NiKr wrote: » Gospell wrote: » to bad pvp* Unless you just want to kill people that never fight back - no, it'll lead to more good pvp. If greens could be CCed, they'll never fight back because they'll get overwhelmed by CCs and attacks before they can even return a hit, so they'll never even try. But if they can respond with a CC after getting attacked - there's gonna be more people willing to fight back. This design will create more pvp situations instead of pure PKing.
Gospell wrote: » to bad pvp*
Gospell wrote: » NiKr wrote: » Arya_Yeshe wrote: » When this green's cant be cced rule came about, did Steven/Intrepid say why this band-aid was created? What they want to achieve with this? Steven revealed it after a video doubting the system. But as been stated previously, L2 had the same mechanic, with the only difference being CCs with an attack attribute, but we don't know whether absolutely all CCs in Ashes won't work against greens or if there'll be exceptions. Gospell wrote: » do you forget about resistances and chances? everything that you described works only in the game will be 100% chance cc. I have mentioned them more than once. I know that you played L2, tell me how often you could stun an orc with a bow? how often could you hang anchor playing as a magician against players with jewelry? how often did you stun against players with majestic armor? Well, it's okay, now I will attack the player and wait until he turns purple, then I will sharply press the control skill button, nothing will change at all, just the scheme is now a little different xD And that non-100% chance of CCs still benefits the first attacker, so again, the pvper/PKer will still win more fights than the green. The only reason to want CCs against greens is if you want to abuse that mechanic and kill them through mobs w/o getting corruption. You are the one who does the first hit so there's no reason for you to CC your target, because they wouldn't even know that you're about to hit them. And if you're trying to just PK someone, Intrepid is trying to limit your ability to do that as much as possible, while encouraging the victim to fight back instead. The system is designed to encourage pvp and reduce PKing. i already answered this, there are other ways to make a mob kill you. If the game does not have 100%, then there is no need to give invulnerability to green. Apparently you played very badly in l2, if you think that the first one to attack, then he wins. and you're right, I'm going to see all the content in the game, become a pk too, and believe me, I will become ,cc has nothing to do with it)
NiKr wrote: » Arya_Yeshe wrote: » When this green's cant be cced rule came about, did Steven/Intrepid say why this band-aid was created? What they want to achieve with this? Steven revealed it after a video doubting the system. But as been stated previously, L2 had the same mechanic, with the only difference being CCs with an attack attribute, but we don't know whether absolutely all CCs in Ashes won't work against greens or if there'll be exceptions. Gospell wrote: » do you forget about resistances and chances? everything that you described works only in the game will be 100% chance cc. I have mentioned them more than once. I know that you played L2, tell me how often you could stun an orc with a bow? how often could you hang anchor playing as a magician against players with jewelry? how often did you stun against players with majestic armor? Well, it's okay, now I will attack the player and wait until he turns purple, then I will sharply press the control skill button, nothing will change at all, just the scheme is now a little different xD And that non-100% chance of CCs still benefits the first attacker, so again, the pvper/PKer will still win more fights than the green. The only reason to want CCs against greens is if you want to abuse that mechanic and kill them through mobs w/o getting corruption. You are the one who does the first hit so there's no reason for you to CC your target, because they wouldn't even know that you're about to hit them. And if you're trying to just PK someone, Intrepid is trying to limit your ability to do that as much as possible, while encouraging the victim to fight back instead. The system is designed to encourage pvp and reduce PKing.
Arya_Yeshe wrote: » When this green's cant be cced rule came about, did Steven/Intrepid say why this band-aid was created? What they want to achieve with this?
Gospell wrote: » do you forget about resistances and chances? everything that you described works only in the game will be 100% chance cc. I have mentioned them more than once. I know that you played L2, tell me how often you could stun an orc with a bow? how often could you hang anchor playing as a magician against players with jewelry? how often did you stun against players with majestic armor? Well, it's okay, now I will attack the player and wait until he turns purple, then I will sharply press the control skill button, nothing will change at all, just the scheme is now a little different xD
Gospell wrote: » i already answered this, there are other ways to make a mob kill you. If the game does not have 100%, then there is no need to give invulnerability to green. and you're right, I'm going to see all the content in the game, become a pk too, and believe me, I will become ,cc has nothing to do with it)
Gospell wrote: » Apparently you played very badly in l2, if you think that the first one to attack, then he wins.
Arya_Yeshe wrote: » Arya_Yeshe wrote: » People don't leave because dying a few times, they leave because of hopelesness and grinds, it's the devs fault if this happens Exactly, couldn't agree more!
Arya_Yeshe wrote: » People don't leave because dying a few times, they leave because of hopelesness and grinds, it's the devs fault if this happens
daveywavey wrote: » Arya_Yeshe wrote: » Arya_Yeshe wrote: » People don't leave because dying a few times, they leave because of hopelesness and grinds, it's the devs fault if this happens Exactly, couldn't agree more! Psssst... You forgot to log into your other account, and have ended up agreeing with yourself:
Noaani wrote: » Gospell wrote: » NiKr wrote: » Arya_Yeshe wrote: » When this green's cant be cced rule came about, did Steven/Intrepid say why this band-aid was created? What they want to achieve with this? Steven revealed it after a video doubting the system. But as been stated previously, L2 had the same mechanic, with the only difference being CCs with an attack attribute, but we don't know whether absolutely all CCs in Ashes won't work against greens or if there'll be exceptions. Gospell wrote: » do you forget about resistances and chances? everything that you described works only in the game will be 100% chance cc. I have mentioned them more than once. I know that you played L2, tell me how often you could stun an orc with a bow? how often could you hang anchor playing as a magician against players with jewelry? how often did you stun against players with majestic armor? Well, it's okay, now I will attack the player and wait until he turns purple, then I will sharply press the control skill button, nothing will change at all, just the scheme is now a little different xD And that non-100% chance of CCs still benefits the first attacker, so again, the pvper/PKer will still win more fights than the green. The only reason to want CCs against greens is if you want to abuse that mechanic and kill them through mobs w/o getting corruption. You are the one who does the first hit so there's no reason for you to CC your target, because they wouldn't even know that you're about to hit them. And if you're trying to just PK someone, Intrepid is trying to limit your ability to do that as much as possible, while encouraging the victim to fight back instead. The system is designed to encourage pvp and reduce PKing. i already answered this, there are other ways to make a mob kill you. If the game does not have 100%, then there is no need to give invulnerability to green. Apparently you played very badly in l2, if you think that the first one to attack, then he wins. and you're right, I'm going to see all the content in the game, become a pk too, and believe me, I will become ,cc has nothing to do with it) Are you suggesting that if something isnt 100% effective, there is no point in having it?
NiKr wrote: » Gospell wrote: » i already answered this, there are other ways to make a mob kill you. If the game does not have 100%, then there is no need to give invulnerability to green. and you're right, I'm going to see all the content in the game, become a pk too, and believe me, I will become ,cc has nothing to do with it) Give a reason for why you should be able to CC a green, other than your desire to kill them before they could respond. Why do you need to CC a person who's not even fighting back? Gospell wrote: » Apparently you played very badly in l2, if you think that the first one to attack, then he wins. I played L2 as a pvper, so I'd attack first in 90% of interactions with other players. I'd attack others if they were passing by my farming spot, just to let them know that I'm ready to fight for it. My winrate depended on a lot of things, but I never needed a CC as my first attack because I never needed a crutch in a fight. Only weak pvpers need a CC as their very first attack. And AoC's greens would be those weak pvpers because they didn't attack first to let the other player know they mean business.
Gospell wrote: » Noaani wrote: » Gospell wrote: » NiKr wrote: » Arya_Yeshe wrote: » When this green's cant be cced rule came about, did Steven/Intrepid say why this band-aid was created? What they want to achieve with this? Steven revealed it after a video doubting the system. But as been stated previously, L2 had the same mechanic, with the only difference being CCs with an attack attribute, but we don't know whether absolutely all CCs in Ashes won't work against greens or if there'll be exceptions. Gospell wrote: » do you forget about resistances and chances? everything that you described works only in the game will be 100% chance cc. I have mentioned them more than once. I know that you played L2, tell me how often you could stun an orc with a bow? how often could you hang anchor playing as a magician against players with jewelry? how often did you stun against players with majestic armor? Well, it's okay, now I will attack the player and wait until he turns purple, then I will sharply press the control skill button, nothing will change at all, just the scheme is now a little different xD And that non-100% chance of CCs still benefits the first attacker, so again, the pvper/PKer will still win more fights than the green. The only reason to want CCs against greens is if you want to abuse that mechanic and kill them through mobs w/o getting corruption. You are the one who does the first hit so there's no reason for you to CC your target, because they wouldn't even know that you're about to hit them. And if you're trying to just PK someone, Intrepid is trying to limit your ability to do that as much as possible, while encouraging the victim to fight back instead. The system is designed to encourage pvp and reduce PKing. i already answered this, there are other ways to make a mob kill you. If the game does not have 100%, then there is no need to give invulnerability to green. Apparently you played very badly in l2, if you think that the first one to attack, then he wins. and you're right, I'm going to see all the content in the game, become a pk too, and believe me, I will become ,cc has nothing to do with it) Are you suggesting that if something isnt 100% effective, there is no point in having it? you understand what I meant, why are you trying to distort what I said? If there is no 100% chance of control, then it makes no sense to give immunity to the greens, and I'm already tired of writing why it would be fair. If you can't read, that's your problem.
Arya_Yeshe wrote: » Since I know the devs can pull a daveywavey wrote: » Arya_Yeshe wrote: » Arya_Yeshe wrote: » People don't leave because dying a few times, they leave because of hopelesness and grinds, it's the devs fault if this happens Exactly, couldn't agree more! Psssst... You forgot to log into your other account, and have ended up agreeing with yourself: I did that on purpose and this will be a thing from now on, it is a joke about when people forget what really matters in a discussion
Gospell wrote: » just don't write anything more about pvp in l2. only weak pvp , crutches .... Honestly , I did a facepalm . 90% attacked by the first and no one responded with a stun? an orc would hit you in the face with a sledgehammer and you would understand what it means to start with cc
Gospell wrote: » Guys, I understand your position. While you think that the pk is a universal evil, and the green flowers-players, then you will not understand everything. Green are the same pvp players or pk. It’s just that at the moment they are green, if they have an advantage in cc, then this pvp will be like this, 2 players will stand opposite each other and provoke an attack, whoever starts attacking first will most likely lose, and don’t need to write nonsense about the fact that cc is for the weak. But if the green one can't do cc to the purple player, then..... I already wrote what will happen.... I'm tired of writing the same thing several times. I'm sorry, there is no point in explaining anything to you. have a good day
Noaani wrote: » Gospell wrote: » Noaani wrote: » Gospell wrote: » NiKr wrote: » Arya_Yeshe wrote: » When this green's cant be cced rule came about, did Steven/Intrepid say why this band-aid was created? What they want to achieve with this? Steven revealed it after a video doubting the system. But as been stated previously, L2 had the same mechanic, with the only difference being CCs with an attack attribute, but we don't know whether absolutely all CCs in Ashes won't work against greens or if there'll be exceptions. Gospell wrote: » do you forget about resistances and chances? everything that you described works only in the game will be 100% chance cc. I have mentioned them more than once. I know that you played L2, tell me how often you could stun an orc with a bow? how often could you hang anchor playing as a magician against players with jewelry? how often did you stun against players with majestic armor? Well, it's okay, now I will attack the player and wait until he turns purple, then I will sharply press the control skill button, nothing will change at all, just the scheme is now a little different xD And that non-100% chance of CCs still benefits the first attacker, so again, the pvper/PKer will still win more fights than the green. The only reason to want CCs against greens is if you want to abuse that mechanic and kill them through mobs w/o getting corruption. You are the one who does the first hit so there's no reason for you to CC your target, because they wouldn't even know that you're about to hit them. And if you're trying to just PK someone, Intrepid is trying to limit your ability to do that as much as possible, while encouraging the victim to fight back instead. The system is designed to encourage pvp and reduce PKing. i already answered this, there are other ways to make a mob kill you. If the game does not have 100%, then there is no need to give invulnerability to green. Apparently you played very badly in l2, if you think that the first one to attack, then he wins. and you're right, I'm going to see all the content in the game, become a pk too, and believe me, I will become ,cc has nothing to do with it) Are you suggesting that if something isnt 100% effective, there is no point in having it? you understand what I meant, why are you trying to distort what I said? If there is no 100% chance of control, then it makes no sense to give immunity to the greens, and I'm already tired of writing why it would be fair. If you can't read, that's your problem. No, I don't understand what you mean. It makes no sense to say that it is perfectly fine for CC to be applicable to players if there is only a 99% change to hit, but not ok if there is 100% chance. Same with saying it is ok with a 98% chance but not a 99% chance. This can go on and on. The only way this thought process is able to make sense is if you say "it is ok if CC is applicable to greens if CC is so unreliable that players wouldn't want to open a fight with it". Basically, if CC is good enough for players to consider opening a fight with it, then it shouldn't be applicable to greens. It is only if CC is so ineffective over all that it is appropriate for it to be applicable to greens. At this point though, CC would be so weak that there is no point in having it at all.
NiKr wrote: » Gospell wrote: » just don't write anything more about pvp in l2. only weak pvp , crutches .... Honestly , I did a facepalm . 90% attacked by the first and no one responded with a stun? an orc would hit you in the face with a sledgehammer and you would understand what it means to start with cc Yes, I've fought against Tyrs and Destrs who had x2-3 my hp. And my first hit brought our hp values closer. And yes, they replied with a stun, because that is exactly what you do against an attacker who hit you first. And this was fair, because they had time to retaliate rather than me unloading as much as I can while they literally do fuckall, because they're stunned or CCed in other ways. In my 12 years of L2 experience barely anyone started a fight with a stun, because stuns usually had way lower dmg value on them, so why in hell would they start the fight with an unreliable CC (because, as you point out, they weren't 100%) when they could just do a big hit on their target. Gospell wrote: » Guys, I understand your position. While you think that the pk is a universal evil, and the green flowers-players, then you will not understand everything. Green are the same pvp players or pk. It’s just that at the moment they are green, if they have an advantage in cc, then this pvp will be like this, 2 players will stand opposite each other and provoke an attack, whoever starts attacking first will most likely lose, and don’t need to write nonsense about the fact that cc is for the weak. But if the green one can't do cc to the purple player, then..... I already wrote what will happen.... I'm tired of writing the same thing several times. I'm sorry, there is no point in explaining anything to you. have a good day You do understand that you're contradicting yourself, right? You say that CCs won't have a 100% chance. That means that even if that green responds with a CC against an attacker, the attacker won't necessarily be CCed, so they'll still be at an advantage against the victim. So how exactly is that a fair pvp? You keep saying "it's all about the fairness", but you're yet to properly explain how is it fair to both sides.
Gospell wrote: » Describe to me your experience of playing on the Olympus? Or tell us about the tactics of archers?
Gospell wrote: » As for the cc chance, I described above, no one will get an undeserved advantage.
Gospell wrote: » Oh, you use the word "victim", I wrote about the green players in the post above. Even the kindest pve player can get angry at a player who prevents him from playing or insults him in the chat, or vice versa, the pvp player is just green at the moment and is looking for a victim, and specifically provokes others to attack him first. And in this situation with such a control system, the pvp player will have an advantage over the agry pve player. Do not divide the players into black or white, we are all the same players, we all pay for the game, we all play to have fun, then tell me if there is fairness in the fact that the developers systematically limit one player, giving an advantage to others!
Gospell wrote: » It's useless, I've already answered it all... Absolutely everything! About attacking first, about cc chances, about pk, about pvp, about ways to kill a player without becoming a pk (not cc),about green and purple players and situations. ABOUT EVERYTHING! You keep saying the same thing over and over, ignoring what I write. I think our dialogue is meaningless, let's just keep everyone to their own opinion
Arya_Yeshe wrote: » I pretty much accepted that Intrepid, or any actual developing company, can NOT pull a significant PvP game that empowers people, even the PvE runners should.
daveywavey wrote: » Arya_Yeshe wrote: » I pretty much accepted that Intrepid, or any actual developing company, can NOT pull a significant PvP game that empowers people, even the PvE runners should. Aha, that's where the confusion lies, maybe. Ashes isn't a PvP game. It's a PvX game.
