Return PvP to the tropics islands

It's actually bizarre that this change was made - tropics islands being a hotspot for named mob competition was 90% of the reason to visit the tropics. There's no reason any of these should be considered safe zone, and the ZoI should be limited only to the island the node is on

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

Ludullu

The only lawless zone in the full release will be the open seas, so no, this was the right decision.

goodsolonius

Ludullu wrote: »

The only lawless zone in the full release will be the open seas, so no, this was the right decision.

the right decisions and the good decisions are not always the same thing

Settite

Aw really? I was looking forward to some lens based lawless zones. I won't be hopping in until phase 3 however I like the idea of an always on pvp zone.

Vargos

goodsolonius wrote: »

It's actually bizarre that this change was made - tropics islands being a hotspot for named mob competition was 90% of the reason to visit the tropics. There's no reason any of these should be considered safe zone, and the ZoI should be limited only to the island the node is on

I actually think this could turn out to be one of the best design choices, if they decide to introduce specific lawless zones on release with increased experience gain and better resources.
On top of that, adding resource caravan routes from these zones would bring even more content – both for solo gatherers who enjoy risk and for organized player groups. But it must be careful balancing to make rewards feel worth the risk.

This would perfectly align with the game’s core risk vs reward philosophy: the higher the risk, the greater the reward.

Of course, having the lawless open sea is nice on paper…
But what is the real motivation to sail there besides moving caravans? Especially when, as it stands now, the system feels more like a placeholder (only gets gold for delivery) with no real economic impact.

Ludullu

goodsolonius wrote: »

the right decisions and the good decisions are not always the same thing

And there's a ton of "good" decisions out there, which a ton of people keep pushing onto Ashes. Yet none of them are the right decisions for the design.

Vargos

Ludullu wrote: »

goodsolonius wrote: »

the right decisions and the good decisions are not always the same thing

And there's a ton of "good" decisions out there, which a ton of people keep pushing onto Ashes. Yet none of them are the right decisions for the design.

If you think adding of lawless zones with higher xp and resource rewards is wrong, please add disadvantages of it and why you think such lawless zones might not fit well with the Ashes design if it is based on risk vs reward.
We are interested in your opinion. There are obviously a lot of advantages of such zones.

Noaani

Vargos wrote: »

Ludullu wrote: »

goodsolonius wrote: »

the right decisions and the good decisions are not always the same thing

And there's a ton of "good" decisions out there, which a ton of people keep pushing onto Ashes. Yet none of them are the right decisions for the design.

If you think adding of lawless zones with higher xp and resource rewards is wrong, please add disadvantages of it and why you think such lawless zones might not fit well with the Ashes design if it is based on risk vs reward.
We are interested in your opinion. There are obviously a lot of advantages of such zones.

It doesn't fit well because that is not the intention of the game.

The focus of PvP in Ashes is about larger scale warfare. It's node vs node or guild vs guild. That is why the focus intent of PvP is content like sieges and wars.

Sure, they aren't implemented properly (at all, really) on alpha, but that has literally always been the intended focus of PvP for this game.

Even the intent for lawless zones in the live game is for larger scale, as lawless zones are confined to the ocean. Since it takes multiple players to operate a single ship, that means lawless zones in the live game will be similarly large scale conflict.

Adding small scale PvP with an overland lawless zone detracts from all of that. It takes away from what the games core is supposed to be.

That is why not adding it now is the right decision, even if Adding it would make the alpha in its current state play better.

Intrepids decision making process is made with both eyes looking at the end result, not looking at immediate improvements to the alpha environment.

Vargos

Noaani wrote: »

Vargos wrote: »

Ludullu wrote: »

goodsolonius wrote: »

the right decisions and the good decisions are not always the same thing

And there's a ton of "good" decisions out there, which a ton of people keep pushing onto Ashes. Yet none of them are the right decisions for the design.

If you think adding of lawless zones with higher xp and resource rewards is wrong, please add disadvantages of it and why you think such lawless zones might not fit well with the Ashes design if it is based on risk vs reward.
We are interested in your opinion. There are obviously a lot of advantages of such zones.

It doesn't fit well because that is not the intention of the game.

The focus of PvP in Ashes is about larger scale warfare. It's node vs node or guild vs guild. That is why the focus intent of PvP is content like sieges and wars.

Thank you for your response!
I completely agree that large-scale PvP like sieges and wars should remain the core and ultimate endgame of Ashes.

However, I believe it’s equally important to provide horizontal PvP content that allows players to engage outside of organized large-scale events. Not every player is always part of a guild, and even guild members need something meaningful to do between wars, especially if it complements the risk vs reward and philosophy and PvX style.

I don’t think adding overland lawless zones would shift the focus away from large-scale PvP.
On the contrary, it could complement it by offering additional layers of engagement while players wait for sieges or prepare for bigger conflicts.

Ashes is designed as a living sandbox world, and in a sandbox, players should have the freedom to find conflict and risk vs reward opportunities at different scales—not just during pre-scheduled massive events or gvg wars.

After all, guild wars and sieges won’t be happening 24/7, but the world keeps moving.
Small-scale PvP zones could fill that downtime and keep players engaged, giving both solo players and small groups a reason to log in and play if PvP is their main motivation even when large-scale content is not happening.

In the long run, that kind of ongoing engagement could actually strengthen the PvP ecosystem, encouraging more players to eventually participate in the larger wars.

Would you agree that balancing both large and small-scale PvP could lead to a more active and alive world overall?

Ludullu

Vargos wrote: »

giving both solo players and small groups a reason to log in and play if PvP is their main motivation even when large-scale content is not happening.

Except that's not what's gonna happen. Lawless areas will be filled with big guilds that just annihilate anyone who dares enter them. And they'll win all that better loot/xp for absolutely free, w/o any risk.

Now all those solo and small group players are even more behind than they previously were.

Vargos wrote: »

Would you agree that balancing both large and small-scale PvP could lead to a more active and alive world overall?

And lawless areas are not the balancing that should be happening. Better corruption balancing and better war design is what's meant to balance those things.

And wars ARE meant to be 24/7, because outside of the prime-time goals, you can fight each other 24/7. At least that's one of the things Steven promised in the past.
https://forums.ashesofcreation.com/discussion/53205/24-7-pvp-during-guild-node-wars/p1

Lawless zones are simply the laziest, dumbest, most basic way of saying "well, there's a supposed theoretical higher risk in this locations, so here's all the reward you might want". Except that isn't true. Just like caravan attackers have 0 damn risk when attacking a caravan, while they get all the reward for it.

The true and proper equation of risk/reward should be present in the wars and corruption system. Wars should have appropriate costs with appropriate mechanics, so that smaller guilds have smaller costs when declaring against bigger guilds and they should have tasks that function based on guerrilla tactics, while big guilds should have bigger costs to declare against small guilds but really small costs for equally-big/strong wardecs.

AND FFS, STEVEN, NONE OF THIS SHIT IS SUPPOSED TO HAVE DEATH PENALTIES OUTSIDE OF DECAY. CHANGE IT BAAAAACK!

Noaani

Vargos wrote: »

However, I believe it’s equally important to provide horizontal PvP content that allows players to engage outside of organized large-scale events. Not every player is always part of a guild, and even guild members need something meaningful to do between wars, especially if it complements the risk vs reward and philosophy and PvX style.

That is what corruption based PvP and bounty hunters are for.

If a lawless overland zone was added to the game, that would mean it needs to have better drops and resources than the rest of the game. This is just how it would have to be.

That does drastically alter the game. It isn't possible to have a lawless area that is worth going to without changing the core of what Ashes is as a game

The two things just aren't compatible.

Edit; don't get me wrong, I understand the desire for a lawless area, and agree that it would make the current alpha better than it is without it. However, it's the final product that makes it not fit well, and that really is all that should matter.

Settite

Personally I would like another area aside from the open ocean with always on pvp. Something less "structured". Personally I enjoyed cyrodill in eso since you could fight anyone in an opposing faction while there.

It would be hard to balance however since if it gives you more/ better rewards then it'll just be monopolized by larger guilds.

Something to think on i suppose....

Vargos

Ludullu wrote: »

Vargos wrote: »

giving both solo players and small groups a reason to log in and play if PvP is their main motivation even when large-scale content is not happening.

Except that's not what's gonna happen. Lawless areas will be filled with big guilds that just annihilate anyone who dares enter them. And they'll win all that better loot/xp for absolutely free, w/o any risk.

Now all those solo and small group players are even more behind than they previously were.

Thank you for this response, you are raising a very valid point that absolutely deserves attention.

I completely agree that without proper balancing, lawless zones could easily turn into playgrounds for large guilds that just wipe out anyone who dares to enter. And that’s definitely not the kind of risk-versus-reward system I am advocating for.

I believe the question shouldn’t be "if" these zones should exist, but rather "how" they should be designed to avoid exactly the situation you described.

In my opinion, the key lies in how these zones are designed and incentivized.

For example, if the resources were spread out enough across the zone so that it only made sense to gather them in small groups of 1-2 gatherers, it would completely remove the incentive for large guilds to bring their entire force there, since having too many players would be inefficient.

The same goes for mob farming - if their spawns were placed far enough apart that only one group could effectively farm within a 500-1000+ meter radius, it would again make it unproductive for large guilds to dominate the area, since their members would end up standing around doing nothing, making other content a better use of their time.

I also believe that these zones don’t necessarily have to offer better XP or loot. They could simply be resource-focused zones with extra caravan launch points. This would actually be easier to design, because a big guild wouldn’t be able to efficiently control the entire area if they had to split into 5-7 smaller groups to protect individual gatherers. That already creates small-scale PvP skirmishes where the "big guild domination" argument becomes much less relevant.

Vargos

Noaani wrote: »

Vargos wrote: »

However, I believe it’s equally important to provide horizontal PvP content that allows players to engage outside of organized large-scale events. Not every player is always part of a guild, and even guild members need something meaningful to do between wars, especially if it complements the risk vs reward and philosophy and PvX style.

That is what corruption based PvP and bounty hunters are for.

If a lawless overland zone was added to the game, that would mean it needs to have better drops and resources than the rest of the game. This is just how it would have to be.

That does drastically alter the game. It isn't possible to have a lawless area that is worth going to without changing the core of what Ashes is as a game

Thanks for the reply. I see your point, but I believe a carefully designed lawless zone could actually fit the game’s philosophy without breaking it.

Ashes is built on risk vs reward and player-driven conflict, and adding a resource-focused, well-designed lawless area could complement that - not replace or overshadow node wars or large-scale PvP.

It wouldn’t need to offer "the best" rewards for free. The value could come from alternative gathering opportunities with higher risk and higher reward, and/or logistical advantages like extra caravan routes. Meanwhile, the scattered gathering points and distance between objectives would naturally favor small group skirmishes over zerg dominance.

In that way, even large guilds would face the logistical challenge of spreading thin, turning the area into multiple smaller fights, not a single domination point.

If designed this way, it could expand PvP variety without shifting the game’s core - just adding another optional layer to the player-driven world Ashes promises.

Isn’t finding creative ways to reward different types of player risk-taking - without making any single option mandatory - exactly the kind of design challenge that makes Ashes so ambitious and exciting to follow?

Aszkalon

Settite wrote: »

Aw really? I was looking forward to some lens based lawless zones. I won't be hopping in until phase 3 however I like the idea of an always on pvp zone.

Well, People can STILL declare unconditional War on your Guild when you are in one - and then you can be attacked anywhere apparently without your Attackers ever running danger of becoming corrupted ... ...

The Lawless Zones are an Alpha Two-only thing which is i think mostly for testing PvP-Encounters between Groups. But even when they are gone, one will always be able to get attacked anyways.

Settite

Aszkalon wrote: »

Settite wrote: »

Aw really? I was looking forward to some lens based lawless zones. I won't be hopping in until phase 3 however I like the idea of an always on pvp zone.

Well, People can STILL declare unconditional War on your Guild when you are in one - and then you can be attacked anywhere apparently without your Attackers ever running danger of becoming corrupted ... ...

The Lawless Zones are an Alpha Two-only thing which is i think mostly for testing PvP-Encounters between Groups. But even when they are gone, one will always be able to get attacked anyways.

Lol True, however I doubt many people will bother war declaring on my guild since il mostlikly just be in a small guild of friends. I'd prefer not being limited to only attacking one guild or having to gain corruption just to get a fight here and there. Or needing to be on the open sea. (I don't care much for naval stuff.) There are ofcourse arena and I assume pvp based events? (Not sure) so there are still places to scratch the itch without needing to hope someone else willingly flags up to fight when I hit them and jump in place hoping for reciprocation.

All in all its not as make or break it for me since there should still be enough pvp in my daily activities. However like Vargos was saying above, having additional layers of content won't hurt if it's recieved well enough by the community.

Noaani

Vargos wrote: »

It wouldn’t need to offer "the best" rewards for free.

Honestly, the scale of reward just informs the flavor of how this would be bad.

Obviously not "for free", but it will need to offer the best rewards. It would have higher risk.

If such an area doesn't offer the best rewards, it will go largely unused. The only people using it will be those out looking for PvP, taking that away from the rest of the game world and thus lessening the game.

If such an area does have the best rewards, then the games entire meta becomes joining a zero and running this lawless area. This would still have that same issue of removing PvP instigating players from the rest of the game world.

No matter how you look at it, any area that entices PvP focused players in to one area is a detriment to the game. The game needs these players spread out across the server to be PvP instigators, not concentrated in one area and fighting among themselves.

So yeah, it literally can not be added to this game without being a detriment. It is the very existence of a PvP focused area that is bad for the game.

People just wanting some PvP will eventually have an arena - which in itself is going to remove a lot of PvP from the open world.

Xeeg

goodsolonius wrote: »

It's actually bizarre that this change was made - tropics islands being a hotspot for named mob competition was 90% of the reason to visit the tropics. There's no reason any of these should be considered safe zone, and the ZoI should be limited only to the island the node is on

Personally, I think each node should have a few mini purple regions so we can actually PVP a bit in this game without spending hours traveling the map (looking for PVP), or fighting a guild/node only war.

Settite

Xeeg wrote: »

goodsolonius wrote: »

It's actually bizarre that this change was made - tropics islands being a hotspot for named mob competition was 90% of the reason to visit the tropics. There's no reason any of these should be considered safe zone, and the ZoI should be limited only to the island the node is on

Personally, I think each node should have a few mini purple regions so we can actually PVP a bit in this game without spending hours traveling the map (looking for PVP), or fighting a guild/node only war.

Love this idea. I feel like most people will just never flag up so having an always on flag locations sounds lovely. Just increase gatherables and such to give incentive to go and boom a spot to pvp whenever.

Child Item