Pendragxn wrote: » 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. I can see a lot of baiting happening with that like oh someone killed me here, and then people go to look or find the solo Red but turns out it’s a whole group of gankers. This is why I think responding all the time won’t be that easy unless you’re in a group or near to a settlement or something.
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.
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: » 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: » 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.
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.
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: » 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: » 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.
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: » 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.
Arya_Yeshe wrote: » you gotta see that the flagging system in AoC wasn't based on good logic, it is just based on carebear spit against people who ganked them while they were cutting wood in other games, so don't expect great flagging system
Caeryl wrote: » 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.
RocketFarmer wrote: » Other side of the coin are bounty hunters may miss opportunities for a bounty when every green in the neighborhood can poach his kill.
NiKr wrote: » RocketFarmer wrote: » Other side of the coin are bounty hunters may miss opportunities for a bounty when every green in the neighborhood can poach his kill. This is mostly why I hope (and will give feedback on) that the BH system is valued enough by the player culture that greens don't simply attack reds when they see them. Obviously some opportunist will always go for the pinata, but I think that it can be decreased even more than the general culture that George mentioned here before.
Sathrago wrote: » yeah as it stands I dont see bounty hunting, if its only for dealing with reds, to be an actual progression system you can feasibly climb. The green tide (not orks, but combatant non-combatants with a shared greed) will swallow anyone stupid or unfortunate enough to turn red. thats why i was hoping this solution would add a little less incentive for the green tide mentality. but yeah, cant do that so im not sure what else you can do aside from just leave reds as such a heavy punishment that no one will ever attack each other in the open world. Which I would argue is bad for the game.
RocketFarmer wrote: » I’m used to playing on PVP servers without such mechanisms. There’s always ways players can interact/react. Just have to get used to also dealing with the corruption. It’s all good.
Chaliux wrote: » Skill tree. Ultimate is: Teleport to the murder.
Chaliux wrote: » You think people would pay for revenge? Hm. Sweet mafia mindset. I like it. I would pay you, I guess. Because I lack time and nowadays I dont want to get my hands dirty
RocketFarmer wrote: » Why bounty hunters for PK only? There’s an entire market to explore. Same with tax evasion and nonviolent crime within the node. Perhaps they need Hitmen and Bounty Hunters to fill out the sort of criminal/law enforcement element. Bounty Hunters currently sound more like Judge Dredd without the guns. And that’s an entire underworld for rogue characters to explore and exploit. Oh players and guilds will try to fill the role, and I can see a mafia style guild declare a guild war on other guilds. Could that extend to Bounty Hunters or Hitmen via contract. In other words, mercenaries for hire? Or a contract for an individual or smaller group that doesn’t fit the normal guild war mechanics. Nodes would be more inclined to contract Bounty Hunters, although you could set up a criminal node and hire hitmen I guess. And then, what would a Bounty Hunter or Hitman guild look like? John Wick? But these contracts are indeed the mechanism to engage in these elements for those without the skills or time, but with a few coins (or a lot depending on the target). Why not extend it to monster hunter? But then everyone is a monster hunter in this game, right. The true monsters are the players. But, what if said monster hunter character is the counter for the monster coin mechanism? What if you pay a monster coin to a bounty hunter, who then has access to the Bat Cave to go after the monster player in the area? Would they have access to special mounts, depending on the monster? What sort of weapons are at their disposal? What sort of armor might they acquire? And at the end of the contract does some of that gear serve as payment? Or can the bounty hunter pocket the monster coin and try to defeat the monster via their own means? That’s just one of many ways they could expand the idea of bounty hunters, or really players for hire regardless of name. Call them what you will based on the contract. And for a sand park, players ought to have options for the contracts they write.That freehold over there is an eyesore to my beautiful view of the Riverlands. Take care of that for me.
Pendragxn wrote: » Veeshan wrote: » Green attacking anyone should make them a combatant since they initiated it Well if you’re flagged red you’ve already accepted that risk that you could be attacked or plan to attack someone. There’s no reason to initiate greens as combatants as they can only attack or respond to reds.
Veeshan wrote: » Green attacking anyone should make them a combatant since they initiated it
Veeshan wrote: » Pendragxn wrote: » Veeshan wrote: » Green attacking anyone should make them a combatant since they initiated it Well if you’re flagged red you’ve already accepted that risk that you could be attacked or plan to attack someone. There’s no reason to initiate greens as combatants as they can only attack or respond to reds. if the green attacks a red they saying right i accept pvp so should become combatant since at that stage they now opted into pvp which is what the whole flagging system is for. Also whats the point of bounty hunter system if it now becomes safer to hunt reds as a green since if your bounty hunter you can be killed and not make the corruption worst and as a green player u kleave the red player the option to run away, die or make your curruption worst. You know whats gonna happen is there be 1 bounty hunter using the tracking ability to find red players and they just send green player friend to actually kil the red player while they stay back safely so he can never escape due to always being able to track them.
