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.
Possible way to change how the corruption works
Githal
Member
I already posted this in another threat as a comment, but i think the idea deserves its own threat.
I think the corruption solution will require to be a lot more complicated than it is now. Like all areas should be distributed a "PVP Threat" to them. Like The Spawn location of the FIrebrand is S tier threat. Meaning that You will have to kill the same guy a lot of times before you get corrupted. Areas with rare crafting materials can be A tier where you can kill players up to 5-6 times. And ofc the regular areas with low tier crafting materials, and mobs that give regular exp/items and ect where if you kill green player you get corrupted instantly like it is now,
Also in S and A threat levels areas you shouldnt be getting instant corruption even if you kill lower level players. But if you kill lower level player in B threat level (for examplee a great exp farming spot) you get instant corruption, but if you kill player your level you can kill him 3-4 times
Why i think the current way the corruption works is not good:
* It prevents every killing of green players, and while this may prevent griefing, it also stops all PvP that should exist.
- for example - imagine you want to do the Firebrand world boss. There is 1 group of 40 green players that try to steal the boss from your group. The right thing should be that you can kill them without consequences and without getting corrupted, then kill the boss. ATM you just have to try and have more dps, or pull the boss first. This also gives the green players chance to wait till you are fighting the firebrand and after this to attack you.
Killing green players for opportunity to get rare materials, or access to world boss or top farming spot should not be penalized at all. This is not griefing. Its not a crime also. Its WAR. and in war everything is allowed.
The areas with high PVP threat level will require groups of players, a solo player wont be able to do anything even without the PVP. And when its group vs group then its not griefing (except if you dont try to farm them on respawn or something similar, But the respawn locations will be the lowest possible threat level where you get corrupted instantly)
I think the corruption solution will require to be a lot more complicated than it is now. Like all areas should be distributed a "PVP Threat" to them. Like The Spawn location of the FIrebrand is S tier threat. Meaning that You will have to kill the same guy a lot of times before you get corrupted. Areas with rare crafting materials can be A tier where you can kill players up to 5-6 times. And ofc the regular areas with low tier crafting materials, and mobs that give regular exp/items and ect where if you kill green player you get corrupted instantly like it is now,
Also in S and A threat levels areas you shouldnt be getting instant corruption even if you kill lower level players. But if you kill lower level player in B threat level (for examplee a great exp farming spot) you get instant corruption, but if you kill player your level you can kill him 3-4 times
Why i think the current way the corruption works is not good:
* It prevents every killing of green players, and while this may prevent griefing, it also stops all PvP that should exist.
- for example - imagine you want to do the Firebrand world boss. There is 1 group of 40 green players that try to steal the boss from your group. The right thing should be that you can kill them without consequences and without getting corrupted, then kill the boss. ATM you just have to try and have more dps, or pull the boss first. This also gives the green players chance to wait till you are fighting the firebrand and after this to attack you.
Killing green players for opportunity to get rare materials, or access to world boss or top farming spot should not be penalized at all. This is not griefing. Its not a crime also. Its WAR. and in war everything is allowed.
The areas with high PVP threat level will require groups of players, a solo player wont be able to do anything even without the PVP. And when its group vs group then its not griefing (except if you dont try to farm them on respawn or something similar, But the respawn locations will be the lowest possible threat level where you get corrupted instantly)
2
Comments
Also while your murder count is 1 or more you are always combatant. and this may be connected ot the divine nodes also to lower the murder count.
This can also be made so Every player has for example 5 plates (that reset every day) that prevent you from going corrupted. So instead of the count to be on the number of times you kill particular enemy, it will apply for all kills you make.
Meaning if you kill player in S or A threat level area you dont lose plates (so you can kill everyone any amount of times). In B threat areas you lose plates only if you kill players in lower group type than the one you are at.
For example if you are in raid group and you kill members of other raid group then you dont lose plates, but if you kill party group you lose and can go corrupted. If you are in party group killing raid or party members dont make you corrupt, but killing solo players does. And in lower threat levels you either lose all plates instantly on kill or 2-3 pet kill.
The answer you seek is in your question.
I think the idea they are going for is more about whether it is worth it or not to accept the corruption penalties.
So if "it is war!" in your eyes and you feel you should be able to pvp freely in a given scenario, then there should be a good reason for that (like monopolizing the boss), and if there is a good reason for that there should be a good reward (boss loot), meaning its up to you to determine whether the reward is worth the risk, and I imagine there will be opportunities for that to be the case, while still maintaining a semblence of peace and curbing griefing in the majority of scenarios.
For people who really want their pvp fix, that should be satisfied in specific pvp systems like sieges, dueling, arenas, and pvp zones like the open seas and hunting grounds and whatnot; personally I would not expect the open world pvp to provide that fix in most cases.
I think corruption is more there to allow for specific scenarios where pvp can unexpectedly break out in high-stakes scenarios, while still facilitating a relatively safe experience but with the feeling of being on edge during most of the gameplay even if no practical threat realistically exists foe the most part. It would also still allow for those random one-off occurances where players can make an emotionally-driven decision to go corrupt, even if it was a bad decision in the grand scheme and likely won't happen "often". ("often" being a subjective threshold that varies between types of mmo players and depends on the spectrum of audiences AOC is trying to attract)
I wonder why you cant see the problem with what you wrote yourself?
So yes we are both talking about the same thing: PvP in order to have the opportunity to get reward (boss loot or something else). Can you imagine how the current corruption system will affect this? Imagine you have a raid group of 40 players and you want to kill Firebrand boss. You see another group of 40 players next to you that are all green.
What will you do in this situation?
*option 1 - you kill the other group, but they dont fight back and you go corrupted. Now you deal 35% less dmg, move slower, and die faster. You cant kill the boss anymore because of the nerfs, The other group respawns, kill you all because you are all nerfed, they steal all your equipment.
*option 2 - you ignore the other group, you start the firebrand fight. After your group has lost few members and healers are trying to revive the dead, the other group suddenly attack your healers and you all die for few seconds. The other group kills the boss which you already took to below half hp.
Did i miss something other option? Oh yes i did - you leave the area and let the green players kill the firebrand.
And ofc we have the option that you let the green players start the fight first - So they attack the firebrand, you wait the right moment and kill them all. Now you are all corrupted, but you somehow manage to finish the boss. Then the green players respawn and kill you. You lose all your gear and mats that you took from the Firebrand boss. In the end the green players are again with with everything, while you lost everything.
So no, the current corruption system is trash. Because the conclusion from all this is: You have to stay green ALL THE TIME. Else your disadvantage is inanely big. So where did the PvX go if everyone is green?
In the end you will see 2 green groups near the Firebrand, and they wont attack each other. And the one that did more dmg wins the loot? Not exactly how i imagine a PvX game.
Thanks for helping the thread staying alive with your comment i guess...
Scenario 1: If option 1 is a realistic scenario then option 2 would be a viable choice for you to make in order to reap the benefits, so its not as if you are without options
Scenario 2: I don't know if option 1 will actually be a realistic representation of that interaction once the game is finished. Its possible it could get tuned to where they might not be able to come back in time if you win the initial fight.
Regarding the damage nerf making it difficult to beat the boss, the encounter design should account for possible pvp to an extent, and even when it cannot account for pvp, then the strategy should be more about taking control of an area and locking the area down before trying to finish off the boss, rather than always trying to do both simultaneously. Depending on the combat design, it should also be possible to beat things even when your damage is nerfed, if there is depth to the mechancs and skill involved, the lower damage would just make things take a bit longer. Both of these things would make option 1 viable in this case.
Just like we talked about before, the purpose of these contested areas is likely intended to prompt unexpected pvp and group combat, so the main experience is the group pvp aspect in those scenarios, and less about the experience of the pvp raid boss itself, which would likely be a "better pve experience" without pvp interruption, or after the area is locked down and under control from the stronger group (or specific encounters designed around the presence of simultaneous pvp when possible)
- In either scenario you still have options. Your problem is less about the corruptions system itself, and more about your strategy within the system. Regarding which scenario is better design, thats probably one of the purposes of the alpha testing.
I already included those scenarios in my previous comment: And ofc we have the option that you let the green players start the fight first - So they attack the firebrand, you wait the right moment and kill them all. Now you are all corrupted, but you somehow manage to finish the boss. Then the green players respawn and kill you. You lose all your gear and mats that you took from the Firebrand boss. In the end the green players are again with with everything, while you lost everything.
What you talk about taking control is not a viable choice. The reason is simple.
You kill a raid of green players next to the boss. You are now all corrupted and nerfed. But you dont start the boss fight coz you want to take control of the area. The green raid group respawns and attack you. Now take in mind that they will still be green when they attack you. So if you kill them again even with the nerfs, your corruption gets even bigger, with even bigger nerfs. So obviously this is not a viable choice you can make
Correct but that is under the first scenario, which is why I separated that from the second scenario being that if the system is tuned to where the other group cannot come back in time to recontest the area. I pointed out 2 separate scenarios and potential design paths that they could take for that interaction.
However under the first scenario (where they can come back and you are corrupted) one party will win in the end, so the strategy is to be that party, if this means being the first to go corrupt to give you a better chance at locking down the area then do that. If it means letting them kill you first so they go corrupt so you can come back for revenge after you respawn and take their stuff, to give you a better chance at locking down the area, then do that instead. One team will lock down the area eventually, so your problem is a strategy issue. (Unless its just an infinite loop of people respawning back and forth before you can take or maintain loot you have taken, which is likely not the case or you wouldn't have any issue with getting your stuff back. This would be a completely different 3rd scenario though.)
Obviously each of these scenarios is a different kind of gameplay, but you still have options within each, and im assuming the preferred design thoughout the testing is the one they will go with in the end.
How did we 'all' get corrupted in this scenario?
Wouldn't you have a designated DPS to get the corruption? And then that person just wouldn't take any of the Firebrand drops.
There's no likely scenario in which the green players end up with 'everything'.
I think you are missing my point. Probably because you read half my comment.
The whole point is that all those scenarios are where your group is consisted of COMBAT flagged players while the enemy group are all green. Meaning if they kill you first they wont go corrupted.
If you read my comment you would see section where i talk if both groups are green: Because the conclusion from all this is: You have to stay green ALL THE TIME. Else your disadvantage is inanely big. So where did the PvX go if everyone is green?
In the end you will see 2 green groups near the Firebrand, and they wont attack each other. And the one that did more dmg wins the loot? Not exactly how i imagine a PvX game.
meaning that it will be the next PVE game, instead PVX. coz if you pvp you lose. You dont give incentive for players to defend themselves if attacked by other players, instead their right thing to do is wait and die and then get free loot from you.
You really think 1 dps can kill 40 players that have healers bards and ect? WTF am i even reading.
And even if that 1 dps kill 1 of the 40 man group, the 39 green players left will instantly oneshot the corrupted player get his items. and wait someone else to get corrupted.
And if you put some low quality items before attacking the green players, they can just kill you in 40vs40 coz your items will sck.
Thanks, my bad, I wasn't thinking about how most people approach this situation, enough.
Consider it clarified.
Okay I think I have a better understanding of your thought process now.
This new context changes nothing in regards to my previous responses however, so I don't understand or agree with how you are coming to this conclusion of "pvx being discouraged".
If the reward is worth it to go corrupt over (green vs green, one green turns red), then it will be even more worth it to pvp if one side is already purple going into the fight, because the green that would have turned red would just turn purple which is even less risk to contest the area (like you mentioned about green not needing to go corrupt). This results in pvp, which makes the "pvx actually being pve" point moot.
If the purple side is the one one that wanted to pvp first, they can still do so and go corrupt, which is no different than (green vs green, but one green turns red) because the purple would just turn red. This is just about whether or not its worth it to go corrupt, hense my first couple responses in the thread.
Yes, one side "has an advantage" going into the fight if one side is already purple (since the green can go purple instead of red), but thats not really an "advantage", because both sides are reducing risk from their previous state and now have equalized risk . "Purple was green before, so now has less penalty if they die as opposed to being green and getting ganked" and "green goes purple instead of red so now has less penalty for intiating pvp"; so now both are purple with same risk.
In a hypothetical situation where even if it was an "advantage" for the ones side to be green ahead of time while the other was already purple, then part of the strategy would be to become the green team in that scenario which is a viable option and would still result in pvx.
I don't see how any of these scenarios leads to there "not being a viable option for pvp" on either side, or resulting in "pvx actually being pve" other than the cases where that is intended, through the reward not being worth pvping or going corrupt over, which is intended for the majority of situations other than some highly sought after content where the incentive to contest that area would be stronger, which goes back to my initial responses.
You have an option 3, git gud and deal the majority of the damage so you get the drops. So you essentially just compete on DPS against the boss, lowkey fighting along side them, but against them. You are completely right at the end there.
And if they kill you, they get corruption. Then you are free to rez and wipe them, surely before they get the boss down.
The game will not favor those who seek to get corruption, so the best option for both groups is to just git gud and remain peaceful.
That won't be the case in high stakes scenarios or emotionally charged groups though. And if you think a little bit harder on it, you'll realize how complex the strategy and counters can get, because it's not just 40v40, green, red or purple. It can go down numerous ways. But no matter how you cut it, for the sake of efficiency you're better off git'n gud.
If people don't want to do that, well... they're at a disadvantage.
There will be plenty of opportunities for PvP though, it will happen and sometimes those at a disadvantage will win, because there's just too many variables for that not to happen.
You saying the "git gud" too many times and also saying that you should not PvP and compete for dps.
I can conclude that you are some Pve player with 0 skill that cant PvP at all, and that thinks doing dmg to a PvE boss without PvP is SKILL BASED. If you call this skill then you have no idea what actual skill is.
Conclusion: dont really think we will make constructive communication here coz you are PvE player, and i am looking for PvX.
Do you realize that games like WOW provide XP bonuses when completing quests or killing mobs, and also give you additional skills and talents if you are flagged for active PVP compared to non flagged?
This is because when you are flagged this bonuses should compensate the time you will lose from pvp-ing compared to those who only pve. And guess what... WOW IS PVE GAME. So AOC is PVX game that gives disadvantage to purple players. Makes no sense.
And no. As it stands now with the corruption i dont see any scenario where it will be worth going corrupt.
As i explained about world bosses - not worth it whatever you do.
Taking rare mats? how many mats you will have to take to be worth once you lose 4 items? probably A LOT. So you most likely will lose your items before you make it worth it with the mats.
Farming spots? You wont win almost anything since farming requires a lot time.
With my solution you stop griefing as this is the primary intention behind the corruption. and in the same time you make the most important locations PVX, instead PVE. I dont see any negatives in my solution.
Both groups approach the area green, and both have the same options of fighting, competing non-lethally, or conceding the area.
If they both fight because they both want the boss, everyone is purple.
If the group that got there first already pulled, they can fight (everyone goes purple), or focus solely on the boss and let the aggressive team eat some corruption, capitalizing to thin their numbers. This can easily backfire if healers or tanks go down, so it's a riskier choice than fighting back while slowing damage on the boss.
If the late-arrival group really wants those drops, they'll all-in key targets and just have corrupt players stick to safer areas around their healers. Don't let them pick up gear until the corruption is cleared.
That late arrival group also has the option of trying to usurp looting right by significantly outdamaging the group that landed first tag. First group now uses the same tactics, have some people take out core members, dps in this case, to remove the risk of them taking claim.
There isn't a scenario where starting out purple vs green instead of green vs green actually changes any part of those choice dynamics.
I already explained ALL variations. And if your whole 40 man group is green players and the enemy is green players - your only option is to keep staying green. else you are at disadvantage or lose a lot.
When you are green - if you havent started the boss yet and enemy group attacks you, you just let them kill you, If they make a melee where everyone attacks you just let them all go corrupt, if they focus your team 1 by 1 then they kill 1 of your group, and after this you instantly kill the enemy player that got the corruption, and this repeats till you steal like 70% of all of the enemy group items.
If you have already started the boss and the enemy group attacks you, Your best choice is to disengage from the boss and regroup without fighting back, If some enemy go corrupt - kill him. Also at that point the enemy group is already all Purple. So if they start the boss at that point you can kill them all without going corrupt.
The point is - as long as you always stay green - then enemy group has nothing that they can do.
SO the only real option is to "out dps". Would call this a PVE game if you ask me.
I think boss fights will become dps race, people will stay green and fully focus on dealing dps.
As I said many times, corrupted players will barely exist and gamers will see green hordes farming day and night
Okay but ashes doesn't want people pvping all the time in the open world thats why its disincentivized. The incentivization is meant to be specific scenarios in which the reward outweighs the risk of flagging, so that people arent pvping all the time in the open world. Pvp is meant to mainly happen in the other pvp dedicated systems like open seas, sieges, arenas, hunting grounds, etc. Not to happen all the time in the open world. The corruption is meant to deter pvp, but the flagging is there to allow for spontaneous pvp when the reward is worth the risk (such as specific scenarios like certain contested bosses). Under that context I think it does make sense, and would allow for different types of interesting pvp and pvx scenarios.
Its just alpha, things aren't tuned yet so what you are experiencing now isn't what the intent is in the long run once everything is implemented.
Just use the boss mechanics to finish off your enemies. When you want to take a boss from someone in a PvX game, you just figure out how to fight as if the boss is on your side.
You might not be allowed to CC the greens, but the boss can. And from the Boss mob's side, I'm sure that mob would 'appreciate' someone helping to break through those Bard Shields.
You only need to be Purple to DPS through a Shielding Dance. So yes, 'one' DPS can absolutely do it if they're skilled at timing attacks, which is a skill good DPS players have.
When a group rolls up second to an open world bossfight in progress, they are supposed to choose if to cooperate with the other group, or cooperate with the boss. This is fair, because the group that is already fighting already has lost some of their 'cooperate with the boss' options.
The problem is that Intrepid handles the Corruption the same way no matter if you kill player in starting zone, or some afk green player that is chilling in a park, or kill in order to secure a Boss. Tell me if you truly believe that griefers should be dealt the same way as those that try to secure a boss? Coz i dont, and thats why my solution to the problem is to distinguish each area and handle it differently.
This doesnt mean that you will see non stop pvping in the open world, because the vast majority of the open world will work close to what is now. The biggest changes will be to Boss areas, dungeons, and the highest quality of farming spots. The rest of the map will be almost as it is now.
This is as if in real world some murderer being put 3 stack of corruption for 3x kills on innocent people, and then putting 80 stack of corruption to some War HERO that that was fighting in a war against other country coz he killed 80 people in this war. And now you will say that in war the other said should be threated as Purple, But in reality even in wars there are situations where there are group of people that dont attack, but at the same time they are BIG threat to the army. And sometimes its better to kill them preemptively before they strike you by surprise. (They have no place in the battlefield if they dont intend to fight), Or even if they are not killed - they are secured/arrested/transported or some other action being taken against them in order to secure the army safety. But since those options are not present in AOC - then fighting them should be allowed.
Or maybe include option to challenge a group that is next to you. Something like a duel 1v1, but its for groups and is forced. Meaning after challenging them some Big area around the fight (that should cover the whole boss area) is threated as pvp zone. Give the green group 2-3 minutes to flee before the pvp zone start, and if they dont leave then you are free to kill them. And the zone should persist even if they leave, meaning if they come back to harass you while you do the boss you can freely kill them
In short: You didnt read any of the thread comments and have no idea what you are talking about. Got it.
So you want to have multiple kinds of corruption? Where some of the types dont make you drop items and dont reduce your stats? And the type of corruption you get depends on the place you got corrupted at?
What happens if you fight 40 vs 40 and some member make 6 kills. Will the corruption stack? Will these stacks affect you dropping items or reducing your dmg/move spead even tho you got corrupted at boss area?
Can you get multiple types of corruption at the same time? Do they stack?
Yes I agree. But im saying that your complaint is solved through those dedicated pvp/pvx systems like open seas, seiges, etc. These areas are basically the "solution" you are recommending but it is done in a different area than the corruption enabled zones.
The contesting of bosses is meant to be a different type of experience than something like a straight up war.
It isn't meant to facilitate "pre-emptive pvp, and war-like scenarios" all the time because it is meant to deter ganking at the same time as allowing for pvp to take place in specific scenarios. The point is that you can still pre-emptively pvp a group that is a threat but that is up to you to determine whether it is worth it to accept the corruption penalties to do so. If its not worth it then you only pvp if the other group flags and wants to fight over that specific boss/content.
This allows for some more pve focused content to also co-exist in the open world alongside those pvp areas, because it is not supposed to be worth it to go corrupt most of the time. This ultimately depends on the tuning of the penalties and rewards for certain content which is still being tested.
So yes I agree that pvpers/ganking should not be treated the same at all times and under all contexts, but that is already the case, through:
1. having pvp dedicated zones (to facilitate full on pvx scenarios and pre-emptive pvp)
2. allowing for ganking to take place when it is worth it to do so (through a reward provided by specific content that outweighs the risk of going corrupt) like contested areas
3. Deterring ganking in corruption enabled areas in order to provide more dedicated pve content (corruption penalties that outweigh the reward of that content)
I see these as micro-experiences within the overall game, rather than a single cohesive experience at all times, regardless of the consistency of corruption's application.
Well wait and see that with the current corruption system there is absolutely no possible reward that can out weight the penalty of going corrupt. Give it some time and you will see for yourself that almost no one will choose to go corrupt even if the rewards for going corrupt would be great.
In short: you are for a world with NO open world PVP at all. For you the PvP that is provided by the caravans/node or guild wars/node or castle sieges/Sea free pvp areas is enough and AOC has no need of Open world PVP? In the open world doing PVE is enough since the other dedicated contents for pvp are enough?
And i think that the open world PVP is not something that should be threated as criminal act. And for me its FUN while i am farming/gathering to meet some other group, to have some pvp, then continue with your daily tasks. This is something unexpected that you didnt plan for that can make the average game session interesting. But more than this - i think that competing for a boss loot should not be PvE gameplay. Like if both groups want this then sure make it pve. But if 1 of the group wants to secure the boss - then they should be able to do this without going corrupt.
The whole idea behind the game is that its PVX. This doesnt mean to have divided content that is only for PVE and other that is only for PVP. PVX means that the both contents are merged and that doing PVE can lead to PVP and vice versa. As shown in the node wars: there were PVE elements about killing mobs and gathering.
Let's. Things will change, its easy to get caught up in the current experience but its not a game yet atm.
I think you will come to find that this is not true as things get tuned.
That's not true in theory or in practice. That's purely based on your current experience, your perception of the systems, or an unfinished alpha state.
Maybe if I claimed that the current state of things should be final then you might be able to say that, but I said things will change which will likely result in the outcomes and intents that i've previously mentioned.
Agreed. I think that this will be the case eventually. It might not be as often as you would like in the open world, but it will likely happen nonetheless. Again, stick to the other auto-flagged zones and pvp/pvx systems if you want to experience this in the open world, moreso than what you can get in corruption enabled areas/contested content.