Corruption/pvp

How many of you will still be engaging in in world pvp/ ganking reguardless of corruption?

Find more posts tagged with

Staff

Comments

Noaani wrote: »

Mag7spy wrote: »

Noaani wrote: »

Mag7spy wrote: »

Only one misrepresenting comments out here is you. In the past my remembrance of you is your refusal to share anything through videos and explain anything

As I explained to you at the time, I can't share video with you if video doesn't exist. I even explained to you WHY it doesn't exist, and you just basically said "nope, video plz".

There was a discussion that happened around you, but when you stonewalled yourself with wanting video that didn't exist even after being given the reason for it not existing, you missed it.

That is no reason for me having to go through that discussion again.

Naa i found videos and you refused to talk about them.

You found videos of people that had outleveled the content and then "mentored" down to a more appropriate level. The way this system worked in EQ2 left mentored players with a massive advantage - to the point where a player leveled down 20 or more levels could solo raid content at the level they were mentored down to.

This is why I specifically said contemporary - as in, videos at the same time the content was current.

Honestly it really doesn't matter if that is the case with it, the discussion was around tab raid aspects working with action camera. So long as mechanics don't change with the players it should still be the same, even if some do change it shouldn't effect that kind of discussion.

Noaani

Mag7spy wrote: »

Honestly it really doesn't matter if that is the case with it, the discussion was around tab raid aspects working with action camera. So long as mechanics don't change with the players it should still be the same, even if some do change it shouldn't effect that kind of discussion.

It does matter when the aspects of a tab target raid that require player action can just be sat through due to being a higher level.

You are getting close to that whole "questioning someone on a topic they know but you don't" thing again. You aren't quite there, but your post history would suggest your next post will go over that line.

I'm engaging with you here (and in the other thread) on good faith as you seem to be somewhat more reasonable right now than normal - but I can absoutely see the next post here dropping back down to that old level of yours.

Mag7spy

Noaani wrote: »

Mag7spy wrote: »

Honestly it really doesn't matter if that is the case with it, the discussion was around tab raid aspects working with action camera. So long as mechanics don't change with the players it should still be the same, even if some do change it shouldn't effect that kind of discussion.

It does matter when the aspects of a tab target raid that require player action can just be sat through due to being a higher level.

You are getting close to that whole "questioning someone on a topic they know but you don't" thing again. You aren't quite there, but your post history would suggest your next post will go over that line.

I'm engaging with you here (and in the other thread) on good faith as you seem to be somewhat more reasonable right now than normal - but I can absoutely see the next post here dropping back down to that old level of yours.

As long as the entire raid can't be "sat though" the point of the discussion was for you to point out some mechanics and I would explain how it can work in action combat. Again you avoided having the discussion and it derailed while having a view point you couldn't do it.

Anyone can ask questions, it is the best way to get a clear answer and understanding of the person with the topic at hand. Though avoiding to answer would show a lack of experience fortunately you played the game enough so answering shouldn't have been a difficultly for you.

I'm not even trying to re-harsh that old thread just point things out about how you operate and the issues.

Noaani

Mag7spy wrote: »

As long as the entire raid can't be "sat though"

Yeah, but it could. As I said at the time. That is why I said the video was not suited to the discussion.

Anyone can ask questions, it is the best way to get a clear answer and understanding of the person with the topic at hand.

There is a difference between asking questions and needing education.

I'm going to give you an example that isn't you - just so you tdon't think I am specifically targeting you or something.

If the topic of discussion is why some PvE players aren't interested in Ashes, asking questions in relation to those players is valid. If you do not understand what top end PvE actually is, then when someone talks about the effects around it and how it isn't possible to have top end PvE in a situation in which PvP is expected and this will keep some players that enjoy top end PvE away from the game, that isn't really the time to question why top end PvE can't be had when PvP is expected.

If you want to question that point from that person, you need the basic background understanding of what top end PvE is. Without that basic understanding, asking that question would require education on the matter, and at that point it is derailing the discussion.

I often avoid answering questions that I know will require a lengthy back and forth in order to attempt to keep a thread on topic. I tend to get accused of derailing the thread if I answer the questions, or accused of not answering questions if I don't.

Quite frankly, I'd rather the second of these to the first - accuse me of not answering questions I don't think pertain to the topic all you like - this is why I have been answering fewer and fewer tangential questions lately.

Mag7spy

Noaani wrote: »

Mag7spy wrote: »

As long as the entire raid can't be "sat though"

Yeah, but it could. As I said at the time. That is why I said the video was not suited to the discussion.

Anyone can ask questions, it is the best way to get a clear answer and understanding of the person with the topic at hand.

There is a difference between asking questions and needing education.

I'm going to give you an example that isn't you - just so you tdon't think I am specifically targeting you or something.

If the topic of discussion is why some PvE players aren't interested in Ashes, asking questions in relation to those players is valid. If you do not understand what top end PvE actually is, then when someone talks about the effects around it and how it isn't possible to have top end PvE in a situation in which PvP is expected and this will keep some players that enjoy top end PvE away from the game, that isn't really the time to question why top end PvE can't be had when PvP is expected.

If you want to question that point from that person, you need the basic background understanding of what top end PvE is. Without that basic understanding, asking that question would require education on the matter, and at that point it is derailing the discussion.

I often avoid answering questions that I know will require a lengthy back and forth in order to attempt to keep a thread on topic. I tend to get accused of derailing the thread if I answer the questions, or accused of not answering questions if I don't.

Quite frankly, I'd rather the second of these to the first - accuse me of not answering questions I don't think pertain to the topic all you like - this is why I have been answering fewer and fewer tangential questions lately.

At the end of the day rather than ignore you could have point out what they did and mentioned the points that they skipped mechanically wise. That would be using your experience than not only throwing away the conversation but putting the same effort in instead into arguing / insulting.

It is fully a ego thing in that aspect, If I'm asked a question on a boss and I know a group is over geared I can fully mentioned the mechanics I see and say what is skipped, I don't need to make a big deal out of that. I can also look for more videos and use them as reference even if they aren't all as complete as I like. So long as the question wasn't start to end explaining a raid and more so pulling some details from it.

This is all based on the strength of the view point, the stronger the stance the more clear it should be to show what you mean. So saying something can never be done, that means even in pieces there should be a lot of elements that point towards that.

Noaani

Mag7spy wrote: »

It is fully a ego thing in that aspect, If I'm asked a question on a boss and I know a group is over geared I can fully mentioned the mechanics I see and say what is skipped, I don't need to make a big deal out of that. I can also look for more videos and use them as reference even if they aren't all as complete as I like. So long as the question wasn't start to end explaining a raid and more so pulling some details from it.

It isn't a case of over geared, it is a case of over leveled. EQ2 mentoring system is great for its intended use (allowing players to group with lower level friends and run content with them), but is absolutely broken when raid content is involved.

You say I could have explained the mechanics that were missing - I did. That was the discussion, and you demanded video. I'm not going to explain a thing after I already explain it and you say you need more than my explination.

This is all based on the strength of the view point, the stronger the stance the more clear it should be to show what you mean. So saying something can never be done, that means even in pieces there should be a lot of elements that point towards that.

No, this falls down when one person has no knowledge of a topic. For example, if I talk about knockbacks from EQ2, there are about 20 different things I need to mention in relation to them in order for you to even understand what a knockback in EQ2 is - whereas to someone that knows, all I need to do is say "knockback", with an indicator of it's general strength.

Again, it is a case of "with out that base knowledge, you can't really expect to go deep in to the discussion". If you want to go deep in to that discussion, go out and educate yourself on it first.

Mag7spy

Noaani wrote: »

Mag7spy wrote: »

It is fully a ego thing in that aspect, If I'm asked a question on a boss and I know a group is over geared I can fully mentioned the mechanics I see and say what is skipped, I don't need to make a big deal out of that. I can also look for more videos and use them as reference even if they aren't all as complete as I like. So long as the question wasn't start to end explaining a raid and more so pulling some details from it.

It isn't a case of over geared, it is a case of over leveled. EQ2 mentoring system is great for its intended use (allowing players to group with lower level friends and run content with them), but is absolutely broken when raid content is involved.

You say I could have explained the mechanics that were missing - I did. That was the discussion, and you demanded video. I'm not going to explain a thing after I already explain it and you say you need more than my explination.

This is all based on the strength of the view point, the stronger the stance the more clear it should be to show what you mean. So saying something can never be done, that means even in pieces there should be a lot of elements that point towards that.

No, this falls down when one person has no knowledge of a topic. For example, if I talk about knockbacks from EQ2, there are about 20 different things I need to mention in relation to them in order for you to even understand what a knockback in EQ2 is - whereas to someone that knows, all I need to do is say "knockback", with an indicator of it's general strength.

Again, it is a case of "with out that base knowledge, you can't really expect to go deep in to the discussion". If you want to go deep in to that discussion, go out and educate yourself on it first.

You are completely missing the entire point of what I'm saying, which is your mo for giving long winded statements in a ways of actually avoiding answering.

Its like you are purposely trying to mislead or you seriously don't understand what I'm saying. If you make a statement amount something and say it is 100% certain and impossible to do anywhere else. That means when reviewing content it should be easy to point out any part of a showing why something can't do it.

If someone talks about combat you can point out why it can't do it, if it is mechanics you point out why something doesn't have the ability to do it, etc. We shouldn't even be needed to get into the exactly details if it is impossible for something to do it.

Now if we need to get into details and that is the only way to argue why it is not possible, that is a red flag. Simply because it opens up to more nuance and the large more mechanical aspects don't seem to be enough to make something not work. And the details between both can be tweaked, adjusted and have a discussion over. The moment that happens you can't say it is impossible for something to do it.

Noaani

Mag7spy wrote: »

Its like you are purposely trying to mislead or you seriously don't understand what I'm saying. If you make a statement amount something and say it is 100% certain and impossible to do anywhere else. That means when reviewing content it should be easy to point out any part of a showing why something can't do it.

No it isn't.

What you are talking about here is me educating you on a thing you should either understand before entering a debate, or defer to the experience of those that do know.

If you want to get in to a debate as to whether something works in relation to top end PvE content, you should have a grasp on top end PvE content. If you don't have that grasp, you shouldn't be in that discussion - literally at all.

That is like me debating with you why a potential mechanic someone may want to add to a fighting game eiher would or wouldn't work. I have no idea, and as such I just wouldn't get involved in that discussion.

The fact that you don't understand that you don't understand should show you just how much you don't understand. It's like the US military used to say - there are the things we know, the things we know we don't know, and the things we don't know we don't know.

To you, top end PvE definately falls in to this last one, but you seem to think it falls in to the middle.

I mentioned knockbacks in my post above - there are maybe three or four encounters in a content cycle that use it. It is one of hunderds of mechanics that is used. In order for me to explain to someone playing the game how knockbacks work in full, it would take me a few hours in actual discussion. In order to explain it to someone that has never played the game at anything near the level cap (let along top end), and where that discussion is happening via text, based on the time I have for something like that, we are talking weeks - and that is assuming you grasp it straight away.

Again, that is one mechanic of hundreds.

If you had this base level knowledge, I would be able to just say "strong knockback", and we could have that discussion you wanted to have at the time. Without you having that base foundational understanding, we can't have that discussion at all.

Mag7spy

Noaani wrote: »

Mag7spy wrote: »

Its like you are purposely trying to mislead or you seriously don't understand what I'm saying. If you make a statement amount something and say it is 100% certain and impossible to do anywhere else. That means when reviewing content it should be easy to point out any part of a showing why something can't do it.

No it isn't.

What you are talking about here is me educating you on a thing you should either understand before entering a debate, or defer to the experience of those that do know.

If you want to get in to a debate as to whether something works in relation to top end PvE content, you should have a grasp on top end PvE content. If you don't have that grasp, you shouldn't be in that discussion - literally at all.

That is like me debating with you why a potential mechanic someone may want to add to a fighting game eiher would or wouldn't work. I have no idea, and as such I just wouldn't get involved in that discussion.

The fact that you don't understand that you don't understand should show you just how much you don't understand. It's like the US military used to say - there are the things we know, the things we know we don't know, and the things we don't know we don't know.

To you, top end PvE definately falls in to this last one, but you seem to think it falls in to the middle.

I mentioned knockbacks in my post above - there are maybe three or four encounters in a content cycle that use it. It is one of hunderds of mechanics that is used. In order for me to explain to someone playing the game how knockbacks work in full, it would take me a few hours in actual discussion. In order to explain it to someone that has never played the game at anything near the level cap (let along top end), and where that discussion is happening via text, based on the time I have for something like that, we are talking weeks - and that is assuming you grasp it straight away.

Again, that is one mechanic of hundreds.

If you had this base level knowledge, I would be able to just say "strong knockback", and we could have that discussion you wanted to have at the time. Without you having that base foundational understanding, we can't have that discussion at all.

Naa you could get right to the point but you want to avoid disccusion, and attempt to take certain aspects and attempt to make them sound more difficult than they really need to be.

The thing is quite quite aware of my own view point on this, but asking questions so you can understand another is the best way to directly comment on their take on things and not work on assumptions that lead to pointless argument.

My own understanding tells me any feature can be applied since the gameplay is similar in terms of content and how things can effect players / monsters, etc. Any complicated effect you talk about can be applied or varied.

Again not that important though I'm confident in my own knowledge and understanding. And you are missing the original point of this disccusion, use your experience to explain thing stop belittling comments as a way to push your point. Else you are failing to actually have a discussion.

If you are unable to explain through experience and are not equipped to share information in a way others can absorb it. Than you need to go back to the drawing board and educate yourself. Though i feel the true issue is you not wanting to get into detail since it might make people challenge your points, and your desire to belittle people assuming they wont understand what you are talking about or be able to come to an understanding. Arrogance at its finest on that point.

HumblePuffin

@Noaani I believe you have stated this before somewhere but I have zero desire to even attempt to go through your post history to find it; could you list some games you view as having top end PvE experiences, and perhaps some specific encounters in those games that you especially view as top end?

Noaani

HumblePuffin wrote: »

Noaani I believe you have stated this before somewhere but I have zero desire to even attempt to go through your post history to find it; could you list some games you view as having top end PvE experiences, and perhaps some specific encounters in those games that you especially view as top end?

I don't want to get in to encounter specifics, but of the games I have played, only three have top end PvP as I would define it - EQ, EQ2 and WoW.

Other games I have played have raid content (Rift, Age of Conan, a few others), but it doesn't quite rise up as much in those games as it does in the above three. Rift was close though.

Abarat

Noaani wrote: »

Abarat wrote: »

you are not an honest person.

I'm not sure what you mean by this.

I mean you are not an honest person.

HumblePuffin

Noaani wrote: »

HumblePuffin wrote: »

Noaani I believe you have stated this before somewhere but I have zero desire to even attempt to go through your post history to find it; could you list some games you view as having top end PvE experiences, and perhaps some specific encounters in those games that you especially view as top end?

I don't want to get in to encounter specifics, but of the games I have played, only three have top end PvP as I would define it - EQ, EQ2 and WoW.

Other games I have played have raid content (Rift, Age of Conan, a few others), but it doesn't quite rise up as much in those games as it does in the above three. Rift was close though.

Cool thanks. You reference eq a decent bit but wasn’t sure if there was more recent stuff on the list too.

I can think in WoW terms and I believe you’ve said there are only 4(?) you really deem that level. I haven’t done all of the raids in WoW, but I have done some and I never found the ones I did to be overly difficult, but it’s certainly safe to assume I could have missed some next level shit.

Higher mythic+ were definitely a challenge. I know you said you didn’t want to name any encounters, but maybe one WoW one that you find particularly enjoyable? I would like to watch a run.

Noaani

HumblePuffin wrote: »

Noaani wrote: »

HumblePuffin wrote: »

Noaani I believe you have stated this before somewhere but I have zero desire to even attempt to go through your post history to find it; could you list some games you view as having top end PvE experiences, and perhaps some specific encounters in those games that you especially view as top end?

I don't want to get in to encounter specifics, but of the games I have played, only three have top end PvP as I would define it - EQ, EQ2 and WoW.

Other games I have played have raid content (Rift, Age of Conan, a few others), but it doesn't quite rise up as much in those games as it does in the above three. Rift was close though.

Cool thanks. You reference eq a decent bit but wasn’t sure if there was more recent stuff on the list too.

I can think in WoW terms and I believe you’ve said there are only 4(?) you really deem that level. I haven’t done all of the raids in WoW, but I have done some and I never found the ones I did to be overly difficult, but it’s certainly safe to assume I could have missed some next level shit.

Higher mythic+ were definitely a challenge. I know you said you didn’t want to name any encounters, but maybe one WoW one that you find particularly enjoyable? I would like to watch a run.

An example would be Yogg-Saron without using the watchers.

Not going to say it was the most top end raid in WoW, but it is an example.

I have heard that Uu'nat was reasonable as well, but also that it caused a lot of complaints from players. I cant say for sure that I would consider it top end, but I am mentioning it for two reasons - it should be easier to find a video of, and also it is probably the last top end raid Blizzard will ever make.

Edit to add; the main reason many WoW raids fall short if being what I would call top end is because they are over too fast. Some of the encounters have the mechanics of a top end raid, but only take a few minutes to kill - almost not even giving players a chance to mess the mechanics up.

Take the same encounter and triple or quadruple the HP (and any fail condition timers), thus giving players a much greater window to make mistakes, and you would have far more top end encounters in that game.

HumblePuffin

Thanks that’s a solid jumping off point. I don’t believe I have done either of those. I’ll find something to watch on them later.

Nightmarelol

Catch y’all in the Corrupted Realm ☠️

hleV

I honestly think that having to hit a green player in open world to see if they want a fight is stupid. Now I don't really have a solution, but perhaps Intrepid Studios could look for one, because it's bad for everyone:

a green that doesn't want a fight gets hit by another player, which can be annoying
a green that does want a fight misses that opportunity because of unwillingness to hit or get hit by another green player who may want a fight

There should at least be some way of marking yourself a PvPer so that people around you that want to fight wouldn't have to hesitate.

Rocsek

Nightmarelol wrote: »

Catch y’all in the Corrupted Realm ☠️

Until you're a level 20 hitting like a level 1.

Can't tell if you're serious or not but...

This isn't a karma system that lets you live in that play style. You'll eventually gimp yourself in PvP so much you're not effective. Then you'll have so much corruption to either work off or have to die many times to get rid of further wasting your time or setting you back. Then if you do work it off, there is a PK counter on your character so you'll stack corruption quicker the higher that count goes.

So I wish good luck to anyone trying to play this route.

Dygz

I think getting hit once or twice isn't particularly annoying.
Quick interaction/disruption is OK. Prolonged disruption is annoying.

Level 20 hitting a Level 1 does not gain Corruption.
Level 20 killing a Level 1 will gain signficant amount of Corruption.

Depraved

hleV wrote: »

I honestly think that having to hit a green player in open world to see if they want a fight is stupid. Now I don't really have a solution, but perhaps Intrepid Studios could look for one, because it's bad for everyone:
a green that doesn't want a fight gets hit by another player, which can be annoying

a green that does want a fight misses that opportunity because of unwillingness to hit or get hit by another green player who may want a fight

There should at least be some way of marking yourself a PvPer so that people around you that want to fight wouldn't have to hesitate.

yeah you hit someone and become purple. thats how you signal people you want to fight.

also, you killing mobs near me its annoying when im not giving consent. do you want a solution for that too (that isnt pvp) since players getting annoyed seems like a legit reason to change things?

Child Item