How do PVE players feel about the Land Management System?

So before Steven and Margaret showed the gathering video they talked about griefing. Now, there is nothing that says griefing has to do with PVP. Under the land management system what stops people from becoming eco-terrorists even if Intrepid does what PVE players want and include PVE servers? Could griefers not simply make side accounts for the purpose of depleting resources on PVE servers along with the unintended help from the non-griefer gatherers who simply like to gather? Then after hoarding as many resources as they can in freeholds, banks, and guild halls if they aren't allowed to transfer that resource to their main account on a PVP server then why not destroy the economy of the PVE server by dumping resources on the market and repeating the process? So my question again is how do PVE players feel about this system and if you are okay with the land management system which can be used to grieve an even greater amount of players than a simple open-world PVP type of griefing can then why aren't you fine with PVP? Because at that point you don't really mind griefing you just don't like PVPing. This brings me to the point that if you don't like PVPing then I find it hard to believe that such a player would be down for "opt-in" node wars, caravans, castle sieges, etc. The reason why I put quotes around opt-in is that will a PVE player feel like it's opt-in if the survival of their freehold is on the line and basically being held, hostage? Now how will they feel about caravans every time they want to transfer a large amount of mats?

Find more posts tagged with

Staff

Comments

George_Black

What system? What details do we have? It was an idea discussion while showcasing something else.
Too early to throw emotions in this and just create panic.

LordBlank

George_Black wrote: »

What system? What details do we have? It was an idea discussion while showcasing something else.
Too early to throw emotions in this and just create panic.

assuming what they talked about goes through then

George_Black

LordBlank wrote: »

George_Black wrote: »

What system? What details do we have? It was an idea discussion while showcasing something else.
Too early to throw emotions in this and just create panic.

assuming what they talked about goes through then

"How do you feel about an asumption, dear PvE panicked players?"
More drama.

Liniker

George_Black wrote: »

What system? What details do we have? It was an idea discussion while showcasing something else.
Too early to throw emotions in this and just create panic.

??? dude, they literally talked about it and asked for feedback, wtf? the best time to talk about this kind of stuff and give feedback is before it's done and implemented because after it's done and they show it and share all the details it's because they already spent hundreds of hours working on it and it might be too late.

Nova_terra

LordBlank wrote: »

George_Black wrote: »

What system? What details do we have? It was an idea discussion while showcasing something else.
Too early to throw emotions in this and just create panic.

assuming what they talked about goes through then

What George is referring to is that this has been a hotly discussed topic and the consensus is that we don't have enough information. Specifically in how Ultima Online went with just all resources being eaten up by over zealous farmers.

It boils down to, yes this could be a problem is balanced poorly or if some other factor was overlooked by Intrepid but until we get our hands on it and see respawn time on resources or how "large" the world actually is. For all we know it could literally be a borderline Herculean effort by 100+ people to actually Eco-Terrorize a node based on game logistics which would be a feat that deserved the outcome.

I am very sure there will be some level of this in the final product but many people are shouting from the rooftops that within 10 minutes of launch the server will be a barren wasteland (Mad Max: Fury Road) and the game will fail. Breathe, and come back when people have been waist deep in testing.

Depraved

Liniker wrote: »

George_Black wrote: »

What system? What details do we have? It was an idea discussion while showcasing something else.
Too early to throw emotions in this and just create panic.

??? dude, they literally talked about it and asked for feedback, wtf? the best time to talk about this kind of stuff and give feedback is before it's done and implemented because after it's done and they show it and share all the details it's because they already spent hundreds of hours working on it and it might be too late.

when they asked for feedback, they asked the players to answer 3 specific questions

Taleof2Cities

Separate PvE servers are pretty unlikely … that topic has already been beaten to death in other forums threads.

Which means George is right about the unnecessary emotional appeal in the OP.

The sooner PvE players understand this is a PvX game, the earlier they’ll make the best individual decision on whether Ashes is a game for them.

Fantmx

Let's assume is done in a way that works.

From a pure pve perspective I am excited about the idea. It adds to player agency and my changing the world through my actions.

I especially like how it can change my approach to farming. Since that is mostly what I want to do in Ashes it gives me more variety of systems to play with.

I want to make a point about the idea of eco-terrorism. This possibility is supposed to exist. Misuse of resources is supposed to happen and supposed to cause change. Otherwise there is absolutely no reason to have a land management system.

I don't think the economic issues will be resources dumps it will be preventing others from obtaining those resources.

Edit: PvE servers would never happen or work with Ashes. First it would cause all of the PvP servers to die and second world change would evaporate very quickly.

Arya_Yeshe

I really liked the idea of players affecting the world around them, this is really engaging

akabear

George_Black wrote: »

What system? What details do we have? It was an idea discussion while showcasing something else.
Too early to throw emotions in this and just create panic.

With George on this one.. they only described the approach in the very broadest sense.. there was no detail or measure to gauge outcomes and impact.. all speculation until more is revealed and even then , this is likely a test only item

SirChancelot

It could just have a simple self correcting system. The more an area gets gathered the mob density and difficulty could scale making it harder to farm the area until it goes back to normal.

But hey it was just speculation, no need to get worried over a possibility.

novercalis

completely random - imagine, randomly harvesting a tree and a tunnel is found, ala Zelda - cave or dungeon.

Aces_Are_Wild

Find it interesting that you can over harvest your own areas & forces you to travel more, also like how it will get you to also do quests to make the land better

tautau

First, good question OP! However, there are not two groups of players, PvP & PvE. There is a continuum between those two extremes and each person falls along it somewhere.

Second, there are no 'PvP' or 'PvE' servers, just PvX.

Third, and most important, perhaps we have underestimated how easy it will be to have an environmental impact on a node. I doubt that having thirty guildies harvest for two days is going to denude a node of trees, wildlife and ore. It is more likely that it will take a large concentration of players overharvesting for weeks or months to really make an impact. After all, we need to see the respawn rate of resources prior to predicting anything, right?

koltovince

I think something interesting that could come of this is the node system's spawning dungeons and raids in the open world. Lets say its summer, coming onto fall and griefers are moving to the next node over and killing all their summer mountain lions to steal the pelts to sell during fall. A response from the node of this could be that the wolves grow in size due to the player actions of grieving each other, and a rare wolf boss will spawn as a result of their competition being killed. This boss could become a rare event that the suffering node can use to bounce back from getting targeted.

The idea I'm playing with is the land management system should have counter plays to targeted assault, more than just the "Hit them back, or fail to guard the land for 24/7 so they cant harass us". Hell, maybe the mayor could give a raiding mission for players to steal the crops of the neighboring node, and this would increase the regeneration rate of the plants within your node.

In regards to if a node just screwed over their own land because players see a shiny and click collect? Leave it up to the mayor/city as well. If your crafting experience is dependent on elections/dueling, then players will pay more attention to putting into power someone who can manage the land well so people don't suffer. If the ruler lets the land die, either they will get kicked out or they will lose the gatherers/crafters building their node.

PvEPlayer

Idk how node depletion affects me. Doesn't interfere with my gameplay unlike pvp guys running after me for no reason. There's more to pve gameplay than farming whole day.

LordBlank wrote: »

This brings me to the point that if you don't like PVPing then I find it hard to believe that such a player would be down for "opt-in" node wars, caravans, castle sieges, etc. The reason why I put quotes around opt-in is that will a PVE player feel like it's opt-in if the survival of their freehold is on the line and basically being held, hostage? Now how will they feel about caravans every time they want to transfer a large amount of mats?

Why do you guys always think pve players can't pvp and are afraid of it? Consensual pvp via an activity or event like siege, caravan run, naval battle etc is fine. It's people wasting our time with their pointless attacks when we explore the world, doing quests, farming, RP-ing is what we don't like.

tautau wrote: »

Second, there are no 'PvP' or 'PvE' servers, just PvX.

If you can attack other players it's a pvp server/game. Idk why devs came up with this PvX. It just confuses people.

Ludullu

PvEPlayer wrote: »

Why do you guys always think pve players can't pvp and are afraid of it? Consensual pvp via an activity or event like siege, caravan run, naval battle etc is fine. It's people wasting our time with their pointless attacks when we explore the world, doing quests, farming, RP-ing is what we don't like.

I never really understood this. If you're not only ok with pvp as a concept and, potentially, have gear that's good enough to participate in pvp events - why not just fight back and shorten the "wasting" of your time by A LOT? I can understand the position of people that hate pvp as a concept, but not the ones that still pvp otherwise.

I could kinda see why explorers would try and avoid pvp completely, mainly because they're always on the move and it's pointless to stop and fight, but in pretty much all other cases you're staying in some location and if there's a person who're attacking you in that location - you'll have a hard time remaining there if you don't fight. And unless Intrepid changes corruption trigger to attacks rather than killing blows - players will just keep nagging you to leave the location w/o killing you (nameplate decay status will help them).

WHIT3ROS3

It all comes down to implementation. With approximately 480 sqm of land and 85 nodes, that's only about 5.6 sqm for each node's ZOI. They mentioned placing down pylons. I wonder how large a pylon's area of influence is and what information it reveals about an area.

There are 5 main gathering professions. Will land management translate to water areas, in order to find fish?

When it comes to wood, that is a pretty visual endeavor already, you walk around, see trees and chop them down. I'm sure there will be different types and "tiers" of trees, (I hope there are special tree types and enchantments as well) but what more information will placing a pylon actually give me? A % breakdown of the area? How will this translate to beneficial gameplay? Perhaps it could tell me what gatherable are available in this location during the different seasons. So I would know when/where to return for different resources at different times?

When it comes to mining, I see how placing a pylon could reveal the interior contents of rocks by making them glow or by highlighting them in some way. I wonder how many different types of mineable resources AoC is planning to have? I think they need to have at least a dozen different types.

Herbalism is again fairly visual. There was mention of land management being used to reveal hidden resources. How would plants be "hidden" and how would they be "revealed"

We haven't seen anything regarding hunting, killing/skinning creatures yet.

I just have so many questions. I can see the potential in many aspects but there is a part of me that feels like it's a system that will require a lot of time, effort and resources for minimal gameplay gain.

Azherae

NiKr wrote: »

PvEPlayer wrote: »

Why do you guys always think pve players can't pvp and are afraid of it? Consensual pvp via an activity or event like siege, caravan run, naval battle etc is fine. It's people wasting our time with their pointless attacks when we explore the world, doing quests, farming, RP-ing is what we don't like.

I never really understood this. If you're not only ok with pvp as a concept and, potentially, have gear that's good enough to participate in pvp events - why not just fight back and shorten the "wasting" of your time by A LOT? I can understand the position of people that hate pvp as a concept, but not the ones that still pvp otherwise.

I could kinda see why explorers would try and avoid pvp completely, mainly because they're always on the move and it's pointless to stop and fight, but in pretty much all other cases you're staying in some location and if there's a person who're attacking you in that location - you'll have a hard time remaining there if you don't fight. And unless Intrepid changes corruption trigger to attacks rather than killing blows - players will just keep nagging you to leave the location w/o killing you (nameplate decay status will help them).

L2 has spoiled you! You with your 'meaningful PvP' and 'people whose emotions aren't basically fear/ego based lizardbrain activity'! Hmf.

It's because of three things.

A mindset shift that is required for those who are not constantly in the mental PvP state.
The super annoying way that someone who thought they were gonna win easily but is now losing, starts to fight
The knowledge that by doing this you make yourself a target for time-wasting due to the above

These things are fine and a positive to a person whose mind is often in PvP mode, or who experiences positive emotions from participating or just winning against other players who fight in annoying ways, but generally, the sort of person who 'jumps you for solo oWPvP' in games like this is one of the worst types of people and often, they don't even know how to FIGHT well.

I don't know if you've ever been around when I explained this (I feel like I was trying to get Mag to an understanding of something) but even in games where PvP is the ONLY thing you can do with other players, there are some who will aim to suck all the fun out of it to avoid losing, or just 'to get revenge on you for winning' because it is the only way they can 'hurt' you.

Honestly, weak PvP opponents and KarmaBomber 'PvE' players are not very different mentally, just a difference in what they feel they are 'entitled' to.

Ludullu

Azherae wrote: »

L2 has spoiled you! You with your 'meaningful PvP' and 'people whose emotions aren't basically fear/ego based lizardbrain activity'! Hmf.

Guilty as charged

Azherae wrote: »

I don't know if you've ever been around when I explained this (I feel like I was trying to get Mag to an understanding of something) but even in games where PvP is the ONLY thing you can do with other players, there are some who will aim to suck all the fun out of it to avoid losing, or just 'to get revenge on you for winning' because it is the only way they can 'hurt' you.

Honestly, weak PvP opponents and KarmaBomber 'PvE' players are not very different mentally, just a difference in what they feel they are 'entitled' to.

Yeah, I've seen quite a few people like that in L2 and considering that a fair bit of my career in that game was spent on higher rated servers, deaths didn't mean AS much, so such people would often try their best to use the worst tactics in pvp just to spite an opponent that was stronger than them.

To me this behavior shone the brightest when fighting against people of my main class. The class itself was teetering on being OP, due to its buff steal ability (short cd) and high mobility. And ~80% of players of this class would purely play it as a "fuck you" kind of class, rather than someone who could kill people in a direct fight.

I took a lot of pride in killing such players through "proper" means and, overall, doing my best to show other people that I wasn't like them. Maybe that desire is one of the biggest reasons why I can't quite understand non-pvpers. Cause on top of my inherent preference for fighting, I was always "proving" smth to others, so even when I was just minding my own business farming some stuff - if someone attacked me, I'd always fight back to show them that I was a "true pvper". PvErs ain't got nothing to prove, and most definitely not smth related to pvp.

I plan to have a more pvping gatherer alt character in Ashes, so I'll see how my behavior will be influenced by a game that is much more about pure gathering than just "kill mobs and get shit". Though for now I definitely don't see myself not fighting back if attacked while gathering

Child Item