Can we do something about Griefers ?

I'm on Shol server, this past two days have been an horrible experience. I'm looking to test Carphin Tower content, each time we go there there is one (1) player named Heiler from Standby Rubin guild that wants us to pay. We did not, he then proceeded to pull large packs of mobs onto us over and over again until we die. If we kill him we get corrupted, even if he dies from mobs, he's back within 2 minutes. He's at max level so doesn't care about exp debt.

I tried the day later, within 10 minutes he was here, apparently someone from our group was streaming. We moved to Gravespeak, he followed us all the way to grief us there as well.

I'm playing this game to test its content and provide feedback. I'm not interested in providing entertainment for some jobless loser. Want me to provide feedback about Carphin ? Well guess what every time I went there I got griefed.

I'm done playing until something is done.

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

h8br33d

Its_Me wrote: »

h8br33d wrote: »

Yup you didn't know you're are just supposed to surrender all your loot to the level 25, So they can completely gear out off the drops you gave up, and lord over you even more with his newly crafted gear from your materials lol

Why are you going to highway hills as a corrupted red player?

Oh wait the surrendering all your loot, this was just over-exaggeration and drama for a point? 🤦‍♀️

if you have been following the post that comment was from the perspective of a player being griefed by a lvl 25 , it was suggested that you make a peace treaty by giving up all your drops to the high level.....

Depraved

its so easy to avoid dying to mob dropping...

Its_Me

h8br33d wrote: »

Its_Me wrote: »

h8br33d wrote: »

Yup you didn't know you're are just supposed to surrender all your loot to the level 25, So they can completely gear out off the drops you gave up, and lord over you even more with his newly crafted gear from your materials lol

Why are you going to highway hills as a corrupted red player?

Oh wait the surrendering all your loot, this was just over-exaggeration and drama for a point? 🤦‍♀️

if you have been following the post that comment was from the perspective of a player being griefed by a lvl 25 , it was suggested that you make a peace treaty by giving up all your drops to the high level.....

I read the entire thread, I guess I just did not pay attention to your stance to know this was sarcasm as it gets lost on this forum with so many fragile players complaining about any type of contact or death. Boss are too hard, NPCs too hard, PVP players should not be able to attack even if they go red for it, no one should be able to loot bodies, no loot should drop... yada yada yada.....

Oh wait! Was it sarcasm? 🤔🤣

In an attempt to add some productivity to our exchange, I see no reason to place a limit on levels when looting, even if the loss is from an NPC. Someone that loots now flags as a combatant which makes them fair game for anyone else around that wants to engage them for their behavior, including players their level. Now adding a longer timer for staying pvp flagged for looting any body, I would not be opposed to this.

Noaani

Ludullu wrote: »

Noaani wrote: »

To those people that don't know how these things work, there are two key points that matter in *most* games where this is possible. The first is that proximity pulling a mob in itself doesn't generate any hate. You are (in most games) technically on the mobs threat list with 0 hate.

And I'm simply saying that the mob shold only aggro onto the 0 hate player if the mob is not moving.

I've had a mob that was chasing a low hp person (so they fought each other and that player was definitely above 0 hate) transfer onto me while I was just running by on a horse. To me that makes no god damn sense.

Noaani wrote: »

The other thing to keep in mind is that (in most games) buffs generate hate. In some games, even just class passives generate hate.

And I personally consider this shitty design if those buffs can aggro a mob that doesn't have the buffer (or their target) on its aggro list.

I'm completely fine if a person with 0 hate (the supposed abuser puller) gets buffed by a random dude (or any other positive effects) and then the mob reaggros onto that buffer. But this is also why I've been saying for years that I'm against any and all "outside of the party aoe positive effects". Or at the very least the passive auras and stuff like that should not apply to anyone outside of a party.

I don't really want to get in to the specifics of how, but if buffs didn't generate hate to mobs that are active and in range, players like me will abuse the ever living fuck out of that.

This is in fact why most games are designed this way - content becomes trivial (in a literal sense) if it is not the case.

The way I have put this to people in the past is to say that every class if played to its fullest extent with complete disregard for hate should be able to pull hate from a tank - especially at the start of an encounter. If you don't have buffs generate threat, it is kind of like allowing a healer to pre-load heals before the pull without generating any threat, or DPS to load some DoT's pre-pull without generating hate. Clearly these things shouldn't happen, and the same applies to buffs. Since any player or group can join in on any encounter, that means any buff cast within range of an active mob should generate threat.

This really is the way it needs to be - and having a buff heavy class means it is even more important.

While these things combined do leave players in a position where they can be trained, games also give players ways to avoid that happening - so it really isn't a big deal.

Gizban

Its_Me wrote: »

pyreal wrote: »

Noaani wrote: »

rollox wrote: »

Noaani wrote: »

I'm surprised how few people seem to have worked out how to prevent this, or how to turn it around on the character trying to train mobs on to others.

Players have tried. I was in a group that tried. The level and gear difference just makes it futile.

Based on this response, I have to assume your attempt was based around PvP.

As has been said, training mobs like this is commonplace in the early stages of most PvE MMORPG's where you can't attack the other players. This should make it obvious that the means to deal with this situation are not PvP based, meaning your gear and level simply aren't factors.

This is absolutely a player skill issue - if you can't work out how to avoid being trained, then you deserve to be trained.

It's interesting to see what people find pride in.
You get em, tiger. You tell them scrubs.

I am not certain the point of your post?

The person you quoted simply gave some examples of how aggro works to help people understand how to avoid the issue brought up by the OP? They even stated that they agreed with the OP that training mobs on others is shitty?

He offered no insight nor examples nor anything constructive.
Repeated what was already majorily stated but added 'if you can't avoid it, you deserve it'.
What a joke

Ludullu

Noaani wrote: »

This really is the way it needs to be - and having a buff heavy class means it is even more important.

I'm not sure what exactly you mean by "preload". Do you mean "they start the cast of the ability before the pull is made"? Cause this comes down to how ability effect checks work. I believe we've discussed this before. I prefer when those checks happen at the end of the ability animation/cast, so the stuff you're talking about (if that is what you meant) wouldn't work like you say, because the heal would be applied once the pull has happened and it would generate aggro. Same for the dot (w/o even conisdering the obvious point of "dot dmg generates hate").

And as for buffs, what kind of buffs are we talking here? The "it lasts 1 second but is super strong" ones? Cause to me that's an issue with the buff design than the aggro design. But even then, this is only a solvable problem if those buffs can only be cast on melee archetypes, cause you'd still be able to use those buffs on ranged chars outside of the mob's aggro range and the mob would not react to the buff itself.

And obviously, any buff that lasts more than, say, 3 seconds could be easily cast outside of mob aggro range and the buffer would not generate any hate for it. And as I said above, the "preload" buffs would be the same, so if the buffer started casting their ability before the pull was made, but the ability effect took place after the pull - the buffer should get the hate.

But even with all of that being said, I'm still against moving mobs getting unprompted hate from players that are simply within the potential aggro range but have nothing to do with the person that's pulling the mob. And if the abuse you and Azherae refuse to tell me is something along the lines of "parties A and B are working together, but they are not raided up or in the same guild/alliance; tank from party A pulls a mob; party B fully buffs up with their best buffs before attacking the mob, generating 0 hate for having done so" - then I fail to see how this is considered a big abuse of the aggro system.

If it's just that kind of abuse - we simply disagree on the design then. But if it's something else that I'm still missing - please do tell me, because I still cannot come up with something so supposedly aggregious that normal people should suffer for it, cause this aggregious abuse requires a certain aggro system design.

Azherae

Ludullu wrote: »

But even with all of that being said, I'm still against moving mobs getting unprompted hate from players that are simply within the potential aggro range but have nothing to do with the person that's pulling the mob. And if the abuse you and Azherae refuse to tell me is something along the lines of "parties A and B are working together, but they are not raided up or in the same guild/alliance; tank from party A pulls a mob; party B fully buffs up with their best buffs before attacking the mob, generating 0 hate for having done so" - then I fail to see how this is considered a big abuse of the aggro system.

If it's just that kind of abuse - we simply disagree on the design then. But if it's something else that I'm still missing - please do tell me, because I still cannot come up with something so supposedly aggregious that normal people should suffer for it, cause this aggregious abuse requires a certain aggro system design.

Yeah, sorry, busy, Predecessor patch and similar.

Most of it boils down to that I guess. I'll give you the other part but note that I might continue to seem to 'refuse' to engage because, well... busy.

The issue is that almost all solutions of the type you offered just result in the MPK being done in the opposite way, pulling mobs away from a spot where you know people will need to rest, or where they normally have to worry but could skilfully control them, and holding them, then releasing them to leash back to arrive at the right time.

Sure you can 'see them coming', but there are too many factors related to this in games with Ashes' main flows and goals. If they wanna switch to the easymode, it probably suits their design direction, as noted. Similarly, since you don't see 'stuff that allows players to control the zone easily by having a high level tank or Healer do certain things', as a problem, so it is.

My expectation would be that you'd want to go into the details about how your suggestion fixes, or could be changed to fix, all the ways this has been abused over the years, but Noaani seems to be hungry so I doubt you're getting anything from his end, and I don't have the time to walk you through it to the point where we know which part of the design you're willing to give up, precisely.

That's why I 'yield'. Ashes is basically a PvP game at this point either way, so they might as well do whatever they want with the MPK protections.

Ludullu

Azherae wrote: »

I'll give you the other part but note that I might continue to seem to 'refuse' to engage because, well... busy.

That's my bad. I honestly keep forgetting that people lives and shit

Azherae wrote: »

The issue is that almost all solutions of the type you offered just result in the MPK being done in the opposite way, pulling mobs away from a spot where you know people will need to rest, or where they normally have to worry but could skilfully control them, and holding them, then releasing them to leash back to arrive at the right time.

I feel like this kind of move either requires a very specific design of mob respawn locations or some very clueless victims, who probably have never been to that particular location before and don't know that this exact spot has mobs respawning at it.

This also depends on the length of the leash and general mob behavoir.

Azherae wrote: »

Similarly, since you don't see 'stuff that allows players to control the zone easily by having a high level tank or Healer do certain things', as a problem, so it is.

I don't see the action itself as a problem, but I do think that it should be addressed in the aggro design as well. Off the top of my head, I'd say something like

if a highbie was involved in the kill of a mob - the drop is cut according to the general rates for that highbie relative to the involvement of the high lvl player (this depends on hate generated by this player throught the mob's interaction with lowbie players)
if an upartied highbie tank is aggroing the mob (while dealing no damage), while a group of proper-lvled people are fighting the mob - the highbie's hate gen is highly diminished and the any pre-generated aggro goes away within 1-2sec of the group's interaction with the mob
any positive effect used by a highbie on a lowbie that's interacting with a mob burns away the entire mana pool of the high lvl player (maybe even puts a very strong regen debuff as well)

To expound on the first point a bit, the calcuation for drop rates should be similar to how xp reward is calculated when you have an uneven level distribution in your party, while taking into consideration the amount of hate gerenated.

So smth like "if this player was in your party, xp would be cut in half. This player only generated 10% of hp-equivalent hate (this depends on the contribution calculations for different actions), so the drop rates would be decreased by 5%.

And about the third point. Hell, I'd love if that was the case for any non-mentor relationship in the game. We've already seen Intrepid's dislike towards powerleveling, so why not take it to its logical conclusion, while also preventing the abuse of "I'm a lvl50 healer, I overheal lowbies so that they don't get any loot for their mobs". And we also through mentor relationships under the party/guild/ally-mate umbrella, so having an unpartied highbie mentor with you would still cut down your rewards as if they were in a party.

And all of this stuff is already something that's being tracked by the game. We have the party levels tracking for rewards. We have cross-lvl tracking for corruption purposes. We have mob-to-player lvl difference tracking for rewards (kinda same as the party lvl tracking, but more generalized). So I think what I'm suggesting is just a few developmental steps away, if that.

Noaani

Ludullu wrote: »

Noaani wrote: »

This really is the way it needs to be - and having a buff heavy class means it is even more important.

I'm not sure what exactly you mean by "preload". Do you mean "they start the cast of the ability before the pull is made"? Cause this comes down to how ability effect checks work. I believe we've discussed this before. I prefer when those checks happen at the end of the ability animation/cast, so the stuff you're talking about (if that is what you meant) wouldn't work like you say, because the heal would be applied once the pull has happened and it would generate aggro. Same for the dot (w/o even conisdering the obvious point of "dot dmg generates hate").

Yeah, it wouldn't work wirh healers and DPS - that's the point. What I'm saying is that it also shouldn't work with buff classes,which is why buffs generate hate the way they do.

With a long duration buff, you can't just have it apply hate when it is applied, because the effect will last much longer.

Instead, it needs to generate a small amount of recurring hate - and that recurring hate needs to be applied to any active mob that the buffer could conceivably engage with (however, again, that range should be shorter than the proximity aggro range of mobs).

Short duration buffs (less than 6 - 8 seconds in most games) don't need to have this, because they are rarely going to be pre-cast. A shirt duration buff like that is usually (not ways, but usually) going to be used mid combat in terms of PvE (and PvP doesn't matter in this discussion).

This is also why some passive effects in some games generate this recurring hate - especially if it is a passive that can benefit other players.

It's all good to say you don't like it being this way, but in 20+ years, no MMORPG developer has come up with a better method for the particulars in question (a game with a buff heavy class and an attempt at reasonably PvE), at least not one that isn't immediately exploitable.

Ludullu

Noaani wrote: »

It's all good to say you don't like it being this way, but in 20+ years, no MMORPG developer has come up with a better method for the particulars in question (a game with a buff heavy class and an attempt at reasonably PvE), at least not one that isn't immediately exploitable.

I'm fine with buffs generating hate during their duration. What I'm against is them generating that hate while the mob is not even touched by anyone with said buffs.

So, as an example, smth like this

party A is fighting mob 1
party A has buffs on them
party B is running away from mob 2
no one from party A is on mob 2's aggro list
mob 2 runs past party A
1. mob 2 gains aggro for party A's buffer, even though no one from party A touched it
2. mob 2 runs past party A and runs back past them, once the leash is broken - all w/o getting any hate for party A, because no one touched it with any negative effect

I'm against option 1 and for option 2.

Noaani

Ludullu wrote: »

Noaani wrote: »

It's all good to say you don't like it being this way, but in 20+ years, no MMORPG developer has come up with a better method for the particulars in question (a game with a buff heavy class and an attempt at reasonably PvE), at least not one that isn't immediately exploitable.

I'm fine with buffs generating hate during their duration. What I'm against is them generating that hate while the mob is not even touched by anyone with said buffs.

So, as an example, smth like this
party A is fighting mob 1

party A has buffs on them

party B is running away from mob 2

no one from party A is on mob 2's aggro list

mob 2 runs past party A
mob 2 gains aggro for party A's buffer, even though no one from party A touched it

mob 2 runs past party A and runs back past them, once the leash is broken - all w/o getting any hate for party A, because no one touched it with any negative effect

I'm against option 1 and for option 2.

If you have a game with option 2, I will exploit the living shit out of it to make PvE trivial. That is literally the thing that needs to be avoided - not as a perference, or a thing that would be good to see, but as a "this option breaks the game" kind of situation.

MMO developers as a collective know this, and that is why games with actually decent buffs haven't had option 2 for a few decades.

What some games do to get around what a few unskilled players in this thread are calling an issue though, is they don't have classes that are based on buffing.

So, your options are as follows;

Have classes based on buffing, where PvE content is literally trivial,
Have classes based on buffing, but where training is possible,
Don't have classes based on buffing.

There isn't a currently known fourth option.

People looking at this and thinking the first option is the actual best should obviously be ignored. People looking at this and thinking the third option is the best probably work for Blizzard.

That leaves the second option - and if you look at training as a feature of a game rather than a side effect of a requirement to make other things work, then this is by far the preferable option.

I mean, if Intrepid added a groupwide feign death ability, that would be a low/no skill means of dealing with mob training. I'm not a fan of this as I am all about player skill being the best option, but it is one way Intrepid could go.

That said, as I said earlier, there will still be some work done on threat - it is clearly not where it should be, but is in a reasonable state for this early in testing (ie, tanking actually works - which isn't even a given in some games beta tests, let alone alpha).

Rud

h8br33d wrote: »

Andi wrote: »

AstuWar wrote: »

h8br33d wrote: »

The part that makes this very bad is, there is no chance at retaliation for the lower lvl players because of such high level gap.

As is expected.

What you could do instead:

1) Bend over and take it from behind

2) ...

3) Profit

Mmh. Sounds like a solution to anyone?

Yup you didn't know you're are just supposed to surrender all your loot to the level 25, So they can completely gear out off the drops you gave up, and lord over you even more with his newly crafted gear from your materials lol

Yeah man some of these responses are wild. If this is the kind of toxic environment you can expect from this game then this game is not going to last.

Some of these guys act like it's a level 25 persons god given right to be able to hose lower level players with impunity.

Its_Me

Rud wrote: »

Yeah man some of these responses are wild. If this is the kind of toxic environment you can expect from this game then this game is not going to last.

Some of these guys act like it's a level 25 persons god given right to be able to hose lower level players with impunity.

I think most people are simply being realistic in pointing out that this is an issue in every game that has pvp and to take some accountability in doing what you can to avoid it, even providing ways to avoid death.

Everyone has the option to group up and flag and kill the 25, make a callout for higher levels to help with the griefer ect. The victim mentality simply does not work in any pvp or pvx game

Ludullu

Noaani wrote: »

If you have a game with option 2, I will exploit the living shit out of it to make PvE trivial. That is literally the thing that needs to be avoided - not as a perference, or a thing that would be good to see, but as a "this option breaks the game" kind of situation.

@Noaani if by exploit you mean stuff like this

Ludullu wrote: »

"parties A and B are working together, but they are not raided up or in the same guild/alliance; tank from party A pulls a mob; party B fully buffs up with their best buffs before attacking the mob, generating 0 hate for having done so" - then I fail to see how this is considered a big abuse of the aggro system.

Then as I said there - I do not see this as a problem. Iirc you believe that open world content wouldn't be really difficult either way (by your standards of difficulty), so why even care that this is how the game works.

Any properly difficult stuff will have to be in instanced dungeons where only raided/partied people will be and what I'm suggesting would not even be a thing there.

And if a group's singular buffed salvo can impact a mob in such a meaningful way that this is considered an exploit - we have much bigger problems in the game.

Rud

Its_Me wrote: »

Rud wrote: »

Yeah man some of these responses are wild. If this is the kind of toxic environment you can expect from this game then this game is not going to last.

Some of these guys act like it's a level 25 persons god given right to be able to hose lower level players with impunity.

Everyone has the option to group up and flag and kill the 25,

Not in this game you don't. The difference between levels in this game stat wise is like the difference between heaven and earth. In the situation described in this thread the level 25 can defeat his group single handedly.

Noaani

Ludullu wrote: »

Noaani wrote: »

If you have a game with option 2, I will exploit the living shit out of it to make PvE trivial. That is literally the thing that needs to be avoided - not as a perference, or a thing that would be good to see, but as a "this option breaks the game" kind of situation.

@Noaani if by exploit you mean stuff like this

Ludullu wrote: »

"parties A and B are working together, but they are not raided up or in the same guild/alliance; tank from party A pulls a mob; party B fully buffs up with their best buffs before attacking the mob, generating 0 hate for having done so" - then I fail to see how this is considered a big abuse of the aggro system.

Then as I said there - I do not see this as a problem. Iirc you believe that open world content wouldn't be really difficult either way (by your standards of difficulty), so why even care that this is how the game works.

Any properly difficult stuff will have to be in instanced dungeons where only raided/partied people will be and what I'm suggesting would not even be a thing there.

And if a group's singular buffed salvo can impact a mob in such a meaningful way that this is considered an exploit - we have much bigger problems in the game.

No, that is not the exploit I am talking about.

That is a situation to be avoided (the bard in your scenario will never need to worry about pulling aggro, which is not good), but it is not the exploit. I'm obviously not willing to get in to what the exploit itself is here, as since it isn't the kind of exploit that will get you banned (it cant, as it would be intentionally designed in to the game if it exists), I absolutely plan on using it if it is in the game.

As to why I'd be worried about something like this even if the PvE content isn't going to be what I would consider challenging - players attempting it should still be on an even footing - this exploit guarantees that this won't be the case.

apocrisy

The real issues are mob aggro mechanics, that needs to be fixed from the developer side.

The thing with players abusing unintended gameplay to grief others and gain something.. I dunno what to think of this. People paid 120€ for phase1 or maybe even more if they're a supporter before that, and they log in, pull a group of mobs towards players and logout and repeat. Man so much for being a tester in a video game. Grief should happen in intended and not unintended ways. I have half a mind to start reporting such people. I had a case of lvl 8 pulling entire remnants onto us at level 16 and log off, he kept repeating it and I couldn't even fight him cuz he combat logged.

apocrisy

While I haven't got it to work for threat in Ashes yet, it is worth pointing out that figuring out who will get aggro in a situation like this is something a combat tracker can help immensly in - working out what could be behind things that seem random really is the point of them.

It's proximity based at the moment. If you pull a pack and pass a friendly, the pack will pull onto the friendly, at least the undamaged ones instead of all sharing one source of threat and following it they find the nearest hostile in case no DMG was done to them but they aggroed socially.

Noaani

apocrisy wrote: »

unintended gameplay

Is it unintended?

Steven has played MMORPG's where training was a thing. He has had mobs trained on to him in the past.

Most of the development team have experience in MMORPG's where mobs can be trained.

The fact that this would be possible would have long been known within Intrepid, so why assume it is unintended?

Fun fact, one of the few games that has had training be possible at release and has developed it out of the game is WoW.

I have to assume most posters here don't want a game that holds players hand as much as WoW does - so welcome to an MMORPG that doesn't hold your hand.

Graugus

h8br33d wrote: »

Lately i have been noticing an issue of lvl 25 players griefing sub lvl 15 players at highway men, the obvious motive is the crafting materials dropped at this poi. the level 25's simply pull multiple pyro's or various other high lvl mob's with the goal of wiping groups and looting everyone's piles. The part that makes this very bad is, there is no chance at retaliation for the lower lvl players because of such high level gap. My futile attempt at flagging for pvp to stop them from looting my materials was met with 2 lvl 25's chasing down my lvl 14 bard .....which i obviously didn't have a prayer and had a fair amount of exp debt to show for my efforts.

Might i suggest if the level of the player is 10 levels or so above the person he is looting ,that maybe corruption be added perhaps, some type of system needs to be implemented to prevent this type of griefing . In general the act of pulling entire groups of mobs to cause groups to wipe has been becoming an issue..... I witnessed my entire group log off because of frustrations. and eventually nearly the entire POI become vacant.....

Overall my experience with the game has been fantastic , and the passion for delivering an amazing game from the Intrepid team has been nothing short of amazing and refreshing very proud to be a part of the journey!

A simple fix to this would be to have the mobs ignore a group or persons five levels over them (Aggro% = 0 if over five levels and item drop chance = 0%. This would remedy the tag, and train trend growing with level 25s in lower areas. The next problem to solve would be the Alt-f4 champions of the same level that train mobs on top of you.

Going to be interesting seeing how they fix this issue.

Child Item