Another Idea to Mitigate PVP Griefing

Listen, I'm just spit-balling here. I'm not even saying I think this is a good idea, but with all the recent debate about how to optimize OWPVP and minimize griefing, another idea...

I recall some years ago some a wimpy looking guy who trains at my martial arts studio was attacked outside a convenience store by a very menacing looking, huge dude. The victim beat the attacker badly, had to be pulled off him. He was a trained fighter, but you would never know by looking at him. The moral of the story is that you never know whom you're messing with.

So the "you never know who you're messing with" idea for Ashes. If a green is attacked by a purple and fights back, they have x% chance of a y% increase in stats. Maybe 5-10% chance of a 25% stat boost. But the catch is that the boost doesn't proc until you defend yourself. This would increase the likelihood of a green fighting back, while also increasing risk for the attacker (though not outright making it impossible for the attacker to prevail). If Ashes wanted to limit this to gatherers, maybe make gathering tools have the "chance of stat boost" when equipped.

And I still like the poison pill idea too. Just sayin.

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

Mag7spy

NiKr wrote: »

mcnasty wrote: »

So a mechanic to damage yourself. Explore at full health. Nameplate looks good.

Is it a one-second explosion that gets you to no hp or smth?

And, well, if it is, the most obviousest abuse and exploit of this mechanic would be to bait your attackers into becoming corrupted. Afaik people did this kind of stuff in BDO by taking off their gear so that any attack on them would immediately bring their attacker's karma into negatives.

This suggestion just moves the griefing from one group to the other (potentially much bigger one). If this mechanic is widely used it would just effectively remove owpvp, as it happened in BDO to my knowledge.

When you turn someone red and feed them to mobs then suddenly disappear forever in BDO c:

Mag7spy

Also coming up with ideas or badly designed ones is not hard, i could easily do 100 without much thought.

Strevi

mcnasty wrote: »

And I still like the poison pill idea too. Just sayin.

And a glass of water.
But how do you force them down on the throat of the attacker? They never cooperate

Electronn

Okeydoke wrote: »

In a way, they're already using a version of your idea with corrupted stat dampening. A repeat murderer will suffer stat loss that scales upward, effectively giving the people he attacks a stat boost on him.

Good point, and good validation. Let's build on that. Might help address the concerns that the devs have raised.

CptBrownBeard

Your comparison would make more sense if it was possible for the victim in your scenario to suddenly gain powers to fight off their attacker. But they didn't. Martial-arts/self-defense requires training and dedicated practice to be effective (especially in a street fight), so this would really come down to: was the green prepared enough ahead of time to withstand a surprise assault; i.e. leveling their combat skills/abilities and knowing when to use them. So pretty much as the game is already planned to function.

There's too much to accommodate for that could potentially swing the defender to an overpowered state. Do level differences affect the %'s? If so, is it additive or multiplicative? What if there's more than one attacker, does the boost compound based on other purples in the area? Since it activates on the change to combatant, it would definitely need a separate timer to wear off. Otherwise the player could keep the buff running by tapping every player they then come across to remain purple.

Some things to consider.

Okeydoke

mcnasty wrote: »

Good point, and good validation. Let's build on that. Might help address the concerns that the devs have raised.

Well there's not much to build on with your ideas. Your ideas are designed to destroy OW pvp, not griefing. With the changes Steven announced a couple days ago, griefing will be almost non existent. Even before the changes, griefing was already going to be pretty much non existent. I'm talking about actual griefing, not the loose definitions that people come up with where essentially anything they don't want to happen, is griefing.

We haven't even gotten to the point where Asmongold is attacked in the open world and just starts chanting, "Can I play the game yet? I just wanna play the game. Can I play the game yet? I just wanna play the game." While he bot walks in a straight line forward instead of actually playing the game and fighting back. As soon as Steven sees that on a youtube video or twitch, god knows what changes are coming. You might get your wish of destroying OW pvp.

That's just Asmon, other streamers and youtubers will complain about the same thing. Then when the thousands upon thousands of WoW players who've been calling the game a scam for years actually realize it's coming out...all bets are off. They'll come here to throw their weight around with a single goal - OW pvp must be destroyed. It's a threat to them, their worldview and their future game prospects, in their mind.

You may get your wish ultimately. Patience brother. Maybe once OW pvp is destroyed, with the help of Asmon and the hordes of wow players, we can get to the real conversation. MOAR INSTANCES

Ludullu

Okeydoke wrote: »

We haven't even gotten to the point where Asmongold is attacked in the open world and just starts chanting, "Can I play the game yet? I just wanna play the game. Can I play the game yet? I just wanna play the game." While he bot walks in a straight line forward instead of actually playing the game and fighting back. As soon as Steven sees that on a youtube video or twitch, god knows what changes are coming. You might get your wish of destroying OW pvp.

That's just Asmon, other streamers and youtubers will complain about the same thing. Then when the thousands upon thousands of WoW players who've been calling the game a scam for years actually realize it's coming out...all bets are off. They'll come here to throw their weight around with a single goal - OW pvp must be destroyed. It's a threat to them, their worldview and their future game prospects, in their mind.

You may get your wish ultimately. Patience brother. Maybe once OW pvp is destroyed, with the help of Asmon and the hordes of wow players, we can get to the real conversation. MOAR INSTANCES

This is literally what will happen. Asmon reacted to that Lucky Ghost video and his (and chat's) response was pretty much exactly what you're saying

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RhoAczhdwF0

I became a real doomer for a good few hours after that. I hope so damn hard that Steven sticks to his guns, cause god knows people will complain so damn hard against owpvp.

Azherae

NiKr wrote: »

Okeydoke wrote: »

We haven't even gotten to the point where Asmongold is attacked in the open world and just starts chanting, "Can I play the game yet? I just wanna play the game. Can I play the game yet? I just wanna play the game." While he bot walks in a straight line forward instead of actually playing the game and fighting back. As soon as Steven sees that on a youtube video or twitch, god knows what changes are coming. You might get your wish of destroying OW pvp.

That's just Asmon, other streamers and youtubers will complain about the same thing. Then when the thousands upon thousands of WoW players who've been calling the game a scam for years actually realize it's coming out...all bets are off. They'll come here to throw their weight around with a single goal - OW pvp must be destroyed. It's a threat to them, their worldview and their future game prospects, in their mind.

You may get your wish ultimately. Patience brother. Maybe once OW pvp is destroyed, with the help of Asmon and the hordes of wow players, we can get to the real conversation. MOAR INSTANCES

This is literally what will happen. Asmon reacted to that Lucky Ghost video and his (and chat's) response was pretty much exactly what you're saying
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RhoAczhdwF0

I became a real doomer for a good few hours after that. I hope so damn hard that Steven sticks to his guns, cause god knows people will complain so damn hard against owpvp.

Because most players have no reason to value it.

OwPvP is not that valuable as a game experience. PvP can be very valuable. But a lot of even very PvP focused players see it as POINTLESS, which, to be fair, it is. It offers precisely two things that Caravans and Sieges don't, and both those things are more often annoying than not, without some very specific mindsets.

This is why Steven COULD afford to drastically hike up Corruption and so on to the point where it just barely happens and a lot of people who like PvP still play.

The 'OW' part of it just doesn't appeal to them, it causes the reaction that its letters spell out.

"Ow."

Ludullu

Azherae wrote: »

Because most players have no reason to value it.

OwPvP is not that valuable as a game experience. PvP can be very valuable. But a lot of even very PvP focused players see it as POINTLESS, which, to be fair, it is. It offers precisely two things that Caravans and Sieges don't, and both those things are more often annoying than not, without some very specific mindsets.

This is why Steven COULD afford to drastically hike up Corruption and so on to the point where it just barely happens and a lot of people who like PvP still play.

The 'OW' part of it just doesn't appeal to them, it causes the reaction that its letters spell out.

"Ow."

I get that, but those masses of people will mainly push for complete removal of pvp rather than some changes to the corruption system. Because in their minds (and usually experiences) "owpvp" means pure chaos and destruction and nothing else.

I can live with harsher corruption rules (even if I'd prefer just a better balanced counter actions), but if the game turns into yet another toggle-based mmo, I'll just feel bad about losing my last opportunity to live in an mmo (at least until vrmmos).

And considering current design, I dunno if toggle (or a pve server for that matter) system would even work, so it might be another NW's case of "we changed the whole fucking game several year into its development", except even worse

BlackBrony

All of these suggestions always end up being the same: help the helpless PvE player get the upper hand.
Even Asmongold himself said he was griefing people in Wow, and you couldn't do jack against it because they had no PvP.

Azherae

NiKr wrote: »

Azherae wrote: »

Because most players have no reason to value it.

OwPvP is not that valuable as a game experience. PvP can be very valuable. But a lot of even very PvP focused players see it as POINTLESS, which, to be fair, it is. It offers precisely two things that Caravans and Sieges don't, and both those things are more often annoying than not, without some very specific mindsets.

This is why Steven COULD afford to drastically hike up Corruption and so on to the point where it just barely happens and a lot of people who like PvP still play.

The 'OW' part of it just doesn't appeal to them, it causes the reaction that its letters spell out.

"Ow."

I get that, but those masses of people will mainly push for complete removal of pvp rather than some changes to the corruption system. Because in their minds (and usually experiences) "owpvp" means pure chaos and destruction and nothing else.

I can live with harsher corruption rules (even if I'd prefer just a better balanced counter actions), but if the game turns into yet another toggle-based mmo, I'll just feel bad about losing my last opportunity to live in an mmo (at least until vrmmos).

And considering current design, I dunno if toggle (or a pve server for that matter) system would even work, so it might be another NW's case of "we changed the whole fucking game several year into its development", except even worse

Then as I always say, it's our job to 'get it to a state where they won't all just ACTUALLY LEAVE' first.

I'm obviously not playing if it is Toggle PvP, I have Korean games for that.

People that don't like Korean games as much as I do just need to work with Intrepid to give what we can to make this not stupid for that set.

Okeydoke

NiKr wrote: »

This is literally what will happen. Asmon reacted to that Lucky Ghost video and his (and chat's) response was pretty much exactly what you're saying

The daggers have always been out. Even here, for years, there are people who openly wave their dagger, and also the ones who try to mask it. But yeah I mean once the masses realize this game is actually coming out, it'll be full hostile takeover mode. Daggers turn into bazookas and tanks.

All we can do is win the debate. That will be easy. Problem is, you can win the argument but still lose the war.

Azherae

Okeydoke wrote: »

NiKr wrote: »

This is literally what will happen. Asmon reacted to that Lucky Ghost video and his (and chat's) response was pretty much exactly what you're saying

The daggers have always been out. Even here, for years, there are people who openly wave their dagger, and also the ones who try to mask it. But yeah I mean once the masses realize this game is actually coming out, it'll be full hostile takeover mode. Daggers turn into bazookas and tanks.

All we can do is win the debate. That will be easy. Problem is, you can win the argument but still lose the war.

What is 'winning the debate' here though?

IF we 'win the debate' but it is ALSO true that people don't want to play the game as we want it and we end up at Mortal Online 2 numbers, is that a win?

Ludullu

Azherae wrote: »

What is 'winning the debate' here though?

IF we 'win the debate' but it is ALSO true that people don't want to play the game as we want it and we end up at Mortal Online 2 numbers, is that a win?

I do think there's a middle ground and imo that'd be the win.

Azherae

NiKr wrote: »

Azherae wrote: »

What is 'winning the debate' here though?

IF we 'win the debate' but it is ALSO true that people don't want to play the game as we want it and we end up at Mortal Online 2 numbers, is that a win?

I do think there's a middle ground and imo that'd be the win.

Hence the question. I don't know what it means to others, to 'win the debate'.

If we 'start infighting', the line will slip, that's my experience from overseeing development.

Ludullu

Azherae wrote: »

Hence the question. I don't know what it means to others, to 'win the debate'.

If we 'start infighting', the line will slip, that's my experience from overseeing development.

I think winning the debate would be "reassuring the absolute carebears that owpvp can work" and then fiving Intrepid feedback to support that claim, while still preserving owpvp itself.

This would most likely require a few analytical pvers who can succinctly explain the core issues with owpvp. Is it purely the "I never want to die at the hands of another player" or is there more to it. And if there is in fact more, we can look at good ways of addressing that.

Azherae

We have those people already, but they get shouted down too a lot of the time.

We already 'lost' our 'best one', thankfully they've promised to still help test.

Ludullu

Azherae wrote: »

We already 'lost' our 'best one', thankfully they've promised to still help test.

While I do appreciate Dygz' pov, I feel like his is as special as mine or yours. A seemingly outlierish one.

But yes, we're definitely in a constant spiral of both sides flaming each other w/o real attempts at bringing themselves closer to the other side's pov. I've definitely been a part of that spiral, even if I try to only join it when the suggestion from the pve side is just "let's remove pvp outright".

Okeydoke

Azherae wrote: »

What is 'winning the debate' here though?

IF we 'win the debate' but it is ALSO true that people don't want to play the game as we want it and we end up at Mortal Online 2 numbers, is that a win?

It is virtually impossible for Ashes to end up at Mortal Online 2 numbers. That's a nonstarter. Two completely different games. MO2 is low budget, buggy, exploits, full pvp, full loot, bad content, bad itemization, I mean I could go on and on. I played MO1, not 2. Not trying to insult the series. They're fun lil sandbox games and they have their little niche audience.

But Ashes is leagues above MO2 in all ways. Even if Ashes had one of the more lenient versions of potential corruption systems, MO2 would still be a far more hardcore pvp mmo. Ashes successfully launching and having MO2 levels of player count is just not realistic.

But to answer your question, what is winning the debate, it's just winning the debate over whether Ashes should mostly stay true to it's vision, or should it start becoming like the stale, standard fare of most modern mmos. Winning the debate, I mean the debate is already won. Watch a LazyPeon video lol. But that's how you'd win, argue against what has become standard fare in so many modern mmos.

BaSkA_9x2

mcnasty wrote: »

...but with all the recent debate about how to optimize owPVP and minimize griefing, another idea...

I'm confused about the "all the recent debate" part. Are you talking about people who learned about this game less than a month ago and don't like PvP MMORPGs, so they are asking for changes, PvE servers, etc. to make the game "good enough" for them?

If someone says that the PvP rules in Ashes are good, they're just as wrong as someone who says it's bad: nobody knows, not even Intrepid. Here's my idea: wait for Alpha 2 before saying the corruption system is either god tier or dogshit.

If it turns out that the PvP in Ashes is dogshit, (I hope that) the community will inform Intrepid and things will be improved. If it's good and it doesn't require any changes, the people who complain about it today will still complain about it then. You see, most people who complain about the corruption system are not against griefing or whatever else they say they are, they're against PvP itself.

At the end of the day, Ashes (or any other MMORPG) will die if it doesn't cater enough to the carebear audience, but there are many other PvE games out there, the genre doesn't need one more.

Ashes will hopefully be a better game overall and less P2W than most games out there, so let's just hope Intrepid is able to make the PvP in this game meaningful, fun and risky (for not only the victim) enough so that casuals and/or carebears will still play it.

Azherae wrote: »

We already 'lost' our 'best one', thankfully they've promised to still help test.

It's easy to bring him back, just stop dividing the game into nullsec/lowsec/highsec zones. But, sadly, I believe that the player base/PvP rules segregation will only get worse.

Child Item