Never a more wretched Hive of Scum and Villainy... Should Devs show some love to Corrupted Players?

While we all agree, becoming corrupted is bad. This is still a way of life for some people. I don't think the developers should take away all thier options. If you risk much, there should be a chance for reward.

Perhaps allowing corrupted node development. Not as a main node, but maybe a vassal or secret node that can only go to a certain max level, and maybe only 1 or 2 of them allowed per continent and/or being available on the ocean.

This will give corrupted players a place to go instead of being anathema from any population center in the game. The NPC's in these nodes are of course shady and likely all scum as well, so they wouldn't be giving the best deals to players selling loot. However there could also be a black markets and shady quests in this location too.

The guards here won't attack corrupted players, but would attack any players engaged in a fight (like trying to claim a bounty) against corrupted players.

This place could even sell(not cheaply)/and/or offer quests for special potions/drugs that could temporarily stave off the stat weakening from being corrupted and/or their recipes... it wouldn't prevent the equipment drop on death, but it would temporarily prevent you from becoming to weak to defend yourself or beat up monsters to lower your corruption, etc..

Another potion idea would be one that dampens the mini-map notification for being corrupted. It would still show people there was someone corrupted in the area, just not exactly where they were / who they were.

Maybe even giving Corrupted nodes an advanced Thieves/Assassins guild that isn't available elsewhere.

What do you guys think? Anyone else have any ideas?

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

FuryBladeborne

Pannath wrote: »

So do you get corruption just for killing non-combatants? or for attacking them.

Currently, it is for the killing blow.
"If a combatant (purple) player kills a non-combatant (green) player in PvP, they will be flagged as corrupt (red).[2]"
https://ashesofcreation.wiki/Corruption

Pannath wrote: »

Because if it's just killing them, what's to stop me from hitting them a few times while they're in a pve fight and walking away to let the monster do the job?

Right. That and several other exploits have been brought up many times. IS is very aware and it will be subject to change in testing.

daveywavey

Pannath wrote: »

So do you get corruption just for killing non-combatants? or for attacking them. Because if it's just killing them, what's to stop me from hitting them a few times while they're in a pve fight and walking away to let the monster do the job?

This might help to clear it up for you.

daveywavey

Wandering Mist wrote: »

You have a toggle to say whether your aoe abilities affect other players, which I assume would flag you as a combatant in the process. It would be rather odd if you could have your aoe's affect other players and still be a non-combatant.

I read that as a "You're still a green, BUT if your AoE hits someone, you'll flag purple", rather than it being a "you'll always be purple" kind of thing.

Caeryl

daveywavey wrote: »

Wandering Mist wrote: »

You have a toggle to say whether your aoe abilities affect other players, which I assume would flag you as a combatant in the process. It would be rather odd if you could have your aoe's affect other players and still be a non-combatant.

I read that as a "You're still a green, BUT if your AoE hits someone, you'll flag purple", rather than it being a "you'll always be purple" kind of thing.

Exactly what davey said. Enabling the force attack option is not going to flag you Combatant in and of itself. It simply means you will flag Combatant if other players walk through your AoEs, rather than only through direct targeted attacks on other players.

Tyrantor

I hope the Devs take the question about the toggle next week so we can stop the back and forth over a toggle... The topic seems to pop up frequently.

Pannath

Either that means if you are someone who runs your mouth a lot as a player, and you're not into pvp... you're going to have a rough time in this game unless you learn to reign back what you say.

Anyone with extremely strong opinions who thinks they can sit back and just harvest and lip people off are going to get killed, or trained, or attacked by other players just enough to let the monster kill them OVER AND OVER again. That fills me with joy thinking about it. And at the very least someone who we especially thinks needs a lesson, we can take turns dealing with them to spread corruption over a larger group of people.

So you pve'ers who are about to rage out against what I just said, please actually read it again and think about it before opening your mouth.

Atama

Pannath wrote: »

Either that means if you are someone who runs your mouth a lot as a player, and you're not into pvp... you're going to have a rough time in this game unless you learn to reign back what you say.

Anyone with extremely strong opinions who thinks they can sit back and just harvest and lip people off are going to get killed, or trained, or attacked by other players just enough to let the monster kill them OVER AND OVER again. That fills me with joy thinking about it. And at the very least someone who we especially thinks needs a lesson, we can take turns dealing with them to spread corruption over a larger group of people.

So you pve'ers who are about to rage out against what I just said, please actually read it again and think about it before opening your mouth.

2 things...

Firstly, you are correct in that open PvP does give people the freedom in many cases to just off someone who irritates them. There may be consequences such as dealing with corruption, or the person's friends/allies may attack you, or you might even be attacked by guard NPCs depending on where you are at (I am just speculating on that last part). But yes, nobody's "safe" here.

But secondly, getting all huffy about people "opening their mouths" makes you come off like a real jackass. People have opinions and this forum is the place to express them. Acting like an internet tough guy on a forum by threatening to maybe some day attack them in game if you ever someday run into them is really, really sad and pathetic. Up until now you seemed like a legitimate poster.

Pannath

Atama wrote: »

But secondly, getting all huffy about people "opening their mouths" makes you come off like a real jackass. People have opinions and this forum is the place to express them. Acting like an internet tough guy on a forum by threatening to maybe some day attack them in game if you ever someday run into them is really, really sad and pathetic. Up until now you seemed like a legitimate poster.

I never threatened to attack anyone, nor am I going to. But some people may. What I said was a legitimate warning that people may not have considered. With this system in place there will be people who take note of people saying things they don't like and will attack them in game. I personally like pvp, so I'm not worried about people coming to gank me if I run my mouth. But there are people here who likely didn't consider this.

But you decided to jump to the conclusion that instead of offering helpful advise that I was personally threatening people.

Atama

Pannath wrote: »

But you decided to jump to the conclusion that instead of offering helpful advise that I was personally threatening people.

This is not helpful advice. This is being a jerk.

Pannath wrote: »

So you pve'ers who are about to rage out against what I just said, please actually read it again and think about it before opening your mouth.

That is hyper-aggressive and puts a new perspective on everything you’re saying in this thread.

If you didn’t mean to be a jerk. then you seriously want to restate what you’re saying so that you’re not telling people on the forums to shut up.

JosefTheGreat

I understand with what a lot of people are saying in that being corrupted is a deterrent/punishment. However, I think having corrupted nodes (especially those close or on the seas) would add a level of danger or challenge to those people looking to take longer trade journey's. Would also populated the sea more for those who wish to do cross ocean trade and make it more enjoyable. Also there's going to be people that want to be corrupted no matter what so having a place of there own would be really good for those types of players.

FuryBladeborne

Corrupted nodes as a raiding node to attack caravans (including those on the sea) are not necessary as all players in such a node are free to carry out those attacks without being corrupted. In the case of caravans, corruption does not apply.

In the case of raiding any other target that is around the raiders level, the raiders probably won't gain corruption as the defenders will probably protect themselves due to the benefits of fighting back.

If the defenders do not fight back due to being greatly outnumbered and result in causing corruption, then under the current corruption system each raider will probably only get corruption from 0-2 players (since the corruption is spread among the much greater number of raiders) and that corruption should fade pretty quickly. Essentially, corruption is not designed to prevent such raiding against players within 10-15 levels of the raiders.

On the other hand, if you create any form of reward system (which can include a society of corrupted even if it has no in game benefit) for corruption then you encourage players to pursue corruption which is the exact opposite of the purpose of having corruption. Essentially, making a reward system of corruption results in more of murdering lowbies rather than less.

Pannath

@Atama whether you like it or not, it's open world pvp. Anything that is said on a forum is gonna stay here out in the open and some people might decide to do something about it. I never said I was going to be one of those people. It was quite obvious to me that I might get attacked in game if someone didn't like what I had to say, I'm surprised you didn't realize this. Perhaps you are just so upset because you realize this isn't as safe of a space as you thought it might be.

This has nothing to do with my being hyper aggressive. Pointing out the reality of a situation isn't aggressive. But as I said, I'm pro pvp, I thrive off of it. So if when you called me a jackass you were of the impression that I was the sort of person that would attack in retaliation to that, then bravo to you for inviting that onto yourself.

Atama

Okay you’re on ignore now, thanks.

Caeryl

JosefTheGreat wrote: »

I understand with what a lot of people are saying in that being corrupted is a deterrent/punishment. However, I think having corrupted nodes (especially those close or on the seas) would add a level of danger or challenge to those people looking to take longer trade journey's. Would also populated the sea more for those who wish to do cross ocean trade and make it more enjoyable. Also there's going to be people that want to be corrupted no matter what so having a place of there own would be really good for those types of players.

I would imagine the Thieves Guild areas, whether they be large hideouts or small, will be corruption-neutral. Similarly, any evil faction probably will not treat you differently if you have corruption.

That being said, corruption-neutral towns will likely not exist, and any safe spaces for corrupted players will likely not be numerous nor easy to retreat to. Corruption exists as a deterrent to random PK'ing, so creating areas in which that deterrent no longer functions as such is counter-intuitive from a design perspective.

If you really want a corruption-neutral town though, I highly recommend gathering some like-minded people and setting one up with freeholds. It wouldn't be quite the massive cityscape quest-hub with all the niche features, but I think if everyone coordinated on getting particular freehold buildings set up, you'd have something damn close to a proper safe haven for corrupted players.

Jahlon

Caeryl wrote: »

Jahlon wrote: »

There isn’t any manual combatant flagging, unless you’ve got an announcement from Steven to the contrary.

Yes there is

@/Caeryl

Can you link the source of this, because I have yet to see any evidence of it being a feature for release. It’s existence in Alpha is necessary when the corruption system isn’t implemented, but it’s easy to see how it’d absolutely warp the game for the worse if it ended up in live launch.

You're not going to see griefing in the game very often; and that's because our flagging system. The corruption mechanics are based around disincentivizing a griefer or PKer but still offering the opportunity, should the occasion arise, where the benefits outweigh the risk, you have the ability to do so. If you gain corruption, which is killing a non-combatant - a player who is not fighting back basically - if you gain that corruption, your world has changed. It is not going to be a very beneficial place to be and you have the potential of losing your gear. Your combat efficacy decreases based on the amount of corruption you accrue. It is a comfortable balance between player agency and grief and basically removing player agency for other players.[13] – Steven Sharif

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xg2l6DJgHV0&feature=youtu.be&t=49m21s

Caeryl

Jahlon wrote: »

Caeryl wrote: »

Jahlon wrote: »

There isn’t any manual combatant flagging, unless you’ve got an announcement from Steven to the contrary.

Yes there is

@/Caeryl

Can you link the source of this, because I have yet to see any evidence of it being a feature for release. It’s existence in Alpha is necessary when the corruption system isn’t implemented, but it’s easy to see how it’d absolutely warp the game for the worse if it ended up in live launch.

You're not going to see griefing in the game very often; and that's because our flagging system. The corruption mechanics are based around disincentivizing a griefer or PKer but still offering the opportunity, should the occasion arise, where the benefits outweigh the risk, you have the ability to do so. If you gain corruption, which is killing a non-combatant - a player who is not fighting back basically - if you gain that corruption, your world has changed. It is not going to be a very beneficial place to be and you have the potential of losing your gear. Your combat efficacy decreases based on the amount of corruption you accrue. It is a comfortable balance between player agency and grief and basically removing player agency for other players.[13] – Steven Sharif

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xg2l6DJgHV0&feature=youtu.be&t=49m21s

Maybe it wasn’t clear, but I asked you for the source of the Combatant toggle you said exists. I already know the AoC flagging mechanics.

Manual flagging, which would let a player flag Combatant without being involved in any combat, does not exist. Automatic flagging which occurs only upon entering combat with another player, does exist.

You replied that manual flagging will exist, which is what I asked for a source for.

Child Item