Greens unable to be CCd

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

Because in most games those mobs are scripted, so it always comes down purely to your own skill and you learning the fight. Pvp is never predictable (outside of top lvl arena) and quite often super unfair because you're fighting against bigger forces or a much stronger foe who just wants to shit on weaker people.

Going into a dungeon to kill mobs is also completely planned, while dying to a PKer while you're gathering plants is never planned, which is way more annoying to the victim.

This is why I want to minimize the impact on greens, while still allow PKers to kill them. And the fact that greens can't be CCed will most likely lead to more good pvp, while the opposite would just remove all greens from the game which would then snowball the playerbase into amounts that can barely support the game.

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

Unless you just want to kill people that never fight back - no, it'll lead to more good pvp. If greens could be CCed, they'll never fight back because they'll get overwhelmed by CCs and attacks before they can even return a hit, so they'll never even try. But if they can respond with a CC after getting attacked - there's gonna be more people willing to fight back. This design will create more pvp situations instead of pure PKing.

Ashes aims to have a 30s-1m time to kill balancing. If your target responds to your attack with a CC and an attack, you'll literally be at equal points in the fight. While if you could CC them right after your first hit, that just means that you can make 2 or even 3 hits against them, at which point they'll never catch up so most wouldn't even try.

CCs will also have diminishing returns so, no, a green won't just stunlock you in response to your hit.

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

Steven revealed it after a video doubting the system. But as been stated previously, L2 had the same mechanic, with the only difference being CCs with an attack attribute, but we don't know whether absolutely all CCs in Ashes won't work against greens or if there'll be exceptions.

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

And that non-100% chance of CCs still benefits the first attacker, so again, the pvper/PKer will still win more fights than the green. The only reason to want CCs against greens is if you want to abuse that mechanic and kill them through mobs w/o getting corruption. You are the one who does the first hit so there's no reason for you to CC your target, because they wouldn't even know that you're about to hit them.

And if you're trying to just PK someone, Intrepid is trying to limit your ability to do that as much as possible, while encouraging the victim to fight back instead. The system is designed to encourage pvp and reduce PKing.

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

Give a reason for why you should be able to CC a green, other than your desire to kill them before they could respond. Why do you need to CC a person who's not even fighting back?

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

I played L2 as a pvper, so I'd attack first in 90% of interactions with other players. I'd attack others if they were passing by my farming spot, just to let them know that I'm ready to fight for it. My winrate depended on a lot of things, but I never needed a CC as my first attack because I never needed a crutch in a fight. Only weak pvpers need a CC as their very first attack. And AoC's greens would be those weak pvpers because they didn't attack first to let the other player know they mean business.

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

Yes, I've fought against Tyrs and Destrs who had x2-3 my hp. And my first hit brought our hp values closer. And yes, they replied with a stun, because that is exactly what you do against an attacker who hit you first. And this was fair, because they had time to retaliate rather than me unloading as much as I can while they literally do fuckall, because they're stunned or CCed in other ways.

In my 12 years of L2 experience barely anyone started a fight with a stun, because stuns usually had way lower dmg value on them, so why in hell would they start the fight with an unreliable CC (because, as you point out, they weren't 100%) when they could just do a big hit on their target.

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

You do understand that you're contradicting yourself, right? You say that CCs won't have a 100% chance. That means that even if that green responds with a CC against an attacker, the attacker won't necessarily be CCed, so they'll still be at an advantage against the victim.

So how exactly is that a fair pvp? You keep saying "it's all about the fairness", but you're yet to properly explain how is it fair to both sides.

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

Are we talking about controlled arena pvp or open world one? Cause those two things are completely different.

And as for archers, I even asked a friend of mine who has played the game as long as me and in his experience archers were the only ones who'd even try starting the fight with a stun, but even then they didn't do so every time.

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

The unfair advantage comes when the attacker has over 20% difference in hp values right from the start of the fight, before the target can even respond with anything because they were CCed w/o any prior knowledge that there was a fight coming.

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

By victim I meant the person who's getting attacked, not some nebulous entity of good people or anything like that.

There's always green players and there's gonna be one who'll attack first w/o the second one knowing about that attack. If the first attacker can use CCs on the second player then they can bring that second player down in hp by 20-30% (if not more), w/o the second player doing a single damn thing in return.

I don't quite see how pvp is fair when the defender has to start at a much lower hp value than the attacker. No CCs on greens makes that more fair, because the pvp would start with the second player retaliating with a CC and bringing down the attacker's hp to roughly the same % value as their own.

Maybe you think that all CCs will last 20 seconds in Ashes, and that's why you think it's unfair? Though if you think that, it'd be even worse, because now you'd mean that you want to pretty much hit a defenseless target for 20 seconds, at which point it's just the same as PKing.

The other option is that you've literally just been talking about PKing and not PvPing. PKing is when one side just keeps hitting an unresponsive target until said target dies. PvPing is when that target responds with their own hit or CC asap. If you're talking purely about PKing - great, go PK whoever you want however much you want. The CCs still won't work, because you could try avoiding punishment for PKing with the use of CCs and most people here don't want that in the game.

But if you're talking about PvP - unequal hp values at the start of pvp (that is when the attacked person can respond) is in no way fair.

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

Yeah, my bad. I went over your messages in this thread again and saw that from the very first one you were just talking about PKing and not pvping. Yeah, PKing is made harder in Ashes, as it should be, so we have indeed been talking about different things.