Corruption system in relation to auto-flagging in open sea

This is not a post about if auto-flagging is good or not, or about preference between the two.
It is about the corruption system and the logic inconsistency of applying this system.
(for transparency, I would prefer the complete removal of this system, but what irks me more is the logic inconsistency)

The corruption system was presented as a tool that complies with the risk-vs-reward philosophy.

E.g. an attacker risks becoming corrupted if he kills a player that doesn't fight back and the defender risks losing much more loot if he doesn't fight back.
Both sides are risking in order to get rewarded.

In the open-sea, as Steven mentioned in the stream, the rewards will be grater and the risk needs to be higher.
Is the corruption system unable to handle that?
If the reward is more valuable, wouldn't that make the attacker more willing to become corrupted and the defender more willing to fight back to minimize his loses?

Why is now the corruption system presented as an obstacle to the risk-vs-reward philosophy for open-sea content?

In the open-sea now, with the auto-flagging, what is the risk for the attackers? E.g. if let's say 3 ships that are co-operating spot 1 ship, why wouldn't they attack? Where is the risk?
How are the bounty hunters affected by this change? Would they be able to hunt corrupted players in the open-sea?
Contrary to what Steven said, this change is actually going against the risk-vs-reward philosophy. If you outnumber the enemy, there is no risk in attacking.

You cannot treat the corruption system as a helpful tool for land content and as an obstacle for open-sea content.. those things cannot be true at the same time, just because the ground changes!

When you need to add exceptions to a system, in order to make the content fun, then maybe that system is not good enough.
If it is good enough, use it everywhere.. if it is not, remove it from everywhere!

The approach Intrepid is taking makes no sense.

Find more posts tagged with

Staff

Comments

Warth

akabear wrote: »

Will dying at sea effect teleport to the nearest destination, creating fast travel?

@akabear isnt the same thing that happens on land? You die, you get respawned at the next respawn point (node?). Just that its like 3-5 minutes distance on land and like 10 minute distance on water.

Not really different at all. Taking Death Penalties in order to save 10 minutes of travel time seems beyond stupid to me.

Dygz

WHIT3ROS3 wrote: »

Objective-based, opt-in PvP combat for Caravans and Sieges.
Corruption as the compromise for random, non-consensual PvP combat in the open world.
That's what has been stated for the 5 years the game has been in development.

Which is still the case.

The world is large, no need to have 100% of it dedicated to what you consider to be optimal. Seems a bit extreme to approach it as "Yeah, the entirety of the land mass is how I want it, but the fact that it isn't 100% of the game is a dealbreaker for me" that doesn't seem reasonable. In fact, it comes across as pretty petulant considering we haven't even seen a single piece of Naval gameplay as of yet.

But you do you.

Um. No. It's not "still the case".
There are now areas in the open world that do not have the compromise of the Corruption mechanic.

Doesn't matter how large the world is.
And... yes. I will not play what I don't like.
That's OK.

insomnia

I guess i'll avoid the open sea as much as possible.

so, the open sea is going to be a shitzone. Full Pvp are often for a-holes. People that likes to corpse camp others, so they have no option but to log off. If they really liked Pvp, why not do arenas or battlegrounds. Because they proberly aren't that good at pvp. They need all the advangates they can get. Being higher level. Being more people. Attacking someone in the back. Attacking them while the opponent is fighting a mob. etc

George_Black

insomnia wrote: »

I guess i'll avoid the open sea as much as possible.

so, the open sea is going to be a shitzone. Full Pvp are often for a-holes. People that likes to corpse camp others, so they have no option but to log off. If they really liked Pvp, why not do arenas or battlegrounds. Because they proberly aren't that good at pvp. They need all the advangates they can get. Being higher level. Being more people. Attacking someone in the back. Attacking them while the opponent is fighting a mob. etc

What a sore loser.

insomnia

George_Black wrote: »

insomnia wrote: »

I guess i'll avoid the open sea as much as possible.

so, the open sea is going to be a shitzone. Full Pvp are often for a-holes. People that likes to corpse camp others, so they have no option but to log off. If they really liked Pvp, why not do arenas or battlegrounds. Because they proberly aren't that good at pvp. They need all the advangates they can get. Being higher level. Being more people. Attacking someone in the back. Attacking them while the opponent is fighting a mob. etc

What a sore loser.

That comment makes no sence at all. But i get what type of person you are now. You are only happy when you can ruin things for other. Those who can't create, destroy

Veeshan

Iffithy wrote: »

I’m going to have to agree with Dygz on this one. It’s a disappointing change. Not because I am against the pvp but because it changes the balance that I was hoping for in a pvx game.

But the thing I really don’t understand is why do this? I mean the vast majority of people traveling across the ocean would likely be caravans, which are mobile pvp zones already. So what does this accomplish other than discourage exploration?

Allows them to make deep sea fishing more profitable due to added inherit risk. here the thing though what do u risk traveling across the sea to the other continent if your taking resources then your basicly a caravan if your travelling to get to other continent dont carry any resources then u got no risk either sooo i dont see an issue.
Also adds makes boss encounter in the ocean much more interesting like archages kraken kills and so on had to keep an eye out for enemy vessels too.

Veeshan

JamesSunderland wrote: »

If Steven is intending to go for the "Archeage style"(as i believe he is) I expect that the Sea will be the place with possible the highest rewards in the game, considering Archeage's golden age as a base, Across the Sea trading would have the most valuable trading routes; Fishing, seafloor gathering and deep dive treasure hunting possible some of the most rewarding professions and Sea World Bosses to be some of the most rewarding .

It's all about the Higher Risk for the Higher Reward.

pretty certain your right here. I bet you resources on the islands will be different from eachother or there be unique resources on each island for example the better plank of wood might need wood that is unique to each continent in its combination so taking said wood across the islands could be rather profitable

insomnia

My prediction is that, you are going to have a group of people, who reach max level, in the fastest possible time, and they are going to roam the open sea, to attack other people. Proberly not on all servers, but they will be there. Perhaps even entire guilds dedicated for this

Dygz

My response to this mechanic really has nothing to do with resources gained or resources lost.

Beeper

I'm skeptical.

Having spent years in Archeage, I know firsthand what happens out on the open seas. It can be super exciting, but in the blink of an eye it can easily devolve into an mass of toxicity and unchecked griefing. How this pans out will largely depend on how its balanced from a design point of view, in addition to how the community rallies around this. So I'm looking forward to how this will look in Alpha 2 play testing.

Balance = How many harbors are there? If there are only a couple harbors across the world like Archeage, that probably won't cut it. How hard is it to build/upgrade ships? How widespread are the really good fishing spots/hot spots for quests/etc? Hopefully more than just a few, or ideally they're dynamic. What's the ship to ship combat really going to be like?

Community = How will a server treat unfettered douchebaggery? Will they be able to transfer/name change and can people run away from their reputation? What's the servers appetite weeding out people that bully lower level/lower skill players?

I'm still skeptical. But there are too many variables for me to have a real opinion.

Dygz

I think there won't be enough people in Alpha 2 to make a meaningful decision about how chaotic it might once it's open to everyone.

Iffithy

I mean things are worth more from the ocean sounds good and all.
But in an open world pvp game, you already run the risk of loosing stuff to getting attacked and killed.

At least the corruption mechanic creates a give and take element and gives the player an option in a fight.

Dygz

Well, it was said to be an open world PvX game.
I now consider it to be an open world PvP-centric game. Which is why I won't be playing it.
I don't really care about losing a portion of resources. I'm also not particulary concerned about losing the PvP battle.
I don't want to participate in a PvP battle when I'm not in the mood...and would prefer to be doing something else, like exploring and gathering. Which includes exploring the Open Sea and its unique NPCs.

Iffithy

That’s why I agree with you Dygz. This imo pushes the game away from pvx to pvp. Which is fine for a lot of people but not what I thought I was signing up for. It’s just disappointing

Mopy King

When it comes to just wanting to explore things in the ocean, not the biggest fan of knowing people can take me out with zero penalty whatsoever as I was quite content with the corruption system.. but won't be a deal breaker.

I am curious if naval caravans will be like land ones where you teleport out randomly when it launches to prevent people from waiting by harbors to gank.

mfckingjoker

That's great news. Although the flagging system works great it's important in a pvp game to have areas in the world that you can freely kill anybody w/o consequences

mfckingjoker

Dygz wrote: »

LMFAO
It's a dealbreaker.
Like EvE and ArcheAge, that's too PvP-centric for me.
I won't be playing.
Unless we can use the Divine Gateways to port to starting areas on other continents.

Just move on man. I've seen you complaining many many times in this forums. This game is not for you.

Veeshan

mfckingjoker wrote: »

Dygz wrote: »

LMFAO
It's a dealbreaker.
Like EvE and ArcheAge, that's too PvP-centric for me.
I won't be playing.
Unless we can use the Divine Gateways to port to starting areas on other continents.

Just move on man. I've seen you complaining many many times in this forums. This game is not for you.

PvE players just gotta complain till somone changes the game to PvE just for them :P new world tried this and we all know how well that went :P haha

BaSkA_9x2

Bearheart wrote: »

How this pans out will largely depend on how its balanced from a design point of view, in addition to how the community rallies around this. So I'm looking forward to how this will look in Alpha 2 play testing.

I'm still skeptical. But there are too many variables for me to have a real opinion.

I personally don't mind the change because it won't affect my gameplay style, I used to be a resident of the Wildy in RS and Rust is currently my main game, however I'm also skeptical and cannot stay quiet when I see something that doesn't make sense to me or that feels like it contradicts what was said in the past. And I'm not sure a big change like this is simple enough to test and to just toggle on and off during Alpha 2.

If naval gameplay in Ashes works similar to Sea of Thieves', which I hope it will because that game can be quite fun, when all members of a crew die the winning crew will more often than not sunk the other ship, for any number of reasons. So unlike open world PvP in land, you probably won't be able to go back to the fight in the open sea and get revenge because you don't have a ship in your inventory and swimming/aquatic mount is probably not going to get you (and your group) back there quick enough.

For the reason above (and probably other reasons too), in my opinion, even with corruption the open sea would already be one of the most dangerous places PvP wise, which is the reason why I fail to understand their decision from a game design perspective.

This change might turn out to be extremely fun, a great addition to the game and the majority of the community might love it, but I genuinely still can't see a logical explanation to do it, especially because this change somewhat contradicts quotes like these:

Just because our flagging system gives corruption to pkers, doesn't mean PvP won't happen. There is plenty of reason for PvP to occur open-world. Scarce resources, open world hunting grounds, caravans, sieges, guild wars etc.[7] – Steven Sharif

[...] the reason for that is our current PvP systems already allow for material risk essentially that's either through the flagging system or through other event-based pvp opt-in systems as well.[11] – Steven Sharif

One of the interesting components of Ashes of Creation and our flagging system is that it presents the potential for two conflicting parties to have open conflict in the open world over pretty much anything that they may want or disagree with;... [99] – Steven Sharif

[...] Our PvP is designed to offer the players a well-balanced and fair world to shape through the pen, or sword should they choose.[100]

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. [...] It is a comfortable balance between player agency and grief and basically removing player agency for other players.[65] – Steven Sharif

Reward without risk is meaningless. Corruption is just another word for risk.[138] – Steven Sharif

TL;DR: the more I think about it, the more it feels like Intrepid is just catering to those who enjoy this style of gameplay and/or the corruption system is bad, which I don't think it is. If they want to say risk vs. reward was the reason for this change, then why aren't open world dungeons, land world bosses and other high tier/rewarding land content also free PvP/corruptionless?

Dygz

mfckingjoker wrote: »

Just move on man. I've seen you complaining many many times in this forums. This game is not for you.

LMFAO
That's what I said.

Child Item