Things we DON'T like about AoC.

We have not received permission from Songcaller to share the quoted post.

Pretty much all of those are just pvp encounters, which makes them the main pvp content of the game, so while, yes, they do support greens in a way, they're mainly pvpers' domain.

We have not received permission from Songcaller to share the quoted post.

The only ones who "earned" them are the greens themselves. The red then stole them through a forced kill and the BH then used that forced kill for their own benefit (double btw, if you don't return the resources).

That's like saying "well I stole this money from another robber, so I definitely earned this money". Though if you do think that, well then we just have differing povs (as if this wasn't already apparent )

We have not received permission from Songcaller to share the quoted post.

The only resource sink involved in a kill of a player is the gear decay, because you'll need to use mats to repair it, instead of using those mats for another craft. The loot itself won't be sunk (unless we're talking caravans). It's just a shift of possession.

We have not received permission from Songcaller to share the quoted post.

Say the red loots 10 branches off a green who had 20 (assuming 50% drop rates). The red would now have to drop 40 branches which they don't have, so they just drop the 10 that they got from the green.

If we get much lower drop rates, then I definitely want way more PKing in the game, cause the price for it would be utterly negligible for the green.

We have not received permission from Songcaller to share the quoted post.

That's the difference in our definitions of pvp. For me, pvp is two people fighting each other. And PKing is one dude hitting a wall until it crumbles. Yes, effectively that wall is a player, but there's no reciprocation, so I personally don't see that as "pvp". Which is exactly why one doesn't give you corruption, while the other does.

We have not received permission from Songcaller to share the quoted post.

Nah, I see it as a pvx game too. I just want all part of that pvx to be as enjoyable as possible to everyone involved. I want PKers to be able to kill quite a few people a day w/o deleting their character in the process. I want pvers to enjoy the game despite of frequent PKs. And I want BHs to be the pvpers who not only benefit from killing reds, but also help the pvers enjoy the game. Ya know, the full circle.

And obviously on top of that there's all kinds of opt-in pvp events/locations in the game.

We have not received permission from Songcaller to share the quoted post.

Well Solvryn pretty much explained what I was about to say, because I've described my suggestion before in other threads.

The loot would be marked with the victim's name and would be returned to the green through the BH system. All the BH would have to do is to kill the PKer and give the marked loot to an NPC at a node. Btw, the PKer would still drop their own loot too and obviously that remains with the BH. All I want is to only the victim's stuff to be returned to them.

As for the factories, yes there'd be more corruption, because people would kill more readily. But the scale of those factories can just be balanced through the PK counter removal costs (both money and time).

And as I discussed here before, the resources in your storage are just as yours as the ones in your inventory. Mainly because the stuff in your storage can be taken through a siege, so how would it be any different from just someone killing you directly and taking it (well outside of the obvious cost of the siege itself). This is the main reason for me seeing resources being "someone's" as soon as those resources are acquired.

But, as a weaker point of my argument, I mainly want those resources to be marked only after a PK has occurred and not if the victim fought back. Mainly because tying named loots into the bigger pvp systems could lead to other unneeded complexities, due to the very fact I mentioned (stuff will be looted during sieges).

We have not received permission from Songcaller to share the quoted post.

Do you mean certificates? Cause I include those in the "resources". Just anything that drops from a person is their resource. I should've made that more clear.

The loss for the green player is time out of his preferred content. Especially if that green was farming mobs in a lucrative (at least relative to the green themselves) location. That green player might've lost their farming location because they vacated it through death and now they might have to lose even more time because they need to move to a whole different location.

The BH not only partook in their preferred content (that is the pvp), but also got rewarded for doing so. The reward being anything else that dropped from the PKer and the system-based reward that they'll get for successfully hunting that PKer.

And the PKer obviously got to kill a defenseless victim and could've potentially even gotten away, if they were good enough (though I have a separate suggestion for these situations, but that's beside the point rn).

We have not received permission from Songcaller to share the quoted post.

And what about the PKer? He literally did fuckall in terms of farming mobs, but he potentially got the rewards for it. Hell, he might've gotten multiple hours worth of pve rewards for literally hitting a wall for a minute. How is that fair?

And the BH not only gets rewarded for only doing pvp, but they could potentially get the PKer's gear, which could amount to literal weeks worth of work of several people across several content mediums. Also for just killing a single dude. How in the hell is that any fair?

You seem to really dislike any pvers. And while I do also want everyone to be the ultimate pvxer who pves as much as they pvp - that's a very unreasonable ask of the majority population of the mmo genre. Pvers (and obviously pure artisans) will most likely be the ones producing all the gear and food and potions and whatever else you'd use in your day-to-day gameplay for the pvpers, who will most likely just serve as mercs or just participate in pvp events most of the time. So saying that pvers are all freeloaders, just because they decline to fight back when they're already preoccupied with other content (that they prefer more than the pvp), seems quite unreasonable to me.

We have not received permission from Songcaller to share the quoted post.

Got it.

Hope this kind of approach doesn't destroy the game in the long run.

We have not received permission from Dygz to share the quoted post.

But like you like to say yourself, players are much more kill-hungry than mobs. A green player can just run away from a mob if they think the mob will kill them. But running away from a PKer would be more difficult, especially if the PKer attacked while the green was preoccupied with other content.

And if corrupted are meant to just be treated as mobs - why da hell is there a BH system? Any player can just go kill mobs and get the reward from them, so why do we need a whole separate system that, for some reason, gives out additional rewards for killing "mobs"?

If Intrepid decides to remove the BHs completely, I'll live with that. But if they want to keep that system in - I'd expect a much more holistic system that serves all sides of its encounter equation.

We have not received permission from Songcaller to share the quoted post.

As I've said before, my suggestion only works (at least as I see it) if the corruption gain values are somewhat low. So that BH would only kill the PKer once before the corruption goes away. It would just be "a single kill = whatever the PKer drops of their own stuff + the system reward for getting the bounty". A few minutes of "work" (not really, because it's pvp which is exactly the content BHs would be looking for) for a potentially substantial reward (not even counting the gear that could drop).

And with more people feeling better about PKing here and there, there's gonna be enough players who get killed by BHs while they have normally stacked inventories on them. While in the current system (well, considering what we know), I'd almost bet that most PKers will just be alt chars with the most basic cheapest gear on them, with 0 droppable items in their inventories and potentially a ton of trash low lvl gear, depending on how the gear drop mechanics work.

I'd bet on that because that is literally how it was in L2 (though it still have "good PKing" too). I've done it myself countless times and I've died to such characters as many times too. If Ashes keeps the super harsh penalties for PKing (mainly talking about the corruption values here) - I'd imagine that the general PKing quantities wouldn't really go down, because anyone who might've normally PKed a dude a day (or less) won't do it, but all the people who'd come to the game purely to fuck shit up won't really be stopped by the system.

There won't be enough BHs across the server to catch the uberPKers, because quantitively there wouldn't be enough "normal" PKers around to justify BHs. And with barely any "law enforcement" the true criminals will only become that much worse.

But that's just a theory. A corrupted theory

We have not received permission from Songcaller to share the quoted post.

And this is why I'm gonna be giving a ton of feedback "to prevent party/guild/alliance/raid-mates and people on your friend list from killing you if you're red". They already can't flag on you, so why should they be able to kill you? This is one of the biggest exploits in the system, so I hope that Intrepid has already changed that and just haven't told us.

We have not received permission from Songcaller to share the quoted post.

BH flag only against the PKer, so PKer's friends would have to go red themselves if they wanted to help. So while it is possible that they'll try and help somehow, the BH would still have the upper hand.

Also, you gotta think about this in the context of the bigger picture of the game. How would a PKer appear while being in a group? The most likely case is PKs in a dungeon against another group, while the victim group did literally nothing to stop it. And considering that even Dygz said that his party would probably just fight back, I do think that most groups of people would fight back. But even if they don't flag up against the attackers, they'd at least immediately kill the PKer in response (cause it'd still be 7vs1). So in such cases a BH wouldn't even have the time to learn about the PKer.

Most other cases of PKs will probably be amongst solo players or some small group gankers, at which point a well-gear BH would probably easily deal with the PKer (well, relatively speaking). And this would only be more common if the corruption gain is not as huge as it currently seems to be.

Again, this is mainly coming from L2 experience. People would PK here and there, mostly for farming spots (though more often the target would just fight back). There'd always be some uberPKers, but those would usually pick a glass cannon build and try to kill weaker players, so literally anyone with good gear would wipe them easily. L2's corruption gain/removal values were laxer than AoC's are supposed to be, which is why people felt better about PKing more often. But L2 also didn't have a BH system, so all PKers either grinded off their corruption or were killed by normal players that happened to be near the kill spot.

I do think that with a proper design and balance of said design, Ashes could still have those normal somewhat common PKs, while also curbing some of the uberPKers because there'd just be more BHs around to simply prevent huge genocidal runs by those psychos.

We have not received permission from Songcaller to share the quoted post.

The reward will come from the BH system itself. Now we'll obviously have to learn what those are, but still.

We have not received permission from Songcaller to share the quoted post.

Yes