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.
But simply by making that video, that person has successfully caused us to get additional information upon which to judge that system.
People are just as likely to judge 'this system probably won't work' as they will 'this system probably will work', and to compare it to what the stated goals of the system are. That's what he did.
"The system as we understand it doesn't reach the goals as we understand them."
You say 'Ignore them' but Steven didn't ignore them, and I believe Steven was explicitly right to not ignore them.
I knew about the aoe thing, but did not know you can't cc a green. Looks like some people that played L2 a lot knew about some of the issues with this type of flagging more than the youtuber realized. Or well youtuber just hasn't fully researched the game, there is a lot of information to it.
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.
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.
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 exeted 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.
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.
Many parts of the video correlates L2 Karma system and AOC Corruption system as direct equals 9:52 for example there is no way to deny the ignorance when he make such blunt statements.
Regarding those 2 scenarios, you do understand that they require alot of assumptions using Lineage 2 as a base to understand a system yet to be tested or understood on how it works.
CC against greens: CC against greens has 1 restriction in L2 that he seems to have intentionally avoided to mention, that being "only CCs that cause damage could be used against non-purple players" risking PKing them.
The second scenario depends entirely on the moderation team properly dealing with bots and rmt, something way beyond the mere discussion about the flagging system.
CC against greens: CC against greens has 1 restriction in L2 that he seems to have intentionally avoided to mention, that being "only CCs that cause damage could be used against non-purple players" risking PKing them.
Yeah, but this is a new thing, which was added to the wiki after Steven announced it in the comments of the same video. You can't research things that are only announced in response to your own video.
This is just pure proof that the discussion the video participates in did its job, and influenced the game (or at very least our information about it) in a positive way.
I knew about the aoe thing, but did not know you can't cc a green. Looks like some people that played L2 a lot knew about some of the issues with this type of flagging more than the youtuber realized. Or well youtuber just hasn't fully researched the game, there is a lot of information to it.
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.
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.
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.
I knew about the aoe thing, but did not know you can't cc a green. Looks like some people that played L2 a lot knew about some of the issues with this type of flagging more than the youtuber realized. Or well youtuber just hasn't fully researched the game, there is a lot of information to it.
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.
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.
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 exeted 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.
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.
Many parts of the video correlates L2 Karma system and AOC Corruption system as direct equals 9:52 for example there is no way to deny the ignorance when he make such blunt statements.
Regarding those 2 scenarios, you do understand that they require alot of assumptions using Lineage 2 as a base to understand a system yet to be tested or understood on how it works.
CC against greens: CC against greens has 1 restriction in L2 that he seems to have intentionally avoided to mention, that being "only CCs that cause damage could be used against non-purple players" risking PKing them.
The second scenario depends entirely on the moderation team properly dealing with bots and rmt, something way beyond the mere discussion about the flagging system.
Yes, it sounds moreso like we agree. You could argue 'they should never have made this video, it makes no sense' to make it, as Atama has, but I still don't see a point at which they 'should have done more research' and 'didn't do it'.
Nothing in particular would change about the specific situation mentioned in the case of CCs that do damage. The attacker is already purple. Unless the Healer is going to explicitly figure out a way to make their own HP lower for the CHANCE that their CC-er kills them, the same situation given occurs.
But either way, it seems that Steven at least responded in the way I would have hoped for, so I guess it doesn't matter if people here have that opinion of the content. I wasn't arguing 'this person isn't making assumptions'. I'm saying that given how little we know, there is nothing BUT assumptions to make. Now we know a little more, and that's great.
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.
It's simple. No matter how harsh system is, if you can evade punishment altogether. Nothing what we now about corruption system is addresses fundamental issues which where described in his video. Like yea, corrupted player suffer much higher losses than in l2, but it doesn't matter if you have the opportunity to stun people when they fighting mobs, or log in your alt and kill some noobs, gain huge debaffs, log off clear that dungeon and wash corruption away later in safe environment.
I knew about the aoe thing, but did not know you can't cc a green. Looks like some people that played L2 a lot knew about some of the issues with this type of flagging more than the youtuber realized. Or well youtuber just hasn't fully researched the game, there is a lot of information to it.
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.
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.
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 exeted 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.
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.
Many parts of the video correlates L2 Karma system and AOC Corruption system as direct equals 9:52 for example there is no way to deny the ignorance when he make such blunt statements.
Regarding those 2 scenarios, you do understand that they require alot of assumptions using Lineage 2 as a base to understand a system yet to be tested or understood on how it works.
CC against greens: CC against greens has 1 restriction in L2 that he seems to have intentionally avoided to mention, that being "only CCs that cause damage could be used against non-purple players" risking PKing them.
The second scenario depends entirely on the moderation team properly dealing with bots and rmt, something way beyond the mere discussion about the flagging system.
Yes, it sounds moreso like we agree. You could argue 'they should never have made this video, it makes no sense' to make it, as Atama has, but I still don't see a point at which they 'should have done more research' and 'didn't do it'.
Nothing in particular would change about the specific situation mentioned in the case of CCs that do damage. The attacker is already purple. Unless the Healer is going to explicitly figure out a way to make their own HP lower for the CHANCE that their CC-er kills them, the same situation given occurs.
But either way, it seems that Steven at least responded in the way I would have hoped for, so I guess it doesn't matter if people here have that opinion of the content. I wasn't arguing 'this person isn't making assumptions'. I'm saying that given how little we know, there is nothing BUT assumptions to make. Now we know a little more, and that's great.
Im very interested about the answer Steven give. Where i can find his comments on this issue? I can't find anything
I knew about the aoe thing, but did not know you can't cc a green. Looks like some people that played L2 a lot knew about some of the issues with this type of flagging more than the youtuber realized. Or well youtuber just hasn't fully researched the game, there is a lot of information to it.
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.
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.
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 exeted 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.
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.
Many parts of the video correlates L2 Karma system and AOC Corruption system as direct equals 9:52 for example there is no way to deny the ignorance when he make such blunt statements.
Regarding those 2 scenarios, you do understand that they require alot of assumptions using Lineage 2 as a base to understand a system yet to be tested or understood on how it works.
CC against greens: CC against greens has 1 restriction in L2 that he seems to have intentionally avoided to mention, that being "only CCs that cause damage could be used against non-purple players" risking PKing them.
The second scenario depends entirely on the moderation team properly dealing with bots and rmt, something way beyond the mere discussion about the flagging system.
Yes, it sounds moreso like we agree. You could argue 'they should never have made this video, it makes no sense' to make it, as Atama has, but I still don't see a point at which they 'should have done more research' and 'didn't do it'.
Nothing in particular would change about the specific situation mentioned in the case of CCs that do damage. The attacker is already purple. Unless the Healer is going to explicitly figure out a way to make their own HP lower for the CHANCE that their CC-er kills them, the same situation given occurs.
But either way, it seems that Steven at least responded in the way I would have hoped for, so I guess it doesn't matter if people here have that opinion of the content. I wasn't arguing 'this person isn't making assumptions'. I'm saying that given how little we know, there is nothing BUT assumptions to make. Now we know a little more, and that's great.
Im very interested about the answer Steven give. Where i can find his comments on this issue? I can't find anything
It's complicated because of the timeline of events of this particular situation.
But short version: you can go back to Lucky Ghost's Video and scroll down in the comments to find Steven's.
Long Version:
Basically, if you only looked at the Corruption page, it would show a quote that was added today, with a citation added today.
But THAT page doesn't show that they were added today, so if you see the quote, and the citation (for me, the citation is an unreadable screenshot of Steven's comment on the video itself), you might think 'well has this been here the whole time?' and if you check THAT page's history, it will appear to be true.
In MY case that made me assume that whatever the unreadable comment image was, it was old and couldn't possibly be connected to the video. That was why I was 'worried' that Steven hadn't responded or dealt with this. But it's just a weirdness of wiki work.
Even Steven's comment itself has edits though, so I am worried that at least a few people (my group has at least one person like this) will assume that Steven just threw in this instant off-the-cuff solution to the situation the video presents.
One way or the other though, it's all handled, and we can debate 'if not being able to CC Greens at all' is good, separately. It solves a lot of the things you were noting, though.
I knew about the aoe thing, but did not know you can't cc a green. Looks like some people that played L2 a lot knew about some of the issues with this type of flagging more than the youtuber realized. Or well youtuber just hasn't fully researched the game, there is a lot of information to it.
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.
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.
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 exeted 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.
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.
Many parts of the video correlates L2 Karma system and AOC Corruption system as direct equals 9:52 for example there is no way to deny the ignorance when he make such blunt statements.
Regarding those 2 scenarios, you do understand that they require alot of assumptions using Lineage 2 as a base to understand a system yet to be tested or understood on how it works.
CC against greens: CC against greens has 1 restriction in L2 that he seems to have intentionally avoided to mention, that being "only CCs that cause damage could be used against non-purple players" risking PKing them.
The second scenario depends entirely on the moderation team properly dealing with bots and rmt, something way beyond the mere discussion about the flagging system.
Yes, it sounds moreso like we agree. You could argue 'they should never have made this video, it makes no sense' to make it, as Atama has, but I still don't see a point at which they 'should have done more research' and 'didn't do it'.
Nothing in particular would change about the specific situation mentioned in the case of CCs that do damage. The attacker is already purple. Unless the Healer is going to explicitly figure out a way to make their own HP lower for the CHANCE that their CC-er kills them, the same situation given occurs.
But either way, it seems that Steven at least responded in the way I would have hoped for, so I guess it doesn't matter if people here have that opinion of the content. I wasn't arguing 'this person isn't making assumptions'. I'm saying that given how little we know, there is nothing BUT assumptions to make. Now we know a little more, and that's great.
Im very interested about the answer Steven give. Where i can find his comments on this issue? I can't find anything
It's complicated because of the timeline of events of this particular situation.
But short version: you can go back to Lucky Ghost's Video and scroll down in the comments to find Steven's.
Long Version:
Basically, if you only looked at the Corruption page, it would show a quote that was added today, with a citation added today.
But THAT page doesn't show that they were added today, so if you see the quote, and the citation (for me, the citation is an unreadable screenshot of Steven's comment on the video itself), you might think 'well has this been here the whole time?' and if you check THAT page's history, it will appear to be true.
In MY case that made me assume that whatever the unreadable comment image was, it was old and couldn't possibly be connected to the video. That was why I was 'worried' that Steven hadn't responded or dealt with this. But it's just a weirdness of wiki work.
Even Steven's comment itself has edits though, so I am worried that at least a few people (my group has at least one person like this) will assume that Steven just threw in this instant off-the-cuff solution to the situation the video presents.
One way or the other though, it's all handled, and we can debate 'if not being able to CC Greens at all' is good, separately. It solves a lot of the things you were noting, though.
I read Steven's comment, and became more confident in the future of AoC. Now i worry only about "encouraged pvp" issue. But I guess we looked how things work out in the alpha 2.
0
Options
AtamaMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
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.
But simply by making that video, that person has successfully caused us to get additional information upon which to judge that system.
People are just as likely to judge 'this system probably won't work' as they will 'this system probably will work', and to compare it to what the stated goals of the system are. That's what he did.
"The system as we understand it doesn't reach the goals as we understand them."
You say 'Ignore them' but Steven didn't ignore them, and I believe Steven was explicitly right to not ignore them.
Steven has the right to do that, of course, and I guess a blind squirrel finds a nut now and then, but they're still a blind squirrel. I still don't give this person any credibility.
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.
But simply by making that video, that person has successfully caused us to get additional information upon which to judge that system.
People are just as likely to judge 'this system probably won't work' as they will 'this system probably will work', and to compare it to what the stated goals of the system are. That's what he did.
"The system as we understand it doesn't reach the goals as we understand them."
You say 'Ignore them' but Steven didn't ignore them, and I believe Steven was explicitly right to not ignore them.
Steven has the right to do that, of course, and I guess a blind squirrel finds a nut now and then, but they're still a blind squirrel. I still don't give this person any credibility.
Jesus Christ man, relax. Anything about the corruption system untill this day contradicted worries in his video. Damn, i still have few questions about the open world PVP, corruption system and loot drop chance. Don't be such a fun boy of the game which doesn't even released yet. And don't forget a word's of the chosen one - "Tear my systems apart, i love it" - Steven Sharif
CC against greens: CC against greens has 1 restriction in L2 that he seems to have intentionally avoided to mention, that being "only CCs that cause damage could be used against non-purple players" risking PKing them.
Yeah, but this is a new thing, which was added to the wiki after Steven announced it in the comments of the same video. You can't research things that are only announced in response to your own video.
This is just pure proof that the discussion the video participates in did its job, and influenced the game (or at very least our information about it) in a positive way.
I would say it's more a case of our understanding of the game growing a bit. I would assume (based on this being a thing in L2) that it was a plan all along.
My question then becomes - can a green open combat with a combatant using CC?
If so, this kind of puts the initiative in the hands of the attacked player, rather than the attacker.
Not saying this is a bad thing (I think it could be good, actually), just more wondering how this works.
CC against greens: CC against greens has 1 restriction in L2 that he seems to have intentionally avoided to mention, that being "only CCs that cause damage could be used against non-purple players" risking PKing them.
Yeah, but this is a new thing, which was added to the wiki after Steven announced it in the comments of the same video. You can't research things that are only announced in response to your own video.
This is just pure proof that the discussion the video participates in did its job, and influenced the game (or at very least our information about it) in a positive way.
I would say it's more a case of our understanding of the game growing a bit. I would assume (based on this being a thing in L2) that it was a plan all along.
My question then becomes - can a green open combat with a combatant using CC?
If so, this kind of puts the initiative in the hands of the attacked player, rather than the attacker.
Not saying this is a bad thing (I think it could be good, actually), just more wondering how this works.
Yes CC thing is great, but PK still may just attack green player while his fighting with mob's to drop his HP just enough, so the mob's kill him. But at this point I feel like it's unfortunately unavoidable evil.
CC against greens: CC against greens has 1 restriction in L2 that he seems to have intentionally avoided to mention, that being "only CCs that cause damage could be used against non-purple players" risking PKing them.
Yeah, but this is a new thing, which was added to the wiki after Steven announced it in the comments of the same video. You can't research things that are only announced in response to your own video.
This is just pure proof that the discussion the video participates in did its job, and influenced the game (or at very least our information about it) in a positive way.
I would say it's more a case of our understanding of the game growing a bit. I would assume (based on this being a thing in L2) that it was a plan all along.
My question then becomes - can a green open combat with a combatant using CC?
If so, this kind of puts the initiative in the hands of the attacked player, rather than the attacker.
Not saying this is a bad thing (I think it could be good, actually), just more wondering how this works.
Yes CC thing is great, but PK still may just attack green player while his fighting with mob's to drop his HP just enough, so the mob's kill him. But at this point I feel like it's unfortunately unavoidable evil.
I think that one's intentional.
The other thing I think matters here is the difference in approach that comes up because of what you just noted.
If I can CC someone successfully just by choosing a move that ALSO does damage, I would risk this to do the scenario implied in the video.
If I can do the damage but the CC will NEVER WORK, I can't do the thing mentioned in Lucky Ghost's video. If, as Noaani says, the Green is 'always the first to get to have their CC actually work', that shifts a lot of things.
CC against greens: CC against greens has 1 restriction in L2 that he seems to have intentionally avoided to mention, that being "only CCs that cause damage could be used against non-purple players" risking PKing them.
Yeah, but this is a new thing, which was added to the wiki after Steven announced it in the comments of the same video. You can't research things that are only announced in response to your own video.
This is just pure proof that the discussion the video participates in did its job, and influenced the game (or at very least our information about it) in a positive way.
I would say it's more a case of our understanding of the game growing a bit. I would assume (based on this being a thing in L2) that it was a plan all along.
My question then becomes - can a green open combat with a combatant using CC?
If so, this kind of puts the initiative in the hands of the attacked player, rather than the attacker.
Not saying this is a bad thing (I think it could be good, actually), just more wondering how this works.
Yes CC thing is great, but PK still may just attack green player while his fighting with mob's to drop his HP just enough, so the mob's kill him. But at this point I feel like it's unfortunately unavoidable evil.
I think that one's intentional.
The other thing I think matters here is the difference in approach that comes up because of what you just noted.
If I can CC someone successfully just by choosing a move that ALSO does damage, I would risk this to do the scenario implied in the video.
If I can do the damage but the CC will NEVER WORK, I can't do the thing mentioned in Lucky Ghost's video. If, as Noaani says, the Green is 'always the first to get to have their CC actually work', that shifts a lot of things.
I was wondering about this, myself. If you don't get strong CC at all, obviously it was never a problem in the first place, but it's not like you're going to get abilities that are both high damage AND strong CC. That'd just be broken. But low damage, strong CC? That doesn't exactly give you bad odds on pulling off what the video describes. Sure your low damage strong CC move might manage to kill the guy, but it's not exactly likely unless the damage is good. It's basically a straight up catch-22.
Hello all! Lots of big thoughts in here. I thought I'd stop by and share a well written post Steven wrote on that YouTube video, which can be found here
I'll also copy-paste it for ya here as well:
"Greetings brother, awesome video!
Just a few points I’d love to add.
Much of the Ashes corruption system has taken into account these concerns. In my experience with similar flagging systems, such as that of L2’s, there were very apparent flaws in implementation.
Some of the adjustments that have been made for Ashes’ approach to open world flagging system is as follows;
- Abilities with CC effects do not apply to non-combatants. The target of a cc ability must be flagged in order to suffer the CC effects. This prevents players from opening attacks that stun players during a pull for example.
- Corruption gain also takes into account level disparity between the player killed and the corrupted. The greater the disparity the higher the corruption accrued.
- PK alts would be highly ineffective, since acquiring corruption will apply dampening effects on skill dmg for PvP the higher your corruption score becomes.
- Working corruption off through exp grinding also takes significantly longer than L2, and during that time we’ve created a bounty system that reveals corrupt player locations on the map.
It is true that Ashes is a PvX game. And that means it won’t be for everyone. And that’s ok.
Testing will further refine our approach for corruption, but as a system it is core to introducing risk vs reward in Ashes, while disincentivizing griefing.
If you have any questions feel free to shoot me a dm on discord or Twitter 💪❤️" - Steven Sharif
I hope this provides some insight into the system that Lucky Ghost may not have highlighted in the video. Carry on! ^_^
This doesn't QUITE clarify enough, @Vaknar, so if SOMEHOW you have just ONE more answer from Steven it would help, especially if y'all aren't planning to make a whole specific post about it (someone else surely will, might be me).
I just want to know if we can interpret this part EXACTLY AS WRITTEN.
Abilities with CC effects do not apply to non-combatants. The target of a cc ability must be flagged in order to suffer the CC effects. This prevents players from opening attacks that stun players during a pull for example.
I think the most reasonable way to interpret this is:
"If your ability does only CC, it cannot affect non-combatants. If it does damage and CC, it can do the damage but the CC will not function."
However I can see an interpretation that is:
"If your ability does only CC, it cannot affect non-combatants. If it does damage and CC, it will not do the damage and the CC will not function."
Which, to me, are very different things, and I feel it would be counterproductive to make a whole post just 'discussing which of them is more likely', so IF this is a decided factor, or even if 'it differs by ability', we might be able to have a much more productive conversation on it.
This doesn't QUITE clarify enough, @Vaknar, so if SOMEHOW you have just ONE more answer from Steven it would help, especially if y'all aren't planning to make a whole specific post about it (someone else surely will, might be me).
I just want to know if we can interpret this part EXACTLY AS WRITTEN.
Abilities with CC effects do not apply to non-combatants. The target of a cc ability must be flagged in order to suffer the CC effects. This prevents players from opening attacks that stun players during a pull for example.
I think the most reasonable way to interpret this is:
"If your ability does only CC, it cannot affect non-combatants. If it does damage and CC, it can do the damage but the CC will not function."
However I can see an interpretation that is:
"If your ability does only CC, it cannot affect non-combatants. If it does damage and CC, it will not do the damage and the CC will not function."
Which, to me, are very different things, and I feel it would be counterproductive to make a whole post just 'discussing which of them is more likely', so IF this is a decided factor, or even if 'it differs by ability', we might be able to have a much more productive conversation on it.
Thanks as always.
My Interpretation is this - if ability has a CC effect, it just doesn't start to cast.
This doesn't QUITE clarify enough, @Vaknar, so if SOMEHOW you have just ONE more answer from Steven it would help, especially if y'all aren't planning to make a whole specific post about it (someone else surely will, might be me).
I just want to know if we can interpret this part EXACTLY AS WRITTEN.
Abilities with CC effects do not apply to non-combatants. The target of a cc ability must be flagged in order to suffer the CC effects. This prevents players from opening attacks that stun players during a pull for example.
I think the most reasonable way to interpret this is:
"If your ability does only CC, it cannot affect non-combatants. If it does damage and CC, it can do the damage but the CC will not function."
However I can see an interpretation that is:
"If your ability does only CC, it cannot affect non-combatants. If it does damage and CC, it will not do the damage and the CC will not function."
Which, to me, are very different things, and I feel it would be counterproductive to make a whole post just 'discussing which of them is more likely', so IF this is a decided factor, or even if 'it differs by ability', we might be able to have a much more productive conversation on it.
Thanks as always.
My. Interpretation is this - if ability has a CC effect, it just doesn't start to cast.
That could limit a LOT of the potential CC effect types in the game, and reduce the complexity of the game as a whole, if it was true.
It also wouldn't matter if there were such a thing as a ground template CC. If I augmented my Hallowed Ground to also slow enemies in the radius and explicitly cast it as 'Full flagged, hits all Greens it touches', I want it to slow them, but you also can't 'control whether or not I'm allowed to cast it' as easily.
This doesn't QUITE clarify enough, @Vaknar, so if SOMEHOW you have just ONE more answer from Steven it would help, especially if y'all aren't planning to make a whole specific post about it (someone else surely will, might be me).
I just want to know if we can interpret this part EXACTLY AS WRITTEN.
Abilities with CC effects do not apply to non-combatants. The target of a cc ability must be flagged in order to suffer the CC effects. This prevents players from opening attacks that stun players during a pull for example.
I think the most reasonable way to interpret this is:
"If your ability does only CC, it cannot affect non-combatants. If it does damage and CC, it can do the damage but the CC will not function."
However I can see an interpretation that is:
"If your ability does only CC, it cannot affect non-combatants. If it does damage and CC, it will not do the damage and the CC will not function."
Which, to me, are very different things, and I feel it would be counterproductive to make a whole post just 'discussing which of them is more likely', so IF this is a decided factor, or even if 'it differs by ability', we might be able to have a much more productive conversation on it.
Thanks as always.
My. Interpretation is this - if ability has a CC effect, it just doesn't start to cast.
That could limit a LOT of the potential CC effect types in the game, and reduce the complexity of the game as a whole, if it was true.
It also wouldn't matter if there were such a thing as a ground template CC. If I augmented my Hallowed Ground to also slow enemies in the radius and explicitly cast it as 'Full flagged, hits all Greens it touches', I want it to slow them, but you also can't 'control whether or not I'm allowed to cast it' as easily.
Of your various interpretations, which do you feel would be best for Ashes of Creation and why? 🤔
Greens being immune to cc means that greens can attack corrupted and the corrupted can't even cc to try to get away, much less use cc to fight back.
Think some additional thought might be required here.
Fully expecting the typical "don't go red then bro" responses from the typical people. But you have to realize how utterly insane that is.
Am I missing something? Or is that the way its actually going to be.
It's going to make an even bigger difference if one has abilities that do heavy damage, light CC, but then NEITHER of those work.
Challenging? Probably. Fun? Debatable.
Oof, that would be a disaster, in my personal opinion. But it would really take the forced PvP out of the game. Way easier for a Green to run away if a bunch of your big skills don't touch them. It'd basically be the end of ganking gatherers for materials.
This doesn't QUITE clarify enough, @Vaknar, so if SOMEHOW you have just ONE more answer from Steven it would help, especially if y'all aren't planning to make a whole specific post about it (someone else surely will, might be me).
I just want to know if we can interpret this part EXACTLY AS WRITTEN.
Abilities with CC effects do not apply to non-combatants. The target of a cc ability must be flagged in order to suffer the CC effects. This prevents players from opening attacks that stun players during a pull for example.
I think the most reasonable way to interpret this is:
"If your ability does only CC, it cannot affect non-combatants. If it does damage and CC, it can do the damage but the CC will not function."
However I can see an interpretation that is:
"If your ability does only CC, it cannot affect non-combatants. If it does damage and CC, it will not do the damage and the CC will not function."
Which, to me, are very different things, and I feel it would be counterproductive to make a whole post just 'discussing which of them is more likely', so IF this is a decided factor, or even if 'it differs by ability', we might be able to have a much more productive conversation on it.
Thanks as always.
My. Interpretation is this - if ability has a CC effect, it just doesn't start to cast.
That could limit a LOT of the potential CC effect types in the game, and reduce the complexity of the game as a whole, if it was true.
It also wouldn't matter if there were such a thing as a ground template CC. If I augmented my Hallowed Ground to also slow enemies in the radius and explicitly cast it as 'Full flagged, hits all Greens it touches', I want it to slow them, but you also can't 'control whether or not I'm allowed to cast it' as easily.
Of your various interpretations, which do you feel would be best for Ashes of Creation and why? 🤔
Oh, this is open for discussion then? At least for now? Post time!
Thank you, Vaknar, pulling through on that 'sorta-end-of-normal-workday' clutch. I may 'stress' you, but I appreciate you.
Yeah challenging for the red azherae. Ez mode for the green. Regular greens would be a tougher fight than actual bounty hunters. Think someone at intrepid needs to stop getting panic'd by critical youtubers and focus more on making a good game.
Sorry on my phone can't quote and type beautifully like I normally try to haha
If I, Red, come up to you, Green, you can beat on me all you want and never become a Combatant.
It is intentional, to the point where people have complained about it, that you can just 'be hunted by an army of Green players who you can't even kill without becoming more Corrupted', as soon as you turn Red.
Greens being immune to cc means that greens can attack corrupted and the corrupted can't even cc to try to get away, much less use cc to fight back.
Think some additional thought might be required here.
Fully expecting the typical "don't go red then bro" responses from the typical people. But you have to realize how utterly insane that is.
Am I missing something? Or is that the way its actually going to be.
If green attacks back he becomes a purple and CC effects start to work to theirs fullest extent. I think this goes without saying.
You might need to review this handy graph. If Green attacks Red, they remain Green.
And of course a reminder: There's no such thing as people just "being Purple" out in the wild. You turn Green when you haven't PvPed for like 90 seconds. "Green attacks Red" will apply to anyone who happens to see a Red walk by and wants a piece of that action.
Comments
But simply by making that video, that person has successfully caused us to get additional information upon which to judge that system.
People are just as likely to judge 'this system probably won't work' as they will 'this system probably will work', and to compare it to what the stated goals of the system are. That's what he did.
"The system as we understand it doesn't reach the goals as we understand them."
You say 'Ignore them' but Steven didn't ignore them, and I believe Steven was explicitly right to not ignore them.
Many parts of the video correlates L2 Karma system and AOC Corruption system as direct equals 9:52 for example there is no way to deny the ignorance when he make such blunt statements.
Regarding those 2 scenarios, you do understand that they require alot of assumptions using Lineage 2 as a base to understand a system yet to be tested or understood on how it works.
CC against greens: CC against greens has 1 restriction in L2 that he seems to have intentionally avoided to mention, that being "only CCs that cause damage could be used against non-purple players" risking PKing them.
The second scenario depends entirely on the moderation team properly dealing with bots and rmt, something way beyond the mere discussion about the flagging system.
Aren't we all sinners?
Yeah, but this is a new thing, which was added to the wiki after Steven announced it in the comments of the same video. You can't research things that are only announced in response to your own video.
This is just pure proof that the discussion the video participates in did its job, and influenced the game (or at very least our information about it) in a positive way.
That way they can make a second video ;o
Yes, it sounds moreso like we agree. You could argue 'they should never have made this video, it makes no sense' to make it, as Atama has, but I still don't see a point at which they 'should have done more research' and 'didn't do it'.
Nothing in particular would change about the specific situation mentioned in the case of CCs that do damage. The attacker is already purple. Unless the Healer is going to explicitly figure out a way to make their own HP lower for the CHANCE that their CC-er kills them, the same situation given occurs.
But either way, it seems that Steven at least responded in the way I would have hoped for, so I guess it doesn't matter if people here have that opinion of the content. I wasn't arguing 'this person isn't making assumptions'. I'm saying that given how little we know, there is nothing BUT assumptions to make. Now we know a little more, and that's great.
It's simple. No matter how harsh system is, if you can evade punishment altogether. Nothing what we now about corruption system is addresses fundamental issues which where described in his video. Like yea, corrupted player suffer much higher losses than in l2, but it doesn't matter if you have the opportunity to stun people when they fighting mobs, or log in your alt and kill some noobs, gain huge debaffs, log off clear that dungeon and wash corruption away later in safe environment.
Im very interested about the answer Steven give. Where i can find his comments on this issue? I can't find anything
It's complicated because of the timeline of events of this particular situation.
But short version: you can go back to Lucky Ghost's Video and scroll down in the comments to find Steven's.
Long Version:
Basically, if you only looked at the Corruption page, it would show a quote that was added today, with a citation added today.
But THAT page doesn't show that they were added today, so if you see the quote, and the citation (for me, the citation is an unreadable screenshot of Steven's comment on the video itself), you might think 'well has this been here the whole time?' and if you check THAT page's history, it will appear to be true.
In MY case that made me assume that whatever the unreadable comment image was, it was old and couldn't possibly be connected to the video. That was why I was 'worried' that Steven hadn't responded or dealt with this. But it's just a weirdness of wiki work.
Even Steven's comment itself has edits though, so I am worried that at least a few people (my group has at least one person like this) will assume that Steven just threw in this instant off-the-cuff solution to the situation the video presents.
One way or the other though, it's all handled, and we can debate 'if not being able to CC Greens at all' is good, separately. It solves a lot of the things you were noting, though.
I read Steven's comment, and became more confident in the future of AoC. Now i worry only about "encouraged pvp" issue. But I guess we looked how things work out in the alpha 2.
Steven has the right to do that, of course, and I guess a blind squirrel finds a nut now and then, but they're still a blind squirrel. I still don't give this person any credibility.
Jesus Christ man, relax. Anything about the corruption system untill this day contradicted worries in his video. Damn, i still have few questions about the open world PVP, corruption system and loot drop chance. Don't be such a fun boy of the game which doesn't even released yet. And don't forget a word's of the chosen one - "Tear my systems apart, i love it" - Steven Sharif
I would say it's more a case of our understanding of the game growing a bit. I would assume (based on this being a thing in L2) that it was a plan all along.
My question then becomes - can a green open combat with a combatant using CC?
If so, this kind of puts the initiative in the hands of the attacked player, rather than the attacker.
Not saying this is a bad thing (I think it could be good, actually), just more wondering how this works.
Yes CC thing is great, but PK still may just attack green player while his fighting with mob's to drop his HP just enough, so the mob's kill him. But at this point I feel like it's unfortunately unavoidable evil.
I think that one's intentional.
The other thing I think matters here is the difference in approach that comes up because of what you just noted.
If I can CC someone successfully just by choosing a move that ALSO does damage, I would risk this to do the scenario implied in the video.
If I can do the damage but the CC will NEVER WORK, I can't do the thing mentioned in Lucky Ghost's video. If, as Noaani says, the Green is 'always the first to get to have their CC actually work', that shifts a lot of things.
I was wondering about this, myself. If you don't get strong CC at all, obviously it was never a problem in the first place, but it's not like you're going to get abilities that are both high damage AND strong CC. That'd just be broken. But low damage, strong CC? That doesn't exactly give you bad odds on pulling off what the video describes. Sure your low damage strong CC move might manage to kill the guy, but it's not exactly likely unless the damage is good. It's basically a straight up catch-22.
I'll also copy-paste it for ya here as well:
"Greetings brother, awesome video!
Just a few points I’d love to add.
Much of the Ashes corruption system has taken into account these concerns. In my experience with similar flagging systems, such as that of L2’s, there were very apparent flaws in implementation.
Some of the adjustments that have been made for Ashes’ approach to open world flagging system is as follows;
- Abilities with CC effects do not apply to non-combatants. The target of a cc ability must be flagged in order to suffer the CC effects. This prevents players from opening attacks that stun players during a pull for example.
- Corruption gain also takes into account level disparity between the player killed and the corrupted. The greater the disparity the higher the corruption accrued.
- PK alts would be highly ineffective, since acquiring corruption will apply dampening effects on skill dmg for PvP the higher your corruption score becomes.
- Working corruption off through exp grinding also takes significantly longer than L2, and during that time we’ve created a bounty system that reveals corrupt player locations on the map.
It is true that Ashes is a PvX game. And that means it won’t be for everyone. And that’s ok.
Testing will further refine our approach for corruption, but as a system it is core to introducing risk vs reward in Ashes, while disincentivizing griefing.
If you have any questions feel free to shoot me a dm on discord or Twitter 💪❤️" - Steven Sharif
I hope this provides some insight into the system that Lucky Ghost may not have highlighted in the video. Carry on! ^_^
I just want to know if we can interpret this part EXACTLY AS WRITTEN.
Abilities with CC effects do not apply to non-combatants. The target of a cc ability must be flagged in order to suffer the CC effects. This prevents players from opening attacks that stun players during a pull for example.
I think the most reasonable way to interpret this is:
"If your ability does only CC, it cannot affect non-combatants. If it does damage and CC, it can do the damage but the CC will not function."
However I can see an interpretation that is:
"If your ability does only CC, it cannot affect non-combatants. If it does damage and CC, it will not do the damage and the CC will not function."
Which, to me, are very different things, and I feel it would be counterproductive to make a whole post just 'discussing which of them is more likely', so IF this is a decided factor, or even if 'it differs by ability', we might be able to have a much more productive conversation on it.
Thanks as always.
My Interpretation is this - if ability has a CC effect, it just doesn't start to cast.
That could limit a LOT of the potential CC effect types in the game, and reduce the complexity of the game as a whole, if it was true.
It also wouldn't matter if there were such a thing as a ground template CC. If I augmented my Hallowed Ground to also slow enemies in the radius and explicitly cast it as 'Full flagged, hits all Greens it touches', I want it to slow them, but you also can't 'control whether or not I'm allowed to cast it' as easily.
Think some additional thought might be required here.
Fully expecting the typical "don't go red then bro" responses from the typical people. But you have to realize how utterly insane that is.
Am I missing something? Or is that the way its actually going to be.
It's going to make an even bigger difference if one has abilities that do heavy damage, light CC, but then NEITHER of those work.
Challenging? Probably. Fun? Debatable.
Of your various interpretations, which do you feel would be best for Ashes of Creation and why? 🤔
Oof, that would be a disaster, in my personal opinion. But it would really take the forced PvP out of the game. Way easier for a Green to run away if a bunch of your big skills don't touch them. It'd basically be the end of ganking gatherers for materials.
Oh, this is open for discussion then? At least for now? Post time!
Thank you, Vaknar, pulling through on that 'sorta-end-of-normal-workday' clutch. I may 'stress' you, but I appreciate you.
Off I go!
Sorry on my phone can't quote and type beautifully like I normally try to haha
If green attacks back he becomes a purple and CC effects start to work to theirs fullest extent. I think this goes without saying.
It's exactly how it works homie
No, it is definitely not, check the thing again.
If I, Red, come up to you, Green, you can beat on me all you want and never become a Combatant.
It is intentional, to the point where people have complained about it, that you can just 'be hunted by an army of Green players who you can't even kill without becoming more Corrupted', as soon as you turn Red.
You might need to review this handy graph. If Green attacks Red, they remain Green.
And of course a reminder: There's no such thing as people just "being Purple" out in the wild. You turn Green when you haven't PvPed for like 90 seconds. "Green attacks Red" will apply to anyone who happens to see a Red walk by and wants a piece of that action.