CROW3 wrote: » It was a worthwhile question, @Sathrago. We've been discussing these aspects for so long now, always good to check our collective assumptions.
Dygz wrote: » I think we had this topic a few months ago...?
Veeshan wrote: » Green attacking anyone should make them a combatant since they initiated it
Otr wrote: » The green players of a military node attacking a red, should automatically become Bounty Hunters and get progression on that path. The other players, even if they were bounty hunters before, if they are no longer military citizens, should become purple when attacking first, but only if a certain time passed since the red player was in combat with a regular non-BH green player. If the red player killed recently a non BH green, other green players should be able to chase the red away. There should be no visual indicator if a red player can be safely attacked by regular green players or not.
Pendragxn wrote: » Otr wrote: » The green players of a military node attacking a red, should automatically become Bounty Hunters and get progression on that path. The other players, even if they were bounty hunters before, if they are no longer military citizens, should become purple when attacking first, but only if a certain time passed since the red player was in combat with a regular non-BH green player. If the red player killed recently a non BH green, other green players should be able to chase the red away. There should be no visual indicator if a red player can be safely attacked by regular green players or not. Doesn’t there need to be an indicator if a red player can be attacked as they’re already flagged red which is the indicator. I don’t see the advantage for the green to not know that another player is hostile. If you flag red it should be that you’re willing to attack others and be attacked that’s the risk.
Otr wrote: » Pendragxn wrote: » Otr wrote: » The green players of a military node attacking a red, should automatically become Bounty Hunters and get progression on that path. The other players, even if they were bounty hunters before, if they are no longer military citizens, should become purple when attacking first, but only if a certain time passed since the red player was in combat with a regular non-BH green player. If the red player killed recently a non BH green, other green players should be able to chase the red away. There should be no visual indicator if a red player can be safely attacked by regular green players or not. Doesn’t there need to be an indicator if a red player can be attacked as they’re already flagged red which is the indicator. I don’t see the advantage for the green to not know that another player is hostile. If you flag red it should be that you’re willing to attack others and be attacked that’s the risk. You don't know when a red became red. And they are supposed to be hunted by bounty hunters rather than green players. If the red was running from players and avoiding them for some time, a random green attacking it should become purple. Greens should have the advantage to remain green as attackers, only if the red killed a green in their vicinity very recently. Or if they are military node citizens.
Caeryl wrote: » Otr wrote: » Pendragxn wrote: » Otr wrote: » The green players of a military node attacking a red, should automatically become Bounty Hunters and get progression on that path. The other players, even if they were bounty hunters before, if they are no longer military citizens, should become purple when attacking first, but only if a certain time passed since the red player was in combat with a regular non-BH green player. If the red player killed recently a non BH green, other green players should be able to chase the red away. There should be no visual indicator if a red player can be safely attacked by regular green players or not. Doesn’t there need to be an indicator if a red player can be attacked as they’re already flagged red which is the indicator. I don’t see the advantage for the green to not know that another player is hostile. If you flag red it should be that you’re willing to attack others and be attacked that’s the risk. You don't know when a red became red. And they are supposed to be hunted by bounty hunters rather than green players. If the red was running from players and avoiding them for some time, a random green attacking it should become purple. Greens should have the advantage to remain green as attackers, only if the red killed a green in their vicinity very recently. Or if they are military node citizens. It doesn't matter when the player turned red. They should know not to approach settlements until they've worked off that corruption. And players coming to avenge their PK'd group mate is a risk you know every time you start combat, that you chose to go red doesn't change that the base play pattern is 'people come back for revenge'. Reds don't need to be safeguarded, you need to weigh the risk first, not complain about the consequences after you already accepted to go red.
Otr wrote: » Caeryl wrote: » Otr wrote: » Pendragxn wrote: » Otr wrote: » The green players of a military node attacking a red, should automatically become Bounty Hunters and get progression on that path. The other players, even if they were bounty hunters before, if they are no longer military citizens, should become purple when attacking first, but only if a certain time passed since the red player was in combat with a regular non-BH green player. If the red player killed recently a non BH green, other green players should be able to chase the red away. There should be no visual indicator if a red player can be safely attacked by regular green players or not. Doesn’t there need to be an indicator if a red player can be attacked as they’re already flagged red which is the indicator. I don’t see the advantage for the green to not know that another player is hostile. If you flag red it should be that you’re willing to attack others and be attacked that’s the risk. You don't know when a red became red. And they are supposed to be hunted by bounty hunters rather than green players. If the red was running from players and avoiding them for some time, a random green attacking it should become purple. Greens should have the advantage to remain green as attackers, only if the red killed a green in their vicinity very recently. Or if they are military node citizens. It doesn't matter when the player turned red. They should know not to approach settlements until they've worked off that corruption. And players coming to avenge their PK'd group mate is a risk you know every time you start combat, that you chose to go red doesn't change that the base play pattern is 'people come back for revenge'. Reds don't need to be safeguarded, you need to weigh the risk first, not complain about the consequences after you already accepted to go red. The green who go for revenge are cowards who would not dare to attack him if they know they turn purple? And yes, the red should not be able to enter cities. I said nothing about that.
Caeryl wrote: » Otr wrote: » Caeryl wrote: » Otr wrote: » Pendragxn wrote: » Otr wrote: » The green players of a military node attacking a red, should automatically become Bounty Hunters and get progression on that path. The other players, even if they were bounty hunters before, if they are no longer military citizens, should become purple when attacking first, but only if a certain time passed since the red player was in combat with a regular non-BH green player. If the red player killed recently a non BH green, other green players should be able to chase the red away. There should be no visual indicator if a red player can be safely attacked by regular green players or not. Doesn’t there need to be an indicator if a red player can be attacked as they’re already flagged red which is the indicator. I don’t see the advantage for the green to not know that another player is hostile. If you flag red it should be that you’re willing to attack others and be attacked that’s the risk. You don't know when a red became red. And they are supposed to be hunted by bounty hunters rather than green players. If the red was running from players and avoiding them for some time, a random green attacking it should become purple. Greens should have the advantage to remain green as attackers, only if the red killed a green in their vicinity very recently. Or if they are military node citizens. It doesn't matter when the player turned red. They should know not to approach settlements until they've worked off that corruption. And players coming to avenge their PK'd group mate is a risk you know every time you start combat, that you chose to go red doesn't change that the base play pattern is 'people come back for revenge'. Reds don't need to be safeguarded, you need to weigh the risk first, not complain about the consequences after you already accepted to go red. The green who go for revenge are cowards who would not dare to attack him if they know they turn purple? And yes, the red should not be able to enter cities. I said nothing about that. They're not 'cowards' any more than the red was for killing someone who didn't fight back.
Pendragxn wrote: » Caeryl wrote: » Otr wrote: » Pendragxn wrote: » Otr wrote: » The green players of a military node attacking a red, should automatically become Bounty Hunters and get progression on that path. The other players, even if they were bounty hunters before, if they are no longer military citizens, should become purple when attacking first, but only if a certain time passed since the red player was in combat with a regular non-BH green player. If the red player killed recently a non BH green, other green players should be able to chase the red away. There should be no visual indicator if a red player can be safely attacked by regular green players or not. Doesn’t there need to be an indicator if a red player can be attacked as they’re already flagged red which is the indicator. I don’t see the advantage for the green to not know that another player is hostile. If you flag red it should be that you’re willing to attack others and be attacked that’s the risk. You don't know when a red became red. And they are supposed to be hunted by bounty hunters rather than green players. If the red was running from players and avoiding them for some time, a random green attacking it should become purple. Greens should have the advantage to remain green as attackers, only if the red killed a green in their vicinity very recently. Or if they are military node citizens. It doesn't matter when the player turned red. They should know not to approach settlements until they've worked off that corruption. And players coming to avenge their PK'd group mate is a risk you know every time you start combat, that you chose to go red doesn't change that the base play pattern is 'people come back for revenge'. Reds don't need to be safeguarded, you need to weigh the risk first, not complain about the consequences after you already accepted to go red. I’m confused but my understanding is green players are non-combatants which can’t be affected by certain status effects, AOE or CC. Technically a military node would be purple as the purple can kill red but suffer no penalty but if they attack green they become red which is corrupted I believe. I’m really interested to see how this whole colour thing is going to work out especially in lawless zones. What colour will you as well as your party be and will you see other parties as just red?
Otr wrote: » Caeryl wrote: » Otr wrote: » Caeryl wrote: » Otr wrote: » Pendragxn wrote: » Otr wrote: » The green players of a military node attacking a red, should automatically become Bounty Hunters and get progression on that path. The other players, even if they were bounty hunters before, if they are no longer military citizens, should become purple when attacking first, but only if a certain time passed since the red player was in combat with a regular non-BH green player. If the red player killed recently a non BH green, other green players should be able to chase the red away. There should be no visual indicator if a red player can be safely attacked by regular green players or not. Doesn’t there need to be an indicator if a red player can be attacked as they’re already flagged red which is the indicator. I don’t see the advantage for the green to not know that another player is hostile. If you flag red it should be that you’re willing to attack others and be attacked that’s the risk. You don't know when a red became red. And they are supposed to be hunted by bounty hunters rather than green players. If the red was running from players and avoiding them for some time, a random green attacking it should become purple. Greens should have the advantage to remain green as attackers, only if the red killed a green in their vicinity very recently. Or if they are military node citizens. It doesn't matter when the player turned red. They should know not to approach settlements until they've worked off that corruption. And players coming to avenge their PK'd group mate is a risk you know every time you start combat, that you chose to go red doesn't change that the base play pattern is 'people come back for revenge'. Reds don't need to be safeguarded, you need to weigh the risk first, not complain about the consequences after you already accepted to go red. The green who go for revenge are cowards who would not dare to attack him if they know they turn purple? And yes, the red should not be able to enter cities. I said nothing about that. They're not 'cowards' any more than the red was for killing someone who didn't fight back. The red killing a non-combatant are something else, not cowards. You can better call them evil, or corrupted... Dygz calls them monsters.
Pendragxn wrote: » I’m confused but my understanding is green players are non-combatants which can’t be affected by certain status effects, AOE or CC.
Caeryl wrote: » Otr wrote: » Caeryl wrote: » Otr wrote: » Caeryl wrote: » Otr wrote: » Pendragxn wrote: » Otr wrote: » The green players of a military node attacking a red, should automatically become Bounty Hunters and get progression on that path. The other players, even if they were bounty hunters before, if they are no longer military citizens, should become purple when attacking first, but only if a certain time passed since the red player was in combat with a regular non-BH green player. If the red player killed recently a non BH green, other green players should be able to chase the red away. There should be no visual indicator if a red player can be safely attacked by regular green players or not. Doesn’t there need to be an indicator if a red player can be attacked as they’re already flagged red which is the indicator. I don’t see the advantage for the green to not know that another player is hostile. If you flag red it should be that you’re willing to attack others and be attacked that’s the risk. You don't know when a red became red. And they are supposed to be hunted by bounty hunters rather than green players. If the red was running from players and avoiding them for some time, a random green attacking it should become purple. Greens should have the advantage to remain green as attackers, only if the red killed a green in their vicinity very recently. Or if they are military node citizens. It doesn't matter when the player turned red. They should know not to approach settlements until they've worked off that corruption. And players coming to avenge their PK'd group mate is a risk you know every time you start combat, that you chose to go red doesn't change that the base play pattern is 'people come back for revenge'. Reds don't need to be safeguarded, you need to weigh the risk first, not complain about the consequences after you already accepted to go red. The green who go for revenge are cowards who would not dare to attack him if they know they turn purple? And yes, the red should not be able to enter cities. I said nothing about that. They're not 'cowards' any more than the red was for killing someone who didn't fight back. The red killing a non-combatant are something else, not cowards. You can better call them evil, or corrupted... Dygz calls them monsters. The term fits as much for them as it does for greens attacking a red player. You risk more penalties dying as a green, so they also have to consider if they're willing to risk those additional penalties before they go aggressive on a red.
Otr wrote: » Caeryl wrote: » Otr wrote: » Caeryl wrote: » Otr wrote: » Caeryl wrote: » Otr wrote: » Pendragxn wrote: » Otr wrote: » The green players of a military node attacking a red, should automatically become Bounty Hunters and get progression on that path. The other players, even if they were bounty hunters before, if they are no longer military citizens, should become purple when attacking first, but only if a certain time passed since the red player was in combat with a regular non-BH green player. If the red player killed recently a non BH green, other green players should be able to chase the red away. There should be no visual indicator if a red player can be safely attacked by regular green players or not. Doesn’t there need to be an indicator if a red player can be attacked as they’re already flagged red which is the indicator. I don’t see the advantage for the green to not know that another player is hostile. If you flag red it should be that you’re willing to attack others and be attacked that’s the risk. You don't know when a red became red. And they are supposed to be hunted by bounty hunters rather than green players. If the red was running from players and avoiding them for some time, a random green attacking it should become purple. Greens should have the advantage to remain green as attackers, only if the red killed a green in their vicinity very recently. Or if they are military node citizens. It doesn't matter when the player turned red. They should know not to approach settlements until they've worked off that corruption. And players coming to avenge their PK'd group mate is a risk you know every time you start combat, that you chose to go red doesn't change that the base play pattern is 'people come back for revenge'. Reds don't need to be safeguarded, you need to weigh the risk first, not complain about the consequences after you already accepted to go red. The green who go for revenge are cowards who would not dare to attack him if they know they turn purple? And yes, the red should not be able to enter cities. I said nothing about that. They're not 'cowards' any more than the red was for killing someone who didn't fight back. The red killing a non-combatant are something else, not cowards. You can better call them evil, or corrupted... Dygz calls them monsters. The term fits as much for them as it does for greens attacking a red player. You risk more penalties dying as a green, so they also have to consider if they're willing to risk those additional penalties before they go aggressive on a red. Still the green going out to hunt for revenge a red are not anymore non-combatants. They are acting and competing with (or helping) a bounty hunter.
Caeryl wrote: » Otr wrote: » Caeryl wrote: » Otr wrote: » Caeryl wrote: » Otr wrote: » Caeryl wrote: » Otr wrote: » Pendragxn wrote: » Otr wrote: » The green players of a military node attacking a red, should automatically become Bounty Hunters and get progression on that path. The other players, even if they were bounty hunters before, if they are no longer military citizens, should become purple when attacking first, but only if a certain time passed since the red player was in combat with a regular non-BH green player. If the red player killed recently a non BH green, other green players should be able to chase the red away. There should be no visual indicator if a red player can be safely attacked by regular green players or not. Doesn’t there need to be an indicator if a red player can be attacked as they’re already flagged red which is the indicator. I don’t see the advantage for the green to not know that another player is hostile. If you flag red it should be that you’re willing to attack others and be attacked that’s the risk. You don't know when a red became red. And they are supposed to be hunted by bounty hunters rather than green players. If the red was running from players and avoiding them for some time, a random green attacking it should become purple. Greens should have the advantage to remain green as attackers, only if the red killed a green in their vicinity very recently. Or if they are military node citizens. It doesn't matter when the player turned red. They should know not to approach settlements until they've worked off that corruption. And players coming to avenge their PK'd group mate is a risk you know every time you start combat, that you chose to go red doesn't change that the base play pattern is 'people come back for revenge'. Reds don't need to be safeguarded, you need to weigh the risk first, not complain about the consequences after you already accepted to go red. The green who go for revenge are cowards who would not dare to attack him if they know they turn purple? And yes, the red should not be able to enter cities. I said nothing about that. They're not 'cowards' any more than the red was for killing someone who didn't fight back. The red killing a non-combatant are something else, not cowards. You can better call them evil, or corrupted... Dygz calls them monsters. The term fits as much for them as it does for greens attacking a red player. You risk more penalties dying as a green, so they also have to consider if they're willing to risk those additional penalties before they go aggressive on a red. Still the green going out to hunt for revenge a red are not anymore non-combatants. They are acting and competing with (or helping) a bounty hunter. Firstly, green is not a player type, it's a player state. Player state is unchanged by fighting Monsters, which is what you've made yourself into mechanically when you go corrupted. Second, you accepted these consequences as balance to your gains when you killed that non-combatant. Third, this assumes you are a solo PKer with no group to cover your back while you work off corruption. Why are you going red solo but sticking around at the scene of the crime? If you're staying there because you're gaining something, why is that value not enough payout for having to watch your surroundings for a while because you chose to PK? Why would you go red solo, having seen groups in the area? If you're in a group and I'm in a group and we're contesting an area, how in the world does anyone avoid going purple and thus negating someone going red at all? You'll flag by healing a combatant or a red, hitting a purple or another green. Again it's not possible to go red on accident, because you specifically have to choose to hit non-combatants. Most likely how it goes is some solo PKer kills some solo Gatherer of some kind, that players says in local chat, 'hey some asshole just killed me for no reason at <location>' and players come kill the solo PKer. That's an extremely fair scenario for the corrupted player to have to deal with, and they decided upon killing the non-combatant that they were willing to deal with the consequences.
