of other players is despicable.
If you really want to roleplay a battle between our two characters, I would probably be willing to schedule time for us to battle. I'd probably even be willing to schedule in a couple hours for us to do nothing else but battle each other. Character v character conflict is core to a fantasy setting, sure.
Player v player is personal. On several levels. And really shouldn't be a thing in MMORPGs or RPGs of any kind.
Crafting for sale or yourself, gathering, selling materials or products… that is also all PVP. All the players that do that as an enjoyable game aught to appreciate non consensual PVP too. If they want a more interesting game anyway.[/quote]
Why does dying from PvE encounters not count as REAL risk??
How does failing a quest result in increasing wealth?
Personally I couldn't care less about "the economy". I don't play RPGs for the economy. I play RPGs for the stroytelling.
I want my RPG experience to be like living out a Tolkien adventure. Where other players are the "heroes" and the NPCs are the adversaries/monsters.
Doesn't necessarily mean that I want no risk (although I prefer to live out a story where the protagonists don't die), but the risk I don't want is to be stabbed in the back by other "heroes". If I'm going to have risk, I really want that to come from NPCs. I want to support other players (except greedy opportunists) and compete against NPCs, if I have to compete.
Or, if my character is going to battle another player's character, I want both of us to agree to do battle rather than have one player force another player to do something they don't want to do. that's just basic common courtesy.
At least we're getting some of that in the siege mechanic. War is declared days or weeks in advance...and the defenders have time to prepare. It's a scheduled event.
I am perfectly OK with very high supply. Because that's never really a plot point in fantasy novels.
Which is the experience I'm looking for in an MMORPG - living out a fantasy novel adventure.
<div class="d4p-bbt-quote-title"><a href="https://www.ashesofcreation.com/forums/topic/free-pvp/#post-6364" rel="nofollow">Ezenkrul87 wrote:</a></div>
I really don’t understand why people play MMOs if they don’t like PvP. Personally I feel that is the whole point of an MMO, otherwise you can just play an online non mmo game with friends.
Dying to another player in game rarely results in you losing anything and don’t get why people get so mad or nervous about it.
</blockquote>
What you wrote really doesn’t make any sense.
1: You completely leave out the key aspect of the specific genre : the
<ul><strong>RP</strong></ul>
in MMORPG.
Many of the people who don’t want PvP don’t want PvP because D&D didn’t have PvP. We played RPGs decades before anything online -especially multiplayer online- to cooperate with other players; not be competitive against and kill other players. And those are the kinds of interactions we hope to relive with masses of players online. Cooperative play against NPCs rather than competitive play against other players. Those are the types of bonds we hope to forge. Danger is fine. What we don’t want is to be stabbed in the back by our “friends”.
More specifically, playing a role in the world is more important than having a challenging game. The focus is on story-telling with other players rather than on hardcore gameplay.
2: Dying to other people inherently results in loss -in games with xp dept we lose real world time – which is more precious and valuable than any in-game loot. The time I’ve invested working to level or obtain gear should not be able to be stolen at the whim of other players. That theft is the most despicable, in my view.
I don’t play games in order to cause other people grief. I’m not interested in ruining the play session of another player.
I don’t play games so I can price gouge and personally become rich in the game.
I play MMORPGs because I enjoy roleplaying with other people – specifically, working together to aid other players achieve common goals as we live in a fantasy or sci-fi world.
3: The whole point of an MMOFPS might be PvP. And FPS is all about shooting stuff. An MMORPG should mostly be focused on roleplaying – and there should be a wide variety of roles beyond kill everything in sight. Character built for stealth and avoidance should be able to avoid killers that aren’t built to trap and track.
4: MMORPGs should not involve PvP -player v player. Players should be courteous enough to leave people not interested in PvP combat alone and, instead attack players who are interested in combat with other players. The focus should be on Character v Character.
If I have planned my play session to harvest 50 trees, my time should not be stolen by other players who wish to force me into battling them – killing me, leaving me with xp debt and potentially looting tools or other items I use to make harvesting easier.
Ruining the play session of other players is despicable.
If you really want to roleplay a battle between our two characters, I would probably be willing to schedule time for us to battle. I’d probably even be willing to schedule in a couple hours for us to do nothing else but battle each other. Character v character conflict is core to a fantasy setting, sure.
Player v player is personal. On several levels. And really shouldn’t be a thing in MMORPGs or RPGs of any kind.
[/quote]
A lot of this I tackled in a previous post of mine, but it got ate. If you want to read it, plz look at Isende's quote of my post, on pg 4, I believe.
To answer some of your questions, from my perspective of course, I'll start with DnD not having pvp. Now, I'm not sure if you're talking about the single player PC games, the DnD mmo, or table top. I'll refer to table top, and disagree that DnD never had PvP, of a sort. Granted, there was no system centered around PvP, between group mates, as it were. But, I would think that the group going against the DM, through monsters as proxy of course, would be a type of PvP. Also, depending on the GM, it was not unheard of for group mates to turn on each other, and kill/maim another. I remember a particular session where this occurred, and because of the split, the game had to be partitioned, with each group getting their own time, working against the other. Didn't happen normally, and the GM had to get creative, but it happens.
Dying sucks. Loss sucks. But, without these things, whats the true value of attaining our desires. Knowing that no matter what, I'll keep what I have, without any effort to maintain it, or keep it safe, it loses value.
I don't think having PvP elements, necessarily negates RP. Example: If I know I can go out at get X amount of wood, without threat, then why would my friends, who aren't interested in gathering, accompany me? They'd just go do what they want, safely, and that's that. Yes, once chores are done, we could all convene, relax, RP, etc. But, where's the "world" interaction RP-wise? If getting that wood carries risk of robbery, or whatever, then my friends would come with me to guard my back, while I work. And, vice versa, with them. We could turn that into a chance to RP together, on top of everything else.
I can't speak on the penalties of the game for PvP'ers, attacker or defender, since it's all up in flux, but I choose to have faith that Intrepid will do what they can to make sure that we have balance, in all aspects of the game. Mindless PK'ing is not true PvP.
<div class="d4p-bbt-quote-title"><a href="https://www.ashesofcreation.com/forums/topic/free-pvp/page/5/#post-16499" rel="nofollow">freespiryt wrote:</a></div>
Alright. You have probably watched lots of the video, right? You must have seen them talking about how important the Economy is to the design. Without threat and sometimes reality of random PVP, you have nothing but reward for PVE and gathering players. Anyone can go out and increase their wealth without the slightest REAL risk. They can bring home materials for themselves or for sale and market prices artificially tank, take a nose dive, etc… When there is risk spread through the acquisition part of the economy the rest of the economy has a great chance to be healthy. No RISK = very high supply = very low returns for your time.
Crafting for sale or yourself, gathering, selling materials or products… that is also all PVP. All the players that do that as an enjoyable game aught to appreciate non consensual PVP too. If they want a more interesting game anyway.
</blockquote>
Why does dying from PvE encounters not count as REAL risk??
How does failing a quest result in increasing wealth?
Personally I couldn’t care less about “the economy”. I don’t play RPGs for the economy. I play RPGs for the stroytelling.
I want my RPG experience to be like living out a Tolkien adventure. Where other players are the “heroes” and the NPCs are the adversaries/monsters.
Doesn’t necessarily mean that I want no risk (although I prefer to live out a story where the protagonists don’t die), but the risk I don’t want is to be stabbed in the back by other “heroes”. If I’m going to have risk, I really want that to come from NPCs. I want to support other players (except greedy opportunists) and compete against NPCs, if I have to compete.
Or, if my character is going to battle another player’s character, I want both of us to agree to do battle rather than have one player force another player to do something they don’t want to do. that’s just basic common courtesy.
At least we’re getting some of that in the siege mechanic. War is declared days or weeks in advance…and the defenders have time to prepare. It’s a scheduled event.
I am perfectly OK with very high supply. Because that’s never really a plot point in fantasy novels.
Which is the experience I’m looking for in an MMORPG – living out a fantasy novel adventure.
[/quote]
But your whole view is based only on exactly what YOU want and I guess probably what you feel most other players want. I like playing the role of a trader and your ideas don't allow that to be very fun or meaningful, IMO.
Around a table with 2-8 people and a GM there is room to provide just about all of each players wants. At a massive table with literally 1000's of players, catering to only a few does not work well.
I understand and I have had pretty much the same opinion as you seem to have. But, I have expanded my viewpoint since my early MMO playing days. The hardest part is letting go of the feeling that because you occasionally get killed and robbed, your day/night/whatever has been ruined. That is tough to get past. :)
<div class="d4p-bbt-quote-title"><a href="https://www.ashesofcreation.com/forums/topic/free-pvp/page/5/#post-16529" rel="nofollow">Dygz wrote:</a></div>
<blockquote>
<div class="d4p-bbt-quote-title"><a href="https://www.ashesofcreation.com/forums/topic/free-pvp/page/5/#post-16499" rel="nofollow">freespiryt wrote:</a></div>
Alright. You have probably watched lots of the video, right? You must have seen them talking about how important the Economy is to the design. Without threat and sometimes reality of random PVP, you have nothing but reward for PVE and gathering players. Anyone can go out and increase their wealth without the slightest REAL risk. They can bring home materials for themselves or for sale and market prices artificially tank, take a nose dive, etc… When there is risk spread through the acquisition part of the economy the rest of the economy has a great chance to be healthy. No RISK = very high supply = very low returns for your time.
Crafting for sale or yourself, gathering, selling materials or products… that is also all PVP. All the players that do that as an enjoyable game aught to appreciate non consensual PVP too. If they want a more interesting game anyway.
</blockquote>
Why does dying from PvE encounters not count as REAL risk??
How does failing a quest result in increasing wealth?
Personally I couldn’t care less about “the economy”. I don’t play RPGs for the economy. I play RPGs for the stroytelling.
I want my RPG experience to be like living out a Tolkien adventure. Where other players are the “heroes” and the NPCs are the adversaries/monsters.
Doesn’t necessarily mean that I want no risk (although I prefer to live out a story where the protagonists don’t die), but the risk I don’t want is to be stabbed in the back by other “heroes”. If I’m going to have risk, I really want that to come from NPCs. I want to support other players (except greedy opportunists) and compete against NPCs, if I have to compete.
Or, if my character is going to battle another player’s character, I want both of us to agree to do battle rather than have one player force another player to do something they don’t want to do. that’s just basic common courtesy.
At least we’re getting some of that in the siege mechanic. War is declared days or weeks in advance…and the defenders have time to prepare. It’s a scheduled event.
I am perfectly OK with very high supply. Because that’s never really a plot point in fantasy novels.
Which is the experience I’m looking for in an MMORPG – living out a fantasy novel adventure.
</blockquote>
But your whole view is based only on exactly what YOU want and I guess probably what you feel most other players want. I like playing the role of a trader and your ideas don’t allow that to be very fun or meaningful, IMO.
Around a table with 2-8 people and a GM there is room to provide just about all of each players wants. At a massive table with literally 1000’s of players, catering to only a few does not work well.
I understand and I have had pretty much the same opinion as you seem to have. But, I have expanded my viewpoint since my early MMO playing days. <strong>The hardest part is letting go of the feeling that because you occasionally get killed and robbed, your day/night/whatever has been ruined. That is tough to get past.</strong> <img alt="????" src="https://s.w.org/images/core/emoji/2.2.1/svg/1f642.svg" />
[/quote]
Eh. Not for me. As long as I can get out into the world again, I can always get back what I loss. Maybe even better. Yes, the more valuable the loss, the more it'd sting, but that just drives you to get after it again, imo. Like you, though, I didn't always feel that way, but now, I'm damn near cool with most anything...within reason, lol.
I think this is a key statement here, and I'm glad you made it.
Let's examine it. You have a couple of different types of players in MMOs; you have your PVX, PVE, and PVP. Within these, there is always crossover. However, what we've seen a lot of in MMOs the last few years is an over-abundance of games that completely ignore those of us who prefer a more PVE-centric gamestyle, and completely embraces the twitch players. Why, you may ask? Ask yourself, instead, which are the more "noisy" ones -- usually the twitch. Even when we use the PVX label, it's still understood that that's PVE with a heavy dose of PVP. PVE is more incidental in this model.
What I'm finding gratifying is that Intrepid really seems to be working to make PVP meaningful; to the world, to the player, to the community. Nodes have certain resources available with them, but if this node is predominant, then that node won't be, and you lose out on some resources. Ssssoooo ... we declare battles and sieges, and may the best group win. The PVP in here seems to be designed to enhance the story -- for the character as well as for the community.
Speaking as someone who's done the PVP grind, and the PVE-bunny stuff, I have to admit that, while I still sometimes wish for a way to fully segregate PVP and PVE, I think they're on the right track here. I told one of my guildies -- who takes <em>extreme</em> delight in "oops, sorry, we're in a battle now!" dragging me into PVP that I would be willing, under this design, to work with him on things like protecting our node/town, or protecting a caravan, or even heading out bounty-hunting.
Many people like me got very disgusted with BDO because they went so far toward "Westernizing" their game that they took away some key items available to their Korean public; there was no gating for PVP, if you hit lvl 45 then you could be ganked. The Karma system was horrible, and griefing did happen very frequently. Intrepid has paid a lot of attention, and gone to a lot of trouble, to try and give us a reason <em>why</em> we may want to PVP.
Everyone doesn't game the same way, like it or not. One of our favorite guildies is in his 70s, and he's the most amazing person ever; his gameplay, on the other hand? Not so great; eyesight goes to hell, responsiveness diminishes. As I said earlier, even my responsiveness has diminished -- as has my tolerance for above-mentioned arsehats. It's a rare game that can be developed that can interest so many myriad levels of players, and again, I feel that Intrepid has managed that task quite well. Naturally, alphas and betas and actual gameplay will teach us if my belief is true; in the meantime?
I continue to hold out hope that this will be a platform that many different types of players can embrace and enjoy.
But I enjoy MMOs that allow for open PvP interaction with harsh penalties for killing unwilling participants. Games that don't punish one-sided PK encounters devolve into pointless chaos but games that have meaningful consequences for that kind of behavior end up much more civilized. It's a great environment for role players. It's a good environment for people who enjoy real PvP as opposed to cowardly gank attacks against defenseless targets. And it's a good environment for people like me who enjoy PvE primarily but also like a little risk when venturing out into the wild.
There are always going to be people who kill anything that moves and, yeah, once in a while you might get killed by someone you had no chance of defending yourself against. If a game ensures that type of interaction is rare, I don't see it as a big deal. Most people aren't going to find the PK penalty worth it and will opt to participate in PvP where all parties are interested instead. Not to mention that in games like this there are players whose entire enjoyment of the game revolves around protecting non-combatants.
I really disagree with Dygz, who is arguing that D&D doesn't have PvP so it doesn't belong in a role playing game. Yes, D&D does have PvP. Players have free will to attack anyone they wish, including the guy sitting right next to him. It might not turn out well, and the DM might find interesting ways to punish him, but the player can still make the attempt. That free will is part of what makes D&D so much fun. You can attempt to do whatever you want as long as you are willing to accept the consequences of those actions.
Well, you don’t respawn at the regular spawn locations. It’s randomized. So there’s no guarantee that your friend could find you. Also, BHs will be tracking you, and will want to kill you. So, there’s no guarantee that your friend will find you before the BHs do.
</blockquote>
See this is kinda after the fact. Ok you still got off free because all the crap you dropped your friend grabbed and will give back.
[/quote]
Also you could give your gear to your friend and let the bounty hunters kill you until you're corruption free then make your way back home.
Intrepid seem to be structuring PvP so it becomes smart PvE instead.
Trying to do away with the MMO total murderbox (except when/where appropriate), braindead combat and blatant griefing.
Would PvE vs super advanced AI be any different to honorable PvP ?
Do PvE players or even RP's, really have an issue with honorable PvP ?
I normally have a foot in all camps, because i like to experience everything.
Not much point paying for a new experience if you arent actually going to do it.
But some peoples needs are far more selective and specific than mine.
I like to think I can understand all restricted viewpoints to some degree.
For many, alternative viewpoints are simply beyond their comprehension.
Or much worse...invalid.
<strong>WE DON'T WANT PVP!!!! </strong>
What don't devs get about that? Give us PVE only servers or lose millions of potential customers.
<strong>WE DON’T WANT PVP!!!! </strong>
What don’t devs get about that? Give us PVE only servers or lose millions of potential customers.
[/quote]
Pve only server will not work for the kind of game the devs of AOC want to make. The market for players in mmos is a 100 times bigger then when EQ and EQ2 where relevant games. Base on how fast money is pouring in for the kickstarter , there is a hunger for this kind of mmo out there.
To answer some of your questions, from my perspective of course, I’ll start with DnD not having pvp. Now, I’m not sure if you’re talking about the single player PC games, the DnD mmo, or table top. I’ll refer to table top, and disagree that DnD never had PvP, of a sort. Granted, there was no system centered around PvP, between group mates, as it were. But, I would think that the group going against the DM, through monsters as proxy of course, would be a type of PvP. Also, depending on the GM, it was not unheard of for group mates to turn on each other, and kill/maim another. I remember a particular session where this occurred, and because of the split, the game had to be partitioned, with each group getting their own time, working against the other. Didn’t happen normally, and the GM had to get creative, but it happens.[/quote]
Uh. No. In D&D, the Dungeon Master is in control of NPCs and that is separate from a Player Character.
The DM is not a Player. Characters controlled by the DM are NPCs.
It's not unheard of for a player character to attack another player character... especially if the party has conflicting alignments.
What's rare is for a player character to kill or maim another player character - or even attempt to do so. And once discovered, that killer would most likely be booted from the party at best, and very likely killed by the surviving party members.
PvP combat encounters comprise less than 1% of the gameplay. Never would be hyperbole, but it did not occur at the relatively high frequency that it does in MMORPG servers that allow players to attack/kill other players.
[quote]Dying sucks. Loss sucks. But, without these things, whats the true value of attaining our desires. Knowing that no matter what, I’ll keep what I have, without any effort to maintain it, or keep it safe, it loses value. [/quote]
The true value of obtaining our desires is obtaining our desires. Same value as Harry Potter and his friends surviving their adventures or Frodo surviving his adventures.
More importantly, I want to have control over my play session rather than other players ruining my play session and stealing my real life time - just because they want to have five minutes of fun. Just talking about basic fairness - it is not fair for some dick player to add more hours to my play time without my direct consent simply because they've decided they want to have 5 minutes of fun.
That is the epitome of despicable behavior.
[quote]If I know I can go out at get X amount of wood, without threat, then why would my friends, who aren’t interested in gathering, accompany me? They’d just go do what they want, safely, and that’s that. Yes, once chores are done, we could all convene, relax, RP, etc. But, where’s the “world” interaction RP-wise? If getting that wood carries risk of robbery, or whatever, then my friends would come with me to guard my back, while I work. And, vice versa, with them. We could turn that into a chance to RP together, on top of everything else. [/quote]
In AoC, my friends should want to accompany me gathering would because I have friends who enjoy gathering wood or I have friends who enjoy hanging out with me, or I have friends who like helping me because I'm their friend or I have friends who share a common goal, like gathering wood to improve the buildings of the village and help evolve it into a city.
That's actually about the strangest question I've ever heard. My friends accompany me because they like my company.
I don't really want my friends around to guard my back. And I don't want the motivation for hanging with my friends to be that I need to guard their back.
If we're on a mission, I'd rather my role to be to recon and area, find and disarm traps, steal some secret documents, buff other people with us and use some scholarly knowledge to unearth some secret lore. While danger might be involved in that, I'd prefer that danger to be from NPCs and mobs rather than from other players.
The RP is inherent in whatever roles we have in the game we have and the interests of our characters. In Wiz101, we decorated our homes and held parties to view those decorations and play games in those homes... sometimes dev-made games and sometimes games players devise, like traverse the maze created from the decorations. Sometimes we bred our pets. Sometimes we leveled our pets. Sometimes we held costume parties. Sometimes we helped each other farm specific items. Sometimes we helped level lowbies. Sometimes we experimented with pet breeding together. Sometimes we practiced for an in-game flash mob.
In Landmark, sometimes we held tutorials in-game to demonstrate how to build complex voxels and shapes.
Getting the wood is likely to carry some risk in any case. But, that risk will be from NPCs. And, most importantly, likely to be a known risk. A risk that I can plan for because I know the area. And I know how to deal with the mobs in that area.
I'm in a Level 10 zone with ice-themed threats. And am prepared for avoidance of those threats should they appear.
I can't be prepared for a random gank squad - especially one that outnumbers me or significantly out levels me.
Not that that matters because I'm really not interested in fighting other players.
I prefer, even in D&D, to use diplomacy and stealth to avoid combat. I would prefer to avoid attacking or killing mobs and NPCs. That preference is compounded even more if I'm encountering a player character.
That being said, I loved slitting the throats of NPCs in KOA: Reckoning. Probably the game where I felt most attached to my role as a Rogue. Also, once some secret lore for Revival was revealed, I pretty my ditched my Batman/vigilante plans for what I thought would be my main character and created a new main character whose primary objective was to recapture the city of Khan Gorai ( if that were an actual game mechanic) and return it to the hands of its ancestral people. And if player characters defending the city lost their lives or lost access to the homes they paid for - tough titties for them.
Pretty much everything I do in an MMORPG is from the perspective of my character. It's all roleplay.
I'm not such an RP nazi that I'll refuse to say anything OOC or scream at players who discuss real world topics...
But, OOC is probably about 5% of my play session... at the highest.
[quote]I can’t speak on the penalties of the game for PvP’ers, attacker or defender, since it’s all up in flux, but I choose to have faith that Intrepid will do what they can to make sure that we have balance, in all aspects of the game. Mindless PK’ing is not true PvP.[/quote]
I disagree.
"Meaningful PvP" is not true PvP. Because "meaningful PvP" is truly character v character - not player v player.
And character v character is all about the story.
I don't even have faith that Intrepid can successfully release the game.
But, it's worth backing the design... people have to work on revolutionizing MMORPG design if we're ever going to see the evolution we need for the genre to live on.
*Have you played in more recent games that have tried to control it through more well designed discouragements than previous games?
*Have you ever tried to play a little bit differently in dangerous games than in non PVP games? Like being ready to fight or flee at a moments notice or gathering/traveling with others or making deals with the bandits of your favorite areas?
*Have you ever, in an OWPVP game, gone on a wild ride for Holy Vengence with about 10 or 20 of your guildmates, all on voice chat and had a real blast?
Most <----
gamers
hate
PVP!
But your whole view is based only on exactly what YOU want and I guess probably what you feel most other players want.
I understand and I have had pretty much the same opinion as you seem to have. But, I have expanded my viewpoint since my early MMO playing days. The hardest part is letting go of the feeling that because you occasionally get killed and robbed, your day/night/whatever has been ruined. That is tough to get past. [/quote]
If I allocate three hours of play time to acquire an item and hit the next level. And then some player kills me, accrues xp debt and loots that item I just acquired such that it takes me another 3-6 hours to reach my objective simply because some asshat wanted 5 minutes of fun - yes, that ruins my night. There is no "letting go of that feeling". Rather there is a "letting go of that fucked up game" if it happens to often.
If that happens too often in AoC, I'll simply stop playing the game. Just like I never played UO or EVE or Shadowbane. And quit playing EQ when that happened too often.
What I enjoy includes no xp debt and no corruption... and probably no bounty hunting. Probably preferably no PvP combat at all.
At least, in the plethora of MMORPGs I've played for the past 20 years.
But that's not not what I want for AoC - because PvP conflict and PvP combat are core parts of the AoC game design and intrinsically tied to the roleplay of their story.
I support the devs' vision for their game. I spent a few hundred bucks supporting their vision.
Which I would not have done if the game design didn't have what I wanted.
But, AoC is a revolutionary game design, similar to EQNext and Revival. Where the focus of "PvP combat" is integrated into the story.
It's no longer player v player combat, where we're merely at the whims of other players: "Why are attacking me? I didn't do anything to you!"
"I'm roleplaying. Dark Elves killed my parents so all Dark Elves are KoS to me."
For one thing, that's racist. Especially when the Dark Elf that's being killed has been giving newbies free stuff despite being flagged as an enemy. For another it's just a lazy way of excusing rampant PKing anyone it's possible to PK.
If the devs design the nodes correctly, we'll be fighting other player characters because we are rivals for the resources necessary to maintain the health of our cities. Maybe the neighboring city is being neglected and my city decides it's best for us to take it over, by force if we have to, so we can build it back up to a Metropolis and better protect the region from mob attacks.
An example I gave somewhere earlier today is revolves around destroying shrines at a rival Divine Metropolis so that we continue to get defensive blessings at my home Divine Metropolis. If I gotta kill some player characters along the way, I gotta kill 'em.
But, that is character v character.
Player to player - if I kill them, I might very well be willing to help them get rid of their xp debt. As long as I've completed my character objective of destroying their shrine. And might even be willing to let them kill my character - as long as my primary character objective was achieved.
[quote]I like playing the role of a trader and your ideas don’t allow that to be very fun or meaningful, IMO.[/quote]
haha Well, yeah, in my view "traders" in MMORPGs are too greedy. I don't care about in-game economy.
I circumvent paying players money as much as possible because their prices almost always seem to be too high.
I much prefer to pay NPCs and alts.
If I trade with players - it's for free. (I'm a hippy socialist.)
So, we have a different view of what's fun. That doesn't mean my view is all about what I want.
If it was all about what I want, I would say the game should only have NPC trading.
I'll let those who like player economy talk about what they want for player economy. The devs can support whatever economy they like. I don't care one whit about it.
That has nothing to do with PvP combat. In my view.
[quote]Around a table with 2-8 people and a GM there is room to provide just about all of each players wants. At a massive table with literally 1000’s of players, catering to only a few does not work well.[/quote]
I don't know what you mean by catering to only a few.
AoC will be accommodating a variety of playstyles. According to the game design shared so far.
It's not going to be appealing to everyone. The devs aren't going to try to appeal to everyone.
None of us will get 100% of what we want. I'm pretty sure we agree there. So I dunno why you mentioned it.
(great response, btw)
<div class="d4p-bbt-quote-title"><a href="https://www.ashesofcreation.com/forums/topic/free-pvp/page/5/#post-16542" rel="nofollow">Bringslite wrote:</a></div>
But your whole view is based only on exactly what YOU want and I guess probably what you feel most other players want.
I understand and I have had pretty much the same opinion as you seem to have. But, I have expanded my viewpoint since my early MMO playing days. The hardest part is letting go of the feeling that because you occasionally get killed and robbed, your day/night/whatever has been ruined. That is tough to get past.
</blockquote>
What I want includes no xp debt and no corruption… and probably no bounty hunting. Probably preferably no PvP combat at all.
That’s not what I want. That’s what I most enjoy. At least, in the plethora of MMORPGs I’ve played for the past 20 years.
But, AoC is a revolutionary game design, similar to EQNext and Revival.
Where the focus of “PvP combat” is integrated into the story. It’s no longer player v player combat, where we’re merely at the whims of other players. “Why are attacking me? I didn’t do anything to you!”
“I’m roleplaying. Dark Elves killed my parents so all Dark Elves are KoS to me.”
For one thing, that’s racist. Especially when the Dark Elf that’s being killed has been giving newbies free stuff despite being flagged as an enemy.
If the devs design the nodes correctly, we’ll be fighting other player characters because we are rivals for the resources necessary to maintain the health of our cities. Maybe the neighboring city is being neglected and my city decides it’s best for us to take it over, by force if we have to, so we can build it back up to a Metropolis and better protect the region from mob attacks.
An example I gave somewhere earlier today is revolves around destroying shrines at a rival Divine Metropolis so that we continue to get defensive blessings at my home Divine Metropolis. If I gotta kill some player characters along the way, I gotta kill ’em.
But, that is character v character.
Player to player – if I kill them, I might very well be willing to help them get rid of their xp debt. As long as I’ve completed my character objective of destroying their shrine. And might even be willing to let them kill my character – as long as my primary character objective was achieved.
<blockquote>I like playing the role of a trader and your ideas don’t allow that to be very fun or meaningful, IMO.
</blockquote>
haha Well, yeah, in my view “traders” in MMORPGs are too greedy. I don’t care about in-game economy.
I circumvent paying players money as much as possible because their prices almost always seem to be too high.
I much prefer to pay NPCs and alts.
If I trade with players – it’s for free. (I’m a hippy socialist.)
So, we have a different view of what’s fun. That doesn’t mean my view is all about what I want.
If it was all about what I want, I would say the game should only have NPC trading.
I’ll let those who like player economy talk about what they want for player economy. The devs can support whatever economy they like. I don’t care one whit about it.
That has nothing to do with PvP combat. In my view.
<blockquote>Around a table with 2-8 people and a GM there is room to provide just about all of each players wants. At a massive table with literally 1000’s of players, catering to only a few does not work well.
</blockquote>
I don’t know what you mean by catering to only a few.
AoC will be accommodating a variety of playstyles. According to the game design shared so far.
It’s not going to be appealing to everyone. The devs aren’t going to try to appeal to everyone.
None of us will get 100% of what we want. I’m pretty sure we agree there. So I dunno why you mentioned it.
(great response, btw)
[/quote]
Well you are reinforcing your desires as the only important desires. Sometimes you are posting in a way that looks like you are excepting PVP and sometimes like you are against. Its a bit confusing and difficult to debate with you that way! ;)
Why did I mention that with thousands of players it is tougher to meet every player's expectations exactly? Because the topic of my reply was dealing with what I quoted and you wrote.
Paraphrasing here so correct me if I'm misrepresenting:
"I don't care about economy"
"I don't want anyone to have thier story play out different than Heroic Goodguy."
"I want it to be more like Table Top gaming"
Yup, you said exactly what I meant in your reply.
Now, if I still have your attention, could you please link to somewhere that states that ANY death will bring on xp debt? That has been repeated by you a few times as one of your major objections to the RPK problem that might be. I'd like to read about it because if true... I have to add it to my own problems with RPK in this MMO.
*Have you played in more recent games that have tried to control it through more well designed discouragements than previous games?
*Have you ever tried to play a little bit differently in dangerous games than in non PVP games? Like being ready to fight or flee at a moments notice or gathering/traveling with others or making deals with the bandits of your favorite areas?
*Have you ever, in an OWPVP game, gone on a wild ride for Holy Vengence with about 10 or 20 of your guildmates, all on voice chat and had a real blast?[/quote]
More recent games like what?
PvP lovers tend to have a very different vision of what "well-designed discouragements" would be to a person who hates PvP combat.
People who don't like PvP don't want to be prepared to fight other players - they don't like fighting other players. And they also don't want to be forced to flee what they're doing simply because other players want to force them to fight.
People who don't like PvP combat have no interest in vengence - especially vengence that involves PvP combat - even it's their "friends" doling out that vengence.
That's the major disconnect between the playstyles.
PvP combat lovers think that "well-designed discouragement" is more PvP combat.
[quote quote=16664]<blockquote>
<div class="d4p-bbt-quote-title"><a href="https://www.ashesofcreation.com/forums/topic/free-pvp/page/5/#post-16542" rel="nofollow">Bringslite wrote:</a></div>
But your whole view is based only on exactly what YOU want and I guess probably what you feel most other players want.
I understand and I have had pretty much the same opinion as you seem to have. But, I have expanded my viewpoint since my early MMO playing days. The hardest part is letting go of the feeling that because you occasionally get killed and robbed, your day/night/whatever has been ruined. That is tough to get past.
</blockquote>
If I allocate three hours of play time to acquire an item and hit the next level. And then some player kills me, accrues xp debt and loots that item I just acquired such that it takes me another 3-6 hours to reach my objective simply because some asshat wanted 5 minutes of fun – yes, that ruins my night. There is no “letting go of that feeling”. Rather there is a “letting go of that fucked up game” if it happens to often.
If that happens too often in AoC, I’ll simply stop playing the game. Just like I never played UO or EVE or Shadowbane. And quit playing EQ when that happened too often.
What I enjoy includes no xp debt and no corruption… and probably no bounty hunting. Probably preferably no PvP combat at all.
At least, in the plethora of MMORPGs I’ve played for the past 20 years.
But that’s not not what I want for AoC – because PvP conflict and PvP combat are core parts of the AoC game design and intrinsically tied to the roleplay of their story.
I support the devs’ vision for their game. I spent a few hundred bucks supporting their vision.
Which I would not have done if the game design didn’t have what I wanted.
But, AoC is a revolutionary game design, similar to EQNext and Revival. Where the focus of “PvP combat” is integrated into the story.
It’s no longer player v player combat, where we’re merely at the whims of other players: “Why are attacking me? I didn’t do anything to you!”
“I’m roleplaying. Dark Elves killed my parents so all Dark Elves are KoS to me.”
For one thing, that’s racist. Especially when the Dark Elf that’s being killed has been giving newbies free stuff despite being flagged as an enemy. For another it’s just a lazy way of excusing rampant PKing anyone it’s possible to PK.
If the devs design the nodes correctly, we’ll be fighting other player characters because we are rivals for the resources necessary to maintain the health of our cities. Maybe the neighboring city is being neglected and my city decides it’s best for us to take it over, by force if we have to, so we can build it back up to a Metropolis and better protect the region from mob attacks.
An example I gave somewhere earlier today is revolves around destroying shrines at a rival Divine Metropolis so that we continue to get defensive blessings at my home Divine Metropolis. If I gotta kill some player characters along the way, I gotta kill ’em.
But, that is character v character.
Player to player – if I kill them, I might very well be willing to help them get rid of their xp debt. As long as I’ve completed my character objective of destroying their shrine. And might even be willing to let them kill my character – as long as my primary character objective was achieved.
<blockquote>I like playing the role of a trader and your ideas don’t allow that to be very fun or meaningful, IMO.
</blockquote>
haha Well, yeah, in my view “traders” in MMORPGs are too greedy. I don’t care about in-game economy.
I circumvent paying players money as much as possible because their prices almost always seem to be too high.
I much prefer to pay NPCs and alts.
If I trade with players – it’s for free. (I’m a hippy socialist.)
So, we have a different view of what’s fun. That doesn’t mean my view is all about what I want.
If it was all about what I want, I would say the game should only have NPC trading.
I’ll let those who like player economy talk about what they want for player economy. The devs can support whatever economy they like. I don’t care one whit about it.
That has nothing to do with PvP combat. In my view.
<blockquote>Around a table with 2-8 people and a GM there is room to provide just about all of each players wants. At a massive table with literally 1000’s of players, catering to only a few does not work well.
</blockquote>
I don’t know what you mean by catering to only a few.
AoC will be accommodating a variety of playstyles. According to the game design shared so far.
It’s not going to be appealing to everyone. The devs aren’t going to try to appeal to everyone.
None of us will get 100% of what we want. I’m pretty sure we agree there. So I dunno why you mentioned it.
(great response, btw)
[/quote]
I pointed out that MMOs can't cater to a few because it kinda seems like you want this one to.
You want only Goodguy Herioc tales for all players.
You don't seem to care that many players may want to play out different stories or in different ways than you like.
You don't care anything about the "economy" so it is of no importance to you, so nothing important to it should matter or be a part of the game.
All of the above are impressions and paraphrasing. I don't mean to misrepresent you so let me know if I have.
Our opinions may differ in a lot of areas. But, I would like to attempt to clarify some points, from my perspective.
Even though I have no proof of Intrepid's ultimate designs for gameplay, it is my fervent hope that they'll be able to institute a system that drastically reduces the instances of mindless PK'ing, which I believe, is the main crux of this thread, as opposed to PvP, in general. Of course, I could be mistaken.
As, Dygz stated earlier, he/she (sorry. i don't know who you are irl, apologies) would have no problem if PvP was centered around an objective, such as a quest to attack/defend a city, or it's immediate environs. And, there may be such tasks given by npc's, though I believe most of that sort of "meaningful PvP" would be player/community driven, as opposed to some scheduled task. Either, or, that kind of interaction is what seems to help drive the core of the game, along with all the PvE aspects. Hand in hand.
I think most here agree that mindless PK'ing, with no intent behind it, other than to grief, is abhorrent. Even bandits, and pirates, have a motive. To fill their coffers/larders. But, "murderers" (and I use that term lightly, as though distasteful as mindless PK'ing is, it's still just a game), should be dealt with in a stern, heavy handed way, to discourage such behavior.
Will this totally eliminate risk when adventuring? No. But, I don't think it'd be to such a degree that just being out in the open is a death sentence. That kind of environment is toxic, and could raise serious issues. I have faith that as the game progresses, these things will be addressed. That's what testing is for, after all.
2: For some reason, you keep telling me what I want. I'm explaining why people who don't like PvP in MMORPGs don't like PvP MMORPGs. And then you are twisting that into what I want from AoC.
What I want from AoC is for the devs to fulfill their game design exactly as they've designed it. Else, I wouldn't be here.
3: If the devs want player economy to matter, they should make player economy matter. I don't care about the player economy.
This topic is about open world PvP combat - not about player economy.
(I'm basically just stating my perspective here - I'm enjoying our discussion)
<div class="d4p-bbt-quote-title"><a href="https://www.ashesofcreation.com/forums/topic/free-pvp/page/6/#post-16629" rel="nofollow">Bringslite wrote:</a></div>
Anyone reading here that absolutely HATES all nonconsensual PVP,
*Have you played in more recent games that have tried to control it through more well designed discouragements than previous games?
*Have you ever tried to play a little bit differently in dangerous games than in non PVP games? Like being ready to fight or flee at a moments notice or gathering/traveling with others or making deals with the bandits of your favorite areas?
*Have you ever, in an OWPVP game, gone on a wild ride for Holy Vengence with about 10 or 20 of your guildmates, all on voice chat and had a real blast?
</blockquote>
More recent games like what?
PvP lovers tend to have a very different vision of what “well-designed discouragements” would be to a person who hates PvP combat.
People who don’t like PvP don’t want to be prepared to fight other players – they don’t like fighting other players. And they also don’t want to be forced to flee what they’re doing simply because other players want to force them to fight.
People who don’t like PvP combat have no interest in vengence – especially vengence that involves PvP combat – even it’s their “friends” doling out that vengence.
That’s the major disconnect between the playstyles.
PvP combat lovers think that “well-designed discouragement” is more PvP combat.
[/quote]
Well when I was a youngin there were MMOs but they were new stuff. They were terrible about controlling "naughty PVP" and anyway that was pretty much the only PVP designed by the game companies. I really, really hated PVP for probably about 20 years of gaming. Now I still am not a huge fan of it and only do it for stuff like ingame wars or payback vs. someone that ganks a guildmate but I have come to recognize that it does make games more interesting. The rewards from doing all manner of PVE stuff feel much better when there is RISK.
I recognize that many players have been soured through bad experiences with PVP. I ask the questions I ask because PVP has evolved. Despite what many think, it is less ganky now in games that really do try to control it better. Games that don't... well they are pretty much the same.
Now if I still have your attention, Digz: could you please link info about xp death and who it pertains to? I want to see it because if it is as you have been saying, getting ganked will cause the victim to take on xp debt... well I have to speak up against that.
Our opinions may differ in a lot of areas. But, I would like to attempt to clarify some points, from my perspective.
Even though I have no proof of Intrepid’s ultimate designs for gameplay, it is my fervent hope that they’ll be able to institute a system that drastically reduces the instances of mindless PK’ing, which I believe, is the main crux of this thread, as opposed to PvP, in general. Of course, I could be mistaken.
As, Dygz stated earlier, he/she (sorry. i don’t know who you are irl, apologies) would have no problem if PvP was centered around an objective, such as a quest to attack/defend a city, or it’s immediate environs. And, there may be such tasks given by npc’s, though I believe most of that sort of “meaningful PvP” would be player/community driven, as opposed to some scheduled task. Either, or, that kind of interaction is what seems to help drive the core of the game, along with all the PvE aspects. Hand in hand.
I think most here agree that mindless PK’ing, with no intent behind it, other than to grief, is abhorrent. Even bandits, and pirates, have a motive. To fill their coffers/larders. But, “murderers” (and I use that term lightly, as though distasteful as mindless PK’ing is, it’s still just a game), should be dealt with in a stern, heavy handed way, to discourage such behavior.
Will this totally eliminate risk when adventuring? No. But, I don’t think it’d be to such a degree that just being out in the open is a death sentence. That kind of environment is toxic, and could raise serious issues. I have faith that as the game progresses, these things will be addressed. That’s what testing is for, after all.
[/quote]
Well written. I hope that no one takes offense at my posting. I enjoy debating and discussing things about MMO's but sometimes I am too curt or abrupt and not explanatory. Actually I feel like most of us are much more agreed about things than we realize. :)
Our opinions may differ in a lot of areas. But, I would like to attempt to clarify some points, from my perspective.
Even though I have no proof of Intrepid’s ultimate designs for gameplay, it is my fervent hope that they’ll be able to institute a system that drastically reduces the instances of mindless PK’ing, which I believe, is the main crux of this thread, as opposed to PvP, in general. Of course, I could be mistaken.
As, Dygz stated earlier, he/she (sorry. i don’t know who you are irl, apologies) would have no problem if PvP was centered around an objective, such as a quest to attack/defend a city, or it’s immediate environs. And, there may be such tasks given by npc’s, though I believe most of that sort of “meaningful PvP” would be player/community driven, as opposed to some scheduled task. Either, or, that kind of interaction is what seems to help drive the core of the game, along with all the PvE aspects. Hand in hand.
I think most here agree that mindless PK’ing, with no intent behind it, other than to grief, is abhorrent. Even bandits, and pirates, have a motive. To fill their coffers/larders. But, “murderers” (and I use that term lightly, as though distasteful as mindless PK’ing is, it’s still just a game), should be dealt with in a stern, heavy handed way, to discourage such behavior.
Will this totally eliminate risk when adventuring? No. But, I don’t think it’d be to such a degree that just being out in the open is a death sentence. That kind of environment is toxic, and could raise serious issues. I have faith that as the game progresses, these things will be addressed. That’s what testing is for, after all.
[/quote]
Well written. I hope that no one takes offense at my posting. I enjoy debating and discussing things about MMO's but sometimes I am too curt or abrupt and not explanatory. Actually I feel like most of us are much more agreed about things than we realize. :)
[quote quote=16706]1: Again…if I didn’t support the devs’ game design as is, I wouldn’t have backed the kickstarter and I would be ignoring this game, just like I ignore Crowfall and Pantheon and Saga of Lucimia and EVE and Star Citizen.
2: For some reason, you keep telling me what I want. I’m explaining why people who don’t like PvP in MMORPGs don’t like PvP MMORPGs. And then you are twisting that into what I want from AoC.
What I want from AoC is for the devs to fulfill their game design exactly as they’ve designed it. Else, I wouldn’t be here.
3: If the devs want player economy to matter, they should make player economy matter. I don’t care about the player economy.
This topic is about open world PvP combat – not about player economy.
(I’m basically just stating my perspective here – I’m enjoying our discussion)
[/quote]
Great I think that I understand better. Thanks for clarifying. :)