Corruption: Does it / Should it Diminish While Logged Out?

The wiki at this time doesn't specify if corruption diminishes while you're logged out. Being corrupt puts a 60-second log-out timer on logging out - but there's no mention if it diminishes while your logged out.

It kind of feels like it probably should, if you're gone *long enough*. If a player has to leave the game for 2 or 3 months, there's probably no sense in them returning to find out they're still corrupted. If you come back after 2 days, though, it doesn't really feel like it should be gone.

Maybe auto-remove corruption after something like 30 days?

Find more posts tagged with

Staff

Comments

Solvryn

NiKr wrote: »

Arya_Yeshe wrote: »

Absolutely not, tell me one idea that I gave that would overkill carebear?
There's not even one, I even suggested that people should have freehold pvp settings and be able to opt for no pvp in the freehold yard

I'd look for it, but right now I'm barely holding this page active, cause my RAM has gone completely fucked and my PC barely works. But your every other post is about how carebears are bad and shouldn't exist. And most of your suggestions are hardcore even for the hardcore players on the forum, so I'd say ~90% of your suggestions would absolutely remove all the greens from the game in one way or another.

Most people here would be besides themselves in a game like Darkfall. They can’t handle the actual PK life.

Xnate13X

Diamaht wrote: »

So I make 15 alts (or 30 if Im truly motivated) and I never have to opperate under the effects of corruption.

Wouldn't you technically ALWAYS be operating undet the effects of corruption? You'd have to constantly be gearing new characters, leveling them, paying attention to all the corruption timers, making gold for each one, adding friends to each, etc, etc. You'd feel like your actual life ia corrupted, lol. Your second job would become "Dealing with corruption on AoC."

Diamaht

Xnate13X wrote: »

Diamaht wrote: »

So I make 15 alts (or 30 if Im truly motivated) and I never have to opperate under the effects of corruption.

Wouldn't you technically ALWAYS be operating undet the effects of corruption? You'd have to constantly be gearing new characters, leveling them, paying attention to all the corruption timers, making gold for each one, adding friends to each, etc, etc. You'd feel like your actual life ia corrupted, lol. Your second job would become "Dealing with corruption on AoC."

Maybe a little bit, but corruption is progressive. It would reach a point eventually where it's intolerable, but not right away. When that happens you swap out and let that character "time out". Obviously it would be pretty ambitions to have that many alts just for pvp, however the point I'm making is that if corruption diminishes with time you would simply character swap and wait it out instead of having to deal with the issue.

As time goes on, say a year or two post launch, the idea of having quite a few PK alts that you can easily rotate between, thereby mitigating corruption, becomes more realistic.

Arya_Yeshe

Anyway, at this point of the project, maybe the best is leaving corruption as it is
For years people will wonder what could be done different for a better outcome

Vaknar

I couldn't find anything about this on the wiki. This is not a planned feature that I'm aware of, but if you wanted a potential update, you could try to ask this for the next Q&A!

unknownsystemerror

Okeydoke wrote: »

Azherae wrote: »

Corruption's goal is to prevent unwanted PvP, and in that I think it is doing the wrong thing but I can see that it will achieve that well.

Not trying to derail or create a supreme court case out of this lol. And I think I know what you meant with what you said, there's just nuance left out of your statement.

But from the wiki - "The goal of the corruption system is to keep risk alive while significantly curtailing or deterring the ability for players to grief other players."

There was even another statement on the wiki until recently, unless I'm losing my mind, that worded it more as, "The goal of the corruption system is to prevent excessive griefing." I don't see it now though.

Does it seem that it's being geared now more towards not just preventing excess griefing, but unwanted pvp period? Yeah.

As far as the original post in this thread - seems like he's saying there should be a corruption amnesty basically for someone who hasn't played in 30+ days. I don't really see any reason for this unless the devs made some kind of drastic change to the penalties of corruption, making them harsher, and they decided that people who accrued their corruption in the old system shouldn't be subject to the new penalties. Edge case, entirely up to the discretion of the devs if this scenario were to happen.

Perhaps this is what you were talking about?

bloodprophet

This was answered in one of the early streams, maybe the Kickstarter streams with the community people. Been a long time since I watched those.

Tyranthraxus

Am very eager to see how the Bounty Hunter system will work, and just how popular it will be.

Have to agree with the majority consent, herein; Being logged out shouldn't diminish the Corruption.

I'd be okay if it automatically drops off after 6 months or some long-ish period of time; No one's specifically going to PK 50 people, then purposefully NOT play that toon for 6 months just to have the Corruption go away. There's just WAY better ways to get rid of Corruption.

Okeydoke

unknownsystemerror wrote: »

Perhaps this is what you were talking about?

I think that was Steven's comment on the LuckyGhost video. But yeah he makes a similar comment at the end of that about it being a system about introducing risk vs reward and disincentivizing griefing.

All the quotes basically say the same thing. But there was a much more clear and concise version of it on the wiki until recently. Unless I'm losing my mind, which I might be. But I had actually pulled it up last week because I was going to reference it in a post, but ended up not. I may have just dreamed all of this though lol.

insomnia

no. If you don't want to get corrupted, don't kill other players. So many excuses/ways people are trying to use, or have implemented, so they don't have to deal with it

Core4891

No, it should stay even if you log out. And not only that, I would suggest after a certain amount of corruption it should be account wide (to all your alts). I am sure a lot of people will have many alts to grief people.

I am not talking about killing green players once or twice. I am talking about excessive griefing.

nanfoodle

No, you do the crime you should suffer that in game time. Want to a PKer, you should be open to attack and loss of items.

Myosotys

When I see the massive cons against loss of corruption offline, I understand that AOC is a PvE game…
One more game pretending to be PvP (PvX) and at the end will be full of whiner that will cry loud to destroy the PvP.
Very disappointing !

Core4891

Myosotys wrote: »

When I see the massive cons against loss of corruption offline, I understand that AOC is a PvE game…
One more game pretending to be PvP (PvX) and at the end will be full of whiner that will cry loud to destroy the PvP.
Very disappointing !

If I understand correctly corruption will have grades to it, it's not a binary thing. We are talking about griefers who kill people constantly and camping them, not killing one player here and there. And we don't even know what the developers will create, this is us giving an opinion.

Ludullu

Core4891 wrote: »

If I understand correctly corruption will have grades to it, it's not a binary thing. We are talking about griefers who kill people constantly and camping them, not killing one player here and there. And we don't even know what the developers will create, this is us giving an opinion.

Depends on what you're talking about. As soon as you kill another player you better not die, because there's already an x4 multiplier on your death penalties. That part is binary.

BHs seeing you on the map and your stats dampening seem to be on a spectrum and depend on how much corruption you have. So not so binary.

Diamaht

Myosotys wrote: »

When I see the massive cons against loss of corruption offline, I understand that AOC is a PvE game…
One more game pretending to be PvP (PvX) and at the end will be full of whiner that will cry loud to destroy the PvP.
Very disappointing !

Well I mean the real question is, which of those "real PVX" games succeeded? I don't think any of them are still around. Maybe Eve Online would count, but even that has safe zones and criminal flags that are hard to shed.

True PvX games always fail or become hyper niche. I don't think its because they do it wrong. I just think games where you can do anything to anyone at any time are not popular. I'm a big fan of open world pvp but the no meaningful consequence style game worlds are just not fun to be in.

Mortal online for example just devolved into join the biggest, most aggressive group or don't waste your time logging in. It's just not a good time.

Albion, Eve and OSRS are examples of games that have open pvp and that are very popular. However they all have meaningful restrictions, via things like locations or flagging, that prevent the game from devolving.

Mag7spy

Azherae wrote: »

Arya_Yeshe wrote: »

If I say "greens are not the good guys", I mean it with double meaning and sometimes literal meaning

The good guys are the pirates

I had a nightmare once where you were revealed to be Steven Sharif's alt account on the forums.

LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL

Child Item