Arya_Yeshe wrote: » Not bad, but let’s be real. The ultimate system would let a bounty hunter snag the corrupted, and if bounty hunter pulls it off, that corrupted player gets hit with a debt mark. Every time they score gold, a slice goes to the victim and another to the bounty hunter. But what if the bounty hunter is tight with the corrupted? Unless a legit neutral debt collector bounty hunter swoops in first and gets the kill, that’s the real drama! Honestly, all of Intrepid's ideas about corrupted and bounty hunter gameplay are a snooze fest. They’re so childish, it’s almost cute.
Ludullu wrote: » I'm mainly against this cause full items provide just too good of a feeling when you loot them off a PKer. Just as Steven mentioned on that interview, he looted a +9 jewel cause some PKer lost it. And you're never "stuck" with that stuff. We have free market - go sell it. Or give it to someone from your guild. I agree with Arya that this should be addressed through the BH system, accounting for potential BH-ally situations. Though my approach to that is through bags and system-based loot returnal from BHs to victims, while BHs can either get their rewards from the system itself or go "unpack" the PKer's loot bag at the black market npc, which will then decrease BH's rank in their career stuff, so if they do that a bit too often - they get completely fucked over.
Dolyem wrote: » I'll take slightly less happy feelings with material looting if it prevent players from cheesing the system. Not to mention it helps the artisan market.
Dolyem wrote: » And there is no obligation that needs to uphold returning a non-combatants stolen goods. Otherwise their risk is drastically reduced. Whoever kills the corrupted player takes the loot. If the victim wants it back, make a trade.
Ludullu wrote: » Dolyem wrote: » I'll take slightly less happy feelings with material looting if it prevent players from cheesing the system. Not to mention it helps the artisan market. It wouldn't help the market though, cause in this case the friends picked those things up and they'll just use their own artisans to recraft stuff. Dolyem wrote: » And there is no obligation that needs to uphold returning a non-combatants stolen goods. Otherwise their risk is drastically reduced. Whoever kills the corrupted player takes the loot. If the victim wants it back, make a trade. I mean, the PKer need to be killed first. Then they must be killed by an outside BH. And then the BH must want to return the loot. That's several steps of separation from the victim getting their stuff back.
Depraved wrote: » umm no because then no one would ever go red, and sometimes you need to go red. if you have a guaranteed piece of gear destroyed when you die red, that's too much of a punishment, whereas having a chance of dropping something (or nothing) its still punishment but not too harsh.
Depraved wrote: » but they could just re caft it quite easily then after their friends pick up the mats. they might just be losing some money, that's it.
Dolyem wrote: » Just a suggestion to pitch to the Devs to possibly test it out. Saw on the recent interview between Steven and TheoryForge regarding dealing with corrupted players avoiding penalties by dying to friends. Another suggestion I have thought of you can toss around or completely ignore. Instead of a chance of dropping a piece of the gear the corrupted player is using, have a piece of gear they are wearing be destroyed, but drop the highest material(s) that would correspond with the dropped gear. Pros: - It deters dying as a corrupted player because it causes the corrupted player a guaranteed gear loss even if they try to cheese the system by dying to a friend. - The Corrupted player would still have to be able to make the item, have the other materials for it, and have a place to make said item, if they went the route of dying to a friend. - It gives the player who killed the corrupted player more agency by allowing them to use that material to craft gear they actually want and is useful to them, as opposed to potentially being stuck with an item that is of no use to them. Cons: - It doesn't feel as good as getting a piece of completed gear from a corrupted player
Goalid wrote: » I had a system I wrote about years ago to prevent players from dying to a friend to drop your gear and have them pick it up for you. The system: At the point and time you become corrupt, the dice rolls on what gear you having the potential to drop on death. The gear that would drop on death while corrupt becomes "Bloodstained". Bloodstained gear always drops on death. If you kill a player and pick up bloodstained gear, it automatically flags you for PvP, and is trackable by bounty hunters. In order to cleanse the bloodstained gear you have to do a quest while avoiding the bounty hunters of a given node, whereas bounty hunters who acquire the gear can put it in the bounty hunter's node auction. If it's on auction, the gold generated goes to the node and the bounty hunter gets an equivalent of currency for the bounty hunting system. Why it works: bounty hunters get a gameplay loop for hunting for gear, and then either risking it by doing the cleansing quest or simply turning it in for their currency. A corrupt player could buy it from the auction, but they'd lose the gold equivalent of the gear, and anyone else can also get it. If your friend kills you and picks up your gear, it doesn't guarantee at all that your gear will be saved, and you incur the full XP debt penalty, hence not worth it. This imo is the system Intrepid should look into, because right now with corruption I would absolutely have a friend kill me for my gear if I was corrupt.
hleV wrote: » Corruption shouldn't lose you months of progression (like losing a valuable item). That's a recipe for people quitting the game if they end up on the short stick of going corrupted spontaneously without planning ahead and stashing their best gear beforehand.