Benefits for corrupt players

The current Corruption and Flagging system kills the vibe. Of course, no one wants to be PKed right after leaving a Node, but at the moment, there is literally no reason to PK. There is no Risk vs. Reward, it's just death.

Corrupt players can only remove corruption by dying or by slowly leveling for x amount of time. Plenty of bounty hunters might try to kill you and the consequences for dying are massive. Not only that, but combat becomes more and more difficult the more corrupt you are. Just a 10% decrease in stats would cripple me in PVP, so why would I ever become corrupt?

The only benefit is that non-combat players suffer twice the death penalty as combat players, so if you kill one of these players, you might get slightly more resources. This is not at all worth it. It would be cool if Corrupted players could receive some tangible benefits, rather than just having a ban on PKing in disguise.

My idea is, if the NPC reputation system is expanded to have evil NPCs be more favorable to Corrupted players, they might be able to exchange rare resources and items. The more PKs under your belt, the better the items. If you already have killed five players, let's assume you suffer a 5% decrease in stats and are a very tempting target for bounty hunters. If your goal is to get 10 PKs so you can trade for some really good items or resources, then the risks and benefits would balance each other.

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

False Prophet

Well i'm pretty sure you are wrong because the published explanation of the flagging system explicitly states that if you kill a corrupt player, you will remain in a non-combat state.

https://ashesofcreation.wiki/Player_flagging

George_Black

False Prophet wrote: »

Well i'm pretty sure you are wrong because the published explanation of the flagging system explicitly states that if you kill a corrupt player, you will remain in a non-combat state.

https://ashesofcreation.wiki/Player_flagging

Ye. Dont become corrupted if you dont have the balls.

Jirue

False Prophet wrote: »

I was not aware of that. If that's the case then the corruption system in its current form is useless. I don't think many people would just die willingly.

I would. I would ignore the pesky fly nipping at me because they're not worth my time. If they kill me, then they get corrupted and suffer the consequences. If they don't kill me, then I just move on my merry way as before.

Vhaeyne

False Prophet wrote: »

Well the idea is that you can never be sure of anything. I don't think its possible to confidently kill players, while suffering a stat penalty and being chased by players who know your location.

@George Black is right. The corruption system has been working fine since 2003. With Lineage 2 with the Karma system. Which is why I am so confident about how all of this will play out in game.

False Prophet

Ok then we agree that my proposition does not really improve the status of corrupt players a lot. The way I see it, only masochists like myself would even consider participating and get a short dopamine rush, followed by having to waste time and get nothing in return.

False Prophet

Vhaeyne wrote: »

False Prophet wrote: »

Well the idea is that you can never be sure of anything. I don't think its possible to confidently kill players, while suffering a stat penalty and being chased by players who know your location.

@George Black is right. The corruption system has been working fine since 2003. With Lineage 2 with the Karma system. Which is why I am so confident about how all of this will play out in game.

As mentioned in another reply, the system does not work like so. You don't become a combatant even if you kill 1000 corrupt players.

False Prophet

Jirue wrote: »

False Prophet wrote: »

I was not aware of that. If that's the case then the corruption system in its current form is useless. I don't think many people would just die willingly.

I would. I would ignore the pesky fly nipping at me because they're not worth my time. If they kill me, then they get corrupted and suffer the consequences. If they don't kill me, then I just move on my merry way as before.

Yes but since non-combat players can kill corrupt players without changing to combat players, you really don't have a reason not to resist, furthering my point that this will not make PKing widespread in any way.

George_Black

False Prophet wrote: »

Ok then we agree that my proposition does not really improve the status of corrupt players a lot. The way I see it, only masochists like myself would even consider participating and get a short dopamine rush, followed by having to waste time and get nothing in return.

If I dont like someone I will PK them regardless of consequences. Just like millions of players have been doing since 2003. It's a new concept for you. If you cant understand wait to experience it.

tautau

I strongly disagree with the OP's underlying premise that PKers should somehow be rewarded for their deeds. Corruption, as other replies have stated, is a PUNISHMENT. Do you get punished for good deeds? No. You get punished for bad deeds, like killing white players.

Back in early L2, there were many players, lots of players, who quite the game early on because of the rampant PKing around the starter villages. So much that it hurt the commercial viability of the game. There were a surprising number of jerk/players who got their jollies from killing white players, players too low to effectively fight back.

When I first logged in to Alpha, I was PKed right there in the starter area, so by the time my screen loaded I was dead. While level 1 on my first character, I was twice more attacked by higher levels. So I stood there and let the attacker go red so they could be dealt punishment by players their own level.

Jirue

False Prophet wrote: »

As mentioned in another reply, the system does not work like so. You don't become a combatant even if you kill 1000 corrupt players.

Yeah, that's the point. It makes non-combatants your worst enemy since they can track you down and you would be weakened if you kill them in return. It flips the dynamic, since you killed someone minding their own business those same people become your biggest weakness until you are no longer corrupted.

False Prophet

tautau wrote: »

I strongly disagree with the OP's underlying premise that PKers should somehow be rewarded for their deeds. Corruption, as other replies have stated, is a PUNISHMENT. Do you get punished for good deeds? No. You get punished for bad deeds, like killing white players.

Back in early L2, there were many players, lots of players, who quite the game early on because of the rampant PKing around the starter villages. So much that it hurt the commercial viability of the game. There were a surprising number of jerk/players who got their jollies from killing white players, players too low to effectively fight back.

When I first logged in to Alpha, I was PKed right there in the starter area, so by the time my screen loaded I was dead. While level 1 on my first character, I was twice more attacked by higher levels. So I stood there and let the attacker go red so they could be dealt punishment by players their own level.

As discussed in the other replies. If this were implemented, it would not make PKing widespread at all. PKing would still lead to losing items and XP and you would basically get nothing in return as long as you aren't superman with 5 lucky charms hanging around.

False Prophet

George Black wrote: »

False Prophet wrote: »

Ok then we agree that my proposition does not really improve the status of corrupt players a lot. The way I see it, only masochists like myself would even consider participating and get a short dopamine rush, followed by having to waste time and get nothing in return.

If I dont like someone I will PK them regardless of consequences. Just like millions of players have been doing since 2003. It's a new concept for you. If you cant understand wait to experience it.

I don't know man, the idea that I could have enough beef with someone in a game of 10.000 players to lose items and my precious time is pretty ludicrous to me and I've been playing MMOs for quite a while.

False Prophet

Jirue wrote: »

False Prophet wrote: »

As mentioned in another reply, the system does not work like so. You don't become a combatant even if you kill 1000 corrupt players.

Yeah, that's the point. It makes non-combatants your worst enemy since they can track you down and you would be weakened if you kill them in return. It flips the dynamic, since you killed someone minding their own business those same people become your biggest weakness until you are no longer corrupted.

Yea I like that. That's why I want there to be a far off reward for surviving a meat grinder 10 times over.

tautau

But one of my points (which I did not make clear, sorry) @False Prophet , is that there are a LOT of jerk/players who will kill low level white players just for the fun of it. They won't get much in 'financial' return, we agree on that. But they are the kind of people who just do that, and we could assign them all kinds of derogatory names. I saw tons in L2 and ran into them in Alpha in AoC as well...already.

So the corruption system is an attempt, hopefully successful, to curtail this type of game destructive behavior.

George_Black

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J6eeS0mLEgQ

30s video. The red player gets away with it.

akabear

L2`s system was much harsher when first went live and got toned down later.

Early on, as a newbie, I recall getting excited after invited to a "high level group" and taken into dungeons that I could not explore solo. However, whilst knowing I would drop gear on death, I never contemplated a pickup group would have key players that were organising groups, taking new players into content that was above their level only to let them die and pickup their gear that dropped.

Early on there were random pk`ers that killed you for gear.

Soon after there were organised pk`ers that went on regular rampages, looting the gear of all those that were killed.

As the player levels increased and the stakes also increased, the pk`ing toned down.

Later Pk`ing became far more political and strategic.

The bounty hunters will be quest bound to military zones, so perhaps the military zones may have more order.

But to kill a pk`er is actually quite hard, whist their risk increases and not much down side for self to attack, in late game mostly players adept at pvp opt to go pk.. so its not so easy.

There are still gains in AoC for pk`ing which was much reduced in L2.. so I see incentive with risk that there will be a portion of the community willing to take!

ThexBlackxKnight

The whole point of Ashes is the conflict of players , you going to make enemies just by game design alone. There will be people that wont like you , because of your citizenship , guild or you are in a area they dont want you in.

False Prophet

tautau wrote: »

But one of my points (which I did not make clear, sorry) @False Prophet , is that there are a LOT of jerk/players who will kill low level white players just for the fun of it. They won't get much in 'financial' return, we agree on that. But they are the kind of people who just do that, and we could assign them all kinds of derogatory names. I saw tons in L2 and ran them in Alpha in AoC as well...already.

So the corruption system is an attempt, hopefully successful, to curtail this type of game destructive behavior.

I 100% agree and I hope you can agree that anything short of instantly banning offending parties is completely ineffective. So considering what I'm proposing is essentially bait, what's the problem in adding it? The only beneficiary would be people who like adversity like myself. Non-combatants would not even notice.

Jirue

False Prophet wrote: »

Yea I like that. That's why I want there to be a far off reward for surviving a meat grinder 10 times over.

There seems to be a fundamental misunderstanding of the point of this system. The goal of the corruption system is not to create some kind of emerging gameplay dynamic to survive the slaughtering of people minding their own business. It is to systematically discourage player behavior that is harmful to a online game's player base. That means there is no reward structure for participating in the system, only punishment.

False Prophet

akabear wrote: »

L2`s system was much harsher when first went live and got toned down later.

Early on, as a newbie, I recall getting excited after invited to a "high level group" and taken into dungeons that I could not explore solo. However, whilst knowing I would drop gear on death, I never contemplated a pickup group would have key players that were organising groups, taking new players into content that was above their level only to let them die and pickup their gear that dropped.

Early on there were random pk`ers that killed you for gear.

Soon after there were organised pk`ers that went on regular rampages, looting the gear of all those that were killed.

As the player levels increased and the stakes also increased, the pk`ing toned down.

Later Pk`ing became far more political and strategic.

The bounty hunters will be quest bound to military zones, so perhaps the military zones may have more order.

But to kill a pk`er is actually quite hard, whist their risk increases and not much down side for self to attack, in late game mostly players adept at pvp opt to go pk.. so its not so easy.

There are still gains in AoC for pk`ing which was much reduced in L2.. so I see incentive with risk that there will be a portion of the community willing to take!

I just don't get it. You lose stats, you lose XP, you lose items and you gain some herbs and ore, which you could acquire much faster if you simply go around picking plants.

Child Item