Caeryl wrote: » 'Can', not 'will'. One or two kills isn't going to strip you down to undies.
Serukka wrote: » Caeryl wrote: » Slipree wrote: » Punishing pvp because of griefers won’t work. Griefers always find ways to grief. They work around systems, not in spite of them. Being red should be hard, but you should be able to defend yourself regardless. Not flagging when attacking a red player, and not being able to be cc’d is bad mechanics. It's not punishing PvP, just PK Those systems exist as they do for a reason. Non-combatants being immune to player-sourced CC is in place because it's proven a problem to allow it in other games that use a similar system. I don't have the links on hand, but you can find videos of lockdown kills on greens that gave them no chance to flag up or escape, which is something they don't want to have as an option in Ashes. After all, if a green is running away, then you've achieved the goal that PK would accomplish, which is getting them out of an area you want to lay claim on. There's no mechanical difference between trying to CC a green to keep them from running away, and trying to CC them out of 'self-defense' as a red. There's no way to prevent one but allow another, and so neither are allowed. Edit: Ultimately it's on you to improve your skill and adapt to the rules of the game Question Say at a farm spot there is a person taking my mobs. I hit him once and he turns to me to flag up. Will I still gain corruption upon killing? Since I initiated. Even tho at this point is consensual to a degree
Caeryl wrote: » Slipree wrote: » Punishing pvp because of griefers won’t work. Griefers always find ways to grief. They work around systems, not in spite of them. Being red should be hard, but you should be able to defend yourself regardless. Not flagging when attacking a red player, and not being able to be cc’d is bad mechanics. It's not punishing PvP, just PK Those systems exist as they do for a reason. Non-combatants being immune to player-sourced CC is in place because it's proven a problem to allow it in other games that use a similar system. I don't have the links on hand, but you can find videos of lockdown kills on greens that gave them no chance to flag up or escape, which is something they don't want to have as an option in Ashes. After all, if a green is running away, then you've achieved the goal that PK would accomplish, which is getting them out of an area you want to lay claim on. There's no mechanical difference between trying to CC a green to keep them from running away, and trying to CC them out of 'self-defense' as a red. There's no way to prevent one but allow another, and so neither are allowed. Edit: Ultimately it's on you to improve your skill and adapt to the rules of the game
Slipree wrote: » Punishing pvp because of griefers won’t work. Griefers always find ways to grief. They work around systems, not in spite of them. Being red should be hard, but you should be able to defend yourself regardless. Not flagging when attacking a red player, and not being able to be cc’d is bad mechanics.
CROW3 wrote: » - a red killing a red reduces corruption for both
CROW3 wrote: » I’m hoping for the following: - a red killing a green increases corruption - red killing a purple has no additional corruption - a red killing a red reduces corruption for both
Slipree wrote: » items need to be lootable and have limited durability. this isnt an mmo where you grind a set of gear and wear it forever, or until the new expansion that makes it obsolete.
Kilion wrote: » Slipree wrote: » items need to be lootable and have limited durability. this isnt an mmo where you grind a set of gear and wear it forever, or until the new expansion that makes it obsolete. This isn't the case with Ashes' current design anyways. There is no "one set" you grind and then you have the best there is. The best items will be different depending on the content around the specific player. In a PvP heavy part of Verra gear will have to account for that, while in the heart of a ZOI with a huge vulcano dungeon, gear with fire resistance would be much better and on the other side of the continent in a snow region it will be something different again. So basically this is like Vanilla WoW with plenty of repair requirements and PvP based reasons to lose gear (node destruction & corruption drops) And with the amount of time necessary to make good gear having a full loot system would actually ruin the game.
Ludullu wrote: » CROW3 wrote: » - a red killing a red reduces corruption for both I'd totally support this, cause it would drive the point of "Reds are mobs" even further.
Dolyem wrote: » Serukka wrote: » Caeryl wrote: » Slipree wrote: » Punishing pvp because of griefers won’t work. Griefers always find ways to grief. They work around systems, not in spite of them. Being red should be hard, but you should be able to defend yourself regardless. Not flagging when attacking a red player, and not being able to be cc’d is bad mechanics. It's not punishing PvP, just PK Those systems exist as they do for a reason. Non-combatants being immune to player-sourced CC is in place because it's proven a problem to allow it in other games that use a similar system. I don't have the links on hand, but you can find videos of lockdown kills on greens that gave them no chance to flag up or escape, which is something they don't want to have as an option in Ashes. After all, if a green is running away, then you've achieved the goal that PK would accomplish, which is getting them out of an area you want to lay claim on. There's no mechanical difference between trying to CC a green to keep them from running away, and trying to CC them out of 'self-defense' as a red. There's no way to prevent one but allow another, and so neither are allowed. Edit: Ultimately it's on you to improve your skill and adapt to the rules of the game Question Say at a farm spot there is a person taking my mobs. I hit him once and he turns to me to flag up. Will I still gain corruption upon killing? Since I initiated. Even tho at this point is consensual to a degree If you werent already corrupt upon hitting them, you will both simply be combatants since you both hit eachother. In which case, no you wont gain corruption. If you are corrupt already, they will remain a non-combatant even after retaliating. And as it is currently designed, you will gain more corruption upon killing them. Been debating this mechanic in several discussions. If you go by what corruption is designed for, punishing a PvP engagement that couldnt be defined as griefing with more corruption makes no sense.
Slipree wrote: » Dolyem wrote: » Serukka wrote: » Caeryl wrote: » Slipree wrote: » Punishing pvp because of griefers won’t work. Griefers always find ways to grief. They work around systems, not in spite of them. Being red should be hard, but you should be able to defend yourself regardless. Not flagging when attacking a red player, and not being able to be cc’d is bad mechanics. It's not punishing PvP, just PK Those systems exist as they do for a reason. Non-combatants being immune to player-sourced CC is in place because it's proven a problem to allow it in other games that use a similar system. I don't have the links on hand, but you can find videos of lockdown kills on greens that gave them no chance to flag up or escape, which is something they don't want to have as an option in Ashes. After all, if a green is running away, then you've achieved the goal that PK would accomplish, which is getting them out of an area you want to lay claim on. There's no mechanical difference between trying to CC a green to keep them from running away, and trying to CC them out of 'self-defense' as a red. There's no way to prevent one but allow another, and so neither are allowed. Edit: Ultimately it's on you to improve your skill and adapt to the rules of the game Question Say at a farm spot there is a person taking my mobs. I hit him once and he turns to me to flag up. Will I still gain corruption upon killing? Since I initiated. Even tho at this point is consensual to a degree If you werent already corrupt upon hitting them, you will both simply be combatants since you both hit eachother. In which case, no you wont gain corruption. If you are corrupt already, they will remain a non-combatant even after retaliating. And as it is currently designed, you will gain more corruption upon killing them. Been debating this mechanic in several discussions. If you go by what corruption is designed for, punishing a PvP engagement that couldnt be defined as griefing with more corruption makes no sense. The point is I’m already red. Which contrary to how some people think around here, DOES happen from world pvp. (The best pvp), and not just from grief/pking unwilling participants(which. Is a joke in a pvx mmo, you already consented by installing imo)
Slipree wrote: » Caeryl wrote: » Slipree wrote: » Punishing pvp because of griefers won’t work. Griefers always find ways to grief. They work around systems, not in spite of them. Being red should be hard, but you should be able to defend yourself regardless. Not flagging when attacking a red player, and not being able to be cc’d is bad mechanics. It's not punishing PvP, just PK Those systems exist as they do for a reason. Non-combatants being immune to player-sourced CC is in place because it's proven a problem to allow it in other games that use a similar system. I don't have the links on hand, but you can find videos of lockdown kills on greens that gave them no chance to flag up or escape, which is something they don't want to have as an option in Ashes. After all, if a green is running away, then you've achieved the goal that PK would accomplish, which is getting them out of an area you want to lay claim on. There's no mechanical difference between trying to CC a green to keep them from running away, and trying to CC them out of 'self-defense' as a red. There's no way to prevent one but allow another, and so neither are allowed. Edit: Ultimately it's on you to improve your skill and adapt to the rules of the game Reading comprehension? I’m talking. About people who go red from world pvp because it happens, not being able to cc a green and get away from it when attacked, because the green doesn’t flag, and you can cc him. Now you have 2 options. 1 kill him and get more corruption, or 2 dying is never an option They already have diminishing returns for cc anyway, and if you’re getting cc’d and killed by 1 player, you’re just bad. If it’s a bunch of players, how would you expect to win that anyway, you string em along until your buddies show up, or gtfo.
Slipree wrote: » Exploitable af. Me and an alt corruption farming and removal. Most clans would keep alts just for this. (Obv not in same clan )
Slipree wrote: » In a pvp game that’s focused on player crafted gear, not raid dropped gear, it needs to be a sink, else crafters won’t mean anything once everyone has a couple gear sets. If you die a few times in a set/weapon, it should become useless, without at minimum, paying a crafter to repair it.
Slipree wrote: » If you don’t lose anything, there’s nothing to fight for. That’s the problem with mmos that want to do it all. Doesn’t work. Not unless you separate pvp and pve gear. Which is an even worse solution.
Podgnil wrote: » Serukka wrote: » Will have to see how it plays out. I do agree that this ‘godly’ system feels weird and enacts controversy. I also understand that random pk’ing drives away a lot of players and only leaves behind a small group of players who enjoy full pvp mmo’s. Many games have tried to balance this thru the years with different systems and they always fail and every time the players left to play the game are these ‘pvp/griefers’. I agree that this corruption system just sounds odd, if I want to be a murdering jackass the punishment should come from the world and its players not some magical stat dampening that makes me weak. I could live with dropping all my gear upon death when red. But making me unable to kill another player after x kills just feels lame. I really enjoy pvp and I really like mmo’s. People often tell me ‘well go play x pvp mmo’ But I played them all extensively and I want to play this game. Just hope that somehow being red or living the lawless life is a possibility somehow, someday. I agree completely, such decisions kill banditry and robbery in the world of the game) Yes, of course, so that the game does not turn into a bloody swamp in which people are killed as soon as you leave the city, there must be tools that regulate this. Perhaps even prisons in nodes, in which the most malicious griefers can sit for a couple of days. Punishment must be logical and follow from the laws of the world. Ashes strives for the players to create the world, so why then did the developers take this issue completely to their own discretion)) This process should be self-regulating, the number of raids increases, players tighten laws, increase their security costs, pay more taxes. Banditry ceases to be profitable, the players begin to feel safe, and they tell the mayor that they do not want to pay so much. Okay, the tax will be reduced, no one wants to catch bandits, and so on and so forth... You understand. I understand that the system is complex, it is difficult to predict how it will work and whether it will work, but we have a couple of years of testing for this.
Serukka wrote: » Will have to see how it plays out. I do agree that this ‘godly’ system feels weird and enacts controversy. I also understand that random pk’ing drives away a lot of players and only leaves behind a small group of players who enjoy full pvp mmo’s. Many games have tried to balance this thru the years with different systems and they always fail and every time the players left to play the game are these ‘pvp/griefers’. I agree that this corruption system just sounds odd, if I want to be a murdering jackass the punishment should come from the world and its players not some magical stat dampening that makes me weak. I could live with dropping all my gear upon death when red. But making me unable to kill another player after x kills just feels lame. I really enjoy pvp and I really like mmo’s. People often tell me ‘well go play x pvp mmo’ But I played them all extensively and I want to play this game. Just hope that somehow being red or living the lawless life is a possibility somehow, someday.
CROW3 wrote: » Much of the push back above is about individuals griefing greens as a ‘bad guy.’ I’m more concerned about large guilds just mopping the field of any greens not in their guild. That scale of griefing will cause mass attrition of the pve player segment, and Ashes will be relegated to an MO2-esque existence. The corruption system is the weight bearing beam holding up the PvX house. You may not get to live your best life as an rp criminal, but that may come at trade-off of hundreds of players sticking around. I can’t even guess how many subsystems will need to be in place to constantly adjust the pendulum of corruption over time.
Dygz wrote: » Ha! Plus Steven will tell you that Ashes is a PvX game; not a PvP game.
ralangorf wrote: » Podgnil wrote: » Serukka wrote: » Will have to see how it plays out. I do agree that this ‘godly’ system feels weird and enacts controversy. I also understand that random pk’ing drives away a lot of players and only leaves behind a small group of players who enjoy full pvp mmo’s. Many games have tried to balance this thru the years with different systems and they always fail and every time the players left to play the game are these ‘pvp/griefers’. I agree that this corruption system just sounds odd, if I want to be a murdering jackass the punishment should come from the world and its players not some magical stat dampening that makes me weak. I could live with dropping all my gear upon death when red. But making me unable to kill another player after x kills just feels lame. I really enjoy pvp and I really like mmo’s. People often tell me ‘well go play x pvp mmo’ But I played them all extensively and I want to play this game. Just hope that somehow being red or living the lawless life is a possibility somehow, someday. I agree completely, such decisions kill banditry and robbery in the world of the game) Yes, of course, so that the game does not turn into a bloody swamp in which people are killed as soon as you leave the city, there must be tools that regulate this. Perhaps even prisons in nodes, in which the most malicious griefers can sit for a couple of days. Punishment must be logical and follow from the laws of the world. Ashes strives for the players to create the world, so why then did the developers take this issue completely to their own discretion)) This process should be self-regulating, the number of raids increases, players tighten laws, increase their security costs, pay more taxes. Banditry ceases to be profitable, the players begin to feel safe, and they tell the mayor that they do not want to pay so much. Okay, the tax will be reduced, no one wants to catch bandits, and so on and so forth... You understand. I understand that the system is complex, it is difficult to predict how it will work and whether it will work, but we have a couple of years of testing for this. I can tell you why it's like this. They don't want you to purple often.
