I am happy with both Ashes PvP and PvE design so far. I'm very much a PvX player when it comes to sandbox mmos.
Me stating that it would ruin the game isn't opinion based, it would clearly change the game into something that it's not intended to be. Taverns, open world dungeons, world bosses and node development, just to name a few, would be unplayable if they could be hindered so easily without repercussions.
What you are asking for spits in the face of game balance and meaningful combat, one of Intrepids main pillars.
Even if everyone was constantly flagged and there were no penalties, as you wish to happen, you would still feel no danger from the players you seem intent on attacking, as they might now be flagged, but they still have no interest in fighting you, just preferring to explore or gather or quest.
So your system does not actually provide you with what you purport to want because the system is not changing the mindset of those other players.
Yes but those other player who would like to attack, but don't want to because of punishing corruption, would if corruption is not there, or at least if it was less punishing. And THESE players change everything. They make the world interesting place where you have to watch out.
With punishing corruption, they will not attack, and world becomes boring place, where you AFK auto run from spot A to spot B.
So these "other players" also want to attack green players? Why is everyone so intent on attacking green players? These are players who have shown no interest in PvP.
There isn't any corruption for attacking other flagged players. So for everyone who wants to PvP there is no penalty whatsoever. There is only a penalty for attacking people who don't want to PvP. You still can, but you can't do it with impunity.
Just for one moment use your own logic on behalf of those people you seem intent on attacking. They are not forcing their playstyle on you, they aren't forcing you to ride around exploring instead of doing PvP.
Why do you feel it is ok for you to force your playstyle on them? Because you want to feel more danger? Where is this danger coming from? From players who have no intention of attacking you?
If you really want to feel danger, go right ahead and attack green players. Then you will have a nice dose of corruption and your gametime will be full of danger because you will have just made yourself a target and your every move will be full of danger.
It seems like the corruption mechanic should be something you passionately advocate for because it will give you exactly what you want - every moment of your playtime dogged by the danger of someone killing you.
Taverns, open world dungeons, world bosses and node development, just to name a few, would be unplayable if they could be hindered so easily without repercussions.
If you do not wish your node to be hindered then fight for it. If you do not wish your world boss even to fail because of player attacks, then fight those players.
Expecting a game to protect you so you do not have to fight for yourself is just lame, I'm sorry to say.
Repercussions should be dealt by other players, fighting for themselves, and then punishing the attackers in the way they seem fit (bounty hunter system is a good example of that). Repercussions should not be dealt automatically by game mechanics, that is just lame, and it is not in heart of PvP design. Not by a long shot.
These are players who have shown no interest in PvP.
Honestly it's their own problem. They should have chosen a pure PvE game if they did not wish to be attacked.
And maybe you should choose a game without corruption or consequences if you dislike it so? Can you not see the hypocrisy in your arguements?
Im sorry, but right now it seems that both sides have equal risk / reward and neither will be completely 100% happy, so Gothix, why do you feel that your view and playstyle is more valid than those who would avoid PvP given the opportunity?
If you do not wish your node to be hindered then fight for it. If you do not wish your world boss even to fail because of player attacks, then fight those players.
Expecting a game to protect you so you do not have to fight for yourself is just lame, I'm sorry to say.
Repercussions should be dealt by other players, fighting for themselves, and then punishing the attackers in the way they seem fit (bounty hunter system is a good example of that). Repercussions should not be dealt automatically by game mechanics, that is just lame, and it is not in heart of PvP design. Not by a long shot.
Ashes is not a PvP focused game? You do realize this, right? You can't expect someone to PvP if they don't want to, no one is forcing you to do raids or dungeons.
Intrepid is letting you have open world PvP but they've also implemented a system so you can choose to become a combatant or not. If you want to be an asshole and kill someone who doesn't want to fight you back then you'll get punished for it.
The punishment is harsh because what you are doing is wrong, you are impacting someone else's gameplay in a negative way without cause or reason. If you kill an innocent you are a criminal and deserve to be treated like one.
Why would you assume you should have the right to choose how other people play a roleplaying game?
If Intrepid took away the Punishment for killing innocents the whole world would become one giant Battle Arena with everyone killing each other without cause.
It's like you don't even know what game you're talking about. Corruption is a fundamental part of Ashes, so much so it defines the game itself. Maybe you should rewatch some streams so you can get a better grasp on why Corruption is essential for Ashes to survive.
Ashes has a pretty good system that works for both pvp and pve players.
-PVP players wanting open world pvp.... flag yourselves up and stay perma flagged. There is your consensual constant danger / more difficult fights. Feel free to fight each other all you want without loosing gear or gaining corruption.
-PVE players wanting pve..... don't flag up, don't fight back. Very unlikely pve players will have to deal with spawn camping or gankers. Feel free to go about your business with little fear of getting ganked every time you step out of town.
-Strategic conflict - The flagging and corruption system allows the pvp system to be bent between the two groups of players (pvp & pve). A player can strategically kill a non combatant for a variety of reasons such as denial of resources i.e. gaining access to a resource node. Maybe someone was shit talking while unflagged and you get tired of hearing it and deal with it by removing them from the area. But there are repercussions for bending the system that keep things balanced, hence the corruption system. The more someone bends the rule set, the more repercussions there will be. This makes the cross between pvp and pve very flexible rather than rigid and set in stone.
Problem solved.
From reading the complaints from the PVP player side, these people are not happy with this. They want to be able to circumvent the system and kill anyone, anywhere, anytime. The flagging system is not enough for you..... This would lead people to think you just want to grief / gank. Steven has clearly said that Ashes will not be a gank box and it would be stupid to alienate all the pve players.
This would lead people to think you just want to grief / gank. Steven has clearly said that Ashes will not be a gank box and it would be stupid to alienate all the pve players.
No, because if you actually READ what I posted many times over...
I want GRIEFING to be punished, and GANKING too.
ganking = killing lower level players griefing = repeatedly following same target and killing him over and over
What I don't want to be punished are occasional one time thefts. Where you see a player, engage him and steal the loot he was carrying (and not following him more to kill him again and grief him).
So I do not want a gank box, as you call it. But you still claim that I do, because... well I don't know why, either, you just don't read the posts or you just want to make it seem like I do (which is more likely).
No, because if you actually READ what I posted many times over...
I want GRIEFING to be punished, and GANKING too.
ganking = killing lower level players griefing = repeatedly following same target and killing him over and over
What I don't want to be punished are occasional one time thefts. Where you see a player, engage him and steal the loot he was carrying (and not following him more to kill him again and grief him).
So I do not want a gank box, as you call it. But you still claim that I do, because... well I don't know why, either, you just don't read the posts or you just want to make it seem like I do (which is more likely).
Did I quote you there? Was there an @Gothix ? Was not directed at you per say. Thin skin.
Lets say you are able to perform a 1 time theft, and then the other 7 members of your group could each get their turn.....(already see where your argument is gonna go with that, and if so presume they each in turn drop group before killing the poor little pve player,) soooo.... that is 8 deaths on one guy who doesn't care for pvp in a short span of time, loot lost 8 times...
Doesn't matter if you personally don't intend to grief or gank...... that is how the mechanic you purpose will end up being utilized. I know I would work it like that. That poor little guy wont eva show up in my woods again. Them be my resources.
@Gothix Unrestricted PvE? Do you mean in the sense we can kill as many monsters as we want but you can't do the same with people? That's a bit childish don't you think? they aren't one and the same and shouldn't be treated as such. You aren't being hindered one bit from participating in PvP content, it just makes it harder for you to murder people who don't want to participate.
Just because either PvP or PvE is more prominently featured in a game doesn't mean it isn't a PvX game. Infact I think you'll find 99% of PvX mmorpgs mainly feature PvE content and only feature PvP as an alternative play style. When was the last time you saw a PvP campaign or expansion pack for any of the major mmos. When was the last time you could login to a roleplaying game and not have to quest or grind to level up or progress a story.
Edit: If all you want is to not be punished so hard for occasional murders then you already have that. That's what the corruption system is for, you'll gain increasingly more as you commit more atrocities. A little corruption wont have much of an affect on you but a lot could be devastating.
Lets say you are able to perform a 1 time theft, and then the other 7 members of your group could each get their turn.....(already see where your argument is gonna go with that, and if so presume they each in turn drop group before killing the poor little pve player,) soooo.... that is 8 deaths on one guy who doesn't care for pvp in a short span of time, loot lost 8 times...
There are ways to work around that problem.
For example when player is killed and robbed, he get's a mark on him, lasting for (to be discussed) amount of time. If anyone else attacks player that already has mark on him, corruption applies.
However when someone kills (steals) from player without this mark, no corruption applies.
In this way people would still be protected from "free" multiple kills in a row, but not from a single theft, which should be completely ok for a PvX game.
Also (same like for getting killed to be ridden of corruption) same would apply for getting a mark: when someone from your guild or friend list kills you, you would get no mark. This would be to protect against exploit, of friends getting marks on themselves to be protected full time, and then returning their loot to each other.
So see, occasional kills ok, but still no "free" griefing by multiple players. Just need to consider how to compromise a bit.
For example when player is killed and robbed, he get's a mark on him, lasting for (to be discussed) amount of time. If anyone else attacks player that already has mark on him, corruption applies.
However when someone kills (steals) from player without this mark, no corruption applies.
In this way people would still be protected from "free" multiple kills in a row, but not from a single theft, which should be completely ok for a PvX game.
Also (same like for getting killed to be ridden of corruption) same would apply for getting a mark: when someone from your guild or friend list kills you, you would get no mark. This would be to protect against exploit, of friends getting marks on themselves to be protected full time, and then returning their loot to each other.
So see, occasional kills ok, but still no "free" griefing by multiple players. Just need to consider how to compromise a bit.
There are still a lot of holes with this.
- A mark of shame is not an appropriate answer. This could be abused by pve players, intentionally carrying little to no valuable loot and baiting a would be thief for the sole purpose to get a mark of shame so that they can then harvest valuable resources without fear. Not viable.
- Your suggestion of guild mates and friends list not able to apply the mark of shame... easy to work around and exploit. Drop guild / friend list...... have an alt outside of the guild...... have a designated guild member's alt applying the mark of shame to everyone in the guild's gathering party to provide temporary safety....Not viable.
- The idea of an occasional theft with no repercussions.
What would stop someone from killing an entire party of pve players?
What would stop a guild mate from scoring the killing blow on you while the would be thief is attacking you?
To what does allowing an occasional theft add to the game?
Why would a pve player with no interest in pvp bother leaving town if they could lose their time and effort without warning (crafting and stock market simulator 2019)?
Why should your whims have an impact that could be measured in hours on another player?
What would prevent an easy kill while the pve player is engaged with pve mobs?
Why spend time developing arenas and "meaningful conflict" if you are allowed to effectively camp resource areas?
How would this impact groups forming at dungeons or world boss areas?
These are just a few of the questions that would all have to be answered and have their own rule sets to be balanced and thus make this idea not viable.
The concept of an occasional theft sounds intriguing, but would create wide reaching problems that would require a ton of other systems and rule sets to get it even remotely balanced. The only people who benefit from this would be predatory PVPers / griefers / trolls and this would be at the expense of time and effort from PVEers.
What is wrong with settling for killing other PVPers? I know PVEers are the more easy targets. I take it that you intend to be perma flagged in game? If not your whole argument is mute.
@Hatred I see that there is no discussion with you. You just want to enforce your PvE paradise.
What happens if one player kills an entire raid of PvE players? Seriously, lol? If one player kills 40 other players, they have nothing else to do besides cover themselves in shame... lol
What if other player is engaged with mobs when attacked? This should be a PvX game. That player should deal with it.
Many of your questions just show that you would rather have a PvE server then PvX server. So I guess I'm out of attempting to reach a common ground with you. I see that it's impossible.
It's not pubg, murder isn't something you should have to be doing every day if you don't want to. Who in their right mind is going to go farm for mats if it's a certainty they'll die doing it?
@Gothix You don't seem to know how a discussion works, you also want to enforce your PvP perspective. It's not much of a discussion without opposing views.
The first thing I thought about when they mentioned battle maps was the ability to see where in the zone there was fighting happening, to kind of allow everyone to see where the hotspots were.
Warhammer Online had a system like this, showing little clashing swords (IIRC) at the places in the RvR zones where there were battles taking place. The larger the battle, the bigger the icon.
A single pvp encounter would not show up, but once a few people are killed over a prolonged period of time, then this could start to show up.
Now there is no guarantee that it would still be there by the time you saddled up and rode all the way there, but it would be a cool indicator for where to find some action if you were looking for some meaningful pvp.
I know these taverns are to be mostly player driven, but I think it would be too much to ask for these battle hotspots to show up only through player placement (you'd have to ride all the way back to the tavern and the fight could be long over by then).
What would be better is to explain it by saying the rumours are coming in through NPC travellers of fighting in a certain area and that is how it is getting added to the battlemap.
I think that to implement this it should only be available on the battlemaps in taverns, not on everyone's personal map. And maybe a guild could choose to have one in their guildhall as well - instead of a crafting station or whatever other additions you can have in such places.
@Gothix So I need to bring my guild with me every time I want to pick mushrooms? Get real man, we all have better shit to be doing.
No not the whole guild, but unless you are travelling with a friend or 2, then you should accept the risk of getting killed out there. And not blame anyone but yourself for your carelessness in a dangerous world.
I'm still not sure why you feel that you have a right to murder players that don't want to engage in PvP and not suffer any consequence?
Players who want to PvP will flag themselves. You as a PvP player will have plenty of opportunity to enjoy your chosen playstyle, however you have not made any good reason for your need to murder innocent passers by other than "I don't want to be punished for killing those who don't want to play the same way as me"
You don't want corruption? Roll lots of disposable alts.
How is the risk of being slaughtered and having my goods taken away from me, by an aggressive bully such as yourself, not enough of a risk for passing PvEr's?
Trust us, even PvE players who don't want to group, will do so in this game, especially if there are a lot of people with the same attitude as yourself.
I feel like there has been a lot of explanation, as to why the PvX system as it currently stands provides consequences and risks to all playstyles, yet you're not hearing it. What's happening instead is that you're repeating your stance without actually providing more of an explanation to help us change our minds on this, because right now, and I am sorry to say so, it's coming across as your only reason is because you want to be selfish.
You want no corruption. You want to inflict your playstyle on everyone. You don't want to try to make an effort to understand that actually, both sides in this game are going to be at risk and be punished for playing how they want to play.
I'm sure that there is a reasonable argument, I'm just still unclear as to what it is
Actually, the character you roll doesn't have to be disposable, if you want to choose the corruption lifestyle, why not embrace it? Just whenever the urge to kill comes upon you, do so on that alt. Otherwise, play by the rules
I'm still not sure why you feel that you have a right to murder players that don't want to engage in PvP and not suffer any consequence?
Players who want to PvP will flag themselves. You as a PvP player will have plenty of opportunity to enjoy your chosen playstyle, however you have not made any good reason for your need to murder innocent passers by other than "I don't want to be punished for killing those who don't want to play the same way as me"
You don't want corruption? Roll lots of disposable alts.
How is the risk of being slaughtered and having my goods taken away from me, by an aggressive bully such as yourself, not enough of a risk for passing PvEr's?
Trust us, even PvE players who don't want to group, will do so in this game, especially if there are a lot of people with the same attitude as yourself.
I feel like there has been a lot of explanation, as to why the PvX system as it currently stands provides consequences and risks to all playstyles, yet you're not hearing it. What's happening instead is that you're repeating your stance without actually providing more of an explanation to help us change our minds on this, because right now, and I am sorry to say so, it's coming across as your only reason is because you want to be selfish.
You want no corruption. You want to inflict your playstyle on everyone. You don't want to try to make an effort to understand that actually, both sides in this game are going to be at risk and be punished for playing how they want to play.
I'm sure that there is a reasonable argument, I'm just still unclear as to what it is
@Gothix This is very well put, I suggest you read it a few times and meditate on it a little.
What I want is, when someone farms out resource i needed (resource nodes are disposable, they vanish after being looted) and I see him, to be able to attack him to take that resource without having to travel to another side of world to find more of it.
At the same time, I don't want see my stats reduced instantly because of (in my view legit kill) to get that resource that this person took first.
This is not griefing, as I will not follow him around and kill him over for no reason at all. This is a single kill, for specific purpose of taking this resource i need, that this guy took first, and has depleted the nodes that had it.
My options being, having to travel on another side of world, hoping i will find more (chances also being i might not), or attacking that person trying to get this resource then and there.
This is what Ashes is about, conflict about resources, competition between nodes.
Now, I accept bounty being placed on me for me killing that player. What i do not want to see is my stats drop, just because i engaged in combat with that person to do what this game is about, resource conflict.
This is why I don't: - request complete removal of corruption - request corruption being voided in case of griefing (repeated killing) or ganking lower players
This is why I do: - ask corruption to be tweaked a bit so it functions in such way that it doesn't reduce stats in case of single occasional engagements over the resources (which I think should be completely logical and legit)
For the above I believe, bounty system should more than suffice.
@Megs I tried to explain to the best of my ability.
I see your point, in what you want but it could be abused by pvpers by killing one person in a certain amount of time so they wont have stats reduced. Their needs to be a balance you kill a player you should be treated as a PKer because you are. Murder is Murder doesn't matter the reason, you might think its justified by killing a bot stealing the resources but its still murder you need to deal with the consequences.
Tweaking a corruption system will undoubtedly be used to abuse people by Pkers so its a fine line. I bet if you kill 1 player you wont be corrupted for a long period of time. Your stats should be affected during that period. Risk and Reward.
You kill someone who took the resources you take some of the resources but now its risky to stay around due to the bounty hunters and your stats being reduced I think this is a good way to keep things balanced.
I'm actually kinda with you on this one now, but I'd personally not worry too much until there's a chance to see how it actually plays out during the alpha / betas, the reason for this is because imo: The dev team do have their heads screwed on rightright If there's too much outcry from pvpers during that stage, (and I'm no game dev) wouldn't it be rather simple to tweak any stat % adjustments up / down as needed?
So I'm very sorry for calling you a bully, or feeling that you were aiming to gank harmless peeps. Sorry.
Comments
I didn't. I also didn't insult you, look I sent you a heart.
But still you should know, Ashes isn't going to have the PvE like you want, and if it did it would ruin the game in so many ways.
Me stating that it would ruin the game isn't opinion based, it would clearly change the game into something that it's not intended to be. Taverns, open world dungeons, world bosses and node development, just to name a few, would be unplayable if they could be hindered so easily without repercussions.
What you are asking for spits in the face of game balance and meaningful combat, one of Intrepids main pillars.
There isn't any corruption for attacking other flagged players. So for everyone who wants to PvP there is no penalty whatsoever. There is only a penalty for attacking people who don't want to PvP. You still can, but you can't do it with impunity.
Just for one moment use your own logic on behalf of those people you seem intent on attacking. They are not forcing their playstyle on you, they aren't forcing you to ride around exploring instead of doing PvP.
Why do you feel it is ok for you to force your playstyle on them? Because you want to feel more danger? Where is this danger coming from? From players who have no intention of attacking you?
If you really want to feel danger, go right ahead and attack green players. Then you will have a nice dose of corruption and your gametime will be full of danger because you will have just made yourself a target and your every move will be full of danger.
It seems like the corruption mechanic should be something you passionately advocate for because it will give you exactly what you want - every moment of your playtime dogged by the danger of someone killing you.
Honestly it's their own problem. They should have chosen a pure PvE game if they did not wish to be attacked.
If you do not wish your node to be hindered then fight for it. If you do not wish your world boss even to fail because of player attacks, then fight those players.
Expecting a game to protect you so you do not have to fight for yourself is just lame, I'm sorry to say.
Repercussions should be dealt by other players, fighting for themselves, and then punishing the attackers in the way they seem fit (bounty hunter system is a good example of that). Repercussions should not be dealt automatically by game mechanics, that is just lame, and it is not in heart of PvP design. Not by a long shot.
Im sorry, but right now it seems that both sides have equal risk / reward and neither will be completely 100% happy, so Gothix, why do you feel that your view and playstyle is more valid than those who would avoid PvP given the opportunity?
Intrepid is letting you have open world PvP but they've also implemented a system so you can choose to become a combatant or not. If you want to be an asshole and kill someone who doesn't want to fight you back then you'll get punished for it.
The punishment is harsh because what you are doing is wrong, you are impacting someone else's gameplay in a negative way without cause or reason. If you kill an innocent you are a criminal and deserve to be treated like one.
Why would you assume you should have the right to choose how other people play a roleplaying game?
If Intrepid took away the Punishment for killing innocents the whole world would become one giant Battle Arena with everyone killing each other without cause.
It's like you don't even know what game you're talking about. Corruption is a fundamental part of Ashes, so much so it defines the game itself. Maybe you should rewatch some streams so you can get a better grasp on why Corruption is essential for Ashes to survive.
-PVP players wanting open world pvp.... flag yourselves up and stay perma flagged. There is your consensual constant danger / more difficult fights. Feel free to fight each other all you want without loosing gear or gaining corruption.
-PVE players wanting pve..... don't flag up, don't fight back. Very unlikely pve players will have to deal with spawn camping or gankers. Feel free to go about your business with little fear of getting ganked every time you step out of town.
-Strategic conflict - The flagging and corruption system allows the pvp system to be bent between the two groups of players (pvp & pve). A player can strategically kill a non combatant for a variety of reasons such as denial of resources i.e. gaining access to a resource node. Maybe someone was shit talking while unflagged and you get tired of hearing it and deal with it by removing them from the area. But there are repercussions for bending the system that keep things balanced, hence the corruption system. The more someone bends the rule set, the more repercussions there will be. This makes the cross between pvp and pve very flexible rather than rigid and set in stone.
Problem solved.
From reading the complaints from the PVP player side, these people are not happy with this. They want to be able to circumvent the system and kill anyone, anywhere, anytime. The flagging system is not enough for you..... This would lead people to think you just want to grief / gank. Steven has clearly said that Ashes will not be a gank box and it would be stupid to alienate all the pve players.
No, because if you actually READ what I posted many times over...
I want GRIEFING to be punished, and GANKING too.
ganking = killing lower level players
griefing = repeatedly following same target and killing him over and over
What I don't want to be punished are occasional one time thefts. Where you see a player, engage him and steal the loot he was carrying (and not following him more to kill him again and grief him).
So I do not want a gank box, as you call it. But you still claim that I do, because... well I don't know why, either, you just don't read the posts or you just want to make it seem like I do (which is more likely).
It's a PvX game. And PvX means that it includes both PvP and PvE.
If the PvX includes: unrestricted PvE and restricted PvP, then it is unfair to call it "PvX".
Either make PvP more liberal, or restrict PvE somehow as well. Gain curruption for doing PvE "too much", or at "wrong times".
Lets say you are able to perform a 1 time theft, and then the other 7 members of your group could each get their turn.....(already see where your argument is gonna go with that, and if so presume they each in turn drop group before killing the poor little pve player,) soooo.... that is 8 deaths on one guy who doesn't care for pvp in a short span of time, loot lost 8 times...
Doesn't matter if you personally don't intend to grief or gank...... that is how the mechanic you purpose will end up being utilized. I know I would work it like that. That poor little guy wont eva show up in my woods again. Them be my resources.
That's a bit childish don't you think? they aren't one and the same and shouldn't be treated as such. You aren't being hindered one bit from participating in PvP content, it just makes it harder for you to murder people who don't want to participate.
Just because either PvP or PvE is more prominently featured in a game doesn't mean it isn't a PvX game. Infact I think you'll find 99% of PvX mmorpgs mainly feature PvE content and only feature PvP as an alternative play style. When was the last time you saw a PvP campaign or expansion pack for any of the major mmos. When was the last time you could login to a roleplaying game and not have to quest or grind to level up or progress a story.
Edit: If all you want is to not be punished so hard for occasional murders then you already have that. That's what the corruption system is for, you'll gain increasingly more as you commit more atrocities. A little corruption wont have much of an affect on you but a lot could be devastating.
There are ways to work around that problem.
For example when player is killed and robbed, he get's a mark on him, lasting for (to be discussed) amount of time. If anyone else attacks player that already has mark on him, corruption applies.
However when someone kills (steals) from player without this mark, no corruption applies.
In this way people would still be protected from "free" multiple kills in a row, but not from a single theft, which should be completely ok for a PvX game.
Also (same like for getting killed to be ridden of corruption) same would apply for getting a mark: when someone from your guild or friend list kills you, you would get no mark. This would be to protect against exploit, of friends getting marks on themselves to be protected full time, and then returning their loot to each other.
So see, occasional kills ok, but still no "free" griefing by multiple players. Just need to consider how to compromise a bit.
- A mark of shame is not an appropriate answer. This could be abused by pve players, intentionally carrying little to no valuable loot and baiting a would be thief for the sole purpose to get a mark of shame so that they can then harvest valuable resources without fear. Not viable.
- Your suggestion of guild mates and friends list not able to apply the mark of shame... easy to work around and exploit. Drop guild / friend list...... have an alt outside of the guild...... have a designated guild member's alt applying the mark of shame to everyone in the guild's gathering party to provide temporary safety....Not viable.
- The idea of an occasional theft with no repercussions.
What would stop someone from killing an entire party of pve players?
What would stop a guild mate from scoring the killing blow on you while the would be thief is attacking you?
To what does allowing an occasional theft add to the game?
Why would a pve player with no interest in pvp bother leaving town if they could lose their time and effort without warning (crafting and stock market simulator 2019)?
Why should your whims have an impact that could be measured in hours on another player?
What would prevent an easy kill while the pve player is engaged with pve mobs?
Why spend time developing arenas and "meaningful conflict" if you are allowed to effectively camp resource areas?
How would this impact groups forming at dungeons or world boss areas?
These are just a few of the questions that would all have to be answered and have their own rule sets to be balanced and thus make this idea not viable.
The concept of an occasional theft sounds intriguing, but would create wide reaching problems that would require a ton of other systems and rule sets to get it even remotely balanced. The only people who benefit from this would be predatory PVPers / griefers / trolls and this would be at the expense of time and effort from PVEers.
What is wrong with settling for killing other PVPers? I know PVEers are the more easy targets. I take it that you intend to be perma flagged in game? If not your whole argument is mute.
What happens if one player kills an entire raid of PvE players? Seriously, lol? If one player kills 40 other players, they have nothing else to do besides cover themselves in shame... lol
What if other player is engaged with mobs when attacked? This should be a PvX game. That player should deal with it.
Many of your questions just show that you would rather have a PvE server then PvX server. So I guess I'm out of attempting to reach a common ground with you. I see that it's impossible.
Someone who is willing to defend them. Have friends that help each other, and actually play a MMO instead of single player game.
And in such case it will be far from certainty they'll die doing it. In fact it's far more likely attackers will die and loose their own mats.
Warhammer Online had a system like this, showing little clashing swords (IIRC) at the places in the RvR zones where there were battles taking place. The larger the battle, the bigger the icon.
A single pvp encounter would not show up, but once a few people are killed over a prolonged period of time, then this could start to show up.
Now there is no guarantee that it would still be there by the time you saddled up and rode all the way there, but it would be a cool indicator for where to find some action if you were looking for some meaningful pvp.
I know these taverns are to be mostly player driven, but I think it would be too much to ask for these battle hotspots to show up only through player placement (you'd have to ride all the way back to the tavern and the fight could be long over by then).
What would be better is to explain it by saying the rumours are coming in through NPC travellers of fighting in a certain area and that is how it is getting added to the battlemap.
I think that to implement this it should only be available on the battlemaps in taverns, not on everyone's personal map. And maybe a guild could choose to have one in their guildhall as well - instead of a crafting station or whatever other additions you can have in such places.
No not the whole guild, but unless you are travelling with a friend or 2, then you should accept the risk of getting killed out there. And not blame anyone but yourself for your carelessness in a dangerous world.
I'm still not sure why you feel that you have a right to murder players that don't want to engage in PvP and not suffer any consequence?
Players who want to PvP will flag themselves. You as a PvP player will have plenty of opportunity to enjoy your chosen playstyle, however you have not made any good reason for your need to murder innocent passers by other than "I don't want to be punished for killing those who don't want to play the same way as me"
You don't want corruption? Roll lots of disposable alts.
How is the risk of being slaughtered and having my goods taken away from me, by an aggressive bully such as yourself, not enough of a risk for passing PvEr's?
Trust us, even PvE players who don't want to group, will do so in this game, especially if there are a lot of people with the same attitude as yourself.
I feel like there has been a lot of explanation, as to why the PvX system as it currently stands provides consequences and risks to all playstyles, yet you're not hearing it.
What's happening instead is that you're repeating your stance without actually providing more of an explanation to help us change our minds on this, because right now, and I am sorry to say so, it's coming across as your only reason is because you want to be selfish.
You want no corruption. You want to inflict your playstyle on everyone. You don't want to try to make an effort to understand that actually, both sides in this game are going to be at risk and be punished for playing how they want to play.
I'm sure that there is a reasonable argument, I'm just still unclear as to what it is
Just whenever the urge to kill comes upon you, do so on that alt. Otherwise, play by the rules
At the same time, I don't want see my stats reduced instantly because of (in my view legit kill) to get that resource that this person took first.
This is not griefing, as I will not follow him around and kill him over for no reason at all. This is a single kill, for specific purpose of taking this resource i need, that this guy took first, and has depleted the nodes that had it.
My options being, having to travel on another side of world, hoping i will find more (chances also being i might not), or attacking that person trying to get this resource then and there.
This is what Ashes is about, conflict about resources, competition between nodes.
Now, I accept bounty being placed on me for me killing that player. What i do not want to see is my stats drop, just because i engaged in combat with that person to do what this game is about, resource conflict.
This is why I don't:
- request complete removal of corruption
- request corruption being voided in case of griefing (repeated killing) or ganking lower players
This is why I do:
- ask corruption to be tweaked a bit so it functions in such way that it doesn't reduce stats in case of single occasional engagements over the resources (which I think should be completely logical and legit)
For the above I believe, bounty system should more than suffice.
@Megs I tried to explain to the best of my ability.
I see your point, in what you want but it could be abused by pvpers by killing one person in a certain amount of time so they wont have stats reduced. Their needs to be a balance you kill a player you should be treated as a PKer because you are. Murder is Murder doesn't matter the reason, you might think its justified by killing a bot stealing the resources but its still murder you need to deal with the consequences.
Tweaking a corruption system will undoubtedly be used to abuse people by Pkers so its a fine line. I bet if you kill 1 player you wont be corrupted for a long period of time. Your stats should be affected during that period. Risk and Reward.
You kill someone who took the resources you take some of the resources but now its risky to stay around due to the bounty hunters and your stats being reduced I think this is a good way to keep things balanced.
I'm actually kinda with you on this one now, but I'd personally not worry too much until there's a chance to see how it actually plays out during the alpha / betas, the reason for this is because imo:
The dev team do have their heads screwed on rightright
If there's too much outcry from pvpers during that stage, (and I'm no game dev) wouldn't it be rather simple to tweak any stat % adjustments up / down as needed?
So I'm very sorry for calling you a bully, or feeling that you were aiming to gank harmless peeps.
Sorry.