Non consensual PvP will not exist at launch

Intrepid will 1000000% tune corruption so tight against non consensual PvP at launch that most every player will not see the same person do it twice.

I imagine it'll be tuned so tight that it will damn near brick your account just from the first time, the second time making most people uninstall.

If they don't tune it this way on launch then the game is going to take a hard and unnecessary nosedive.

Anyone who thinks that the corruption system won't be tuned like this is thinking that Intrepid is incompetent. And everything we've seen/heard so far shows us this is lightyears away from the truth.

Just for reference, I'm eagerly awaiting the time when they loosen it up, cause my plans are to gank farmers, not for mats, just because I'm so friggin tired of hearing people complain about the games PvP situation. As if it would just be so devastating that they get ganked once or twice in a week with a bag full of mats and lose them. Or that they have a little adrenaline rush and try to actually put up a fight, possibly winning.

Those people instead want to go face a boss that is predictable and that they could probably down with half their fingers, half blind, and doped up on like 4 Xanax. Or better yet go farm herbs for 4 months straight while drooling on their keyboard, watching a Youtube video on the other monitor and eating a taco with the other hand.

That's what's annoying, that these people come into MMO communities and raise such a fuss about PvP that the systems get gimped. When they aren't even really playing the game when they're on it anyways.

BUT, I love em, my best friends like this and I do hope that those people come to AoC, have fun, and hopefully either get great at player vs player combat or enjoy the fact that their pacifism is supported by the universe Intrepid has created and bricks someones account for "being a dick" lol. End of my rant

Find more posts tagged with

Staff

Comments

Noaani

mcstackerson wrote: »

Dygz wrote: »

ChipsAhoy007 wrote: »

There are going to be those people and I wouldn't call them a problem, more like "a problem". They're content, a "F around and find out" thing. I enjoy playing the villain, though I know most people in the same boat as me are just cold blooded griefers out to really ruin someone's day full stop. There isn't much distinction between us, and that's why the system exists, for people like me, but it's going to have to be tuned giga tight for the.. OTHERS.

Yeah... I have 0 interest in playing MMORPGs on servers where gamers consider players to be their content.

Then why are you playing multiplayer games? even without open pvp, aren't players part of the experience/content?

In my opinion, in PvE player games, other players are part if the experience, but not part of the content.

Dolyem

Fantmx wrote: »

Respectfully, there is no system in place to prevent non-consensual PvP thus the title of this post is factually incorrect.

You consent to the system upon log in. You are making a choice to play under the systems rules. If you do not agree with a games design and philosophy, you don't have to play it. This works just as much for Ashes for carebears as it's does with WoW and me who hates opt-in PvP. I simply won't play. If I do choose to play however, I don't get to tell the game to change its design if it is part of the core groundwork of the game.

PherPhur

Dolyem wrote: »

Fantmx wrote: »

Respectfully, there is no system in place to prevent non-consensual PvP thus the title of this post is factually incorrect.

You consent to the system upon log in. You are making a choice to play under the systems rules. If you do not agree with a games design and philosophy, you don't have to play it. This works just as much for Ashes for carebears as it's does with WoW and me who hates opt-in PvP. I simply won't play. If I do choose to play however, I don't get to tell the game to change its design if it is part of the core groundwork of the game.

I don't know why this reminded me of playing Classic on a PvP server and 90% of the people you'd gank would switch to their main or get a guildy and they'd body camp you for as long as they possibly could.

I mean you really knew they were seething. Almost as if they didn't want to be on a PvP server and were really losing it over one gank lol. I'd almost always wait for them to finish fighting a mob and eat/drink to full health/mana before attacking too.

I even had a couple people make an alliance character(on RPPVP realms you can have both horde and alliance) just to go off on me. Actually insane

Dygz

CROW3 wrote: »

Fantmx wrote: »

Respectfully, there is no system in place to prevent non-consensual PvP thus the title of this post is factually incorrect.

I’ve said this before, but maybe worth bringing up again. A big part of me believes that system is simply login - that’s your informed consent. The foundational social contract of Ashes is that you are not safe from a dangerous world, and other players are part of that world.

@Dygz and I went back and forth privately on this one for what? Like 4-5 months?

Edit: just to put a period on the above, what you define as non-consensual pvp won’t exist in Ashes at launch because just by being in the world all conflict has been consented to.

On the mainland, non-consensual PvP is punished with Corruption.
On the Open Seas, you auto-consent when you enter that space.
And I don't play games with permanent
I also don't want to play on the same servers with gamers who believe that you auto-consent just by playing the game, so...
At this point, it's effectively the same. And there's not much point quibbling over the details because you will never agree that non-consensual PvP exists.

But, again, that is really the true conundrum...
How do you convince players who abhor non-consensual PvP to play on the same PvP servers as gamers who don't acknowledge non-consensual PvP as a valid concept. And the answer is - you probably don't.

Dygz

CROW3 wrote: »

We would all then be PvX players.

Exactly. Because the only people playing will be PvPers.
And PvX just means that PvPers will have to do some PvE.

CROW3

Dygz wrote: »

At this point, it's effectively the same. And there's not much point quibbling over the details because you will never agree that non-consensual PvP exists.

But, again, that is really the true conundrum...
How do you convince players who abhor non-consensual PvP to play on the same PvP servers as gamers who don't acknowledge non-consensual PvP as a valid concept. And the answer is - you probably don't.

Yeah, agreed on both points. I’m not sure it’s a conundrum considering how explicitly exclusive IS is approaching their audience.

Reminds me of Joshua’s conclusion: ‘Would you like to play a nice game of chess?’

I’ll join you in Pax Dei or Palia though.

Dygz

CROW3 wrote: »

Yeah, agreed on both points. I’m not sure it’s a conundrum considering how explicitly exclusive IS is approaching their audience.

Reminds me of Joshua’s conclusion: ‘Would you like to play a nice game of chess?’

I’ll join you in Pax Dei or Palia though.

For the first 4 years, Steven said that Corruption should make playing on the same servers as PvPers comfortable for PvEers, except for those who never want to participate in PvP at all. And that there are no permanent zones with auto-consent FFA PvP.

At that point in time, non-consensual PvP was punished by Corruption. Across the entire map.
And, basically, that was the deal. You might have to put up with non-consensual PvP sometimes, but you always have the option of punishing that person with Corruption.

Permanent zones with auto-consent FFA PvP nullifies that deal.

And, you know, back in May 2018, when Steven was on The Ashen Forge...
The first thing I asked him was to compare Ashes PvP to Eve Online and ArcheAge PvP.
Because those games have PvP rulesets I refuse to play. Areas with auto-consent FFA PvP.
Steven said that the difference is that Ashes does not have permanent areas with auto-consent FFA PvP.
The Corruption mechanic is in play across the entire map.

So, yeah... now, as of Aug 2022, it's pretty clear who Steven's target audience is and who he is excluding when he says the game is not made for everyone. And the more Hardcore Challenge elements he adds - like the Inventory designed to make players have to contemplate economic warfare every time they want to pick some flowers - the clearer we can see who the target audience truly is.

Solvryn

Sure there will, some dope will think killing people at launch is a good idea.

LadyZel

ChipsAhoy007 wrote: »

@LadyZel

I doubt alpha is a great representation in regards to tuning corruption. Most of the alpha players didn't drop hundreds of dollars on a key to come in and grief. I imagine the vast majority of alpha players are there for hype, support and content.

Yes, that's true. Beta onwards would be where the true test of corruption would begin.

Fantmx

Dolyem wrote: »

Fantmx wrote: »

Respectfully, there is no system in place to prevent non-consensual PvP thus the title of this post is factually incorrect.

You consent to the system upon log in. You are making a choice to play under the systems rules. If you do not agree with a games design and philosophy, you don't have to play it. This works just as much for Ashes for carebears as it's does with WoW and me who hates opt-in PvP. I simply won't play. If I do choose to play however, I don't get to tell the game to change its design if it is part of the core groundwork of the game.

A valid point. Seems we are in agreement here.

daveywavey

Boneshatter wrote: »

Here's a better analogy for you. I don't like turkey stuffing/dressing at Thanksgiving and Christmas. I never have. Every time I go to a new person's house for Thanksgiving/Christmas dinner I give a polite "no thanks" when offered stuffing and without fail its met with an offended look. They claim that my dislike of stuffing is because I haven't tried THEIR stuffing and that I simply must try it because they put unicorn turds in it or something.

I try to weasel out of it, but they insist and won't let it go so I'm forced to try it with everyone at the table staring at me. Of course I don't like it. I don't like stuffing and I told them that right up front, but they are offended that I don't like THEIR stuffing. Every. Single. Time.

"No thanks, I want to save extra space for that amazing dessert!"

You're welcome.

Child Item