My argument against stat dampening in PvP for corrupted players.

Although not always "fair", ganking creates community.

People talk about the bullies who pick on defenseless newbies but, more importantly, they have fond memories of those who came to save them. It takes away from a server to have such heavy-handed punishments for an integral part of the MMO experience.

The solution to ganking in Ashes of Creation shouldn't be "Ganker loses stats progressively the more they kill until they can no longer deal damage.". It diminishes the achievement of killing the corrupted player if he's already severely weakened. What's the fun in 1 shotting someone who's hyped up to be this big scary bandit? Like Illidan himself said the hunter is nothing without the hunt.

The considerable loss of items/crafting materials they already are subject to is punishment enough. It should, and kind of already does, fall into the hands of the victim's friends/guild/bounty hunters/node in which he is a citizen to save him.

I believe they should eschew the system that benefits the single player, and harms PvPers for one that is amicable to both. Which would simply be don't reduce the stats of a corrupted player. That way the the bounty hunter can feel good about saving civilians and the corrupted player doesn't just flee/log off after murdering several low level players, now that there is incentive for them to stay knowing they will have a fair fight against the bounty hunter.

In short, the PvP stat dampening that comes with corruption is too harsh of a punishment. I fear bounty hunter's won't exist if the mechanic remains in game. What are your thoughts?

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

Sathrago

Red players respawn randomly near where they died. This makes it completely plausible for players to camp a corrupted player until they run out of corruption.

Noaani

Sathrago wrote: »

Red players respawn randomly near where they died. This makes it completely plausible for players to camp a corrupted player until they run out of corruption.

That would depend on the specifics of "near".

If they are talking "near" in terms of the entire game map, not necessarily.

FuryBladeborne

rikardp98 wrote: »

The word "meaningful" is a subjective word that can never have an objective definition.

It has been defined by Steven to explain what he means when he says that he is creating systems that foster meaningful conflict.

rikardp98 wrote: »

I also want to say that, a discussion is based on personal feelings and past experience, especially when it comes to games xD

A discussion can be based on personal feelings. It can also be based on an objective review of the available information.

rikardp98 wrote: »

Ps. When you respond to the OP dont do it by trying to quote the developers, because what they have said before may change in the future, and what is interesting is what YOU think about the OP.

What is apparently interesting to you is only what the writer thinks about the OP.

Also, if we can't use the information given by the developers, how can we have a conversation about anything that will actually be built into the game? You would apparently just throw out all known information about the game because of the possibility that something might change. Are you just trolling?

rikardp98 wrote: »

So answers me this, why do we need bounty hunters if stat dampening will just handle the corrupted player for us?

The systems are somewhat redundant. However, that means the corrupted player is being taken down in more than one way. It is increasing the pressure not to build a high level of corruption. The bounty hunter system may stop a corrupted player early. Or it may not. It is up to the bounty hunters in the area. The stat dampening will increase as the corrupted keeps killing non combatants. If the bounty hunter system doesn't stop the corrupted player before the corrupted player kills a lot of non combatants, then the stat dampening appears to be intended to cause a hard stop.

Ganknasty

Isn't this why we have certain server types? PvE, PvP, RP and such? Playing on an open PVP server being PK'd as opposite faction/node is bound to happen. Now I agree that Max level camping lowbies is just lame, but if were even level, why should those of us who love to PVP be punished? Players who can't handle being killed/ganked out in the world should play on a "Normal PVE" server where all PVP is instanced. So I gain Max Corruption and now I'm easy bait for Bounty Hunters and other Players to kill? I've done my fair share of ganking in MMO's but it's not to the extreme like corpse camping for no legit reason, hanging out in lowbie areas to impede character progress and such. I agree for penalties if there is X difference in levels, but not when we're on equal footing.

Bricktop

Ganknasty wrote: »

Isn't this why we have certain server types? PvE, PvP, RP and such? Playing on an open PVP server being PK'd as opposite faction/node is bound to happen. Now I agree that Max level camping lowbies is just lame, but if were even level, why should those of us who love to PVP be punished? Players who can't handle being killed/ganked out in the world should play on a "Normal PVE" server where all PVP is instanced. So I gain Max Corruption and now I'm easy bait for Bounty Hunters and other Players to kill? I've done my fair share of ganking in MMO's but it's not to the extreme like corpse camping for no legit reason, hanging out in lowbie areas to impede character progress and such. I agree for penalties if there is X difference in levels, but not when we're on equal footing.

There are no server types for this game.

Sathrago

Ganknasty wrote: »

Isn't this why we have certain server types? PvE, PvP, RP and such? Playing on an open PVP server being PK'd as opposite faction/node is bound to happen. Now I agree that Max level camping lowbies is just lame, but if were even level, why should those of us who love to PVP be punished? Players who can't handle being killed/ganked out in the world should play on a "Normal PVE" server where all PVP is instanced. So I gain Max Corruption and now I'm easy bait for Bounty Hunters and other Players to kill? I've done my fair share of ganking in MMO's but it's not to the extreme like corpse camping for no legit reason, hanging out in lowbie areas to impede character progress and such. I agree for penalties if there is X difference in levels, but not when we're on equal footing.

No. They have not planned for pve and pvp servers. It is a PVX game.

rikardp98

FuryBladeborne wrote: »

It has been defined by Steven to explain what he means when he says that he is creating systems that foster meaningful conflict.

And that's his definition, which I personally agree with. But the word "meaningful" is subject and may change depending on the person.

FuryBladeborne wrote: »

Also, if we can't use the information given by the developers, how can we have a conversation about anything that will actually be built into the game? You would apparently just throw out all known information about the game because of the possibility that something might change. Are you just trolling?

What I'm saying is that the game still have a few years before a full release and that's why we, the forum users, should focus on discussing our subjective views and old experience with other games.
I'm not saying that you shouldn't use facts that the developers have given us, you should use it if there is a miss interpretation or someone missed something. But using that information to "dismiss" an opinion about a system in the game just feels weird and won't start a healthy discussion between two parties. Saying "well the developers don't see that as meaningful, and so that's why." Isn't a argument, no matter how much you show evidence of them saying it. And that's because it's a subjective view that some may not agree with. And you have to use your own subjective view to try and get them to understand why you agree with the developers.

FuryBladeborne wrote: »

The systems are somewhat redundant. However, that means the corrupted player is being taken down in more than one way. It is increasing the pressure not to build a high level of corruption. The bounty hunter system may stop a corrupted player early. Or it may not. It is up to the bounty hunters in the area. The stat dampening will increase as the corrupted keeps killing non combatants. If the bounty hunter system doesn't stop the corrupted player before the corrupted player kills a lot of non combatants, then the stat dampening appears to be intended to cause a hard stop.

Well that to me just means that there won't be a lot of bounty hunters. They won't be able to kill corrupted players before a random player, and there for no rewards, which means no reason to be a bounty hunter.
I think that the bounty hunter system seems really cool and interesting, I just want it to be meaningful and rewarding to do as job in the game.

FuryBladeborne

rikardp98 wrote: »

FuryBladeborne wrote: »

It has been defined by Steven to explain what he means when he says that he is creating systems that foster meaningful conflict.

And that's his definition, which I personally agree with. But the word "meaningful" is subject and may change depending on the person.

Changing meaning by person doesn't matter in this context. Steven is adding systems to the game to create what he has chosen to call meaningful PvP. He's created a label. If people disagree with the label, that is fine. However, the group of systems that stimulate meaningful conflict are still being put into Ashes under that name.

rikardp98 wrote: »

FuryBladeborne wrote: »

Also, if we can't use the information given by the developers, how can we have a conversation about anything that will actually be built into the game? You would apparently just throw out all known information about the game because of the possibility that something might change. Are you just trolling?

What I'm saying is that the game still have a few years before a full release and that's why we, the forum users, should focus on discussing our subjective views and old experience with other games.
I'm not saying that you shouldn't use facts that the developers have given us, you should use it if there is a miss interpretation or someone missed something. But using that information to "dismiss" an opinion about a system in the game just feels weird and won't start a healthy discussion between two parties. Saying "well the developers don't see that as meaningful, and so that's why." Isn't a argument, no matter how much you show evidence of them saying it. And that's because it's a subjective view that some may not agree with. And you have to use your own subjective view to try and get them to understand why you agree with the developers.

You did say not to quote developers though. It was: "When you respond to the OP dont do it by trying to quote the developers". Quoting the developers is useful for talking about what is actually being created and solutions or getting people on track with where the game is rather than every random thing that someone can dream up.

However, it does look like your arguing about something else having to do with promoting healthy discussions and dealing with dismissive comments. All I tried to do was point out that meaningful PvP does refer to a specific group of systems being placed in the game to stimulate meaningful conflict.

rikardp98 wrote: »

FuryBladeborne wrote: »

The systems are somewhat redundant. However, that means the corrupted player is being taken down in more than one way. It is increasing the pressure not to build a high level of corruption. The bounty hunter system may stop a corrupted player early. Or it may not. It is up to the bounty hunters in the area. The stat dampening will increase as the corrupted keeps killing non combatants. If the bounty hunter system doesn't stop the corrupted player before the corrupted player kills a lot of non combatants, then the stat dampening appears to be intended to cause a hard stop.

Well that to me just means that there won't be a lot of bounty hunters. They won't be able to kill corrupted players before a random player, and there for no rewards, which means no reason to be a bounty hunter.
I think that the bounty hunter system seems really cool and interesting, I just want it to be meaningful and rewarding to do as job in the game.

It would be nice for the bounty hunters if there were plenty of targets. But it does look like the corruption system may keep the number of corrupted pretty low. On the other hand, I would bet that as the game ages a few years and beyond, the number of corrupted would grow quite a bit in spite of the system. If I am right, bounty hunting may become more fun as time goes on.

rikardp98

FuryBladeborne wrote: »

Changing meaning by person doesn't matter in this context. Steven is adding systems to the game to create what he has chosen to call meaningful PvP. He's created a label. If people disagree with the label, that is fine. However, the group of systems that stimulate meaningful conflict are still being put into Ashes under that name.

Yes that's true, but what I mean is that the game is not released yet and we are having a discussion about the game and our own views based on past experience. Just because Steven uses his definition of "meaningful pvp" to great the pvp system, doesn't mean that other peoples definition of "meaningful pvp" is invalid.

And all your other responses I have nothing to say about xD Totally agree

Child Item