Azherae wrote: » Nerror wrote: » Azherae wrote: » Behold! My PvX. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qWQ_aer93t8 Now with more Equality. Ok, so a fairly standard raid boss fight with two competing raids. I have questions! In T&L is it the raid group with 50%+ damage that gets the boss kill? Are the members of the other raid group not enemies until they engage inside that circle? It looks somewhat like what I envision we'll see in Ashes, except for all the teleporting. For dungeon bosses I hope there are chokepoints where you can have friendly groups preventing others from even entering, at least if they are flagged as combatants somehow, until they are strong enough to overcome the blocking force. For worldbosses out on the open that may be difficult. Would you prefer that, actually? I feel like that would just lead to the situation becoming more stale, faster. Losing side loses more rapidly, zergs get advantaged, etc. I don't care either way, but I'm interested in the concept in terms of what people find good. To be clear, I feel like the entire premise of territory/chokepoint control doesn't work in modern MMOs and Ashes does not seem to be going 'back to when it mattered' (this is sort of a good thing, but in effect it can be a bad thing if you try to design it like old games but with a new coat of paint... the paint is toxic in that case, is what I'm saying).
Nerror wrote: » Azherae wrote: » Behold! My PvX. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qWQ_aer93t8 Now with more Equality. Ok, so a fairly standard raid boss fight with two competing raids. I have questions! In T&L is it the raid group with 50%+ damage that gets the boss kill? Are the members of the other raid group not enemies until they engage inside that circle? It looks somewhat like what I envision we'll see in Ashes, except for all the teleporting. For dungeon bosses I hope there are chokepoints where you can have friendly groups preventing others from even entering, at least if they are flagged as combatants somehow, until they are strong enough to overcome the blocking force. For worldbosses out on the open that may be difficult.
Azherae wrote: » Behold! My PvX. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qWQ_aer93t8 Now with more Equality.
Nerror wrote: » Azherae wrote: » Nerror wrote: » Azherae wrote: » Behold! My PvX. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qWQ_aer93t8 Now with more Equality. Ok, so a fairly standard raid boss fight with two competing raids. I have questions! In T&L is it the raid group with 50%+ damage that gets the boss kill? Are the members of the other raid group not enemies until they engage inside that circle? It looks somewhat like what I envision we'll see in Ashes, except for all the teleporting. For dungeon bosses I hope there are chokepoints where you can have friendly groups preventing others from even entering, at least if they are flagged as combatants somehow, until they are strong enough to overcome the blocking force. For worldbosses out on the open that may be difficult. Would you prefer that, actually? I feel like that would just lead to the situation becoming more stale, faster. Losing side loses more rapidly, zergs get advantaged, etc. I don't care either way, but I'm interested in the concept in terms of what people find good. To be clear, I feel like the entire premise of territory/chokepoint control doesn't work in modern MMOs and Ashes does not seem to be going 'back to when it mattered' (this is sort of a good thing, but in effect it can be a bad thing if you try to design it like old games but with a new coat of paint... the paint is toxic in that case, is what I'm saying). I don't want it for all fights. Actually, I think it's more about the flagging than the choke points really. I would like to reward organization in terms of having forces ready to take on competing raid groups before they even reach the boss. It looked like people were able to run back to near the boss uncontested, and the fighting only took place while engaged with the boss. I think that is a bit silly. If all you have is enough for the raid to kill the boss, then that is what it is, but I don't have a problem at all with one raid group on the boss and one raid group protecting them outside the immediate boss area. Yes, it favours large guilds or alliances, but that's fine. The competing group will have to bring two raids groups as well, and they will dispatch the first raid group through sheer numbers, unless the raid group on the boss peel off and help them. The main issue will probably be the flagging if starting a guild war on the opposing raids isn't a thing. Having to go corrupt to contest a boss through other means than DPS would suck a little IMO. That and boss-fights lasting long enough to where that back and forth has time to take place. But back to the question, how did the flagging thing work in that video? Did it happen automatically when entering the circle?
Azherae wrote: » Nerror wrote: » Azherae wrote: » Nerror wrote: » Azherae wrote: » Behold! My PvX. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qWQ_aer93t8 Now with more Equality. Ok, so a fairly standard raid boss fight with two competing raids. I have questions! In T&L is it the raid group with 50%+ damage that gets the boss kill? Are the members of the other raid group not enemies until they engage inside that circle? It looks somewhat like what I envision we'll see in Ashes, except for all the teleporting. For dungeon bosses I hope there are chokepoints where you can have friendly groups preventing others from even entering, at least if they are flagged as combatants somehow, until they are strong enough to overcome the blocking force. For worldbosses out on the open that may be difficult. Would you prefer that, actually? I feel like that would just lead to the situation becoming more stale, faster. Losing side loses more rapidly, zergs get advantaged, etc. I don't care either way, but I'm interested in the concept in terms of what people find good. To be clear, I feel like the entire premise of territory/chokepoint control doesn't work in modern MMOs and Ashes does not seem to be going 'back to when it mattered' (this is sort of a good thing, but in effect it can be a bad thing if you try to design it like old games but with a new coat of paint... the paint is toxic in that case, is what I'm saying). I don't want it for all fights. Actually, I think it's more about the flagging than the choke points really. I would like to reward organization in terms of having forces ready to take on competing raid groups before they even reach the boss. It looked like people were able to run back to near the boss uncontested, and the fighting only took place while engaged with the boss. I think that is a bit silly. If all you have is enough for the raid to kill the boss, then that is what it is, but I don't have a problem at all with one raid group on the boss and one raid group protecting them outside the immediate boss area. Yes, it favours large guilds or alliances, but that's fine. The competing group will have to bring two raids groups as well, and they will dispatch the first raid group through sheer numbers, unless the raid group on the boss peel off and help them. The main issue will probably be the flagging if starting a guild war on the opposing raids isn't a thing. Having to go corrupt to contest a boss through other means than DPS would suck a little IMO. That and boss-fights lasting long enough to where that back and forth has time to take place. But back to the question, how did the flagging thing work in that video? Did it happen automatically when entering the circle? Yes, basically. Thanks for the data.
Nerror wrote: » Azherae wrote: » Nerror wrote: » Azherae wrote: » Nerror wrote: » Azherae wrote: » Behold! My PvX. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qWQ_aer93t8 Now with more Equality. Ok, so a fairly standard raid boss fight with two competing raids. I have questions! In T&L is it the raid group with 50%+ damage that gets the boss kill? Are the members of the other raid group not enemies until they engage inside that circle? It looks somewhat like what I envision we'll see in Ashes, except for all the teleporting. For dungeon bosses I hope there are chokepoints where you can have friendly groups preventing others from even entering, at least if they are flagged as combatants somehow, until they are strong enough to overcome the blocking force. For worldbosses out on the open that may be difficult. Would you prefer that, actually? I feel like that would just lead to the situation becoming more stale, faster. Losing side loses more rapidly, zergs get advantaged, etc. I don't care either way, but I'm interested in the concept in terms of what people find good. To be clear, I feel like the entire premise of territory/chokepoint control doesn't work in modern MMOs and Ashes does not seem to be going 'back to when it mattered' (this is sort of a good thing, but in effect it can be a bad thing if you try to design it like old games but with a new coat of paint... the paint is toxic in that case, is what I'm saying). I don't want it for all fights. Actually, I think it's more about the flagging than the choke points really. I would like to reward organization in terms of having forces ready to take on competing raid groups before they even reach the boss. It looked like people were able to run back to near the boss uncontested, and the fighting only took place while engaged with the boss. I think that is a bit silly. If all you have is enough for the raid to kill the boss, then that is what it is, but I don't have a problem at all with one raid group on the boss and one raid group protecting them outside the immediate boss area. Yes, it favours large guilds or alliances, but that's fine. The competing group will have to bring two raids groups as well, and they will dispatch the first raid group through sheer numbers, unless the raid group on the boss peel off and help them. The main issue will probably be the flagging if starting a guild war on the opposing raids isn't a thing. Having to go corrupt to contest a boss through other means than DPS would suck a little IMO. That and boss-fights lasting long enough to where that back and forth has time to take place. But back to the question, how did the flagging thing work in that video? Did it happen automatically when entering the circle? Yes, basically. Thanks for the data. Ok. Well, it's certainly a way to do it, and it circumvents the flagging issues to some extent. Without having tried it versus how I imagine Ashes will do it, it's hard to say which system ends up better, but maybe we'll find out in A2.
Ethanh37 wrote: » im guessing the blue out line is the boss fight area and the other group cant see the bosses health unless they have a member in that area... i liked the moment at 11.28 wiped them in seconds that time... this type of PVP content is what people will be expecting i think, what people complain about is the thought of getting killed out in the open world more often...and for no reason...
Nerror wrote: » It just hit me what my main issue is with the T&L system in that video is. It feels very themepark-y and not very player driven. Or perhaps like a gameshow or big arena fight, is another way to put it. I prefer it more chaotic, player controlled and with less fairness forced on the players in those situations.
JustVine wrote: » Nerror wrote: » It just hit me what my main issue is with the T&L system in that video is. It feels very themepark-y and not very player driven. Or perhaps like a gameshow or big arena fight, is another way to put it. I prefer it more chaotic, player controlled and with less fairness forced on the players in those situations. 'Themepark-y' feels fairly subjective to me here. Like, my first reaction was 'what the fuck are you even talking about', but I thought about it and was like 'nah if I step in Nerror's shoes I can sorta see it.' Still... As for your actual point the actual reason I'm chiming in. I feel like I've observed enough of the people interested in this game to come to the conclusion that this 'i want less fairness in the game' to be a common sentiment. But given the combat design of Ashes specifically, I do not think that really makes sense.
Nerror wrote: » JustVine wrote: » Nerror wrote: » It just hit me what my main issue is with the T&L system in that video is. It feels very themepark-y and not very player driven. Or perhaps like a gameshow or big arena fight, is another way to put it. I prefer it more chaotic, player controlled and with less fairness forced on the players in those situations. 'Themepark-y' feels fairly subjective to me here. Like, my first reaction was 'what the fuck are you even talking about', but I thought about it and was like 'nah if I step in Nerror's shoes I can sorta see it.' Still... As for your actual point the actual reason I'm chiming in. I feel like I've observed enough of the people interested in this game to come to the conclusion that this 'i want less fairness in the game' to be a common sentiment. But given the combat design of Ashes specifically, I do not think that really makes sense. Of course, it's subjective Can you elaborate what you mean about the combat design of Ashes that goes against the "I want less fairness" sentiment? I don't quite follow.
Azherae wrote: » Behold! My PvX. Now with more Equality.
Azherae wrote: » I don't care either way, but I'm interested in the concept in terms of what people find good.
chibibree wrote: » Beauchee wrote: » I understand the desire for a balance between PvE and PvP systems in Ashes of Creation. While PvX offers a blend of both, some may lean towards PvE-centric gameplay. It's about finding your comfort level within the spectrum. Personally, I enjoy the risks PvP brings but prefer PvE overall. It's worth noting that PvP encounters or risks can often be avoided or mitigated, allowing PvE-focused players to still thrive in the world of Verra. Let's embrace the diverse preferences within the community and enjoy the game together; see you on the battlefield. PS: If we happen to play on the same server, count on me to assist you and Virtek in securing that household or tavern land plot. I agree! Lots of unique perceptions when it comes to these things. I also prefer PvE. Also, heck yeah! The Golden Feather Tavern will be up and running in no time!
Beauchee wrote: » I understand the desire for a balance between PvE and PvP systems in Ashes of Creation. While PvX offers a blend of both, some may lean towards PvE-centric gameplay. It's about finding your comfort level within the spectrum. Personally, I enjoy the risks PvP brings but prefer PvE overall. It's worth noting that PvP encounters or risks can often be avoided or mitigated, allowing PvE-focused players to still thrive in the world of Verra. Let's embrace the diverse preferences within the community and enjoy the game together; see you on the battlefield. PS: If we happen to play on the same server, count on me to assist you and Virtek in securing that household or tavern land plot.
Otr wrote: » chibibree wrote: » Beauchee wrote: » I understand the desire for a balance between PvE and PvP systems in Ashes of Creation. While PvX offers a blend of both, some may lean towards PvE-centric gameplay. It's about finding your comfort level within the spectrum. Personally, I enjoy the risks PvP brings but prefer PvE overall. It's worth noting that PvP encounters or risks can often be avoided or mitigated, allowing PvE-focused players to still thrive in the world of Verra. Let's embrace the diverse preferences within the community and enjoy the game together; see you on the battlefield. PS: If we happen to play on the same server, count on me to assist you and Virtek in securing that household or tavern land plot. I agree! Lots of unique perceptions when it comes to these things. I also prefer PvE. Also, heck yeah! The Golden Feather Tavern will be up and running in no time! To prefer PvE is fine. The problem is when you hate risks in a game which has risk vs reward as a core pillar. To like AoC you must love the caravan concept and risks in general. This whole game is about resources: - artificially created scarcity - moving them around trying to avoid being attacked - taking resources from other nodes You must see the PvE as the source of resources and with the associated risk that you will not get them. If Steven removes risk, it goes against a core pillar of the game. So if you want PvE just to chill or to show how skilled you are to defeat some AI then AoC might not be the right game for you, because only 20% of content might overlap with your expectations and you might lose the resources anyway on your trip back to the node.
Pawkets wrote: » chibibree wrote: » Do I want PvE only servers? No. I enjoy the risks that come with the PvP Systems in mind. Will I need a group of friends to play with because (even though I'm complimented for living in the Caravan stream) I'm a big scaredy cat when it comes to PvP? Absolutely! I picture you living in that showcase because you were hiding under the caravan until everyone else in the fight died and someone found you under the caravan.
chibibree wrote: » Do I want PvE only servers? No. I enjoy the risks that come with the PvP Systems in mind. Will I need a group of friends to play with because (even though I'm complimented for living in the Caravan stream) I'm a big scaredy cat when it comes to PvP? Absolutely!
Solid_Sneak wrote: » Might be reading this wrong, but OP's issue is they play MMOs solo? Also as people mentioned, yes, "PK" is gonna be primarily between gatherers who are greedy. Some call it "robbery", some prefer the term "Advanced Stalinism".
chibibree wrote: » Otr wrote: » chibibree wrote: » Beauchee wrote: » I understand the desire for a balance between PvE and PvP systems in Ashes of Creation. While PvX offers a blend of both, some may lean towards PvE-centric gameplay. It's about finding your comfort level within the spectrum. Personally, I enjoy the risks PvP brings but prefer PvE overall. It's worth noting that PvP encounters or risks can often be avoided or mitigated, allowing PvE-focused players to still thrive in the world of Verra. Let's embrace the diverse preferences within the community and enjoy the game together; see you on the battlefield. PS: If we happen to play on the same server, count on me to assist you and Virtek in securing that household or tavern land plot. I agree! Lots of unique perceptions when it comes to these things. I also prefer PvE. Also, heck yeah! The Golden Feather Tavern will be up and running in no time! To prefer PvE is fine. The problem is when you hate risks in a game which has risk vs reward as a core pillar. To like AoC you must love the caravan concept and risks in general. This whole game is about resources: - artificially created scarcity - moving them around trying to avoid being attacked - taking resources from other nodes You must see the PvE as the source of resources and with the associated risk that you will not get them. If Steven removes risk, it goes against a core pillar of the game. So if you want PvE just to chill or to show how skilled you are to defeat some AI then AoC might not be the right game for you, because only 20% of content might overlap with your expectations and you might lose the resources anyway on your trip back to the node. The thing is I don't hate risks. I like them, they should be there. I was just saying I prefer PvE.
Otr wrote: » chibibree wrote: » Otr wrote: » chibibree wrote: » Beauchee wrote: » I understand the desire for a balance between PvE and PvP systems in Ashes of Creation. While PvX offers a blend of both, some may lean towards PvE-centric gameplay. It's about finding your comfort level within the spectrum. Personally, I enjoy the risks PvP brings but prefer PvE overall. It's worth noting that PvP encounters or risks can often be avoided or mitigated, allowing PvE-focused players to still thrive in the world of Verra. Let's embrace the diverse preferences within the community and enjoy the game together; see you on the battlefield. PS: If we happen to play on the same server, count on me to assist you and Virtek in securing that household or tavern land plot. I agree! Lots of unique perceptions when it comes to these things. I also prefer PvE. Also, heck yeah! The Golden Feather Tavern will be up and running in no time! To prefer PvE is fine. The problem is when you hate risks in a game which has risk vs reward as a core pillar. To like AoC you must love the caravan concept and risks in general. This whole game is about resources: - artificially created scarcity - moving them around trying to avoid being attacked - taking resources from other nodes You must see the PvE as the source of resources and with the associated risk that you will not get them. If Steven removes risk, it goes against a core pillar of the game. So if you want PvE just to chill or to show how skilled you are to defeat some AI then AoC might not be the right game for you, because only 20% of content might overlap with your expectations and you might lose the resources anyway on your trip back to the node. The thing is I don't hate risks. I like them, they should be there. I was just saying I prefer PvE. I would not mind the mega catacomb generated by the Divine metropolis which extend it's vassal nodes, to be closer to the PvE you like but only if you find a way to make it so only for the divine citizens, without relying on instances.
chibibree wrote: » Do I want PvE only servers? No. I enjoy the risks that come with the PvP Systems in mind. Will I need a group of friends to play with because (even though I'm complimented for living in the Caravan stream) I'm a big scaredy cat when it comes to PvP? Absolutely! All in all, I'm just trying to say that I think PvX can be considered more of a spectrum...
