Corrupted State and how to hide it

I have been looking into Player Death and Player Flagging.
I have came to conclusion beeing corrupted is a huge burden at the moment. Not only does your death affects you way more than regular player (which is fine) but it bars you from many activities. Therefore there should be a way to even temporarily hide your corrupted state, for a right price of course.
For example high cost consumable that would hide your corrupted state for up to 2 hours or until you exit node(city) you first walk into.
Another way could be some Epic or Legendary items that could hide your status with active ability.

On the other hand it would be a nice if you could see through disguise somehow. As a priest you could cast "Detect Evil" or something.

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

Dygz

A freehold is not a zone.

Abarat

Player stall zones are also PVP free permanently, at least i am pretty sure.

Dygz

Player stalls also are not zones.

Ludullu

hleV wrote: »

Running around fighting random players is some of the most fun I've had in MMORPGs (RF Online - 3 factions, no unflag; WOTLK PvP server - 2 factions, no unflag; New World - 3 factions, can unflag), and I worry I'm not gonna be able to experience that in AoC if people who wish to partake in random OWPvP have to go through the hassle of hitting randoms to flag themselves up. You just won't know if they're PvPers or not until you hit them and they fight back, which, IMHO, is an issue for PvPers like myself.

Funny how you've listed 3 faction-based games. I'd be interested in hearing how "fun" your victims found those games, and more specifically the times when they were murdered by the opposing faction with 0 punishment for their killers.

The whole point of the corruption system is to move all that "random" pvp into more meaningful and goal-based places/situations. Because in most cases, if you get randomly attacked while you're minding your own business, you probably didn't want to be attacked. Now Steven doesn't want to completely remove PKing, because he knows that sometimes you "just gotta", but random meaningless attacks (and especially kills) will be way rarer than in most faction-based mmos.

The problem with togglable flag is that no one will use it. If you want to pvp, there's gonna be several ways to do so against other people who want to pvp. Quite a lot of those people will be in the open world, but they'll be way more likely to fight back against you because they'd be participating in the same means of pvp as you.

Abarat

Dygz wrote: »

I'm not overestimating anything.
Ashes design now has a permanent auto-flag PvP zone. Since there is no permanent PvP-free zone, that makes the game more PvP-centric than it previously was... and... that makes the game even more PvP-centric.

I believe I remember hearing that fully 20% of dungeon and raid content will be instanced and therefore permanently PVP free... surely that qualifies as a zone by whatever definition you are using.

Dygz

Nowhere does it say fully. Nor does it say that those dungeons and raids are permanent.
Also, it's not necessarily PvP free, AFAIK. It's just not open world.

Ludullu

Abarat wrote: »

I believe I remember hearing that fully 20% of dungeon and raid content will be instanced and therefore permanently PVP free... surely that qualifies as a zone by whatever definition you are using.

Those dungeons are supposed to be non-repeatable. So out of hundreds, and potentially thousands, of hours of gameplay, you'd maybe spend a few dozen in instances. If that even.

Abarat

Dygz wrote: »

Nowhere does it say fully. Nor does it say that those dungeons and raids are permanent.
Also, it's not necessarily PvP free, AFAIK. It's just not open world.

Just saying... you said there were NONE... now you are arguing semantics.

Dygz

There are no permanent PvP-free zones.
I'm not arguing semantics. You may be trying to.

It's like I say "No county" and then when you say "but there is a house and office building."
And when I say neither houses nor office buildings are counties, you say... "Semantics."
smh

Strevi

hleV wrote: »

Dygz wrote: »

hleV wrote: »

If it doesn't matter, then why did you bring it up?
"Green is not "protected". Might be less likely to be killed, but is not less likely to be attacked."

If a player wants to kill a Green, they can kill a Green. But if a player wants random OWPvP, surely they'll go for the purple guy rather than green? This is where permaflagging comes in.

You brought up that Green is protected. I stated that Green is not "protected".
If a player wants to participate in random PvP, they will attack back and flag Purple.
Perma-flagging is not a thing... except on the Open Seas.
If the devs want to make the game even more PvP-centric than they announced a month ago - sure... they can have everyone be a Combatant by default.

Green IS protected by the corruption system, in a way that it's way less likely that they will be murdered than if corruption didn't exist. Purple is NOT protected by the corruption system. You can go all out against a purple, even if they don't fight back. Which part of this confuses you?

You overestimate the "PvP-centerness" of AoC. The majority are PvEers, so random OWPvP (read: non-guild/node wars), as proven by New World, isn't likely to happen. There may be PK griefing if corruption is not done right, but it's a different subject, let's focus on consentual, random OWPvP. Running around fighting random players is some of the most fun I've had in MMORPGs (RF Online - 3 factions, no unflag; WOTLK PvP server - 2 factions, no unflag; New World - 3 factions, can unflag), and I worry I'm not gonna be able to experience that in AoC if people who wish to partake in random OWPvP have to go through the hassle of hitting randoms to flag themselves up. You just won't know if they're PvPers or not until you hit them and they fight back, which, IMHO, is an issue for PvPers like myself.

Instead of "running around fighting random players" you might be sailing around.
But on land there are caravans too and somebody has to attack them. You don't want them?
The corruption puts more pressure on attacker to kill when the other has valuable loot which seems ok.
Running around to kill 20, because is faster to find the one which is valuable is too easy.
But yes, I see your point. It can become really hard to find that one person which is worth being killed and looted if nobody fights back. Could be that some servers will have more players like you and then you fight each-other more often.

hleV

Dygz wrote: »

Green is not "protected". Green can be attacked at any time. That is not protection.
Whatever else you may be trying to say - it's not protection.
You seem to be saying that Purples can be killed without the penalty of Corruption. That is not the same thing as protection.

Once again I had made the mistake of engaging in a conversation with you. You're so desperate to win the argument that you fall back to semantics.

NiKr wrote: »

hleV wrote: »

Running around fighting random players is some of the most fun I've had in MMORPGs (RF Online - 3 factions, no unflag; WOTLK PvP server - 2 factions, no unflag; New World - 3 factions, can unflag), and I worry I'm not gonna be able to experience that in AoC if people who wish to partake in random OWPvP have to go through the hassle of hitting randoms to flag themselves up. You just won't know if they're PvPers or not until you hit them and they fight back, which, IMHO, is an issue for PvPers like myself.

Funny how you've listed 3 faction-based games. I'd be interested in hearing how "fun" your victims found those games, and more specifically the times when they were murdered by the opposing faction with 0 punishment for their killers.

I think you're confusing random ganking and oneshotting someone with actually engaging someone and having an actual fight.

NiKr wrote: »

The whole point of the corruption system is to move all that "random" pvp into more meaningful and goal-based places/situations. Because in most cases, if you get randomly attacked while you're minding your own business, you probably didn't want to be attacked. Now Steven doesn't want to completely remove PKing, because he knows that sometimes you "just gotta", but random meaningless attacks (and especially kills) will be way rarer than in most faction-based mmos.

The option to permaflag doesn't detract from that.

NiKr wrote: »

The problem with togglable flag is that no one will use it.

It's not a problem. Someone wishing to attract people for OWPvP will use it.

NiKr wrote: »

If you want to pvp, there's gonna be several ways to do so against other people who want to pvp. Quite a lot of those people will be in the open world, but they'll be way more likely to fight back against you because they'd be participating in the same means of pvp as you.

The option to permaflag on top of all this would be nice.

Strevi

hleV wrote: »

NiKr wrote: »

The whole point of the corruption system is to move all that "random" pvp into more meaningful and goal-based places/situations. Because in most cases, if you get randomly attacked while you're minding your own business, you probably didn't want to be attacked. Now Steven doesn't want to completely remove PKing, because he knows that sometimes you "just gotta", but random meaningless attacks (and especially kills) will be way rarer than in most faction-based mmos.

The option to permaflag doesn't detract from that.

NiKr wrote: »

The problem with togglable flag is that no one will use it.

It's not a problem. Someone wishing to attract people for OWPvP will use it.

NiKr wrote: »

If you want to pvp, there's gonna be several ways to do so against other people who want to pvp. Quite a lot of those people will be in the open world, but they'll be way more likely to fight back against you because they'd be participating in the same means of pvp as you.

The option to permaflag on top of all this would be nice.

I think a voluntary toggle flag would be bad because if would show the willingness to not fight if that is not set, even if the automatic toggle would happen when being hit.
It is better to not know than knowing the stance of the player toward PvP, in that very moment.
Also without a toggle, as it is now, a PvE-er will be aware that the attacker has no idea if he is more a PvP-er or a PvE-er. Putting everybody in the same basket is a psychological trick to invite for combat if a need for it exists.

hleV

Strevi wrote: »

I think a voluntary toggle flag would be bad because if would show the willingness to not fight if that is not set, even if the automatic toggle would happen when being hit.
It is better to not know than knowing the stance of the player toward PvP, in that very moment.
Also without a toggle, as it is now, a PvE-er will be aware that the attacker has no idea if he is more a PvP-er or a PvE-er. Putting everybody in the same basket is a psychological trick to invite for combat if a need for it exists.

Remember that the option to permaflag would be quite inconvenient, even for PvPers, so its usage would be minimal. Someone not permaflagged would not be an indicator that they're not a PvPer. I myself wouldn't be permaflagged 24/7.

Dygz

Permaflag Combatant is not inconvenient since you receive half normal death penalties.

Noaani

NiKr wrote: »

Abarat wrote: »

I believe I remember hearing that fully 20% of dungeon and raid content will be instanced and therefore permanently PVP free... surely that qualifies as a zone by whatever definition you are using.

Those dungeons are supposed to be non-repeatable. So out of hundreds, and potentially thousands, of hours of gameplay, you'd maybe spend a few dozen in instances. If that even.

I wouldn't get too attached to this notion

If you look over everything Intrepid have said on this, "not repeatable" could mean that you can only do it once, but it could also mean that you cant do it once, turn around and go right back in to do it again.

Keep on mind, Archeage is the most recent game Steven has played that is influencing Ashes. The above was how instances worked in that game.

There was one instance that a specific quest needed players to complete 100 times (bad game design already). People would do that in a weekend.

It is reasonable to assume that this is what Steven had in mind when saying instances wont be able to be repeated.

Abarat

Dygz wrote: »

Also, it's not necessarily PvP free, AFAIK. It's just not open world.

This was in regards to instanced dungeons. Can you clarify what you mean by not pvp free, just not open world?

You are afraid someone in your group will attack you?

You REALLY are afraid of PVP... hehe

hleV

Dygz wrote: »

Permaflag Combatant is not inconvenient since you receive half normal death penalties.

This is how it works for purples in general, not just permaflagged purples. Having it permanent is a disadvantage for reasons I've described in earlier posts. You really can't accept this can you?

Deadfool

I see another Falador massacre in the making, and i love it xD

Cat Quiver

Dreik wrote: »

I have came to conclusion beeing corrupted is a huge burden at the moment.

Based on you combing the wiki up and down for a game that not even out with a system that hasn't even been tested yet? Corruption is almost guaranteed to change if Ashes ever comes out. But it won't be from the hundreds of threads/posters like this that have 0 idea of what they're talking about.

Dygz

Abarat wrote: »

This was in regards to instanced dungeons. Can you clarify what you mean by not pvp free, just not open world?

You are afraid someone in your group will attack you?

You REALLY are afraid of PVP... hehe

The only thing instanced means is that it is not Open World. That is not the same thing as PvP-free.
So...PvP-free is an unsubstanciated assumption.
That's simple facts - not fear.

Child Item