Im not talking about if greens concenting to pvp should be treated as victims.
Im talking about if collective greens should be able to take part in a reds punishment. And i think its both more fun, and more interesting as is. And i dont think its drastically "unfair" to the red because they know the risks, and make their own decisions.
The only reason im on this other tangent is because you dont like that one, so im trying to have a conversation about the topic that you will actually have a part in.
Im literally here and interested in ashes, because you CAN just kill the guy who agitates you. Im fine with the risks as is, for doing that. I think all these care bears that need killing greens to be easier with less risks kinda need to just get good...
@PenguinPaladin there can be however many greens trying to punish a red. But once they do attempt that, they're not the victims of the red player, and shall be not treated as such. They know what they signed up for by consenting to directly (damage, CC) or indirectly (healing and whatnot, up to the same system that also applies in non-red PvP) participate in PvP against a red player, therefore the red player defending themselves in the way of eliminating the threat shall not be additionally penalized.
Simply saying the person is a mob doesn't do anything to explain the situation on why the system is the way the system is and that is why you all will keep going in circles. It is better to explain reasons or why you think that is the case from a design perspective as I tried to do earlier.
I mean, I already said the reason. It's to punish you for killing the green in the first place. That's it. And that reason applies every single time you kill a green. The system doesn't care that you were defending yourself or just minding your own business or anything else. You kill a green - you get corruption.
Yes, it's unfair, but that's the point. And OP likes to dismiss the lore as if it doesn't explain the current system, but the lore is there exactly to be the explanation for the system. You, as a red, are a mob. And any mob is killed by any person w/o that person flagging as a combatant. That's it.
Hell, I'd fucking love if some mobs could agro onto other mobs and in the process of killing them became interactable npcs. Like, holy hell that would be an amazing feature for Ashes. I'm not sure if I've ever seen such a feature in another mmo. And the lore/mechanics of the game would support that. The mob was corrupted and then "gained XP" to repent its sin, which made it a "green".
Btw @hleV would you be ok with the current system if it really applied to the mobs in the same way it applies to any Red player? As in, the mobs can remove their corruption if they fight other mobs. Obviously the mobs can't remove corruption through death, because they'll be fucking dead, but removal through XP gain should work. Each mob would start with a set amount of corruption and would gain/lose it the same way a Red player would. Would you consider that fair to the player or would you still not give a shit about the game's own explanation for its system mechanics?
@PenguinPaladin there can be however many greens trying to punish a red. But once they do attempt that, they're not the victims of the red player, and shall be not treated as such. They know what they signed up for by consenting to directly (damage, CC) or indirectly (healing and whatnot, up to the same system that also applies in non-red PvP) participate in PvP against a red player, therefore the red player defending themselves in the way of eliminating the threat shall not be penalized.
Again, i thinks its both more fun, and more interesting if all the antipvp players are temped to try and get revenge on the red guy. I think its good for the overall game, because reveng could be a slippery slope for those greenies to start doing actual pvp. Does the red guy have to sholder all that responsibility? Yeah... but hes such a great guy for doing it tho. Someone needs to be the bad guy. Someones gotta take the fall. Someone has to be the interaction between the greenies and pvp content. And revenge, and an "unfair battle ground" is the perfect place for them greenies to try and step up.
Again, i thinks its both more fun, and more interesting if all the antipvp players are temped to try and get revenge on the red guy. I think its good for the overall game, because reveng could be a slippery slope for those greenies to start doing actual pvp. Does the red guy have to sholder all that responsibility? Yeah... but hes such a great guy for doing it tho. Someone needs to be the bad guy. Someones gotta take the fall. Someone has to be the interaction between the greenies and pvp content. And revenge, and an "unfair battle ground" is the perfect place for them greenies to try and step up.
I don't even disagree with this. My proposal doesn't affect this, greens can go nuts and hunt down red for justice or whatever reasons. Just let the red defend themselves without treating it as if red is going on a rampage killing innocent PvEers who were minding their own PvE business and didn't consent to PvP.
Again, i thinks its both more fun, and more interesting if all the antipvp players are temped to try and get revenge on the red guy. I think its good for the overall game, because reveng could be a slippery slope for those greenies to start doing actual pvp. Does the red guy have to sholder all that responsibility? Yeah... but hes such a great guy for doing it tho. Someone needs to be the bad guy. Someones gotta take the fall. Someone has to be the interaction between the greenies and pvp content. And revenge, and an "unfair battle ground" is the perfect place for them greenies to try and step up.
I don't even disagree with this. My proposal doesn't affect this, greens can go nuts and hunt down red for justice or whatever reasons. Just let the red defend themselves without treating it as if red is going on a rampage killing innocent players.
But in societies eyes, red is going on a rampage and killing innocent players...
You murdered someone. The cops showed up, you killed them too. What do you want? A cookie?
Again, i thinks its both more fun, and more interesting if all the antipvp players are temped to try and get revenge on the red guy. I think its good for the overall game, because reveng could be a slippery slope for those greenies to start doing actual pvp. Does the red guy have to sholder all that responsibility? Yeah... but hes such a great guy for doing it tho. Someone needs to be the bad guy. Someones gotta take the fall. Someone has to be the interaction between the greenies and pvp content. And revenge, and an "unfair battle ground" is the perfect place for them greenies to try and step up.
I don't even disagree with this. My proposal doesn't affect this, greens can go nuts and hunt down red for justice or whatever reasons. Just let the red defend themselves without treating it as if red is going on a rampage killing innocent players.
Then will you accept if Greens get a massive advantage in PvP against Red? Blessed by their Religious Order to root out corruption?
Maybe a 'Divine Hammer Of Justice' ability that instantly debuffs the Red or instantly kills them if you can target it correctly?
The point is that the reason Greens attack Reds is to deliver Justice, so PvP isn't even really required. You could just let the Greens have a oneshot skillshot. That way they aren't even thinking of it as 'PvP'.
If you like they could Pray to summon a Manifestation Of The Will Of Seven which then, as a Holy Mob, fights and strikes down the Red? No PvP has occurred.
Then will you accept if Greens get a massive advantage in PvP against Red? Blessed by their Religious Order to root out corruption?
Maybe a 'Divine Hammer Of Justice' ability that instantly debuffs the Red or instantly kills them if you can target it correctly?
The point is that the reason Greens attack Reds is to deliver Justice, so PvP isn't even really required. You could just let the Greens have a oneshot skillshot. That way they aren't even thinking of it as 'PvP'.
If you like they could Pray to summon a Manifestation Of The Will Of Seven which then, as a Holy Mob, fights and strikes down the Red? No PvP has occurred.
There doesn't need to be a compromise. BHs don't get such benefits, no reason greens, or anyone for that matter, would. Players being treated as PvPers when they consent to PvP doesn't do harm to the system.
Then will you accept if Greens get a massive advantage in PvP against Red? Blessed by their Religious Order to root out corruption?
Maybe a 'Divine Hammer Of Justice' ability that instantly debuffs the Red or instantly kills them if you can target it correctly?
The point is that the reason Greens attack Reds is to deliver Justice, so PvP isn't even really required. You could just let the Greens have a oneshot skillshot. That way they aren't even thinking of it as 'PvP'.
If you like they could Pray to summon a Manifestation Of The Will Of Seven which then, as a Holy Mob, fights and strikes down the Red? No PvP has occurred.
There doesn't need to be a compromise. Players being treated as PvPers when they consent to PvP doesn't do harm to the system.
My last question stands then.
The Green player feels threatened by the presence of a Murderer. They pray to summon a Protector that immediately pursues the Murderer. The Murderer can avoid this by running away before the Prayer finishes since the Manifestation has a range beyond which it doesn't engage.
If the Green chooses to attack instead, no Corruption if Red fights back. Acceptable?
Then will you accept if Greens get a massive advantage in PvP against Red? Blessed by their Religious Order to root out corruption?
Maybe a 'Divine Hammer Of Justice' ability that instantly debuffs the Red or instantly kills them if you can target it correctly?
The point is that the reason Greens attack Reds is to deliver Justice, so PvP isn't even really required. You could just let the Greens have a oneshot skillshot. That way they aren't even thinking of it as 'PvP'.
If you like they could Pray to summon a Manifestation Of The Will Of Seven which then, as a Holy Mob, fights and strikes down the Red? No PvP has occurred.
There doesn't need to be a compromise. Players being treated as PvPers when they consent to PvP doesn't do harm to the system.
It doesnt do harm to the system, sure. But it does harm to the game world.
As it stands, greens will attack red if there are enough of them to feel like they could win.
If they had to flag, a large amount of greens will just never attack reds anyway. It changes those situations, and i think that is bad.
Now if you only gain curruption against the largest level gap target for a cooldown or something i wouldnt be against necessarily. And if every additional green kill reduced that cooldown by a good amount maybe... but i want greens that would never flag to still be tempted to attack me as a red.
0
Options
DygzMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
Well... Greens might attack reds if they think they can win.
Or they might choose to leave reds alone.
Same as the might any other monster, but...
Reds are monsters and Greens don't change to Purple when they attack monsters.
Using logic than it is fun for a red player to be at a huge disadvantage and should just die without difficulty will continue to make this go in circles forever. He is looking at it logically and some of you are pretty much saying red should die after killing someone do to all the disadvantages and should not have a chance.
Shooter terms That guys is a asshole so we are all fine if you use aim bot on him, just don't use it on us.
This is going to go in circles forever.
*edit
He is looking at things logically and from a fair point of view and his points aren't wrong from that perspective
The Green player feels threatened by the presence of a Murderer. They pray to summon a Protector that immediately pursues the Murderer. The Murderer can avoid this by running away before the Prayer finishes since the Manifestation has a range beyond which it doesn't engage.
If the Green chooses to attack instead, no Corruption if Red fights back. Acceptable?
If green does PvP and not just gets PK'd without fighting back, red receives no additional penalty for killing them.
It doesnt do harm to the system, sure. But it does harm to the game world.
As it stands, greens will attack red if there are enough of them to feel like they could win.
If they had to flag, a large amount of greens will just never attack reds anyway. It changes those situations, and i think that is bad.
Now if you only gain curruption against the largest level gap target for a cooldown or something i wouldnt be against necessarily. And if every additional green kill reduced that cooldown by a good amount maybe... but i want greens that would never flag to still be tempted to attack me as a red.
I don't know what you're on about. The only thing my proposal affects is that reds dont receive additional penalty if greens consent to PvP, and greens only receive combatant level of penalty for dying rather than full green penalty, which is a win-win.
The Green player feels threatened by the presence of a Murderer. They pray to summon a Protector that immediately pursues the Murderer. The Murderer can avoid this by running away before the Prayer finishes since the Manifestation has a range beyond which it doesn't engage.
If the Green chooses to attack instead, no Corruption if Red fights back. Acceptable?
If green does PvP and not just gets PK'd without fighting back, red receives no additional penalty for killing them.
It doesnt do harm to the system, sure. But it does harm to the game world.
As it stands, greens will attack red if there are enough of them to feel like they could win.
If they had to flag, a large amount of greens will just never attack reds anyway. It changes those situations, and i think that is bad.
Now if you only gain curruption against the largest level gap target for a cooldown or something i wouldnt be against necessarily. And if every additional green kill reduced that cooldown by a good amount maybe... but i want greens that would never flag to still be tempted to attack me as a red.
I don't know what you're on about. The only thing my proposal affects is that reds dont receive additional penalty if greens consent to PvP, and greens only receive combatant level of penalty for dying rather than full green penalty, which is a win-win.
So is that a yes? You will accept 'Overpowered Protection Summon Through Prayer' as long as 'Actual PvP' doesn't result in further Corruption?
Using logic than it is fun for a red player to be at a huge disadvantage and should just die without difficulty will continue to make this go in circles forever. He is looking at it logically and some of you are pretty much saying red should die after killing someone do to all the disadvantages and should not have a chance.
Shooter terms That guys is a asshole so we are all fine if you use aim bot on him, just don't use it on us.
This is going to go in circles forever.
Mag7spy, the king of circular arguments. Thanks for the heads up.
I think its more fun, as the red... to have a whole new event of escape all the greenies. If i wanted going red to just kill you, then i would say remove the curruption system and just have a player who lands the killing blow on a green die.
As it stands, greens will attack red if there are enough of them to feel like they could win.
I'd disagree with this somewhat. In my experience, quite a lot of greens might attempt killing the Red just because they understand how the system works. They know he'll get more corruption if he kills them so he might not fight back or might just run away.
But imo that is exactly how it should be. You, as a red, must always be alert of literally any other player, especially the green. You've done a shitty thing so you shall now be shunned and hunted, especially by the "same people" as the one you did the shitty thing to.
The "can always fight back w/o gaining more corruption" change would just mean that the strongest player/party could go on absolute rampages of PKing w/o ever being killed. Because all they'd need to do is just wait until any green player around them does so much as just raise their weapon against them - and they'd be free to kill said player w/o any consequence.
The whole change to the karma system from L2, in the form of stat dampening with high amounts of corruption, was made exactly to prevent that kind of thing from happening. You got a super strong party running around fighting anyone as reds? You can punish them with green players, because no matter what the greens do - the red will become unable to win in pvp soon enough. But with the OP's change - there'd be no way to punish them because they'd never gain enough corruption to make them weak.
As it stands, greens will attack red if there are enough of them to feel like they could win.
I'd disagree with this somewhat. In my experience, quite a lot of greens might attempt killing the Red just because they understand how the system works. They know he'll get more corruption if he kills them so he might not fight back or might just run away.
But imo that is exactly how it should be. You, as a red, must always be alert of literally any other player, especially the green. You've done a shitty thing so you shall now be shunned and hunted, especially by the "same people" as the one you did the shitty thing to.
The "can always fight back w/o gaining more corruption" change would just mean that the strongest player/party could go on absolute rampages of PKing w/o ever being killed. Because all they'd need to do is just wait until any green player around them does so much as just raise their weapon against them - and they'd be free to kill said player w/o any consequence.
The whole change to the karma system from L2, in the form of stat dampening with high amounts of corruption, was made exactly to prevent that kind of thing from happening. You got a super strong party running around fighting anyone as reds? You can punish them with green players, because no matter what the greens do - the red will become unable to win in pvp soon enough. But with the OP's change - there'd be no way to punish them because they'd never gain enough corruption to make them weak.
I agree with this and appreciate the L2 perspective
Using logic than it is fun for a red player to be at a huge disadvantage and should just die without difficulty will continue to make this go in circles forever. He is looking at it logically and some of you are pretty much saying red should die after killing someone do to all the disadvantages and should not have a chance.
Shooter terms That guys is a asshole so we are all fine if you use aim bot on him, just don't use it on us.
This is going to go in circles forever.
Mag7spy, the king of circular arguments. Thanks for the heads up.
I think its more fun, as the red... to have a whole new event of escape all the greenies. If i wanted going red to just kill you, then i would say remove the curruption system and just have a player who lands the killing blow on a green die.
I don't think that is fun at all, sound like a hassle. I don't try to look at things being fun or not, I look at it more from a design perspective so there is less bias on what people deem as fun and unfair.
Using logic than it is fun for a red player to be at a huge disadvantage and should just die without difficulty will continue to make this go in circles forever. He is looking at it logically and some of you are pretty much saying red should die after killing someone do to all the disadvantages and should not have a chance.
Shooter terms That guys is a asshole so we are all fine if you use aim bot on him, just don't use it on us.
This is going to go in circles forever.
Mag7spy, the king of circular arguments. Thanks for the heads up.
I think its more fun, as the red... to have a whole new event of escape all the greenies. If i wanted going red to just kill you, then i would say remove the curruption system and just have a player who lands the killing blow on a green die.
I don't think that is fun at all, sound like a hassle. I don't try to look at things being fun or not, I look at it more from a design perspective so there is less bias on what people deem as fun and unfair.
Well im sure as a green player, they dont like the fact that you can just kill them with no hassle. Weird. Different perspectives and all
As it stands, greens will attack red if there are enough of them to feel like they could win.
I'd disagree with this somewhat. In my experience, quite a lot of greens might attempt killing the Red just because they understand how the system works. They know he'll get more corruption if he kills them so he might not fight back or might just run away.
But imo that is exactly how it should be. You, as a red, must always be alert of literally any other player, especially the green. You've done a shitty thing so you shall now be shunned and hunted, especially by the "same people" as the one you did the shitty thing to.
The "can always fight back w/o gaining more corruption" change would just mean that the strongest player/party could go on absolute rampages of PKing w/o ever being killed. Because all they'd need to do is just wait until any green player around them does so much as just raise their weapon against them - and they'd be free to kill said player w/o any consequence.
The whole change to the karma system from L2, in the form of stat dampening with high amounts of corruption, was made exactly to prevent that kind of thing from happening. You got a super strong party running around fighting anyone as reds? You can punish them with green players, because no matter what the greens do - the red will become unable to win in pvp soon enough. But with the OP's change - there'd be no way to punish them because they'd never gain enough corruption to make them weak.
Which reduces the amount of pvp and times this would happen and making people rely on the other system for pvp that gives them a lot more weight. Growing the social dynamics, drama and politics between nodes and guilds as those are the main means to war on other people for owpvp.
So is that a yes? You will accept 'Overpowered Protection Summon Through Prayer' as long as 'Actual PvP' doesn't result in further Corruption?
If the ability you're describing is meant as a means to PvP the red, then the system counts it as PvP, therefore green consented and red is not penalized for killing them.
So is that a yes? You will accept 'Overpowered Protection Summon Through Prayer' as long as 'Actual PvP' doesn't result in further Corruption?
If the ability you're describing is meant as a means to PvP the red, then the system counts it as PvP, therefore green consented and red is not penalized for killing them.
No, they're summoning a Protector. As the Red, you could just run away from them before it finishes summoning and it never pursues you. They summon it literally for 'security to make sure they don't have a Murderer near them', and it performs the purpose because the Murderer, knowing they would lose to this being, runs away.
PvP only happens if the Murderer chooses to stay in range, or they both agree to that and the Green cancels the Prayer.
So is that a yes? You will accept 'Overpowered Protection Summon Through Prayer' as long as 'Actual PvP' doesn't result in further Corruption?
If the ability you're describing is meant as a means to PvP the red, then the system counts it as PvP, therefore green consented and red is not penalized for killing them.
Look man. Red just needs to be the bigger man. A lil' extra curruption wouldnt hold him back. Look at how cool he is.
No, they're summoning a Protector. As the Red, you could just run away from them before it finishes summoning and it never pursues you. They summon it literally for 'security to make sure they don't have a Murderer near them', and it performs the purpose because the Murderer, knowing they would lose to this being, runs away.
PvP only happens if the Murderer chooses to stay in range, or they both agree to that and the Green cancels the Prayer.
If the protector attacks red, then it's PvP. Until then it's nothing.
No, they're summoning a Protector. As the Red, you could just run away from them before it finishes summoning and it never pursues you. They summon it literally for 'security to make sure they don't have a Murderer near them', and it performs the purpose because the Murderer, knowing they would lose to this being, runs away.
PvP only happens if the Murderer chooses to stay in range, or they both agree to that and the Green cancels the Prayer.
If the protector attacks red, then it's PvP. Until then it's nothing.
Red has the choice to run away out of the range of Green's protector, or negotiate/assure Green that the Protector is not necessary and no PvP even needs to happen. Acceptable?
No, they're summoning a Protector. As the Red, you could just run away from them before it finishes summoning and it never pursues you. They summon it literally for 'security to make sure they don't have a Murderer near them', and it performs the purpose because the Murderer, knowing they would lose to this being, runs away.
PvP only happens if the Murderer chooses to stay in range, or they both agree to that and the Green cancels the Prayer.
If the protector attacks red, then it's PvP. Until then it's nothing.
Red has the choice to run away out of the range of Green's protector, or negotiate/assure Green that the Protector is not necessary and no PvP even needs to happen. Acceptable?
Bro, i really dont know why you're pushing justice and prayer and protectors so hard here man... like... im on your side.... but... find a better argument.
Which reduces the amount of pvp and times this would happen and making people rely on the other system for pvp that gives them a lot more weight. Growing the social dynamics, drama and politics between nodes and guilds as those are the main means to war on other people for owpvp.
Exactly. Which is the whole point of the corruption system. It still lets you kill whoever you want whenever you want, but it punishes you severely for doing so, which makes you either find another route (as you've listed) or you just do your best with the consequences of your actions. You run away and avoid other players as much as possible, while killing mobs to remove corruption.
You're meant to suffer as a red, which makes you more social because sociability will lead you to more ways of fighting other people w/o huge detriments to you. But if you try use that sociability to circumvent the corruption system - it punishes you even more, because your party has to suffer the same consequences too now.
The system works just as intended and works just fine. And is beneficial to the overall structure of the game and to the main goal of "bringing the social life back to mmos". Which is the exact reason why I'm against what OP suggested.
No, they're summoning a Protector. As the Red, you could just run away from them before it finishes summoning and it never pursues you. They summon it literally for 'security to make sure they don't have a Murderer near them', and it performs the purpose because the Murderer, knowing they would lose to this being, runs away.
PvP only happens if the Murderer chooses to stay in range, or they both agree to that and the Green cancels the Prayer.
If the protector attacks red, then it's PvP. Until then it's nothing.
Red has the choice to run away out of the range of Green's protector, or negotiate/assure Green that the Protector is not necessary and no PvP even needs to happen. Acceptable?
Bro, i really dont know why you're pushing justice and prayer and protectors so hard here man... like... im on your side.... but... find a better argument.
Well because I really should just sleep, it's simple.
I am not willing to assume that @hleV is actually being completely selfish and disingenuous here, and I can see their point.
If the answer is 'no, any action taken in pre-emptive self defense by the Green is PvP and I shouldn't be punished for killing them', then I can go 'ok, selfish and disingenuous'.
If the answer is 'this is ok, I just want that when a Green decides to chase me down to kill me just because I happened to meet them on the road, I can defend myself', then it's valid enough to me. I can agree that it's not necessary for 'being hounded by an army of Greens through the world because you can't even log off' to be a thing, it isn't really that fun and maybe not adding too much to the game.
The problem is that if hleV is starting from the perspective of 'Greens just wanna grief me' then even this explanation will get caught up in weeds because then I have to explain 'ok the Protector moves slower than a player' or 'Ok the protector's range doesn't change' or 'ok Protector summoning has a cooldown' because everything will be viewed by hleV as 'this is a tool for Greens to grief me' instead of for protection.
But making assumptions about people is easier, so...
Comments
Im talking about if collective greens should be able to take part in a reds punishment. And i think its both more fun, and more interesting as is. And i dont think its drastically "unfair" to the red because they know the risks, and make their own decisions.
The only reason im on this other tangent is because you dont like that one, so im trying to have a conversation about the topic that you will actually have a part in.
Im literally here and interested in ashes, because you CAN just kill the guy who agitates you. Im fine with the risks as is, for doing that. I think all these care bears that need killing greens to be easier with less risks kinda need to just get good...
Yes, it's unfair, but that's the point. And OP likes to dismiss the lore as if it doesn't explain the current system, but the lore is there exactly to be the explanation for the system. You, as a red, are a mob. And any mob is killed by any person w/o that person flagging as a combatant. That's it.
Hell, I'd fucking love if some mobs could agro onto other mobs and in the process of killing them became interactable npcs. Like, holy hell that would be an amazing feature for Ashes. I'm not sure if I've ever seen such a feature in another mmo. And the lore/mechanics of the game would support that. The mob was corrupted and then "gained XP" to repent its sin, which made it a "green".
Btw @hleV would you be ok with the current system if it really applied to the mobs in the same way it applies to any Red player? As in, the mobs can remove their corruption if they fight other mobs. Obviously the mobs can't remove corruption through death, because they'll be fucking dead, but removal through XP gain should work. Each mob would start with a set amount of corruption and would gain/lose it the same way a Red player would. Would you consider that fair to the player or would you still not give a shit about the game's own explanation for its system mechanics?
Again, i thinks its both more fun, and more interesting if all the antipvp players are temped to try and get revenge on the red guy. I think its good for the overall game, because reveng could be a slippery slope for those greenies to start doing actual pvp. Does the red guy have to sholder all that responsibility? Yeah... but hes such a great guy for doing it tho. Someone needs to be the bad guy. Someones gotta take the fall. Someone has to be the interaction between the greenies and pvp content. And revenge, and an "unfair battle ground" is the perfect place for them greenies to try and step up.
But in societies eyes, red is going on a rampage and killing innocent players...
You murdered someone. The cops showed up, you killed them too. What do you want? A cookie?
Then will you accept if Greens get a massive advantage in PvP against Red? Blessed by their Religious Order to root out corruption?
Maybe a 'Divine Hammer Of Justice' ability that instantly debuffs the Red or instantly kills them if you can target it correctly?
The point is that the reason Greens attack Reds is to deliver Justice, so PvP isn't even really required. You could just let the Greens have a oneshot skillshot. That way they aren't even thinking of it as 'PvP'.
If you like they could Pray to summon a Manifestation Of The Will Of Seven which then, as a Holy Mob, fights and strikes down the Red? No PvP has occurred.
There doesn't need to be a compromise. BHs don't get such benefits, no reason greens, or anyone for that matter, would. Players being treated as PvPers when they consent to PvP doesn't do harm to the system.
My last question stands then.
The Green player feels threatened by the presence of a Murderer. They pray to summon a Protector that immediately pursues the Murderer. The Murderer can avoid this by running away before the Prayer finishes since the Manifestation has a range beyond which it doesn't engage.
If the Green chooses to attack instead, no Corruption if Red fights back. Acceptable?
It doesnt do harm to the system, sure. But it does harm to the game world.
As it stands, greens will attack red if there are enough of them to feel like they could win.
If they had to flag, a large amount of greens will just never attack reds anyway. It changes those situations, and i think that is bad.
Now if you only gain curruption against the largest level gap target for a cooldown or something i wouldnt be against necessarily. And if every additional green kill reduced that cooldown by a good amount maybe... but i want greens that would never flag to still be tempted to attack me as a red.
Or they might choose to leave reds alone.
Same as the might any other monster, but...
Reds are monsters and Greens don't change to Purple when they attack monsters.
Shooter terms That guys is a asshole so we are all fine if you use aim bot on him, just don't use it on us.
This is going to go in circles forever.
*edit
He is looking at things logically and from a fair point of view and his points aren't wrong from that perspective
I don't know what you're on about. The only thing my proposal affects is that reds dont receive additional penalty if greens consent to PvP, and greens only receive combatant level of penalty for dying rather than full green penalty, which is a win-win.
So is that a yes? You will accept 'Overpowered Protection Summon Through Prayer' as long as 'Actual PvP' doesn't result in further Corruption?
Mag7spy, the king of circular arguments. Thanks for the heads up.
I think its more fun, as the red... to have a whole new event of escape all the greenies. If i wanted going red to just kill you, then i would say remove the curruption system and just have a player who lands the killing blow on a green die.
But imo that is exactly how it should be. You, as a red, must always be alert of literally any other player, especially the green. You've done a shitty thing so you shall now be shunned and hunted, especially by the "same people" as the one you did the shitty thing to.
The "can always fight back w/o gaining more corruption" change would just mean that the strongest player/party could go on absolute rampages of PKing w/o ever being killed. Because all they'd need to do is just wait until any green player around them does so much as just raise their weapon against them - and they'd be free to kill said player w/o any consequence.
The whole change to the karma system from L2, in the form of stat dampening with high amounts of corruption, was made exactly to prevent that kind of thing from happening. You got a super strong party running around fighting anyone as reds? You can punish them with green players, because no matter what the greens do - the red will become unable to win in pvp soon enough. But with the OP's change - there'd be no way to punish them because they'd never gain enough corruption to make them weak.
I agree with this and appreciate the L2 perspective
I don't think that is fun at all, sound like a hassle. I don't try to look at things being fun or not, I look at it more from a design perspective so there is less bias on what people deem as fun and unfair.
Well im sure as a green player, they dont like the fact that you can just kill them with no hassle. Weird. Different perspectives and all
Which reduces the amount of pvp and times this would happen and making people rely on the other system for pvp that gives them a lot more weight. Growing the social dynamics, drama and politics between nodes and guilds as those are the main means to war on other people for owpvp.
No, they're summoning a Protector. As the Red, you could just run away from them before it finishes summoning and it never pursues you. They summon it literally for 'security to make sure they don't have a Murderer near them', and it performs the purpose because the Murderer, knowing they would lose to this being, runs away.
PvP only happens if the Murderer chooses to stay in range, or they both agree to that and the Green cancels the Prayer.
Look man. Red just needs to be the bigger man. A lil' extra curruption wouldnt hold him back. Look at how cool he is.
Red has the choice to run away out of the range of Green's protector, or negotiate/assure Green that the Protector is not necessary and no PvP even needs to happen. Acceptable?
Bro, i really dont know why you're pushing justice and prayer and protectors so hard here man... like... im on your side.... but... find a better argument.
You're meant to suffer as a red, which makes you more social because sociability will lead you to more ways of fighting other people w/o huge detriments to you. But if you try use that sociability to circumvent the corruption system - it punishes you even more, because your party has to suffer the same consequences too now.
The system works just as intended and works just fine. And is beneficial to the overall structure of the game and to the main goal of "bringing the social life back to mmos". Which is the exact reason why I'm against what OP suggested.
Well because I really should just sleep, it's simple.
I am not willing to assume that @hleV is actually being completely selfish and disingenuous here, and I can see their point.
If the answer is 'no, any action taken in pre-emptive self defense by the Green is PvP and I shouldn't be punished for killing them', then I can go 'ok, selfish and disingenuous'.
If the answer is 'this is ok, I just want that when a Green decides to chase me down to kill me just because I happened to meet them on the road, I can defend myself', then it's valid enough to me. I can agree that it's not necessary for 'being hounded by an army of Greens through the world because you can't even log off' to be a thing, it isn't really that fun and maybe not adding too much to the game.
The problem is that if hleV is starting from the perspective of 'Greens just wanna grief me' then even this explanation will get caught up in weeds because then I have to explain 'ok the Protector moves slower than a player' or 'Ok the protector's range doesn't change' or 'ok Protector summoning has a cooldown' because everything will be viewed by hleV as 'this is a tool for Greens to grief me' instead of for protection.
But making assumptions about people is easier, so...
zzz