worddog wrote: » BlackBrony wrote: » worddog wrote: » Lust69 wrote: » The game is designed around pvp it literally wouldn’t work it’s not a case of choose to have no pvp the mechanics wouldn’t work without it. You still have PvP on PvE servers. Read the post again. what about caravans? You get attacked but it's not consensual. Caravans are optional, so you'd have to consent to PvP to start a caravan route. Some things would of course require PvP like caravans and sieges. PvE players still enjoy PvP just as much as people on PvP servers, they just don't enjoy being level 10 and getting spawn camped by a max level player for 6 hours.
BlackBrony wrote: » worddog wrote: » Lust69 wrote: » The game is designed around pvp it literally wouldn’t work it’s not a case of choose to have no pvp the mechanics wouldn’t work without it. You still have PvP on PvE servers. Read the post again. what about caravans? You get attacked but it's not consensual.
worddog wrote: » Lust69 wrote: » The game is designed around pvp it literally wouldn’t work it’s not a case of choose to have no pvp the mechanics wouldn’t work without it. You still have PvP on PvE servers. Read the post again.
Lust69 wrote: » The game is designed around pvp it literally wouldn’t work it’s not a case of choose to have no pvp the mechanics wouldn’t work without it.
BlackBrony wrote: » worddog wrote: » BlackBrony wrote: » worddog wrote: » Lust69 wrote: » The game is designed around pvp it literally wouldn’t work it’s not a case of choose to have no pvp the mechanics wouldn’t work without it. You still have PvP on PvE servers. Read the post again. what about caravans? You get attacked but it's not consensual. Caravans are optional, so you'd have to consent to PvP to start a caravan route. Some things would of course require PvP like caravans and sieges. PvE players still enjoy PvP just as much as people on PvP servers, they just don't enjoy being level 10 and getting spawn camped by a max level player for 6 hours. Caravans have the "same problem"
Azherae wrote: » worddog wrote: » Azherae wrote: » worddog wrote: » Azherae wrote: » worddog wrote: » Azherae wrote: » worddog wrote: » Andy wrote: » The famous "How does it hurt the game" and the "Don't like it don't chose/use it" The game is designed around WPvP. How do you plan to compete for dungeons/world boss/ressources in PvE servers ? God, modern players are used to fully instanced themepark so they don't really understand how sandbox MMORPGs are working. Why are there any safe zones at all? Why isn't PvP enabled 100% of the time? Why can't my guild mass murder people in cities? Your guild CAN do that. Nothing stops them now. You need to siege a city to remove the safe zones, has that been changed? What safe zones? Did something change? Cities haven't ever had safe zones, have they? Do you have a Wiki reference for this, or do I need to go look for it? (I don't mind looking, but if it's NOT there it obviously would take hours to confirm that unless there is a clear counter-statement) EDIT: Ok I found what you conflated. Safe Zones: Your OWN Player stall while selling, your OWN Freehold (which is outside the city, one per account, must be earned). Steven has explicitly talked about the existence of safe zones not in relation to player stalls or freeholds. So I'm assuming the Wiki doesn't have all the information. If we're really expecting Ashes to allow max level players to permanently spawn camp level 1 players, the game will objectively be unplayable. Even if you want open world PvP, there will always be places that open world PvP is disabled. Unless you want the game to actually just die and only play with like a small community that likes that really niche idea. I'm just saying I would be glad to know what you mean/what quote you are referring to. I have never heard it, that's all. So I go with what exists in the game and what we were able to do in Alpha-1 and in Alpha-1 you could kill people in cities. If your point was about 'Safe Zones in general' I understand. But cities are NORMALLY Safe Zones (and I consider this realistic personally for lots of reasons so even as a PvP player I would not mind it, I'd personally just make it so that flagging in a city makes you instantly Red). To 'make it so Nodes aren't safe zones', to the point where you have to SPECIFY 'you can't be attacked in a city WHILE in your stall', seems intentional to me, so I would like to know what counterpoint, if any, Steven has ever said. The only things I've heard him say: 1. When a node is upgrading, players are teleported to a safe zone. 2. When a green/purple player dies they respawn in a safe zone. Again, this is very vague and doesn't really mean much. But because he said safe zones exist, I just assumed they would want safe zones to be an important mechanic, and not just super specific things like player stalls. My hope is that this game doesn't pointlessly throw away 80% of the player base for no reason. I'm sorry but if you like instantly dying to a max level player while you're trying to level, that really doesn't make you a better person or even a hardcore gamer. That is a very niche experience that few people value. Yes, I'm aware, I don't necessarily agree with everything that Intrepid's designs lead to, either, I just want to make sure we're all giving feedback or 'arguing' from the correct stances.So far we don't expect there to be many safe zones. I think we weren't even sure if Freeholds were actually going to be safe zones for a while. That's how rare the concept was.
worddog wrote: » Azherae wrote: » worddog wrote: » Azherae wrote: » worddog wrote: » Azherae wrote: » worddog wrote: » Andy wrote: » The famous "How does it hurt the game" and the "Don't like it don't chose/use it" The game is designed around WPvP. How do you plan to compete for dungeons/world boss/ressources in PvE servers ? God, modern players are used to fully instanced themepark so they don't really understand how sandbox MMORPGs are working. Why are there any safe zones at all? Why isn't PvP enabled 100% of the time? Why can't my guild mass murder people in cities? Your guild CAN do that. Nothing stops them now. You need to siege a city to remove the safe zones, has that been changed? What safe zones? Did something change? Cities haven't ever had safe zones, have they? Do you have a Wiki reference for this, or do I need to go look for it? (I don't mind looking, but if it's NOT there it obviously would take hours to confirm that unless there is a clear counter-statement) EDIT: Ok I found what you conflated. Safe Zones: Your OWN Player stall while selling, your OWN Freehold (which is outside the city, one per account, must be earned). Steven has explicitly talked about the existence of safe zones not in relation to player stalls or freeholds. So I'm assuming the Wiki doesn't have all the information. If we're really expecting Ashes to allow max level players to permanently spawn camp level 1 players, the game will objectively be unplayable. Even if you want open world PvP, there will always be places that open world PvP is disabled. Unless you want the game to actually just die and only play with like a small community that likes that really niche idea. I'm just saying I would be glad to know what you mean/what quote you are referring to. I have never heard it, that's all. So I go with what exists in the game and what we were able to do in Alpha-1 and in Alpha-1 you could kill people in cities. If your point was about 'Safe Zones in general' I understand. But cities are NORMALLY Safe Zones (and I consider this realistic personally for lots of reasons so even as a PvP player I would not mind it, I'd personally just make it so that flagging in a city makes you instantly Red). To 'make it so Nodes aren't safe zones', to the point where you have to SPECIFY 'you can't be attacked in a city WHILE in your stall', seems intentional to me, so I would like to know what counterpoint, if any, Steven has ever said. The only things I've heard him say: 1. When a node is upgrading, players are teleported to a safe zone. 2. When a green/purple player dies they respawn in a safe zone. Again, this is very vague and doesn't really mean much. But because he said safe zones exist, I just assumed they would want safe zones to be an important mechanic, and not just super specific things like player stalls. My hope is that this game doesn't pointlessly throw away 80% of the player base for no reason. I'm sorry but if you like instantly dying to a max level player while you're trying to level, that really doesn't make you a better person or even a hardcore gamer. That is a very niche experience that few people value.
Azherae wrote: » worddog wrote: » Azherae wrote: » worddog wrote: » Azherae wrote: » worddog wrote: » Andy wrote: » The famous "How does it hurt the game" and the "Don't like it don't chose/use it" The game is designed around WPvP. How do you plan to compete for dungeons/world boss/ressources in PvE servers ? God, modern players are used to fully instanced themepark so they don't really understand how sandbox MMORPGs are working. Why are there any safe zones at all? Why isn't PvP enabled 100% of the time? Why can't my guild mass murder people in cities? Your guild CAN do that. Nothing stops them now. You need to siege a city to remove the safe zones, has that been changed? What safe zones? Did something change? Cities haven't ever had safe zones, have they? Do you have a Wiki reference for this, or do I need to go look for it? (I don't mind looking, but if it's NOT there it obviously would take hours to confirm that unless there is a clear counter-statement) EDIT: Ok I found what you conflated. Safe Zones: Your OWN Player stall while selling, your OWN Freehold (which is outside the city, one per account, must be earned). Steven has explicitly talked about the existence of safe zones not in relation to player stalls or freeholds. So I'm assuming the Wiki doesn't have all the information. If we're really expecting Ashes to allow max level players to permanently spawn camp level 1 players, the game will objectively be unplayable. Even if you want open world PvP, there will always be places that open world PvP is disabled. Unless you want the game to actually just die and only play with like a small community that likes that really niche idea. I'm just saying I would be glad to know what you mean/what quote you are referring to. I have never heard it, that's all. So I go with what exists in the game and what we were able to do in Alpha-1 and in Alpha-1 you could kill people in cities. If your point was about 'Safe Zones in general' I understand. But cities are NORMALLY Safe Zones (and I consider this realistic personally for lots of reasons so even as a PvP player I would not mind it, I'd personally just make it so that flagging in a city makes you instantly Red). To 'make it so Nodes aren't safe zones', to the point where you have to SPECIFY 'you can't be attacked in a city WHILE in your stall', seems intentional to me, so I would like to know what counterpoint, if any, Steven has ever said.
worddog wrote: » Azherae wrote: » worddog wrote: » Azherae wrote: » worddog wrote: » Andy wrote: » The famous "How does it hurt the game" and the "Don't like it don't chose/use it" The game is designed around WPvP. How do you plan to compete for dungeons/world boss/ressources in PvE servers ? God, modern players are used to fully instanced themepark so they don't really understand how sandbox MMORPGs are working. Why are there any safe zones at all? Why isn't PvP enabled 100% of the time? Why can't my guild mass murder people in cities? Your guild CAN do that. Nothing stops them now. You need to siege a city to remove the safe zones, has that been changed? What safe zones? Did something change? Cities haven't ever had safe zones, have they? Do you have a Wiki reference for this, or do I need to go look for it? (I don't mind looking, but if it's NOT there it obviously would take hours to confirm that unless there is a clear counter-statement) EDIT: Ok I found what you conflated. Safe Zones: Your OWN Player stall while selling, your OWN Freehold (which is outside the city, one per account, must be earned). Steven has explicitly talked about the existence of safe zones not in relation to player stalls or freeholds. So I'm assuming the Wiki doesn't have all the information. If we're really expecting Ashes to allow max level players to permanently spawn camp level 1 players, the game will objectively be unplayable. Even if you want open world PvP, there will always be places that open world PvP is disabled. Unless you want the game to actually just die and only play with like a small community that likes that really niche idea.
Azherae wrote: » worddog wrote: » Azherae wrote: » worddog wrote: » Andy wrote: » The famous "How does it hurt the game" and the "Don't like it don't chose/use it" The game is designed around WPvP. How do you plan to compete for dungeons/world boss/ressources in PvE servers ? God, modern players are used to fully instanced themepark so they don't really understand how sandbox MMORPGs are working. Why are there any safe zones at all? Why isn't PvP enabled 100% of the time? Why can't my guild mass murder people in cities? Your guild CAN do that. Nothing stops them now. You need to siege a city to remove the safe zones, has that been changed? What safe zones? Did something change? Cities haven't ever had safe zones, have they? Do you have a Wiki reference for this, or do I need to go look for it? (I don't mind looking, but if it's NOT there it obviously would take hours to confirm that unless there is a clear counter-statement) EDIT: Ok I found what you conflated. Safe Zones: Your OWN Player stall while selling, your OWN Freehold (which is outside the city, one per account, must be earned).
worddog wrote: » Azherae wrote: » worddog wrote: » Andy wrote: » The famous "How does it hurt the game" and the "Don't like it don't chose/use it" The game is designed around WPvP. How do you plan to compete for dungeons/world boss/ressources in PvE servers ? God, modern players are used to fully instanced themepark so they don't really understand how sandbox MMORPGs are working. Why are there any safe zones at all? Why isn't PvP enabled 100% of the time? Why can't my guild mass murder people in cities? Your guild CAN do that. Nothing stops them now. You need to siege a city to remove the safe zones, has that been changed?
Azherae wrote: » worddog wrote: » Andy wrote: » The famous "How does it hurt the game" and the "Don't like it don't chose/use it" The game is designed around WPvP. How do you plan to compete for dungeons/world boss/ressources in PvE servers ? God, modern players are used to fully instanced themepark so they don't really understand how sandbox MMORPGs are working. Why are there any safe zones at all? Why isn't PvP enabled 100% of the time? Why can't my guild mass murder people in cities? Your guild CAN do that. Nothing stops them now.
worddog wrote: » Andy wrote: » The famous "How does it hurt the game" and the "Don't like it don't chose/use it" The game is designed around WPvP. How do you plan to compete for dungeons/world boss/ressources in PvE servers ? God, modern players are used to fully instanced themepark so they don't really understand how sandbox MMORPGs are working. Why are there any safe zones at all? Why isn't PvP enabled 100% of the time? Why can't my guild mass murder people in cities?
Andy wrote: » The famous "How does it hurt the game" and the "Don't like it don't chose/use it" The game is designed around WPvP. How do you plan to compete for dungeons/world boss/ressources in PvE servers ? God, modern players are used to fully instanced themepark so they don't really understand how sandbox MMORPGs are working.
Talents wrote: » I'll copy and paste my response to this from Reddit. Ok, here's a few reasons why opt-in would break the game. Firstly, the dungeons and raids are currently 80%+ open-world with the BiS gear and materials coming from open-world content rather than instanced. If they made PvP opt-in, then you'd just have 1000 people sitting in dungeons trying to snipe the bosses and mobs before the other 1000 people who are PvE only. Next, the economy. Take the example above of dungeons and raids being open-world, maybe your solution to the above point is making the dungeons instanced, but then they need to redesign all the loot drops since you can't just have people being able to enter an instanced area and kill their own version of these mobs and bosses otherwise it would increase the number of drops coming in to the game 100 fold. And because the large large majority of items in Ashes do not bind to your character, neither on pick up or equip, this means the market will be flooded with these items. Next is world bosses. World bosses are planned to drop some of the rarest items in the game, such as Flying Mount Eggs. But now without PvP, there's no contesting this stuff. It's just which group can deal the most damage and get lucky enough to get the drops instead of guilds contesting each other and earning the drops. Next is caravans. Why would anyone use a caravan when they can just run the materials from one end of the map to the other without the risk of losing any of the gatherables/processed goods when they die? Sure it might take longer, but most people would prefer to put on a stream or Netflix and run stuff across the map while chilling. You've now basically made caravans useless.
worddog wrote: » Azherae wrote: » worddog wrote: » Azherae wrote: » worddog wrote: » Azherae wrote: » worddog wrote: » Azherae wrote: » worddog wrote: » Andy wrote: » The famous "How does it hurt the game" and the "Don't like it don't chose/use it" The game is designed around WPvP. How do you plan to compete for dungeons/world boss/ressources in PvE servers ? God, modern players are used to fully instanced themepark so they don't really understand how sandbox MMORPGs are working. Why are there any safe zones at all? Why isn't PvP enabled 100% of the time? Why can't my guild mass murder people in cities? Your guild CAN do that. Nothing stops them now. You need to siege a city to remove the safe zones, has that been changed? What safe zones? Did something change? Cities haven't ever had safe zones, have they? Do you have a Wiki reference for this, or do I need to go look for it? (I don't mind looking, but if it's NOT there it obviously would take hours to confirm that unless there is a clear counter-statement) EDIT: Ok I found what you conflated. Safe Zones: Your OWN Player stall while selling, your OWN Freehold (which is outside the city, one per account, must be earned). Steven has explicitly talked about the existence of safe zones not in relation to player stalls or freeholds. So I'm assuming the Wiki doesn't have all the information. If we're really expecting Ashes to allow max level players to permanently spawn camp level 1 players, the game will objectively be unplayable. Even if you want open world PvP, there will always be places that open world PvP is disabled. Unless you want the game to actually just die and only play with like a small community that likes that really niche idea. I'm just saying I would be glad to know what you mean/what quote you are referring to. I have never heard it, that's all. So I go with what exists in the game and what we were able to do in Alpha-1 and in Alpha-1 you could kill people in cities. If your point was about 'Safe Zones in general' I understand. But cities are NORMALLY Safe Zones (and I consider this realistic personally for lots of reasons so even as a PvP player I would not mind it, I'd personally just make it so that flagging in a city makes you instantly Red). To 'make it so Nodes aren't safe zones', to the point where you have to SPECIFY 'you can't be attacked in a city WHILE in your stall', seems intentional to me, so I would like to know what counterpoint, if any, Steven has ever said. The only things I've heard him say: 1. When a node is upgrading, players are teleported to a safe zone. 2. When a green/purple player dies they respawn in a safe zone. Again, this is very vague and doesn't really mean much. But because he said safe zones exist, I just assumed they would want safe zones to be an important mechanic, and not just super specific things like player stalls. My hope is that this game doesn't pointlessly throw away 80% of the player base for no reason. I'm sorry but if you like instantly dying to a max level player while you're trying to level, that really doesn't make you a better person or even a hardcore gamer. That is a very niche experience that few people value. Yes, I'm aware, I don't necessarily agree with everything that Intrepid's designs lead to, either, I just want to make sure we're all giving feedback or 'arguing' from the correct stances.So far we don't expect there to be many safe zones. I think we weren't even sure if Freeholds were actually going to be safe zones for a while. That's how rare the concept was. Okay if that's the foundation we're working from, than that version of Ashes open world PvP sounds really bad in my opinion. I don't even think I'd want to play on a PvP server that unregulated. And I love PvP, like in Lost Ark I was top 500 before I quit and I didn't do any high level raiding. I love the idea of node sieges, but I assumed those would be instanced and everyone would have set date and time for when it occurs. If people are just having massive battlegrounds in the middle of a city at 3 am that sounds really stupid to me.
worddog wrote: » Talents wrote: » I'll copy and paste my response to this from Reddit. Ok, here's a few reasons why opt-in would break the game. Firstly, the dungeons and raids are currently 80%+ open-world with the BiS gear and materials coming from open-world content rather than instanced. If they made PvP opt-in, then you'd just have 1000 people sitting in dungeons trying to snipe the bosses and mobs before the other 1000 people who are PvE only. Next, the economy. Take the example above of dungeons and raids being open-world, maybe your solution to the above point is making the dungeons instanced, but then they need to redesign all the loot drops since you can't just have people being able to enter an instanced area and kill their own version of these mobs and bosses otherwise it would increase the number of drops coming in to the game 100 fold. And because the large large majority of items in Ashes do not bind to your character, neither on pick up or equip, this means the market will be flooded with these items. Next is world bosses. World bosses are planned to drop some of the rarest items in the game, such as Flying Mount Eggs. But now without PvP, there's no contesting this stuff. It's just which group can deal the most damage and get lucky enough to get the drops instead of guilds contesting each other and earning the drops. Next is caravans. Why would anyone use a caravan when they can just run the materials from one end of the map to the other without the risk of losing any of the gatherables/processed goods when they die? Sure it might take longer, but most people would prefer to put on a stream or Netflix and run stuff across the map while chilling. You've now basically made caravans useless. We're not talking about opt-in PvP Opt-in is absolutely horrible. You have either PvE or PvP SERVERS and they never change the rulesets for those servers.
WhyFour wrote: » My Gods so many topics after one clickbaity video from some niche youtuber, that's crazy!
BlackBrony wrote: » worddog wrote: » Talents wrote: » I'll copy and paste my response to this from Reddit. Ok, here's a few reasons why opt-in would break the game. Firstly, the dungeons and raids are currently 80%+ open-world with the BiS gear and materials coming from open-world content rather than instanced. If they made PvP opt-in, then you'd just have 1000 people sitting in dungeons trying to snipe the bosses and mobs before the other 1000 people who are PvE only. Next, the economy. Take the example above of dungeons and raids being open-world, maybe your solution to the above point is making the dungeons instanced, but then they need to redesign all the loot drops since you can't just have people being able to enter an instanced area and kill their own version of these mobs and bosses otherwise it would increase the number of drops coming in to the game 100 fold. And because the large large majority of items in Ashes do not bind to your character, neither on pick up or equip, this means the market will be flooded with these items. Next is world bosses. World bosses are planned to drop some of the rarest items in the game, such as Flying Mount Eggs. But now without PvP, there's no contesting this stuff. It's just which group can deal the most damage and get lucky enough to get the drops instead of guilds contesting each other and earning the drops. Next is caravans. Why would anyone use a caravan when they can just run the materials from one end of the map to the other without the risk of losing any of the gatherables/processed goods when they die? Sure it might take longer, but most people would prefer to put on a stream or Netflix and run stuff across the map while chilling. You've now basically made caravans useless. We're not talking about opt-in PvP Opt-in is absolutely horrible. You have either PvE or PvP SERVERS and they never change the rulesets for those servers. on a pve server caravans are useless. why have that system at all
worddog wrote: » BlackBrony wrote: » worddog wrote: » Talents wrote: » I'll copy and paste my response to this from Reddit. Ok, here's a few reasons why opt-in would break the game. Firstly, the dungeons and raids are currently 80%+ open-world with the BiS gear and materials coming from open-world content rather than instanced. If they made PvP opt-in, then you'd just have 1000 people sitting in dungeons trying to snipe the bosses and mobs before the other 1000 people who are PvE only. Next, the economy. Take the example above of dungeons and raids being open-world, maybe your solution to the above point is making the dungeons instanced, but then they need to redesign all the loot drops since you can't just have people being able to enter an instanced area and kill their own version of these mobs and bosses otherwise it would increase the number of drops coming in to the game 100 fold. And because the large large majority of items in Ashes do not bind to your character, neither on pick up or equip, this means the market will be flooded with these items. Next is world bosses. World bosses are planned to drop some of the rarest items in the game, such as Flying Mount Eggs. But now without PvP, there's no contesting this stuff. It's just which group can deal the most damage and get lucky enough to get the drops instead of guilds contesting each other and earning the drops. Next is caravans. Why would anyone use a caravan when they can just run the materials from one end of the map to the other without the risk of losing any of the gatherables/processed goods when they die? Sure it might take longer, but most people would prefer to put on a stream or Netflix and run stuff across the map while chilling. You've now basically made caravans useless. We're not talking about opt-in PvP Opt-in is absolutely horrible. You have either PvE or PvP SERVERS and they never change the rulesets for those servers. on a pve server caravans are useless. why have that system at all Caravans are still a faster way of transporting more items. That is still useful in PvE servers. Sure people could just carry stuff around but if you want to spend 100 more hours doing something than that is a big tradeoff. Moving goods faster means you can reach new markets first and make way more money.
worddog wrote: » How does a PvE server hurt the game exactly? If you want open world PvP you just play on a PvP server. The game can be designed the exact same way and nothing needs to change other than on a PvE server, open world PvP is just disabled. You'd still have areas where PvP is enabled, just not the entire map.
Myosotys wrote: » worddog wrote: » How does a PvE server hurt the game exactly? If you want open world PvP you just play on a PvP server. The game can be designed the exact same way and nothing needs to change other than on a PvE server, open world PvP is just disabled. You'd still have areas where PvP is enabled, just not the entire map. As a PvP player, I agree with this guy. Better to play on a PvE server than getting corruption for killing a bot or toxic guys finishing all your mobs or stealing your ressources. In a PvE server, the message would be clear : “No open world PvP”. In the current state of the rules, the message is: “you can open world PvP but don’t do it”.
Lust69 wrote: » I’ll worddog wrote: » Lust69 wrote: » The game is designed around pvp it literally wouldn’t work it’s not a case of choose to have no pvp the mechanics wouldn’t work without it. You still have PvP on PvE servers. Read the post again. Ok I thought you said just PvE. So you want only PvE in certain areas while keeping PvP alive everywhere else. In theory that could work but I’m not a fan of it because people could just hide away 24/7 in safe zones what could stop someone from doing that? This game is meant to be a challenge and made for PvP everywhere. There is supposed to be a risk at all times. Making a safe zone areas is against the spirit of what the developers want. I see where you’re coming from though but I doubt they will change it. The corruption mechanic is meant to stop people being killed over and over again.
BlackBrony wrote: » worddog wrote: » BlackBrony wrote: » worddog wrote: » Talents wrote: » I'll copy and paste my response to this from Reddit. Ok, here's a few reasons why opt-in would break the game. Firstly, the dungeons and raids are currently 80%+ open-world with the BiS gear and materials coming from open-world content rather than instanced. If they made PvP opt-in, then you'd just have 1000 people sitting in dungeons trying to snipe the bosses and mobs before the other 1000 people who are PvE only. Next, the economy. Take the example above of dungeons and raids being open-world, maybe your solution to the above point is making the dungeons instanced, but then they need to redesign all the loot drops since you can't just have people being able to enter an instanced area and kill their own version of these mobs and bosses otherwise it would increase the number of drops coming in to the game 100 fold. And because the large large majority of items in Ashes do not bind to your character, neither on pick up or equip, this means the market will be flooded with these items. Next is world bosses. World bosses are planned to drop some of the rarest items in the game, such as Flying Mount Eggs. But now without PvP, there's no contesting this stuff. It's just which group can deal the most damage and get lucky enough to get the drops instead of guilds contesting each other and earning the drops. Next is caravans. Why would anyone use a caravan when they can just run the materials from one end of the map to the other without the risk of losing any of the gatherables/processed goods when they die? Sure it might take longer, but most people would prefer to put on a stream or Netflix and run stuff across the map while chilling. You've now basically made caravans useless. We're not talking about opt-in PvP Opt-in is absolutely horrible. You have either PvE or PvP SERVERS and they never change the rulesets for those servers. on a pve server caravans are useless. why have that system at all Caravans are still a faster way of transporting more items. That is still useful in PvE servers. Sure people could just carry stuff around but if you want to spend 100 more hours doing something than that is a big tradeoff. Moving goods faster means you can reach new markets first and make way more money. does not compute.
worddog wrote: » Lust69 wrote: » I’ll worddog wrote: » Lust69 wrote: » The game is designed around pvp it literally wouldn’t work it’s not a case of choose to have no pvp the mechanics wouldn’t work without it. You still have PvP on PvE servers. Read the post again. Ok I thought you said just PvE. So you want only PvE in certain areas while keeping PvP alive everywhere else. In theory that could work but I’m not a fan of it because people could just hide away 24/7 in safe zones what could stop someone from doing that? This game is meant to be a challenge and made for PvP everywhere. There is supposed to be a risk at all times. Making a safe zone areas is against the spirit of what the developers want. I see where you’re coming from though but I doubt they will change it. The corruption mechanic is meant to stop people being killed over and over again. Soft systems like corruption don't prevent griefing, they only act as a deterrance. That's why safe zones exist in the first place, they are nessacary. Now games like Rust are constant pure open world PvP at all times, and Rust is an awesome game that I love and have put hundreds of hours into. But in Rust you can kill even the strongest player with a bow and arrow. In an MMO you cannot kill players who are massively stronger than you. Greifing guilds will exist, and if they are able to grief, they will. The consequences won't stop them from greifing. They'll have alt accounts, they'll have deals with other guilds where they pay them to help them grief other guilds/players they don't like, you can't report RMT if you're not trading items. Rust is a toxic game with a toxic community, and it's because that is the whole point of an unregulated pure PvP system. It's fun in Rust, but in an MMO? I don't think so.
Azherae wrote: » Myosotys wrote: » worddog wrote: » How does a PvE server hurt the game exactly? If you want open world PvP you just play on a PvP server. The game can be designed the exact same way and nothing needs to change other than on a PvE server, open world PvP is just disabled. You'd still have areas where PvP is enabled, just not the entire map. As a PvP player, I agree with this guy. Better to play on a PvE server than getting corruption for killing a bot or toxic guys finishing all your mobs or stealing your ressources. In a PvE server, the message would be clear : “No open world PvP”. In the current state of the rules, the message is: “you can open world PvP but don’t do it”. The current state of the rules is 'You can Open World PvP but if your opponent doesn't accept your challenge you will face a penalty for killing them'. If that sounds just like your own interpretation to you, then some might not say that Ashes Of Creation is Not For You.
Myosotys wrote: » Azherae wrote: » Myosotys wrote: » worddog wrote: » How does a PvE server hurt the game exactly? If you want open world PvP you just play on a PvP server. The game can be designed the exact same way and nothing needs to change other than on a PvE server, open world PvP is just disabled. You'd still have areas where PvP is enabled, just not the entire map. As a PvP player, I agree with this guy. Better to play on a PvE server than getting corruption for killing a bot or toxic guys finishing all your mobs or stealing your ressources. In a PvE server, the message would be clear : “No open world PvP”. In the current state of the rules, the message is: “you can open world PvP but don’t do it”. The current state of the rules is 'You can Open World PvP but if your opponent doesn't accept your challenge you will face a penalty for killing them'. If that sounds just like your own interpretation to you, then some might not say that Ashes Of Creation is Not For You. I will play the game and decide myself if the game is for me or not. But thank you for your kind advice.
