Hot topic - PvP servers without corruption and full loot.

Thoughts, is this something people might want?

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

I want a PvX game that being said i wouldnt mind seeing a corrupted zone or a couple designated spot where that have this however.

maybe if player fail an event or something the zone becomes corrupted for X time or till X thing happen and when it in this corrupted state there no corruption penalty/high death penalty in regards to loot i would rather full inventory drop over equipment however. however there should be more of a reward for being in said area too in regards for PvE or what not

Ferryman

It could be actually interesting concept if open world rules would change and progress with node progression from safer to more dangerous when node levels up. Anyhow, at least economy would work great if portion of items are destroyed and sinked always when loot drops.

PenguinPaladin

Mag7spy wrote: »

PenguinPaladin wrote: »

Corruption is needed for ashes to function because of the node system......

There are no low level zones. Only nodes. So max levels and noobs are going to be living on the same towns. Low levels cant even do their quests or dungeons if max ranks can be allowed to one shot them in passing just in case they had loot. There is no where thats truly safe in ashes, but the corruption system lets the world function despite that. Without it nodes cant function properly

Other mmos have function like that in the pas the same way,

Name one other mmo, with the node system where the content all exists in the same place because the people being there is creating it........ how big the world is doesnt matter. Unless a large amount of players are playing near each other no content will exist.........

I didnt think i would need to explain this... but, nothing exists in ashes without a large group of players in one place. Nothing. Endless fields mountains and forests, and basic trash mobs. No world bosses, no quests. No anything. Until players build up the nodes.

A server with no curruption, would have to manage to build up towns for there to be anything to do. And i mean. It would be interesting to see this attempted. All the player deaths around the stating nodes being part of the exp that builds them up i guess.. but people leaving areas, because there is too many people killing anyone, makes the node delevel and content go away. And then those gankers move to the next city, run everyone out of town and it all happens again. Until you run people off your server, and because merges means a complete reset of the world, back to no content existing.

Mag7spy

Doesn't have to have a node system. Shadowbane had one central city people were sent to when they died, low levels and high levels. Also the city your teleport scool was linked to and high levels would run past the city through the low level areas and kill them. Closest to node element about that is that you can pick areas to build the base and upgrade it.

PenguinPaladin

Mag7spy wrote: »

Doesn't have to have a node system. Shadowbane had one central city people were sent to when they died, low levels and high levels. Also the city your teleport scool was linked to and high levels would run past the city through the low level areas and kill them. Closest to node element about that is that you can pick areas to build the base and upgrade it.

Yes. But those places dont dissapear if you run the players off, like they will in ashes.

Mag7spy

PenguinPaladin wrote: »

Mag7spy wrote: »

Doesn't have to have a node system. Shadowbane had one central city people were sent to when they died, low levels and high levels. Also the city your teleport scool was linked to and high levels would run past the city through the low level areas and kill them. Closest to node element about that is that you can pick areas to build the base and upgrade it.

Yes. But those places dont dissapear if you run the players off, like they will in ashes.

If your base gets sieged in shadowbane you lose a spawn point for your guild and its destroyed so its just a empty ground after. Either way im just saying it could be done in ashes, though personally its a very very niche group that enjoys it. As much as i like pvp I don't want my progression lost too often and these servers die faster then most or are just tiny.

PvX is the way to go in building something that last and is more fun and fair imo with the right balance.

Amrothe

Sure would do this but only if it was perma death.

Mag7spy

Amrothe wrote: »

Sure would do this but only if it was perma death.

O.O. The moment I realize someone is more hardcore than me.

PenguinPaladin

Amrothe wrote: »

Sure would do this but only if it was perma death.

Perma death would balance it as to having enough risk involved for ganking every living thing. Im down

Mag7spy

If you die in ashes you die irl.
edit* Now we just need the SAO vr headsets

Shilee

The same reason why others and myself don't want pve servers, is the same reason we don't want full pvp servers. It segregates the player bases, it isn't the pvx MMO that we were promised and are excited for, and it's a slippery slope. If we get pvp servers we may as well have pve servers also because we are already going to squander development time to make one small group happy, may as well take time to make the significantly larger group happy. I want neither of those types of servers, people should find a way to coexist with each other on a pvx server as Steven intended. If people wanted a full loot pvp game they should try Rust, Ark, or V Rising instead.

Mag7spy

Shilee wrote: »

The same reason why others and myself don't want pve servers, is the same reason we don't want full pvp servers. It segregates the player bases, it isn't the pvx MMO that we were promised and are excited for, and it's a slippery slope. If we get pvp servers we may as well have pve servers also because we are already going to squander development time to make one small group happy, may as well take time to make the significantly larger group happy. I want neither of those types of servers, people should find a way to coexist with each other on a pvx server as Steven intended. If people wanted a full loot pvp game they should try Rust, Ark, or V Rising instead.

I agree, everyone should be together to experience how it is rather then splitting up the player base. Sure some people might leave, but atleast the maximum amount of people are introduced to it and im sure plenty will stay so long as it is a good game.

Ferryman

If Ashes can reach players that they cannot with current concept and if different servers would be benefical for the company, then I have nothing against different kinds of servers. If I can play on a server I like most, I do not mind if others can do the same.

I would play most likely on a PvX server anyway because I want some owPvP action, however, full loot can be sometimes a little bit too stressful.

CROW3

PvX is a lot more interesting that the sum of optional PvE servers and optional PvP servers. It's one of the pillars to Steven's $X00M bet.

Volgaris

it'll as successful as mortal online. for the 120 dudes that play it they love it.

WHIT3ROS3

Mortal Online 2 is a perfect example of how certain, self-described "Hardcore PvP" players, will destroy a game and burn it to the ground if only they can be king of the ashes.

As others have said. AoC aims to be a PvX game and spending precious time and resources on segmenting the base probably isn't the best approach.

Aerlana

I mean, this kind of suggestion feels like corruption has the effect to limit PvP on the game.

Real PvPer won't care that corruption exist, (by "real" i mean those who focus on PvP and only it)
There are way to limit the impact of corruption like a lesser cost stuff simply.
I never understood why people said that such system reduce PvP...

This idea is to solve a problem that doesn't exist in fact. PvPer complaining about corruption should ask themselve why corruption is a problem for their favourite activity in MMORPG

aaaand... i don't think it would be a good idea to have 2 kind of servers.

Also remember why corruption is defended by so much (and not only there)
Without risk for a totally free PvP, some dude can become the pinnacle of toxicity, going in killing frenzy because "lol it is fun, and this is real PvP lol" and just avoiding new players to simply ... play the game.
Sure "if only some servers not a problem for the game" but i feel that soon enough, due to this kind of behaviour, those server could be quite empty... And ashes needs decent populations for each server to have it work decently.
"they could gather to push some nodes" no, a full pvP will make people more spread to have some time to rest, gather, and travel to attack others...

Kovrm

No. Only as Steven intended it. Amd that's coming from someone who plans to do a whole hell of a lot of pvp.

Dolyem

No thanks. I dont want any special servers. I want PvX with the intended game design. No full PvP, no full PvE...just the one type so all of the systems work and have a healthy population of players from both sides.

Veeshan

whats with people wanting full loot, now im a pvper and from experience in every pvp game with full loot in it they dont work in the long run -.-
Full loot games be, worst 10% of players quit cause there constantly farming to requip only to die again then they quit the the next worst 10% quit for same reason and so till no one is left.

Child Item