Greetings, glorious testers!
Check out Alpha Two Announcements here to see the latest news on Alpha Two.
Check out general Announcements here to see the latest news on Ashes of Creation & Intrepid Studios.
To get the quickest updates regarding Alpha Two, connect your Discord and Intrepid accounts here.
Check out Alpha Two Announcements here to see the latest news on Alpha Two.
Check out general Announcements here to see the latest news on Ashes of Creation & Intrepid Studios.
To get the quickest updates regarding Alpha Two, connect your Discord and Intrepid accounts here.
Comments
This is correct. My original suggestion in another thread was to remove all HP bars.
Then another person came up with a better suggestion which is to remove HP bars only for green players and leave them for everyone else. Currently this is the best option without changing the system that is not going to be changed anyway, according to Steven.
If someone comes with even better solution which, once again, will not break the whole PvP/PK system or make it pointless - I'm all ears. So far I haven't seen anything remotely close to that.
And you still, haven't answer this question. Not after it was asked...
Not after I emphasized it that you decided to ignore, as there is no valid reason for you to see the HP of green players, unless you actually plan to behave the way we described in this thread.
You're gonna skip it again, huh?
1. You have 1200sq km of world map and 85/100 nodes to choose from
2. In vast majority of cases during unpleasant encounters there will be a way to disengage and/or deescalate
3. Even when it comes to caravans, Ashes provides a lower risk/lower reward option which is using mules instead of a caravan.
4. Ashes also allows you to do a ton of other stuff, besides PvP related stuff.
....?
You seem to have this assumption that people read every post in a thread like this. The reason I said I didn't "ignore" that shit you were talking about earlier after you said I did is because it was in a post I had no reason to read. I'll read posts if something catches my eye, or if I am quoted, and sometimes if I am pinged. The only real way to guarantee I'll read a post is to quote me - and even then the only guarantee is that I'll read the portion of the post that is directed at me.
I didn't answer Mags question initially because I didn't read it. I am not answering it now because I'm not going to answer it when you are asking it after being so insistent. I am not your performing monkey. If someone that I respect (or, more specifically, I don't have negative respect for) asks me it, in a post I read, I'll probably answer it, because it's really easy to answer.
It is your assumption that just because it was posted and not answered that this means it was ignored that is the reason I'm not posting one for you.
If you had have said "you missed this question", or "what is your take on this question" as opposed to "you ignored this question" in relation to something that wasn't even addressed to me, then maybe you would have an answer already.
> I pointed out the first time while quoting your message - you skipped and ignored it, this time 100% intentionally, because there was no way you couldn't see it
> I pointed out the second time that every single time you get cornered with arguments or have nothing to say, you just ignore it and try to switch the topic
> You decided not to answer a relatively simple question and couldn't find anything better than just making up another cockroach-IQ-level excuse.
It could be an assumption when I mentioned it for the first time. Who knows, maybe you really missed it, right? At this point it is a fact, a public fact that literally anyone can see
Why would I?
Either answer it or stop making up your lame excuses
I told you once and will repeat it again: I will keep calling out your nonsense every single time I see you posting it. You may keep squirming when you are cornered, yet the question remains and you keep ignoring that knowingly and intentionally, which only proves my point even more. Crucio
RIP Noaani
Did he?
Cool, probably another post I didn't read.
Oh, so I definately just don't remember it.
Kind of getting stalker vibes from you now though.
Some of them also will remember me, because "me" will come in form of million players soon
Have no fear, sweet summer child
@Noaani can you give me an example of the benefits that visible green hp would bring?
It is different because in Archeage, I had access to housing and I could gather mats that I grow myself, which I would then use in crafting.
In Ashes, I either won't have that ability, or the housing that I do get will be very limiting in what you can and cannot do, and the scope/size itself.
I had an option to do safe trade runs, where I spend mats that I farmed, and my time, in order to get some gold. In Ashes, there isn't such option.
I had an option to do instanced dungeons that gave me rewards, and gear. In Ashes, so far it doesn't look like that will be the case.
This was majority of my time spent in game anyways, doing exactly that. And then came group content 2x a week, whether it was RD PvP or Kraken, or risky, group trade runs that can be run any time.
But here I am, doing it again, responding to an argument made against my post, where my post wasn't even meant to be an argument. I simply replied to @Ludullu_(NiKr) because he asked a question.
Besides, this argument is not really relevant to the post, so I don't want to engage in it any further.
You should stop viewing everything as an argument that you need to respond to btw.
Also, we've been going in circles and off tangents constantly. I have offered a solution to this problem, so have other people.
Right now it's all about going on different tangents, and making up new arguments with every post.
Sorry, I've had my fair share of this exact kind of conversations within the past month now, so I'm always viewing it as an argument against my point of view.
Anyways onto the topic, I want to repeat my suggestions/solutions to the problem, as I didn't get a reply with people agreeing or disagreeing with it:
My last point solves one issue, that is "You target someone, get them down to 5% hp and let mobs do the rest". Yes it can get exploited, but after all, is it really an exploit? If you willingly go to grief another player, and then they go out of their way to die, in order to punish you, then I'd say fair play.
My first point, is kind of an addition to the corruption system. Where you also have a chance to become corrupted, if you harass enough greens.
Now there are downsides to this, which I would kindly let everyone else point out, but there are downsides to the current corruption system anyways, and it's never going to be perfect.
And I feel these 2 solutions would have much better impact on solving those examples presented, of griefing other players, rather than just obfuscating the hp bar.
Keep in mind, I'm not against your suggestions, I'm just providing another solution, that has potential to be more effective. Or even, both could exist at the same time.
Either don't display it at all (like in Lineage 2 for example, and have people be surprised when they get a kill)
Or have it update normally and let it update like we're used to.
This in-between solution is definitely not it imo. Gotta commit to one of the two.
I really like both proposals a lot. Very constructive.
The reason why I'm not sure about this:
1. It might be a more complicated and potentially less-user friendly mechanic that takes work hours to design and implement instead of focusing on other 3842 things Intrepid already needs to do
2. As Mag said, I still have no idea why anyone needs to see the HP of a green players
3. Even if your solution does contribute to reducing the risk of this particular way of griefing, the fact that HP bars of green players are still visible doesn't prevent other ways of griefing, such as bringing the mob trains onto the green player. If victim's HP is visible, it's much easier to choose the right moment.
Makes sense? I would agree, but apparently Intrepid planned some progression system when it comes to HP bars, which might allow you to see more detailed info, 1/6 and 1/8 health bar segments, instead of default 1/4. Check out my reply to @iccer above. Is there any valid reason why anyone needs to see HP of a green player? It's gonna be horror stories, much scarier than Stephen King's books
Not everyone will run when they are in a bad situation - in fact most people won't.
If you can't see player health, you have no way of knowing if someone that isn't running is in a bad situation.
You say you help out people when you notice them in a bad situation - which in L2 is literally reduced to the handful of times players run away.
In a game where you can see player health, that kind of positive player interaction happens exponentially more often. Players can see immediately if someone else is in danger, because you can see the health of the mobs on them, and their own health as well. Throwing them a heal or pulling a few mobs off the player is an incredibly powerful positive interaction. This is even more true in games where the assisting player also had the option to attack the player in need, but opted to help instead.
If the only way to tell if a player is in trouble is if they run, you will walk by 90% of the occurances of a player being in trouble.
So, the notion of removing health information to lessen the occurance of a specific negative interaction is being done at the cost of also lessening the occurance of a specific positive interaction.
This is why any and all other means of lessening that negative interaction should be explored and exhausted first.
Edit to add; even with Intrepids current plan of displaying health information, this is still fairly hard to do. The difference between someone that is at 48% and 28% is fairly stark - yet would show up as the same to players walking past. If I saw someone at 48% I probably wouldn't think they needed assistance (I try to not get involved as that can upset people), but someone at 28% is probably in need of assistance.
Those that see no value in siplaying it are those that have no notion of helping someone in trouble.
More over, corruption was not really an issue in most instances of pk`ing in L2 and I will elaboate why:
Trying to kill a player though reducing their hp count to allow a mob to finish them off and/or training the player with a group of mobs timed when they were likely a low hp was mostly reserved for taking control of a valued XP spot.
The vast majority of the kills in this manner were against bots or farmers and enemy clans.. not random players as appears to be the main concern.
Enemy clan warfare was sometime fair under joint wars, but sometimes not as they were 1 way wars or just straight out pk warfare!.
The bots for the most part did not fight back.
The farmers and enemy clans sometimes sent high levels back or a larger group to take us out afterwards, but this was rare. Usually it was just the same 1-3 players and a ring in or two on the return round!.
The spots being contested took a while to get to and sometimes were remote, deep in dungeons or towers. Or gated by groups of mobs which had to be passed first!.. We also had alt accounts as scouts. By the time any support group came back, the karma had been burned off already and we were often prepared for round 2 of either pk`ing or pvp. If one team member had too much karma and risk to do another pk, then another player in the group would take the pk next round.. this meant there was up to 10-20 potential safe pks within a group before concern or risk!
L2 had quite a large land and the valued xp spots could take a good few minutes to return to once killed and returning from town or your clan hall.
I think it all my years of playing, a team returned a max of 5x and with progressively increasing forces and were killed again.
Was a good bit of entertainment for an hour!
We did get wiped a few times in the early days by very high level perma-red farmers but level and skill level soon closed.
> Farmers - I don't really understand what exactly you mean by "farmers", your definition of it could help
> Enemy clans - true. But if there was a clan war, you could kill them anyway without going PK.
I would add to this a few categories:
> Personal vendetta - your name meant something in Lineage (same expected in Ashes), so any past negative interactions with player X could often lead to you punishing him for that.
> On older patches - there was a chance to drop a piece of gear or items from your inventory, if you get killed by mobs. So some players did that intentionally and sometimes succeeded. Was pretty common on Classic, where servers were initially launched from C1 basically.
> Could be other reasons that I forgot, because I just woke up True Rare? I wouldn't say that haha, but it depends on the server and clan, I guess. I've seen it so many times when 2 players have a beef, Player A calls a few friends, Player B calls brings a group, Player A calls his clan, Player B calls his clan. And it ends up in a fight between 2 clans that lasts for hours, even though half of the players don't even know what happened initially xD
But it was always fun, no matter if you won or lost Yup. A true risk vs reward in play Correct. And the fact that it took time to go back to the spot was important. This is what brought more sense to those encounters, as you couldn't return back in ~30 seconds. On one of the x7 HF servers, we occupied one of the best farming spots in SoA (frogs). We were there literally 24/7 (split our group in shifts, so that we maintain 24/7 presence there) and were defending it for ~3 weeks from those who dared to come. Throughout those 3 weeks, it was like that: 8-12 hours of fights, 12--16 hours of relaxed farming. 3 weeks later players (including the top clans) realized that we will never give up, we are fine with investing time in this and the only result they achieve is wasting their own time. So everyone just stopped coming and we kinda won it. It was hella fun and it would still be even if we lost the spot. Hand on heart - did you ever care much about getting killed by a PK?
Just curious, as I never gave a f about it whatsoever