Amazon Game Studios - New World = Learning opportunity

New world shares a lot of similarities with the Ashes of creation vision. In my opinion, AoC has a lot more potential but New World can still be seen as an amazing learning opportunity.

Intrepid studios, please, watch the community feedback on New World when it comes out. Learn from their mistakes and especially from their future succeses.

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

Ventharien

Honestly i think a great measuring stick for the longevity of Ashes, is when the first towns and cities go down, how the community takes the rebuilding/ moving to another node. I'm hoping since they'll still have all their gear (though i wonder how banks or storage will be handled) and be essentially combat ready, they'll look forward to getting some payback and not get disheartened.

Noaani

Ventharien wrote: »

So long as the dev kit stays in single player mode i don't think it has a bearing on the conversation. And 100 player per server is just a more obvious limitation. How many people are playing around in any given shard, or server between handshake protocols? Especially when you can still travel between servers in most of the titles i mentioned. And most MMO's these days have a local server or 2 floating around. Not supported as the 'main' game, but neither are those the 'main' game in the above titles. My main gaming background has been MMO's, and then these survival pvp types for the last 5 or 6 years (with some more mmo sprinkled in) and with more MMO's going for that player driven economy, world, etc. i think these are valuable references on how many gamers act and play in such a framework. Hell, the New World guys were surprised at players antics, when anyone whos ever put 10 minutes into ark or rust could tell you that people have no qualms about wiping out low level groups or areas if they're incentivized in the slightest (loot) or if there aren't punishments or consequences for such tactics. And yeah i was referring to a persistent worlds in regards to pve. call of duty, fortnite and all the others show how much you can rake in with with pvp in more of a lobby setup.

I can't think of any AAA MMO's that have local servers. Nor can I think of any with single player (offline) modes.

In regards to servers, I'm not talking about region specific servers, I am talking about players hosting their own servers and having control over various aspects of those servers. Many MMO's have unofficial private servers - ones that the publisher of the game would shut down if they could - but that is not the same as providing support and functionality for players hosting local servers.

To me, full PvP is fine in survival games and in non-persistent games. It can't, doesn't, never has and never will work in a full AAA MMORPG. There needs to be some kind of control in place, as you yourself seem to agree.

This has always been my argument in regards to PvP in Ashes.

If you consider survival games to be their own genre, and put a clear delineation between survival games and MMORPG's, you very quickly see that pure survival games work, pure MMORPG's work, but attempting to blend them doesn't.

Noaani

Ventharien wrote: »

Honestly i think a great measuring stick for the longevity of Ashes, is when the first towns and cities go down, how the community takes the rebuilding/ moving to another node. I'm hoping since they'll still have all their gear (though i wonder how banks or storage will be handled) and be essentially combat ready, they'll look forward to getting some payback and not get disheartened.

I agree, this will be telling.

From what I understand, players will not lose anything, ever, unless killed while corrupt or if they lose a caravan. If a Freehold is destroyed, players essentially gain a blueprint to rebuild that Freehold as it was when destroyed, all they need to do is find somewhere to build it. My understanding is that when built, you regain all customizations and stored items you had when it was destroyed - but that is just my understanding.

I am somewhat interested to see how in node storage and housing will be taken in to account if a node is de-leveled or destroyed.

Ventharien

noaani wrote: »

I am somewhat interested to see how in node storage and housing will be taken in to account if a node is de-leveled or destroyed.

Yep. i think that'll be a big one. Making it disappear, or be able to be stolen seems too far from how they're handling other systems so i don't think that'll be the case. But if everything has a physical place in the world, ie no item teleport, how do people regain access to their goodies? Maybe a blueprint like with the freeholds, that can be redeemed at another storage point to grant access there, but with a time limit to simulate in world travel time?

Noaani

Ventharien wrote: »

noaani wrote: »

I am somewhat interested to see how in node storage and housing will be taken in to account if a node is de-leveled or destroyed.

Yep. i think that'll be a big one. Making it disappear, or be able to be stolen seems too far from how they're handling other systems so i don't think that'll be the case. But if everything has a physical place in the world, ie no item teleport, how do people regain access to their goodies? Maybe a blueprint like with the freeholds, that can be redeemed at another storage point to grant access there, but with a time limit to simulate in world travel time?

That is about the only way I could come up with to do it as well.

Doesn't seem ideal to me, but in the absence of anything better...

Sarevok

I actually hate the corruption system AoC is putting in place but that's just me. This could be the BDO mentality in me or I'm just an ass but in BDO if I was grinding a rotation and someone came along I gave them 1 chance to move along since I asked them politely to relocate. If I saw them again in my rotation, they were dead or I was. The problem with BDO's system is that people could just respawn, run back and die to me over and over increasing my karma. This was "karma bombing." Eventually, I would have to waste declaring war on the guild (if they were eligible) and once it was fair game they'd finally leave.

My guild left war decs up for a while when this happened so there was that.

When it comes to full loot as long as it doesn't take me hours or days to reach a fully decked out suit of armor + weapon only to die in the matter of a few seconds and lose it all I can deal with full loot.

Ravudha

noaani wrote: »

Ventharien wrote: »

noaani wrote: »

I am somewhat interested to see how in node storage and housing will be taken in to account if a node is de-leveled or destroyed.

Yep. i think that'll be a big one. Making it disappear, or be able to be stolen seems too far from how they're handling other systems so i don't think that'll be the case. But if everything has a physical place in the world, ie no item teleport, how do people regain access to their goodies? Maybe a blueprint like with the freeholds, that can be redeemed at another storage point to grant access there, but with a time limit to simulate in world travel time?

That is about the only way I could come up with to do it as well.

Doesn't seem ideal to me, but in the absence of anything better...

From one of the nodes blogs:

"Destroyed Freeholds are subject to material loss, and blueprints for them are mailed to the player to utilize for future placement in order to allow the player to keep their Freehold’s layout and structure."

In a 2017 livestream they also said they wanted building a freehold to be fairly easy so if you have to relocate, it won't be a monumental task. So I'd like to think the blueprint would include storage in the spirit of making the whole process forgiving for players.

There was also something about the freehold not being destroyed if it still resides in the ZOI of a lvl 3+ node after the freehold's original node is destroyed - that was in 2017 too.

Noaani

Sarevok wrote: »

This could be the BDO mentality in me or I'm just an ass

Don't take this the wrong way, but I'm going with the second one here - although coupled with poor game design in BDO.

At their best, MMO's are about cooperation, not confrontation. To be perfectly blunt, anyone that disagrees with this statement should be playing a non-persistent PvP based game or a survival game - both for the sake of their own enjoyment and the sake of the MMO they would otherwise play a small part in ruining for others.

If BDO were well designed (it wasn't), then the optimal way to deal with that specific situation would have been to invite that player to join you, if you both wanted to kill the same specific respawning mobs. The fact that BDO didn't have enough of these mobs for everyone that would want to be killing them was another issue with that games design, it encouraged players to fight for things that should not need to be fought over.

Any time an MMO makes you want to kill another player other than for political/social reasons, the game is doing something wrong.

There should never be an outright economic or progression based reason to want to kill another player. At absolute minimum, there needs to be serious consideration and apprehension of the consequences of taking such an action.

Sarevok wrote: »

When it comes to full loot as long as it doesn't take me hours or days to reach a fully decked out suit of armor + weapon only to die in the matter of a few seconds and lose it all I can deal with full loot.

Assuming you mean gear that is close to the best in the game, I would expect that to take the best, most dedicated players months to get.

An MMO where you need only spend a few hours to get a full set of decent gear isn't one that is worth playing, as at that point there is nothing left to do other than PvP.

You should keep in mind, Ashes will have - among other things - tiered raid content (and I am hoping- tiered group content). This means high end gear will be a form of progression - which means that high end gear will take real time and effort to actually acquire.

These things can not co-exist with a full loot PvP game. You can't have a full loot game AND a tiered PvE game at the same time.

It simply doesn't work.

mcstackerson

noaani wrote: »

At their best, MMO's are about cooperation, not confrontation. To be perfectly blunt, anyone that disagrees with this statement should be playing a non-persistent PvP based game or a survival game - both for the sake of their own enjoyment and the sake of the MMO they would otherwise play a small part in ruining for others.

This sounds like you are saying anyone who doesn't play MMOs the way you like to play them shouldn't play MMOs.

I disagree with this, i think MMOs are at their best when there is both. Why limit players to only being able to cooperate with each other? I'd agree that games should provide incentives for both and not all games are good at that. You should have reasons to play with people and reasons to play against.

Why do you feel the need to limit MMOs so much? Why can't games be different?

Ventharien

I think the best and most memorable experiences come from player confrontation, but also some of the worst can as well. In Ashes i could see the confrontation between two metropolis' being a story ever one remembers as an awesome experience, but in an mmo, player can so easily feel out of the loop, or excluded from those big events, and during their every day play feel it's every man for themselves. I think this will be fine if IS can hammer into everyones heads and play style, that going out around your node, or its vassals and killing people over resources, mobs, territory etc. is directly against your best interests. That player living and working in your ZOI after all is speeding your node forward in the growth race. In fact it might be worthwhile to be patrolling to protect those very people from attacks from rival nodes trying to slow you down. If they get people to act together within their node group it should work out to form communities that keep everyone engaged, but we'll only know once we get our hands on the game to see the reaction of players.

Sarevok

noaani wrote: »

Sarevok wrote: »

This could be the BDO mentality in me or I'm just an ass

Don't take this the wrong way, but I'm going with the second one here - although coupled with poor game design in BDO.

At their best, MMO's are about cooperation, not confrontation. To be perfectly blunt, anyone that disagrees with this statement should be playing a non-persistent PvP based game or a survival game - both for the sake of their own enjoyment and the sake of the MMO they would otherwise play a small part in ruining for others.

If BDO were well designed (it wasn't), then the optimal way to deal with that specific situation would have been to invite that player to join you, if you both wanted to kill the same specific respawning mobs. The fact that BDO didn't have enough of these mobs for everyone that would want to be killing them was another issue with that games design, it encouraged players to fight for things that should not need to be fought over.

Any time an MMO makes you want to kill another player other than for political/social reasons, the game is doing something wrong.

There should never be an outright economic or progression based reason to want to kill another player. At absolute minimum, there needs to be serious consideration and apprehension of the consequences of taking such an action.

None taken. I am a competitive player and BDO, for lack of a better word, pushed players to solo grind rotations to maximize their profit. Silver(money) was the main factor in your progression. You could enhance your gear with a little luck and play the odds but at the end of the day silver kept that progression possible. It was used in everything. Inviting another player to my group would mean faster killing of the rotation and splitting the profits. If we killed too fast it would reduce the amount of XP and silver we would gain since we would be standing around waiting for the next pack to spawn. We could however increase the size of the rotation if possible but then I might overlap with another nearby player. Grinding in BDO was tricky and often led to open world PvP (which I lived for). The end game in BDO was PvP. Node wars, sieges and Arsha Arena (bragging rights) so trying to stay competitive and at the top of the food chain required you to be confrontational. Too many times I tried to be nice to players crossing my path but at the end of the day most players are just assholes as well. Luckily, players could just swap channels in hopes of finding a vacant rotation every 7 minutes or so.

Overall though, I think I disagree with mostly everything you said besides the fact I am an ass. No offense but you sound like a PvE carebear that only enjoys PvP in an agreed upon setting of the player's choice. I hate safe PvE areas where players can just kill over me, take quest mobs or named mobs I am trying to farm since they are safe from me flagging and killing them. Society has rules but those rules don't usually transfer over to games since people can be scumbags. I guess we just see polar opposites of what the ideal MMO should be.

Ventharien

@Sarevok While i love open world pvp as well, the things you are describing as safe PvE areas you hate, are the exact thing Noanni is saying are poor systems. Presumably you and these other players are in the same faction/race/team that you can both safely do PvE things, so why should you ever be made to compete with each other at a detriment to both your 'team' and the community as a whole? Every time someone quits a game for a poorly thought out open world system, that's one less crafter, gatherer, buyer, or raid or pvp teammate, and that starts to add up. suddenly you have a dead economy, ghost towns of zones, and systems that shone with large player interaction, now seem lackluster and boring since everyone left. Society has rules because it helps the whole thing keep turning. Games of this nature should have rules to simulate that effect. If you have a problem with a system like corruption, then you don't want to pvp, you want to grief. Which is not even being stopped. If you want to slaughter that person 30 levels below you, you are entirely free to, and enjoy a full mat drop to your own profit. Other people like me who really don't like griefing, then get the chance to hunt you down, giving both parties some pvp. And that player first killed doesn't feel like they're running around with noone to back them up. The way i see it, everybody wins. Also, since i hate the term, in my experience, people who only go for the pvp and think that anyone who doesn't want that is a carebear tend to have the attention span of a gnat, always jumping to the newest things. While hardcore pve raiders are some of the most dedicated, involved players i've ever got to group with.

Sarevok

Ventharien wrote: »

@Sarevok While i love open world pvp as well, the things you are describing as safe PvE areas you hate, are the exact thing Noanni is saying are poor systems. Presumably you and these other players are in the same faction/race/team that you can both safely do PvE things, so why should you ever be made to compete with each other at a detriment to both your 'team' and the community as a whole? Every time someone quits a game for a poorly thought out open world system, that's one less crafter, gatherer, buyer, or raid or pvp teammate, and that starts to add up. suddenly you have a dead economy, ghost towns of zones, and systems that shone with large player interaction, now seem lackluster and boring since everyone left. Society has rules because it helps the whole thing keep turning. Games of this nature should have rules to simulate that effect. If you have a problem with a system like corruption, then you don't want to pvp, you want to grief. Which is not even being stopped. If you want to slaughter that person 30 levels below you, you are entirely free to, and enjoy a full mat drop to your own profit. Other people like me who really don't like griefing, then get the chance to hunt you down, giving both parties some pvp. And that player first killed doesn't feel like they're running around with noone to back them up. The way i see it, everybody wins. Also, since i hate the term, in my experience, people who only go for the pvp and think that anyone who doesn't want that is a carebear tend to have the attention span of a gnat, always jumping to the newest things. While hardcore pve raiders are some of the most dedicated, involved players i've ever got to group with.

I'm not a griefer and I don't condone spawn camping or killing lowbies for fun but mark my words this corruption system is going to get exploited. Like my example of karma bombing in BDO, exploited by players that will passively push you out of your grinding spot by dying repeatedly because they lose nothing and you lose time, your mob clearing speed, karma and drops. If you don't flag then that same player will just screw up your rotation until you either leave or he does. Sometimes players group together but there was always that chance you had to fight for your rotation.

If you discover a gold mine and while you're mining another person comes along and starts mining some for himself. You tell this newcomer you discovered it first so he should move along but he doesn't. He keeps taking your gold. You have to defend what's yours. I found BDO did a lot of things right but definitely had a lot of things wrong.

Noaani says we should all cooperate but that still doesn't stop people from exploiting the system for their own personal gain. Who am I to call when I am killing mobs in a dungeon and another player quietly follows me only to loot chests I am fighting for, or kill important mobs or even the quest mob? Nah, the GM isn't going to look out for me. That's why I'll warn that player or flag and kill him. Hopefully, things will respawn and then he'll have to work for his loot instead of stealing mine.

My opinions on PvE players doing raids, is simple. You like orchestrated fights with tactics you can memorize (or have a mod do for you) and I like chaotic, unpredictable and satisfying fights with real people that push my skill and knowledge of my class as well as all others. I find mostly nothing satisfying in PvE. It's a means to an end. Get the money or gear to beat the other PvPers. I'll be that guy in a guild that holds a node, a castle, and plans to stay on top of that PvP scene because that's what I enjoy.

Unfortunately, I don't have a perfect solution to keep players from griefing, mindlessly killing players for their own satisfaction or stopping players from taking advantage of these systems we put in place to protect them. I'm just a PvPer that sees similar systems in previous games that were taken advantage of. Sorry for the wall. I could debate this stuff all day but I've gotten off-topic.

Noaani

Ravudha wrote: »

noaani wrote: »

Ventharien wrote: »

noaani wrote: »

I am somewhat interested to see how in node storage and housing will be taken in to account if a node is de-leveled or destroyed.

Yep. i think that'll be a big one. Making it disappear, or be able to be stolen seems too far from how they're handling other systems so i don't think that'll be the case. But if everything has a physical place in the world, ie no item teleport, how do people regain access to their goodies? Maybe a blueprint like with the freeholds, that can be redeemed at another storage point to grant access there, but with a time limit to simulate in world travel time?

That is about the only way I could come up with to do it as well.

Doesn't seem ideal to me, but in the absence of anything better...

From one of the nodes blogs:

"Destroyed Freeholds are subject to material loss, and blueprints for them are mailed to the player to utilize for future placement in order to allow the player to keep their Freehold’s layout and structure."

In a 2017 livestream they also said they wanted building a freehold to be fairly easy so if you have to relocate, it won't be a monumental task. So I'd like to think the blueprint would include storage in the spirit of making the whole process forgiving for players.

There was also something about the freehold not being destroyed if it still resides in the ZOI of a lvl 3+ node after the freehold's original node is destroyed - that was in 2017 too.

Yeah, I vaguely remember that - other than the materials loss part.

It is systems like this though that I expect to be reassessed completely during beta. At this point in time, I would say it is (from our perspective) a roll of the dice in terms of where things will actually land.

Noaani

Sarevok wrote: »

None taken. I am a competitive player and BDO, for lack of a better word, pushed players to solo grind rotations to maximize their profit. Silver(money) was the main factor in your progression. You could enhance your gear with a little luck and play the odds but at the end of the day silver kept that progression possible. It was used in everything. Inviting another player to my group would mean faster killing of the rotation and splitting the profits. If we killed too fast it would reduce the amount of XP and silver we would gain since we would be standing around waiting for the next pack to spawn. We could however increase the size of the rotation if possible but then I might overlap with another nearby player. Grinding in BDO was tricky and often led to open world PvP (which I lived for). The end game in BDO was PvP. Node wars, sieges and Arsha Arena (bragging rights) so trying to stay competitive and at the top of the food chain required you to be confrontational. Too many times I tried to be nice to players crossing my path but at the end of the day most players are just assholes as well. Luckily, players could just swap channels in hopes of finding a vacant rotation every 7 minutes or so.

If you join up with another player, that should increases the size of the area you need to farm in order to maximize your time. I'm with you so far.

If that new expanded area then encroaches on someone elses area, the correct thing to do would be to then include that player in your group.

A well organized group of 5 players can kill faster than 10 individual players in every game - BDO included.

Yes, I am a top end PvE player first, but that means I know how to maximize resources (players, classes) in a multi-player setting far more than PvP players do. PvP players are generally better at which class counters which other class, and how to build a class to best counter various other classes and situations, but a competent PvE player know how to get the most out of various class combinations in PvE situations, and this makes everyone involved more effective (MUCH more effective).

BDO never encouraged solo grinding, players of the game just had the confrontational mindset while playing the game, and so that is how they behaved in that grind.

The funny thing about BDO - I have never met a single BDO player that has not told me they are only playing BDO until something better comes out. No one plans in staying in that game, no one thinks it is as good an MMO as could be made. The fact that you are posting on these forums tells me that you think the same.

This may not be the same for you, but when you get in to detail with most players, the reason they don't intend on staying in BDO is because there is nothing to do at the end game. Sieges and node wars only go so far to keep players entertained, and grinding the same mobs over and over again between sieges and wars does not make for a fun time.

Sarevok wrote: »

Overall though, I think I disagree with mostly everything you said besides the fact I am an ass. No offense but you sound like a PvE carebear that only enjoys PvP in an agreed upon setting of the player's choice. I hate safe PvE areas where players can just kill over me, take quest mobs or named mobs I am trying to farm since they are safe from me flagging and killing them. Society has rules but those rules don't usually transfer over to games since people can be scumbags. I guess we just see polar opposites of what the ideal MMO should be.

I am a PvE player first, for sure, but far from a carebear. The two are not synonymous.

As I said earlier in this thread, I spent 3 years as the only full time pirate on my server in Archeage, and spent most of my online time farming land in Auroria. As someone that prefers PvP aspects of games, I assume you are familiar with Archeage enough to know the kind of situation that put me in, and the fact that the only way I could be in that situation is if I put myself in that situation on purpose.

I'm not at all anti-PvP, and thus can't really be called a carebear other than by someone that doesn't understand the term.

However, I do understand that in almost every MMO on the market (Ashes included) PvE is the driving force. Progression (in real terms) comes from PvE, not PvP. Even BDO is the same, you don't progress by fighting in the arena, you progress via PvE, thus PvE is the driving force of the game.

You say we just see opposite ends of what an ideal MMO should be, but I would suggest that your ideal game is a survival game, not an MMO. Survival games allow you the opportunity to kill whom ever you want, when ever you want, with virtually no hindrance.

The only thing a survival game doesn't allow you to do that a full loot, full PvP MMO would allow you to do is to kill players that are not up for PvP, as survival games don't have any such players. Everyone in a survival game is always ready and willing to engage in PvP.

This is why I am suspect about the motivations of any player that wishes to see a full loot, full PvP MMO. They clearly don't want a game where everyone is ready and willing to fight all the time, as those games already exist. On the other hand, they also clearly want to be able to fight those not ready and unwilling otherwise they would have no reason to want full PvP.

It is this kind of player that MMO's in general are better off without. They reduce the number of subscriptions the game has in an exponential fashion, whereas they can be a boon to a survival games population.

Sarevok wrote: »

I'm not a griefer and I don't condone spawn camping or killing lowbies for fun but mark my words this corruption system is going to get exploited. Like my example of karma bombing in BDO, exploited by players that will passively push you out of your grinding spot by dying repeatedly because they lose nothing and you lose time, your mob clearing speed, karma and drops. If you don't flag then that same player will just screw up your rotation until you either leave or he does. Sometimes players group together but there was always that chance you had to fight for your rotation.

It may get exploited, but in your example, I would suggest you were exploiting the war declaration system.

If you want the mobs so badly that you are unwilling to share, then yeah, take all the karma that other player is willing to bring your way. if you are not willing to take that karma hit, learn to cooperate and then you are both happy.

The problem in your example from BDO is simply that the game fails to induce cooperation between players, and provides players on both sides with ways to attempt to avoid the situation without cooperating. Most games avoid this by simply making the best mobs for grinding group based, so that cooperation is an essential part of the game, and it then becomes the first action, rather than an afterthought only years after the fact when someone on a forum points out that maybe you should have tried it.

The other major failing in BDO was the fact that those boring as all hell rotations were the pinnacle of PvE content. In a well designed game, you have layered difficulty and group size content. There would be solo, group and raid content for players of varying skill and ability. This meant that if you were working on solo mobs and someone came along and challenged your rotation, if you group up with them you then start killing that rotation faster for even more rewards, but if you then encroached on the rotation next to that one, you could group up with that player and then increase your rewards even more. But then the three of you could leave those waste of time solo mobs and go and take on small group content, getting even more rewards still - and freeing up that solo grind content for any other players that may come along.

So, in a well designed game, where players cooperate, those three of you that cooperated together get 4 or 5 times the reward by working together on harder content than you would get by soloing solo content, and you free up that solo content for other players.

I see no one here that loses.

This isn't possible in BDO because BDO is a half-game. It is the true definition of an MMO with no end game - not because that is what they want, but because they created the PvE content for players to level up on, and then just stopped making any more after that.

Sarevok wrote: »

Noaani says we should all cooperate but that still doesn't stop people from exploiting the system for their own personal gain. Who am I to call when I am killing mobs in a dungeon and another player quietly follows me only to loot chests I am fighting for, or kill important mobs or even the quest mob? Nah, the GM isn't going to look out for me. That's why I'll warn that player or flag and kill him. Hopefully, things will respawn and then he'll have to work for his loot instead of stealing mine.

If it is possible for someone to come along behind you and loot chests, then you should turn to the Steven and ask him why he hired developers that got their game design degree from the back of a cereal box - as anyone that has put any thought in to game design would not develop a game in this manner.

Sarevok wrote: »

My opinions on PvE players doing raids, is simple. You like orchestrated fights with tactics you can memorize (or have a mod do for you) and I like chaotic, unpredictable and satisfying fights with real people that push my skill and knowledge of my class as well as all others. I find mostly nothing satisfying in PvE. It's a means to an end. Get the money or gear to beat the other PvPers. I'll be that guy in a guild that holds a node, a castle, and plans to stay on top of that PvP scene because that's what I enjoy.

Spoken like someone that has never participated in an end game raid.

Low end raids are like this, sure. But then low end raids are the PvE equivalent of 1v1 PvP. Both can be fun, if you are in to that sort of thing, but in the same way PvP centric players don't thrive on 1v1 PvP, raiders don't thrive on low end raid content.

High end raids though, they are more chaotic than the 200v200v50vRed Dragon evening that I was a part of in Archeage (all Archeage raids count as low end raids as far as I am concerned). There is more going on in an end game raid - from an individual players perspective - than there is in any PvP situation. They introduce variables that need to be accounted for on the fly - and in some encounters there can be dozens of these variables. This is an aspect of raiding I expect Ashes to excel in - as not only will raids at the high end have variables, but exactly what these variables may be themselves could change from play session to play session.

The reason a lot of raid guilds never make it to the top end of raiding is because they have a number of players in the guild that are capable of following directions, but incapable of thinking for themselves. Following directions gets you through easy raid content, but knowing what to do without being told is needed for end game raiding.

Sarevok wrote: »

Unfortunately, I don't have a perfect solution to keep players from griefing, mindlessly killing players for their own satisfaction or stopping players from taking advantage of these systems we put in place to protect them. I'm just a PvPer that sees similar systems in previous games that were taken advantage of. Sorry for the wall. I could debate this stuff all day but I've gotten off-topic.

You say you see those systems being taken advantage of, I say you have seen those systems put to use as intended.

If I kill someone in Ashes over some raw material nodes, I will expect that player to come right back to me and start harvesting them again. My expectation of the system is that I will need to kill that player - and gain corruption for each kill - for as long as I am harvesting those resources. It is not and will not be a one kill kind of situation, nor should it be. If I want to ruin that players time, I should face a very heavy penalty - and that player is the player that is in the best position to determine how heavy that penalty should be based on how many times they can be bothered coming back to me forcing me to kill them again and gain more corruption.

If you then add to that the fact that this accumulated corruption means I will then be a less effective fighter and drop more items upon death, I need to really consider right at the start of the encounter with this player if attacking them is really what I want to do, or if I should try and find some other means of resolving the situation.

This is how a well designed system should make a player think.

Ventharien

People will always try to exploit the system, it's just in some peoples nature to do anything that gives them any bit of advantage, or do things just to troll. I need to find the exact soundbyte, but i believe not every resource node is just a one and done, there will be ones that need to be gathered for a while before they exhaust and relocate. So you're going to be more concerned with making sure it's YOUR fellow citizens of your node that are pulling in the mats not another. Hell with what they've said about materials expiring and moving, you aren't even going to have a rotation. At least not a permanent one. And if you notice a gatherer from another node grabbing a bunch of goods, he can only carry so much. At some point he's going to need to caravan up. Then you swoop in. And in the point of someone diving in after you to try to ninja chests, if there are any, then if he's not in your node, same dealy, and if he is, tell your city/town. Chances are they aren't targeting you specifically, and other people chime in too. Like in the old dungeoning days in wow before cross server groups, if you got a rep on your server of being a need ninja, people wouldn't let you in their groups.

unknown

This content has been removed.

Lalli

ekadzati wrote: »

All I can say about New World is this - not only did I 'nope out' of the NDA alpha, I cancelled my Prime subscription and closed my Amazon account. Companies who don't listen no longer get my money, particularly when they're ignoring readily available data.

Seems a little overboard doesn't it?

unknown

This content has been removed.

Noaani

ekadzati wrote: »

I'm no longer paying to be ignored.

I am.

But only on the condition that the developers of the games I play also ignore everyone else.

Child Item