Corruption-less server option

On Corruption. Have you given any consideration to a Chaos-style server or subset of servers that have no corruption feature enabled? I'm probably in the minority on this one, as in this day and age, with the type of gamers we have, a darktide server may not stand the test of time like it did back then. However, with the mechanics proposed, I can see some viability. Since guilds and alliances have more power to police the unfavorable elements than with a simple game like AC. I do like the concept of Corruption and think that for the general public, this is a good idea in theory. The more hard-core player-base (albeit much smaller) would enjoy a server with no such limitations. We like the extreme risk and the ability to police ourselves. It also lends to stronger and tighter guilds, where your allegiance really matters and the threat is constant not just from NPC's but from other players all the time.

Update: For anyone just joining the conversation. According to the wiki that LieutenantToast posted, there are going to be no server specific designs. This conversation shall continue debating the corruption system, but has changed focus from the original suggestion.

Find more posts tagged with

Staff

Accepted answers

Korkone

I really dont get how you all can hate on someones opinion with the Words "This is a stupid idear" "This will kill the game" its not like he asked about doing that on EVERY server... He asked if there will be 1 server out of 20 who has the perma pvp on... i personaly like that idear because i made more friends on servers like that because if you have someone you can really trust on such servers that means alot. You ppl should come out of your littl bubbel and understand that different ppl like different playstyles. So the option to have a server for ppl who like the danger of getting attacked every second is better for you than have us RED players on your server ganging up on you running around in a fixed 5 man group killing you all around the world without caring about consequenzes... because ppl who kill on sight are mostely groups who already trained to play together in sticky situations.

sorry my english sucks so sorry if it came out wrong

LieutenantToast

Hi there - while you can check out what our current philosophy around server types is in the helpful community-run wiki here, I'm going to go ahead and move this over to the General Discussion section as it appears to be more of a suggestion than a question

Darktide

Let me fairly state, that no matter how this game comes out or if they have a pvp server offering. I'll still play it. It's AMAZING looking and sounding. I'm not "Demanding" a pvp server in the way you're telling me that I'm stupid for asking for the option. I want this game however they'll give it to me, right!!!

If you can't bring the server to darktide, bring darktide to the server:
Darktide (the guild) https://discord.gg/x8kfFSy

All comments

Nexmagus

If they ever did a server with no corruption, there should also be one where non-flagged can not be attack in the open world. The normal rules would still apply for siege and caravans

IllusionTokomi

I don't have a dog in this fight. But it seems to me, there is no reason to gainsay @Flagg 's idea.
Simply: if one doesn't like it: don't roll a character on that server. No problem exists, no problem to solve. No problem. Why would someone be so passionate about it if they ultimately do not care?

Nevertheless, we've been informed: it is a No Go.

Caeryl

IllusionTokomi wrote: »

I don't have a dog in this fight. But it seems to me, there is no reason to gainsay @/Flagg 's idea.
Simply: if one doesn't like it: don't roll a character on that server. No problem exists, no problem to solve. No problem. Why would someone be so passionate about it if they ultimately do not care?

Nevertheless, we've been informed: it is a No Go.

Niche servers (of all kinds) cost $$$, niche servers aren’t equal in appeal, niche servers require dedicated moderation and development time due to having specific needs a general server does not.

Basically, niche servers leech resources from the general servers to appeal to a narrow audience.

novercalis

Caeryl wrote: »

IllusionTokomi wrote: »

I don't have a dog in this fight. But it seems to me, there is no reason to gainsay @/Flagg 's idea.
Simply: if one doesn't like it: don't roll a character on that server. No problem exists, no problem to solve. No problem. Why would someone be so passionate about it if they ultimately do not care?

Nevertheless, we've been informed: it is a No Go.

Niche servers (of all kinds) cost $$$, niche servers aren’t equal in appeal, niche servers require dedicated moderation and development time due to having specific needs a general server does not.

Basically, niche servers leech resources from the general servers to appeal to a narrow audience.

good thing steve seems to be in the concept of - we dont cater to carebears and seems he himself is a pvper / pker and - based on the wiki seems we will be getting a pvp server.
also steve seems to have fuck you money since he is basically funding this game.

Caeryl

novercalis wrote: »

Caeryl wrote: »

IllusionTokomi wrote: »

I don't have a dog in this fight. But it seems to me, there is no reason to gainsay @/Flagg 's idea.
Simply: if one doesn't like it: don't roll a character on that server. No problem exists, no problem to solve. No problem. Why would someone be so passionate about it if they ultimately do not care?

Nevertheless, we've been informed: it is a No Go.

Niche servers (of all kinds) cost $$$, niche servers aren’t equal in appeal, niche servers require dedicated moderation and development time due to having specific needs a general server does not.

Basically, niche servers leech resources from the general servers to appeal to a narrow audience.

good thing steve seems to be in the concept of - we dont cater to carebears and seems he himself is a pvper / pker and - based on the wiki seems we will be getting a pvp server.
also steve seems to have fuck you money since he is basically funding this game.

The wiki very clearly states there’s not gonna be any split PvE / PvP servers.

Kohl

I'm loving this.
People will quickly band under such system. Make their own "safe places" that needs defending.

Jahlon

Flagg wrote: »

@Jahlon Another example of someone who has no knowledge of game design. It's not entrenched as much as you make it out to be. A simple toggle that disables corruption gain and boom, you have a corruption less server. Wait, just lock the database field.

And I have a better idea than that, which would appeal to many likely.. A reverse-corruption server. Start out corrupted and have to work to become good. This disables weakness as well as the BH system and starts everyone at max corruption.

If the game relies on corruption, then it's not a good idea. You do not design a game to hinge on a pvp metric like this. It's one of those, this is cool, aspects. Because if everything is tied to it, bad things would happen if (god forbid) someone figured out how to exploit the system. *Cough, Bounty-hunters*

The game does rely on corruption to ensure the server does not become a gang box.

The corruotion system cannot just be turned off, because if you turn off that system, you also eliminate the Bounty Hunter system.

Without the bounty hunter system, you have eliminated one theme of the game, amd one source horizontal progression, source of enchants, etc.

Darktide

The way that Steven designed a sandbox is how they should have always been, period. I love that he gets it, too. Even AC was super flawed, which was the first sandbox, I think. The devs did provide some content monthly, and that worked, but other copy-cats lost sight of that and sandbox games evolved into nothing more than arenas. I mean, sadly they look like the test world before you implement your content. That's how I've always felt, like so much was missing from sandboxes. Take Life is Feudal, Mortal Online. They always die because they're expecting the players to write the story for them. We're paying you to write your narrative?

Steven got it right and this game will not fail for that reason, if it does it's because they failed to deliver it.

The corruption system is such a small piece of the game. I will admit that it's an important one to the pvp and non-pvp community alike. For opposite reasons. The non-pvp community wants harsh restrictions so they can freely roam and mine and smack talk without consequence. The pvp community likes to have that control factor, strength, skill, power matters as it should.

My main concerns is the risk/reward for a pk. It's biased highly toward risk unless it's predefined pvp content (Caravans, raids, sieges). So basically you pvp the way they intend for you to pvp (rails) or you are penalized. I can't decide without much, much more detail, whether this is a good or bad thing.

Steven is a VERY smart guy and has been playing games almost as long as I have, so I don't think he'll let us down on the pvp front, but if any game is to be successful, he has to account for the non-pvp people and even protect them to a degree. I get that.

See, that's the beauty of a server option to cater to different audiences without compromise (they're not offering this, btw).

There is a valid point that different server types do require a different level of attention. Exploiting a system that would otherwise work perfectly on a non-pvp server is commonplace. So there is added effort. In a sandbox of the AC1/Rust style, it's not as common, because those are set-and-forget servers. It took months for Turbine to fix the pocket lifestone exploit. It was available on all the other servers, but they weren't pvp centric, so who cares, right. It was a HUGE advantage on Darktide, a PvP server, however.

So ultimately, I think that Steven has made the right decision not to include various server types from a design decision standpoint. Will the corruption system be too harsh? Will it be highly exploitable? I know if someone attacked me and I was not corrupt, I'd just surrender and let them get the max penalty, I assume their corruption would be worth more than what small amount of xp I lost. Fighting back cuts their corruption down considerably. Why on earth would I want to do that as a Non-pvp player? It's not like I'm losing my gear or anything, just some xp. The aggressor is losing more in comparison, so yeah, here's some cheese to go with that.