Greetings, glorious testers!
Check out Alpha Two Announcements here to see the latest news on Alpha Two.
Check out general Announcements here to see the latest news on Ashes of Creation & Intrepid Studios.
To get the quickest updates regarding Alpha Two, connect your Discord and Intrepid accounts here.
Check out Alpha Two Announcements here to see the latest news on Alpha Two.
Check out general Announcements here to see the latest news on Ashes of Creation & Intrepid Studios.
To get the quickest updates regarding Alpha Two, connect your Discord and Intrepid accounts here.
PvP sanctioned events and corruption?
Kesthely
Member
In the UI/UX livestream a question was asked that basicly said: In pvp sanctioned events you don't gain corruption. This does make me wonder, if guilds can circumvent the corruption alltogether, by for example declaring war to every other guild (in the vicinity)?
How should AoC prevent circumventing the corruption system by clever manipulation of pvp sanctioned events?
How should AoC prevent circumventing the corruption system by clever manipulation of pvp sanctioned events?
0
Comments
Never use again the word circunventing when talking about this, because declaring war is simply playing the game.
Also, if you declare war on several guilds - you'll get attacked by all those guilds too. And while a strong guild might overpower a few weaker guilds here and there, if that strong guild declares a ton of wars against everyone around they'll get overwhelmed due to being spread out too thin.
I've declared wars on whole private servers back in L2 days and we could only fight those if our whole guild was constantly on the same level of progress and was always farming stuff together. But as soon as we'd split up - we'd get destroyed by bigger forces. It was its own fun of course, but war decs in L2 also had 0 costs, so we didn't lose much in the process.
But there's always next time.
As for your question, I don't think there should be any prevention of that. I do think that the 'protected members' thing that some games do, could be a good fit for Ashes, especially if a Guild War is treated as 'sanctioned', it wouldn't be THAT weird to say 'these players are civilians for this war, if you kill them you will get corrupted normally, and they can't directly assist in clearing objectives.
But this would really only be to allow guilds to have lower level characters/players able to join them and try to catch up, which isn't really the 'point' of a Guild War situation. People may just have to adjust to that.
Declare war to everybody? Meaning that everybody can attack you without consequencess?
..... plz think before you type a strange scenario.
I don't remember right now the percentage, but it's quite low, like 15-20%? I forgot
Declaring a war will be done through a war scroll that can be acquired running a specific quest with your guild, so you can't simply buy it with gold
EG, i wouldn't mind paying 25% of my monthly income, if that means i never have to deal with potential corruption, if i keep non allies out of our territory.
In Eve, i've always lived in NBSI space, (Not Blue Shoot It) If we can muster enough players we are going to plan on taking a node on a server and use that NBSI approach there.
In essence id much rather have the corruption system work in conjuntion with this then having a way to circumvent it. Having an area that is known to be hostile for players if there not blue, is going to bring a much different, and dynamic warfront. Its much more fun if there is risk involved in your pvp (hence i love eve pvp) and a flatout price to pay to remove risk is going to be easy for the bigger and more powerfull guilds in the long run. Especially if you consider the impact that landform may have on the tactics of your attrition wars.
An example, we want to economically hurt node/region x, so we declare war at them. this way we don't drop harvested materials on death, and we make a campaign to completly mine out and deforest an area. Due to it beeing a sanctioned pvp event, Counterplay to kill us and retrieve the harvested goods is not possible, in addition, because we do not get corrupted we will sill be able to interact with our guilds storage facilities and deposit our plundered goods. This sort of gameplay should be possible, but should never becomethe norm, and therefor i believe there should be failsaves to circumvent corruption.
My idea:
Logiritmic scale on the cost of wars depending on size of the declaring, and receiving war target, as well as a logaritmic scale on the amount of active wars, and a logaritmic scale on the frequency of declaring wars. As a last failsave an Inverse logarithmic scale on the max duration of a war.
if you attack someone you are in war with in a PVP event, why would you get any loot or anything out of that? you are still in the PVP event
you can leave the guild for the duration of the war if you want to be civilians as an option all sanctioned events have a way to avoid it, you can leave the area where the conflict is, your can drop guild or citizen ship, you can not go in the area that flag you (ruins and open ocean).
if a node war breaks out its in your interest to do what u can to defend it if ur invested there but if you dont care either way just go on a vacation and check out other parts of the world while the war sorts itself out. Basicly any santumed pvp stuff can be advoided by checking out a different part of the world for a bit since chances to find somone part of that war away from active area is slim.
Also one thing alot of people are overlooking the heavy pvp orinated players tend to flock to the same portion of the map since thats where the "action is" which basicly leaves 75% of the rest of the maps rather void of pvp orientated players. They are apparently the minority of the playerbase if u listen to people when it comes to pvp/pve debate so you will probaly only see small pockets of heavy pvp on the map where alot of the other area are relativly untouched
i dont think they ever given a value on drop atm all we know is purple is half of non combatant but i dont think we even heard how much a non combatant drops.
pvp event just make them purple tag so same drop rule apply as purple tag when it comes to drops
death penalties are disabled during pvp events...
This was the point of the question.
One of two things is gonna happen and we probably should care which.
"I declare Guild War against the guild of this person who keeps killing me to take my gatherables, so now he can't take any."
"I declare Guild War against the guild of this person to take her gatherables, without getting Corruption, even if she doesn't fight back." (and then maybe they drop 25%, maybe they drop 50%).
Maybe I misunderstand Guild Wars, but in the games I've played, it goes on for sometimes 2-3 rl days and it's just 'whenever you see anyone from this guild in the world you should fight them'.
On the other hand, in AoC, wars last for several days and then a cooldown period begins. From a game design perspective, this is really good. I don't care how petty people's reasons will be or if they will declare war just for the sake of playing the game.
Depraved is correct, during pvp events such as caravans, guild wars, and sieges, the death penalties are disabled between participating characters on opposing sides. Attacking and killing players on the opposing side doesn't trigger the purple and red flags, nor does dying drop any resources or loot. However, you can't hide in this state as a Red corrupted player either. If you are Red, you'll still be Red in the siege or caravan and open to anyone to kill you and drop your loot, regardless of the side you are on. Being Red trumps everything.
Special case, entering Open Seas will turn you purple and a combatant. Open Seas are not a pvp event per se, but are combatant zones.
Thank you! I believe that clears up the entire thing.
EDIT: Also I hate and disagree with this implementation, but I truly appreciate the detailed clarification.
Feel like the corruption system is incomplete or maybe corruption and a law system need to be in place. Once corruption was removed from the waters and is no longer explained, it's just international waters and really the system becomes law and order.
There's no explanation for us to why corruption is only on soil and not at sea. Not to mention that the corruption system is incomplete on paper and no where does it show us where it feeds back into the game.
if you are red and enter the sea, you are still red....
im with you here too, thanks for the clarification but yeah i dont agree with it, death penalty should still apply in these events atleast the material drop side of thing should apply, XP loss not so much though. You will get people exploiting these system to avoid item drop.
gonna kill world boss for rare materials well ill take a caravan with me too to the boss area kill boss join caravan defence and item now safe while u walk ur way back to the safety of a town to bank it in (or get killed for a quick way back) for exaample
You don't say? He only said it. But I was addressing something broader.
well, I absolutely love it
even tho those are separate systems with their own penalties and objectives that can easily be changed to stop people from miss using it
Yes, that's me coming from games where 'Guild War' means something different, and expecting there to be risks or penalties for 'suddenly deciding to join an attack on a Caravan you see nearby'.
I'm glad to wait for more information on both these things, in the end, what I hate is the fact that a sensible implementation of Caravans is now unlikely to be enjoyable to me (either because Caravans will be a terrible idea and no one will do them, or because they won't be any fun because they're usually a waste of time to attack).
But like everything else with this game, that's speculation, so I guess I should really just have no opinion. Loving or hating this would require more information.
lol. Isn't that the truth. I'm pretty passionate about mmos and the features I like. Sometimes I have to take a step back and acknowledge so much is speculation at this point. And there's just no telling how things will end up with this game, or any other game.
But here is what's awesome. Man this space is heating up, the mmo genre. All of a sudden like. For years all that's really been on my radar is Ashes. Now I'm looking at T&L, AA2, Ashes, and Pax Dei. All four of them are high(ish) budget mmos looking to put open world pvp in it's rightful place, as an equal and core part of the game. It'll just come down to which one does it best, for me. And it is heavenly to have options. It'll be interesting to see how these four competitors feed off of each other and the decisions they make going forward. The timing of it all will play a big role too obviously.
But then you got Bethesda working on a new IP mmo. Riot working on an mmo. Pantheon...whatever they're doing. But even Pantheon will fill a niche for a certain subset of mmo players. Blue Protocol. Some other pve focused mmo/lobby/dungeon runner game, name escapes me heh. This is not even an exhaustive list, and I'm only listing games we KNOW about.
My point is these are extremely exciting times in the genre. And I'd have to imagine almost everyone will be able to find something they like. This New World, Crowfall, Lost Ark era that we've been through recently has been shameful. And all we've had as alternatives are the same old tired mmos people have been playing for decades. But man I think we're finally turning the corner. Next few years are going to be very exciting for all mmo players. I hope so at least.
edit: Honestly there's too many games coming out. They need to slow it down. I can't play all of these games at the same time or back to back to back. It's like getting 6 months of rain in 6 minutes. It's too much, like noo stoppp. Hold your horses.
True, there is a lot more happening in the genre than in the past and it certainly looks more promising. However, I have to say that T&L as an example for now is too hot for me, because I suspect that it will not take long before the P2W sneaks into the game after it builds its player base without RMT in it.
Definitely. Same with Archeage 2. Both companies have made comments that they understand there's too much p2w in their monetization. But we'll see what their definition of too much is. T&L is first up to bat here of this next wave of mmos. I expect (hope) the p2w to start off very minor. The stage is theirs. I don't see them just ruining it immediately.
But no matter where it starts, it's probably coming in heavier levels at some point. I will bail instantly when it does. It's very easy for me. Much practice over the last decade.