Open World PVP has a problem

Hello guys!

I made a video about an observation I made on a flaw in the design of the corruption system
that could lead to situations where the corruption system wouldn't even work.
FYI the team is already aware of it but I still post it so you can be aware of it until it's fixed!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ilXsGxCxwjg

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

daveywavey

Or, you could have just typed it here to save us all having to trawl through the video.

Unless, this is just a cheap way of getting more views...

yianni_LoD

what if someone flagged went in a group of non flagged say low lvls, then another flagged AEs said flagged person and kills a low lvl. then that person goes red, right?

nopstr

iirc if you group up with a flagged person you will stay unflagged, in this case - yes, you would go corrupt, because the white names would still be white when you kill them.

nopstr

daveywavey wrote: »

Or, you could have just typed it here to save us all having to trawl through the video.

Unless, this is just a cheap way of getting more views...

Yes I could have, but I had a visual representation of the problem.
And thanks to me posting the video, the devs saw exactly what the problem is and therefor I helped them fix the issue. You can't really be mad at that, or can you?

Githal

Or just make it so you CAN NEVER heal target that is not in your group. (this will help as anti zerg measure as well)

Depraved

nopstr wrote: »

daveywavey wrote: »

Or, you could have just typed it here to save us all having to trawl through the video.

Unless, this is just a cheap way of getting more views...

Yes I could have, but I had a visual representation of the problem.
And thanks to me posting the video, the devs saw exactly what the problem is and therefor I helped them fix the issue. You can't really be mad at that, or can you?

or maybe the issue isn't really an issue? :O

nopstr

Depraved wrote: »

nopstr wrote: »

daveywavey wrote: »

Or, you could have just typed it here to save us all having to trawl through the video.

Unless, this is just a cheap way of getting more views...

Yes I could have, but I had a visual representation of the problem.
And thanks to me posting the video, the devs saw exactly what the problem is and therefor I helped them fix the issue. You can't really be mad at that, or can you?

or maybe the issue isn't really an issue? :O

It is though as it let's people grief and completly avoid the corruption system and that's not intended.

Aszkalon

nopstr wrote: »

I have one more take on this which might interest You as well.

So two Players run around. <- * imagined Scenario *

One is a Cleric, a Healer. The other is a Hunter, like what i played last Weekend-Test.

Another Player comes -> and attacks the Hunter. The Attacker goes purple, right ? So far, so good.

But then both Hunter and Cleric notice -> " WOAH !! This Dude makes a hella lot of Damage. "
and then the Cleric heals the Hunter.

So what should happen ?
Because this can turn EASILY into a Scenario in which the flagged, purple Player has no real Chance to take any of them down.

Should the Action of " HEALING " against PvP-intended Damage -> also flag the Cleric Purple ? Maybe the healed up Hunter as well -> since he was helped and assisted against PvP-intended Damage which was done to him ?

Imagine they could both turn the Attackers Efforts into nothing without even flagging purple themselves.

I am undecided right now if this should flag the Players concerned purple or not. - > and of Course i am aware that there is not unlikely a Mechanic already in place, in case that such an Event happens.

But i never engaged into PvP until now, aside from shooting a corrupted Player to Death which passed me by and wanted to run towards/into Lionhold.

I thought to myself -> why letting him die on the City-Guards when i can kill and loot him ? lol
And so i did.

he had only like 1 Quarter of HP left when he passed me by - so my rapid Fire sealed his fate.

nopstr

Aszkalon wrote: »

nopstr wrote: »

I have one more take on this which might interest You as well.

So two Players run around. <- * imagined Scenario *

One is a Cleric, a Healer. The other is a Hunter, like what i played last Weekend-Test.

Another Player comes -> and attacks the Hunter. The Attacker goes purple, right ? So far, so good.

But then both Hunter and Cleric notice -> " WOAH !! This Dude makes a hella lot of Damage. "
and then the Cleric heals the Hunter.

So what should happen ?
Because this can turn EASILY into a Scenario in which the flagged, purple Player has no real Chance to take any of them down.

Should the Action of " HEALING " against PvP-intended Damage -> also flag the Cleric Purple ? Maybe the healed up Hunter as well -> since he was helped and assisted against PvP-intended Damage which was done to him ?

Imagine they could both turn the Attackers Efforts into nothing without even flagging purple themselves.

I am undecided right now if this should flag the Players concerned purple or not. - > and of Course i am aware that there is not unlikely a Mechanic already in place, in case that such an Event happens.

But i never engaged into PvP until now, aside from shooting a corrupted Player to Death which passed me by and wanted to run towards/into Lionhold.

I thought to myself -> why letting him die on the City-Guards when i can kill and loot him ? lol
And so i did. he had only like 1 Quarter of HP left when he passed me by - so my rapid Fire sealed his fate.

Interesting, although I think both should stay white - they both don't actually want to engage in PVP. If the purple guy keeps attacking them and manages to kill them, he will go corrupted. I think your scenario is the intended way of the corruption system.

Hope that helped you decide

gadann

I have another question and would like to hear what people think of the following scenario:

Army1 meets Army2 in the open world.
Army1 chooses to battle Army2 and starts dealing damage to them members raidwide.
Army2 calls out in voip "Do not attack, stand by and die!"

Army1 proceeds to kill everyone in Army2.
Everyone in Army1 is now corrupted, Army2 died and proceeds to resurrect. Army2 players are not corrupted.
After the "tactical" defeat Army2 goes on the hunt to wipe Army1 in its entirety and if they find them, they loot them all.

Do you think this is how it works and if it does, is it intended?
Someone might say yes, it is.
I find this as something of a loophole that might be used by many guilds if the tactic spreads and it might incentivise "anti-play" and essentially work as a method of griefing in an nonengaging way.

What do you think?

Rym

I saw your video on youtube actually and I agree.

This will be fixed in a future build, as it's not intended.

nopstr

gadann wrote: »

I have another question and would like to hear what people think of the following scenario:

Army1 meets Army2 in the open world.
Army1 chooses to battle Army2 and starts dealing damage to them members raidwide.
Army2 calls out in voip "Do not attack, stand by and die!"

Army1 proceeds to kill everyone in Army2.
Everyone in Army1 is now corrupted, Army2 died and proceeds to resurrect. Army2 players are not corrupted.
After the "tactical" defeat Army2 goes on the hunt to wipe Army1 in its entirety and if they find them, they loot them all.

Do you think this is how it works and if it does, is it intended?
Someone might say yes, it is.
I find this as something of a loophole that might be used by many guilds if the tactic spreads and it might incentivise "anti-play" and essentially work as a method of griefing in an nonengaging way.

What do you think?

I think that would be a tactical misplay by both armies.
Army 1 takes corruption into account, but they could've just not attacked until the others would have flagged up.
Army 2 takes the death penalty into account by not fighting back or retreating.

nopstr

Rym wrote: »

I saw your video on youtube actually and I agree.

This will be fixed in a future build, as it's not intended.

Yes Plannindorf, who is a dev, commented that he will forward it to the right team and I saw in the statistics that I got a view from Slack which means they already watched it

Ludullu

This is simply a bug or a not-yet-implemented feature that is already planned to address this issue. Heals will not heal flagged people (even those in your party), as long as you have the option ticked.
https://ashesofcreation.wiki/Player_flagging
Players will be able to opt-in (via a checkbox) to allow their beneficial spells, or non-beneficial AoEs to hit combatants.[17][18]
If you have that check-box for flagging with your AOEs and heals available then you will flag. If you do not have that box checked then on completion of the skill it will not flag you because the check was made at the start that there was a flagged party member; and then he will not he or she will not receive the beneficial effect as a result or the damage, if it's an offensive spell.[18] – Steven Sharif

Ludullu

gadann wrote: »

What do you think?

Guild wars exist to go around this kind of situation. Node wars exist as well, if that second army is based around a node rather than a guild.

Also, no sane guild would make literally all of their members go corrupt. If it is known that Army2 are a bunch of weaklings that never flag up - Army1 will simply bring some alts to PK Army2, and that's gonna be that.

gadann

Good thoughts, both of you.
Hope you're right!

Thanks

Slipree

Oh gee. No one saw all this coming with the stupid flagging system. *rolls eyes*

I’ve been saying since I found out how it works that it’ll be broken. It’s like people who don’t pvp try to make pvp games.

nopstr

Slipree wrote: »

Oh gee. No one saw all this coming with the stupid flagging system. *rolls eyes*

I’ve been saying since I found out how it works that it’ll be broken. It’s like people who don’t pvp try to make pvp games.

it's not broken how you think it is, they simply haven't implemented it the intended way hence why said it's an oversight.
This is exactly why the Alpha exists.
If you find broken/unintended things in regards to it, report it

Depraved

nopstr wrote: »

Depraved wrote: »

nopstr wrote: »

daveywavey wrote: »

Or, you could have just typed it here to save us all having to trawl through the video.

Unless, this is just a cheap way of getting more views...

Yes I could have, but I had a visual representation of the problem.
And thanks to me posting the video, the devs saw exactly what the problem is and therefor I helped them fix the issue. You can't really be mad at that, or can you?

or maybe the issue isn't really an issue? :O

It is though as it let's people grief and completly avoid the corruption system and that's not intended.

first of all, intrepid had already said there will be a setting that you can turn on or off to prevent you from hitting unintended targets. right now, we have alt + f. if someone is purple or white (not sure about red since I didn't find any pk) you can only attack that player but pressing alt f first and getting a buff on your buff bar. I'm not sure if other players can see this buff or not when they click you. if you forget to turn it off and aoe and turn purple, thats on you.

regarding the situation on the video. i think its perfectly valid that you turn purple if you aoe damage or heal. the game doesn't know (and it shouldn't) if the purple guy next to you is an ally or not. it doesn't know your intent to heal him or not. if you aoe heal, the game should flag you, since you are aiding a combatant, the same way it should flag you if you aoe on top of your friend. it should damage him. the game cant read your mind and know your intent. this is if you arent in a party. this is different If you are already purple, since you could be healing your enemies as well. if you are white, and soloing and aoe heal and flag, that's on you.

if you are in a party, your aoe heals shouldn't affect players outside the party (maybe only guild members) to prevent you from healing the enemy. this also applies to aoe damage, you don't want to aoe your guildies, just your enemies. basically no friendly fire. however, if your guild is split into multiple guilds.

regarding avoiding corruption, it is a perfectly valid strategy to force flag the enemy, especially when corruption is as punishing at it is. right now you can win fights without throwing a single punch. you can win a spot without fighting. don't you think that's even worse than avoiding corruption? you simply don't hit back and that's it. if the enemy I spilling, for example, it is perfectly valid to flag and get near the mobs so that they flag when they aoe or heal, then you can pvp. I'm against adding a setting that prevents this, but it will be added as steven mentioned before. if you forgot to turn it off, that's on you.

Depraved

nopstr wrote: »

Rym wrote: »

I saw your video on youtube actually and I agree.

This will be fixed in a future build, as it's not intended.

Yes Plannindorf, who is a dev, commented that he will forward it to the right team and I saw in the statistics that I got a view from Slack which means they already watched it

that doesn't mean it will get changed, it just means they will evaluate it.

Child Item