Mojottv wrote: » 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. I dont agree that greefing should be punished in sense of some system that forbids griefing, it just should have cencequences, and lineage system did good job at that, it didnt limit people, but made made griefing very punishing without limiting them, so you could do it, but it was not worth it
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.
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 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 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 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.
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.
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 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 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.
CaptnChuck wrote: » Mojottv wrote: » 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. I dont agree that greefing should be punished in sense of some system that forbids griefing, it just should have cencequences, and lineage system did good job at that, it didnt limit people, but made made griefing very punishing without limiting them, so you could do it, but it was not worth it Lmao. Yea sure, no low level griefing ever occured in L2. The karma system was more than enough to prevent that right? I never said that griefing should be forbidden. All I said is that players who grief others should face severe in-game consequences. These consequences cannot be consistently imposed upon griefers by other players. Only a built in system can do that.
Xyls wrote: » 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. But that is way too punishing for groups trying to initiate pvp. Let's say group A has 25 people and is in the best farm spot. Group B has 20 people and wants to take that farm spot. Group B attacks group A. Group A expects the attack and immediately attacks back. It's now a 25vs20 fight. So not only is Group B fighting more people, but they are also going to be hit with corruption penalties whether they win or lose. No one would ever initiate fight over world bosses or farming spots unless they have way more people. That system would hurt smaller groups and promote zergs.
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: » 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.
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.
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?
Mojottv wrote: » What kind of system do you have in mind, that doesnt forbid or limit actions of player, while also punishing griefing? also what do you consider griefing?
CaptnChuck wrote: » @Vyraka Read my replies first. Not everyone can join a guild and have guild mates to come and help them deal with griefing. Not everyone has friends that play MMOs with them. Sometimes you start out solo and then you garner friends and join guilds at some point. If you aren't able to enjoy the game before you reach that point, cuz some idiot ruined your experience by griefing you and nobody was there to help you out, then that isn't good gameplay. Sometimes gameplay should take precedence over realism or social bonding or whatever. Griefing should NEVER be something that is left to be solved by the players themselves. If you think so, then I'm afraid you're simply too naive. What happens if you happen to play at a time when not many people are online? Do you just accept your fate and do nothing? What happens if you join the game as a new player with no community and intend to join one as you progress through the world? Do you just accept that no one is going to help you cuz you don't have in-game friends/guilds yet? If you think so, then I really have nothing more to say as you simply don't have the ability to look at other perspectives and understand when another is better than yours. Wait and watch, Intrepid will solve griefing through the corruption system itself. They won't be leaving it to players as they have the common sense that you lack. Stop living in the 2000s, this era is different.
CaptnChuck wrote: » Mojottv wrote: » What kind of system do you have in mind, that doesnt forbid or limit actions of player, while also punishing griefing? also what do you consider griefing? @Mojottv I don't have one and I never said that I did. I merely stated a problem. Its upto Intrepid to find a solution and I'm sure that they will. Griefing is basically harassment/intentionally ruining someone's in-game experience through methods that were unintended by game devs. There are many different variants of it that exist in different games but i'm only concerned with two in AoC. The first one is inting in PvP/PvPvE. And the second one is open world harassment which is what the situation I mentioned above comes under.
Mojottv wrote: » CaptnChuck wrote: » Mojottv wrote: » What kind of system do you have in mind, that doesnt forbid or limit actions of player, while also punishing griefing? also what do you consider griefing? @Mojottv I don't have one and I never said that I did. I merely stated a problem. Its upto Intrepid to find a solution and I'm sure that they will. Griefing is basically harassment/intentionally ruining someone's in-game experience through methods that were unintended by game devs. There are many different variants of it that exist in different games but i'm only concerned with two in AoC. The first one is inting in PvP/PvPvE. And the second one is open world harassment which is what the situation I mentioned above comes under. See our definition of griefing is quite different. I consider griefing is continuously abusing systems to ruin gameplay for specific person or group of people. if someone random runs by and kills you, its not griefing... thats the problem with carebear mentality, that they need "safe space" so that you wouldnt get bullied...god forbit you feel some negative emotion during game play.. i think you should accept the fact that the world is not safe and you need to learn to deal with it
CaptnChuck wrote: » 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 your 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?
Bricktop wrote: » If a level 50 wants to follow around a level 30 and smack him for 4 hours and keep him at 10% HP, that's the biggest waste of life I have ever heard of, but also his prerogative. Just because it isn't fun for you doesn't mean it should be gotten rid of. Why do you get to dictate how that person has fun in an open world MMO?
CaptnChuck wrote: » Bricktop wrote: » If a level 50 wants to follow around a level 30 and smack him for 4 hours and keep him at 10% HP, that's the biggest waste of life I have ever heard of, but also his prerogative. Just because it isn't fun for you doesn't mean it should be gotten rid of. Why do you get to dictate how that person has fun in an open world MMO? Yea my bad @Bricktop . I'm sure that that is a FUN experience for other people. I'm the ONLY one who won't enjoy that. Jesus, what kind of people am I talking with. It feels like I'm talking to children. Some people ENJOY ruining a person's experience. It isn't "wasting time to them". They enjoy the other person's sadness/dissapointment/anger. I can't believe that you think that that's ok and should be allowed in game. I vehemently disagree with you. Killing players is fine, but continuous griefing? Hell no.
Bricktop wrote: » CaptnChuck wrote: » Bricktop wrote: » If a level 50 wants to follow around a level 30 and smack him for 4 hours and keep him at 10% HP, that's the biggest waste of life I have ever heard of, but also his prerogative. Just because it isn't fun for you doesn't mean it should be gotten rid of. Why do you get to dictate how that person has fun in an open world MMO? Yea my bad @Bricktop . I'm sure that that is a FUN experience for other people. I'm the ONLY one who won't enjoy that. Jesus, what kind of people am I talking with. It feels like I'm talking to children. Some people ENJOY ruining a person's experience. It isn't "wasting time to them". They enjoy the other person's sadness/dissapointment/anger. I can't believe that you think that that's ok and should be allowed in game. I vehemently disagree with you. Killing players is fine, but continuous griefing? Hell no. Yes they do, and it's all just part of the open world experience to me chucky.
CaptnChuck wrote: » Bricktop wrote: » CaptnChuck wrote: » Bricktop wrote: » If a level 50 wants to follow around a level 30 and smack him for 4 hours and keep him at 10% HP, that's the biggest waste of life I have ever heard of, but also his prerogative. Just because it isn't fun for you doesn't mean it should be gotten rid of. Why do you get to dictate how that person has fun in an open world MMO? Yea my bad @Bricktop . I'm sure that that is a FUN experience for other people. I'm the ONLY one who won't enjoy that. Jesus, what kind of people am I talking with. It feels like I'm talking to children. Some people ENJOY ruining a person's experience. It isn't "wasting time to them". They enjoy the other person's sadness/dissapointment/anger. I can't believe that you think that that's ok and should be allowed in game. I vehemently disagree with you. Killing players is fine, but continuous griefing? Hell no. Yes they do, and it's all just part of the open world experience to me chucky. Listen brickhead, it ain't. Just because the game is open world, it shouldn't support negative behavior like that. And guess what? It won't. This situation that I suggested, will be addressed by Intrepid and won't be left to be dealt with by players. I'll PM you then to see your reaction. Can't wait.
Bricktop wrote: » CaptnChuck wrote: » Bricktop wrote: » CaptnChuck wrote: » Bricktop wrote: » If a level 50 wants to follow around a level 30 and smack him for 4 hours and keep him at 10% HP, that's the biggest waste of life I have ever heard of, but also his prerogative. Just because it isn't fun for you doesn't mean it should be gotten rid of. Why do you get to dictate how that person has fun in an open world MMO? Yea my bad @Bricktop . I'm sure that that is a FUN experience for other people. I'm the ONLY one who won't enjoy that. Jesus, what kind of people am I talking with. It feels like I'm talking to children. Some people ENJOY ruining a person's experience. It isn't "wasting time to them". They enjoy the other person's sadness/dissapointment/anger. I can't believe that you think that that's ok and should be allowed in game. I vehemently disagree with you. Killing players is fine, but continuous griefing? Hell no. Yes they do, and it's all just part of the open world experience to me chucky. Listen brickhead, it ain't. Just because the game is open world, it shouldn't support negative behavior like that. And guess what? It won't. This situation that I suggested, will be addressed by Intrepid and won't be left to be dealt with by players. I'll PM you then to see your reaction. Can't wait. Haha you are a very silly person.
