jubilum wrote: » bigepeen wrote: » jubilum wrote: » Well then you are naive. The online gaming community is alot different than it was when lineage was a thing. You have no idea what is awaiting you when this game launches. Warp off (LoL) I can't think of any of the hundreds of times I have tried to warp off when getting ganked that It was successful. Anyone that has played for more than a few days knows that the first thing you do when attacking is lock the target down with your warp disrupter before ever firing a gun. If you want a game with real pvp go play Eve. I will even give you some survival tips. @jubilum So how successful were you in lobbying EVE to become a PvP checkbox game? Without full loot drop in AoC non consensual PvP is pointless, other than to harass and drive players off. AoC has so much more to offer than Eve the non consensual PvP is completely unnecessary. I fully support sieges, guild wars (with limits, not like Eve war dec system), caravans, battle grounds, areans, and any other form of consensual PvP. But giving a player with unknown ethics the ability to run around and kill people is a very bad idea.
bigepeen wrote: » jubilum wrote: » Well then you are naive. The online gaming community is alot different than it was when lineage was a thing. You have no idea what is awaiting you when this game launches. Warp off (LoL) I can't think of any of the hundreds of times I have tried to warp off when getting ganked that It was successful. Anyone that has played for more than a few days knows that the first thing you do when attacking is lock the target down with your warp disrupter before ever firing a gun. If you want a game with real pvp go play Eve. I will even give you some survival tips. @jubilum So how successful were you in lobbying EVE to become a PvP checkbox game?
jubilum wrote: » Well then you are naive. The online gaming community is alot different than it was when lineage was a thing. You have no idea what is awaiting you when this game launches. Warp off (LoL) I can't think of any of the hundreds of times I have tried to warp off when getting ganked that It was successful. Anyone that has played for more than a few days knows that the first thing you do when attacking is lock the target down with your warp disrupter before ever firing a gun. If you want a game with real pvp go play Eve. I will even give you some survival tips.
CaptnChuck wrote: » Non-consensual PvP is fine. But when that non-consentual PvP turns into griefing, it isn't anymore. The karma system in L2 wasn't enough to stop griefing, especially low-level griefing. A lot of you think that the corruption system is more than sufficient as is. It isn't. There are a ton of ways to bypass corruption. I'll state one such example and I want you @Mojottv , @Dolyem , @Bricktop , @bigepeen , to tell me how the corruption system will address it. Say you're a lvl10 questing in the open world. You encounter a lvl20. He attacks you. You don't fight back as you know that you won't win. But guess what? He doesn't kill you either. He takes away half/more than half of your health and then stops fighting you. Now you can't quest anymore as you're HP is so low. You'll be forced to use food, bandages etc. Once you're back to full, he does it again. How would you fix this issue with the current corruption system? Sure, not being able to see a player's health does mitigate it to some extent. But not completely. The name plate still exists. Once it blurs out sufficiently, you can stop attacking. The current corruption system only gives you corruption when you kill an innocent player. It doesn't give you corruption when you dmg/debuff him, and it shouldn't either, as that would completely discourage PvP. So Intrepid needs to find ways of not punishing non-consensual PvP, while punishing griefing. If you want to ruin another guy's experience for a couple of minutes, that's absolutely ok. But doing it continuously for 15+ min, isn't non-consensual PvP anymore. Its griefing and it shouldn't be supported.
CaptnChuck wrote: » A lot of you think that the corruption system is more than sufficient as is. It isn't. There are a ton of ways to bypass corruption. I'll state one such example and I want you @Mojottv , @Dolyem , @Bricktop , @bigepeen , to tell me how the corruption system will address it. Say you're a lvl10 questing in the open world. You encounter a lvl20. He attacks you. You don't fight back as you know that you won't win. But guess what? He doesn't kill you either. He takes away half/more than half of your health and then stops fighting you. Now you can't quest anymore as you're HP is so low. You'll be forced to use food, bandages etc. Once you're back to full, he does it again. How would you fix this issue with the current corruption system?
CaptnChuck wrote: » @Xyls So let me get this straight. You want players to rely on OTHER people to come and help them against the griefer? How exactly are they going to HELP you? That guy isn't killing you, he is just attacking you. Why would somebody else come and kill him for you, just to gain corruption? Your first 2 points does not solve the problem. None of them can help you, and even if they could, you shouldn't let counter measures for griefing rely on player help, as that is an inconsistent variable. As for your third one, yes you could fight back. But the problem is, that guy is 10 levels above you. So whilst you may damage him, it won't be by much. Also, now if he kills you, he won't gain corruption and he gains a portion of your loot as well. You also get re-spawned at a re-spawn point, which may be far away from where you were questing. So its going to take you a long time to get back there. He was griefing you and now he got rewarded for it because you fought back. So there goes your third point as well.
bigepeen wrote: » CaptnChuck wrote: » A lot of you think that the corruption system is more than sufficient as is. It isn't. There are a ton of ways to bypass corruption. I'll state one such example and I want you @Mojottv , @Dolyem , @Bricktop , @bigepeen , to tell me how the corruption system will address it. Say you're a lvl10 questing in the open world. You encounter a lvl20. He attacks you. You don't fight back as you know that you won't win. But guess what? He doesn't kill you either. He takes away half/more than half of your health and then stops fighting you. Now you can't quest anymore as you're HP is so low. You'll be forced to use food, bandages etc. Once you're back to full, he does it again. How would you fix this issue with the current corruption system? Yeah I've thought about this. It is my opinion that if you are willing to commit to attacking a non-combatant, then you should be all-in and try to kill him. So I would be fine if Intrepid decided to change the trigger for becoming corrupted from killing a non-combatant to attacking a non-combatant. However, this raises some other concerns. Especially with mining/harvesting scarce resources (which Intrepid has cited as a main reason for engaging in open world PvP). We don't want a lvl 10 alt to waltz in and start mining valuable resources while others have to fight for it. Basically, the lvl 10 will know that he will cause massive corruption penalties to the lvl 50s that are killing him to protect the scarce resources, and he will just keep on coming back every time he dies, stacking corruption on to the people defending the resource. Previously, you would've been able to perma-stun him and disrupt him from gathering the resource without getting corrupted, however, now this would make you gain corruption. A solution to this is to only put scarce resources in zones that force everyone inside to flag as combatants. I'm not sure if Intrepid is already planning to do this or not, but it would make sense. It's a win-win in my opinion because it would be interesting to have dangerous, high level areas where there are only combatants allowed.
Xyls wrote: » CaptnChuck wrote: » @Xyls So let me get this straight. You want players to rely on OTHER people to come and help them against the griefer? How exactly are they going to HELP you? That guy isn't killing you, he is just attacking you. Why would somebody else come and kill him for you, just to gain corruption? Your first 2 points does not solve the problem. None of them can help you, and even if they could, you shouldn't let counter measures for griefing rely on player help, as that is an inconsistent variable. As for your third one, yes you could fight back. But the problem is, that guy is 10 levels above you. So whilst you may damage him, it won't be by much. Also, now if he kills you, he won't gain corruption and he gains a portion of your loot as well. You also get re-spawned at a re-spawn point, which may be far away from where you were questing. So its going to take you a long time to get back there. He was griefing you and now he got rewarded for it because you fought back. So there goes your third point as well. Oh my bad, I didn't know you didn't know how the flagging system works. So when a player attacks a non-combatant (green) or combatant (purple), they become a combatant (purple). A player only becomes corrupted (red) when they kill a non-combatant (green). So when the lvl 20 attacks the lvl 10, the lvl 20 becomes purple. If someone comes along to help the lvl 10 kill the lvl 20, they will only become purple because the lvl 20 is purple, not green. They solve the problem in a MMO that requires players to socialize and work together... like AoC.
CaptnChuck wrote: » Xyls wrote: » CaptnChuck wrote: » @Xyls So let me get this straight. You want players to rely on OTHER people to come and help them against the griefer? How exactly are they going to HELP you? That guy isn't killing you, he is just attacking you. Why would somebody else come and kill him for you, just to gain corruption? Your first 2 points does not solve the problem. None of them can help you, and even if they could, you shouldn't let counter measures for griefing rely on player help, as that is an inconsistent variable. As for your third one, yes you could fight back. But the problem is, that guy is 10 levels above you. So whilst you may damage him, it won't be by much. Also, now if he kills you, he won't gain corruption and he gains a portion of your loot as well. You also get re-spawned at a re-spawn point, which may be far away from where you were questing. So its going to take you a long time to get back there. He was griefing you and now he got rewarded for it because you fought back. So there goes your third point as well. Oh my bad, I didn't know you didn't know how the flagging system works. So when a player attacks a non-combatant (green) or combatant (purple), they become a combatant (purple). A player only becomes corrupted (red) when they kill a non-combatant (green). So when the lvl 20 attacks the lvl 10, the lvl 20 becomes purple. If someone comes along to help the lvl 10 kill the lvl 20, they will only become purple because the lvl 20 is purple, not green. They solve the problem in a MMO that requires players to socialize and work together... like AoC. But we don't know if the other guy gains corruption or not. If he does then why would he help you? The lvl20 guy didn't attack him he just attacked the lvl10 guy. Also you miss my point. Relying on other people to solve Griefing isn't a good idea. There should be systems in place that solve it even if players are not online to help you at that time.
Xyls wrote: » CaptnChuck wrote: » Xyls wrote: » CaptnChuck wrote: » @Xyls So let me get this straight. You want players to rely on OTHER people to come and help them against the griefer? How exactly are they going to HELP you? That guy isn't killing you, he is just attacking you. Why would somebody else come and kill him for you, just to gain corruption? Your first 2 points does not solve the problem. None of them can help you, and even if they could, you shouldn't let counter measures for griefing rely on player help, as that is an inconsistent variable. As for your third one, yes you could fight back. But the problem is, that guy is 10 levels above you. So whilst you may damage him, it won't be by much. Also, now if he kills you, he won't gain corruption and he gains a portion of your loot as well. You also get re-spawned at a re-spawn point, which may be far away from where you were questing. So its going to take you a long time to get back there. He was griefing you and now he got rewarded for it because you fought back. So there goes your third point as well. Oh my bad, I didn't know you didn't know how the flagging system works. So when a player attacks a non-combatant (green) or combatant (purple), they become a combatant (purple). A player only becomes corrupted (red) when they kill a non-combatant (green). So when the lvl 20 attacks the lvl 10, the lvl 20 becomes purple. If someone comes along to help the lvl 10 kill the lvl 20, they will only become purple because the lvl 20 is purple, not green. They solve the problem in a MMO that requires players to socialize and work together... like AoC. But we don't know if the other guy gains corruption or not. If he does then why would he help you? The lvl20 guy didn't attack him he just attacked the lvl10 guy. Also you miss my point. Relying on other people to solve Griefing isn't a good idea. There should be systems in place that solve it even if players are not online to help you at that time. Yes we do know. Attacking and killing a combatant does not give you corruption. Only killing a non-combatant does. https://ashesofcreation.wiki/PvP#/media/File:pvp_flagging_diagram.png I am not missing your point, your point just isn't valid in an mmorpg that heavily promotes community interaction and guilds.
Xyls wrote: » bigepeen wrote: » CaptnChuck wrote: » A lot of you think that the corruption system is more than sufficient as is. It isn't. There are a ton of ways to bypass corruption. I'll state one such example and I want you @Mojottv , @Dolyem , @Bricktop , @bigepeen , to tell me how the corruption system will address it. Say you're a lvl10 questing in the open world. You encounter a lvl20. He attacks you. You don't fight back as you know that you won't win. But guess what? He doesn't kill you either. He takes away half/more than half of your health and then stops fighting you. Now you can't quest anymore as you're HP is so low. You'll be forced to use food, bandages etc. Once you're back to full, he does it again. How would you fix this issue with the current corruption system? Yeah I've thought about this. It is my opinion that if you are willing to commit to attacking a non-combatant, then you should be all-in and try to kill him. So I would be fine if Intrepid decided to change the trigger for becoming corrupted from killing a non-combatant to attacking a non-combatant. However, this raises some other concerns. Especially with mining/harvesting scarce resources (which Intrepid has cited as a main reason for engaging in open world PvP). We don't want a lvl 10 alt to waltz in and start mining valuable resources while others have to fight for it. Basically, the lvl 10 will know that he will cause massive corruption penalties to the lvl 50s that are killing him to protect the scarce resources, and he will just keep on coming back every time he dies, stacking corruption on to the people defending the resource. Previously, you would've been able to perma-stun him and disrupt him from gathering the resource without getting corrupted, however, now this would make you gain corruption. A solution to this is to only put scarce resources in zones that force everyone inside to flag as combatants. I'm not sure if Intrepid is already planning to do this or not, but it would make sense. It's a win-win in my opinion because it would be interesting to have dangerous, high level areas where there are only combatants allowed. There is no way it could ever be corruption on attack... there would be no open world pvp if it was lol. That would make it so the only way to attack someone would be if they manually made themselves a combatant before you attacked. If I'm a non-combatant and I attack a non-combatant, I would become corrupted. Wouldn't work.
CaptnChuck wrote: » Xyls wrote: » CaptnChuck wrote: » Xyls wrote: » CaptnChuck wrote: » @Xyls So let me get this straight. You want players to rely on OTHER people to come and help them against the griefer? How exactly are they going to HELP you? That guy isn't killing you, he is just attacking you. Why would somebody else come and kill him for you, just to gain corruption? Your first 2 points does not solve the problem. None of them can help you, and even if they could, you shouldn't let counter measures for griefing rely on player help, as that is an inconsistent variable. As for your third one, yes you could fight back. But the problem is, that guy is 10 levels above you. So whilst you may damage him, it won't be by much. Also, now if he kills you, he won't gain corruption and he gains a portion of your loot as well. You also get re-spawned at a re-spawn point, which may be far away from where you were questing. So its going to take you a long time to get back there. He was griefing you and now he got rewarded for it because you fought back. So there goes your third point as well. Oh my bad, I didn't know you didn't know how the flagging system works. So when a player attacks a non-combatant (green) or combatant (purple), they become a combatant (purple). A player only becomes corrupted (red) when they kill a non-combatant (green). So when the lvl 20 attacks the lvl 10, the lvl 20 becomes purple. If someone comes along to help the lvl 10 kill the lvl 20, they will only become purple because the lvl 20 is purple, not green. They solve the problem in a MMO that requires players to socialize and work together... like AoC. But we don't know if the other guy gains corruption or not. If he does then why would he help you? The lvl20 guy didn't attack him he just attacked the lvl10 guy. Also you miss my point. Relying on other people to solve Griefing isn't a good idea. There should be systems in place that solve it even if players are not online to help you at that time. Yes we do know. Attacking and killing a combatant does not give you corruption. Only killing a non-combatant does. https://ashesofcreation.wiki/PvP#/media/File:pvp_flagging_diagram.png I am not missing your point, your point just isn't valid in an mmorpg that heavily promotes community interaction and guilds. I'll say it again. You missed my point @Xyls . Relying on other people to solve Griefing isn't a good idea. There should be systems in place that solve it, even if players are not online/willing to help you at that time. Also, not everyone has friends and guilds when they start playing a game. So its foolish to rely on player help to solve things like griefing; especially when it can have a huge negative impact on a new player's experience.
bigepeen wrote: » Xyls wrote: » bigepeen wrote: » CaptnChuck wrote: » A lot of you think that the corruption system is more than sufficient as is. It isn't. There are a ton of ways to bypass corruption. I'll state one such example and I want you @Mojottv , @Dolyem , @Bricktop , @bigepeen , to tell me how the corruption system will address it. Say you're a lvl10 questing in the open world. You encounter a lvl20. He attacks you. You don't fight back as you know that you won't win. But guess what? He doesn't kill you either. He takes away half/more than half of your health and then stops fighting you. Now you can't quest anymore as you're HP is so low. You'll be forced to use food, bandages etc. Once you're back to full, he does it again. How would you fix this issue with the current corruption system? Yeah I've thought about this. It is my opinion that if you are willing to commit to attacking a non-combatant, then you should be all-in and try to kill him. So I would be fine if Intrepid decided to change the trigger for becoming corrupted from killing a non-combatant to attacking a non-combatant. However, this raises some other concerns. Especially with mining/harvesting scarce resources (which Intrepid has cited as a main reason for engaging in open world PvP). We don't want a lvl 10 alt to waltz in and start mining valuable resources while others have to fight for it. Basically, the lvl 10 will know that he will cause massive corruption penalties to the lvl 50s that are killing him to protect the scarce resources, and he will just keep on coming back every time he dies, stacking corruption on to the people defending the resource. Previously, you would've been able to perma-stun him and disrupt him from gathering the resource without getting corrupted, however, now this would make you gain corruption. A solution to this is to only put scarce resources in zones that force everyone inside to flag as combatants. I'm not sure if Intrepid is already planning to do this or not, but it would make sense. It's a win-win in my opinion because it would be interesting to have dangerous, high level areas where there are only combatants allowed. There is no way it could ever be corruption on attack... there would be no open world pvp if it was lol. That would make it so the only way to attack someone would be if they manually made themselves a combatant before you attacked. If I'm a non-combatant and I attack a non-combatant, I would become corrupted. Wouldn't work. There would still be open world PvP. The end result is the same if you kill the target. The only difference is that you would be committed to killing the target if you get corruption upon attack.
Xyls wrote: » CaptnChuck wrote: » Xyls wrote: » CaptnChuck wrote: » Xyls wrote: » CaptnChuck wrote: » @Xyls So let me get this straight. You want players to rely on OTHER people to come and help them against the griefer? How exactly are they going to HELP you? That guy isn't killing you, he is just attacking you. Why would somebody else come and kill him for you, just to gain corruption? Your first 2 points does not solve the problem. None of them can help you, and even if they could, you shouldn't let counter measures for griefing rely on player help, as that is an inconsistent variable. As for your third one, yes you could fight back. But the problem is, that guy is 10 levels above you. So whilst you may damage him, it won't be by much. Also, now if he kills you, he won't gain corruption and he gains a portion of your loot as well. You also get re-spawned at a re-spawn point, which may be far away from where you were questing. So its going to take you a long time to get back there. He was griefing you and now he got rewarded for it because you fought back. So there goes your third point as well. Oh my bad, I didn't know you didn't know how the flagging system works. So when a player attacks a non-combatant (green) or combatant (purple), they become a combatant (purple). A player only becomes corrupted (red) when they kill a non-combatant (green). So when the lvl 20 attacks the lvl 10, the lvl 20 becomes purple. If someone comes along to help the lvl 10 kill the lvl 20, they will only become purple because the lvl 20 is purple, not green. They solve the problem in a MMO that requires players to socialize and work together... like AoC. But we don't know if the other guy gains corruption or not. If he does then why would he help you? The lvl20 guy didn't attack him he just attacked the lvl10 guy. Also you miss my point. Relying on other people to solve Griefing isn't a good idea. There should be systems in place that solve it even if players are not online to help you at that time. Yes we do know. Attacking and killing a combatant does not give you corruption. Only killing a non-combatant does. https://ashesofcreation.wiki/PvP#/media/File:pvp_flagging_diagram.png I am not missing your point, your point just isn't valid in an mmorpg that heavily promotes community interaction and guilds. I'll say it again. You missed my point @Xyls . Relying on other people to solve Griefing isn't a good idea. There should be systems in place that solve it, even if players are not online/willing to help you at that time. Also, not everyone has friends and guilds when they start playing a game. So its foolish to rely on player help to solve things like griefing; especially when it can have a huge negative impact on a new player's experience. I don't know what to tell you, in these types of games (sandbox, sand-park) with player created content, relying on others is the ultimate solution and is the best solution. The corruption system is the back up for when you can't get others.
CaptnChuck wrote: » Xyls wrote: » CaptnChuck wrote: » Xyls wrote: » CaptnChuck wrote: » Xyls wrote: » CaptnChuck wrote: » @Xyls So let me get this straight. You want players to rely on OTHER people to come and help them against the griefer? How exactly are they going to HELP you? That guy isn't killing you, he is just attacking you. Why would somebody else come and kill him for you, just to gain corruption? Your first 2 points does not solve the problem. None of them can help you, and even if they could, you shouldn't let counter measures for griefing rely on player help, as that is an inconsistent variable. As for your third one, yes you could fight back. But the problem is, that guy is 10 levels above you. So whilst you may damage him, it won't be by much. Also, now if he kills you, he won't gain corruption and he gains a portion of your loot as well. You also get re-spawned at a re-spawn point, which may be far away from where you were questing. So its going to take you a long time to get back there. He was griefing you and now he got rewarded for it because you fought back. So there goes your third point as well. Oh my bad, I didn't know you didn't know how the flagging system works. So when a player attacks a non-combatant (green) or combatant (purple), they become a combatant (purple). A player only becomes corrupted (red) when they kill a non-combatant (green). So when the lvl 20 attacks the lvl 10, the lvl 20 becomes purple. If someone comes along to help the lvl 10 kill the lvl 20, they will only become purple because the lvl 20 is purple, not green. They solve the problem in a MMO that requires players to socialize and work together... like AoC. But we don't know if the other guy gains corruption or not. If he does then why would he help you? The lvl20 guy didn't attack him he just attacked the lvl10 guy. Also you miss my point. Relying on other people to solve Griefing isn't a good idea. There should be systems in place that solve it even if players are not online to help you at that time. Yes we do know. Attacking and killing a combatant does not give you corruption. Only killing a non-combatant does. https://ashesofcreation.wiki/PvP#/media/File:pvp_flagging_diagram.png I am not missing your point, your point just isn't valid in an mmorpg that heavily promotes community interaction and guilds. I'll say it again. You missed my point @Xyls . Relying on other people to solve Griefing isn't a good idea. There should be systems in place that solve it, even if players are not online/willing to help you at that time. Also, not everyone has friends and guilds when they start playing a game. So its foolish to rely on player help to solve things like griefing; especially when it can have a huge negative impact on a new player's experience. I don't know what to tell you, in these types of games (sandbox, sand-park) with player created content, relying on others is the ultimate solution and is the best solution. The corruption system is the back up for when you can't get others. Relying on other players for in game systems is the way to go. But relying on other players to solve things that can impact a player's fundamental experience with the game isn't the way to go. The reason why I say that is because it isn't as consistent or as efficient as a pre-built system that solves such kinds of problems. Players are an inconsistent variable. When it comes to important things like griefing, you cannot rely on such an inconsistent variable to solve the problem. Not EVERYTHING has to be connected to players. Its like asking players to punish those that get reported, instead of having them be punished by Intrepid themselves. Whilst your idea does provide a social element to the game, it shouldn't be the main way to solve griefing.
Xyls wrote: » CaptnChuck wrote: » Xyls wrote: » CaptnChuck wrote: » Xyls wrote: » CaptnChuck wrote: » Xyls wrote: » CaptnChuck wrote: » @Xyls So let me get this straight. You want players to rely on OTHER people to come and help them against the griefer? How exactly are they going to HELP you? That guy isn't killing you, he is just attacking you. Why would somebody else come and kill him for you, just to gain corruption? Your first 2 points does not solve the problem. None of them can help you, and even if they could, you shouldn't let counter measures for griefing rely on player help, as that is an inconsistent variable. As for your third one, yes you could fight back. But the problem is, that guy is 10 levels above you. So whilst you may damage him, it won't be by much. Also, now if he kills you, he won't gain corruption and he gains a portion of your loot as well. You also get re-spawned at a re-spawn point, which may be far away from where you were questing. So its going to take you a long time to get back there. He was griefing you and now he got rewarded for it because you fought back. So there goes your third point as well. Oh my bad, I didn't know you didn't know how the flagging system works. So when a player attacks a non-combatant (green) or combatant (purple), they become a combatant (purple). A player only becomes corrupted (red) when they kill a non-combatant (green). So when the lvl 20 attacks the lvl 10, the lvl 20 becomes purple. If someone comes along to help the lvl 10 kill the lvl 20, they will only become purple because the lvl 20 is purple, not green. They solve the problem in a MMO that requires players to socialize and work together... like AoC. But we don't know if the other guy gains corruption or not. If he does then why would he help you? The lvl20 guy didn't attack him he just attacked the lvl10 guy. Also you miss my point. Relying on other people to solve Griefing isn't a good idea. There should be systems in place that solve it even if players are not online to help you at that time. Yes we do know. Attacking and killing a combatant does not give you corruption. Only killing a non-combatant does. https://ashesofcreation.wiki/PvP#/media/File:pvp_flagging_diagram.png I am not missing your point, your point just isn't valid in an mmorpg that heavily promotes community interaction and guilds. I'll say it again. You missed my point @Xyls . Relying on other people to solve Griefing isn't a good idea. There should be systems in place that solve it, even if players are not online/willing to help you at that time. Also, not everyone has friends and guilds when they start playing a game. So its foolish to rely on player help to solve things like griefing; especially when it can have a huge negative impact on a new player's experience. I don't know what to tell you, in these types of games (sandbox, sand-park) with player created content, relying on others is the ultimate solution and is the best solution. The corruption system is the back up for when you can't get others. Relying on other players for in game systems is the way to go. But relying on other players to solve things that can impact a player's fundamental experience with the game isn't the way to go. The reason why I say that is because it isn't as consistent or as efficient as a pre-built system that solves such kinds of problems. Players are an inconsistent variable. When it comes to important things like griefing, you cannot rely on such an inconsistent variable to solve the problem. Not EVERYTHING has to be connected to players. Its like asking players to punish those that get reported, instead of having them be punished by Intrepid themselves. Whilst your idea does provide a social element to the game, it shouldn't be the main way to solve griefing. You would be correct if this game was a straight theme-park like WoW, but it isn't.
CaptnChuck wrote: » Xyls wrote: » CaptnChuck wrote: » Xyls wrote: » CaptnChuck wrote: » Xyls wrote: » CaptnChuck wrote: » Xyls wrote: » CaptnChuck wrote: » @Xyls So let me get this straight. You want players to rely on OTHER people to come and help them against the griefer? How exactly are they going to HELP you? That guy isn't killing you, he is just attacking you. Why would somebody else come and kill him for you, just to gain corruption? Your first 2 points does not solve the problem. None of them can help you, and even if they could, you shouldn't let counter measures for griefing rely on player help, as that is an inconsistent variable. As for your third one, yes you could fight back. But the problem is, that guy is 10 levels above you. So whilst you may damage him, it won't be by much. Also, now if he kills you, he won't gain corruption and he gains a portion of your loot as well. You also get re-spawned at a re-spawn point, which may be far away from where you were questing. So its going to take you a long time to get back there. He was griefing you and now he got rewarded for it because you fought back. So there goes your third point as well. Oh my bad, I didn't know you didn't know how the flagging system works. So when a player attacks a non-combatant (green) or combatant (purple), they become a combatant (purple). A player only becomes corrupted (red) when they kill a non-combatant (green). So when the lvl 20 attacks the lvl 10, the lvl 20 becomes purple. If someone comes along to help the lvl 10 kill the lvl 20, they will only become purple because the lvl 20 is purple, not green. They solve the problem in a MMO that requires players to socialize and work together... like AoC. But we don't know if the other guy gains corruption or not. If he does then why would he help you? The lvl20 guy didn't attack him he just attacked the lvl10 guy. Also you miss my point. Relying on other people to solve Griefing isn't a good idea. There should be systems in place that solve it even if players are not online to help you at that time. Yes we do know. Attacking and killing a combatant does not give you corruption. Only killing a non-combatant does. https://ashesofcreation.wiki/PvP#/media/File:pvp_flagging_diagram.png I am not missing your point, your point just isn't valid in an mmorpg that heavily promotes community interaction and guilds. I'll say it again. You missed my point @Xyls . Relying on other people to solve Griefing isn't a good idea. There should be systems in place that solve it, even if players are not online/willing to help you at that time. Also, not everyone has friends and guilds when they start playing a game. So its foolish to rely on player help to solve things like griefing; especially when it can have a huge negative impact on a new player's experience. I don't know what to tell you, in these types of games (sandbox, sand-park) with player created content, relying on others is the ultimate solution and is the best solution. The corruption system is the back up for when you can't get others. Relying on other players for in game systems is the way to go. But relying on other players to solve things that can impact a player's fundamental experience with the game isn't the way to go. The reason why I say that is because it isn't as consistent or as efficient as a pre-built system that solves such kinds of problems. Players are an inconsistent variable. When it comes to important things like griefing, you cannot rely on such an inconsistent variable to solve the problem. Not EVERYTHING has to be connected to players. Its like asking players to punish those that get reported, instead of having them be punished by Intrepid themselves. Whilst your idea does provide a social element to the game, it shouldn't be the main way to solve griefing. You would be correct if this game was a straight theme-park like WoW, but it isn't. Jesus. Stop relating EVERYTHING with WoW. Griefing should be punished, whether its in AoC or if its in WoW. All I'm saying is that it should be CONSISTENTLY punished, something that "player help" cannot do.
