Yeah which is exactly as intended. It was my sentence not yours! Jaysus.
Americans debating English. Give us all a laugh.
Your incorrect, strawman sentences were:
"Lol this is fundamentally the same as RL stereotypes. So anyone who enjoys PvP is a 'trash talker'?"
Again. Not semantics.
You just try to move the bar so as not to appear incorrect.
As for median attempts per boss, this is something that is both hard to really work out (especially a decade after the fact) but also not overly applicable to the notion of a discussion on repetitive gameplay. It was fairly common for only a few pulls at an idea to happen at a time, and if no real progress was being made, a different idea that was vastly different was attempted.
Some encounters absolutely were killed first attempt, without a doubt. Some encounters took hundreds of hours of attempts, with the above multiple different ideas being fairly common.
You're referring here to different ideas being attempted. IE: different attempts at cracking the encounter.
Once cracked, it stays cracked. Then it just becomes a case of everyone knowing the script and not fucking up.
PvP is never solved in the same way. Yes there can be dominant strategies, groups etc - but the enemy then continues to evolve around your strategies.
So the variety in PvP is not coming from the different group setups (yes that contributes), but more fundamentally from the very nature of competing vs enemies who learn, improve and adapt.
As I said earlier, PvE is like Agent Smith to PvP's Neo. It can be very advanced, difficult, fun etc.. but is inherently limited by its programmed nature.
Does noone have answer for this?
Or would we rather sit furiously flicking through dictionaries to engage in semantic warfare? [/yawn]
1
Options
DygzMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
I know, petty isn't it?
How about we just give everyone the benefit of the doubt and meet each other in the middle?
I mean... when you are factually incorrect, you are factually incorrect.
There was no stereotyping where you claim there was. There is no middle there. Just true or false
And your claim was false.
I know, petty isn't it?
How about we just give everyone the benefit of the doubt and meet each other in the middle?
I mean... when you are factually incorrect, you are factually incorrect.
There was no stereotyping where you claim there was. There is no middle there. Just true or false
And your claim was false.
There was. But the key point here is, as usual, that you know exactly what was meant and have chosen to drag a thread out with nitpicking instead. It's boring, totally non-constructive, and only makes you look a bit of a tit.
Shall we get back to Ashes?
As for median attempts per boss, this is something that is both hard to really work out (especially a decade after the fact) but also not overly applicable to the notion of a discussion on repetitive gameplay. It was fairly common for only a few pulls at an idea to happen at a time, and if no real progress was being made, a different idea that was vastly different was attempted.
Some encounters absolutely were killed first attempt, without a doubt. Some encounters took hundreds of hours of attempts, with the above multiple different ideas being fairly common.
You're referring here to different ideas being attempted. IE: different attempts at cracking the encounter.
Once cracked, it stays cracked. Then it just becomes a case of everyone knowing the script and not fucking up.
PvP is never solved in the same way. Yes there can be dominant strategies, groups etc - but the enemy then continues to evolve around your strategies.
So the variety in PvP is not coming from the different group setups (yes that contributes), but more fundamentally from the very nature of competing vs enemies who learn, improve and adapt.
As I said earlier, PvE is like Agent Smith to PvP's Neo. It can be very advanced, difficult, fun etc.. but is inherently limited by its programmed nature.
Does noone have answer for this?
Or would we rather sit furiously flicking through dictionaries to engage in semantic warfare? [/yawn]
I don't think you are going to get a answer certain people have their preferences so you aren't really going to change anyone's mind.
I agree with the whole pve / pvp thing already argued this is the past and it got no where. I've always said as more eyes are on the game and the closer it gets to actual release you will get more people with this view point.
Only argument that pvp strategy than PvE is if pvp becomes about who zergs harder, and war types of pvp lack objectives and is just about a giant ball.
PvE is meant to be beat, PvP is players fighting and that conflict constantly increases the bar level of players strength.
Pretty much all I'm going to say on this though, I don't want to get into any arguments around this since I have more important things to do atm lol.
As for median attempts per boss, this is something that is both hard to really work out (especially a decade after the fact) but also not overly applicable to the notion of a discussion on repetitive gameplay. It was fairly common for only a few pulls at an idea to happen at a time, and if no real progress was being made, a different idea that was vastly different was attempted.
Some encounters absolutely were killed first attempt, without a doubt. Some encounters took hundreds of hours of attempts, with the above multiple different ideas being fairly common.
You're referring here to different ideas being attempted. IE: different attempts at cracking the encounter.
Once cracked, it stays cracked. Then it just becomes a case of everyone knowing the script and not fucking up.
PvP is never solved in the same way. Yes there can be dominant strategies, groups etc - but the enemy then continues to evolve around your strategies.
So the variety in PvP is not coming from the different group setups (yes that contributes), but more fundamentally from the very nature of competing vs enemies who learn, improve and adapt.
As I said earlier, PvE is like Agent Smith to PvP's Neo. It can be very advanced, difficult, fun etc.. but is inherently limited by its programmed nature.
Does noone have answer for this?
Or would we rather sit furiously flicking through dictionaries to engage in semantic warfare? [/yawn]
I don't think you are going to get a answer certain people have their preferences so you aren't really going to change anyone's mind.
I agree with the whole pve / pvp thing already argued this is the past and it got no where. I've always said as more eyes are on the game and the closer it gets to actual release you will get more people with this view point.
Only argument that pvp strategy than PvE is if pvp becomes about who zergs harder, and war types of pvp lack objectives and is just about a giant ball.
PvE is meant to be beat, PvP is players fighting and that conflict constantly increases the bar level of players strength.
Pretty much all I'm going to say on this though, I don't want to get into any arguments around this since I have more important things to do atm lol.
If it was just "we like different things" yeah, fair. Great.
But this argument that scripted PvE is more varied than PvP is just madness.
I also find it odd/ironic that most hostility in this forum comes from PvEers.
As for median attempts per boss, this is something that is both hard to really work out (especially a decade after the fact) but also not overly applicable to the notion of a discussion on repetitive gameplay. It was fairly common for only a few pulls at an idea to happen at a time, and if no real progress was being made, a different idea that was vastly different was attempted.
Some encounters absolutely were killed first attempt, without a doubt. Some encounters took hundreds of hours of attempts, with the above multiple different ideas being fairly common.
You're referring here to different ideas being attempted. IE: different attempts at cracking the encounter.
Once cracked, it stays cracked. Then it just becomes a case of everyone knowing the script and not fucking up.
PvP is never solved in the same way. Yes there can be dominant strategies, groups etc - but the enemy then continues to evolve around your strategies.
So the variety in PvP is not coming from the different group setups (yes that contributes), but more fundamentally from the very nature of competing vs enemies who learn, improve and adapt.
As I said earlier, PvE is like Agent Smith to PvP's Neo. It can be very advanced, difficult, fun etc.. but is inherently limited by its programmed nature.
Does noone have answer for this?
Or would we rather sit furiously flicking through dictionaries to engage in semantic warfare? [/yawn]
I don't think you are going to get a answer certain people have their preferences so you aren't really going to change anyone's mind.
I agree with the whole pve / pvp thing already argued this is the past and it got no where. I've always said as more eyes are on the game and the closer it gets to actual release you will get more people with this view point.
Only argument that pvp strategy than PvE is if pvp becomes about who zergs harder, and war types of pvp lack objectives and is just about a giant ball.
PvE is meant to be beat, PvP is players fighting and that conflict constantly increases the bar level of players strength.
Pretty much all I'm going to say on this though, I don't want to get into any arguments around this since I have more important things to do atm lol.
If it was just "we like different things" yeah, fair. Great.
But this argument that scripted PvE is more varied than PvP is just madness.
I also find it odd/ironic that most hostility in this forum comes from PvEers.
Certain people just have very strong opinions, I'm sure I'm one of them lol.
Though I'd rather see strong reactions since it gets better feedback rather than everyone agreeing imo. Eventually you get to a wall though.
If it was just "we like different things" yeah, fair. Great.
But this argument that scripted PvE is more varied than PvP is just madness.
I also find it odd/ironic that most hostility in this forum comes from PvEers.
Hostility is in the eye of the beholder.
There's one person who pops up on the Forums once in a while who I would flag as always hostile.
Everyone else just has strong opinions. And then there can be some low key frustration sometimes as we struggle to understand how diverse playstyles influence perceptions and expectations.
I tend to agree that mobs/NPCs are more predictable than gamers.
Which is precisely why I prefer PvE over PvP.
It could also be true that for Noaani, PvPers feel more predictable than mobs.
Different people have different perspectives.
That's OK.
0
Options
DygzMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
There was. But the key point here is, as usual, that you know exactly what was meant and have chosen to drag a thread out with nitpicking instead. It's boring, totally non-constructive, and only makes you look a bit of a tit.
Shall we get back to Ashes?
There wasn't. You were the one who began with the boring, non-constructive, false claim. You can also stop pursuing this specific conversation whenever you like, since you don't want admit to being wrong.
So, what you are saying is that PvE is harder? That PvP players can't handle it?
No, what I'm saying is that this repetition is simply dull to people. Those 33 repetitive attempts are still way too similar to each other, while 33 pvp fights could have several different groups, with different gear, with different power lvls, with different gameplay strategies - all of that also around different mobs, so the interaction overall can be even more different.
That doesn't feel as dull as attempting the same boss over and over, so pvpers don't get tired of it as fast.
And if repetitive same actions are seen as strength in pve games, then, as I've already said, my whole pvp bubble was about grinding and repetitiveness. No one got tired of that, even if pvp quantity took a dip from time to time.
You could say that, but the implication there would be that PvE players are happy in their game of choice, where as PvP players are shopping around.
No one ever left EQ for another game? No one ever left WoW for another game? PvPers are not unique here. Everyone leaves sooner or later, and for a multitude of reasons.
One of the biggest reasons for why people stopped playing pvp mmos was because the only good ones that were still left went to utter shit. Stuff like mobas and BRs is definitely a reason, but considering that majority of my mates in late 00s were also playing dota on the side of L2 - both games coexisted just fine. Dota just won out in the end when we all saw the writing on the wall and decided to only play on earlier versions of L2, but obviously not everyone was willing to do that over and over again.
There were 20 different titles that required killing 20,000 mobs of a specific type. Running around with the "Executioner of Fairies" title is just fun. Getting all 20 titles is 400,000 mobs of specific types that you need to kill.
Titles are cute and all, and I would grind that out if bosses weren't available, but to me they are in no way rewarding. Well, the "see, I did this" stamp is definitely rewarding, but the process itself is not. When I grinded 400k mobs in L2 - all of them dropped mats for crafting, which I could then use to make my gear better (cause OE> burn> craft again> OE higher> repeat).
If I couldn't grind top gear like that in EQ, the grind wouldn't be rewarding to me.
And that's simply where our views differ yet again. To me that's just presenting players loot on a silver platter. I prefer market gameplay and manipulation, when it comes to getting a thing that you need but which keeps not dropping from the mob that you kill.
Entire server markets were manipulated in various ways just to control a price on some rare item or in preparation for it. To me this deeper interaction is way more interesting than "just go kill mob and you'll get what you need".
But I know that you'll say my preference is shit design, so we can avoid that particular conversation
TL;DR
Before 2004, EQ was the WoW of MMORPGs (in the US). Still immensely popular 10 years ago.
Appreciate the history lesson No one in my circles knew what EQ(2) or any of those games were. We only knew what was available on our PC cafes' machines and those were L2 and Mu Online.
No one surfed the internet, because why would you do that when you have limited time at the PC cafe, and no one in my circles could afford gaming journals, so even the WoW news got to us waaay later when people started getting internet at their homes and buying PCs for themselves.
1
Options
DygzMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
Appreciate the history lesson No one in my circles knew what EQ(2) or any of those games were. We only knew what was available on our PC cafes' machines and those were L2 and Mu Online.
No one surfed the internet, because why would you do that when you have limited time at the PC cafe, and no one in my circles could afford gaming journals, so even the WoW news got to us waaay later when people started getting internet at their homes and buying PCs for themselves.
Yeah... that's amazing!
Kinda reminds me of the arcades in the US in the 60s - 80s.
My foot in the door for Activision was when some QA guys saw me reading PC Gamer while I was eating at a restaurant a couple of doors down from the Activision offices.
How many hours would you typically spend playing games at the PC cafe???
People started buying PCs for themselves, when? Late 2000s?
As for median attempts per boss, this is something that is both hard to really work out (especially a decade after the fact) but also not overly applicable to the notion of a discussion on repetitive gameplay. It was fairly common for only a few pulls at an idea to happen at a time, and if no real progress was being made, a different idea that was vastly different was attempted.
Some encounters absolutely were killed first attempt, without a doubt. Some encounters took hundreds of hours of attempts, with the above multiple different ideas being fairly common.
You're referring here to different ideas being attempted. IE: different attempts at cracking the encounter.
Once cracked, it stays cracked. Then it just becomes a case of everyone knowing the script and not fucking up.
This is generally true. There are exceptions to it, but not ones that are worth us discussing here.
However, it is also at this point where (especially in EQ2) you are only really going to do this new thing you just learned how to do once a week, for about 12 weeks or so.
PvP, on the other hand, is basically always the same. You are never learning how to do something new - at least not on the scale of learning a new top end PvE encounter.
While it may well be true that players learn, improve and adapt (I didn't see it in my time playing Archeage), there is no doubt at all that this learning, improving and adapting happens at a slower rate than what players have to learn for PvE - because sure, you may spend 12 weeks killing a mob in the same manner after you learn how to do so, but in that time you are also working on learning the next encounter, or the encounter after that.
In the two years of playing Archeages Mistmerrow, the biggest change/adaptation that the rival faction managed to make was "lets start off by going counter-clockwise rather than clockwise".
It took them two years to even try that.
Mass PvP specifically changes at literally a glacial pace.
While your last statement that PvE is limited by programming is true - PvP is also limited. In PvP, players only have access to class abilities, where as in PvE developers can add literally anything they want to an encounter.
This is why my argument is not that one encounter is more varied than PvP, but PvEas a whole is more varied than PvP could ever be.
How many hours would you typically spend playing games at the PC cafe???
People started buying PCs for themselves, when? Late 2000s?
Both depended on how much money you had, and the first one also included how much time.
School kids would usually get 1-2h. If it was the weekend and your family had enough money to give you some allowance, you'd get 4-5h. Older people would usually cruise at 3h and buyout night shifts in-between weekends (full night was considered 7h at a highly discounted price).
As for home PCs, it varied wildly. I managed to get one in 2005, but didn't have good internet and didn't have a dvd drive for a few years, so couldn't really install L2 at home. Iirc I started playing it at home somewhere in 2008 or early 2009.
Richer folks bought stuff even earlier. Poorer kids got PCs in late 00s, if at all. Once I started grinding L2 at home I stopped going to PC cafes, so don't know much about 10s and later. Do know that all of our cafes died out by ~2016, so I guess majority of people got their own PCs or switched to phone gaming.
So, what you are saying is that PvE is harder? That PvP players can't handle it?
No, what I'm saying is that this repetition is simply dull to people. Those 33 repetitive attempts are still way too similar to each other, while 33 pvp fights could have several different groups, with different gear, with different power lvls, with different gameplay strategies - all of that also around different mobs, so the interaction overall can be even more different.
Look objectively at PvP.
If you seperate them off in to small scale, medium scale and large scale, there really isn't much variation. The only question is if you are on the side that wins or the side that loses. PvP is far more repetitive than those 33 or so attempts at that boss.
No one ever left EQ for another game? No one ever left WoW for another game?
That coment was in the context of what you said, not something I said.
You said that perhaps people that were playing other PvE games that were capable of being at the top end were instead opting to stay in the game they were in, while PvP players were not. This is not something I agree with, but the implication is again that PvE players are happy with their game where as PvP players are not.
When I grinded 400k mobs in L2 - all of them dropped mats for crafting, which I could then use to make my gear better (cause OE> burn> craft again> OE higher> repeat).
It is the notion of top gear being able to come from such a mindless grind that turned many people I know away from L2.
Gear quality should be a direct representation of the difficulty of the content you defeated to get said gear, not a result of how long you mindlessly grind trash mobs.
That said, in EQ2 that grind for the titles could well see you earning a reasonable amount of coin, and since near every group of mobs in the game has a named mob or moss associated with it, and killing them results in better drops, you'd probably still be fine.
And that's simply where our views differ yet again. To me that's just presenting players loot on a silver platter.
And yet, only about 3% of players were able to get the full set.
That is one hard to grab silver platter.
Again, games like EQ and EQ2 reward gear based on the difficulty of the encounter. You can't manipulate a market that you can't control the supply of, and you can't hide behind bad RNG. If you are good enough, you will have that gear. If you are not good enough, you will not have it.
If you seperate them off in to small scale, medium scale and large scale, there really isn't much variation. The only question is if you are on the side that wins or the side that loses. PvP is far more repetitive than those 33 or so attempts at that boss.
Mass pvp might be more repetitive than smaller scaled fights, cause it usually includes everyone from those small scales and the overall strategy depends on the person at the top trying out different approaches.
People from your AA example apparently were shit at trying out new approaches. I've seen leaders that could try out a dozen different attack pattern throughout a single siege, and imo I haven't even played with the best leaders in the game, so I'm sure there those who could do even more.
You said that perhaps people that were playing other PvE games that were capable of being at the top end were instead opting to stay in the game they were in, while PvP players were not. This is not something I agree with, but the implication is again that PvE players are happy with their game where as PvP players are not.
I think you misread what I said. I said that top pvpers, who might've been good enough to be top EQers, stayed in their games cause they were at the top.
Do you have examples of top pvers from other games who came to EQ and could also stay at the top? Or did no one of that caliber ever switched to EQ?
And yet, only about 3% of players were able to get the full set.
That is one hard to grab silver platter.
Again, games like EQ and EQ2 reward gear based on the difficulty of the encounter. You can't manipulate a market that you can't control the supply of, and you can't hide behind bad RNG. If you are good enough, you will have that gear. If you are not good enough, you will not have it.
Most people did not have it.
Did the 3% apply to the entire population of the game? As in, only those who could clear the content got the full set. Or does that number include people who could clear the boss once, but then failed?
Cause if it's the former - to me that's just representation of your skill in the game. Except in L2 it was your general skill (i.e. pvp, social connections, time invested), while in EQ it was more weighted towards your pve skill.
If it's the latter - it's even more about your pve skill and your ability to upkeep that skill in all encounters.
I'd hope that Ashes manages to capture the former and merge it with L2's approach, to arrive at an even better game.
Do you have examples of top pvers from other games who came to EQ and could also stay at the top? Or did no one of that caliber ever switched to EQ?
Most of EQ2's original playerbase was from EQ.
Did the 3% apply to the entire population of the game? As in, only those who could clear the content got the full set. Or does that number include people who could clear the boss once, but then failed?
I'm not sure what you are asking here. In the context of EQ2, it makes no real sense.
If you killed a boss once, then there would be a number of these items drop (2 or 3). If you got one, then you have that item. If you then "fail", which to me could only really be the guild dissolves or you leave it, then you still have the item.
Guilds that were getting this full set though, they weren't dissolving. You needed to clear the entire expansions content, with the chest piece being from the second to last instanced boss (the last boss only being added a few weeks before the next expansion).
I'd hope that Ashes manages to capture the former and merge it with L2's approach, to arrive at an even better game.
This is somethign Archeage did fairly well, within the constraints of the difficulty they developed PvE content to, and if you ignore the pay to win nature of the game (which I did).
You could make base tier items fairly easily, and regrade (enchant) them at this early stage. The materials for this were all things that you could just grind out in various ways.
Then, when you had regraded this base item to a point you were happy, you could go out and kill content to get components that were used to upgrade the item to the next tier, keeping the regrade level you had achieved.
Thus, the items you were wearing were a result of both how much you were willing to grind out basic shit, and how good at killing the games content you were.
I would be shocked to see anything other than this system in Ashes, as it was easily the best aspect of Archeage.
Then I'm glad that EQ2 managed to hold their audience as long as it did. Cause if there's no migration between games - they die, due to people leaving for non-changing-games reasons.
This is also how we get people that only played 1 game their entire life (WoW being the biggest example because it was just the biggest game). People stay in their game because they either only prefer it or are just so deep in sunken cost that they don't want to leave, and any new game just fails cause it has no audience to draw upon (even if the game is good).
So, just as top EQers stayed in EQ at the top, as top WoWers stayed at WoW's top - same was true for top L2ers. Why move to another game, when you're at the top in your own and you like it there.
And that's why anyone who would've come to EQ from other games were most likely not the kind of players who would be able to get to the top. It's not really about shopping around. Cause if it was - your few years in AA could be seen as you "leaving EQ to shop around", but I doubt that was your reason for playing AA.
Guilds that were getting this full set though, they weren't dissolving. You needed to clear the entire expansions content, with the chest piece being from the second to last instanced boss (the last boss only being added a few weeks before the next expansion).
This was the piece of info that I was missing for my question.
So the answer is the latter. The 3% imply that those who might've been able to clear some bosses that gave you the set items later failed to clear other bosses, which is why they didn't get the full set and weren't a part of the 3%.
So, just as top EQers stayed in EQ at the top, as top WoWers stayed at WoW's top - same was true for top L2ers. Why move to another game, when you're at the top in your own and you like it there.
As someone that has been at the top myself in 2 MMO's, near the top in 3 others, and run with people at the top in another 3, I disagree with this premise.
While it may (or may not) be true in L2, people do indeed move around games somewhat often. Many guilds operate in multiple games at the same time, often at the top of many.
While it may (or may not) be true in L2, people do indeed move around games somewhat often. Many guilds operate in multiple games at the same time, often at the top of many.
Then either what you said about top EQ players is disingenuous or top EQ is simply so above any other game, that it ultimately doesn't matter that some L2ers couldn't reach it - cause no one from other games could.
@Dygz gonna be real honest with you bro, I gave you the benefit of the doubt but it just seems like you're trolling.
Steven told you that flagging sytem isn't the same as L2 because it fucking isn't. The base and general workings of it is very similar, but how it will work for the game is completely different because on the corruption side of the flagging system, the corruption penalties are much harsher. Do I REALLY have to tell you that Corruption is a part of the flagging system and that's where the differences are with L2? That's why Steven believes it will be more than enough to not encourage PKing so much. You couldn't use 3 braincells to understand that by yourself without me telling you? Holy FUCK
Again, I'm completely right and you're cherrypicking words to make it seem like Steven lied to you.
You stated that a PvX game has PvP and PvE combined.
I said PvX is when a game has PvE with the risk of you getting absolutely dumpstered by other players. In WoW that's non existant because you just toggle off PvP and nobody can touch you. So WoW is clearly not a PvX game. The main game has warmode, effectively stopping all PvP with one click so that's not PvX. You could say WoW used to be PvX, but that was ages ago.
StevenSTEVEN StevenStEvEnSteeeeven STeeeeven Steven Steven
You just seem butthurt, but in reality it's just your own fault- You were completely clueless about Lineage 2 which is the main inspiration for AoC. Steven never lied to you. We read the same things Steven said about the flagging systems, about PvP, PvE and PvX. We got EXACTLY the same information. I understood what that meant, but you somehow made up a completely wrong idea in your head about the kind of game AoC was going to be, due to being completely clueless and in years not even bothering checking what L2 was (which would have taken you 10 minutes, by the way) and now you're here, daily, claiming Steven lied to you.
You can dislike the Open Sea free for all, that part i KINDA get, but since nobody knows how it will work yet or how rewarding it will be, I'm not going to judge it until I see it. That''s because unlike you, I'm not a fucking crybaby who stays in the forums of a game he's not going to play for YEARS bitching about things he doesn't like and all of that because you couldn't take 10 minutes to do a bit of research which is honestly quite hilarious since you spend at least 2 hours in the forum daily. Boomer who acts like an angry 13 year old who didn't get the present he wanted for his birthday.
While it may (or may not) be true in L2, people do indeed move around games somewhat often. Many guilds operate in multiple games at the same time, often at the top of many.
Then either what you said about top EQ players is disingenuous or top EQ is simply so above any other game, that it ultimately doesn't matter that some L2ers couldn't reach it - cause no one from other games could.
Well, EQ2 is the hardest MMO I have played, so that probably is a factor.
A bigger factor in my opinion is the expectation of players. If you come from a game like L2 where PvE is comparitively easy if PvP isn't present, EQ2 will come as a shock. The same is true of players coming from EQ2 to L2 - in the case of these two games, it absolutely goes both ways. This is why I only ever came across one small group of moderately successful L2 players in EQ2.
Top end raiders coming from WoW to EQ2 also couldn't function. If they came over as a guild, they often never even made it to attempting raid content, as they couldn't find information on it. Those that came over to join existing guilds often didn't last long because most WoW encounters required players do specific things at specific times, while many EQ2 raids required players to think and make decisions for themselves. Players going from EQ2 to WoW had different issues though. Raids in WoW were significantly less interesting, due to not needing to think at all - the only people I know that were successful moving from EQ2 to WoW were those that did it for friends aalready in WoW.
In my experience, most players and guilds (most, not all) are somewhat unsuccessful in their second MMORPG, as that is where they find their ideas what what an MMORPG is get shattered and reformed. My second MMORPG was Age of Conan - a game I rarely talk about because I didn't do all that well there.
1
Options
DygzMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
Steven told you that flagging sytem isn't the same as L2 because it fucking isn't.
Dude! YOU wrote: "Flagging system being exactly like L2 was a dead giveaway this is a PVP game."
And I replied, "Steven says that the Ashes flagging system is not exactly like L2. Steven says that Corruption is harsher than Karma and designed to make Ashes less of a murderbox than L2."
Steven says that Ashes is not a PvP MMORPG; it is a PvX MMORPG.
The Ashes is flagging system is not exactly like L2 - even though you claimed it was.
And Steven says that Ashes is a PvX MMORPG; not a PvP MMORPG.
So, again, when you state "was a dead giveaway this is a PvP game" - that can only be true if I chose to believe Steven was lying.
The base and general workings of it is very similar, but how it will work for the game is completely different because on the corruption side of the flagging system, the corruption penalties are much harsher. Do I REALLY have to tell you that Corruption is a part of the flagging system and that's where the differences are with L2? That's why Steven believes it will be more than enough to not encourage PKing so much. You couldn't use 3 braincells to understand that by yourself without me telling you? Holy FUCK
Right, so then, I shouldn't have to fucking tell you 5+ times that that means, according to Steven in 2018, Ashes was not designed to be as much of a murderbox as he considers L2 to be. Which is why Steven says Ashes is not a PvP game.
Which again, negates your statement that "the Flagging system being exactly like L2 was a dead giveaway this is a PVP game."
Again, I'm completely right and you're cherrypicking words to make it seem like Steven lied to you.
Again, you are completely wrong. I am not cherrypicking anything.
I am blatantly showcasing where you are wrong. While pointing out that the only way for me to have believed that "the Flagging system being exactly like L2 was a dead giveaway this is a PVP game." would be for me to believe that Steven says it's not - after I directly asked him the question.
The Ashes Flagging system is acceptable to me as long as Corruption is in play across the entire map.
As Steven stated it would be when we discussed that in 2018.
I said PvX is when a game has PvE with the risk of you getting absolutely dumpstered by other players. In WoW that's non existant because you just toggle off PvP and nobody can touch you. So WoW is clearly not a PvX game. If you play a PvP server, then sure, but that's not how the game is aimed to be played, if it were, then warmode wouldn't exist. And if that's the case then you might as well make an arguement that X private server have PvP mode, too. The main game has warmode, effectively stopping all PvP with one click so that's not PvX. You could say WoW used to be PvX, but that was ages ago.
Yay. You said that in a thread that has the title: My PvX != Your PvX
And this thread has that title because people all seem to have their own concepts of what PvX is.
I don't agree with your definition of PvX.
Anyways, you just seem butthurt over the fact that you yourself were completely clueless about L2 which is the main inspiration for AoC. Steven never lied to you. We read the same things Steven said about the flagging systems and PvP, PvE and PvX. We got EXACTLY the same information. I understood what that meant, but you somehow made up a completely wrong idea in your head about the kind of game AoC was going to be (due to being completely clueless and in YEARS not even bothering checking what L2 was which would have taken you 10 minutes, by the way) and now you're here, daily, claiming Steven lied to you.
I don't know why you are fixated on L2.
1: I am not butt hurt about anything. Steven significantly changed the game by adding a ruleset in 2022 that I don't play.
2: I did not say that Steven lied. I stated that the only way I could think that "the Flagging system being exactly like L2 was a dead giveaway this is a PVP game." is if I believed Steven was lying when he told me it's not.
3: The dealbreaker is the addition of The Open Seas - which makes Ashes similar enough to EvE and ArcheAge that I no longer have an interest to play. Has nothing to do with L2 at all. So I still fail to understand why you keep bringing up L2. L2 is mostly irrelvant to this discussion other than you keep wanting to talk about it.
You can dislike the Open Sea free for all, that part i KINDA get it, but since nobody knows how it will work yet or how rewarding it will be, I'm not going to judge it until I see it. That''s because unlike you, I'm not a fucking crybaby who stays in the forums of a game he's not going to play for YEARS bitching about things he doesn't like and all of that because you couldn't take 10 minutes to do a bit of research which is honestly quite hilarious since you spend at least 2 hours in the forum daily.
I mean you don't really have to get it. Just like I don't get how my childhood friend, Joanie, hates chocolate.
I just accept that she does.
I don't think I judged anything about the Open Seas. It's just a ruleset that I don't enjoy playing.
It's a great addition for gamers who like PvP.
I stay in the Forums because I'm still going to be testing other systems, like Nodes and Augments, in the Alpha. And, I also hang out with friends I've made here. And I also try to make sure that these Forums are not just an echo chamber for gamers who only understand the expectations and perspectives of their own playstyle.
I think the crybaby is probably the poster who cussed first.
(And... with that, I'm off to dance class.)
I said the flagging system is the same as in L2, because "Flagging" literally means attacking somebody in the Open World and entering a "Flagged" state (when your name turns Pink/Purple). That's what Flagging is. That's one part that's identical to L2. Not my fault you can't even understand basic MMO PvP words and concepts cause you're a fuckng carebear who's terrified of even touching world PvP. What comes next, Corruption, assuming the player kills somebody, is the part that Steven trusts will deter PKing. Not because it does different things, it works the same as it was in L2, but because of all the safeguards added by Intrepid to protect players from Corrupted players. So even if Corruption gain is also the same as in L2 , the safeguards added AFTER Corruption (BHs, Dampening, etc) change the result completely and make PKing incredibly more dangerous and riskier than in L2.
That's why I told you 20 times that the Flagging system itself is the same as L2, but that Steven was right in saying Corruption is more punishing in AoC and that will make PKing a lot more unlikely. So once again, I'm right and AGAIN, Steven didn't lie.
Do you understand now, old crybaby, or do you want me to fucking use MSPaint?
Literally lost 20 braincells reading your attempt of a post.
I already explaind PvX. You can do all the mental gymnastics you want and pretend PvX is whatever you think it is, but you'd be wrong (again). Steven saying AoC is PvX clearly shows that what he believes to be PvX is exactly what I said: PvE with the RISK of PvP that you CANT opt out of, AKA be ready to fight and contest the good shit.
And If I have to explain to you why I'm "fixated" on Lineage 2, while we're discussing Ashes of Creation, a game inspired MAINLY by Lineage 2, so much that it takes literally every single social system that existed in Lineage 2 (even getting married ingame!) except Olympiads (for now) and adds them into the game, then you're a waste of my time.
0
Options
DygzMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
edited April 17
You said "the Flagging system being exactly like L2 was a dead giveaway this is a PVP game."
Again, I don't know why you think that is significant to the topic.
Obviously, I knew from the Kickstarter that Ashes is an MMORPG that includes PvP.
Obviously, I knew that Ashes Corruption is similar to L2 Karma, but not exactly the same.
And, I was on board to play right up until the addition of The Open Seas.
The safeguards provided by Corruption is irrelevant. Indeed, Corruption is mostly irrlevant to this discussion other than you keep bringing it up.
But the statement "the Flagging system being exactly like L2 was a dead giveaway this is a PVP game' remains invalid and wrong because Steven denied both of those components to the sentence when I directly asked him to describe Ashes PvP.
That's why I told you 20 times that the Flagging system itself is the same as L2, but that Steven was right in saying Corruption is more punishing in AoC and that will make PKing a lot more unlikely.
The flagging system is similar to L2 Karma - everyone knows that.
That has not changed since the Kickstarter.
No need for you to tell me that.
There is no disagreement that Corruption is similar to Karma.
The disagreement is that Corruption is exactly like Karma and that because of that it should have been a dead giveaway that Ashes is a PvP game to the same degree as L2.
When I asked Steven to share some MMORPGs that are a murderbox - because he kept saying that Ashes is not a murderbox, he said that Lineage II could sometimes be a murderbox, but Corruption and no deleveling should make Ashes not a murderbox.
Steven said he didn't know any MMORPGs that are a murderbox because he doesn't play games like that.
I told him I consider EvE and ArcheAge to be murderboxes. And that those are MMORPGs that are too PvP-centric for me.
Steven said those could be murderboxes if you went to certain areas that had free-for-all PvP combat, but Ashes does not have areas like that because the threat of Corruption is active across the entire map.
Obviously Sieges and Caravan raids inherently means that Ashes is a game that includes PvP.
My concern was not about whether Ashes is a game with PvP. My concern was whether or not Ashes is a murderbox.
Steven said that Ashes is not as much of a murderbox as Lineage II or EvE or ArcheAge.
So I was on board to play right up until 2022, when Steven added The Open Seas.
With the addition of The Open Seas, I place Ashes in the same category as EvE and ArcheAge - games that are too PvP-centric for me. And I no longer accept Steven's PvX label. With the addition of The Open Seas I do not consider Ashes to be a PvX game. I consider Ashes to be a PvP game, regardless of how Steven tries to spin it.
That's it.
It's not rocket science. Your obsession with the L2 flagging system continues to be mostly irrelevant to the discussion thread which started with: "Dygz, for the record, I don't dislike you or anything, I'm just completely confused as to why you're here. AoC will be exactly the opposite of what you're looking for, and it has been like that since the day I frst saw Steven talk about the game. You seem the type of player who would enjoy FF XIV. Why are you in an open world PVP MMO forum? It's very clearly something you don't or won't enjoy. The game won't change either, this has been the vision from the start."
The game did change significant;y with the addition of The Open Seas.
Steven stated that it was a significant change when he announced it.
Simple as that. And still has nothing to do with L2 Flagging.
You're so clueless it's painful.
I said the flagging system is the same as in L2, because "Flagging" literally means attacking somebody in the Open World and entering a "Flagged" state (when your name turns Pink/Purple). That's what Flagging is. That's one part that's identical to L2.
That's so ridiculous it's painful.
By that logic, Flagging in New World is identical to Flagging in Lineage II.
And Flagging on a PvP-Optional Server in EQ/EQ2 and WoW is identical to Flagging in Lineage II.
Again...obviously the description of Sieges and Caravans clearly tells everyone that Ashes is a game that includes PvP.
But, that is different than Ashes being a PvP game - especially when Steven always says that Ashes is not a PvP game.
Before the addition of The Open Seas, I believed Steven when he said that Ashes is not a PvP game.
With the addition of The Open Seas, I no longer agree with Steven that Ashes is not a PvP game.
With the addition of The Open Seas, I place Ashes in my category of "Too PvP-centric", alongside EvE and ArcheAge.
Not my fault you can't even understand basic MMO PvP words and concepts cause you're a fuckng carebear who's terrified of even touching world PvP.
Again, this is you being a hyperbolic crybaby.
I am a Carebear. I'm not terrified of touching a world of PvP.
I enjoy objective-based PvP. I abhor non-consensual PvP.
We're in a thread titled "My PvX != Your PvX" and you are whining that we don't all agree on MMO terms.
Does Ashes use terms in a manner typical of common MMO undertstanding?
Does Battlegrounds in Ashes have the standard meaning? (The answer was no prior to 2022.)
Does Class in Ashes have the standard meaning? (The answer is no)
Does Tank in Ashes have the standard meaning? (The answer is no)
That's why I told you 20 times that the Flagging system itself is the same as L2, but that Steven was right in saying Corruption is more punishing in AoC and that will make PKing a lot more unlikely. So once again, I'm right and AGAIN, Steven didn't lie.
Do you understand now, old crybaby, or do you want me to fucking use MSPaint? Literally lost 20 braincells reading your attempt of a post.
I know that Steven was right when he said that Corruption is more punishing in AoC.
I know that Steven didn't lie. I never claimed that Steven lied.
It is your poor reading comprehension leading you to think that I claimed Steven lied about Corruption.
Again, you didn't even just say that Corruption is the same as the L2 Flagging system. You said it's exactly the same. And then you want to try to say "it's exactly the same but also different."
So, what I do understand now, young crybaby, is that you really couldn't spare those 20 braincells because you only had 21 to begin with. Sorry for that.
And If I have to explain to you why I'm "fixated" on Lineage 2, while we're discussing Ashes of Creation, a game inspired MAINLY by Lineage 2, so much that it takes literally every single social system that existed in Lineage 2 (even getting married ingame!) except Olympiads (for now) and adds them into the game, then you're a waste of my time.
Explain how Lineage II has any relevance to why I now consider Ashes to be a murderbox when I did not consider it to be a murderbox before 2022. That is what we've been discussing, specifically.
You could try explaining with your finger paints, sure.
0
Options
DygzMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
We read the same things Steven said about the flagging systems, about PvP, PvE and PvX. We got EXACTLY the same information. I understood what that meant, but you somehow made up a completely wrong idea in your head about the kind of game AoC was going to be.
Ooops. I skimmed over this part in my rush to leave for dance class.
We read the same things Steven said about the flagging systems.
We got the exact same info.
We both understood what that means.
And I was on board with all of that.
I didn't make anything up in my head.
The only reason I had the wrong idea about what kind of game Ashes was going to be is because prior to 2022 Steven said that Ashes would have Corruption active across the entire map.
And in Sep of 2022, Steven revealed that there was a signifcant change - the addition of a large, permanent area of the map that auto-flags for Corruption-free, free-for-all PvP combat.
I have no interest in playing MMORPGs with that ruleset.
I now consider Ashes to be a murderbox. Just as I consider EvE and ArcheAge to be murderboxes.
I read your post and I just think you're baiting or just a troll. That's it.
I'm going to spell it out for you old man, one last time because it was funny at some point but now I'm two posts away from calling you the R word and I'm just done trying to explain. Honestly PvE carebears in these forums are absolutely tiring and annoying.
So, again, when you state "was a dead giveaway this is a PvP game" - that can only be true if I chose to believe Steven was lying.
No.
One last chance for you to understand how I got to the "dead giveaway this is a PvP game" conclusion.
The Flagging system is a combination of Flagging which makes you vulnerable to other players + Corruption which is what you get if you PK a non combatant player. SHOULD BE FUCKING OBVIOUS BY NOW that the reason why I keep bringing up Corruption is because of all the safeguards added by Intrepid TO COUNTER CORRUPTED PLAYERS. Those safeguards are the reason why Steven told you that AoC won't be a murderbox. And he's right, because Lineage 2 wasnt a murderbox and they had 10x less penalties for PKing than in AoC. So obviously AoC will be much more tame.
The fact that the Flagging + Corruption is the same as L2 IS the reason why Ashes will be a PvP game. Steven just likes to call it PvX because there's also a ton of PvE to be had. However, as I already stated in other posts, when you mix PvE and PvP together with no opt out choice, the dominant force IS and will always be PvP. So while Steven is technically right in saying that AoC isn't strictly a PvP game, because there will be a shitload of Raids, Bosses, Dungeons, etc etc, HAVING THE SAME FLAGGING AND CORRUPTION AS LINEAGE 2 MEANS IT WILL ABSOLUTELY BE RULED, CONTROLLED AND GOVERNED BY PVP. How do I know that? Cause it's the same fucking system I played for nearly a decade + some new safeguards they added so that carebears like you won't cry and quit in the first 6 hours of gameplay. And literally anyone who played Lineage 2 understands that technically, and in name, L2 was a PvX game, but IN REALITY and GAMEPLAY, it was a PvP game. So, NO, you don't have to think Steven is lying, Steven is correct because the game is indeed PvX, not only PvP, but both combined. However, everyone who has played an ACTUAL PvX game (not the games YOU think are PvX, I mean ACTUAL PvX games) understands that ingame PvX means CONTESTING ABSOLUTELY EVERYTHING THATS IMPORTANT via PvP. Sieges, Raids, Nodes, Rare Mats, Caravans, Dungeons, Farming Spots, and everything else. All PvP, (with the exception of maybe quests and story).
You know what, you old, stubborn and clueless boomer? The first day you play the Alpha or launch, you'll quickly realize how this game will be entirely governed by PvP, even if it isn't strictly a pure PvP game. I'll just let the game show you, since people like you need to see for themselves.Think whatever you want, the moment you play the game, you'll understand how right I am. Only then, you and OP and all of the other carebears will realize how clueless their "My PvX" take is.
Oh and by the way, it still doesn't make the game a murderbox, lmao. You're just a carebear and players like you just LOVE throwing the words "murderbox" and "gankfest" around. (Though Alpha 2 will most likely be exactly that, since it's not the same as launch and people won't care about their gear much, so that's going to be a killing festival for sure, but that won't be an accurate representation of the game. After actual launch, it's another game. Hardly anyone will want to risk losing their precious gear over killing someone, unless it's for a very specific purpose which may lead to greater gain).
I read your post and I just think you're baiting or just a troll. That's it.
I'm going to spell it out for you old man, one last time because it was funny at some point but now I'm two posts away from calling you the R word and I'm just done trying to explain. Honestly PvE carebears in these forums are absolutely tiring and annoying.
So, again, when you state "was a dead giveaway this is a PvP game" - that can only be true if I chose to believe Steven was lying.
No.
One last chance for you to understand how I got to the "dead giveaway this is a PvP game" conclusion.
The Flagging system is a combination of Flagging which makes you vulnerable to other players + Corruption which is what you get if you PK a non combatant player. SHOULD BE FUCKING OBVIOUS BY NOW that the reason why I keep bringing up Corruption is because of all the safeguards added by Intrepid TO COUNTER CORRUPTED PLAYERS. Those safeguards are the reason why Steven told you that AoC won't be a murderbox. And he's right, because Lineage 2 wasnt a murderbox and they had 10x less penalties for PKing than in AoC. So obviously AoC will be much more tame.
The fact that the Flagging + Corruption is the same as L2 IS the reason why Ashes will be a PvP game. Steven just likes to call it PvX because there's also a ton of PvE to be had. However, as I already stated in other posts, when you mix PvE and PvP together with no opt out choice, the dominant force IS and will always be PvP. So while Steven is technically right in saying that AoC isn't strictly a PvP game, because there will be a shitload of Raids, Bosses, Dungeons, etc etc, HAVING THE SAME FLAGGING AND CORRUPTION AS LINEAGE 2 MEANS IT WILL ABSOLUTELY BE RULED, CONTROLLED AND GOVERNED BY PVP. How do I know that? Cause it's the same fucking system I played for nearly a decade + some new safeguards they added so that carebears like you won't cry and quit in the first 6 hours of gameplay. And literally anyone who played Lineage 2 understands that technically, and in name, L2 was a PvX game, but IN REALITY and GAMEPLAY, it was a PvP game. So, NO, you don't have to think Steven is lying, Steven is correct because the game is indeed PvX, not only PvP, but both combined. However, everyone who has played an ACTUAL PvX game (not the games YOU think are PvX, I mean ACTUAL PvX games) understands that ingame PvX means CONTESTING ABSOLUTELY EVERYTHING THAT S IMPORTANT via PvP. Sieges, Raids, Nodes, Rare Mats, Caravans, Dungeons, Farming Spots, and everything else. All PvP, (with the exception of maybe quests and story).
You know what, you old, stubborn and clueless boomer? The first day you play the Alpha or launch, you'll quickly realize how this game will be entirely governed by PvP, even if it isn't strictly a pure PvP game. I'll just let the game show you, since people like you need to see for themselves.Think whatever you want, the moment you play the game, you'll understand how right I am.
Chill everyone can have their hopes on what they thought the game might be. And be disappointed when it turns it that isn't the case.
I agree it was pretty clear if we go off assumptions on what you would generally expect. Though since it is in development its harder for people to have as clear of a vision what the game will be like with less information out there. It leaves more to ones imagination to fill in the blanks. Though as more of the game is developed it paints a much more clear picture without as much guess work.
Comments
"Lol this is fundamentally the same as RL stereotypes. So anyone who enjoys PvP is a 'trash talker'?"
Again. Not semantics.
You just try to move the bar so as not to appear incorrect.
You're*
I know, petty isn't it?
How about we just give everyone the benefit of the doubt and meet each other in the middle?
Does noone have answer for this?
Or would we rather sit furiously flicking through dictionaries to engage in semantic warfare? [/yawn]
There was no stereotyping where you claim there was. There is no middle there. Just true or false
And your claim was false.
There was. But the key point here is, as usual, that you know exactly what was meant and have chosen to drag a thread out with nitpicking instead. It's boring, totally non-constructive, and only makes you look a bit of a tit.
Shall we get back to Ashes?
I don't think you are going to get a answer certain people have their preferences so you aren't really going to change anyone's mind.
I agree with the whole pve / pvp thing already argued this is the past and it got no where. I've always said as more eyes are on the game and the closer it gets to actual release you will get more people with this view point.
Only argument that pvp strategy than PvE is if pvp becomes about who zergs harder, and war types of pvp lack objectives and is just about a giant ball.
PvE is meant to be beat, PvP is players fighting and that conflict constantly increases the bar level of players strength.
Pretty much all I'm going to say on this though, I don't want to get into any arguments around this since I have more important things to do atm lol.
If it was just "we like different things" yeah, fair. Great.
But this argument that scripted PvE is more varied than PvP is just madness.
I also find it odd/ironic that most hostility in this forum comes from PvEers.
Certain people just have very strong opinions, I'm sure I'm one of them lol.
Though I'd rather see strong reactions since it gets better feedback rather than everyone agreeing imo. Eventually you get to a wall though.
There's one person who pops up on the Forums once in a while who I would flag as always hostile.
Everyone else just has strong opinions. And then there can be some low key frustration sometimes as we struggle to understand how diverse playstyles influence perceptions and expectations.
I tend to agree that mobs/NPCs are more predictable than gamers.
Which is precisely why I prefer PvE over PvP.
It could also be true that for Noaani, PvPers feel more predictable than mobs.
Different people have different perspectives.
That's OK.
That doesn't feel as dull as attempting the same boss over and over, so pvpers don't get tired of it as fast.
And if repetitive same actions are seen as strength in pve games, then, as I've already said, my whole pvp bubble was about grinding and repetitiveness. No one got tired of that, even if pvp quantity took a dip from time to time.
No one ever left EQ for another game? No one ever left WoW for another game? PvPers are not unique here. Everyone leaves sooner or later, and for a multitude of reasons.
One of the biggest reasons for why people stopped playing pvp mmos was because the only good ones that were still left went to utter shit. Stuff like mobas and BRs is definitely a reason, but considering that majority of my mates in late 00s were also playing dota on the side of L2 - both games coexisted just fine. Dota just won out in the end when we all saw the writing on the wall and decided to only play on earlier versions of L2, but obviously not everyone was willing to do that over and over again.
Titles are cute and all, and I would grind that out if bosses weren't available, but to me they are in no way rewarding. Well, the "see, I did this" stamp is definitely rewarding, but the process itself is not. When I grinded 400k mobs in L2 - all of them dropped mats for crafting, which I could then use to make my gear better (cause OE> burn> craft again> OE higher> repeat).
If I couldn't grind top gear like that in EQ, the grind wouldn't be rewarding to me.
And that's simply where our views differ yet again. To me that's just presenting players loot on a silver platter. I prefer market gameplay and manipulation, when it comes to getting a thing that you need but which keeps not dropping from the mob that you kill.
Entire server markets were manipulated in various ways just to control a price on some rare item or in preparation for it. To me this deeper interaction is way more interesting than "just go kill mob and you'll get what you need".
But I know that you'll say my preference is shit design, so we can avoid that particular conversation
Appreciate the history lesson
No one surfed the internet, because why would you do that when you have limited time at the PC cafe, and no one in my circles could afford gaming journals, so even the WoW news got to us waaay later when people started getting internet at their homes and buying PCs for themselves.
Kinda reminds me of the arcades in the US in the 60s - 80s.
My foot in the door for Activision was when some QA guys saw me reading PC Gamer while I was eating at a restaurant a couple of doors down from the Activision offices.
How many hours would you typically spend playing games at the PC cafe???
People started buying PCs for themselves, when? Late 2000s?
This is generally true. There are exceptions to it, but not ones that are worth us discussing here.
However, it is also at this point where (especially in EQ2) you are only really going to do this new thing you just learned how to do once a week, for about 12 weeks or so.
PvP, on the other hand, is basically always the same. You are never learning how to do something new - at least not on the scale of learning a new top end PvE encounter.
While it may well be true that players learn, improve and adapt (I didn't see it in my time playing Archeage), there is no doubt at all that this learning, improving and adapting happens at a slower rate than what players have to learn for PvE - because sure, you may spend 12 weeks killing a mob in the same manner after you learn how to do so, but in that time you are also working on learning the next encounter, or the encounter after that.
In the two years of playing Archeages Mistmerrow, the biggest change/adaptation that the rival faction managed to make was "lets start off by going counter-clockwise rather than clockwise".
It took them two years to even try that.
Mass PvP specifically changes at literally a glacial pace.
While your last statement that PvE is limited by programming is true - PvP is also limited. In PvP, players only have access to class abilities, where as in PvE developers can add literally anything they want to an encounter.
This is why my argument is not that one encounter is more varied than PvP, but PvEas a whole is more varied than PvP could ever be.
EQ2 was optimised for the future they thought was about four years off in 2002 - a single core CPU running at 7Ghz.
This is also why they never really advertised.
School kids would usually get 1-2h. If it was the weekend and your family had enough money to give you some allowance, you'd get 4-5h. Older people would usually cruise at 3h and buyout night shifts in-between weekends (full night was considered 7h at a highly discounted price).
As for home PCs, it varied wildly. I managed to get one in 2005, but didn't have good internet and didn't have a dvd drive for a few years, so couldn't really install L2 at home. Iirc I started playing it at home somewhere in 2008 or early 2009.
Richer folks bought stuff even earlier. Poorer kids got PCs in late 00s, if at all. Once I started grinding L2 at home I stopped going to PC cafes, so don't know much about 10s and later. Do know that all of our cafes died out by ~2016, so I guess majority of people got their own PCs or switched to phone gaming.
I can definitely agree with this general point.
If you seperate them off in to small scale, medium scale and large scale, there really isn't much variation. The only question is if you are on the side that wins or the side that loses. PvP is far more repetitive than those 33 or so attempts at that boss. That coment was in the context of what you said, not something I said.
You said that perhaps people that were playing other PvE games that were capable of being at the top end were instead opting to stay in the game they were in, while PvP players were not. This is not something I agree with, but the implication is again that PvE players are happy with their game where as PvP players are not. It is the notion of top gear being able to come from such a mindless grind that turned many people I know away from L2.
Gear quality should be a direct representation of the difficulty of the content you defeated to get said gear, not a result of how long you mindlessly grind trash mobs.
That said, in EQ2 that grind for the titles could well see you earning a reasonable amount of coin, and since near every group of mobs in the game has a named mob or moss associated with it, and killing them results in better drops, you'd probably still be fine.
And yet, only about 3% of players were able to get the full set.
That is one hard to grab silver platter.
Again, games like EQ and EQ2 reward gear based on the difficulty of the encounter. You can't manipulate a market that you can't control the supply of, and you can't hide behind bad RNG. If you are good enough, you will have that gear. If you are not good enough, you will not have it.
Most people did not have it.
People from your AA example apparently were shit at trying out new approaches. I've seen leaders that could try out a dozen different attack pattern throughout a single siege, and imo I haven't even played with the best leaders in the game, so I'm sure there those who could do even more.
I think you misread what I said. I said that top pvpers, who might've been good enough to be top EQers, stayed in their games cause they were at the top.
Do you have examples of top pvers from other games who came to EQ and could also stay at the top? Or did no one of that caliber ever switched to EQ?
Did the 3% apply to the entire population of the game? As in, only those who could clear the content got the full set. Or does that number include people who could clear the boss once, but then failed?
Cause if it's the former - to me that's just representation of your skill in the game. Except in L2 it was your general skill (i.e. pvp, social connections, time invested), while in EQ it was more weighted towards your pve skill.
If it's the latter - it's even more about your pve skill and your ability to upkeep that skill in all encounters.
I'd hope that Ashes manages to capture the former and merge it with L2's approach, to arrive at an even better game.
I'm not sure what you are asking here. In the context of EQ2, it makes no real sense.
If you killed a boss once, then there would be a number of these items drop (2 or 3). If you got one, then you have that item. If you then "fail", which to me could only really be the guild dissolves or you leave it, then you still have the item.
Guilds that were getting this full set though, they weren't dissolving. You needed to clear the entire expansions content, with the chest piece being from the second to last instanced boss (the last boss only being added a few weeks before the next expansion).
This is somethign Archeage did fairly well, within the constraints of the difficulty they developed PvE content to, and if you ignore the pay to win nature of the game (which I did).
You could make base tier items fairly easily, and regrade (enchant) them at this early stage. The materials for this were all things that you could just grind out in various ways.
Then, when you had regraded this base item to a point you were happy, you could go out and kill content to get components that were used to upgrade the item to the next tier, keeping the regrade level you had achieved.
Thus, the items you were wearing were a result of both how much you were willing to grind out basic shit, and how good at killing the games content you were.
I would be shocked to see anything other than this system in Ashes, as it was easily the best aspect of Archeage.
This is also how we get people that only played 1 game their entire life (WoW being the biggest example because it was just the biggest game). People stay in their game because they either only prefer it or are just so deep in sunken cost that they don't want to leave, and any new game just fails cause it has no audience to draw upon (even if the game is good).
So, just as top EQers stayed in EQ at the top, as top WoWers stayed at WoW's top - same was true for top L2ers. Why move to another game, when you're at the top in your own and you like it there.
And that's why anyone who would've come to EQ from other games were most likely not the kind of players who would be able to get to the top. It's not really about shopping around. Cause if it was - your few years in AA could be seen as you "leaving EQ to shop around", but I doubt that was your reason for playing AA.
This was the piece of info that I was missing for my question.
So the answer is the latter. The 3% imply that those who might've been able to clear some bosses that gave you the set items later failed to clear other bosses, which is why they didn't get the full set and weren't a part of the 3%.
Let's hope that Steven's promise of no p2w doesn't crumble away, as it usually does in other games.
While it may (or may not) be true in L2, people do indeed move around games somewhat often. Many guilds operate in multiple games at the same time, often at the top of many.
Steven told you that flagging sytem isn't the same as L2 because it fucking isn't. The base and general workings of it is very similar, but how it will work for the game is completely different because on the corruption side of the flagging system, the corruption penalties are much harsher. Do I REALLY have to tell you that Corruption is a part of the flagging system and that's where the differences are with L2? That's why Steven believes it will be more than enough to not encourage PKing so much. You couldn't use 3 braincells to understand that by yourself without me telling you? Holy FUCK
Again, I'm completely right and you're cherrypicking words to make it seem like Steven lied to you.
I said PvX is when a game has PvE with the risk of you getting absolutely dumpstered by other players. In WoW that's non existant because you just toggle off PvP and nobody can touch you. So WoW is clearly not a PvX game. The main game has warmode, effectively stopping all PvP with one click so that's not PvX. You could say WoW used to be PvX, but that was ages ago.
You just seem butthurt, but in reality it's just your own fault- You were completely clueless about Lineage 2 which is the main inspiration for AoC. Steven never lied to you. We read the same things Steven said about the flagging systems, about PvP, PvE and PvX. We got EXACTLY the same information. I understood what that meant, but you somehow made up a completely wrong idea in your head about the kind of game AoC was going to be, due to being completely clueless and in years not even bothering checking what L2 was (which would have taken you 10 minutes, by the way) and now you're here, daily, claiming Steven lied to you.
You can dislike the Open Sea free for all, that part i KINDA get, but since nobody knows how it will work yet or how rewarding it will be, I'm not going to judge it until I see it. That''s because unlike you, I'm not a fucking crybaby who stays in the forums of a game he's not going to play for YEARS bitching about things he doesn't like and all of that because you couldn't take 10 minutes to do a bit of research which is honestly quite hilarious since you spend at least 2 hours in the forum daily. Boomer who acts like an angry 13 year old who didn't get the present he wanted for his birthday.
And with done I'm done replying to you.
Well, EQ2 is the hardest MMO I have played, so that probably is a factor.
A bigger factor in my opinion is the expectation of players. If you come from a game like L2 where PvE is comparitively easy if PvP isn't present, EQ2 will come as a shock. The same is true of players coming from EQ2 to L2 - in the case of these two games, it absolutely goes both ways. This is why I only ever came across one small group of moderately successful L2 players in EQ2.
Top end raiders coming from WoW to EQ2 also couldn't function. If they came over as a guild, they often never even made it to attempting raid content, as they couldn't find information on it. Those that came over to join existing guilds often didn't last long because most WoW encounters required players do specific things at specific times, while many EQ2 raids required players to think and make decisions for themselves. Players going from EQ2 to WoW had different issues though. Raids in WoW were significantly less interesting, due to not needing to think at all - the only people I know that were successful moving from EQ2 to WoW were those that did it for friends aalready in WoW.
In my experience, most players and guilds (most, not all) are somewhat unsuccessful in their second MMORPG, as that is where they find their ideas what what an MMORPG is get shattered and reformed. My second MMORPG was Age of Conan - a game I rarely talk about because I didn't do all that well there.
And I replied, "Steven says that the Ashes flagging system is not exactly like L2. Steven says that Corruption is harsher than Karma and designed to make Ashes less of a murderbox than L2."
Steven says that Ashes is not a PvP MMORPG; it is a PvX MMORPG.
The Ashes is flagging system is not exactly like L2 - even though you claimed it was.
And Steven says that Ashes is a PvX MMORPG; not a PvP MMORPG.
So, again, when you state "was a dead giveaway this is a PvP game" - that can only be true if I chose to believe Steven was lying.
Right, so then, I shouldn't have to fucking tell you 5+ times that that means, according to Steven in 2018, Ashes was not designed to be as much of a murderbox as he considers L2 to be. Which is why Steven says Ashes is not a PvP game.
Which again, negates your statement that "the Flagging system being exactly like L2 was a dead giveaway this is a PVP game."
Again, you are completely wrong. I am not cherrypicking anything.
I am blatantly showcasing where you are wrong. While pointing out that the only way for me to have believed that "the Flagging system being exactly like L2 was a dead giveaway this is a PVP game." would be for me to believe that Steven says it's not - after I directly asked him the question.
The Ashes Flagging system is acceptable to me as long as Corruption is in play across the entire map.
As Steven stated it would be when we discussed that in 2018.
Yay. You said that in a thread that has the title: My PvX != Your PvX
And this thread has that title because people all seem to have their own concepts of what PvX is.
I don't agree with your definition of PvX.
I don't know why you are fixated on L2.
1: I am not butt hurt about anything. Steven significantly changed the game by adding a ruleset in 2022 that I don't play.
2: I did not say that Steven lied. I stated that the only way I could think that "the Flagging system being exactly like L2 was a dead giveaway this is a PVP game." is if I believed Steven was lying when he told me it's not.
3: The dealbreaker is the addition of The Open Seas - which makes Ashes similar enough to EvE and ArcheAge that I no longer have an interest to play. Has nothing to do with L2 at all. So I still fail to understand why you keep bringing up L2. L2 is mostly irrelvant to this discussion other than you keep wanting to talk about it.
I mean you don't really have to get it. Just like I don't get how my childhood friend, Joanie, hates chocolate.
I just accept that she does.
I don't think I judged anything about the Open Seas. It's just a ruleset that I don't enjoy playing.
It's a great addition for gamers who like PvP.
I stay in the Forums because I'm still going to be testing other systems, like Nodes and Augments, in the Alpha. And, I also hang out with friends I've made here. And I also try to make sure that these Forums are not just an echo chamber for gamers who only understand the expectations and perspectives of their own playstyle.
I think the crybaby is probably the poster who cussed first.
(And... with that, I'm off to dance class.)
I said the flagging system is the same as in L2, because "Flagging" literally means attacking somebody in the Open World and entering a "Flagged" state (when your name turns Pink/Purple). That's what Flagging is. That's one part that's identical to L2. Not my fault you can't even understand basic MMO PvP words and concepts cause you're a fuckng carebear who's terrified of even touching world PvP. What comes next, Corruption, assuming the player kills somebody, is the part that Steven trusts will deter PKing. Not because it does different things, it works the same as it was in L2, but because of all the safeguards added by Intrepid to protect players from Corrupted players. So even if Corruption gain is also the same as in L2 , the safeguards added AFTER Corruption (BHs, Dampening, etc) change the result completely and make PKing incredibly more dangerous and riskier than in L2.
That's why I told you 20 times that the Flagging system itself is the same as L2, but that Steven was right in saying Corruption is more punishing in AoC and that will make PKing a lot more unlikely. So once again, I'm right and AGAIN, Steven didn't lie.
Do you understand now, old crybaby, or do you want me to fucking use MSPaint?
Literally lost 20 braincells reading your attempt of a post.
I already explaind PvX. You can do all the mental gymnastics you want and pretend PvX is whatever you think it is, but you'd be wrong (again). Steven saying AoC is PvX clearly shows that what he believes to be PvX is exactly what I said: PvE with the RISK of PvP that you CANT opt out of, AKA be ready to fight and contest the good shit.
And If I have to explain to you why I'm "fixated" on Lineage 2, while we're discussing Ashes of Creation, a game inspired MAINLY by Lineage 2, so much that it takes literally every single social system that existed in Lineage 2 (even getting married ingame!) except Olympiads (for now) and adds them into the game, then you're a waste of my time.
Again, I don't know why you think that is significant to the topic.
Obviously, I knew from the Kickstarter that Ashes is an MMORPG that includes PvP.
Obviously, I knew that Ashes Corruption is similar to L2 Karma, but not exactly the same.
And, I was on board to play right up until the addition of The Open Seas.
The safeguards provided by Corruption is irrelevant. Indeed, Corruption is mostly irrlevant to this discussion other than you keep bringing it up.
But the statement "the Flagging system being exactly like L2 was a dead giveaway this is a PVP game' remains invalid and wrong because Steven denied both of those components to the sentence when I directly asked him to describe Ashes PvP.
The flagging system is similar to L2 Karma - everyone knows that.
That has not changed since the Kickstarter.
No need for you to tell me that.
There is no disagreement that Corruption is similar to Karma.
The disagreement is that Corruption is exactly like Karma and that because of that it should have been a dead giveaway that Ashes is a PvP game to the same degree as L2.
When I asked Steven to share some MMORPGs that are a murderbox - because he kept saying that Ashes is not a murderbox, he said that Lineage II could sometimes be a murderbox, but Corruption and no deleveling should make Ashes not a murderbox.
Steven said he didn't know any MMORPGs that are a murderbox because he doesn't play games like that.
I told him I consider EvE and ArcheAge to be murderboxes. And that those are MMORPGs that are too PvP-centric for me.
Steven said those could be murderboxes if you went to certain areas that had free-for-all PvP combat, but Ashes does not have areas like that because the threat of Corruption is active across the entire map.
Obviously Sieges and Caravan raids inherently means that Ashes is a game that includes PvP.
My concern was not about whether Ashes is a game with PvP. My concern was whether or not Ashes is a murderbox.
Steven said that Ashes is not as much of a murderbox as Lineage II or EvE or ArcheAge.
So I was on board to play right up until 2022, when Steven added The Open Seas.
With the addition of The Open Seas, I place Ashes in the same category as EvE and ArcheAge - games that are too PvP-centric for me. And I no longer accept Steven's PvX label. With the addition of The Open Seas I do not consider Ashes to be a PvX game. I consider Ashes to be a PvP game, regardless of how Steven tries to spin it.
That's it.
It's not rocket science. Your obsession with the L2 flagging system continues to be mostly irrelevant to the discussion thread which started with:
"Dygz, for the record, I don't dislike you or anything, I'm just completely confused as to why you're here. AoC will be exactly the opposite of what you're looking for, and it has been like that since the day I frst saw Steven talk about the game. You seem the type of player who would enjoy FF XIV. Why are you in an open world PVP MMO forum? It's very clearly something you don't or won't enjoy. The game won't change either, this has been the vision from the start."
The game did change significant;y with the addition of The Open Seas.
Steven stated that it was a significant change when he announced it.
Simple as that. And still has nothing to do with L2 Flagging.
That's so ridiculous it's painful.
By that logic, Flagging in New World is identical to Flagging in Lineage II.
And Flagging on a PvP-Optional Server in EQ/EQ2 and WoW is identical to Flagging in Lineage II.
Again...obviously the description of Sieges and Caravans clearly tells everyone that Ashes is a game that includes PvP.
But, that is different than Ashes being a PvP game - especially when Steven always says that Ashes is not a PvP game.
Before the addition of The Open Seas, I believed Steven when he said that Ashes is not a PvP game.
With the addition of The Open Seas, I no longer agree with Steven that Ashes is not a PvP game.
With the addition of The Open Seas, I place Ashes in my category of "Too PvP-centric", alongside EvE and ArcheAge.
Again, this is you being a hyperbolic crybaby.
I am a Carebear. I'm not terrified of touching a world of PvP.
I enjoy objective-based PvP. I abhor non-consensual PvP.
We're in a thread titled "My PvX != Your PvX" and you are whining that we don't all agree on MMO terms.
Does Ashes use terms in a manner typical of common MMO undertstanding?
Does Battlegrounds in Ashes have the standard meaning? (The answer was no prior to 2022.)
Does Class in Ashes have the standard meaning? (The answer is no)
Does Tank in Ashes have the standard meaning? (The answer is no)
This remains irrelevant. I have no clue why you keep returning to the discussion Corruption.
I know that Steven was right when he said that Corruption is more punishing in AoC.
I know that Steven didn't lie. I never claimed that Steven lied.
It is your poor reading comprehension leading you to think that I claimed Steven lied about Corruption.
Again, you didn't even just say that Corruption is the same as the L2 Flagging system. You said it's exactly the same. And then you want to try to say "it's exactly the same but also different."
So, what I do understand now, young crybaby, is that you really couldn't spare those 20 braincells because you only had 21 to begin with. Sorry for that.
Explain how Lineage II has any relevance to why I now consider Ashes to be a murderbox when I did not consider it to be a murderbox before 2022. That is what we've been discussing, specifically.
You could try explaining with your finger paints, sure.
We read the same things Steven said about the flagging systems.
We got the exact same info.
We both understood what that means.
And I was on board with all of that.
I didn't make anything up in my head.
The only reason I had the wrong idea about what kind of game Ashes was going to be is because prior to 2022 Steven said that Ashes would have Corruption active across the entire map.
And in Sep of 2022, Steven revealed that there was a signifcant change - the addition of a large, permanent area of the map that auto-flags for Corruption-free, free-for-all PvP combat.
I have no interest in playing MMORPGs with that ruleset.
I now consider Ashes to be a murderbox. Just as I consider EvE and ArcheAge to be murderboxes.
I read your post and I just think you're baiting or just a troll. That's it.
I'm going to spell it out for you old man, one last time because it was funny at some point but now I'm two posts away from calling you the R word and I'm just done trying to explain. Honestly PvE carebears in these forums are absolutely tiring and annoying.
No.
One last chance for you to understand how I got to the "dead giveaway this is a PvP game" conclusion.
The Flagging system is a combination of Flagging which makes you vulnerable to other players + Corruption which is what you get if you PK a non combatant player. SHOULD BE FUCKING OBVIOUS BY NOW that the reason why I keep bringing up Corruption is because of all the safeguards added by Intrepid TO COUNTER CORRUPTED PLAYERS. Those safeguards are the reason why Steven told you that AoC won't be a murderbox. And he's right, because Lineage 2 wasnt a murderbox and they had 10x less penalties for PKing than in AoC. So obviously AoC will be much more tame.
The fact that the Flagging + Corruption is the same as L2 IS the reason why Ashes will be a PvP game. Steven just likes to call it PvX because there's also a ton of PvE to be had. However, as I already stated in other posts, when you mix PvE and PvP together with no opt out choice, the dominant force IS and will always be PvP. So while Steven is technically right in saying that AoC isn't strictly a PvP game, because there will be a shitload of Raids, Bosses, Dungeons, etc etc, HAVING THE SAME FLAGGING AND CORRUPTION AS LINEAGE 2 MEANS IT WILL ABSOLUTELY BE RULED, CONTROLLED AND GOVERNED BY PVP. How do I know that? Cause it's the same fucking system I played for nearly a decade + some new safeguards they added so that carebears like you won't cry and quit in the first 6 hours of gameplay. And literally anyone who played Lineage 2 understands that technically, and in name, L2 was a PvX game, but IN REALITY and GAMEPLAY, it was a PvP game. So, NO, you don't have to think Steven is lying, Steven is correct because the game is indeed PvX, not only PvP, but both combined. However, everyone who has played an ACTUAL PvX game (not the games YOU think are PvX, I mean ACTUAL PvX games) understands that ingame PvX means CONTESTING ABSOLUTELY EVERYTHING THATS IMPORTANT via PvP. Sieges, Raids, Nodes, Rare Mats, Caravans, Dungeons, Farming Spots, and everything else. All PvP, (with the exception of maybe quests and story).
You know what, you old, stubborn and clueless boomer? The first day you play the Alpha or launch, you'll quickly realize how this game will be entirely governed by PvP, even if it isn't strictly a pure PvP game. I'll just let the game show you, since people like you need to see for themselves.Think whatever you want, the moment you play the game, you'll understand how right I am. Only then, you and OP and all of the other carebears will realize how clueless their "My PvX" take is.
Oh and by the way, it still doesn't make the game a murderbox, lmao. You're just a carebear and players like you just LOVE throwing the words "murderbox" and "gankfest" around. (Though Alpha 2 will most likely be exactly that, since it's not the same as launch and people won't care about their gear much, so that's going to be a killing festival for sure, but that won't be an accurate representation of the game. After actual launch, it's another game. Hardly anyone will want to risk losing their precious gear over killing someone, unless it's for a very specific purpose which may lead to greater gain).
Chill everyone can have their hopes on what they thought the game might be. And be disappointed when it turns it that isn't the case.
I agree it was pretty clear if we go off assumptions on what you would generally expect. Though since it is in development its harder for people to have as clear of a vision what the game will be like with less information out there. It leaves more to ones imagination to fill in the blanks. Though as more of the game is developed it paints a much more clear picture without as much guess work.