Account wide corruption...

I would first like to acknowledge that I know yall love me around here for my "W" takes on this game.
This is just an idea I want to float and debate. I am not trying to get people going.

Yes, I watched the Asmongold event the other day. My key take away was that people are just making alts to evade the corruption system.

My first thought was maybe if they did not allow or limited the number of alts this would reduce the number of people making alts to gank. It's not just a low level issue. Once the economy come online gearing a gank alt is just going to have a gold value.

I know people love alts too much and limiting or removing them is probably too radical even for me.

Then I had an idea I know the community is going to adore.

Just apply the corruption to the entire account so every character has to deal with it.

This is one of the least gameable solutions I can think of. I am sure there are issues with it, but I would not mind hearing other peoples thoughts on it.

I would like to hear pros and cons.

If everyone had a pro and a con it may be a better discussion.

I know one con is that a lot of people are not going to like not being able to log into an alt after ganking if that alt was in a town...

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

Andi

Personally I'd completely remove non-consensual PVP. There are so many meaningful PVP interactions in the game, and with all the scenario where RiskVsReward(TM) matters, why have random open world ganking?

The only people who WANT that kind of PVP aren't interested in PVP. They're interested in dominating others, to the detriment of those people's enjoyment.

Mork

If you're going to make corruption so punishing, just make the game pvp on and off... why going through all of this when all you are doing is essentialy pushing the rules that way.

Just make it on and off, while on has more xp while leveling and drops chance at max level.
And turn certain farming areas and open world dungeons into pvp on zones

focus on guild wars

Vhaeyne

@Andi
There are good reasons to gank non-consenting players though.

Competition for mobs, resources, raid bosses.

I hate the mayors so much on my server right now I am about to start shooting them out of the sky. If they get in range.

Someone stealing my corpse loot is a good reason I may want to kill them after a risk assessment.

Non-consenting PVP has always been something that I consider to be core to ashes.

You just repeated what asmongold said reacting to nyce. In that reaction asmongold ignored the reasons Steven gave for non-consenting PVP. Some of which I just listed. Shooting the mayors is my idea though.

I understand non-consenting PVP is not popular and you may want to remove it. I also agree that removing it may make the game more popular.
I just feel ashes would lose its soul in the process.

A pro to my idea would also be nice if you find yourself charitable enough to give one.

Vhaeyne

Mork wrote: »

If you're going to make corruption so punishing, just make the game pvp on and off... why going through all of this when all you are doing is essentialy pushing the rules that way.

Just make it on and off, while on has more xp while leveling and drops chance at max level.
And turn certain farming areas and open world dungeons into pvp on zones

That's just WOWs war mode. Which is not a very popular feature. Because no one turns it on.
The magic old wow had on vanilla pvp servers is gone.

We would go through all of this to keep the PvX the thing that makes ashes different and interesting.

I may have the opportunity to shoot one of these mayors out of the sky soon for not advancing the nodes crafting benches.

I love that I am free to do this. It would feel lame if I gave an alt a crazy bow to do it to evade corruption.

There is a magic to non-consenting PVP that I value.

SmileGurney

It's a fair opinion. Personally I have no idea how far Intrepid should punish the persistent Reds. I actually don't like the whole movement speed penalty for Reds they recently added.

I fully expect PKers to run red alts and feed them gear, if the corruption system can be mitigated, especially on the max level.

Even with account wide corruption you could dodge it with an alt account, instead of alt chars. $15 a month is nothing if you are really into the idea of running as a PK group.

Uncommon Sense

If you grief you are breaking the rules of conduct...So there will be repercussions.
Making another account in an alpha given the key price just makes these people massive imbeciles.

the $15 subscription will deter the low hanging rotten fruit. while any account that has spent time to lvl up or gain resources would perhaps reconsider a potential account ban...

The corruption system is a substantial deterrent...We're in Alpha things are being tuned nothing is permanent.

There will systems in place to protect the new player/zone they are not implemented in the Alpha 2 because this isnt a fully released game is it...

I have played a number of hours without being ganked...

Asmond should have known better...He knows his 'fans'

Other streamers have not had the same issue...Esfand for example.

This is not a PVE game the systems that make the world operate require conflict...

If you get ganked hire a bounty hunter or 2...perhaps join in and who knows you might actually enjoy it...

Vhaeyne

@ThevoicestHeVoIcEs @Uncommon Sense

The $15 to sub and evade corruption is exactly the kind of stuff I had not thought of.

I guess people corruption evading for 15$ is slightly better than free.

Mork

Vhaeyne wrote: »

Mork wrote: »

If you're going to make corruption so punishing, just make the game pvp on and off... why going through all of this when all you are doing is essentialy pushing the rules that way.

Just make it on and off, while on has more xp while leveling and drops chance at max level.
And turn certain farming areas and open world dungeons into pvp on zones

That's just WOWs war mode. Which is not a very popular feature. Because no one turns it on.
The magic old wow had on vanilla pvp servers is gone.

because its not rewarding, and also pvp in wow right now is pure garbage.
I say implement some of it and to keep PvX alive, make certain farming and openworld dungeons pvp on zones. But not all of the world, it clearly does not work and the way they are going about corruption is essentially just that, on or off because no one will want to have it

souldaze86

I personally think there just needs to be an server response to Pk's. If people hate it so much then they should make a peacekeeping guild that responds to the PvP event. I was part of a guild that did this in WOW and it was a lot of fun. It also increased the amount of PvP on the server and made random battles that were usually bigger than the battlegrounds.

Vhaeyne

@Mork

Well we clearly disagree. That's okay.

I understand that open PVP for the entire world is something you don't think works. I also understand that ashes would be more popular your way. I am not here to debate that.

It's just that your way takes so much from the vision of Ashes Steven sold me on. I would not want to play Ashes if PvP was opt in or limited to zones. It really ruins the magic for me.

Remember that magic is a double edged sword. I am actively fighting to potentially make my life harder here.

I also don't think ashes needs or should have a huge player base. I am fine playing a niche game. I think 50-100k concurrent players for a PvX game is probably a great outcome. I also think ashes could 10x that by being so good that a new generation learns to love PvX.

souldaze86

The only reason I'm playing this game is for the risk of PvP. I've always played on a PvP realm and thought PvE was boring. Granted the PvP system needs to get polished a bit more. I honestly don't think players should get corruption for battling players their own level unless it turns into a griefing type interaction. I want players to be like Griefer, the ghost of Menethil Harbor. The rogue would sit in the ally town and murder anyone that came in. It adds a lot of fun and danger to the game. Most of what i've seen people complain about are losing items and xp. I could get behind losing less XP for PvP deaths but as for item drops you just need to be more aware of yourself and the risk. They do need to make something of a hearth though.

Mork

Vhaeyne wrote: »

@Mork

Well we clearly disagree. That's okay.

I understand that open PVP for the entire world is something you don't think works. I also understand that ashes would be more popular your way. I am not here to debate that.

It's just that your way takes so much from the vision of Ashes Steven sold me on. I would not want to play Ashes if PvP was opt in or limited to zones. It really ruins the magic for me.

Remember that magic is a double edged sword. I am actively fighting to potentially make my life harder here.

I also don't think ashes needs or should have a huge player base. I am fine playing a niche game. I think 50-100k concurrent players for a PvX game is probably a great outcome. I also think ashes could 10x that by being so good that a new generation learns to love PvX.

ho I would love these original vision to work, believe me it was one of the things that got me really excited, and I believe it can work but the game has so much more potential and I can not see it unlock that potential with this current system. All of the work I see is pushing the corruption system even harder.

If there was something that could solve this I would be all in, I just can't see one where we can have both worlds.
Your idea of account wide corruption is very good, I agree 100% it would decrease the gaming of this system.

Vhaeyne

@Mork

I am very happy to see we have common ground here.

I would like to say that both Eve online and Mortal Online 2 have non-pvp starting areas. I was originally against this stuff, but I have changed my mind for other peoples sanity. (I have also played some 2b2t so I my idea of good player onboarding my be a little off.)

Sanctus could be an instanced non-pvp starting area. I think that fits the needs and lore of the game.

Lodrig

I would modify the OP sugjestions slightly.

Deleting a corrupted character from your account TRANSFERS it's corruptiong to a global level over the whole account which will apply to all existing characters and to any newly created character

The issue of trash alts for griefing is really that the corruption on the throw away character can be deleted with the character, eliminate that and you eliminate the abuse. But still allow healthy use of multiple characters and even a 'multiple persona' type of play in which you have a character you KEEP which is corruped or routinely becoming corrupted, so long as your not evading corrupton by deletion the corruption remains on the character that earned it.

I think this accomplishes all that the OP is looking for with the lightest touch and least collateral damage.

Vhaeyne

@Lodrig

I get why you would want to maintain the partition provided by other characters.

My initial reaction to your modification was that people would not delete their characters.

I think at some point they would have so much corruption the character slot would be wasted.

Your modification could be an improvement on the current system.

Lodrig

Yes players could accululate up to 4 corrupted and abandoned characters before seeing any ill effects on a character which did not directly earn corruption. But in the long run if they wish to continue to grief with throw away alts they must delete or clense the characters in game. So for a committed griefer it will allow them more time before the system catches up with them, but when it dose the punishment should be comperable to your initial proposal. The mid or incidental corruption on an alt though won't punish the bulk of players which is my intent.

On a related note to prevent newbie griefing I think need a simple newbie pvp immunity flag that lasts for the first hour of a characters time online, no engaging or being engaged in pvp for that simple grace period will cut out some of the worst bottom feeding and allow newly spawned players sufficient time to disperse to a thin enough concentration on the landscape that griefers find it hard to locate prey and are more likely to be found by a bounty hunter after they first go corrupt. This is needed independent of corruption changes.

Vhaeyne

@Lodrig

Could be hours, levels, or both that prevent PK.

I think lineage 2 protected you from death penalty up to level 4? Not sure if it was pk protection too. I never tried to pk a noob.

I would rather the protection be based on the individual than the area. Knowing there is no safe place people can run to is a good feeling.

Pyrolol

Vhaeyne

Pyrolol wrote: »

Doesn't Doctor Evil not get his way in the end?

Child Item