Combatant Opt-In

Bricktop wrote: »

There will be no extra ganking that comes from the feature since you would still go red on unflagged players.

No no, you misunderstand my meaning. What I mean is that YOU will get ganked due to your flag. Even if you go into this understanding that you flag yourself, this will inevitably lead to people asking for more individual power so that they can "compete" in this area of the game. This is where my opinion comes in. I believe this will detract from the other parts of the game designed more around group v group content. The option causes more issues than it solves. Either play as a corrupted player or go to war with other guilds/alliances in the area, that is my solution for you.

George_Black

The logic is that there is no demand for casual PvP toggle to merit development. There is no demand because there are many setbacks to dying.

For PvPrs there is meaningful reasons to fight and kill other players and that satisfies the crave.

Games that have opt in PvP:
Have many teleport features.
No death penalties/losses
Quick max lv up
Players dont claim grind/farm spots
And overall, there is no NEED to reach milestones.

If I aim to complete my lv 30 gear set, which will require a few days, save up on materials to repair it from time to time, gather ingredients for my combat potions/foos buffs, contribute to my guild + chances of meaningful conflict with other people, there is just no room for optional PvP joyrides.

There is no demand for the feature.

George_Black

Additionally diluting game features with more options like the opt in PvP you suggest, is not good.

Here are some exames of how your feature dilutes PvP in AoC.

Let's say your group of friends clicked the opt in PvP status and spend a couple of hours looking for fights. And then a guild member asks for caravan escort or guild member needs help fighting off some **, realistically you and most people will say "ah crap, I spend too much time fvcking around today, I need to reach 32 to unlock these skills, I aight going to help my community.

Dont worry. There will be plenty of open world PvP without having to risk losing gear if you get corrupted.

What @CROW3 said is another form of PvP/community interraction dilution occuring due to your opt in feature.

Sathrago wrote: »

Bricktop wrote: »

There will be no extra ganking that comes from the feature since you would still go red on unflagged players.

No no, you misunderstand my meaning. What I mean is that YOU will get ganked due to your flag. Even if you go into this understanding that you flag yourself, this will inevitably lead to people asking for more individual power so that they can "compete" in this area of the game. This is where my opinion comes in. I believe this will detract from the other parts of the game designed more around group v group content. The option causes more issues than it solves. Either play as a corrupted player or go to war with other guilds/alliances in the area, that is my solution for you.

Lol believe me bub I won't be complaining about being ganked. I live for that type of thing in these games. I genuinely don't understand your point here. I don't personally think it'll detract from the other parts of the game at all. World bosses and caravans will be the biggest sources of open world PvP and those are going to need to be done all the time for all guilds as often as they can.

CROW3 wrote: »

I want to make sure I’m understanding your idea. Basically, ‘I always want to participate in open world pvp with anyone in the world, and don’t think my opponent should suffer corruption when I’m eventually killed.’

If I got that correct, makes sense to me. In an indirect way, that flag may further reduce killing non-combatants by creating a more ‘target rich environment.’

Yep, that's jist of it. Nothing crazy or game breaking that I can see.

CROW3 wrote: »

I want to make sure I’m understanding your idea. Basically, ‘I always want to participate in open world pvp with anyone in the world, and don’t think my opponent should suffer corruption when I’m eventually killed.’

If I got that correct, makes sense to me. In an indirect way, that flag may further reduce killing non-combatants by creating a more ‘target rich environment.’

Yes.

So far the argument against this seems to be "development resources" in a game that is in pre-alpha stage for a toggle that already exists in game by design when someone attacks someone else? Guys if you can't explain how this is going to negatively impact the game from a game play perspective no need to reply further thanks. @George Black @Sathrago

The alternative is I could just constantly attack random players to go purple instead of clicking a button which one has a more negative impact on the game?

The alternative is to war up against other guilds and you dont have to worry about flagging at all since both sides understand that they are enemies and KoS. This makes it so you go into each others areas and fight one another rather than having to wander around aimlessly while flagged for any pvp in hopes that you get a group that wanna circle jerk with you.

I don't agree with adding the system. I can't change your mind and you can't change mine so i guess we leave it up to the developers to decide which is best. All I know is that if they decide to take this route it complicates the pvp dynamic in the game even further.

lol

George Black wrote: »

A

Here are some exames of how your deature dilutes PvP in AoC.

Let's say your group of friends clicked the opt in PvP status and spend a couple of hours looking for fights. And then a guild member asks for caravan escort or guild member needs help fighting off some **, realistically you and most people will say "ah crap, I spend too much time fvcking around today, I need to reach 32 to unlock these skills, I aight going to help my community.

.

You understand that's a horrible example right? We can already do that the only difference is our group would start the day as "non combatants" instead of combatants. I don't really understand what the two of you seem to not understand here.

Nothing I'm suggesting can't already happen. All this toggle does is prevent the person who toggles from DYING as non combatant and the person who kills them from getting corruption. Do you really not understand this?

CROW3

I’m not following the argument against the combatant flag. I see this flag as having two states:

A. flag is on, and I’m always a combatant
B. flag is off, normal rules apply

What’s the downside?

CROW3 wrote: »

I’m not following the argument against the combatant flag. I see this flag as having two states:

A. flag is on, and I’m always a combatant
B. flag is off, normal rules apply

What’s the downside?

Why would anyone ever turn it off?

AoC wiki: A combatant (purple player) who dies suffers these same penalties, but at half the rate of a non-combatant.

Lets be clear with this as well: Death penalties do not differ between PvP and PvE, but this is subject to change.[48]

If everyone plays with combatant on you wont see any corrupted players and this wont deter ganking in the slightest, the whole reason for corrupted being in the game.

Sathrago wrote: »

CROW3 wrote: »

I’m not following the argument against the combatant flag. I see this flag as having two states:

A. flag is on, and I’m always a combatant
B. flag is off, normal rules apply

What’s the downside?

Why would anyone ever turn it off?

Why does it matter if they don't turn it off ever? They still get corruption for killing unflagged people.

edited my previous post.

Sathrago wrote: »

edited my previous post.

Do you not understand how the flagging system works? I'm really beginning to suspect you just don't. If people have an opt in flag on at all times they would still go corrupted against unflagged players.

Bricktop wrote: »

Sathrago wrote: »

edited my previous post.

Do you not understand how the flagging system works? I'm really beginning to suspect you just don't. If people have an opt in flag on at all times they would still go corrupted against unflagged players.

YEP! but why would anyone not be flagged? You can be attacked still if you are not flagged so just flag and not worry about them stunlocking you to death so you only take half the losses when you die.

Sathrago wrote: »

Bricktop wrote: »

Sathrago wrote: »

edited my previous post.

Do you not understand how the flagging system works? I'm really beginning to suspect you just don't. If people have an opt in flag on at all times they would still go corrupted against unflagged players.

YEP! but why would anyone not be flagged? You can be attacked still if you are not flagged so just flag and not worry about them stunlocking you to death so you only take half the losses when you die.

This argument makes zero sense and I'm done trying to understand what you are trying to convey. There's no problem at all If everybody wants to flag up. PvP is encouraged and the only reason for the corruption system is to protect lowbies from being ganked for the most part.

Noaani

Tyrantor wrote: »

Noaani Would you care how to explain how this would change the game for you? What exactly do you think this changes in the flagging system other than people walk around purple instead of green?

It isn't how this changes the game for me, it is how it changes the game.

This change would make it so people think this is a game where roaming around in groups looking for PvP is encouraged by the game developers.

This is not currently something they support, as they want PvP to always be meaningful. Roaming around in a mob actively looking for others to attack is not meaningful PvP.

This change would alter the feel of the game more than instancing 50% of the games content would. It would mean the game needs to drop the notion of being PvX and label itself full PvP - as the difference between these two is that PvP in a PvX game is done for specific reasons, while PvP in a PvP game is just done for fun.

If you want a game where you can roam around the open world PvP'ing for fun, Ashes is about as suited to you as it is to a player that wants fully instanced raid progression.

Noaani wrote: »

Tyrantor wrote: »

Noaani Would you care how to explain how this would change the game for you? What exactly do you think this changes in the flagging system other than people walk around purple instead of green?

It isn't how this changes the game for me, it is how it changes the game.

This change would make it so people think this is a game where roaming around in groups looking for PvP is encouraged by the game developers.

This is not currently something they support, as they want PvP to always be meaningful. Roaming around in a mob actively looking for others to attack is not meaningful PvP.

This change would alter the feel of the game more than instancing 50% of the games content would. It would mean the game needs to drop the notion of being PvX and label itself full PvP - as the difference between these two is that PvP in a PvX game is done for specific reasons, while PvP in a PvP game is just done for fun.

If you want a game where you can roam around the open world PvP'ing for fun, Ashes is about as suited to you as it is to a player that wants fully instanced raid progression.

It's absolutely hilarious you put roaming groups looking for PvP fights on the same level as instancing half the game. You understand that's completely delusional right?

George_Black

It isnt.
This feature provides a "plane" of combatant players in the world which changes the dynamic of interactions

But since you can't understand that, let's stick to fact that it isnt worth adding lines and lines of code, which need to be examined anytime something breaks in the game (look at ESO), just because you dont want to be purple without laying a hand on your targets.
Just do that.

And I feel like you are missing my point that this would create a system where everyone flags as soon as they hear the benefits and rampant ganking of players will happen defeating the purpose of the original corruption system. The benefits of being a combatant vs the benefits of being non-combatant are just too skewed for the game to allow anyone to turn it on whenever they feel like it.

The current system where you have to actually participate in pvp to become flagged for it makes much more sense to me. This is ALLLLL before we introduce the many other pvp types and going to war with guilds/alliances. There is no need to add in this option with so many options available already.