Current forced pvp will kill the game

I agree with Steven that pvp should be for game political reasons, fight over resources, etc.
But ... people who can grief will always exist and Ashes will NEVER be able to control it.
Big Streamers will never be able to really cover the game and it will take revenue from the game.
Casual players will not want to login for 30 min and deal with a griever. If you can not play the game the way you want people will leave.
This will cause the game to be too niche. And I really really like playing Ashes ... this will be sad.

Bottom line, consider the unconsentual pvp system the way it is now. Your current penalties will not stop grievers, and you can not police it.

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

Its_Me

ratbait wrote: »

So true Redherring,these forums are just a narrowminded echo chamber for the hardcore PVPer,who will probably just leave after a few months of play and it has all burned to the ground.

I see extreme statements on both sides of the fence, those saying PVE players don't matter and those saying PVP players don't matter. As far as I am concerned, it is the extremists on both sides that are the real issue.

muncherofmidgets

I like most of what Kalnazzar said, the corruption system is on the right track but still needs to be tweaked. It seems like it might be punishing enough for the moment, though I would like more tier levels for those that don't care about only 1 character on their account.

-I think Tier 4 corruption sounds like a great idea, with even more tiers being possible so you could eventually gain enough corruption to corrupt all your characters on your account. There needs to be VERY serious punishment for griefing players. Not all of us have the platform that Asmongold has to make it to the attention of Steven that we are being griefed (I'll be lucky if a dev even sees this post I imagine). Since this is the case it must be made an in game mechanic that punishes players for griefing, that could be dragging mobs onto innocent players, or using skills to nondirectly kill players. If you are flagged for PvP and do anything to another player it should be punishable in a serious way.

-I think looting a non flagged players body should give you corruption (and they need to make it more clear what body is yours and what is another players, maybe even adding a check box in settings to choose not to be able to loot other players bodies at all)

-I also think that dropping resources when not in PvP is excessive, while XP debt is fine while PvE'ing. On the flip side, XP debt while PvP'ing is too much, but dropping resources seems fine!

Examples: If you are PvP flagged and hit an enemy then that enemy kills a player, it should count as corruption. If you are PvP flagged and you hit a player with ANY spell effect it should give you corruption. If you loot a non flagged player body it should give you corruption.

Uncommon Sense

Symbiosome wrote: »

I agree with Steven that pvp should be for game political reasons, fight over resources, etc.
But ... people who can grief will always exist and Ashes will NEVER be able to control it.
Big Streamers will never be able to really cover the game and it will take revenue from the game.
Casual players will not want to login for 30 min and deal with a griever. If you can not play the game the way you want people will leave.
This will cause the game to be too niche. And I really really like playing Ashes ... this will be sad.

Bottom line, consider the unconsentual pvp system the way it is now. Your current penalties will not stop grievers, and you can not police it.

We dont want another New World Flop thank you very much. They caved to the PVE crowd the game lost its identity and environment function and the game died.

Please do some research on how the corruption system works because right now we have PVP'rs complaining they cant PVP.

While the next wave of PVE'rs try to break the will of fundamental world mechanics by using the threat that they wont play...

Well guess what you're not playing NewWorld either after they made the PVP toggle.
That big$ MMO is essentially dead because PVE players made the same threats the game would be unplayable and that they wouldnt play unless it changes...

So the eveidence is clear even if Ashes changed it (They wont) the PVE crowd wont play it...

Crotchless

Symbiosome wrote: »

I agree with Steven that pvp should be for game political reasons, fight over resources, etc.
But ... people who can grief will always exist and Ashes will NEVER be able to control it.
Big Streamers will never be able to really cover the game and it will take revenue from the game.
Casual players will not want to login for 30 min and deal with a griever. If you can not play the game the way you want people will leave.
This will cause the game to be too niche. And I really really like playing Ashes ... this will be sad.

Bottom line, consider the unconsentual pvp system the way it is now. Your current penalties will not stop grievers, and you can not police it.

it will not kill the game and let me explain why:

1)Not all systems are in place:
eventually players will be able to bounty hunt red players. towns also may be non-pvp areas, as well as no pvp for players below a certain level.

2)Being red is VERY punishing:
when you get killed as a red player you drop 2-3 GEAR pieces you have equipped(Gear that you can't take off to protect it, once red)

3) You get next to nothing from killing players
Players drop a very small % of there materials, not gear. going red to loot 8 oak logs and 20 glint is not worth losing 2-3 gear pieces.

If your going to reference the Asmond gold issue, ill cover that too. That happened to him because as many people love him, just as many do not. Many people do not want his massive zerg following populating their server and ruining the natural flow of the game. i am one of those players. so many of the players who were griefing him, would never normally do that. I believe that on launch they should have a server dedicated to big streamers that is encouraged for them to use. this server should be known to all players so they have the option to avoid them if they wish

But keeping the system in the game allows players to flag and fight over resources and mobs. if you take the system out. itll turn into Black desert online, where low level players who are not strong enough to properly contest an area freely farm under you with 100% protection which is a far bigger issue. Ever play BDO and grind for a rare drop for 1,000+ hours to constantly be dealing with players who you could push out of your farm spot but cant because the system protects them? that kills a game.

The system currently is so punishing that out of thousands of players on a server, you may see a handful of people still play the style of red, griefing. but the rewards for killing the red players in the future will be worth it, and bring the thousands of other players together to hunt them.

It will not kill the game, its perfectly fine as is. ive played over 80 hours in the alpha and have been killed once by a player, who did it for science and gave my stuff back.

In short, Aoc will have many systems in place to keep the red player numbers low, and playing as red useless. just give them time to implement all the systems.

RocketFarmer

The forum sure loves to pick at the extremes. One hand PVP sucks because you can’t gank players without terrible penalties. Others seem to feel penalties aren’t harsh enough or you need a constant immunity from any other player interaction. I am good where it is. I’m sticking around.

novercalis

redherring wrote: »

Hmm.. I seem to read a lot of PvP opinions that miss the mark. However, I do see that Orym encapsulated a lot of the recent design principle updates Steve has shared.

To those who want the "casuals" to go away. Uh... there are more "casuals" than "true PvPers" and "casuals" are what makes a game monetarily stable and successful. The "casuals" are the unwashed masses you need.

That isn't to say this game doesn't feature PvP as a core principle. It is not too much unlike Albion. In Albion, you better believe that the "carebears" there are a large percentage of what makes the economy move.

I do agree that having consequences and "weight" to actions and decisions seems to be the message being portrayed. Levels matter. Groups Matter. Crafting matters. Leveling up and each level matters. Being thoughtful when you are out gathering or doing solo content isn't inherently safe. The tension is a core game requirement.

However, when I read "leave carebears" or "this game isnt' for you", I think there is a vocal minority of players that don't get that this game IS for all of us. Every day isn't "The Purge". There is a flagging system that will punish you for killing innocents. You should PvP for political reasons, but just killing indiscriminately isn't a design tenant.

To those espousing "kill everyone" and "griefing is fine", you are welcome to leave as well as this game isn't for you.

here is the thing - steven has gone on records saying he's fine this game doesnt appeal to the masses (aka casuals) and isn't in it to make money or be a WoW killer. He is contend this game is a niche game that itches his perfect Lineage/ArchAge system. He is fine if the game becomes a 20k 1 server population. He isn't here to win investors or be the biggest mmo ever, that was never his goal and vision.

mainedutch

Its_Me wrote: »

ratbait wrote: »

So true Redherring,these forums are just a narrowminded echo chamber for the hardcore PVPer,who will probably just leave after a few months of play and it has all burned to the ground.

I see extreme statements on both sides of the fence, those saying PVE players don't matter and those saying PVP players don't matter. As far as I am concerned, it is the extremists on both sides that are the real issue.

It's so refreshing to hear a voice of reason. I agree.

I think corruption is fine if it gets tuned down and will prevent PvErs from getting ganked like they're afraid. I also believe there will be plenty of PvP events and areas for PvPers to get the combat they want. I desperately want there to be a healthy mix of both, and I honestly believe we're moving in that direction (though reading these forums would make you think otherwise). Anyway, we're not even feature testing yet... Time will tell.

But to say there should be PvP toggles, PvE/PvP servers, or the removal of a barrier to PK (corruption) is all crazy IMO. The game is PvX and it needs to remain PvX. That was always its goal. I believe it will work out.

Its_Me

mainedutch wrote: »

Its_Me wrote: »

ratbait wrote: »

So true Redherring,these forums are just a narrowminded echo chamber for the hardcore PVPer,who will probably just leave after a few months of play and it has all burned to the ground.

I see extreme statements on both sides of the fence, those saying PVE players don't matter and those saying PVP players don't matter. As far as I am concerned, it is the extremists on both sides that are the real issue.

It's so refreshing to hear a voice of reason. I agree.

I think corruption is fine if it gets tuned down and will prevent PvErs from getting ganked like they're afraid. I also believe there will be plenty of PvP events and areas for PvPers to get the combat they want.

But to say there should be PvP toggles, PvE/PvP servers, or the removal of a barrier to PK (corruption) is crazy imo. The game is PvX and it needs to remain PvX. That was always its goal. I believe it will work out.

Corruption will be tuned down as Steven already stated he has purposely overtuned for alpha to prevent griefing.

I too hope that they do not go with a toggle as other games have tried (looking at you New World) and it didn't work very well. New World started out in design as a great pvp game and then did this 180 mid development changing to a pvp opt in, no loot drop upon death ect which was disappointing. I did like what they attempted to do with incentives to achieve more open world pvp by giving players a higher xp gain if flagged, but this resulted in a lot of pve players constantly crying that pvp was happening when they flagged for the xp and died to another player. 🤦‍♀️The safe zone fighting where fights would break out around towns and people would constantly run into the safe zone to escape death was weird as well.

I am used to real pvp games so pvx will take a little getting used to but like I said in another post, I am willing to stay flexible enough in my mindset in the hope that Steven's corruption system will balance out his playerbase of both pve and pvp players and the game stays populated a lot longer than recently released games.

snowmannumbertwo

corruption system takes care of this concern. also for the streamer grief problem , easy add to TOS that continuous killing of player can lead to ban. they can easily add metrics to the DB to flag a person as suspicious for targeted greif.

also in game they can add this high level corruption where you also drop your storage key that players can loot and open your town storage. obviously only save this for the most vile of the player base.

RedLeader1

We are just testing the core PvE element, that would exist even if it was a purely PvP game or a purely PvE game, but I must say cracks are appearing. My optimism for a truly PvX game has taken a hit.

I think a corruption system to balance the risk/reward for PvP players killing and disincentivizing players focused on PvE is necessary. But I would say that a bigger priority is incentivising those PvE players to play in the first place.

I think the goal in a PvX game, is to create content gated behind PvE and PvP, so that a team comprised of both PvE focused players and PvP focused players, or all-rounders, is most successful.

All I am seeing is a PvP focused game. Even the grinding in groups and zergs is very PvP oriented, because gathering and crafting is a solo operation. When artisanship is added, are all the mobs going to be rebalanced? Because I am too far behind now to do anything after 1 weekend. I cant rejoin the group grinding and I cant solo anywhere.

Right now I don't think me dying repeatedly out in the wild, grinding to 10 for 3 days in the starter area, trying to compete for mobs in a level 9 group amongst the level 15 groups, or spamming LFG is helping test much.

I think a more holistic design to the first 15 levels is required, because it is going to require a lot of rework to balance PvE leveling in with what we have at the moment.

mainedutch

RedLeader1 wrote: »

We are just testing the core PvE element, that would exist even if it was a purely PvP game or a purely PvE game, but I must say cracks are appearing. My optimism for a truly PvX game has taken a hit.

I think a corruption system to balance the risk/reward for PvP players killing and disincentivizing players focused on PvE is necessary. But I would say that a bigger priority is incentivising those PvE players to play in the first place.

I think the goal in a PvX game, is to create content gated behind PvE and PvP, so that a team comprised of both PvE focused players and PvP focused players, or all-rounders, is most successful.

All I am seeing is a PvP focused game. Even the grinding in groups and zergs is very PvP oriented, because gathering and crafting is a solo operation. When artisanship is added, are all the mobs going to be rebalanced? Because I am too far behind now to do anything after 1 weekend. I cant rejoin the group grinding and I cant solo anywhere.

Right now I don't think me dying repeatedly out in the wild, grinding to 10 for 3 days in the starter area, trying to compete for mobs in a level 9 group amongst the level 15 groups, or spamming LFG is helping test much.

I think a more holistic design to the first 15 levels is required, because it is going to require a lot of rework to balance PvE leveling in with what we have at the moment.

I just made two new characters today and have had no trouble finding random groups. Just go to a spot and start inviting people.

Plus you can get 1-6, hell even 7 or 8, pretty easily by yourself right now.

Sigtyr

Steven has said many times that this game is not for everybody. There are core visions of this game that simply will not be changed, no matter how many times someone makes this thread.

Andi

People really, really need to stop using "not for everybody".

Caeryl

ratbait wrote: »

Casual crafters wont play a game like this,to spend 2 hours gathering just to have a guy roll up and kill you,lose half your stuff just isnt worth it.But hey lets incentivize the griefing by giving the killer 25% of your stuff for 1 seconds farming gatherers.

Crafters and Processors stick to towns, because you can't progress either path out in the wilds to any significant degree.

Gatherers are out in the wilds to gather and need to learn how to PvP, same as they need decent enough gear and skill to get through mobs between them and the resources they want to harvest.

Gameplay-casual players aren't really the demographic Ashes is looking to appeal to. Time-casual maybe, but not gameplay-casual. Your nodes and progress in them all live and die by PvP.

Uncommon Sense

Andi wrote: »

People really, really need to stop using "not for everybody".

Ok, its designed for a specific audience with a particular game play preference....

redherring

Sigtyr wrote: »

Steven has said many times that this game is not for everybody. There are core visions of this game that simply will not be changed, no matter how many times someone makes this thread.

I sometimes see this phrase used as a rally cry that this game should be PvP-centric, period. That may not be what you are stating, but all the PvP "let me kill everyone with no consequences is what my brain hears.

Then, you see Steven state "killing low levels is not a thing and I will ban you" and the same group loses their minds... as this isn't the game for them.

As a gatherer, crafter, and solo player, I love the current balance. I am fine with the game rewarding grouping.

I think overall for the minimal alpha content that is in, it isn't bad. We don't really have the designed "null sec" places or whole mechanics even in yet (high seas), hence alpha and partial information.

There are some classes that are good 1-10 and then fall off. There are some classes that are bad 1-10 and then get strong. There are some people starting to flag more often. There are new players that pick up from an ashes pile and immediately flag and realize that is bad.

I prefer the "show me" then "tell me", and sometimes I think certain PvPers are really hanging onto the "tell me" way too much and being wrong.

However, when you use Steven's phrase, you need to realize it is OK for Steven to say that. Steven has a vision and almost no one else is going to mean the same thing when he says it. It is more clear for you to state "this game should lean heavier on PvP in "this way". That is good and something to discuss.

Having a mantra call that doesn't mean what you think it means (to everyone) is not helpful and just seems like mob mentality.

Barzel

Ah, this old argument. Well, I'd say Intrepid simply needs to decide how many players they want. If they want a larger community, and presumably more revenue, they will design PvP in such a way that it neither allows for griefing, nor makes the game punitive for new players. Or, conversely, they can have a smaller population of dedicated PvP players with very little PvP restriction.

Uncommon Sense

If you want a full PVP sandbox just play Rust...Otherwise I can point to a number of full loot open PVP MMOs that have all failed.
If you want a PVE tailored MMO experience I can point you to the last 10 years of MMOs

there are currently no PVX MMOs and if any are still around P2W has likely made them a husk of what they used to be.

There are plenty of potential oldschool gamers just waiting for 'thier game' the question is can Intrepid attain/retain new players with no prior PVX MMO gaming experiences or MMO preconceptions.

A game that tries to appeal to everybody inevitably appeals to nobody.

ShivaFang

Symbiosome wrote: »

I agree with Steven that pvp should be for game political reasons, fight over resources, etc.
But ... people who can grief will always exist and Ashes will NEVER be able to control it.
Big Streamers will never be able to really cover the game and it will take revenue from the game.
Casual players will not want to login for 30 min and deal with a griever. If you can not play the game the way you want people will leave.
This will cause the game to be too niche. And I really really like playing Ashes ... this will be sad.

Bottom line, consider the unconsentual pvp system the way it is now. Your current penalties will not stop grievers, and you can not police it.

Honestly? Baiting people into going corrupt is more of a grief than forcing pvp on people who don't want it. Going corrupt is such a punishment it's not worth doing (and that's a good thing)

chickengeorge

Sigtyr wrote: »

Steven has said many times that this game is not for everybody. There are core visions of this game that simply will not be changed, no matter how many times someone makes this thread.

Reduce your player base, great business model. I guess we'll find out in a few years.

Child Item