Noaani wrote: » Dolyem wrote: » If it were me, I'd send in the first ship with level ones as a decoy, they'll likely die quickly from attacks from other ships. This would corrupt those ships and allow for less penalties for the rest of my fleet but more penalties for the enemy. Instant advantage The thing is, in naval combat, the players aren't your opponent. The ship is. The object of naval combat will be to destroy the ship. Ideally, you'll leave the players alone in the water, stranded, needing to either swim home or "self die" before they can get on another ship. I mean, a lone player in the water isn't going to be a threat to a warship. If it's anything like Archeage, even just getting on board a warship that doesn't want you on board is a challenge - let alone doing anything while there. Since you are going to be using your ship to attack another ship, and not a player directly, the entire concept of corruption in naval combat just doesn't make much sense. This is the reason I have always assumed it would just straight up not be a thing in naval content in Ashes.
Dolyem wrote: » If it were me, I'd send in the first ship with level ones as a decoy, they'll likely die quickly from attacks from other ships. This would corrupt those ships and allow for less penalties for the rest of my fleet but more penalties for the enemy. Instant advantage
XiraelAcaron wrote: » Dolyem wrote: » XiraelAcaron wrote: » Dolyem wrote: » . JustVine wrote: » Dolyem wrote: » JustVine wrote: » Dolyem wrote: » Mag7spy wrote: » Not to mention people can corruption bomb you with a bunch of low levels in order to highly deter attacks or ensure people are extremely deep red. This is actually a good point. You could bait people by loading up some level 1's and then kill the corrupted attackers. I mean... I'm not sure I quite see how corruption bombing is easier at sea than on land. If anything I think it'd be harder to corruption bomb at sea because you get thrown to shore on death which is probably going to be further away in most cases than on a land respawn point. There is a finite amount of greens you can throw at a person with out a ton of logistics as a result... And that's provided your opponent doesn't kill everyone in the encounter who could give you coordinates. Once you do, it's a lot harder to find people at sea so the Red is free to just go grind pirates and other mobs to rinse the corruption off. Feel free to point out to me what scenarios you are thinking of. On land corruption bombing is definitely going to be a challenge and a lot easier to find the opponent via bounty hunting and return to the fray due to the difference in respawn distance and population density. IS needs to solve this problem anyway. If it were me, I'd send in the first ship with level ones as a decoy, they'll likely die quickly from attacks from other ships. This would corrupt those ships and allow for less penalties for the rest of my fleet but more penalties for the enemy. Instant advantage That sounds like the interesting political/strategy based risk gameplay Steven was aiming for to me. But how is this more likely at sea than land? Also I think I might have missed an assumption you were making. I didn't realize you were proposing the scenario as 'ships gain corruption'. To me it's an exploit. The difference between land and sea is on land you'll select an individual and see their level, on a ship, you'll attack from a distance hitting another ship with players on it/potentially hiding in it. Send 10 lvl 1 rogues stealthed on it and they die. Not a great time for the attackers. Politic/strategy shouldn't be based off manipulating a system as it wasn't originally intended. Corruption isn't meant to be a weapon. It's meant to be a limiter Simple solution would be to base corruption gained not on the number or level of player on board but on the difference of the ship classes. How would you go about ship classes then Bigger ships killing smaller green ships get more corruption. Since there are only 3 classes that I know of, and we want to promote PvP I would say for the biggest ship (tier 1) against anothe tier 1, almost no corruption gain. Tier 1 against tier 2 only slightly more. Tier 1 againts Tier 3 (personal ship) maximum corruption. Tier 2 againts Tier 1 slightly more than normal. Tier 1 against Tier 1 normal corruption. Lower classes against higher classes no curruption (I believe that would be hard to win anyway).
Dolyem wrote: » XiraelAcaron wrote: » Dolyem wrote: » . JustVine wrote: » Dolyem wrote: » JustVine wrote: » Dolyem wrote: » Mag7spy wrote: » Not to mention people can corruption bomb you with a bunch of low levels in order to highly deter attacks or ensure people are extremely deep red. This is actually a good point. You could bait people by loading up some level 1's and then kill the corrupted attackers. I mean... I'm not sure I quite see how corruption bombing is easier at sea than on land. If anything I think it'd be harder to corruption bomb at sea because you get thrown to shore on death which is probably going to be further away in most cases than on a land respawn point. There is a finite amount of greens you can throw at a person with out a ton of logistics as a result... And that's provided your opponent doesn't kill everyone in the encounter who could give you coordinates. Once you do, it's a lot harder to find people at sea so the Red is free to just go grind pirates and other mobs to rinse the corruption off. Feel free to point out to me what scenarios you are thinking of. On land corruption bombing is definitely going to be a challenge and a lot easier to find the opponent via bounty hunting and return to the fray due to the difference in respawn distance and population density. IS needs to solve this problem anyway. If it were me, I'd send in the first ship with level ones as a decoy, they'll likely die quickly from attacks from other ships. This would corrupt those ships and allow for less penalties for the rest of my fleet but more penalties for the enemy. Instant advantage That sounds like the interesting political/strategy based risk gameplay Steven was aiming for to me. But how is this more likely at sea than land? Also I think I might have missed an assumption you were making. I didn't realize you were proposing the scenario as 'ships gain corruption'. To me it's an exploit. The difference between land and sea is on land you'll select an individual and see their level, on a ship, you'll attack from a distance hitting another ship with players on it/potentially hiding in it. Send 10 lvl 1 rogues stealthed on it and they die. Not a great time for the attackers. Politic/strategy shouldn't be based off manipulating a system as it wasn't originally intended. Corruption isn't meant to be a weapon. It's meant to be a limiter Simple solution would be to base corruption gained not on the number or level of player on board but on the difference of the ship classes. How would you go about ship classes then
XiraelAcaron wrote: » Dolyem wrote: » . JustVine wrote: » Dolyem wrote: » JustVine wrote: » Dolyem wrote: » Mag7spy wrote: » Not to mention people can corruption bomb you with a bunch of low levels in order to highly deter attacks or ensure people are extremely deep red. This is actually a good point. You could bait people by loading up some level 1's and then kill the corrupted attackers. I mean... I'm not sure I quite see how corruption bombing is easier at sea than on land. If anything I think it'd be harder to corruption bomb at sea because you get thrown to shore on death which is probably going to be further away in most cases than on a land respawn point. There is a finite amount of greens you can throw at a person with out a ton of logistics as a result... And that's provided your opponent doesn't kill everyone in the encounter who could give you coordinates. Once you do, it's a lot harder to find people at sea so the Red is free to just go grind pirates and other mobs to rinse the corruption off. Feel free to point out to me what scenarios you are thinking of. On land corruption bombing is definitely going to be a challenge and a lot easier to find the opponent via bounty hunting and return to the fray due to the difference in respawn distance and population density. IS needs to solve this problem anyway. If it were me, I'd send in the first ship with level ones as a decoy, they'll likely die quickly from attacks from other ships. This would corrupt those ships and allow for less penalties for the rest of my fleet but more penalties for the enemy. Instant advantage That sounds like the interesting political/strategy based risk gameplay Steven was aiming for to me. But how is this more likely at sea than land? Also I think I might have missed an assumption you were making. I didn't realize you were proposing the scenario as 'ships gain corruption'. To me it's an exploit. The difference between land and sea is on land you'll select an individual and see their level, on a ship, you'll attack from a distance hitting another ship with players on it/potentially hiding in it. Send 10 lvl 1 rogues stealthed on it and they die. Not a great time for the attackers. Politic/strategy shouldn't be based off manipulating a system as it wasn't originally intended. Corruption isn't meant to be a weapon. It's meant to be a limiter Simple solution would be to base corruption gained not on the number or level of player on board but on the difference of the ship classes.
Dolyem wrote: » . JustVine wrote: » Dolyem wrote: » JustVine wrote: » Dolyem wrote: » Mag7spy wrote: » Not to mention people can corruption bomb you with a bunch of low levels in order to highly deter attacks or ensure people are extremely deep red. This is actually a good point. You could bait people by loading up some level 1's and then kill the corrupted attackers. I mean... I'm not sure I quite see how corruption bombing is easier at sea than on land. If anything I think it'd be harder to corruption bomb at sea because you get thrown to shore on death which is probably going to be further away in most cases than on a land respawn point. There is a finite amount of greens you can throw at a person with out a ton of logistics as a result... And that's provided your opponent doesn't kill everyone in the encounter who could give you coordinates. Once you do, it's a lot harder to find people at sea so the Red is free to just go grind pirates and other mobs to rinse the corruption off. Feel free to point out to me what scenarios you are thinking of. On land corruption bombing is definitely going to be a challenge and a lot easier to find the opponent via bounty hunting and return to the fray due to the difference in respawn distance and population density. IS needs to solve this problem anyway. If it were me, I'd send in the first ship with level ones as a decoy, they'll likely die quickly from attacks from other ships. This would corrupt those ships and allow for less penalties for the rest of my fleet but more penalties for the enemy. Instant advantage That sounds like the interesting political/strategy based risk gameplay Steven was aiming for to me. But how is this more likely at sea than land? Also I think I might have missed an assumption you were making. I didn't realize you were proposing the scenario as 'ships gain corruption'. To me it's an exploit. The difference between land and sea is on land you'll select an individual and see their level, on a ship, you'll attack from a distance hitting another ship with players on it/potentially hiding in it. Send 10 lvl 1 rogues stealthed on it and they die. Not a great time for the attackers. Politic/strategy shouldn't be based off manipulating a system as it wasn't originally intended. Corruption isn't meant to be a weapon. It's meant to be a limiter
JustVine wrote: » Dolyem wrote: » JustVine wrote: » Dolyem wrote: » Mag7spy wrote: » Not to mention people can corruption bomb you with a bunch of low levels in order to highly deter attacks or ensure people are extremely deep red. This is actually a good point. You could bait people by loading up some level 1's and then kill the corrupted attackers. I mean... I'm not sure I quite see how corruption bombing is easier at sea than on land. If anything I think it'd be harder to corruption bomb at sea because you get thrown to shore on death which is probably going to be further away in most cases than on a land respawn point. There is a finite amount of greens you can throw at a person with out a ton of logistics as a result... And that's provided your opponent doesn't kill everyone in the encounter who could give you coordinates. Once you do, it's a lot harder to find people at sea so the Red is free to just go grind pirates and other mobs to rinse the corruption off. Feel free to point out to me what scenarios you are thinking of. On land corruption bombing is definitely going to be a challenge and a lot easier to find the opponent via bounty hunting and return to the fray due to the difference in respawn distance and population density. IS needs to solve this problem anyway. If it were me, I'd send in the first ship with level ones as a decoy, they'll likely die quickly from attacks from other ships. This would corrupt those ships and allow for less penalties for the rest of my fleet but more penalties for the enemy. Instant advantage That sounds like the interesting political/strategy based risk gameplay Steven was aiming for to me. But how is this more likely at sea than land? Also I think I might have missed an assumption you were making. I didn't realize you were proposing the scenario as 'ships gain corruption'.
Dolyem wrote: » JustVine wrote: » Dolyem wrote: » Mag7spy wrote: » Not to mention people can corruption bomb you with a bunch of low levels in order to highly deter attacks or ensure people are extremely deep red. This is actually a good point. You could bait people by loading up some level 1's and then kill the corrupted attackers. I mean... I'm not sure I quite see how corruption bombing is easier at sea than on land. If anything I think it'd be harder to corruption bomb at sea because you get thrown to shore on death which is probably going to be further away in most cases than on a land respawn point. There is a finite amount of greens you can throw at a person with out a ton of logistics as a result... And that's provided your opponent doesn't kill everyone in the encounter who could give you coordinates. Once you do, it's a lot harder to find people at sea so the Red is free to just go grind pirates and other mobs to rinse the corruption off. Feel free to point out to me what scenarios you are thinking of. On land corruption bombing is definitely going to be a challenge and a lot easier to find the opponent via bounty hunting and return to the fray due to the difference in respawn distance and population density. IS needs to solve this problem anyway. If it were me, I'd send in the first ship with level ones as a decoy, they'll likely die quickly from attacks from other ships. This would corrupt those ships and allow for less penalties for the rest of my fleet but more penalties for the enemy. Instant advantage
JustVine wrote: » Dolyem wrote: » Mag7spy wrote: » Not to mention people can corruption bomb you with a bunch of low levels in order to highly deter attacks or ensure people are extremely deep red. This is actually a good point. You could bait people by loading up some level 1's and then kill the corrupted attackers. I mean... I'm not sure I quite see how corruption bombing is easier at sea than on land. If anything I think it'd be harder to corruption bomb at sea because you get thrown to shore on death which is probably going to be further away in most cases than on a land respawn point. There is a finite amount of greens you can throw at a person with out a ton of logistics as a result... And that's provided your opponent doesn't kill everyone in the encounter who could give you coordinates. Once you do, it's a lot harder to find people at sea so the Red is free to just go grind pirates and other mobs to rinse the corruption off. Feel free to point out to me what scenarios you are thinking of. On land corruption bombing is definitely going to be a challenge and a lot easier to find the opponent via bounty hunting and return to the fray due to the difference in respawn distance and population density. IS needs to solve this problem anyway.
Dolyem wrote: » Mag7spy wrote: » Not to mention people can corruption bomb you with a bunch of low levels in order to highly deter attacks or ensure people are extremely deep red. This is actually a good point. You could bait people by loading up some level 1's and then kill the corrupted attackers.
Mag7spy wrote: » Not to mention people can corruption bomb you with a bunch of low levels in order to highly deter attacks or ensure people are extremely deep red.
Noaani wrote: » The thing is, in naval combat, the players aren't your opponent. The ship is. The object of naval combat will be to destroy the ship. Ideally, you'll leave the players alone in the water, stranded, needing to either swim home or "self die" before they can get on another ship. I mean, a lone player in the water isn't going to be a threat to a warship. If it's anything like Archeage, even just getting on board a warship that doesn't want you on board is a challenge - let alone doing anything while there. Since you are going to be using your ship to attack another ship, and not a player directly, the entire concept of corruption in naval combat just doesn't make much sense. This is the reason I have always assumed it would just straight up not be a thing in naval content in Ashes.
Mag7spy wrote: » XiraelAcaron wrote: » Mag7spy wrote: » JustVine wrote: » Dolyem wrote: » JustVine wrote: » Dolyem wrote: » Mag7spy wrote: » Not to mention people can corruption bomb you with a bunch of low levels in order to highly deter attacks or ensure people are extremely deep red. This is actually a good point. You could bait people by loading up some level 1's and then kill the corrupted attackers. I mean... I'm not sure I quite see how corruption bombing is easier at sea than on land. If anything I think it'd be harder to corruption bomb at sea because you get thrown to shore on death which is probably going to be further away in most cases than on a land respawn point. There is a finite amount of greens you can throw at a person with out a ton of logistics as a result... And that's provided your opponent doesn't kill everyone in the encounter who could give you coordinates. Once you do, it's a lot harder to find people at sea so the Red is free to just go grind pirates and other mobs to rinse the corruption off. Feel free to point out to me what scenarios you are thinking of. On land corruption bombing is definitely going to be a challenge and a lot easier to find the opponent via bounty hunting and return to the fray due to the difference in respawn distance and population density. IS needs to solve this problem anyway. If it were me, I'd send in the first ship with level ones as a decoy, they'll likely die quickly from attacks from other ships. This would corrupt those ships and allow for less penalties for the rest of my fleet but more penalties for the enemy. Instant advantage That sounds like the interesting political/strategy based risk gameplay Steven was aiming for to me. But how is this more likely at sea than land? Also I think I might have missed an assumption you were making. I didn't realize you were proposing the scenario as 'ships gain corruption'. Exploiting the system is strategy...... When has Steven ever said that? In L2, which is the inspiration for the corruption system baiting players to accidentally kill a white player (green in AoC) to get them red and kill them was a common tactic. The white one was sitting in the middle of the road and was annoying all the other players. If someone annoyed you you would run to him and hit him once. You would get purple, but that was basically slap to the face. The problem was that the white player had a dot on him and was hovering at 1HP. So hitting him cause any player to go red and then his friends came out and killed you. A friend of mine lost his weapons that way which he worked for for month. So...this was not an exploit then and I doubt steven sees it that way. But you have to ask him As Dygz says below your post. Basing inspiration doesn't mean wanting exploits. It is why there have been changings to the overall system and making it more pve friendly.
XiraelAcaron wrote: » Mag7spy wrote: » JustVine wrote: » Dolyem wrote: » JustVine wrote: » Dolyem wrote: » Mag7spy wrote: » Not to mention people can corruption bomb you with a bunch of low levels in order to highly deter attacks or ensure people are extremely deep red. This is actually a good point. You could bait people by loading up some level 1's and then kill the corrupted attackers. I mean... I'm not sure I quite see how corruption bombing is easier at sea than on land. If anything I think it'd be harder to corruption bomb at sea because you get thrown to shore on death which is probably going to be further away in most cases than on a land respawn point. There is a finite amount of greens you can throw at a person with out a ton of logistics as a result... And that's provided your opponent doesn't kill everyone in the encounter who could give you coordinates. Once you do, it's a lot harder to find people at sea so the Red is free to just go grind pirates and other mobs to rinse the corruption off. Feel free to point out to me what scenarios you are thinking of. On land corruption bombing is definitely going to be a challenge and a lot easier to find the opponent via bounty hunting and return to the fray due to the difference in respawn distance and population density. IS needs to solve this problem anyway. If it were me, I'd send in the first ship with level ones as a decoy, they'll likely die quickly from attacks from other ships. This would corrupt those ships and allow for less penalties for the rest of my fleet but more penalties for the enemy. Instant advantage That sounds like the interesting political/strategy based risk gameplay Steven was aiming for to me. But how is this more likely at sea than land? Also I think I might have missed an assumption you were making. I didn't realize you were proposing the scenario as 'ships gain corruption'. Exploiting the system is strategy...... When has Steven ever said that? In L2, which is the inspiration for the corruption system baiting players to accidentally kill a white player (green in AoC) to get them red and kill them was a common tactic. The white one was sitting in the middle of the road and was annoying all the other players. If someone annoyed you you would run to him and hit him once. You would get purple, but that was basically slap to the face. The problem was that the white player had a dot on him and was hovering at 1HP. So hitting him cause any player to go red and then his friends came out and killed you. A friend of mine lost his weapons that way which he worked for for month. So...this was not an exploit then and I doubt steven sees it that way. But you have to ask him
Mag7spy wrote: » JustVine wrote: » Dolyem wrote: » JustVine wrote: » Dolyem wrote: » Mag7spy wrote: » Not to mention people can corruption bomb you with a bunch of low levels in order to highly deter attacks or ensure people are extremely deep red. This is actually a good point. You could bait people by loading up some level 1's and then kill the corrupted attackers. I mean... I'm not sure I quite see how corruption bombing is easier at sea than on land. If anything I think it'd be harder to corruption bomb at sea because you get thrown to shore on death which is probably going to be further away in most cases than on a land respawn point. There is a finite amount of greens you can throw at a person with out a ton of logistics as a result... And that's provided your opponent doesn't kill everyone in the encounter who could give you coordinates. Once you do, it's a lot harder to find people at sea so the Red is free to just go grind pirates and other mobs to rinse the corruption off. Feel free to point out to me what scenarios you are thinking of. On land corruption bombing is definitely going to be a challenge and a lot easier to find the opponent via bounty hunting and return to the fray due to the difference in respawn distance and population density. IS needs to solve this problem anyway. If it were me, I'd send in the first ship with level ones as a decoy, they'll likely die quickly from attacks from other ships. This would corrupt those ships and allow for less penalties for the rest of my fleet but more penalties for the enemy. Instant advantage That sounds like the interesting political/strategy based risk gameplay Steven was aiming for to me. But how is this more likely at sea than land? Also I think I might have missed an assumption you were making. I didn't realize you were proposing the scenario as 'ships gain corruption'. Exploiting the system is strategy...... When has Steven ever said that?
Dolyem wrote: » XiraelAcaron wrote: » Dolyem wrote: » XiraelAcaron wrote: » Dolyem wrote: » . JustVine wrote: » Dolyem wrote: » JustVine wrote: » Dolyem wrote: » Mag7spy wrote: » Not to mention people can corruption bomb you with a bunch of low levels in order to highly deter attacks or ensure people are extremely deep red. This is actually a good point. You could bait people by loading up some level 1's and then kill the corrupted attackers. I mean... I'm not sure I quite see how corruption bombing is easier at sea than on land. If anything I think it'd be harder to corruption bomb at sea because you get thrown to shore on death which is probably going to be further away in most cases than on a land respawn point. There is a finite amount of greens you can throw at a person with out a ton of logistics as a result... And that's provided your opponent doesn't kill everyone in the encounter who could give you coordinates. Once you do, it's a lot harder to find people at sea so the Red is free to just go grind pirates and other mobs to rinse the corruption off. Feel free to point out to me what scenarios you are thinking of. On land corruption bombing is definitely going to be a challenge and a lot easier to find the opponent via bounty hunting and return to the fray due to the difference in respawn distance and population density. IS needs to solve this problem anyway. If it were me, I'd send in the first ship with level ones as a decoy, they'll likely die quickly from attacks from other ships. This would corrupt those ships and allow for less penalties for the rest of my fleet but more penalties for the enemy. Instant advantage That sounds like the interesting political/strategy based risk gameplay Steven was aiming for to me. But how is this more likely at sea than land? Also I think I might have missed an assumption you were making. I didn't realize you were proposing the scenario as 'ships gain corruption'. To me it's an exploit. The difference between land and sea is on land you'll select an individual and see their level, on a ship, you'll attack from a distance hitting another ship with players on it/potentially hiding in it. Send 10 lvl 1 rogues stealthed on it and they die. Not a great time for the attackers. Politic/strategy shouldn't be based off manipulating a system as it wasn't originally intended. Corruption isn't meant to be a weapon. It's meant to be a limiter Simple solution would be to base corruption gained not on the number or level of player on board but on the difference of the ship classes. How would you go about ship classes then Bigger ships killing smaller green ships get more corruption. Since there are only 3 classes that I know of, and we want to promote PvP I would say for the biggest ship (tier 1) against anothe tier 1, almost no corruption gain. Tier 1 against tier 2 only slightly more. Tier 1 againts Tier 3 (personal ship) maximum corruption. Tier 2 againts Tier 1 slightly more than normal. Tier 1 against Tier 1 normal corruption. Lower classes against higher classes no curruption (I believe that would be hard to win anyway). And what if I run a fleet of fast small ships to take down a large ship?
Dolyem wrote: » Noaani wrote: » Dolyem wrote: » If it were me, I'd send in the first ship with level ones as a decoy, they'll likely die quickly from attacks from other ships. This would corrupt those ships and allow for less penalties for the rest of my fleet but more penalties for the enemy. Instant advantage The thing is, in naval combat, the players aren't your opponent. The ship is. The object of naval combat will be to destroy the ship. Ideally, you'll leave the players alone in the water, stranded, needing to either swim home or "self die" before they can get on another ship. I mean, a lone player in the water isn't going to be a threat to a warship. If it's anything like Archeage, even just getting on board a warship that doesn't want you on board is a challenge - let alone doing anything while there. Since you are going to be using your ship to attack another ship, and not a player directly, the entire concept of corruption in naval combat just doesn't make much sense. This is the reason I have always assumed it would just straight up not be a thing in naval content in Ashes. That's a good point. I just think it would also make sense for attacks to damage/kill players on the ships being attacked. And it's only speculation for the goal of naval combat. To me, the players should be just as much of s target as their ship.
XiraelAcaron wrote: » Mag7spy wrote: » XiraelAcaron wrote: » Mag7spy wrote: » JustVine wrote: » Dolyem wrote: » JustVine wrote: » Dolyem wrote: » Mag7spy wrote: » Not to mention people can corruption bomb you with a bunch of low levels in order to highly deter attacks or ensure people are extremely deep red. This is actually a good point. You could bait people by loading up some level 1's and then kill the corrupted attackers. I mean... I'm not sure I quite see how corruption bombing is easier at sea than on land. If anything I think it'd be harder to corruption bomb at sea because you get thrown to shore on death which is probably going to be further away in most cases than on a land respawn point. There is a finite amount of greens you can throw at a person with out a ton of logistics as a result... And that's provided your opponent doesn't kill everyone in the encounter who could give you coordinates. Once you do, it's a lot harder to find people at sea so the Red is free to just go grind pirates and other mobs to rinse the corruption off. Feel free to point out to me what scenarios you are thinking of. On land corruption bombing is definitely going to be a challenge and a lot easier to find the opponent via bounty hunting and return to the fray due to the difference in respawn distance and population density. IS needs to solve this problem anyway. If it were me, I'd send in the first ship with level ones as a decoy, they'll likely die quickly from attacks from other ships. This would corrupt those ships and allow for less penalties for the rest of my fleet but more penalties for the enemy. Instant advantage That sounds like the interesting political/strategy based risk gameplay Steven was aiming for to me. But how is this more likely at sea than land? Also I think I might have missed an assumption you were making. I didn't realize you were proposing the scenario as 'ships gain corruption'. Exploiting the system is strategy...... When has Steven ever said that? In L2, which is the inspiration for the corruption system baiting players to accidentally kill a white player (green in AoC) to get them red and kill them was a common tactic. The white one was sitting in the middle of the road and was annoying all the other players. If someone annoyed you you would run to him and hit him once. You would get purple, but that was basically slap to the face. The problem was that the white player had a dot on him and was hovering at 1HP. So hitting him cause any player to go red and then his friends came out and killed you. A friend of mine lost his weapons that way which he worked for for month. So...this was not an exploit then and I doubt steven sees it that way. But you have to ask him As Dygz says below your post. Basing inspiration doesn't mean wanting exploits. It is why there have been changings to the overall system and making it more pve friendly. Dolyem wrote: » XiraelAcaron wrote: » Dolyem wrote: » XiraelAcaron wrote: » Dolyem wrote: » . JustVine wrote: » Dolyem wrote: » JustVine wrote: » Dolyem wrote: » Mag7spy wrote: » Not to mention people can corruption bomb you with a bunch of low levels in order to highly deter attacks or ensure people are extremely deep red. This is actually a good point. You could bait people by loading up some level 1's and then kill the corrupted attackers. I mean... I'm not sure I quite see how corruption bombing is easier at sea than on land. If anything I think it'd be harder to corruption bomb at sea because you get thrown to shore on death which is probably going to be further away in most cases than on a land respawn point. There is a finite amount of greens you can throw at a person with out a ton of logistics as a result... And that's provided your opponent doesn't kill everyone in the encounter who could give you coordinates. Once you do, it's a lot harder to find people at sea so the Red is free to just go grind pirates and other mobs to rinse the corruption off. Feel free to point out to me what scenarios you are thinking of. On land corruption bombing is definitely going to be a challenge and a lot easier to find the opponent via bounty hunting and return to the fray due to the difference in respawn distance and population density. IS needs to solve this problem anyway. If it were me, I'd send in the first ship with level ones as a decoy, they'll likely die quickly from attacks from other ships. This would corrupt those ships and allow for less penalties for the rest of my fleet but more penalties for the enemy. Instant advantage That sounds like the interesting political/strategy based risk gameplay Steven was aiming for to me. But how is this more likely at sea than land? Also I think I might have missed an assumption you were making. I didn't realize you were proposing the scenario as 'ships gain corruption'. To me it's an exploit. The difference between land and sea is on land you'll select an individual and see their level, on a ship, you'll attack from a distance hitting another ship with players on it/potentially hiding in it. Send 10 lvl 1 rogues stealthed on it and they die. Not a great time for the attackers. Politic/strategy shouldn't be based off manipulating a system as it wasn't originally intended. Corruption isn't meant to be a weapon. It's meant to be a limiter Simple solution would be to base corruption gained not on the number or level of player on board but on the difference of the ship classes. How would you go about ship classes then Bigger ships killing smaller green ships get more corruption. Since there are only 3 classes that I know of, and we want to promote PvP I would say for the biggest ship (tier 1) against anothe tier 1, almost no corruption gain. Tier 1 against tier 2 only slightly more. Tier 1 againts Tier 3 (personal ship) maximum corruption. Tier 2 againts Tier 1 slightly more than normal. Tier 1 against Tier 1 normal corruption. Lower classes against higher classes no curruption (I believe that would be hard to win anyway). And what if I run a fleet of fast small ships to take down a large ship? Then you do that. Its the same as when low level players band together to kill a highlevel player on land. As you can see from my discussion posts, I want to have the corruption system on the open sea. But making the corruption system work in all situations was always a pipedream. It will never cover every possible situation one can dream of regardless of where it is active. So all I ask is the same behavior as far as it is possible.
Dolyem wrote: » XiraelAcaron wrote: » Mag7spy wrote: » XiraelAcaron wrote: » Mag7spy wrote: » JustVine wrote: » Dolyem wrote: » JustVine wrote: » Dolyem wrote: » Mag7spy wrote: » Not to mention people can corruption bomb you with a bunch of low levels in order to highly deter attacks or ensure people are extremely deep red. This is actually a good point. You could bait people by loading up some level 1's and then kill the corrupted attackers. I mean... I'm not sure I quite see how corruption bombing is easier at sea than on land. If anything I think it'd be harder to corruption bomb at sea because you get thrown to shore on death which is probably going to be further away in most cases than on a land respawn point. There is a finite amount of greens you can throw at a person with out a ton of logistics as a result... And that's provided your opponent doesn't kill everyone in the encounter who could give you coordinates. Once you do, it's a lot harder to find people at sea so the Red is free to just go grind pirates and other mobs to rinse the corruption off. Feel free to point out to me what scenarios you are thinking of. On land corruption bombing is definitely going to be a challenge and a lot easier to find the opponent via bounty hunting and return to the fray due to the difference in respawn distance and population density. IS needs to solve this problem anyway. If it were me, I'd send in the first ship with level ones as a decoy, they'll likely die quickly from attacks from other ships. This would corrupt those ships and allow for less penalties for the rest of my fleet but more penalties for the enemy. Instant advantage That sounds like the interesting political/strategy based risk gameplay Steven was aiming for to me. But how is this more likely at sea than land? Also I think I might have missed an assumption you were making. I didn't realize you were proposing the scenario as 'ships gain corruption'. Exploiting the system is strategy...... When has Steven ever said that? In L2, which is the inspiration for the corruption system baiting players to accidentally kill a white player (green in AoC) to get them red and kill them was a common tactic. The white one was sitting in the middle of the road and was annoying all the other players. If someone annoyed you you would run to him and hit him once. You would get purple, but that was basically slap to the face. The problem was that the white player had a dot on him and was hovering at 1HP. So hitting him cause any player to go red and then his friends came out and killed you. A friend of mine lost his weapons that way which he worked for for month. So...this was not an exploit then and I doubt steven sees it that way. But you have to ask him As Dygz says below your post. Basing inspiration doesn't mean wanting exploits. It is why there have been changings to the overall system and making it more pve friendly. Dolyem wrote: » XiraelAcaron wrote: » Dolyem wrote: » XiraelAcaron wrote: » Dolyem wrote: » . JustVine wrote: » Dolyem wrote: » JustVine wrote: » Dolyem wrote: » Mag7spy wrote: » Not to mention people can corruption bomb you with a bunch of low levels in order to highly deter attacks or ensure people are extremely deep red. This is actually a good point. You could bait people by loading up some level 1's and then kill the corrupted attackers. I mean... I'm not sure I quite see how corruption bombing is easier at sea than on land. If anything I think it'd be harder to corruption bomb at sea because you get thrown to shore on death which is probably going to be further away in most cases than on a land respawn point. There is a finite amount of greens you can throw at a person with out a ton of logistics as a result... And that's provided your opponent doesn't kill everyone in the encounter who could give you coordinates. Once you do, it's a lot harder to find people at sea so the Red is free to just go grind pirates and other mobs to rinse the corruption off. Feel free to point out to me what scenarios you are thinking of. On land corruption bombing is definitely going to be a challenge and a lot easier to find the opponent via bounty hunting and return to the fray due to the difference in respawn distance and population density. IS needs to solve this problem anyway. If it were me, I'd send in the first ship with level ones as a decoy, they'll likely die quickly from attacks from other ships. This would corrupt those ships and allow for less penalties for the rest of my fleet but more penalties for the enemy. Instant advantage That sounds like the interesting political/strategy based risk gameplay Steven was aiming for to me. But how is this more likely at sea than land? Also I think I might have missed an assumption you were making. I didn't realize you were proposing the scenario as 'ships gain corruption'. To me it's an exploit. The difference between land and sea is on land you'll select an individual and see their level, on a ship, you'll attack from a distance hitting another ship with players on it/potentially hiding in it. Send 10 lvl 1 rogues stealthed on it and they die. Not a great time for the attackers. Politic/strategy shouldn't be based off manipulating a system as it wasn't originally intended. Corruption isn't meant to be a weapon. It's meant to be a limiter Simple solution would be to base corruption gained not on the number or level of player on board but on the difference of the ship classes. How would you go about ship classes then Bigger ships killing smaller green ships get more corruption. Since there are only 3 classes that I know of, and we want to promote PvP I would say for the biggest ship (tier 1) against anothe tier 1, almost no corruption gain. Tier 1 against tier 2 only slightly more. Tier 1 againts Tier 3 (personal ship) maximum corruption. Tier 2 againts Tier 1 slightly more than normal. Tier 1 against Tier 1 normal corruption. Lower classes against higher classes no curruption (I believe that would be hard to win anyway). And what if I run a fleet of fast small ships to take down a large ship? Then you do that. Its the same as when low level players band together to kill a highlevel player on land. As you can see from my discussion posts, I want to have the corruption system on the open sea. But making the corruption system work in all situations was always a pipedream. It will never cover every possible situation one can dream of regardless of where it is active. So all I ask is the same behavior as far as it is possible. But smaller ships aren't necessarily weaker... just for an example, in sea of thieves I run circles around galleons with a sloop.
Dolyem wrote: » JustVine wrote: » Dolyem wrote: » . JustVine wrote: » Dolyem wrote: » JustVine wrote: » Dolyem wrote: » Mag7spy wrote: » Not to mention people can corruption bomb you with a bunch of low levels in order to highly deter attacks or ensure people are extremely deep red. This is actually a good point. You could bait people by loading up some level 1's and then kill the corrupted attackers. I mean... I'm not sure I quite see how corruption bombing is easier at sea than on land. If anything I think it'd be harder to corruption bomb at sea because you get thrown to shore on death which is probably going to be further away in most cases than on a land respawn point. There is a finite amount of greens you can throw at a person with out a ton of logistics as a result... And that's provided your opponent doesn't kill everyone in the encounter who could give you coordinates. Once you do, it's a lot harder to find people at sea so the Red is free to just go grind pirates and other mobs to rinse the corruption off. Feel free to point out to me what scenarios you are thinking of. On land corruption bombing is definitely going to be a challenge and a lot easier to find the opponent via bounty hunting and return to the fray due to the difference in respawn distance and population density. IS needs to solve this problem anyway. If it were me, I'd send in the first ship with level ones as a decoy, they'll likely die quickly from attacks from other ships. This would corrupt those ships and allow for less penalties for the rest of my fleet but more penalties for the enemy. Instant advantage That sounds like the interesting political/strategy based risk gameplay Steven was aiming for to me. But how is this more likely at sea than land? Also I think I might have missed an assumption you were making. I didn't realize you were proposing the scenario as 'ships gain corruption'. To me it's an exploit. The difference between land and sea is on land you'll select an individual and see their level, on a ship, you'll attack from a distance hitting another ship with players on it/potentially hiding in it. Send 10 lvl 1 rogues stealthed on it and they die. Not a great time for the attackers. Politic/strategy shouldn't be based off manipulating a system as it wasn't originally intended. Corruption isn't meant to be a weapon. It's meant to be a limiter AoE attacks don't work on greens though. Destroying a ship vs boarding it was going to be one of the main strategic decision making processes in naval in my opinion for precisely that reason. So again I'm not seeing how the scenario would have come up in the way you are describing. Even if AoE did hit greens, that'd be way more likely of a strategy on land than on sea. Got any other thoughts on how it'd come up more frequently in the old system? If you think corruption is meant to be only a limiter not a weapon, I respect that. I think about game design/fun a little differently than you which is why I highly encouraged IS during that one dev discussion to find a way to nerf karma bombing as it benefits me immensely and that'd be kind of unfair/unfun for people who don't enjoy that style of play. It's definitely an important topic that needs to be addressed. Also now that you've made me think about it more I'm starting to dislike this change (I didn't care before since it mostly only benefited me.) Because you just pointed out to me that this change indirectly simplifies the boat meta of the game. Long ranged potion launcher attacks are now way more powerful and will now probably be more difficult to balance since everyone is forced into purple and can now be more easily effected by AoE. If AOE attacks don't work on ships, then how will engagements work? Instead of being able to engage the entire ship with potion launchers you have to catch up and board or individually target every crew member with each potion launcher attack? Likeni said in other comments, the systems don't need to be the same if it can work.
JustVine wrote: » Dolyem wrote: » . JustVine wrote: » Dolyem wrote: » JustVine wrote: » Dolyem wrote: » Mag7spy wrote: » Not to mention people can corruption bomb you with a bunch of low levels in order to highly deter attacks or ensure people are extremely deep red. This is actually a good point. You could bait people by loading up some level 1's and then kill the corrupted attackers. I mean... I'm not sure I quite see how corruption bombing is easier at sea than on land. If anything I think it'd be harder to corruption bomb at sea because you get thrown to shore on death which is probably going to be further away in most cases than on a land respawn point. There is a finite amount of greens you can throw at a person with out a ton of logistics as a result... And that's provided your opponent doesn't kill everyone in the encounter who could give you coordinates. Once you do, it's a lot harder to find people at sea so the Red is free to just go grind pirates and other mobs to rinse the corruption off. Feel free to point out to me what scenarios you are thinking of. On land corruption bombing is definitely going to be a challenge and a lot easier to find the opponent via bounty hunting and return to the fray due to the difference in respawn distance and population density. IS needs to solve this problem anyway. If it were me, I'd send in the first ship with level ones as a decoy, they'll likely die quickly from attacks from other ships. This would corrupt those ships and allow for less penalties for the rest of my fleet but more penalties for the enemy. Instant advantage That sounds like the interesting political/strategy based risk gameplay Steven was aiming for to me. But how is this more likely at sea than land? Also I think I might have missed an assumption you were making. I didn't realize you were proposing the scenario as 'ships gain corruption'. To me it's an exploit. The difference between land and sea is on land you'll select an individual and see their level, on a ship, you'll attack from a distance hitting another ship with players on it/potentially hiding in it. Send 10 lvl 1 rogues stealthed on it and they die. Not a great time for the attackers. Politic/strategy shouldn't be based off manipulating a system as it wasn't originally intended. Corruption isn't meant to be a weapon. It's meant to be a limiter AoE attacks don't work on greens though. Destroying a ship vs boarding it was going to be one of the main strategic decision making processes in naval in my opinion for precisely that reason. So again I'm not seeing how the scenario would have come up in the way you are describing. Even if AoE did hit greens, that'd be way more likely of a strategy on land than on sea. Got any other thoughts on how it'd come up more frequently in the old system? If you think corruption is meant to be only a limiter not a weapon, I respect that. I think about game design/fun a little differently than you which is why I highly encouraged IS during that one dev discussion to find a way to nerf karma bombing as it benefits me immensely and that'd be kind of unfair/unfun for people who don't enjoy that style of play. It's definitely an important topic that needs to be addressed. Also now that you've made me think about it more I'm starting to dislike this change (I didn't care before since it mostly only benefited me.) Because you just pointed out to me that this change indirectly simplifies the boat meta of the game. Long ranged potion launcher attacks are now way more powerful and will now probably be more difficult to balance since everyone is forced into purple and can now be more easily effected by AoE.
JustVine wrote: » Dolyem wrote: » JustVine wrote: » Dolyem wrote: » . JustVine wrote: » Dolyem wrote: » JustVine wrote: » Dolyem wrote: » Mag7spy wrote: » Not to mention people can corruption bomb you with a bunch of low levels in order to highly deter attacks or ensure people are extremely deep red. This is actually a good point. You could bait people by loading up some level 1's and then kill the corrupted attackers. I mean... I'm not sure I quite see how corruption bombing is easier at sea than on land. If anything I think it'd be harder to corruption bomb at sea because you get thrown to shore on death which is probably going to be further away in most cases than on a land respawn point. There is a finite amount of greens you can throw at a person with out a ton of logistics as a result... And that's provided your opponent doesn't kill everyone in the encounter who could give you coordinates. Once you do, it's a lot harder to find people at sea so the Red is free to just go grind pirates and other mobs to rinse the corruption off. Feel free to point out to me what scenarios you are thinking of. On land corruption bombing is definitely going to be a challenge and a lot easier to find the opponent via bounty hunting and return to the fray due to the difference in respawn distance and population density. IS needs to solve this problem anyway. If it were me, I'd send in the first ship with level ones as a decoy, they'll likely die quickly from attacks from other ships. This would corrupt those ships and allow for less penalties for the rest of my fleet but more penalties for the enemy. Instant advantage That sounds like the interesting political/strategy based risk gameplay Steven was aiming for to me. But how is this more likely at sea than land? Also I think I might have missed an assumption you were making. I didn't realize you were proposing the scenario as 'ships gain corruption'. To me it's an exploit. The difference between land and sea is on land you'll select an individual and see their level, on a ship, you'll attack from a distance hitting another ship with players on it/potentially hiding in it. Send 10 lvl 1 rogues stealthed on it and they die. Not a great time for the attackers. Politic/strategy shouldn't be based off manipulating a system as it wasn't originally intended. Corruption isn't meant to be a weapon. It's meant to be a limiter AoE attacks don't work on greens though. Destroying a ship vs boarding it was going to be one of the main strategic decision making processes in naval in my opinion for precisely that reason. So again I'm not seeing how the scenario would have come up in the way you are describing. Even if AoE did hit greens, that'd be way more likely of a strategy on land than on sea. Got any other thoughts on how it'd come up more frequently in the old system? If you think corruption is meant to be only a limiter not a weapon, I respect that. I think about game design/fun a little differently than you which is why I highly encouraged IS during that one dev discussion to find a way to nerf karma bombing as it benefits me immensely and that'd be kind of unfair/unfun for people who don't enjoy that style of play. It's definitely an important topic that needs to be addressed. Also now that you've made me think about it more I'm starting to dislike this change (I didn't care before since it mostly only benefited me.) Because you just pointed out to me that this change indirectly simplifies the boat meta of the game. Long ranged potion launcher attacks are now way more powerful and will now probably be more difficult to balance since everyone is forced into purple and can now be more easily effected by AoE. If AOE attacks don't work on ships, then how will engagements work? Instead of being able to engage the entire ship with potion launchers you have to catch up and board or individually target every crew member with each potion launcher attack? Likeni said in other comments, the systems don't need to be the same if it can work. I think you made a jump I was not making. So let's see if I can briefly explain how I assumed naval combat was going to work. Assume ships have hull levels and individual component health that can be damaged by either canon fire or player attacks. Assume potion launchers can deal structural damage as well as normal aoe damage. If you shoot the launcher at the ship's rails it'll do structural damage to the rails and a percent damage to the hull. But if a green is standing right there, they won't really get hit. In order to hit a green you'd need to board or destroy the ship so you can get close enough to them to use single target attacks (or just let the sharks eat them.) Maybe you can have ballistas that count as single target attacks to help with engagement threat range a bit. This was the very basic model of what I was assuming navel was going to be like. To me this is very functional and balanceable naval combat. I agree if you assume potion launcher aoe can kill greens there is some risk involved with firing at people who you don't know the level of. But then I gotta ask, why are you aiming at greens instead of the ship at that range. Why are the greens wanting to get killed. Seems pretty obvious that you should just be aiming at the hull when you can. And why does it matter that your cannoneers are corrupted in this model? Lots of potential interesting questions. But I think you can now possibly see why I was not understanding why you thought greens were going to die by potion launcher? I just never saw it as a necessary component of naval combat. So it's at least clarified to me why you think there might be a karma bombing problem in the old model. I disagree that this was going to be the case. We may never know (except we will because coastal naval combat is still going to be a thing.) I'm looking forward to that particular presentation from IS.
Mag7spy wrote: » This is a modern game, and that much should be expected as a large possibility to ensure group play is also active at sea.
Azherae wrote: » Dolyem wrote: » XiraelAcaron wrote: » Mag7spy wrote: » XiraelAcaron wrote: » Mag7spy wrote: » JustVine wrote: » Dolyem wrote: » JustVine wrote: » Dolyem wrote: » Mag7spy wrote: » Not to mention people can corruption bomb you with a bunch of low levels in order to highly deter attacks or ensure people are extremely deep red. This is actually a good point. You could bait people by loading up some level 1's and then kill the corrupted attackers. I mean... I'm not sure I quite see how corruption bombing is easier at sea than on land. If anything I think it'd be harder to corruption bomb at sea because you get thrown to shore on death which is probably going to be further away in most cases than on a land respawn point. There is a finite amount of greens you can throw at a person with out a ton of logistics as a result... And that's provided your opponent doesn't kill everyone in the encounter who could give you coordinates. Once you do, it's a lot harder to find people at sea so the Red is free to just go grind pirates and other mobs to rinse the corruption off. Feel free to point out to me what scenarios you are thinking of. On land corruption bombing is definitely going to be a challenge and a lot easier to find the opponent via bounty hunting and return to the fray due to the difference in respawn distance and population density. IS needs to solve this problem anyway. If it were me, I'd send in the first ship with level ones as a decoy, they'll likely die quickly from attacks from other ships. This would corrupt those ships and allow for less penalties for the rest of my fleet but more penalties for the enemy. Instant advantage That sounds like the interesting political/strategy based risk gameplay Steven was aiming for to me. But how is this more likely at sea than land? Also I think I might have missed an assumption you were making. I didn't realize you were proposing the scenario as 'ships gain corruption'. Exploiting the system is strategy...... When has Steven ever said that? In L2, which is the inspiration for the corruption system baiting players to accidentally kill a white player (green in AoC) to get them red and kill them was a common tactic. The white one was sitting in the middle of the road and was annoying all the other players. If someone annoyed you you would run to him and hit him once. You would get purple, but that was basically slap to the face. The problem was that the white player had a dot on him and was hovering at 1HP. So hitting him cause any player to go red and then his friends came out and killed you. A friend of mine lost his weapons that way which he worked for for month. So...this was not an exploit then and I doubt steven sees it that way. But you have to ask him As Dygz says below your post. Basing inspiration doesn't mean wanting exploits. It is why there have been changings to the overall system and making it more pve friendly. Dolyem wrote: » XiraelAcaron wrote: » Dolyem wrote: » XiraelAcaron wrote: » Dolyem wrote: » . JustVine wrote: » Dolyem wrote: » JustVine wrote: » Dolyem wrote: » Mag7spy wrote: » Not to mention people can corruption bomb you with a bunch of low levels in order to highly deter attacks or ensure people are extremely deep red. This is actually a good point. You could bait people by loading up some level 1's and then kill the corrupted attackers. I mean... I'm not sure I quite see how corruption bombing is easier at sea than on land. If anything I think it'd be harder to corruption bomb at sea because you get thrown to shore on death which is probably going to be further away in most cases than on a land respawn point. There is a finite amount of greens you can throw at a person with out a ton of logistics as a result... And that's provided your opponent doesn't kill everyone in the encounter who could give you coordinates. Once you do, it's a lot harder to find people at sea so the Red is free to just go grind pirates and other mobs to rinse the corruption off. Feel free to point out to me what scenarios you are thinking of. On land corruption bombing is definitely going to be a challenge and a lot easier to find the opponent via bounty hunting and return to the fray due to the difference in respawn distance and population density. IS needs to solve this problem anyway. If it were me, I'd send in the first ship with level ones as a decoy, they'll likely die quickly from attacks from other ships. This would corrupt those ships and allow for less penalties for the rest of my fleet but more penalties for the enemy. Instant advantage That sounds like the interesting political/strategy based risk gameplay Steven was aiming for to me. But how is this more likely at sea than land? Also I think I might have missed an assumption you were making. I didn't realize you were proposing the scenario as 'ships gain corruption'. To me it's an exploit. The difference between land and sea is on land you'll select an individual and see their level, on a ship, you'll attack from a distance hitting another ship with players on it/potentially hiding in it. Send 10 lvl 1 rogues stealthed on it and they die. Not a great time for the attackers. Politic/strategy shouldn't be based off manipulating a system as it wasn't originally intended. Corruption isn't meant to be a weapon. It's meant to be a limiter Simple solution would be to base corruption gained not on the number or level of player on board but on the difference of the ship classes. How would you go about ship classes then Bigger ships killing smaller green ships get more corruption. Since there are only 3 classes that I know of, and we want to promote PvP I would say for the biggest ship (tier 1) against anothe tier 1, almost no corruption gain. Tier 1 against tier 2 only slightly more. Tier 1 againts Tier 3 (personal ship) maximum corruption. Tier 2 againts Tier 1 slightly more than normal. Tier 1 against Tier 1 normal corruption. Lower classes against higher classes no curruption (I believe that would be hard to win anyway). And what if I run a fleet of fast small ships to take down a large ship? Then you do that. Its the same as when low level players band together to kill a highlevel player on land. As you can see from my discussion posts, I want to have the corruption system on the open sea. But making the corruption system work in all situations was always a pipedream. It will never cover every possible situation one can dream of regardless of where it is active. So all I ask is the same behavior as far as it is possible. But smaller ships aren't necessarily weaker... just for an example, in sea of thieves I run circles around galleons with a sloop. Right but can you prevent the Galleon from doing whatever it was that it was trying to do? And if you could, who needed a Galleon? It's definitely not that the scenarios are the same, but even in terms of how one might hope or expect this type of world to 'feel', it seems to me that it'd be more beneficial if 'big boat can be chased off by flotilla of smaller boats'. If your sloop fleet is able to seriously bring down a Galleon, and that's the only Galleon in the enemy group, isn't that a standard encounter problem of 'being swarmed by quick enemies'? Similarly, this seems like it could be 'easily' resolved by disabling the 'Greens can freely attack Reds' rule on the Ocean, rather than making the whole zone autoflag.
Azherae wrote: » mcstackerson wrote: » Azherae wrote: » mcstackerson wrote: » Azherae wrote: » mcstackerson wrote: » Azherae wrote: » "Please explain if you are still of the opinion that the reason for the change is technical." Sorry, i don't think it's purely technical, just thought it might have played a role. I also think it was made because the kind of content that was planned for the sea and to support the pirate playstyle. Please clarify if you expect Coastal content to not include things like meaningful/complex PvE encounters, in contrast to the Open Sea where it might be necessary to change the flagging system due to such encounters. I'd expect coastal pve enounters to work the same as the ones on land and not involve ships but that is purely my guess. On the ocean, I expect ships to play a larger role in pve encounters like the kraken/leviathon from Archeage but i'm not going to go as far as say the change is necessary. I think the difference between the zones and reason for the change is more that the land has a large variety of content but the sea will probably be focused on high level content. Please clarify if you perceive that this high level content will be rewarding enough to be a meaningful impact on the power balance on the server. I hope not. I think it should at least some of the best stuff but wouldn't want it to be so significant that you couldn't compete against players with it. Dolyem wrote: » JustVine wrote: » Dolyem wrote: » . JustVine wrote: » Dolyem wrote: » JustVine wrote: » Dolyem wrote: » Mag7spy wrote: » Not to mention people can corruption bomb you with a bunch of low levels in order to highly deter attacks or ensure people are extremely deep red. This is actually a good point. You could bait people by loading up some level 1's and then kill the corrupted attackers. I mean... I'm not sure I quite see how corruption bombing is easier at sea than on land. If anything I think it'd be harder to corruption bomb at sea because you get thrown to shore on death which is probably going to be further away in most cases than on a land respawn point. There is a finite amount of greens you can throw at a person with out a ton of logistics as a result... And that's provided your opponent doesn't kill everyone in the encounter who could give you coordinates. Once you do, it's a lot harder to find people at sea so the Red is free to just go grind pirates and other mobs to rinse the corruption off. Feel free to point out to me what scenarios you are thinking of. On land corruption bombing is definitely going to be a challenge and a lot easier to find the opponent via bounty hunting and return to the fray due to the difference in respawn distance and population density. IS needs to solve this problem anyway. If it were me, I'd send in the first ship with level ones as a decoy, they'll likely die quickly from attacks from other ships. This would corrupt those ships and allow for less penalties for the rest of my fleet but more penalties for the enemy. Instant advantage That sounds like the interesting political/strategy based risk gameplay Steven was aiming for to me. But how is this more likely at sea than land? Also I think I might have missed an assumption you were making. I didn't realize you were proposing the scenario as 'ships gain corruption'. To me it's an exploit. The difference between land and sea is on land you'll select an individual and see their level, on a ship, you'll attack from a distance hitting another ship with players on it/potentially hiding in it. Send 10 lvl 1 rogues stealthed on it and they die. Not a great time for the attackers. Politic/strategy shouldn't be based off manipulating a system as it wasn't originally intended. Corruption isn't meant to be a weapon. It's meant to be a limiter AoE attacks don't work on greens though. Destroying a ship vs boarding it was going to be one of the main strategic decision making processes in naval in my opinion for precisely that reason. So again I'm not seeing how the scenario would have come up in the way you are describing. Even if AoE did hit greens, that'd be way more likely of a strategy on land than on sea. Got any other thoughts on how it'd come up more frequently in the old system? If you think corruption is meant to be only a limiter not a weapon, I respect that. I think about game design/fun a little differently than you which is why I highly encouraged IS during that one dev discussion to find a way to nerf karma bombing as it benefits me immensely and that'd be kind of unfair/unfun for people who don't enjoy that style of play. It's definitely an important topic that needs to be addressed. Also now that you've made me think about it more I'm starting to dislike this change (I didn't care before since it mostly only benefited me.) Because you just pointed out to me that this change indirectly simplifies the boat meta of the game. Long ranged potion launcher attacks are now way more powerful and will now probably be more difficult to balance since everyone is forced into purple and can now be more easily effected by AoE. If AOE attacks don't work on ships, then how will engagements work? Instead of being able to engage the entire ship with potion launchers you have to catch up and board or individually target every crew member with each potion launcher attack? Likeni said in other comments, the systems don't need to be the same if it can work. Above all else, we have what I consider another problem. Are coastal battles between ships subject to all of this or not? If the result is 'hey don't fight in coastal waters you might get KarmaBombed', that's not great in my opinion. Similar to if you get 'well, coastal battles don't really involve ships', because there are probably quite a few players who would want to do this. Steven gives the argument about Cross Continental Trade opportunities, but I don't really see why because Naval Caravans should have been PvP zones anyway. Maybe it's for 'preventing scouts who are out there looking for hypothetical red pirates' from being effective? This decision definitely isn't 'causing' any new technical problems with Corruption, but it definitely seems to be getting into a weird space. If I use my ship to bring my crew to the edge of open water and they jump off and go attack a coastal fishing boat and sink it, who gets Corruption for boat-sinking, if anyone?
mcstackerson wrote: » Azherae wrote: » mcstackerson wrote: » Azherae wrote: » mcstackerson wrote: » Azherae wrote: » "Please explain if you are still of the opinion that the reason for the change is technical." Sorry, i don't think it's purely technical, just thought it might have played a role. I also think it was made because the kind of content that was planned for the sea and to support the pirate playstyle. Please clarify if you expect Coastal content to not include things like meaningful/complex PvE encounters, in contrast to the Open Sea where it might be necessary to change the flagging system due to such encounters. I'd expect coastal pve enounters to work the same as the ones on land and not involve ships but that is purely my guess. On the ocean, I expect ships to play a larger role in pve encounters like the kraken/leviathon from Archeage but i'm not going to go as far as say the change is necessary. I think the difference between the zones and reason for the change is more that the land has a large variety of content but the sea will probably be focused on high level content. Please clarify if you perceive that this high level content will be rewarding enough to be a meaningful impact on the power balance on the server. I hope not. I think it should at least some of the best stuff but wouldn't want it to be so significant that you couldn't compete against players with it.
Azherae wrote: » mcstackerson wrote: » Azherae wrote: » mcstackerson wrote: » Azherae wrote: » "Please explain if you are still of the opinion that the reason for the change is technical." Sorry, i don't think it's purely technical, just thought it might have played a role. I also think it was made because the kind of content that was planned for the sea and to support the pirate playstyle. Please clarify if you expect Coastal content to not include things like meaningful/complex PvE encounters, in contrast to the Open Sea where it might be necessary to change the flagging system due to such encounters. I'd expect coastal pve enounters to work the same as the ones on land and not involve ships but that is purely my guess. On the ocean, I expect ships to play a larger role in pve encounters like the kraken/leviathon from Archeage but i'm not going to go as far as say the change is necessary. I think the difference between the zones and reason for the change is more that the land has a large variety of content but the sea will probably be focused on high level content. Please clarify if you perceive that this high level content will be rewarding enough to be a meaningful impact on the power balance on the server.
mcstackerson wrote: » Azherae wrote: » mcstackerson wrote: » Azherae wrote: » "Please explain if you are still of the opinion that the reason for the change is technical." Sorry, i don't think it's purely technical, just thought it might have played a role. I also think it was made because the kind of content that was planned for the sea and to support the pirate playstyle. Please clarify if you expect Coastal content to not include things like meaningful/complex PvE encounters, in contrast to the Open Sea where it might be necessary to change the flagging system due to such encounters. I'd expect coastal pve enounters to work the same as the ones on land and not involve ships but that is purely my guess. On the ocean, I expect ships to play a larger role in pve encounters like the kraken/leviathon from Archeage but i'm not going to go as far as say the change is necessary. I think the difference between the zones and reason for the change is more that the land has a large variety of content but the sea will probably be focused on high level content.
Azherae wrote: » mcstackerson wrote: » Azherae wrote: » "Please explain if you are still of the opinion that the reason for the change is technical." Sorry, i don't think it's purely technical, just thought it might have played a role. I also think it was made because the kind of content that was planned for the sea and to support the pirate playstyle. Please clarify if you expect Coastal content to not include things like meaningful/complex PvE encounters, in contrast to the Open Sea where it might be necessary to change the flagging system due to such encounters.
mcstackerson wrote: » Azherae wrote: » "Please explain if you are still of the opinion that the reason for the change is technical." Sorry, i don't think it's purely technical, just thought it might have played a role. I also think it was made because the kind of content that was planned for the sea and to support the pirate playstyle.
Azherae wrote: » "Please explain if you are still of the opinion that the reason for the change is technical."
CROW3 wrote: » I'm between meetings - so adding to the riff. When I was thinking about dealing with naval corruption with the ship as a unit, there were a few states I thought would be necessary: - Functioning in combat / out of combat - Disabled in combat / out of combat - Destroyed Mainly the disabled state v. the destroyed state have very different corruption implications. I'm pulling this from naval combat in AC;Odyssey - if I disable a ship I don't have to board it. I don't have to destroy it. But can I loot a disabled ship for a smaller % of gain? There are combinations of loot / corruption in there, but thought I would toss it out there while I had a minute.
Noaani wrote: » Mag7spy wrote: » This is a modern game, and that much should be expected as a large possibility to ensure group play is also active at sea. Group play will be active at sea - even more so than on land. You have one person that can see what is going on, one person that is steering the ship, several people that are able to fire the weapons, and some people running around patching the ship up. And that is just the basics - I expect to see a few more roles than that. The idea with naval combat in Ashes is that it has it's own classes and specialties - not that it relies on your combat class. You may well be a tank as your primary class, but on a ship you could be the navigator, or a gunner, or what ever else they have. The two spheres are totally independent of each other. The only way to make that work is to remove the benefit of players fighting players, and boost the benefit of ships fighting ships.
XiraelAcaron wrote: » Dolyem wrote: » XiraelAcaron wrote: » Mag7spy wrote: » XiraelAcaron wrote: » Mag7spy wrote: » JustVine wrote: » Dolyem wrote: » JustVine wrote: » Dolyem wrote: » Mag7spy wrote: » Not to mention people can corruption bomb you with a bunch of low levels in order to highly deter attacks or ensure people are extremely deep red. This is actually a good point. You could bait people by loading up some level 1's and then kill the corrupted attackers. I mean... I'm not sure I quite see how corruption bombing is easier at sea than on land. If anything I think it'd be harder to corruption bomb at sea because you get thrown to shore on death which is probably going to be further away in most cases than on a land respawn point. There is a finite amount of greens you can throw at a person with out a ton of logistics as a result... And that's provided your opponent doesn't kill everyone in the encounter who could give you coordinates. Once you do, it's a lot harder to find people at sea so the Red is free to just go grind pirates and other mobs to rinse the corruption off. Feel free to point out to me what scenarios you are thinking of. On land corruption bombing is definitely going to be a challenge and a lot easier to find the opponent via bounty hunting and return to the fray due to the difference in respawn distance and population density. IS needs to solve this problem anyway. If it were me, I'd send in the first ship with level ones as a decoy, they'll likely die quickly from attacks from other ships. This would corrupt those ships and allow for less penalties for the rest of my fleet but more penalties for the enemy. Instant advantage That sounds like the interesting political/strategy based risk gameplay Steven was aiming for to me. But how is this more likely at sea than land? Also I think I might have missed an assumption you were making. I didn't realize you were proposing the scenario as 'ships gain corruption'. Exploiting the system is strategy...... When has Steven ever said that? In L2, which is the inspiration for the corruption system baiting players to accidentally kill a white player (green in AoC) to get them red and kill them was a common tactic. The white one was sitting in the middle of the road and was annoying all the other players. If someone annoyed you you would run to him and hit him once. You would get purple, but that was basically slap to the face. The problem was that the white player had a dot on him and was hovering at 1HP. So hitting him cause any player to go red and then his friends came out and killed you. A friend of mine lost his weapons that way which he worked for for month. So...this was not an exploit then and I doubt steven sees it that way. But you have to ask him As Dygz says below your post. Basing inspiration doesn't mean wanting exploits. It is why there have been changings to the overall system and making it more pve friendly. Dolyem wrote: » XiraelAcaron wrote: » Dolyem wrote: » XiraelAcaron wrote: » Dolyem wrote: » . JustVine wrote: » Dolyem wrote: » JustVine wrote: » Dolyem wrote: » Mag7spy wrote: » Not to mention people can corruption bomb you with a bunch of low levels in order to highly deter attacks or ensure people are extremely deep red. This is actually a good point. You could bait people by loading up some level 1's and then kill the corrupted attackers. I mean... I'm not sure I quite see how corruption bombing is easier at sea than on land. If anything I think it'd be harder to corruption bomb at sea because you get thrown to shore on death which is probably going to be further away in most cases than on a land respawn point. There is a finite amount of greens you can throw at a person with out a ton of logistics as a result... And that's provided your opponent doesn't kill everyone in the encounter who could give you coordinates. Once you do, it's a lot harder to find people at sea so the Red is free to just go grind pirates and other mobs to rinse the corruption off. Feel free to point out to me what scenarios you are thinking of. On land corruption bombing is definitely going to be a challenge and a lot easier to find the opponent via bounty hunting and return to the fray due to the difference in respawn distance and population density. IS needs to solve this problem anyway. If it were me, I'd send in the first ship with level ones as a decoy, they'll likely die quickly from attacks from other ships. This would corrupt those ships and allow for less penalties for the rest of my fleet but more penalties for the enemy. Instant advantage That sounds like the interesting political/strategy based risk gameplay Steven was aiming for to me. But how is this more likely at sea than land? Also I think I might have missed an assumption you were making. I didn't realize you were proposing the scenario as 'ships gain corruption'. To me it's an exploit. The difference between land and sea is on land you'll select an individual and see their level, on a ship, you'll attack from a distance hitting another ship with players on it/potentially hiding in it. Send 10 lvl 1 rogues stealthed on it and they die. Not a great time for the attackers. Politic/strategy shouldn't be based off manipulating a system as it wasn't originally intended. Corruption isn't meant to be a weapon. It's meant to be a limiter Simple solution would be to base corruption gained not on the number or level of player on board but on the difference of the ship classes. How would you go about ship classes then Bigger ships killing smaller green ships get more corruption. Since there are only 3 classes that I know of, and we want to promote PvP I would say for the biggest ship (tier 1) against anothe tier 1, almost no corruption gain. Tier 1 against tier 2 only slightly more. Tier 1 againts Tier 3 (personal ship) maximum corruption. Tier 2 againts Tier 1 slightly more than normal. Tier 1 against Tier 1 normal corruption. Lower classes against higher classes no curruption (I believe that would be hard to win anyway). And what if I run a fleet of fast small ships to take down a large ship? Then you do that. Its the same as when low level players band together to kill a highlevel player on land. As you can see from my discussion posts, I want to have the corruption system on the open sea. But making the corruption system work in all situations was always a pipedream. It will never cover every possible situation one can dream of regardless of where it is active. So all I ask is the same behavior as far as it is possible. But smaller ships aren't necessarily weaker... just for an example, in sea of thieves I run circles around galleons with a sloop. I am not seeing the problem. You want a smaller ship that attacks a bigger green ship to get more corruption? I know its not perfect, but that is something that can be tested and adjusted.
mcstackerson wrote: » Azherae wrote: » mcstackerson wrote: » Azherae wrote: » mcstackerson wrote: » Azherae wrote: » mcstackerson wrote: » Azherae wrote: » "Please explain if you are still of the opinion that the reason for the change is technical." Sorry, i don't think it's purely technical, just thought it might have played a role. I also think it was made because the kind of content that was planned for the sea and to support the pirate playstyle. Please clarify if you expect Coastal content to not include things like meaningful/complex PvE encounters, in contrast to the Open Sea where it might be necessary to change the flagging system due to such encounters. I'd expect coastal pve enounters to work the same as the ones on land and not involve ships but that is purely my guess. On the ocean, I expect ships to play a larger role in pve encounters like the kraken/leviathon from Archeage but i'm not going to go as far as say the change is necessary. I think the difference between the zones and reason for the change is more that the land has a large variety of content but the sea will probably be focused on high level content. Please clarify if you perceive that this high level content will be rewarding enough to be a meaningful impact on the power balance on the server. I hope not. I think it should at least some of the best stuff but wouldn't want it to be so significant that you couldn't compete against players with it. Dolyem wrote: » JustVine wrote: » Dolyem wrote: » . JustVine wrote: » Dolyem wrote: » JustVine wrote: » Dolyem wrote: » Mag7spy wrote: » Not to mention people can corruption bomb you with a bunch of low levels in order to highly deter attacks or ensure people are extremely deep red. This is actually a good point. You could bait people by loading up some level 1's and then kill the corrupted attackers. I mean... I'm not sure I quite see how corruption bombing is easier at sea than on land. If anything I think it'd be harder to corruption bomb at sea because you get thrown to shore on death which is probably going to be further away in most cases than on a land respawn point. There is a finite amount of greens you can throw at a person with out a ton of logistics as a result... And that's provided your opponent doesn't kill everyone in the encounter who could give you coordinates. Once you do, it's a lot harder to find people at sea so the Red is free to just go grind pirates and other mobs to rinse the corruption off. Feel free to point out to me what scenarios you are thinking of. On land corruption bombing is definitely going to be a challenge and a lot easier to find the opponent via bounty hunting and return to the fray due to the difference in respawn distance and population density. IS needs to solve this problem anyway. If it were me, I'd send in the first ship with level ones as a decoy, they'll likely die quickly from attacks from other ships. This would corrupt those ships and allow for less penalties for the rest of my fleet but more penalties for the enemy. Instant advantage That sounds like the interesting political/strategy based risk gameplay Steven was aiming for to me. But how is this more likely at sea than land? Also I think I might have missed an assumption you were making. I didn't realize you were proposing the scenario as 'ships gain corruption'. To me it's an exploit. The difference between land and sea is on land you'll select an individual and see their level, on a ship, you'll attack from a distance hitting another ship with players on it/potentially hiding in it. Send 10 lvl 1 rogues stealthed on it and they die. Not a great time for the attackers. Politic/strategy shouldn't be based off manipulating a system as it wasn't originally intended. Corruption isn't meant to be a weapon. It's meant to be a limiter AoE attacks don't work on greens though. Destroying a ship vs boarding it was going to be one of the main strategic decision making processes in naval in my opinion for precisely that reason. So again I'm not seeing how the scenario would have come up in the way you are describing. Even if AoE did hit greens, that'd be way more likely of a strategy on land than on sea. Got any other thoughts on how it'd come up more frequently in the old system? If you think corruption is meant to be only a limiter not a weapon, I respect that. I think about game design/fun a little differently than you which is why I highly encouraged IS during that one dev discussion to find a way to nerf karma bombing as it benefits me immensely and that'd be kind of unfair/unfun for people who don't enjoy that style of play. It's definitely an important topic that needs to be addressed. Also now that you've made me think about it more I'm starting to dislike this change (I didn't care before since it mostly only benefited me.) Because you just pointed out to me that this change indirectly simplifies the boat meta of the game. Long ranged potion launcher attacks are now way more powerful and will now probably be more difficult to balance since everyone is forced into purple and can now be more easily effected by AoE. If AOE attacks don't work on ships, then how will engagements work? Instead of being able to engage the entire ship with potion launchers you have to catch up and board or individually target every crew member with each potion launcher attack? Likeni said in other comments, the systems don't need to be the same if it can work. Above all else, we have what I consider another problem. Are coastal battles between ships subject to all of this or not? If the result is 'hey don't fight in coastal waters you might get KarmaBombed', that's not great in my opinion. Similar to if you get 'well, coastal battles don't really involve ships', because there are probably quite a few players who would want to do this. Steven gives the argument about Cross Continental Trade opportunities, but I don't really see why because Naval Caravans should have been PvP zones anyway. Maybe it's for 'preventing scouts who are out there looking for hypothetical red pirates' from being effective? This decision definitely isn't 'causing' any new technical problems with Corruption, but it definitely seems to be getting into a weird space. If I use my ship to bring my crew to the edge of open water and they jump off and go attack a coastal fishing boat and sink it, who gets Corruption for boat-sinking, if anyone? Currently, i'd' imagine that fighting on the coast line would come with the risk of corruption and not be encouraged. I'd imagine whoever killed the the noncombatant would get the corruption if they jumped off and attacked a fisher that wasn't out in the open sea.
