Proposal and ideas regarding pvp in order to avoid griefing.
Plasticyeti
Member
I saw a video by Lucky Ghost called "Ashes of Creation is in Trouble" about pvp and how it would be the end of AOC if the flagging system isnt improved or something else is added. Even though i dont agree with everything he said, it still got me thinking, so here is some ideas:
I would like to suggest some ideas, some may be bad and some may be good, or maybe they are all bad, i dont know xD. Also some of these ideas may or may not have already been added to the game or talked about, so i apologize in advance if that is the case. Also sorry for the bad english xd.
1:Overall i think that the reward to pvp players for protecting pve players against getting griefed in certain areas should be desirable and perhaps unique. Atleast to the point where it is atleast just as desirable to defend players as it is to attack players, and perhaps the reward for defending and reviving a certain amount of pve players inside of cetain areas should maybe even be a bit greater in certain cases or in certain areas, perhaps even unique.
Maybe there could be like a system where for example: if you complete 2 quests, and keep the time in between you taking a new quest short, like some sort of time limit, while you simultaneously havent attacked any other player, then you get categorized as a pve player until atleast one of those criteria is broken, then defending and reviving those people could give desirable rewards. This system could be implemented in certain areas and perhaps be implemented or removed under certain situation, like if a siege is taking place in your area then it is removed regardless of whether you fullfill the criteria. The flagging system could also be tuned acording to whether you are categorized as a pvp or pve player.
2: In terms of dungeons: maybe make it so that you enter a sort of portal at the entrance to the dungeons, just like in WoW. Or maybe make it so there is a heavy penalty for killing players inside of dungeons.
3: Maybe there could be like a speciel kind of quest, where you are suppose to protect players inside of your node or a cetain owned territory, and get unique or atleast valuable rewards for succeeding. Perhaps like a type of bodyguard quest.
4: Making sure that atleast the starting lvl areas are heavily protected by npc´s, like to the point where you wouldnt just be able to go in with like 5 of your friends and grief low lvl players.
5: Maybe make it so that if there hasnt been created like a sort of guild which main purpose is to protect the node and the players questing inside of the node or the owned territory, then the node itself cant be upgraded past a certain lvl, and if certain goals where you have to protect lvling players arent reached maybe on a weekly or monthly basis, then the node will decrease in lvl, or other sort of penalties.
6: Making it so that the reward for killing other players gets lower or higher depending on the diffrence between your lvl and the player you are attckings lvl, or perhaps the flag meter increases faster depending on the lvl difference. Maybe even making it so that killing very low lvl players as a very high lvl player, gives some sort of penalty, perhaps even a heavy penalty, on top of that the penalty could perhaps also be adjusted to whether the low lvl player who were killed were in a starting lvling area or not.
7: Since fast travel dosent seem to be a huge thing in aoc, then perhaps being strategic with where the low lvl areas are placed on the map is a good idea, in order to avoid griefing.
Feel free to add ideas or objections. All i want is a great mmorpg game
I would like to suggest some ideas, some may be bad and some may be good, or maybe they are all bad, i dont know xD. Also some of these ideas may or may not have already been added to the game or talked about, so i apologize in advance if that is the case. Also sorry for the bad english xd.
1:Overall i think that the reward to pvp players for protecting pve players against getting griefed in certain areas should be desirable and perhaps unique. Atleast to the point where it is atleast just as desirable to defend players as it is to attack players, and perhaps the reward for defending and reviving a certain amount of pve players inside of cetain areas should maybe even be a bit greater in certain cases or in certain areas, perhaps even unique.
Maybe there could be like a system where for example: if you complete 2 quests, and keep the time in between you taking a new quest short, like some sort of time limit, while you simultaneously havent attacked any other player, then you get categorized as a pve player until atleast one of those criteria is broken, then defending and reviving those people could give desirable rewards. This system could be implemented in certain areas and perhaps be implemented or removed under certain situation, like if a siege is taking place in your area then it is removed regardless of whether you fullfill the criteria. The flagging system could also be tuned acording to whether you are categorized as a pvp or pve player.
2: In terms of dungeons: maybe make it so that you enter a sort of portal at the entrance to the dungeons, just like in WoW. Or maybe make it so there is a heavy penalty for killing players inside of dungeons.
3: Maybe there could be like a speciel kind of quest, where you are suppose to protect players inside of your node or a cetain owned territory, and get unique or atleast valuable rewards for succeeding. Perhaps like a type of bodyguard quest.
4: Making sure that atleast the starting lvl areas are heavily protected by npc´s, like to the point where you wouldnt just be able to go in with like 5 of your friends and grief low lvl players.
5: Maybe make it so that if there hasnt been created like a sort of guild which main purpose is to protect the node and the players questing inside of the node or the owned territory, then the node itself cant be upgraded past a certain lvl, and if certain goals where you have to protect lvling players arent reached maybe on a weekly or monthly basis, then the node will decrease in lvl, or other sort of penalties.
6: Making it so that the reward for killing other players gets lower or higher depending on the diffrence between your lvl and the player you are attckings lvl, or perhaps the flag meter increases faster depending on the lvl difference. Maybe even making it so that killing very low lvl players as a very high lvl player, gives some sort of penalty, perhaps even a heavy penalty, on top of that the penalty could perhaps also be adjusted to whether the low lvl player who were killed were in a starting lvling area or not.
7: Since fast travel dosent seem to be a huge thing in aoc, then perhaps being strategic with where the low lvl areas are placed on the map is a good idea, in order to avoid griefing.
Feel free to add ideas or objections. All i want is a great mmorpg game
1
Comments
1. I get the thought but PvP players will protect PvE players who are either a) in their guild (aka making them gear or b) part of their node. Farming and questing goes up mode levels up…PvP player who is a citizen in that mode benefits. There are 2 incentives right there.
2. Most of the game is not instanced and I believe that means dungeons. There should be no penalties whatsoever in a dungeon..killing bosses will drop high tier resources/schematics and players should only face the normal corruption consequences in those areas. If a guild locks down a boss it’s up to the server players to stop that from happening.
3. I don’t think this is a bad idea but hopefully players just help those they have a connection too without having to have a quest. Or maybe a contract system could be made that does this.
4. I dislike the NPC idea but can see how a roaming group of them outside of the cities could work or could also be super jank like mortal online. Hopefully corruption, if tuned right, will manage low level griefing. But on the same vein some players will have low level Alta knowing they can free farm and people will be reluctant to engage them in fear of worse corruption. So can be abused…
5. Way too much micro manangement and a zerg will absure the shit out of that. Kids will alt-f4 quicker then you blink.
6. Once again if corruption is balanced then this will technically be factored in. But once again low level Alt’s will be used and then in turn be abusing the system. So another slippery slope
7. Idk what that means
8. From my understanding, I could be very wrong, there is no “low level” area. The game advances as the node advances it’s not a traditional spawn here get to level 10 go here get to level 20. It’s way more dynamic and not linear. But could be wrong wiki would explain it better
Not the worst suggestions, hope my responses made sense.
Don't listen to random people on YouTube talk about random things they no little to nothing about.
Start here.
https://ashesofcreation.wiki/
The purpose of the corruption system is to encourage PvP by encouraging players to fight back more, and to PvP more. Corruption is there only to discourage serial ganking, and give uneasy players a way to ease into PvP and get comfortable with it.
Dungeons are one of the places that PvP is most intended to happen. There cannot be a higher penalty for killing players in dungeons because the design intent is for players to fight over good dungeons.
If you're new to Ashes, and the corruption system, you may be interested in reading about the Bounty Hunter system, which grants progression and rewards to players who kill Corrupted players.
This already exists in a different form: The corruption penalties for killing players much lower level than you are much more severe than the ones for killing a player at your level. Your chance of losing gear increases dramatically. Your stats (and ability to fight back) decrease dramatically. Then see above bounty hunting system (or just any indignant passerby that sees you picking on lowbies).
Yeah. This is already done. The PENALTY for killing players lower level than you is much higher. The "flag meter" (I must assume you mean corruption) does increase faster depending on the level difference.
The placement of low-level areas depends entirely on what areas players have leveled up, and will be different on each server to some degree.
As a new visitor, I greatly suggest you read about Corruption in greater depth. Many of the things you are asking for are already in the game, or don't apply to Ashes of Creation.
Remember: You are supposed to be able to kill players who don't want to fight. If you weren't, there would be a hard on/off flag system instead of Corruption. Corruption's goal is to ease players into PvP, and prevent things like the lowbie abuse described. It exists for the sole purpose of solving the problems you seem to be concerned about. It's reasonable to assume it will be adjusted until it does so.
OPs Account - Joined 10:17AM (today)
Checks out.
Because while I don't have any opinion on this, this is closer to what I was expecting to pop up, (and has a few interesting 'lines that lead to it' in terms of ways it will be found on the internet) so it's possible we might actually get more data on what the more general sentiment is.
Hopefully everyone will have the same sort of response you do, OP and come learn about it, even if it is 'learning that their own suggestions are already the implemented ones'.
Go out there and do the good work of telling people that your ideas are in the game and therefore it will probably be fine! (no sarcasm).
The suggestions from the video that I agree with aren't included in your post, so that's my feedback on that.
Yeah Lex is on point with the hardcore shade.
The Citation on the Corruption page that explains this and shows the image (unreadable for me?) of Steven's information on this, now links TO the Lucky Ghost video directly.
Well played.
I assume the youtuber in question knowledge regarding Lineage 2 and Ashes of Creation is quite limited considering his video, he almost directly correlates both systems(L2 Karma and AOC Corruption) as perfect equals throughout the video, even tho its straight up false, may it ignorance or straight up malice is up for debate, i certainly do believe it to be the former.
Aren't we all sinners?
Everything you say works ONLY in imagination of game developers.
If corruption system forcing green players to fight back, i can easily ques what's going to happen - a player who decided to kill another player not going to get a corruption. Because green player have to fight back, and if he have to fight back, whole situation just magicly becomes a consensual PVP and attacker just turns purple and walk's away unpunished. If you're not punish people for bad behaviour, bad behaviour becomes normal and game dies.
Whole take about dungeons is just stupid, if what you described really the intended plan for dungeons, AoC going to fall off in sub 100k online category in first 3-6 month's. But i pretty sure you are wrong.
Bounty Hunter system is good in theory, but first - you have like a 20 ways to grief other players and not become a corrupted, second - i fear this system turns out to be highly exploitable. You can create a alt, become corrupted and kill this alt with your main character to collect Bounty Hunter rewards. This just of the top of my head.
Yeah... Everything you just described has like a
ten ways to work around. And what high penalties for killing noobs going to do, if they "encouraged"(forced) to fight back, and if they fight back they turns purple.
Most of this is wrong.
There are not that many easy ways to grief other players without becoming corrupted that are not also available in PvE games.
There is no reason a Green player needs to fight back.
There is no reason a Green player shouldn't fight back against a player that is already Red, because it doesn't turn them Purple to do that.
The only way this matters is if a Purple figures out a way to make a Green miserable enough that they HAVE to fight back, and NEEDED to be Purple to do it.
Nah, Intrepid tricked even you. That entire quote wasn't even there before.
Aww, and I thought I had checked so well too...
I even looked at some previous versions, I thought... did I do that incorrectly?
Now I'm upset in a lot of weird ways that I don't even know how to articulate... but...
I THINK that page you linked is as exact as it's going to get?
Greypelt is a dev or something, right? Or is this just wiki vandalism? It's not 'Intrepid tricking me' if this is some random person who shouldn't actually have wiki access but does.
EDIT: Now I see, it was because of that thing about how Citations and such are handled on the Disambiguation page.
I guess we're just waiting for a more 'official' announcement of this change, soon, and they're probably just not done crafting it yet? (again, assuming Greypelt is a dev or related)
"There is no reason a Green player needs to fight back"
There is, is hidden in "encouraged pvp" bullshit. Steven basically say something in line with this - "if player A gets attacked by player B and dies, he loosing some loot and player B becomes corrupted. If player A decided to fight back against player B and dies, he loosing way less loot, but becomes purple and player B don't get a corruption."
Actually, while I don't agree with your reasoning, I have been informed that I am in error anyway.
The information that made me say 'well there isn't a way to do that' was apparently changed TODAY. So though I still disagree about your specific example... yeah... my bad.
Oof, I already don't like this... I mean... I like the change... I THINK... but I don't like the 'surroundings' of this.
Why would a dev bother to stealth edit a link in such a weird way just to point to Steven 'debunking' a video? That's only good for doing a scummy publicity stunt.
Even so though, I don't like how this is going, because the wiki now 'discredits' this YouTuber in a disingenuous way. Basically it makes them look like they made a video out of ignorance of something, when that 'something' was only updated AFTER they made the video.
I hope Intrepid changes or clarifies this in some way so as to make good on this, cause this is... kinda not cool...
EDIT: Ok found it, Steven made comments on the video itself.
Good job Intrepid as always.
Honestly i don't expect most people to know everything with Aoc, there isn't an official document technically. Even if you are super into like AoC like me for example you may forget or just not know everything. There is a lot to the game.
From a youtuber perspective they aren't going to hardcore research, they are just trying to get a banger video out. He just knows the basics and the inspiration and bits about the system without knowing all the more fine details.
Honestly i think its a good change that well help stop griefing, also don't think people should know other players hp or have hints at it at all. Meaning the corruption system can work to a stronger effect, without people trying to get around it.
What other studio is on things like this mmo wise in the community of the genre, i can't think of one.
None. I really appreciate it.
I'm not even gonna start a topic about this change, because I'm reasonably sure that Intrepid will just make that topic themselves, and be able to frame the change and question correctly, rather than us just guessing.
I'mma just go think about how I feel about it. I already added my related question to Q&A for this month (whether or not this means you can't drain Mana from a Green).
I'm not sure if it was something people tested in A1(atleast people involved in Wiki) so it's hard to tell if it was already present in A1 or if it already was Steven's intent just not yet stated.
Aren't we all sinners?
Also means they have some perks in favor of trying to escape, which im fine with(though should be knocked off a mount). Mixed in with not being able to harass healers, tanks with cc as they are doing content and are more risking going corrupted to be attacking them.
Was a issue with BDO and people trying to feed you to mobs.
We couldn't really test it in Alpha-1. There was minimal CC, and PvP was off most of the time. So I doubt they would have got enough data that way. Probably internal testing.
It's pretty easy to think about though, most people could pretty simply realize that this could be a problem, the question was WHICH solution Intrepid intended to use for it, and not everyone comes up with the same ones.
I would have preferred something closer to what Lucky Ghost suggested, where you can eventually build up Corruption from CC 'griefing' because it would let me keep the option of 'CC open for combat'. This removes some of the strategy/capability for situations where you EXPLICITLY intend to kill the person, or explicitly intend to use CC to discourage them from doing something (taking your resource node, training mobs onto you, etc).
I think this COULD theoretically make PvE griefing easier, for example, a person who 'finds a way to pull mobs to you using some very defensive ability' could do this while green, but you could send someone from your group to CC them and make their timer run out before they reach your group and they die.
Maybe that won't be important, but in my experience, being able to CC the 'PvE griefers' is an important part of counterplay.
Me neither, but i would expect a little more effort from the youtuber, like atleast reading the wiki regarding corruption to understand that even currently, AOC corruption system is already expected to be Harsher than Lineage 2's Karma system...
But yeah, can't expect alot from the majority of youtubers, they gotta make that bag a way or the other, expecting effort and reliable information in their videos is quite the optimism.
Aren't we all sinners?
Yeah, see, I don't like this perspective.
The video didn't even try to address the HARSHNESS of the system. It looked at two scenarios that explicitly AVOID that harshness, one that exploits the (now non-existent I guess) CC vs Greens, and the other making use of 'groups that literally don't care how harsh it is'.
So no amount of research would have changed the core video at all. It wasn't POSSIBLE to know the counter to the first, and there is still no counter to the second. There was no 'due diligence to do' that wasn't done.
Nobody can claim that a system is broken and will cause the game to fail WHEN THE SYSTEM ISN'T EVEN OUT YET.
They literally have nothing to judge. Anyone who claims that they know it will be a problem is talking out of their rear end. It's fine to look at what has been proposed and to critique it, but anyone who makes definitive declarations of something that hasn't even been tested by the public, they are literally making things up. That person simply is not credible. Ignore them.