My PvX != Your PvX

Basis: I prefer PvE over PvP so, in my mind, I'd like to see more balance between the systems.

Is this a fantasy, yes. I know logically that PvX for Ashes consists of a blend, a mixture if you will, of both elements. Therefore, I think that when some of us say "Ashes isn't really PvX", what we mean is that it isn't what we would think PvX would be (Equal measure of both in my opinion).

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 where some of us like the (in my opinion) PvP heavy version of PvX and I'm sure there are some that prefer a more PvE heavy version of PvX.

I plan to play Ashes all the same, but I had seen this topic floating around and wanted to discuss it, or share my thoughts.

Find more posts tagged with

Staff

Comments

blat

HybridSR wrote: »

or do you want me to fucking use MSPaint?

This was definitely the highlight for me. Lmao

blat

NiKr wrote: »

He really isn't He just has a different opinion and is really staunch about it.

This gets thrown around a lot because it's an easy word to hide behind.
Strong opinions are fine but we can still be constructive about it, without being deliberately obtuse and pissing on every argument that isn't your own.

For example:
I come from always-on PvP, but am intrigued by the corruption system and the genuine attempt to unify player types in a PvX system. And I'm very willing to meet in the middle and give it the benefit of the doubt.
But some people here are so quick to shut down anything that isn't tailor-made for themselves.

Dygz wrote: »

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 now consider Ashes to be a murderbox.

Opinions or not this does seem a bit of an extreme swing.. from a game you were willing to play to "murderbox" status with this one region-locked change?

Surely if anything this change just means there'll be less pvp throughout the rest of the world? The worst of it will be contained to a specific area.

Yes yes I know your Bartle score.. you want to explore. But as pointed out previously, the map is bloody big. There's a whole lot of exploring to be had, and only one portion of the map that you may not fancy.

Noaani

HybridSR wrote: »

I said the flagging system is the same as in L2

The flagging system will be very similar to L2, but not *the same*.

Just sayin ~

Ludullu

blat wrote: »

This gets thrown around a lot because it's an easy word to hide behind.
Strong opinions are fine but we can still be constructive about it, without being deliberately obtuse and pissing on every argument that isn't your own.

Have you been reading these forums?

Everyone who's a regular here has their own special opinion and pretty much never goes outside of the limits of that opinion. We're all rams butting heads in every damn thread

blat wrote: »

Opinions or not this does seem a bit of an extreme swing.. from a game you were willing to play to "murderbox" status with this one region-locked change?

Surely if anything this change just means there'll be less pvp throughout the rest of the world? The worst of it will be contained to a specific area.

Open seas change was a fairly controversial one. And with Dygz being quite far on the anti-forced-pvp scale (pretty much at the extreme end of it tbh) - to him that change was even worse than for others.

We also don't know how hard it'll be to cross the seas w/o dying. And with Dygz also being an avid RPer, I'd imagine he'd prefer to explore on his main character, rather than make 2 dudes on 2 continents (and this doesn't even count the island exploration).

And there's also the super vague and nebulous reason for seas being pvp of "the content is worth the risk", so in theory an explorer would want to see that kind of content for themselves. And with the entire seas being pvp - ya can't really do that, especially considering the potential costs of water mounts/ships.

And as such, when you look at the game overall (because you're interested in exploring all of it) - the game has turned into a murderbox. And you say it yourself, the seas could theoretically draw a lot of the pvpers unto themselves, which would then make those seas even more of an "instakilled" location.

Noaani

NiKr wrote: »

blat wrote: »

This gets thrown around a lot because it's an easy word to hide behind.
Strong opinions are fine but we can still be constructive about it, without being deliberately obtuse and pissing on every argument that isn't your own.

Have you been reading these forums? Everyone who's a regular here has their own special opinion and pretty much never goes outside of the limits of that opinion. We're all rams butting heads in every damn thread

No where are not, and I will argue that point with you all week if need be.

blat

NiKr wrote: »

Everyone who's a regular here has their own special opinion and pretty much never goes outside of the limits of that opinion. We're all rams butting heads in every damn thread

Shame. Tbh it's the deliberately misinterpreting someone's intention that is the most ridiculous.
We don't need to agree but let's not deliberately waste each other's time (and ruin threads) by all being as petty as possible.

Maybe we need to implement a corruption system on this forum because there's more PKing going on here than there will be in Verra.

NiKr wrote: »

And there's also the super vague and nebulous reason for seas being pvp of "the content is worth the risk", so in theory an explorer would want to see that kind of content for themselves. And with the entire seas being pvp - ya can't really do that, especially considering the potential costs of water mounts/ships.

Fair point.
^--- look, it can be done!

CROW3

He doesn’t agree with you, and he doesn’t have to agree with you. Doesn’t make him a troll, doesn’t make you a troll.

blat

CROW3 wrote: »

He doesn’t agree with you, and he doesn’t have to agree with you. Doesn’t make him a troll, doesn’t make you a troll.

I refer you to:

blat wrote: »

it's the deliberately misinterpreting someone's intention that is the most ridiculous.
We don't need to agree but let's not deliberately waste each other's time (and ruin threads) by all being as petty as possible.

I am just assuming here, given that most MMO fans these days will be 35+, that we're all fully capable of having constructive debates whether we agree or not.

(Aside: I think there are parallels here with the current state of political debate, but best we stick to Ashes

)

CROW3

blat wrote: »

I am just assuming here, given that most MMO fans these days will be 35+, that we're all fully capable of having constructive debates whether we agree or not.

Agreed.

You know what you call it when a bunch of trees are rooted in place, but constantly hitting each other to move as they grow?

A forest.

Dygz

HybridSR wrote: »

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.

Again... this has nothing to do with this discussion.

1: This is a discussion with a title: My PvX != Your PvX
We don't all agree in labels.
And the labels are actually irrelevant.
What matters are the systems.

2: I do not use the term "PvP Game" to refer to MMORPGs.
I call MMORPGs like ShadowBane, UO, EvE and ArcheAge as too PvP-centric for me.
Steven does not use the label PvP Game to refer to Ashes.
When it comes to the Flagging system - Steven says that Ashes is not a PvP. Ashes is not PvP-Centric and Ashes is not a murderbox.
Which means that based on the Flagging - the only way for me to think that Ashes is a PvP game due to its similarity to the L2 flagging is if I think Steven is lying when he says the Ashes flagging system is different and/or if I think that Steven is lying when he says that Corruption is designed to keep Ashes from being as PvP-centric as L2.
In Steven's terms: Because Corruption is significantly different than the L2 Flagging system (rather than being identical or exactly the same), Ashes is intended to be less of a murderbox than L2.
That's great. I accept that.
Steven and I are on the same page. Ashes is designed to not be as PvP-centric as L2. Ashes is designed to less of a murderbox than L2. Ashes is not a PvP game; it is a PvX game.
Steven says that Ashes is not a PvP game. I accepted that.
What you mean by "PvP Game" I might not be sure. But it's not the same thing that Steven means because Steven says that Ashes is not a PvP game.

3: Because Steven frequently stated that Ashes would not be a murderbox, I asked Steven to name some MMORPGs that are murderboxes. He replied he doesn't know because he doesn't play those games.
I said, "I consider EvE and ArcheAge to be murderboxes, so compare Ashes PvP to those games. Is the PvP in EvE and ArcheAge trying to be like EvE and ArcheAge?"
Steven answered, "No. Because those games have permanent areas that auto-flag for PvP-combat and Ashes just as Corruption active everywhere across the map."
That's great. I accept that. Because I don't play MMORPGs that have a ruleset that includes large areas the auto-flag for free-for-all PvP. And I'm on board with the Ashes PvP design as long as I can punish non-consensual PvP with Corruption across the entire map.
Steven and I were on the same page. Ashes is designed to not be as PvP-centric as EvE and ArcheAge. Ashes is designed to be less of a murderbox than EvE and ArcheAge. Ashes is not a PvP game; it is a PvX game.

4: The Ashes Flagging system has not changed at all since 2016. The Flagging system is not the dealbreaker.
Without the addition of The Open Seas, I would still be on board to play and Steven and I would still be on the same page: Ashes is designed to not be as PvP-centric as L2. Ashes is designed to be less of a murderbox than L2. Ashes is not a PvP game; it is a PvX game.
So... how similar the Ashes Flagging system is to the L2 Flagging system is mostly irrelevant other than you originally said that its exactly the same.
Even if Corruption worked exactly like Karma, that might not be a dealbreaker. It could very well be that I'd be OK with the Karma flagging system.
Could be that I would not consider L2 to be too PvP-centric for me. Could be that I would not consider L2 to be a murderbox even though Steven says that L2 could be a murderbox sometimes.
But, Corruption is designed to not be exactly the same Karma - and it's designed that way so that Ashes will not feel like a PvP game. It's designed that way to no feel PvP-centric. It's designed that way to not feel as much like a murderbox as L2 sometimes felt to Steven.

5: The dealbreaker for me has nothing to do with Corruption being similar to Karma.
The dealbreaker is the addition of The Open Seas. That is what makes Ashes too similar to EvE and ArcheAge for me to be interested in playing. I don't really care how similar Corruption is to Karma other than you said they are exactly the same when they are not.
What I do care about is the additition of The Open Seas in 2022. That's a ruleset that pushes me out of the Ashes target audience.
With the addition of that ruleset, Ashes is too PvP-centric for me. It places Ashes in the murderbox category for me, alongside EvE and ArcheAge.
And it makes other people's labels irrelevant.
People can say Ashes is not PvP-centric; it is instead Purple. People can say Ashes is not PvP-centric it is PvX. People can say Ashes is not PvP-centric; it is Nirvana.
I don't really care what label is used to describe Ashes now.

The Corruption system is not the dead giveaway that Ashes is too PvP-centric for me to be interested in playing.
Having large areas of the map where Corruption is not active is the dead giveaway that Ashes is too PvP-centric for me to be interested in playing. And that was not added to the game until 2022.

So, at this point, Steven and I are not on the same page when it comes to labels associated with PvP.
Steven might say that Ashes is not a murderbox. I don't agree.
Steven says that Ashes is not PvP-centric. I don't agree.
But, we don't have to agree on terms.
Where Steven and I do agree is that Ashes is not made for everyone. Steven and I also agree that the addition of The Open Seas might be a dealbreaker for some of the original players who were on board with the Kickstarter design(s).

(You can call me whatever you want to call me, btw: I'm rubber, you're glue. Sticks and stones)

Dygz

Mag7spy wrote: »

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.

It's not about what my hopes were, though. I didn't hope for anything... I asked Steven to describe the Ashes PvP system so I could ascertain if it's an MMORPG with PvP that I would enjoy playing or if it's too PvP-centric for me. Steven answered one way in 2018 that I accepted. And then added a feature which contradicts that answer in 2022.

I didn't leave anything to my imagination and there was not "less information".
I asked Steven directly. He answered. And then added a significant change to the design in 2022 that pushed me out of the target audience.
I'm not at all disappointed by that.
I think it's a great addition for PvPers. It's just a ruleset that I don't like to play.

But, I didn't leave anything to guess work. I asked Steven specific questions.
And the answer to a key question changed significantly in 2022.
Everything is subject to change.

Dygz

blat wrote: »

I come from always-on PvP, but am intrigued by the corruption system and the genuine attempt to unify player types in a PvX system. And I'm very willing to meet in the middle and give it the benefit of the doubt.
But some people here are so quick to shut down anything that isn't tailor-made for themselves.

I dunno how being on board with Corruption as an acceptable compromise for 5 years can be categorized as "quick to shutdown anything that isn't tailor made for themselves."

blat wrote: »

Opinions or not this does seem a bit of an extreme swing.. from a game you were willing to play to "murderbox" status with this one region-locked change?

How is that an extreme swing?
In 2018, I asked Steven if Ashes has PvP similar to the free-for-all PvP areas in EvE and ArcheAge.
Because they include that ruleset that makes MMORPGs murderboxes to me.
He answered that Ashes has no zones that auto-flag for free-for-all PvP. There is just the one Flagging system which include Corruption across the entire map.
And, there should me no surprise that that ruleset would be a dealbreaker for me considering my RPG playstyle is: Explorer 87%; Socializer 73% ; Achiever 47%; Killer 0%

blat wrote: »

Yes yes I know your Bartle score.. you want to explore. But as pointed out previously, the map is bloody big. There's a whole lot of exploring to be had, and only one portion of the map that you may not fancy.

Irrelevant how big the map is. My primary goal when playing any RPG is to uncover/explore the entire map as quickly as possible.
And the Open Seas is not a tiny portion of the map, like 5%... rather, it's a large portion of the map - more than 20%.

Mag7spy

Dygz wrote: »

Mag7spy wrote: »

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.

It's not about what my hopes were, though. I didn't hope for anything... I asked Steven to describe the Ashes PvP system so I could ascertain if it's an MMORPG with PvP that I would enjoy playing or if it's too PvP-centric for me. Steven answered one way in 2018 that I accepted. And then added a feature which contradicts that answer in 2022.

I didn't leave anything to my imagination and there was not "less information".
I asked Steven directly. He answered. And then added a significant change to the design in 2022 that pushed me out of the target audience.
I'm not at all disappointed by that.
I think it's a great addition for PvPers. It's just a ruleset that I don't like to play.

But, I didn't leave anything to guess work. I asked Steven specific questions.
And the answer to a key question changed significantly in 2022.
Everything is subject to change.

When i mean guess work knowing that AoC has pvp in it, it is fair to think like most games with pvp there will be other avenues to pvp they had not discussed yet or finalized yet. Meaning while things can change they still need to finish the game and more things could be added.

IE open seas in this case, we still lack understanding of node / guild war decs (OWpvp without corruption), potential open dungeon pvp, the pvp they added to nodes when it is destroyed not controlled by corruption.

So, even though corruption has a significant impact on general PvP, based on my observations with AoC over time, I believe there are still numerous ways to engage in PvP without it significantly hindering someone due to corruption.

That is why also when they said you could go out of your way to avoid pvp, my understanding was you would really have to go out of your way. Be it leaving a node + guild if it is dec'd, avoiding areas set as open pvp (be it dungeons, node destruction, open seas), etc. Unless you are prepared to do some pvp and want it.

I'll agree with you on AoC being more centric pvp, that is why I'm interested in the game and look forward to see how they make it feel like PvX. I get why people don't like that title though cause really there isn't a pvx mmorpg. Most have just had garbage pve and the focus was pvp.

blat

Dygz wrote: »

And the Open Seas is not a tiny portion of the map, like 5%... rather, it's a large portion of the map - more than 20%.

I never once said it was. But I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume that was an accidental misread/misquote

Dygz

Mag7spy wrote: »

When i mean guess work knowing that AoC has pvp in it, it is fair to think like most games with pvp there will be other avenues to pvp they had not discussed yet or finalized yet. Meaning while things can change they still need to finish the game and more things could be added.

IE open seas in this case, we still lack understanding of node / guild war decs (OWpvp without corruption), potential open dungeon pvp, the pvp they added to nodes when it is destroyed not controlled by corruption.

So, even though corruption has a significant impact on general PvP, based on my observations with AoC over time, I believe there are still numerous ways to engage in PvP without it significantly hindering someone due to corruption.

That is why also when they said you could go out of your way to avoid pvp, my understanding was you would really have to go out of your way. Be it leaving a node + guild if it is dec'd, avoiding areas set as open pvp (be it dungeons, node destruction, open seas), etc. Unless you are prepared to do some pvp and want it.

It's still not "guess work" when Steven answers specific questions and then years later adds a change that contradicts his original answer.
Steven: I'm baking chocolate chip cookies, I'd like for you to try them.
Dygz: Oh! OK. Will they have nuts in them? Because I don't eat cookies with nuts in them.
Steven: No. The cookies will just have chocolate chips in them.
Dygz: OK. Great!

Steven: Oh. By the way. I did decide to add nuts to the chocolate chip cookies.
Dygz: Oh. Oops. Sorry. No thanks. I don't eat cookies with nuts.

blat: That seems like an extreme swing!! The cookies stil have chocolate chips in them!!
HybridSR: The moment Steven said there were chocolate chips, you should have known the cookies would include nuts.
Dygz: But... I asked him if there would be nuts and he answered no. And, then, when he added nuts, I was no longer interested in eating the cookies because I don't eat cookies with nuts in them.

There's no guess work involved in that. I asked if there would be nuts because I don't eat cookies that have nuts.
The original answer was no nuts.
When the answer changed to include nuts, I was no longer interested in eating the cookies.

Mag7spy wrote: »

I'll agree with you on AoC being more centric pvp, that is why I'm interested in the game and look forward to see how they make it feel like PvX. I get why people don't like that title though cause really there isn't a pvx mmorpg. Most have just had garbage pve and the focus was pvp.

Yep. I think of it as being great that there will be an MMORPG that caters to PvP fans.
Especially players who enjoyed playing L2, EvE and ArcheAge.

Mag7spy

Dygz wrote: »

Mag7spy wrote: »

When i mean guess work knowing that AoC has pvp in it, it is fair to think like most games with pvp there will be other avenues to pvp they had not discussed yet or finalized yet. Meaning while things can change they still need to finish the game and more things could be added.

IE open seas in this case, we still lack understanding of node / guild war decs (OWpvp without corruption), potential open dungeon pvp, the pvp they added to nodes when it is destroyed not controlled by corruption.

So, even though corruption has a significant impact on general PvP, based on my observations with AoC over time, I believe there are still numerous ways to engage in PvP without it significantly hindering someone due to corruption.

That is why also when they said you could go out of your way to avoid pvp, my understanding was you would really have to go out of your way. Be it leaving a node + guild if it is dec'd, avoiding areas set as open pvp (be it dungeons, node destruction, open seas), etc. Unless you are prepared to do some pvp and want it.

It's still not "guess work" when Steven answers specific questions and then years later adds a change that contradicts his original answer.
Steven: I'm baking chocolate chip cookies, I'd like for you to try them.
Dygz: Oh! OK. Will they have nuts in them? Because I don't eat cookies with nuts in them.
Steven: No. The cookies will just have chocolate chips in them.
Dygz: OK. Great!

Steven: Oh. By the way. I did decide to add nuts to the chocolate chip cookies.
Dygz: Oh. Oops. Sorry. No thanks. I don't eat cookies with nuts.

blat: That seems like an extreme swing!! The cookies stil have chocolate chips in them!!
HybridSR: The moment Steven said there were chocolate chips, you should have known the cookies would include nuts.
Dygz: But... I asked him if there would be nuts and he answered no. And, then, when he added nuts, I was no longer interested in eating the cookies because I don't eat cookies with nuts in them.

There's no guess work involved in that. I asked if there would be nuts because I don't eat cookies that have nuts.
The original answer was no nuts.
When the answer changed to include nuts, I was no longer interested in eating the cookies.

Mag7spy wrote: »

I'll agree with you on AoC being more centric pvp, that is why I'm interested in the game and look forward to see how they make it feel like PvX. I get why people don't like that title though cause really there isn't a pvx mmorpg. Most have just had garbage pve and the focus was pvp.

Yep. I think of it as being great that there will be an MMORPG that caters to PvP fans.
Especially players who enjoyed playing L2, EvE and ArcheAge.

I still wouldn't be that confident the open sea makes that big a difference for exploring and its going to be more open and not really that interesting. I could be wrong but that is what my instincts tell me.

Either way as you test during the alpha when we get to the open sea part maybe you will find it won't make that much big of a deal and the general corruption and ways to avoid pvp will be fine enough, and the game worth stomaching because of it being highly fun (pve exploring stand point).

So I hope the case scenario works out for you atleast so you can enjoy it with your friends. All the other mmorpgs in development imo are a bit meh or more so on the korean side of things and making me expect the pve to be bad. Granted i still don't know enough about aoc pve.

blat

Dygz wrote: »

Mag7spy wrote: »

When i mean guess work knowing that AoC has pvp in it, it is fair to think like most games with pvp there will be other avenues to pvp they had not discussed yet or finalized yet. Meaning while things can change they still need to finish the game and more things could be added.

IE open seas in this case, we still lack understanding of node / guild war decs (OWpvp without corruption), potential open dungeon pvp, the pvp they added to nodes when it is destroyed not controlled by corruption.

So, even though corruption has a significant impact on general PvP, based on my observations with AoC over time, I believe there are still numerous ways to engage in PvP without it significantly hindering someone due to corruption.

That is why also when they said you could go out of your way to avoid pvp, my understanding was you would really have to go out of your way. Be it leaving a node + guild if it is dec'd, avoiding areas set as open pvp (be it dungeons, node destruction, open seas), etc. Unless you are prepared to do some pvp and want it.

It's still not "guess work" when Steven answers specific questions and then years later adds a change that contradicts his original answer.
Steven: I'm baking chocolate chip cookies, I'd like for you to try them.
Dygz: Oh! OK. Will they have nuts in them? Because I don't eat cookies with nuts in them.
Steven: No. The cookies will just have chocolate chips in them.
Dygz: OK. Great!

Steven: Oh. By the way. I did decide to add nuts to the chocolate chip cookies.
Dygz: Oh. Oops. Sorry. No thanks. I don't eat cookies with nuts.

blat: That seems like an extreme swing!! The cookies stil have chocolate chips in them!!
HybridSR: The moment Steven said there were chocolate chips, you should have known the cookies would include nuts.
Dygz: But... I asked him if there would be nuts and he answered no. And, then, when he added nuts, I was no longer interested in eating the cookies because I don't eat cookies with nuts in them.

There's no guess work involved in that. I asked if there would be nuts because I don't eat cookies that have nuts.
The original answer was no nuts.
When the answer changed to include nuts, I was no longer interested in eating the cookies.

Mag7spy wrote: »

I'll agree with you on AoC being more centric pvp, that is why I'm interested in the game and look forward to see how they make it feel like PvX. I get why people don't like that title though cause really there isn't a pvx mmorpg. Most have just had garbage pve and the focus was pvp.

Yep. I think of it as being great that there will be an MMORPG that caters to PvP fans.
Especially players who enjoyed playing L2, EvE and ArcheAge.

Nuts indeed.

Dygz

NiKr wrote: »

Open seas change was a fairly controversial one. And with Dygz being quite far on the anti-forced-pvp scale (pretty much at the extreme end of it tbh) - to him that change was even worse than for others.

I wouldn't phrase it as worse - it's a more significant and impactful change for my playstyle. Yes.
I mostly agree with being on the extreme end of anti-forced-pvp.
But, I'd say the actual extreme end would not be OK with the Corruption concept at all.

NiKr wrote: »

We also don't know how hard it'll be to cross the seas w/o dying. And with Dygz also being an avid RPer, I'd imagine he'd prefer to explore on his main character, rather than make 2 dudes on 2 continents (and this doesn't even count the island exploration).

Ha! Well, the first thing I do with each alt is explore as much of the map as possible.
So, I would likely have more than two alts on two continents. And they would all need to be able to traverse the entire map with no permanent zones that auto-flag for Corruption-free PvP.
If I were going to truly play and pursue progression paths.

NiKr wrote: »

And there's also the super vague and nebulous reason for seas being pvp of "the content is worth the risk", so in theory an explorer would want to see that kind of content for themselves. And with the entire seas being pvp - ya can't really do that, especially considering the potential costs of water mounts/ships.

And as such, when you look at the game overall (because you're interested in exploring all of it) - the game has turned into a murderbox. And you say it yourself, the seas could theoretically draw a lot of the pvpers unto themselves, which would then make those seas even more of an "instakilled" location.

Yeah. I'm not really motivated at all by Risk v Reward, like Steven is.
I do enjoy objective-based PvP, like Sieges and Caravans - which I equate with Meaningful Conflict due to the Kickstarter video.
Murderbox is really Steven's term, but when I try to apply that term to MMORPGs... I first think of:
ShadowBane, then the naval battles in ArcheAge and then the PvP-intense zones of EvE (Null Sec?).
The moment I understand that the gameplay will be similar to the naval battles of ArcheAge, I know I'm not in the target audience.

In the EQNext Forums 10 years ago, we were trying to figure out how the devs were planning to get all the players who typically play EQ on PvE servers to be OK with playing on the server as gamers who play EQ on PvP servers. The devs never gave us a hint of what their actual plans were for that.
The quickest way to get PvPers temporary bans would be for the PvEers to offer a suggestion for a viable compromise (PvEers should be able to travel The Open Seas with a PvE-Only flag).
The PvPers would be all, "WTF?? No efffing way would we ever accept that shit!! That's not a effing compromise."
The quickest way to get PvEers temporary bans would be for the PvPers to offer a suggestion for a viable compromise (PvEers should just not travel to The Open Seas if they don't want to PvP. There's no reson to be in a PvP area if you don't want to PvP. Just being there is auto-consent.).
The PvEers would be all, "WTF?? No efffing way would we ever accept that shit!! That's not a effing compromise!"

I'm not butt hurt about the change because it makes total sense to me that a gamer with Steven's playstyle would consider that to be a resonable addition to a "PvX".
It was just kinda surprising to be on board for 5 years and then suddenly realize I'm actually not in the target audience.
In the meantime, plenty of other MMORPGs that are less PvP-centric than I consider Ashes to now be have now popped onto the horizon. Especially looking forward to Ghost right now.
And then, it's really cool that PvP fans have an MMORPG, like Ashes, with even more PvP than originally designed, rather than typical decimation to PvP that as happening over the last few years - like with New World.

Ha! Speaking of surprising realizations...
All through college, I considered myself to be GenX. I think right around 2000 is when I learned that I'm actually the final year of Boomer. My friend who hates chocolate is 6 months older. She still refuses to accept that we are Boomers and not GenX.

Aszkalon

Dygz wrote: »

Don't worry, Dygz. " I " am not done with You even if Others choose to ignore You.

Sometimes our Arguments are just to interesting - as i am always curious about other Points of View and You personally always deliver nicely and give me some good Information any some time.

Sometimes i am not sure however if You are just plain unsatisfied with the Nature of the Game or not. Lets say our Conversations never get old, which is kind of nice.

Does it sound weird when i say - > i bet not even the MOST PvE-loving kind of Player, who i will see in the World of Verra, will ever be done and start loathing the Game when sometimes PvP happens to him/her ?

Might be just me - but i think People will rather easily accept the State of Being in Verra. Also i can for the Life of mine not imagine that Nobody will ever think of asking People for Aid and Help as PvP-styled Bodyguards whenever they want to for Example farm something in the Wilderness.

Dygz

Yeah... it's fun to examine different perspectives.
Especially when trying to figure out "Who in the world would enjoy that?"
Or "How can you not enjoy that?"

PvPers, for some reason, always seem to think that PvEers are seeking help or protection from PvP.
"Oh! I'm just not good at PvP, so if I ask good PvPers to protect me from gankers, I could have tons of fun in this game."

I don't need protection from PvP combat. When I'm in the mood for PvP combat, I don't really care about who wins or who loses.
It's just another activity.
It's a higher challenge activity than I typically prefer because I'm a casual-challenge player and I find mobs to be more predictable and easier to work around than gamers.

I'm OK with that higher challenge activity for about 1-hour out of an 8-hour play session.
And then I need to be able to go back to casual-challenge activities, like peacefully exploring the map and picking flowers for the remaining 7 hours of my game session - without some random gamer deciding for me that I have to jump back into PvP just because they love PvP.
If other gamers are going to be "protecting" me from PvP, I might as well just join in. I'm either in the mood for PvP or I'm not. And, if I'm not, I don't want my friends and other allies around me to be in PvP combat either. I want us to be doing other stuff that is not PvP combat for those 7 hours.

This is like saying to me - hey, if you don't like nuts in your chocolate chip cookies, NiKr will bite all of the nuts out of the cookies for you and then you can eat the remnants.
Like, no thank you. I will just find some chocolate chip cookies that don't have nuts baked in. It's OK.

PvP Sieges were fun in Alpha One. Because I was able to choose when to participate and when not to rather than some other gamer making that decision for me. Same would be true for Caravans.
I don't need bodyguards - I just prefer to play MMORPGs where I have full control over when I participate in PvP and when I don't, rather than that being decided by some other gamer.
I would have similar issues if another gamer could force me to pick flowers when I'm not in the mood to pick flowers. Or someone could force me to Craft Weapons when I'm not in the mood to Craft Weapons.

Child Item