PvP, the devil: or (to P or not to P?)

[vinnyq]

So you think PvP is evil eh?

Well lemme tell you this, some of the best games in life are PvP! Heck the first popular video game was PvP (Pong).

Thru all ages, games that are competitive, where mind and might match up with other mind and might for a healthy dose of competition, bring out the best (and worst in some cases) of players and gamers. We have Chess, Risk, Checkers, Card Games, Monopoly! We have Dune 2, Command and Conquer, Warcraft, StarCraft! We have Counterstrike, Unreal Tournament, Battle Field 1942, Halo! We have NFL, NBA, World Cups, the Olympics!

True, some play for bragging rights and ego stroking, but the best of them play for pure entertainment and the joy of game and competition, because what is more fun, to match your mind, reflex, and strength against a human opponent, or a computer?

Why are games like StarCraft, Warcraft, and FPS like Counterstrike, Quake and UT remains on people play list long after the game predicted lifespan? The PvP factor (and modding, but we won't get into that here :P).

So PvP, in it's purest form of competition and entertainment, is gold, and keep your gaming fresh and exciting and random and unpredictable. If you can accept competition and that you win some, you lose some, and just have fun with it, then you will.

It's not about my pixel beating up your pixel, it's about may the best man (or woman!) win. PvP in itself is not the devil. Only part of it, the ugly players, are what made it so. Ignore these and enjoy the healthy competition bit, and your gaming experience will transcend way beyond what PvE can ever do for you.

This is my belief, and I am sticking to it.

Thank you for your time.

(please don't KOS me *meep*)

[raynes]

I think many of the people who are afraid of pvp think it's always the person with the biggest toys wins. That is not the case in this game. And it REALLY isn't the case with outposts. Strategy is where the winning is at.

[vinnyq]

hale, even without outposts, just team vs team battle in the arena or pr, there can be strategy.

[geezas]

In my expriance pvp is major fun if you can let go of your fear if being killed. And don't give anything about the loss of your own characters life.
(I played AO/UT that's about all my pvp experiance comes from)

Running around with 12 other people in a instagib deathmatch is something everybody should try once and see if they still don't like pvp *ZAPP* *SPLAT* :D

Snaring everybody (even your own side by accident) can get you some new words for the foul language collection :p Trying to kill a much superior adversairy with 4 people and still beating the dust every time :( But that is war, somebody is alway's stronger and better organised or equiped and 1 must win) Sniping off wounded and stuck people was low and fun at the same time. *evil grin*

One thing that botherd me was the hatred and insulting name-calling caused by pvp.

[sehracii]

I think many of the people who are afraid of pvp think it's always the person with the biggest toys wins. That is not the case in this game. And it REALLY isn't the case with outposts. Strategy is where the winning is at.


I think that is a key point. I've stayed clear of most PvP (aside from some friendly duels) so far in this game because my fight levels aren't really anything to brag about (highest 135 Defensive Affliction) and I'm sure there are a lot of people that feel the same way. They don't want to get in a fight where they'll lose just because they didn't spend enough time leveling melee or elemental.

I am wholeheartedly looking forward to outposts though, but only on the belief that there will be proper implementation on how they run, are attacked, and defended. If a guild full of AoD's can just run out and take over any outpost held by a less combat oriented guild, it will be severely disappointing. I truly hope the aspect of "strategy" you mention runs deep in the system.

[geezas]

If a guild full of AoD's can just run out and take over any outpost held by a less combat oriented guild, it will be severely disappointing. I truly hope the aspect of "strategy" you mention runs deep in the system.

Hoping with you but I do not have high hopes.

[raynes]

I think that is a key point. I've stayed clear of most PvP (aside from some friendly duels) so far in this game because my fight levels aren't really anything to brag about (highest 135 Defensive Affliction) and I'm sure there are a lot of people that feel the same way. They don't want to get in a fight where they'll lose just because they didn't spend enough time leveling melee or elemental.

I am wholeheartedly looking forward to outposts though, but only on the belief that there will be proper implementation on how they run, are attacked, and defended. If a guild full of AoD's can just run out and take over any outpost held by a less combat oriented guild, it will be severely disappointing. I truly hope the aspect of "strategy" you mention runs deep in the system.

I can tell you that the type of players that make of the guild won't make that big of a difference (if any at all). What will matter is what type of NPC's you hire, what combination you have, how you group them to send them to protect your outpost, and when you send them to attack. An outpost will be successfully defended if you use your troops in the best way.

[grimjim]

You're wrong.

And I shall now explain why :)

Context.

Roleplaying games are non-competetive games.

Their very genesis comes from cooperative play, a shift in paradigm from the wargames that gave them birth.

In a conventional RPG the Game Master is there to provide an interesting series of challenges and a good cooperative story. Not to wipe out the players. (Though some never understand this...).

What fun would it be to pit your first level adventurers against a great dragon right off the bat because the GM is in a vindictive mood?

None.

Roleplaying games, even your most basic dungeon crawl, rely on cooperation. The wizard to discern the magic, the fighter to hold the creatures at bay, the cleric to heal and the thief to open locks and disarm traps.

That, primitive, mode of D&D play is _still_ the basis for just about every MMORPG in existence.

Computer games come the other way. Computer games have often been adversarial or scorekeeping, you play to beat something, yet in one player computer games the trick is to make something challenging, not impossible. The game designer is out to intrigue, challenge and hook their audience, not to frustrate them (which these bloody race missions on San Andreas are doing to me at the moment :P)

In Pong players are equal, they have the same size bat, its down to their reflexes and skill, nothing else. Their bat is just a bat, it has no history, no emotional investment in its existence.

Chess pieces don't have personalities and histories.

Risk, Chackers, card games, FPS shooters, everything you mention is NOT an RPG, not on the RPG model of play and, thusly, is entirely irrelevent.

That was always what was refreshing about RPGs, that you got together for a common goal, to have fun, you weren't competing to be the best. The only exceptions to this are, really, Paranoia and Vampire: The Masquerade/Requiem LARPs. In Paranoia the infighting is played for laughs, characters are disposable ciphers and dying is pretty much the point of the game.

Context.

In VTM/R LARPs there is a certain amount of satisfaction to be gained from backstabbing your rivals, getting them killed etc, but this can come down to political skill and innate charm as much as what's on your character sheet, keeping it half a step removed from the PvP in MMORPGs. However, it still causes massive problems. Players gang up to kill an NPC just fine with no arguments, player versus player? Then the arguments start about rules, justifications, lies, cheating, it never ends and it destroys everyone's fun.

You mention pitting your wits against a human opponent being more satisfying, I agree, but that's only really true in 'twitch' games like FPS. In an MMO its more like a trial of endurance, who has spent the most time levelling their character. Unless they're almost exactly on par in levels there is LITTLE to no unpredictability or skill in who wins. Even luck plays a very minor role.

Until we get an MMORPG that moves away from levels and hit point bloat as a mechanism of advancement that's always going to be the way. There's no involvement there, not even who can click attack the fastest.

PvP _IS_ the devil. It makes enemies of friends, spoils people's enjoyment, interrupts their fantasies and takes a large and unwelcome bowel movement in their fun.

How would you feel if you were playing, say, KOTOR and you approach the final scene to face Darth Whats-his-name when suddenly some ubered up dark jedi player runs past you, slaughters your entire party, calls you a 'n00b' and then sprints on chuckling madly. It would totally interrupt and spoil the play experience.

Everyone playing Ryzom is the hero of their own story and PvP knocks that for six.

I can see a limited place for PvP in resolving sections of the story arcs, so long as there can be clear winners and losers. Otherwise PvP is just a way for 1337 kiddies to get their kicks because they haven't discovered girls yet.

[quasar11]

You're wrong.

And I shall now explain why :)

Context.

Roleplaying games are non-competetive games.

Their very genesis comes from cooperative play, a shift in paradigm from the wargames that gave them birth.

In a conventional RPG the Game Master is there to provide an interesting series of challenges and a good cooperative story. Not to wipe out the players. (Though some never understand this...).

What fun would it be to pit your first level adventurers against a great dragon right off the bat because the GM is in a vindictive mood?

None.

Roleplaying games, even your most basic dungeon crawl, rely on cooperation. The wizard to discern the magic, the fighter to hold the creatures at bay, the cleric to heal and the thief to open locks and disarm traps.

That, primitive, mode of D&D play is _still_ the basis for just about every MMORPG in existence.

Computer games come the other way. Computer games have often been adversarial or scorekeeping, you play to beat something, yet in one player computer games the trick is to make something challenging, not impossible. The game designer is out to intrigue, challenge and hook their audience, not to frustrate them (which these bloody race missions on San Andreas are doing to me at the moment :P)

In Pong players are equal, they have the same size bat, its down to their reflexes and skill, nothing else. Their bat is just a bat, it has no history, no emotional investment in its existence.

Chess pieces don't have personalities and histories.

Risk, Chackers, card games, FPS shooters, everything you mention is NOT an RPG, not on the RPG model of play and, thusly, is entirely irrelevent.

That was always what was refreshing about RPGs, that you got together for a common goal, to have fun, you weren't competing to be the best. The only exceptions to this are, really, Paranoia and Vampire: The Masquerade/Requiem LARPs. In Paranoia the infighting is played for laughs, characters are disposable ciphers and dying is pretty much the point of the game.

Context.

In VTM/R LARPs there is a certain amount of satisfaction to be gained from backstabbing your rivals, getting them killed etc, but this can come down to political skill and innate charm as much as what's on your character sheet, keeping it half a step removed from the PvP in MMORPGs. However, it still causes massive problems. Players gang up to kill an NPC just fine with no arguments, player versus player? Then the arguments start about rules, justifications, lies, cheating, it never ends and it destroys everyone's fun.

You mention pitting your wits against a human opponent being more satisfying, I agree, but that's only really true in 'twitch' games like FPS. In an MMO its more like a trial of endurance, who has spent the most time levelling their character. Unless they're almost exactly on par in levels there is LITTLE to no unpredictability or skill in who wins. Even luck plays a very minor role.

Until we get an MMORPG that moves away from levels and hit point bloat as a mechanism of advancement that's always going to be the way. There's no involvement there, not even who can click attack the fastest.

PvP _IS_ the devil. It makes enemies of friends, spoils people's enjoyment, interrupts their fantasies and takes a large and unwelcome bowel movement in their fun.

How would you feel if you were playing, say, KOTOR and you approach the final scene to face Darth Whats-his-name when suddenly some ubered up dark jedi player runs past you, slaughters your entire party, calls you a 'n00b' and then sprints on chuckling madly. It would totally interrupt and spoil the play experience.

Everyone playing Ryzom is the hero of their own story and PvP knocks that for six.

I can see a limited place for PvP in resolving sections of the story arcs, so long as there can be clear winners and losers. Otherwise PvP is just a way for 1337 kiddies to get their kicks because they haven't discovered girls yet.

Nuff said... kudos

[basicart]

wish ya would stop quoting masive speaches then adding just 3 worrds :D

[amitst]

While this is all true.
Not allowing player combat takes a way a certain level of personal power.

Making only a very select few zones PKable means that you cannot get back at the people who do it.

If it were enabled people still wouldnt randomly kill you, because you cant get loot, you cant get experience, there is no reason, and because the community would lynch whoever did it by repeatedly killing them.

Enabling it everywhere except towns would make this game better because it would allow the players to police themselves, and would not cause havoc because noone has any reason to do it.

I'm so pissed, I can't be evil if they dont even let me attack people.


and a sidepoint

what is wrong with having competition in an RPG? isnt that what the online setting is for? to have competition and a social settting??????? isnt that what the merchants and crafters keep talking about in the market? that competition sets the price? if powerful people competed for aen then they could fight over her actually instead of whining to a GM. If they are that much more powerful than you, morgaine, then who deserves it??? My guild of diggers(haha...) are far from weak, digging does not make you weak... and I resent that you said that, for whatever reason you did.

[quasar11]

wish ya would stop quoting masive speaches then adding just 3 worrds :D

Nuff said... kudos to you


There that's 5 :)

[oldmess]

I can see a limited place for PvP in resolving sections of the story arcs, so long as there can be clear winners and losers. Otherwise PvP is just a way for 1337 kiddies to get their kicks because they haven't discovered girls yet.

First, I want to say I agree with your entire post. I'm quoting the above because it dovetails nicely with something I said in another thread:

ATM, there is no point to PvP because there is no winner/loser. It's really nothing more than ganking with a veneer of roleplaying to make the attacker feel better. Even if both parties line up in the arena and it's an agreed-upon fight (as opposed to a blasting someone in the roots before they know what's going on), what's the point? What have you won/lost? Have you really proven that you're the better player or just the one with more free time on his hands for power-leveling?

Hopefully Outposts will gives us enough purpose to PvP (and enough complexity) that it will be good for the story and the community. But I must agree that there is really no point to it today.

Raynes, I want to say I respect you for attempting to give it meaning back on the Windemeer server. But since Nevrax gave us no real way to define victory (except for a single battle), no amount of roleplaying veneer was going to make it work out. It always felt like they didn't intend to have PvP in the first few chapters but added it due to demands from a small segment of the population.

The key question with outposts to me is do they provide:

A. Purpose. A story based reason for this conflict. This I can't tell from the notes. I don't know why we're doing this except to gain some advantage. That may be enough to make this fun, but having it more story oriented would be nice.

B. Scorekeeping. A method to determine success/failure in our conflicts. My guess is 'yes' since it's success to capture an outpost and to maintain one. Failure then is defined as failing to capture an outpost or losing one to another group.

[vinnyq]

ooo grim, we gonna rassel? :D


You're wrong.

And I shall now explain why

Context.

Roleplaying games are non-competetive games.

Their very genesis comes from cooperative play, a shift in paradigm from the wargames that gave them birth.

In a conventional RPG the Game Master is there to provide an interesting series of challenges and a good cooperative story. Not to wipe out the players. (Though some never understand this...).

What fun would it be to pit your first level adventurers against a great dragon right off the bat because the GM is in a vindictive mood?

None.

Roleplaying games, even your most basic dungeon crawl, rely on cooperation. The wizard to discern the magic, the fighter to hold the creatures at bay, the cleric to heal and the thief to open locks and disarm traps.

That, primitive, mode of D&D play is _still_ the basis for just about every MMORPG in existence.
...


Ok, I agree that co-operative plays are also pretty awesome in its own right.
And even thought traditional table top rpg games start out as competitive play, they don't need to be. There're room for both in the genre.

Any sort of multi-players that have players interaction, be it co-operative or competitive, enhances a game. I will admit that if I imply PvP will trump co-op play any day, then I am wrong. I do not, however, agree that rpg can only be about co-operative play and players working together to experience a story together. It can also be about players conflict. No this or that is better, just different style of players interaction, whatever you're in the mood for. You can and should roleplay enemies against other players, and also as friends. Don't know why you would limit it to players against the GMs/Game.

And speaking of context, yes, it'll be the highest form of PvP when it's in context, where you are or pretending you are fighting for something. But doesn't this still gives the argument that PvP isn't the devil? And that if you just dislike PvP because of its competive nature and doesn't have context to go with it, then you're being a tad unreasonable?


You mention pitting your wits against a human opponent being more satisfying, I agree, but that's only really true in 'twitch' games like FPS. In an MMO its more like a trial of endurance, who has spent the most time levelling their character. Unless they're almost exactly on par in levels there is LITTLE to no unpredictability or skill in who wins. Even luck plays a very minor role.

Until we get an MMORPG that moves away from levels and hit point bloat as a mechanism of advancement that's always going to be the way. There's no involvement there, not even who can click attack the fastest.


This is true only if you have 2 guys holding sticks and standing there whacking each other. But if you introduce only a tad more variety in skills and number of moving parts (e.g. team vs team, invuln and auras, healing, affliction, etc), then strategy will come into play. It won't just be about number crunching. I bet you a team of lvl 50 can beat a team of lvl 100 if the lvl 50 team is well balanced and work well together as oppose to a lvl 100 team just trying to nuke the enemies to piece.


PvP _IS_ the devil. It makes enemies of friends, spoils people's enjoyment, interrupts their fantasies and takes a large and unwelcome bowel movement in their fun.


Hehe, you're going to hate me for saying this. But,

PvP don't makes enemies of friends, *people* make enemies of friends. TYVM HAHAHAHAHHAHAHA!

[sehracii]

This is true only if you have 2 guys holding sticks and standing there whacking each other. But if you introduce only a tad more variety in skills and number of moving parts (e.g. team vs team, invuln and auras, healing, affliction, etc), then strategy will come into play. It won't just be about number crunching. I bet you a team of lvl 50 can beat a team of lvl 100 if the lvl 50 team is well balanced and work well together as oppose to a lvl 100 team just trying to nuke the enemies to piece.



This is true only if the 100 team is fighting very stupidly. If they have their act together at all the lvl 50 team won't have a chance.

I'd say currently it takes a whole lot of strategy to overcome even a moderate difference in levels. And you're not going to find a team that won't use any strategy back, so it's going to come down to levels 90% of the time.

[borguk]

Outposts mean PvP, without the PvP element Ryzom wont attract the players and more importantly wont keep the players.

I played this game for 6 months, I felt in March that apart from grinding up some more I had been everywhere and pretty done all that I could.
Ive been on WoW now for 4 months and reached lvl 60 several weeks ago, without PvP I probably would have quit as it meant that I have played in this genre of game for 10 months.
But I havent and if outposts were live now I wouldnt be quittting Ryzom either.

The ultimate of object of any good mmorg is to give the player the levelling without the grind, this is something that I learned from both wow and planetside.

Also this isnt an RP unless you choose it to be, Im sure they will introduce PvP in the same manner.

[vinnyq]

This is true only if the 100 team is fighting very stupidly. If they have their act together at all the lvl 50 team won't have a chance.

I'd say currently it takes a whole lot of strategy to overcome even a moderate difference in levels. And you're not going to find a team that won't use any strategy back, so it's going to come down to levels 90% of the time.


All right, I'll concede this point.

But what if you have a team of mix lvl of players?

And what if you have at least some sort of balancing mechanism (like boxing classes with lightweight, heavy weight, etc).

Then would PvP be fun?

Or would you say that PvP is never fun because it involves the idea of one player hurting another player?

[rakeesh]

Making only a very select few zones PKable means that you cannot get back at the people who do it.

I don't quite understand this statement. If you can't get back at a person, how did they get you in the first place?

Enabling it everywhere except towns would make this game better because it would allow the players to police themselves, and would not cause havoc because noone has any reason to do it.

I think you've seen a better side of people then I have, then.

In my experience, there's absolutely no shortage of people who will indulge in 'thuggery' whenever and whenever it's available. And for the most part others won't do anything about it, even when they're capable of doing something about it because the PK-er hasn't fled to some safe zone to avoid the fight.

I also play EVE Online, which is a severely PvP-oriented game. And I have to say that except for some very notable exceptions, almost all the PvP I've dealt with has been people ganking me when I was helpless, running away when I wasn't (and telling me how much I suck while they did so), and only very rarely did they have any reason to attack me other than because they could.

In EVE, you'll have a group of people shut down entire areas, killing anyone who enters (because they can), and they'll be completely unopposed for a very long time because getting a group together to deal with them is like herding cats.

Like it or not, unrestricted PvP very much changes the tone of the game, and the kind of people who play it.

When I started playing Ryzom, I was under the impression that it was the "homins" trying to reclaim their homelands from the kitin that had devastated them. Is that no longer the case?

[vinnyq]

When I started playing Ryzom, I was under the impression that it was the "homins" trying to reclaim their homelands from the kitin that had devastated them. Is that no longer the case?


I think what Nevrax is going for is a balance of both. It is still the case, plus! here's a little PvP for the competitive gamers! wink wink nudge nudge.

They'll be missing a chunk of the gamers population if they don't at least have *some* form of PvP in the game, and face it, they want the subs from anywhere they can (and not just them, any mmorpg developers out there).

[sehracii]

All right, I'll concede this point.

But what if you have a team of mix lvl of players?

And what if you have at least some sort of balancing mechanism (like boxing classes with lightweight, heavy weight, etc).

Then would PvP be fun?

Or would you say that PvP is never fun because it involves the idea of one player hurting another player?

I'm very interested in PvP that isn't about levels. And I'm excited for outposts for that reason, I hope they can pull it off. Death by PvP doesn't concern me even now, even if it had DP it's a minor inconvenience. I just have no interest in participating in something that comes down to levels, especially when there's not even an incentive to do so other then "I can kill you so I will." There also needs to be some sort of end to conflicts, so it doesn't turn to back and forth killing that gets increasingly personal.

I wasn't posting to necessarily advocate PvP=Evil, just to point out why many people have absolutely no interest in it and even fear more entering Ryzom, as the only exposure so far is the level-based pointless killing.

But like I said, I hope outposts seriously mix things up! ;)

[quasar11]

"I bet you a team of lvl 50 can beat a team of lvl 100 if the lvl 50 team is well balanced and work well together as oppose to a lvl 100 team just trying to nuke the enemies to piece"

Have to disagree here. The games mechanics are such that 15 or 20 lvls is the most you can hope win against consistantly. Resistances and Defense Mods simply play too important a role...if the combatants have same gear.

[vinnyq]

Heh, ok seh. I started this thread mainly to try to allevate some concerns from some of the players of the PvP element that outposts will bring. You weren't my target victim then :)

Cept for this bit,


I just have no interest in participating in something that comes down to levels, especially when there's not even an incentive to do so other then "I can kill you so I will." There also needs to be some sort of end to conflicts, so it doesn't turn to back and forth killing that gets increasingly personal.


This is where I fear what people think PvP is all about. Players ganking each other and cycle of viciousness.

It doesn't have to be like that.

Done wrong, yes, it will be like that, but done right, it's something quite enjoyable.

Ok I am going to pull the GuildWars card :P

PvP can be just for PvP sake, as in just as a form of competition, a competive game. This is why I bring up the comparision to Pong and Chess. Gamers like to compete, it can (and even enhance), by role playing and context, but it doesn't need those at all for it to work.

Guildwars have Capture the Flag games, King of the Hill, defend the hero, assinate the leader, different type of PvP games, and they work.

Another game that I see pvp worked in?

Risk Your Life.

If you're interested in learning how PvP can work in a mmorpg, try out RYL.

In its purest form this is how it work:

They have 2 races, human and demon.

They have 5 islands. 1 island of each race is "newbie" island and restricted terrritory for that race, the other race can't enter those 2 islands.

The next 2 islands are race owned, where the major towns are for that race, for but not restricted to the other race, so the other race can invade these islands if they wish to.

The final 5th island is neutral territory, where both race have equal towns and footing on the island and it's a constant battle to take control.

Human are free to attack demons anywhere anytime and demons can attack humans anywhere anytime on 3 of the 5 islands (with 2 being race restricted).

You can intitiate dueling for member of the same race for PvP'ing players of the same race.

There's also an Arena where there's a constant battle for 3 towers between the 2 race. If a race have control of all 3 towers, any players of that race guarding the tower will earn points that they can use to buy rewards with.

They also have 0 dialogues between the 2 races in game. Demons can't talk to Human and vice versa.

So, althought RYL is pretty lacking in content and the mobs are lame and its PvE is basically a grind-fest, the PvP portion of the game worked quite well.

I give these examples not to advertise those non-ryzom games, but to show how PvP can work, if done correctly.

Now if Ryzom can have both a great PvE system (which I think it already does with its level of environment and mobs detailed and back story), and also have a great PvP system, it will be the dream mmorpg game of all time.

eta:
for quasar


"I bet you a team of lvl 50 can beat a team of lvl 100 if the lvl 50 team is well balanced and work well together as oppose to a lvl 100 team just trying to nuke the enemies to piece"

Have to disagree here. The games mechanics are such that 15 or 20 lvls is the most you can hope win against consistantly. Resistances and Defense Mods simply play too important a role...if the combatants have same gear.


I was a lvl 100 something and I killed a lvl 150+ nuker once, but that's with using invuln and antimagic shield aura and timing things correctly.

And I probably got lucky :D

[rakeesh]

I think what Nevrax is going for is a balance of both.

The post I responded to seemed to want PvP everywhere except towns. I'm also making the assumption that it would be non-consentual PvP, because otherwise there would be no point.

And I think a game like that, where I would have to be constantly watching over my shoulder when I'm doing a mission, where every blue dot is by default an enemy, is not the kind of game I'm interested in playing.

It doesn't matter that every PvP'er isn't necessarily a thirteen year old looking to work out their frustrations because they got picked on in school. Those are the only ones people are going to hear or talk about.

If PvP doesn't work out like that, I'm relieved, and I won't have anything to complain about. But my point is, that "balance" is extremely difficult to achieve.

[vinnyq]

Yeah, rakeesh, you beef is with armist, not me. He hijacked my thread :P But you two are welcome to duke it out in here about all-out pvp, I am still gonna read it:)

[petej]

Interestingly its not all about combat lvls with resists (magic) , my base resist from combat is only 137 (highest combat = 162 heal) but jewel boosted i get 250 (highest lvls as signature) with apropriate jewels

Im intrigued to know what this would actualy mean in a PvP situation but have yet to test it ,melee or range would still woop me but i could be a tougher nut to crack for a mage (if i could cover all resist groups used)

Has anyone tried to work out resists ?

gonna start another thread so not as to hijack..

Any replys here thx:-

http://ryzom.com/forum/showthread.php?t=14753

[gecker]

Hmm, these threads all sounds familiar. Oh yeah, it reminds me of when they implemented PvP in the roots in chapter 2. Of course PvP made Land of Umbra a lot easier to forage in, no more kitin patrols, but most everyone forgets about that.

So you say that a lvl 100 group would beat a lvl 50 group? What about the 100 NPCs the lvl 50 group spawned at their outpost because they're a bunch of high level forager/crafters and have lots of dapper to spend on defenses. Hmm, might make it a lot tougher to take over that outpost.

I remember during the invasion event in January, we had war camps (outposts) that needed to be defended. With 5 or 10 NPC guards it was hard to defend a camp, but when you spawned a 100 guards it was a different story.

At this point its really too early to pass judgement on outposts. Maybe once Nevrax gives us some more details and ATS is open, we will have a better idea of all the options available with outposts.

[vinnyq]

Ok I was going to ignore this example altogether because I think I am being too long winded already, but this is too good to pass up.


How would you feel if you were playing, say, KOTOR and you approach the final scene to face Darth Whats-his-name when suddenly some ubered up dark jedi player runs past you, slaughters your entire party, calls you a 'n00b' and then sprints on chuckling madly. It would totally interrupt and spoil the play experience.


Classic example here, grim, of you getting the wrong idea about PvP. This is not PvP, this is griefing, and should be treated as the ugly mutt that it is.

What would BE pvp, is if you're playing KOTOR, and Darth Whats-his-name is also another player that you have to fight against for the end game. Imagine that, think how manytime you would replay KOTOR if that's actually the case, and not just some computer AI. Because basically, once you figure out how to beat that AI, there are no more challenge.

edit: removing the "See?" because it made my argument ineffective, smell?

[grimjim]

>ooo grim, we gonna rassel?

Put up your dukes :)

>Ok, I agree that co-operative plays are also pretty awesome in its own right.
>And even thought traditional table top rpg games start out as competitive >play, they don't need to be. There're room for both in the genre.

Sometimes it is fun to have a PvP element, a character in the party who is a spy, or has some sort of secret that runs counter to the rest of the group. That's always a conscious decision on the part of the player and added for emotional and plotline significance.

>I do not, however, agree that rpg can only be about co-operative play and >players working together to experience a story together.

I'll agree.

But a successful and stable game with everyone enjoying themselves equally does. The potential from problems and conflict outside the game is too great otherwise.

>It can also be about players conflict. No this or that is better, just different >style of players interaction, whatever you're in the mood for. You can and >should roleplay enemies against other players, and also as friends. Don't >know why you would limit it to players against the GMs/Game.

I'm trying to demonstrate how you build up from a traditional tabletop (or single player CRPG) situation to the MMORPG one. RPGs come from an entirely different paradigm to conventional board games or competitive games. Part of the reason they are/were feted by educators as tools for teaching gifted children.

>And speaking of context, yes, it'll be the highest form of PvP when it's in >context, where you are or pretending you are fighting for something. But >doesn't this still gives the argument that PvP isn't the devil? And that if you >just dislike PvP because of its competive nature and doesn't have context to >go with it, then you're being a tad unreasonable?

I dislike it for the competetive part, for the fact it causes strife and for the fact it will attract/perpetuate the kind of players who are the antithesis of the current cooperative, friendly and RP literate community.

From long and bitter experience I know what once you start pitting players against players the bitterness and recrimination starts. Hell, even in the FPS games you mentioned you'll see accusations (founded or not) of cheating, camping, lag exploitation, spawn camping etc etc. The competetive, aggressive play, brings out the absolute worst in people.

>This is true only if you have 2 guys holding sticks and standing there >whacking each other. But if you introduce only a tad more variety in skills >and number of moving parts (e.g. team vs team, invuln and auras, healing, >affliction, etc), then strategy will come into play. It won't just be about >number crunching. I bet you a team of lvl 50 can beat a team of lvl 100 if >the lvl 50 team is well balanced and work well together as oppose to a lvl 100 >team just trying to nuke the enemies to piece.

In the current game this isn't true.

1 - Nuking trumps everything else.
2 - Everyone pretty much has the same skill set, at least in terms of those that have a major influence on the battles.

As has been said elsewhere, 20 level difference the the winner is pretty much preordained.

>PvP don't makes enemies of friends, *people* make enemies of friends. >TYVM HAHAHAHAHHAHAHA![/QUOTE]

>.<

OK, this smacks of the argument used to excuse gun ownership in the colonies.

To which my argument is... PvP may not make people act like w*nkers, but it makes it a DAMN sight easier for them to do so.

[grimjim]

"Classic example here, grim, of you getting the wrong idea about PvP. This is not PvP, this is griefing, and be treated as the ugly mutt that it is."

If you think anything different is going to happen, then you have the wrong idea about PvP :)

"What would BE pvp, is if you're playing KOTOR, and Darth Whats-his-name is also another player that you have to fight against for the end game. Imagine that, think how manytime you would replay KOTOR if that's actually the case, and not just some computer AI. Because basically, once you figure out how to beat that AI, there are no more challenge. See?"

Having someone called "Darth_SlapNutz" prancing around my corpse crowing does not add to my playing experience.

Sorry.

[vinnyq]

Oh you bore :P

Ok, agrument made on both sides, all guns are out, nothing left to be said, yadiya, thread locked (pretend it is), end of discussion, take your stand as you see fit.

*climbs off soap box*

[sehracii]

group would beat a lvl 50 group? What about the 100 NPCs the lvl 50 group spawned at their outpost because they're a bunch of high level forager/crafters and have lots of dapper to spend on defenses. Hmm, might make it a lot tougher to take over that outpost.



Yeah, I'm looking forward to that aspect. My foraging is my highest level so it's where I personally could make the most difference.

Still though, there's a lot to consider. What's to stop five high level nukers from attacking my guild's outpost 10 times? Say they take out 10 NPC's each time. At worst they max their DP, but if they keep at it they finally break in and take it over. We lose the outpost AND millions of dapper...

At this point its really too early to pass judgement on outposts. Maybe once Nevrax gives us some more details and ATS is open, we will have a better idea of all the options available with outposts.


But that's what it comes down to, hehe. :rolleyes: We're all just guessing :confused:


Edit: Oops, off topic. I think there was an outpost thread (or three) somewhere.......

[vinnyq]

I don't know about you guys, but I am having a heck of a good time enjoying all these (healthy) "conflicts" today on the forum ...

*wink wink*

SCORES!!!!

[zhidao]

ah yes vinnyq. That`s a nice thread to read here, and also nice to see that Homins here on Aristotle have the same discussions and opinions about PvP as we on Leanon.
Interestingly the same arguments are apearring and are repeated again and again (perhaps with other words and examples though) (I feel like to read in our recent PvP thread thanks to xenofurs comment here :) ).

Well, all the problems with PvP can finally reduced to some few statements. (Even though they appear quite long caused by explaining things).

First, PvP is necessary as it brings the kind of competition a lot of Homins are looking for.
The competition of challenging an other brain and its strategics preferably in fight.
Those people are satisfied with any form of PvP because they just wish that competition. This statement includes most of those who are speaking in favour of PvP.

On the contrary there are people who are not playing here as they wish the competition, perhaps even want to escape from the rl competition they have to face each day and want to work with other Homins together for a greater meaning.The true RP - working together to defeat an Enemy.
Those people do not hate PvP itself because they of course grand it to Homins loving it.
But they need good reasons for killing a fellow homin. An explanation if you want. SoR does not offer any reason for killing a Homin yet, so this group won`t accept the current PvP system neither any following System that does not offer the good reason for war between Homins.
Those Homins will also judge PKler and call them bandits of course, as they are only that (because the lack of a reason for PvP).

The discussions and Problems with PvP will rise from any interaction between those 2 groups.
And 1 further thing needs to be considered. In PvP conflict where both groups meet each other, there is on side (the PvP friends) who have control about what shall happen, because there action starts the conflict. No one who don`t like senseless PvP has the opportunity to avoid it, but the PvP friend is capable to not interfere those Homins with PvP.

Well, the challenge for Nevrax and any other publisher of games is clearly to bring those two groups together (or concentrate on one of them), especially if you consider that a good amount of Homins belong to the second group or to the first one but would appreciated a good reason as well. Especially the Outposts offer great potential to reach the heaven of symbiosis of those two groups which not even WOW was able to create at the end.

I dare to guarantee that with a good system that offers logical and story-based reasons for PvP (here in combination with Outposts) both groups will have lots of fun with that feature.
On the contrary, if there will be a lack of reason in that upcoming feature, you will have 1 group satisfied and one group disappointed and frustrated, complaining about the game and finally leaving.

But, unfortunately no clue of information points even in the direction that Nevrax plans to do in this direction.
It appears unbelieveable that someone like David who has quite good dreams up to know have overseen that interrelation explained here - but it appears to be so up to know.

Well, I pray for a good outcome of the PvP question and that Nevrax finally reaches the unbelieveable: A feature with PvP bearable by both sides of the coin. As this is the only thing we can do at the moment. Unfortunately but fact.

That`s for now.

[grimjim]

"First, PvP is necessary as it brings the kind of competition a lot of Homins are looking for.
The competition of challenging an other brain and its strategics preferably in fight.
Those people are satisfied with any form of PvP because they just wish that competition. This statement includes most of those who are speaking in favour of PvP."

Couldn't this desire for conflict against another person also be sated by GM controlled, rather than just spawned, mobs and enemies?

[vinnyq]

Hullo zhidao! You guys called PvP the "devil" too? OMG!!!!

hehe j/k, ty for your views from the other server.

Couldn't this desire for conflict against another person also be sated by GM controlled, rather than just spawned, mobs and enemies?

Sure, but the nature of the conflict is different. One is player vs player, and the other is player vs a god-like entity. There're fun to be had in both.

I really think the difference between me and you, grim, boils down to this:

You: avoid the bad all together by not allowing for it to happen.
Me: bring on the bad with the good, because the good is oh so good when it is good.

Agree?

[grimjim]

Hullo zhidao! You guys called PvP the "devil" too? OMG!!!!

hehe j/k, ty for your views from the other server.



Sure, but the nature of the conflict is different. One is player vs player, and the other is player vs a god-like entity. There're fun to be had in both.

I really think the difference between me and you, grim, boils down to this:

You: avoid the bad all together by not allowing for it to happen.
Me: bring on the bad with the good, because the good is oh so good when it is good.

Agree?

Yep, I'd say that's the difference.

But if even a little cianide turns up in my pint of milk, I'm not going to drink it ;)

[vinnyq]

Yep, I'd say that's the difference.

But if even a little cianide turns up in my pint of milk, I'm not going to drink it ;)

It could be cianide, but it could also be chocolate!

lol nm bad come-back metaphore.

How about, it might give you a stomach ache, but it tastes so friggin good!

[larwood]

It could be cianide, but it could also be chocolate!

lol nm bad come-back metaphore.

How about, it might give you a stomach ache, but it tastes so friggin good!



lol.. what doesnt kill us only makes us stronger right? :)

(i drink cianide with my Wheaties™)

[xenofur]

actually, as i said in another thread, i'm observing a very small group fighting pvp with bared fangs and claws even when there is no chance of it not being implemented and i still stand by something i said on the german forums: the citizens of arispotle are way better suited for accepting pvp than those of leanon, simply through the fact that even the anti-pvp manage to use valid arguments instead of "omg, you traitor, the whole server shall despise you and turn away on seeing your face"
(except for that 1337 kiddy insult, grimjim, that was a really low insult and something i would have never expected from you <_<)

on-topic: me and my clan were always a tight-knit group of individuals who who grew up in a full-pvp strategy game and were always stacked against the odds, even going so far as to defeat the biggest player-fleet in the game with words. it was a very nice way of playing that allowed us to see ourselves as heroes without actually ruining someone's day. it is this kind of gameplay that i crave in a pvp environment and as such i can only wish to have an uberguild of gankers(the seeds for several are already set on leanon *g*) in order to give us a goal. =)

[grimjim]

"(except for that 1337 kiddy insult, grimjim, that was a really low insult and something i would have never expected from you <_<)"

It's the truth as I observe it and representative of every brush with PvP I've had in any MMO.

Including this one.

Though Neun rescued it by turning on some roleplay charm even though he wasn't directly involved.

In my experience, those types of inadequetes are the types it appeals the most to.

YMMV

[zhidao]

Well xenofur, I explained it quite often that beeing treated as a traitor after anouncing to participated in PvP and knock down whoever the traitor considers to be suiteable to be knocked down is a RP based reaction. It was quite a pleasure to see that many Homins on our Server participated and share that kind of thinking and act accordingly. I indeed just spoke out what needs to come after an announcing of that kind.
I remember that grimjin or vinnyq mentioned such a reaction somewhere else as beeing a suiteable and a correct reaction from the non PvPler against those who just do bad PvP or better known as PK or any other kind of limitation which may be not bearable by the majority of Hominkind. Only difference, we lived it while here they just speak about because on Aristotle may not be a reason to react in that manner.

By the way, vinnyq as I said people here and on Leanon have quite similar opinions. At least it seems so. We have those who overpraise PvP into the sky with equal arguments you do here, we have those who hate PvP and consider it as evil with similar reasons as you here and also those who just want to see a sense in PvP and do accept it only under these cercumstances. That`s way I said our discussion here appears quite similar to ours. Perhaps here I find a lack on unsuiteable or misworded posts
which courses only increase in heat of argumentation but that`s all. ;)

[quasar11]

I've tried more than once to steer this conversation from PVP vs no PVP to consentual vs Non-consentual PVP. It's obvious PVP can't be avoided in some form almost every game has it. But there can be only one reason to advocate non-consentual and thats because you plan to do something to other people they won't like. I could care less how much PVP goes on. I don't begrudge you what I consider a waste of the developer time. Why, it's simple you pay for this game just like I do. You're entitled to a game you enjoy just as much as I am.
But, when your "fun" infringed on mine then I have an issue. If all you want is the joy of stalking another mind then why can't you be happy hunting someone with a like mind that wants to. Why, must you insist on preying on those who don't want to be bothered.

If those who advocate PVP would simply be willing to concede on this one point you'd get no more argument from me and most of the rest of the community. This could be settled and we could all look forward to enjoying the game as we each want to play it. IF you can't agree to this I have to ask why. Why do I have to be included against my will for you to have fun?

[vinnyq]

fyi: I am against non-consensual pvp (well non-consensual anything actually :P)

But here's a test:

- Do you considered it concentual PvP if a few areas in the game (not all area, just a few) are marked PvP, and that if you entered these area, you will receive warnings, and then be attackable?

- Do you considered it concentual PvP if buy owning an Outpost, you're also accepting the fact that you will have to fight for the Outpost if it is threaten by other players?

[quasar11]

1. No, because high lvl diggers are forced to go there in other to get certain mats. Were those mats available somewhere else perhaps at a slower drop rate that would constitute a choice. As it is they are only available in PVP zones so no it's not consentual.

2. Certainly not, I joined this game to "save the world from the Kitin menace" I don't see how fighting my fellow Homin accomplishes this. I'm I willing to fight to maintain an Outpost? Heck yeah! Any time day or night if that's whatever it takes. But, my fight is with the kitins they are what I came here to fight. If some guild wants to challenge i'm game for that too. But, it should be my choice. That's the definition of consentual.

[vinnyq]

1. No, because high lvl diggers are forced to go there in other to get certain mats. Were those mats available somewhere else perhaps at a slower drop rate that would constitute a choice. As it is they are only available in PVP zones so no it's not consentual.


There are other PR that are non-pvp. E.G. the Abyss, Sunken City, etc. You only like the PvP PR I think, because it is easier to find mats and safer.


2. Certainly not, I joined this game to "save the world from the Kitin menace" I don't see how fighting my fellow Homin accomplishes this. I'm I willing to fight to maintain an Outpost? Heck yeah! Any time day or night if that's whatever it takes. But, my fight is with the kitins they are what I came here to fight. If some guild wants to challenge i'm game for that too. But, it should be my choice. That's the definition of consentual.

Ah, but here's the thing. You don't have to actually *own* an Outpost. It isn't part of "Kitin Invasion", at least for now.

If it isn't obvious, my answer to the 2 questions I posted is that, Yes, those form of PvP are concentual.

[quasar11]

then obviously we disagree at least on point 2 at the least...

[zhidao]

Ah thats interesting. Finally, somehow who explains my thoughts as I would do myself, thanks quasar11.

I of course agree point 1 is non-concentual.

Point two can be both indeed. You will need to differ there vinnyq.

Non-Concentual if anyone just capture my owned OP just for a nice feature the capturing guild won`t do without (the material way of thinking) or capture just for the challenge of PvP itself. That will lead to the explained on side fun other side frustration.

It will be concentual indeed if there is a greater meaning behind capturing. This can be for example that the peace between Karavan and Kami nations start to waggle and the nations compete for the lands of Atys to gain more power. (The story at least keep this possibility open I think).
That fyros won`t attack an op run by guilds loyal to Zorai or Fyros is out of question logically (at least not without an imensive loss of fame with both fractions as thats betrayal). As for guilds loyal to Tryker or Matis I suppose those are not soo loyal to each other coming from past conflict between both. They may choose to attack all nations. Neutral guilds not loyal to any nation needs to be considered as enemies as soon as they capture an op in the lands or are get in the nations way in the roots.

I think of mission based capture the outposts (that also can mean attack an player leaded op of course sometime when missions of different nations cross each other) which now or than will lead to PvP as after all outposts beeing captured and missions lead you to the lands of an other nation you will faith the competition of a good PvP. One advantage of this is, that guilds will need to work for the right to get a mission to capture on of the most interesting outposts in q250er zones and especially prime roots. Gain a special kind of reputation as no nation will grand such an important mission to a new untested guild.
In this mission based way all outposts will get into view not only those few interesting ones.
That will be a good reason to encounter into PvP even for those who dislike this kind of fight itself and both sides will have fun.

This would be the most meaningful way indeed, and would offer fun and work for all of us for quite a period of time. The R2 will do the rest to keep us busy. And the best all players will have fun and not only one fraction.
I hope and suppose that David have a dream equal to that second point. And if not, well why should David alone have the capability to dream useful dreams, we all dream with him as we stay at his side, Here ón Atys. Don`t forget, only our imagination limits the reachable.

[filtern]

I have been wondering.. Whats the difference between Duel and PvP Challenge IG?

[vinnyq]

Ok, this has probably been said umpth thousands time already, but you guys need to convince me again why entering the Nexus and Umbra PR is not concentual PvP, where you know it is a PvP area and you are warned when you entered the area that you can be attacked.

Quas, wut you gotta to say to the fact that only Umbra PR is PvP, while you still have the Abyss, Wasteland, and Underspring as non-pvp area where you can get sup mats?

[grimjim]

Ok, this has probably been said umpth thousands time already, but you guys need to convince me again why entering the Nexus and Umbra PR is not concentual PvP, where you know it is a PvP area and you are warned when you entered the area that you can be attacked.

Quas, wut you gotta to say to the fact that only Umbra PR is PvP, while you still have the Abyss, Wasteland, and Underspring as non-pvp area where you can get sup mats?

For the same reason me walking back from the pub once it closes isn't consent to being mugged :)

Yeah, someone can attack me at any moment, no, I don't want them to.

:)

[xenofur]

if you walk through an area that is known for a high crimerate and indeed shows up a warning as soon as you enter it then it is consentual, else you'd call a taxi to avoid it

[zhidao]

Ah ok, explanation of that, hehe every time a pleasure to type that down here.

Well, first, I need to admit that my translation of concentual wasn`t as good as it should be as it was typed not correct earlier in the thread.
Your are absolutely right with saying that the rootsPvP is consensual for the given explanation.
It is an area declared to be free of any law of the 4 nations. Reasons for that can be seen in chapter two announcement.
So anyone who dare to enter Umbra an Nexus knows and accepts this given situation of risking the possibility to meet up Homin Bandits, or better someone who might kill you there without warning. That is a simple fact against which nobody could give an argument here. (If we Homins want that or not isn`t subject of consideration here, we have to deal with this situation now)

But now the problem with these circumstances. Every time such a murder happens, a crime against the Homin nations take place and should have consequenses.
Unfortunately there is a lack of consequenses here on Atys for such actions. Worse is, that those murderers expect to be treated as common homins elsewhere on Atys (in non-PvP zones), hopes for heal if beeing killed, hopes for getting equipment and levelpartners, demands to be allowed to enter the cities of hominkind, wants kind discussionpartners and so on.
We had discussions about bandit life recently on leanon forum.
But here is the discrepancy in the situation. You cannot kill members of Homin nations in a law-free zone and expect to be treated as law-abiding Homin elsewhere among homin civilisation.
Just an example. If you kill a human on the law-free sea you cannot expect that the nation/s of earth would hesitate to punish you if they can proof that you have commited the crime as the victim belongs to a nation that have laws and as soon as you dare to cross there border you will be arrested.
It`s the same here on Atys.

Because of these lack of consequences at the moment, discussions about PvP arise again and again because Homins who are not friends of that kind of fight and do not react with PvP with a smile in there faces cannot understand and even accept that they are killed in form of murder.

Further, there is no reason for Homins of different nations to kill each other at the moment as the reason is not given yet.
The inter-nation-conflict could be another explanation for PvP in Umbra (beside funevents of PvP Friends of course).
Exceptions may arise in case of war between guilds, but this should usually not inflict other Homins (accidents may happen but can be treated accordingly).
Don`t forget, there is peace between the fractions and nations, at least for now. Our enemy is still the kitin.

What concerns the region itself, you should not forget that Umbra has the only 150er and 2 of 3 200er regions and harvester of a given quality should go into the region they belong to, to spray extraction amounts over the regions and reduce reduction of the Kamitoleranz to the possible minimum.
(I deliberately did not mention the superspots down there as they are there to cause conflict about property - still the easiest form of creating discrepancies is to give people material everyone claims to be their own instead of sharing it - the dominate principle of materialism which controls most Humans).

I hope this makes the problem around Umbra a bit more visible to those who love PvP.

[iwojimmy]

Another game that I see pvp worked in?

Risk Your Life.

If you're interested in learning how PvP can work in a mmorpg, try out RYL.

In its purest form this is how it work:

They have 2 races, human and demon.

They have 5 islands. 1 island of each race is "newbie" island and restricted terrritory for that race, the other race can't enter those 2 islands.

The next 2 islands are race owned, where the major towns are for that race, for but not restricted to the other race, so the other race can invade these islands if they wish to.

The final 5th island is neutral territory, where both race have equal towns and footing on the island and it's a constant battle to take control.

Human are free to attack demons anywhere anytime and demons can attack humans anywhere anytime on 3 of the 5 islands (with 2 being race restricted).

You can intitiate dueling for member of the same race for PvP'ing players of the same race.

There's also an Arena where there's a constant battle for 3 towers between the 2 race. If a race have control of all 3 towers, any players of that race guarding the tower will earn points that they can use to buy rewards with.

They also have 0 dialogues between the 2 races in game. Demons can't talk to Human and vice versa.

So, althought RYL is pretty lacking in content and the mobs are lame and its PvE is basically a grind-fest, the PvP portion of the game worked quite well.



dont know how much RYL evolved from when I was in the beta tests, but combat on the contested island was like a slideshow, only the area effect nukers, and healers could achieve anything, and while I was trying to get some levels on the advanced island of my race (near its starter city), some high level enemies kept coming over and nuking us.. sure, if the entire player base got together, and had some higher levels passing through help out, we could drive them away, until they respawned and came back.
Dont try to tell me RYL PvP is a worthwhile model.
the player shop was nice tho :P

[iwojimmy]

. Neutral guilds not loyal to any nation needs to be considered as enemies as soon as they capture an op in the lands or are get in the nations way in the roots.

Why is that ?
I want to be a Homin Champion, not a Kami or Karavan Champion.

How is this for an idea..Non concensual(sp?) PvP.. but with consequences :)

the way it works is.. the attacker MUST formally challenge/say they are attacking.. no stealth attacks allowed.. the challenged party has the opportunity to put on their amps/armour etc, and then say if they are willing or not. Even if they arent willing, the attacker can cancel or continue, but if the challenger wins, their fame is affected, with all the factions that victim has fame with..( If the defender wins, good on them :D ) I like the idea of it being proportional to the victims fame - so if you kill someone beloved of the trykers, you will get a significant fame penalty with the trykers, you may even get fame bonuses if your victim has negative fame (how to get in good with the Woven Bridles :D ) however this means that new players can be picked on with relative impunity.
For fully consenting duels/battles, no penalty would be incurred. If the Griefers cant get their kicks without stealth attacks, maybe have a 'post-death' option..
/target "person who just killed me" /report as murderer.. kind of thing :P

[zhidao]

hehe iwojimmy,
you are first a homin champion as kami and karavan was not meant to have an overall role in the first place. Their role is in backround.

Neutral does refer to no loyalty to any of the 4 races.
Look, capturing an op in witherings without their agreement (meaning without a mission of them) should annoy the Zorai a little bit or at least give them alert that conquerers have entered the land (wether the capture took place because of a mission from Matis or without mission is not very interesting then). Fame will get lost with loyal tribes of Zorai, with Zorai themselves, perhaps with Fyros and Kami too the rate of loosing fame could differ between those groups.

I have just given a clue of a possibility how the Outpost-PvP could get a little sense based on story.

I mentioned earlier, that my translation of consensual was wrong and I don`t mean that at all just to make that clear.
I think consensual PvP make only sense between honorable Homins who want to have a small challenge or revange for something in an honorable way.

Things like outpost should get an overall meaning behind them. So I explained, that it should be missionbased, and PvP regulates about crossing of missions of different nations.
I didn`t want to go too deep into that possible way as the post would have got too long to be read of anyone. If someone wish it I will do so of course. Behind the idea is a simple goal. Giving both groups of PvP fractions -the lovers of PvP and those who dislike it - that what they want.
Good PvP to the lovers, and a good reason for it to those who dislike it. I believe, that both groups will so find much fun in the complete system and will go involved even deeper into the mystic story of the Saga of Ryzom (if that could ever be possible ;) ) . For me it appears to be that what is called "the way of the kings" in German. It might be right might be wrong, well its imagination at all atm. ;)

[vinnyq]

dont know how much RYL evolved from when I was in the beta tests, but combat on the contested island was like a slideshow, only the area effect nukers, and healers could achieve anything, and while I was trying to get some levels on the advanced island of my race (near its starter city), some high level enemies kept coming over and nuking us.. sure, if the entire player base got together, and had some higher levels passing through help out, we could drive them away, until they respawned and came back.
Dont try to tell me RYL PvP is a worthwhile model.
the player shop was nice tho :P

When I beta'ed it, it was pretty smooth. And I played as a ranger and an assasin. I do my fair share of killing also ;)

and Mages are totally helpless if they come upon a meleer with netting ability.

And the first time I saw a demon invasion while I was playing human, I laughed out loud and almost peed my pants. Then I jumped in the fun to try to beat them back.

The cool thing here is I dont get get any penalty if I died from the hand of another player. They have a separte xp/fame system for killing and dying from PvP from the xp system in PvE.

[vutescu]

I bet you a team of lvl 50 can beat a team of lvl 100 if the lvl 50 team is well balanced and work well together as oppose to a lvl 100 team just trying to nuke the enemies to piece.
But keeping proportions, a level 75 team would not be able to beat a lev 125 team. No matter how idiotic they would act. At level 75 you have about 1500 HP assuming ur wearing HP gear. A lev 125 nuke is doing 400 damage without amps. With 2x spell and amps, can blast a player to pieces in a single hit.


what is wrong with having competition in an RPG? isnt that what the online setting is for? to have competition and a social settting??????? You can call a competition when all the players starts in the same time, in the same conditions. You are obviously confused about what RPG means. It stands for Role-Play Game. You have to pretend that you are a character in game and to act like you think that character would. This is how your character would react? Would walk around in a killing spree? This is not RP. This is psycho. If you want to RP a psycho, note that you should delete it after the first death. Or maybe in your RP your character can do a lot of crimes and escape unpunished?
And btw, the homins here are the survivers of a kitin masacre. Usually this kind of people are disgusted of violence. ("we had enough blood on our hands")


Or would you say that PvP is never fun because it involves the idea of one player hurting another player? The main purpose of the games is *supposed* to be educational. But as long as sex and violence ar the best sold articles on any market, the games are following the line. Yes. The ideea of a human killing another human is what make me to be against pvp.
I've played Starcraft, Warcraft and other RTS's online. There you are fighting with units. Like in chess. Here you are fighting with a toon that represents - basically - the person from the other comp. My toon is me. And you come to hurt me. This sure generate bad feelings, no matter who wins. If you are choosing an oriented PvP game, is ok, even is called RPG. But to choose a RPG and suddenly to be in a middle of a conflict... hmm...


And I think a game like that, where I would have to be constantly watching over my shoulder when I'm doing a mission, where every blue dot is by default an enemy, is not the kind of game I'm interested in playing.
It doesn't matter that every PvP'er isn't necessarily a thirteen year old looking to work out their frustrations because they got picked on in school. Those are the only ones people are going to hear or talk about.
100% agree.


Do you considered it concentual PvP if buy owning an Outpost, you're also accepting the fact that you will have to fight for the Outpost if it is threaten by other players?
So you ask me if i'm willing to become a target because I own someting? The ownership makes me a target? The next step is to kill me for my sword or my armor.

[vinnyq]

Oh boy, I am so going to rip you a new one vut :)

But keeping proportions, a level 75 team would not be able to beat a lev 125 team. No matter how idiotic they would act. At level 75 you have about 1500 HP assuming ur wearing HP gear. A lev 125 nuke is doing 400 damage without amps. With 2x spell and amps, can blast a player to pieces in a single hit.


All right, I concede this point already! Uncle! Don't hurt me!


You can call a competition when all the players starts in the same time, in the same conditions. You are obviously confused about what RPG means. It stands for Role-Play Game. You have to pretend that you are a character in game and to act like you think that character would.

Roleplaying to me just mean you assumed the role of another character (i.e. a toon called "Fyrx" for a game). Having it be competive playing or co-operativing playing is irrelevant to the defninition. See, when I play counter-strike, I consider myself roleplaying a terrorist or a counter-terrorist. Is that wrong?

What you are talking about, I think, is play-acting, traditional roleplaying, rpg. Sure, role playing games might have start out that way, where players must go beyond the game mechanic and use their imagination to roleplay their characters, but I don't think it has to be taken to that extend for it to be considered "role playing" now-aday (you can thanks Dungeoun Hack and Final Fantasy for that :P).

Maybe what they should have done is come up with another accronym for the rpg games that came after the traditional D&D games. Leave "RPG" to the play actors, and come up with a new term for games like Final Fantasy and Fallout, maybe "QG" for quests games :P

But you get the point I am trying to make, I hope.


The main purpose of the games is *supposed* to be educational. But as long as sex and violence ar the best sold articles on any market, the games are following the line. Yes. The ideea of a human killing another human is what make me to be against pvp.


I didn't know that! Games are supposed to be educational? I thought games are supposed to be fun! I have been fooled :(


So you ask me if i'm willing to become a target because I own someting? The ownership makes me a target? The next step is to kill me for my sword or my armor.

I can't loot you for your sword and armor. But I can fight you for the Outposts. Owning a sword and armor is not concentual pvp because there's NO PVP'ing for sword and armor. We all know this.

I am not asking if you're willing to become a target because you own something. I am asking if you think it's concentual (as in you agree) to take part in PvP, knowing that owning an Outpost means other people can fight you for it.

That, to me, is concentual.

Is it a good or bad idea that Nevrax is forcing it to be "concentual pvp"? that's for you to decide, but it's a different debate altogether.

[petej]

Originaly posted by vutescu

And btw, the homins here are the survivers of a kitin masacre. Usually this kind of people are disgusted of violence. ("we had enough blood on our hands")

Earth is invaded by aliens who do their best to wipe out humankind , all the nations of the world gear thier economys to produce massive amounts of weapons and armour to combat the invaders. All races stand side by side in this epic strugle and eventualy humankind prevails but the planet is left decimated with few resources. The Russians know theres a rich oil deposit in Romania and decide to build an outpost there so they can more easily exploit those resources....

Will the Romanians welcome them with open arms and let them take resources they sorely need for themselves or take up their plentifull weapons again and fight for what is theirs ?

(sorry if ive made this too personal its not my intention to cause offence , but to illustrate a point in a "real-world" context)

[madnak]

if you walk through an area that is known for a high crimerate and indeed shows up a warning as soon as you enter it then it is consentual, else you'd call a taxi to avoid it

That's absurd. Consent means nothing if that's true. If I'm walking down the street that doesn't mean I want to be attacked. Personally I live in Brooklyn and sometimes I do walk through "risky" areas for one reason or another (for one thing I can't exactly afford to take the taxi everywhere I go). That doesn't mean I'm "asking for anything I get." Honestly. Some people have to live in those areas because of income.

Understanding the risk is not the same as giving consent.

[grimjim]

>Roleplaying to me just mean you assumed the role of another character (i.e. >a toon called "Fyrx" for a game). Having it be competive playing or >co-operativing playing is irrelevant to the defninition. See, when I play >counter-strike, I consider myself roleplaying a terrorist or a counter-terrorist. >Is that wrong?

Yep, that's not roleplaying.
That's no different to choosing Chun-Li or Guile.
You're not playing a role, you're selecting a set of attributes.
In TTRPG terms that would be called 'Roll-playing' rather than 'Role-playing', EG: Nothing matters apart from results, you tweak your characters and make decisions based on 'winning' not on character progression or background.

>What you are talking about, I think, is play-acting, traditional roleplaying, >rpg. Sure, role playing games might have start out that way, where players >must go beyond the game mechanic and use their imagination to roleplay >their characters, but I don't think it has to be taken to that extend for it to >be considered "role playing" now-aday (you can thanks Dungeoun Hack and >Final Fantasy for that :P).

Neither of those, even Final Fantasy, which I adore, is really role-playing. The course is largely pre-determined, you're playing out a story, not playing a role. Even the most advanced standard CRPGs that do have story trees and multiple endings fail on this score.

MMORPGs don't have to, since they're constantly developed, tweaked and added to they can respond to player actions more like a proper RPG creating greater immersion and involvement.

>Maybe what they should have done is come up with another accronym for >the rpg games that came after the traditional D&D games. Leave "RPG" to >the play actors, and come up with a new term for games like Final Fantasy >and Fallout, maybe "QG" for quests games :P

That's how the differentiation CRPG and TTRPG have come about, though TTRPGs came first and should hold the title you know :) The differentiation in naming conventions came about in Japan where CRPGs had a much bigger dominance.

'play acting' as you call it, is a much richer and more involving experience.

[quasar11]

Earth is invaded by aliens who do their best to wipe out humankind , all the nations of the world gear thier economys to produce massive amounts of weapons and armour to combat the invaders. All races stand side by side in this epic strugle and eventualy humankind prevails but the planet is left decimated with few resources. The Russians know theres a rich oil deposit in Romania and decide to build an outpost there so they can more easily exploit those resources....

Will the Romanians welcome them with open arms and let them take resources they sorely need for themselves or take up their plentifull weapons again and fight for what is theirs ?

(sorry if ive made this too personal its not my intention to cause offence , but to illustrate a point in a "real-world" context)

You've made my point precisely...and I think the end result will be the same in this game. Allowing the russians<insert uberguilds> to just claim and control large territories will have the same effect on alot of folks in this game. They'll lead to anger and hostility, but many can't or won't fight they'll just leave...

On the other hand if the Russians established a base in order to protect the Romanians from a new Alien threat they could work together to defeat it. The community becomes stronger...

[mmatto]

With 2x spell and amps, can blast a player to pieces in a single hit.


No they can't. Try it out if you don't believe.

[morzyr]

You guys think its going to be easyer to get a res after some months with ouposts up?
You think is going to be easyer to find someone to team with?

Just look how players react on Aen then a other guilds killsteal her over and over.

The friendlyness we all know in atys is going to change redical i think just becuse some few Wanabe evil chars want to try play CS on a system there 2 of 4 the major skills are nocombat.

Ryzom don't have the player mass to make PvP this happen in a good way yet.

Im sorry, just abit tierd of all this talk about pvp then so very few are instrested in the one we alread got ingame.

Tyr.

[mmatto]

You guys think its going to be easyer to get a res after some months with ouposts up?
You think is going to be easyer to find someone to team with?


What would happen if Nevrax announced that Outposts are canceled?

[filtern]

No they can't. Try it out if you don't believe.

True, couldnt even do this to a player with 260 hp (he accedentaly dueled me I think, I were digging east of yrk) and 5* purple jugs I do in 3, sometimes 2 hits.

But PvP in general, I think this will be optinal to participate in. So the Homins that never want to get involved in the outpostpart, wont be. I know Homins that never touch non-aggro mobs, and couldnt imagine to touch another homin (in an aggro way :D )

[morzyr]

What would happen if Nevrax announced that Outposts are canceled?

Lol like they done a year now?
No seriusly, all i heard is stories about them from a PVP lover, and seen some screenshots.
But if them are as hi say just only made for Guild vs Guild and no higher goals like a stand against Kitins or have any purpus for harverster or crafters they are totaly waste in my mind.

[vutescu]

Sorry for not respecting the thread, I tought this need a clarification.

The Russians know theres a rich oil deposit in Romania and decide to build an outpost there so they can more easily exploit those resources....
Will the Romanians welcome them with open arms and let them take resources they sorely need for themselves or take up their plentifull weapons again and fight for what is theirs ?

LOL. You don't need to escuse. That's why the romanians hate the russians.
(For the ones who don't know, is exactly what happened)
Well, if you count my whole country population you will realise that the number of people is smaller than the number of soldiers in the russian army. At that time was a matter of life and death - Cold War wasnt over yet - and there were only 2 choice to made. To accept russian toutelage (aka giving them oil, gold, meat, cereals, ore and womans) or to fight a losing battle.
Well... that's why are still pipes connection Romania and Russia.
In exchange we still can call ouselves a country and a nation. A fair trade I guess.

[petej]

Oh , then my analogy was far closer to RL than i imagined :o

In game you will be able to make alliances and hopefully drive them out (should you wish) and reclaim what should be yours -you could also allie with them of cause

Id also expect a "Land grab" in the PR when outposts come in but like PR theres nothing to say a PvP area has to be played that way (the PvP zones on Arispotle have never been plagued by PKing gankers afaik) , it may turn out that each guild takes one outpost and is satisfied with that , Outpost combat may be limited (by the guilds themselves) to Guilds v NPC/Hostile mob owned outposts

We will only know for sure once it is in

[vutescu]

Oh , then my analogy was far closer to RL than i imagined :o


I tought you know the... hmm... incident. The example was too close of reality and historical facts to make me to think othervise.

We will only know for sure once it is in

*nods

[vinnyq]

all right Jyudas, I think I am going to change my mind some what about PVP.

The current situation is what you were warning me about wasn't it?

*smacks forehead*

[grimjim]

all right Jyudas, I think I am going to change my mind some what about PVP.

The current situation is what you were warning me about wasn't it?

*smacks forehead*

Pretty much, yeah.

The bounty hunting idea is a good one, but open to abuse and with no real consequences.

[kyesmith]

Well i would post what i think, but whats the point i would just get jumped on and corrected......

[vinnyq]

Well i would post what i think, but whats the point i would just get jumped on and corrected......

geez Kye, post away. Since when are you so timid?

[kyesmith]

I personally think PvP is the long needed content to amuse lvl 250 players, at the moment you reach 250 well done gratz, now what to do.....
grind another tree to 250 when the only tree you get bonuses for getting to 250 are harvest, having pvp is one of the benifits of being lvl 250 other wise people will leave, i personally dont think pvp is gunna save ryzom but it sure livens it up.....

[szoszi]

Just an idea (sorry if it came up before):

What about in PvP areas compass don't show players? Then PvP would be about skill, as a lower level group can ambush a bunch of higher lvl players. Then they can win with the element of suprise.

Opinions?

bye, blondy

[kyesmith]

Just an idea (sorry if it came up before):

What about in PvP areas compass don't show players? Then PvP would be about skill, as a lower level group can ambush a bunch of higher lvl players. Then they can win with the element of suprise.

Opinions?

bye, blondy

my point is that high lvl players have no benifits, maybe removing them wud be a good idea, but also stops diggers knowing who is comming :o

[basicart]

all huddle up tight and just try to look like 1 blue dot :D

[sofiaoak]

I don't know how to say this, but here it goes.

Liking someting, like PvP, is about peoples own needs and feelings. I don't say, that PvP can't be fun, just that what's fun to others, isn't always fun to someone else. People playes games for different reasons, even same games, so there is allways different opinions.

I don't like ever be part of PvP, because it's not fun to me. I don't like the PvP attitude, what is competitive and what creates negative atmosphere. I don't like the need of balance what PvP creates in games. I don't like the bad language what is used in PvP.

I like creating someting and be with friends. I like to be a hero, who advetures around fantasy world. I like to be part of community with purpose. Hero don't have need to prove anyting, they help others without profit, reward or glory. I like to be like the hero in adventure books, go in the journey, have fun and challenges.

[toneh]

Hay,

I all for the 'removing the opponent from radar' thing. (thought i was the only one!)

Is PvP a bit like FF in FPS?

Good idea, adds realism, spoiled by pre-shavers?

[holina]

my point is that high lvl players have no benifits, maybe removing them wud be a good idea, but also stops diggers knowing who is comming :oIt works both ways, yes, easier for the prey to hide and the hunter to sneak up on his/her prey :)

Btw, the high level players do have benefits, they have higher resist/dodge/parry aswell as more damage output, hp etc. and with the new LA and Jewelry requirements low level players will have less benefits from them - as it should be.

True, you can't nuke someone from 50m out unless you can select them, but this will also make scouts/spotters more frequent.

It also means that PVP will become more Player vs Player instead of Character vs Character. Character skill level is too important in Ryzom imho. But maybe that's just me.

[kyesmith]

It works both ways, yes, easier for the prey to hide and the hunter to sneak up on his/her prey :)

Btw, the high level players do have benefits, they have higher resist/dodge/parry aswell as more damage output, hp etc. and with the new LA and Jewelry requirements low level players will have less benefits from them - as it should be.

True, you can't nuke someone from 50m out unless you can select them, but this will also make scouts/spotters more frequent.

It also mean that PVP will become more Player vs Player instead of Character vs Character. Character skill level is too important in Ryzom imho. But maybe that's just me.

getting lvl 250 isnt exactly easy (exept elemental) so having bonuses for those who reach there are needed, or like alot of people they will just leave.

[sehracii]

Just keep in mind (everyone) that if lvl 250's start killing lvl 150's frequently (as they easily can), then the lower levels will leave.

It works both ways.

[amitst]

I have been wondering.. Whats the difference between Duel and PvP Challenge IG?

There is supposed to be PvP challenge maps that your whole team/guild is warped to. At the conclusion of the match you are all returned to your original location.

[larwood]

Edit: Nevermind, not gonna get into it. You all know how I feel about PvP anyway. No need to rehash hashed browns.

[vinnyq]

Yep, or you will over cook it Thom :)

PVP discussion has probably started since the beginning of human civilzation, when cavemen picked up rocks and eyeballed each other.

I agree with Kye in that PVP will bring in more "meat" and "contents" to game, as Xavier stated himself in his latest QA. It was the main purpose of why I started this thread during Outposts dicussion.

But now, I am not so sure if PVP can be handle in a mature manner without feelings hurt, as Jyudas had stated.

So, I agree that PVP can be a good thing, but the reasoning why you PVP can be extremely sensitive and hard to keep from getting ugly. So now I am leaning more toward reeeealy limited PVP or no PVP at all, due to recent incidents.

The only thing that make sense then is for Nevrax to implement things that will give actual meaning to PVP (such as Outposts and story events). That might solve a lot of the griefing problem, I am hoping. That way, the players who actually want to PVP won't have to go out to look for it themselves and have a real purpose for PVP'ing and the rest of the community won't get so mad at them for doing it.

[holina]

getting lvl 250 isnt exactly easy (exept elemental) so having bonuses for those who reach there are needed, or like alot of people they will just leave.The problem is that elemental is too powerful compared to... well basically everything except for heal. A full reballance will be needed anyway especially if PVP will have a more central role in Ryzom, or we will see AoD-s nuking eachother left and right which will become boring very quickly.

Maybe a solution would be that you can't initiate PVP in areas lower than your level and having PVP missions in place with rewards.

This way every level group could enjoy PVP and the rewards would suit their levels. Ofc if a lvl150 player wanders into a lvl250 hunting ground, it's their problem ;)

I know, combat restrictions based on levels is not the best solution. It all depends on how Nevrax will reballance stuff. If they bring everything close to the power of elemental then only high level players will PVP, cause lower level player will not stand a chance unless they have overwhelming numbers. If they bring ele down to melee-like level, then you are right about more options needed for higher levels.

Atm PVP in Ryzom is casual, not much incentive to do it or not to do it. So all this may not seem important, but that will quicky change when there will be a reason - aside form the fun factor - to PVP.

[lupine04]

This is a great thread.. I actually read about 90.01% of the posts.

I find I agree overwhelmingly with Grimjim and have experienced the same behavior in other MMORPGs with open PvP. As he so adequately put it, it brings out the worst in people. Why? Ego, mostly. Immaturity. A feeling of inadequacy in real-life that they're compensating for in-game. Pure and unfiltered idiocy. All sorts of things.

And I don't even think the problem would arise from this game's current populace as it remains (as it was from launch) a very mature and respectful player-base; at least from what I've seen. Every community has its pits, of course.

That brings me to another point - if it's not the current player base to be concerned with, it would most certainly be the new players it attracts. The l337 d3wd5, so to speak. Those are the ones who will basically power-level and then hang out around the lowest-level area they can, and continually attack and kill low level players who have no chance to fight back - ie. ganking. They do, and will, feel completely justified in doing so, citing it as being open PvP and calling the victim a "carebear" if they dare say anything about it. The idea of attacking players closer to your own level where you might lose is lost on them because they have no grasp of the concept. They want to win unconditionally - not to be challenged. That *is* the game to them. As soon as they lose their edge, the game gets boring and they go to the next one. Pit one of these lowbie gankers against someone their own level and they'd be dropped in nothing flat. They can't compete on their own level with any hope of winning - so they don't. Your typical schoolyard bully situation.

Case in point: Lineage II. Lineage II is designed around and completely promotes open PvP; even to the extent that lowbie griefing/ganking is considered a perfectly legal gameplay tactic. However, this does not mean the behavior is justified or even respected. If a lower level player makes it known that they're being ganked/griefed without hope of winning, other high level players *will* come to that location and take care of the griefer. Many times, at the first sign of higher level players coming around to take care of them the griefer will immediately log off, like the coward they are. I've seen this many times in that game. Why is it that they do this? Why not stand and fight? Because they couldn't handle losing or being defeated themselves. PvP is only fun for them when they're the ones doing the killing.

That's not to say that L2 doesn't have its mature PvP'ers.. there's plenty. But you'll never find them around the lowbie areas, unless it's to hunt down the lowbie gankers as explained above. The more mature players are out experiencing the gameplay at the higher levels, competing against similarly leveled opponents. They go after the gankers/griefers because they recognize that it leaves a bad taste in the mouth of a new player and hurts the game's population. They're trying to curb it, even while being proponents of PvP themselves. That's the difference.

The concept of PvP in itself is fine, and doesn't have to be limited to killing another player. It could be implemented in psychological or strategic ways as well, so long as the gameplay mechanics allow for it. It's the types of people it tends to attract and their (often) immature mentalities that ruin it for everyone else. Every other MMORPG I've played that has allowed open PvP to any degree has experienced the same element of players. I see no reason why Ryzom would be any different.

These are the circumstances that have ruined other games with open or semi-open PvP for me... and I suspect they're what Grimjim is speaking about in his posts... though I could be wrong.

[vinnyq]

wow, friggin awesome post.

*eyeballs Shanree, in a good way*

[sehracii]

I concur with Fyrx! (well, maybe not on the eyeballin')

Shanree, I really do hope you stick around ;)

[lupine04]

Hey thanks! :-)

Nice to get a positive response to a post like that for once.. I'm usually trounced upon harshly by all the pro-ganking and pro-griefing folks.. called a "carebear" and told to go play some PvE "carebear" game if I "can't handle it".. and so on.

But, to me, that's the basic truth of it. It's clear as crystal and plain as day to anyone seeing it in action.

As for Shanree.. hey you can cast eyes at her all you want.. she is sort of a hottie ... for a digital character.

Does saying that make me wierd, at all? :-p

[basicart]

Maybe there should be a option somewhere that ya have to tick a box that says "Yes i want to PvP" before you can enter the PvP zones, since there seems to be some anti PvP players running about these places.

[grimjim]

These are the circumstances that have ruined other games with open or semi-open PvP for me... and I suspect they're what Grimjim is speaking about in his posts... though I could be wrong.

Thanks for that, I've been getting worn down and tired on arguing this point over and over. :)

[altomesa]

OK, time for me to say something about all this. 1st of all, excellent post Shanree. Well thought out and articulated.

The center of the PvP controvercy for me is not open PvP itself, but griefing. Ganking diggers while they are in full focus gear, on their knees and digging, or a 2 or 3 vs. 1 situation, and then gloating about it aftwards like you've completed some major accomplishment. If you want to kill a digger, at least give them warning, so they can prepare to fight, don't stab them in the back while they are digging. No one like's a griefer but most of us can appreciate a fair fight.

None of us is perfect 100% of the time, most of us have our little quirks and shortfalls. And damn us for allowing our emotions to cloud clear judgements at times. But when your actions fall into the category of "griefing," in the end, everyone loses. The ensueing fallout and overall deterioration of the community it causes (which is painfully obvious if you've been reading the threads lately) isn't worth the 5 seconds of adrenaline rush you get from ganking someone in PR. I understand that you get bored once you have so many 250's under your belt. In our guild, almost every member has multiple 250's, but our focus area's are on daily Q270 boss hunts, tribe commander hunts, specific mat hunts, getting more crafters to 250 and other things that we find enjoyable and help to strenghthen the guild for the future and in the process, bring us closer together. The idea of going to PR just to kill people never occurs to me. Are those the only things to do? No. Am I saying your guild should just do those things? No.

The idea has been suggested that ON member's try to dictate what is/isn't right for others. Once again, it is important to note that these are forums, and as such, forums are here for inidividuals to express their opinions. I have kept largely silent from the majority of these threads because the misunderstandings and accusions tend to get ugly quick, almost no one see's eye to eye, and you can literally see the degredation of the community before your very eyes. I see people I know to be thugs and bullies talking smack, and that's no suprise. I see people I know, like and respect talking smack because they are misunderstanding someone elses opinion for a "this is the way I think things should be and you should think that way too" kind of statement, and I see people I consider close friends talking smack because they are too outspoken for their own good and will defend their beliefs even if it get's them into trouble. Everyone is heated with different ideas and stances on PvP and griefing. It gets uglier by the day, but no resolution or "let's agree to a disagree" to be seen. Just, "I don't like what you said, we declare war on you" kind of jibberish. This is what drives good people away from MMORPG's. Constant childlike bickering that you all must see will have no positive outcome or resolution.

One of the things that sucked me into Ryzom so many months ago was the maturity of the community as compared to other MMORPG's. People willing to go out of their way to help others on a consistant basis. It was a unusually beautiful thing to see. I realize that many of those players are gone, but many have remained (and some are returning) and they are not the same people we knew in months prior. Attitudes have changed, trusts have been broken, feelings have been hurt, bickering is on an upward climb and the community continues to fragment into smaller and smaller pieces, like glass that continues to shatter until it's eventually unrepairable and indistinguishable from it's former self. Seeing the community going in this direction is highly unmotivating for me and sadens me deeply.

Is anyone out there left to help the new players of ryzom, bring them in, give them a home, help then learn the game and be strong and make sure they are having fun, or are all of us vets too busy fighting each other to think about them and the future of the game?

Are we prepared for a major kitin invasion or will we fall to the ground uncoordinated because so many people and guilds have seperated themselves from other's because of disagreements on things that are, in the grand scheme of things, trivial?

My obvious point being that I think we as a community are quickly losing sight of what's important because too many people are thinking emonionally, not logically. What are you're personal goals? What are your goals for your guild? What are you working for for the future? Are you on track to reach those goals? If not, what adjustments can you make to get on track? Where does all this bickering fit in with further advancement of reaching these goeals? Or does it not fit at all?

[larwood]

and I see people I consider close friends talking smack because they are too outspoken for their own good and will defend their beliefs even if it get's them into trouble.


Um.... can anyone tell me who she's referring to in the above quote? LOL (Thom, hint hint)

Well said Saranda. I for one need to work on almost all of the points you mentioned.

/target Saranda
/bow

[lupine04]

Maybe there should be a option somewhere that ya have to tick a box that says "Yes i want to PvP" before you can enter the PvP zones, since there seems to be some anti PvP players running about these places.
The "PvP On" flag idea is something that's actually been implemented in other MMORPGs with certain success.

Personally, I like the idea of having certain "contested areas" where PvP is open. These are usually well-defined areas that are around mid-way between the different homelands of each warring faction. Anarchy Online has a situation something like this.

However.. there's also a way to get from one place to another where you can avoid the free-for-all sections - for those who don't want to PvP and would rather engage in the PvE content. It's feasible in AO to get up to max level (220) without ever fighting another player. But there's also PvP galore for anyone who prefers that.

As for ganking diggers when they're not prepared - that's a great example.. but I think it's conditional on level. If it's clear that they're way too low to put up a fair fight - even if they were in full battle gear - I wouldn't touch them.

I would probably never attack anyone when they're not prepared... but then I'm not an aggressive type player, even in PvP. To me, if I see someone of an opposing faction passing by, I'll just be on my way.. maybe make a gesture or whatever to taunt them a bit.. but I won't attack. If I am attacked however, I will definitely fight back. If I'm defeated, or if I win and it was a fairly matched fight, I'll say "good fight" to them in /tell or whatever and be on my way.

If it's some ganker or griefer who's just going after another easy target, I wouldn't waste the energy typing a response; their action isn't worthy of it and saying anything would only increase their (misplaced) feeling of victory.

I guess you could say I'm for fair play in all situations - even open PvP.

Now.. if it's an all-out war situation and I'm with a small army facing off against another.. of course it's open play and, honestly, I probably wouldn't take the time to find out someone's level before I attacked.. which might mean I'm attacking someone many levels higher or many levels lower. But I figure in that situation, everyone there knows what the risks are... so it doesn't fit into the "ganking" or "griefing" mold...

[bobturke]

Well I dont usually comment on PvP threads because i'm too snobbish and I think its beneath me [j/k mostly], but this is exception.

<superiorsoundinglecture>

I used to be totally against PvP except perhaps in disputed areas someone mentioned above. But i've been reading the PvP threads, especially the ones on other games that are yet to launch, and i'm starting to understand that not everyone who wants PvP necessarily just wants to go around ganking.

As a result i'm starting to come around towards understanding the PvP side. Personally i'd prefer just PvE, but thats not where Ryzom is. I'm not really for open PvP yet but the way its been implimented in Ryzom I don't mind. Its mainly in a PR areas which have limited amounts of top quaility resources.

The way I see it in Ryzom is that if you go into PvP areas you accept the risk that you might be attacked by other players. Now before the trigger words "attacked by other players" sets off any emotive responses think about the worst case scenario. You die. Or worse you die while digging that supreme Oath or whatever your poison is. What happens? You respawn a reasonable distance away in a safe zone. Perhaps you loose access to those supreme mats. Thats it. No DP. No permanent damage. No loss of equipment or dappers. Perhaps you run back to your supreme spot and get killed again. I have to say it but if you run back to the same spot where you just got killed a minute ago and expect a different result you can hardly be called wise.

Now talking smack is another thing altogether, but i'm not getting into that. But my advise is that when you get killed find out why you were killed. You might be able to figure that out for yourself or you might be able to figure it out by saying, "Why the hell did you do that?". The killer will usually be happy to brag about why they did what they did. If the player that killed you starts acting like a 10 year old, talking smack or whatever ignore them and respawn. That's important. Ignore them. Children get bored really quickly when you ignore them and go annoy someone else.

If they say "Those sups belong to ['me'/insert guild name]" then you know what excuse they're using. What you do after that is up to you. Go dig somewhere else, organise your guild/friends and hand their arse to them on a plate, or wait a while and come back and resume digging taking the risk you might go splat again.

Whatever happens when you get killed in PvP you try and be mature about it. Sure retailiate by trying to kill them either by yourself or with your own group of friends, but the worst thing you can do about it IMHO is start whining about it.

PvP isn't about chivalry and fair fights and all that stuff. Thats what dueling and gladiator bouts and the Mantis arena are all about. PvP zones are there for people or groups of people to exert their influnce over other people/guilds and perhaps temporarily "own" resources if they can. Might makes right. Sure people don't have to kill everone they meet on sight and I know they don't. Dragging RL ideals of fairness into it is a waste of time IMHO. IRL how often do you cast magic spells or spend hours cleaving giant insectoids into their component parts? This is fantasy not RL.

Anyway i've prattled on long enough. Remember "You are entering a PvP zone" is not there to entertain you while you wait for the new zone to load and most of all remember, Ryzom is a game.

</superiorsoundinglecture>

Just a quick edit to say I totally agree with Grim's post further up the thread re:RPG (http://www.ryzom.com/forum/showpost.php?p=170812&postcount=61)

[grimjim]

I used to be totally against PvP except perhaps in disputed areas someone mentioned above. But i've been reading the PvP threads, especially the ones on other games that are yet to launch, and i'm starting to understand that not everyone who wants PvP necessarily just wants to go around ganking.

What's said on forums, by PvPers often, is not generally how they behave or what happens IN the game. If only half the justifications and so on mooted were true it wouldn't be so bad.

[hans1976]

I used to be
...
<snip>
...
remember, Ryzom is a game.


Turke, why did you had to go out and make the exact same post I was planning on typing somewhere today?

[ilthor]

the worst thing you can do about it IMHO is start whining about it

Whining is IMHO perfectly understandable. It just makes it known, and thats what forums are for, since there is no TV, radio or newspapers ingame. It is another way of retaliation, a public one that i support and encourage. If you check the last "Pvp report" thread, the killer didnt like having their name on the forums... well suits him right. If we all just shut up about it people will go on doing what they please then call who speaks whiners, when they are the offending ones. If people got reasons to do stuff like going after one another they can answer in the forums too, but giving "server fame" imunity to pvp'ers is just wrong, cause here is the only place ingame where we all have the same lvls etc. I'm sorry if you disagree but free-speach is the most important of civic rights, since it allows for all the dirt to come up.

I for one am not into pvp or otherwise go into pvp areas, but if someone kills me WITHOUT reason (some people might have reasons to do so and then its between us) ill sure report that griefing, cause thats what it is, and as a citizen of Atys i have the right to talk.

[putterix]

Im gettin so tired of all these whinings and complains, use the time to get some quality time in ryzom. There will always be people that likes to aggro innocent people like in RL. IMO the PvP areas are used for events, i dont think devs made them for killin peeps on random.

"One who thinks Ryzom is more than only a game"

[kyesmith]

Im gettin so tired of all these whinings and complains, use the time to get some quality time in ryzom. There will always be people that likes to aggro innocent people like in RL. IMO the PvP areas are used for events, i dont think devs made them for killin peeps on random.

"One who thinks Ryzom is more than only a game"

OFC its for killing people, else they would only activate the PvP when events are on.
The game is being turned into all PvP the devs had done this for content, but it seems this is not what ryzom wants....

[sofiaoak]

I for one am not into pvp or otherwise go into pvp areas, but if someone kills me WITHOUT reason (some people might have reasons to do so and then its between us) ill sure report that griefing, cause thats what it is, and as a citizen of Atys i have the right to talk.
I agree.

I'm not my self interested about PvP, but there is fine line between attacking someone with reason and doing random attacks because it's possible. If someone is doing random attacks, they will know that it does get noticed and "citizens" will be warned. Players will have responsibility they own actions and there will be allways consequences.

Now, attacking others in open PvP area is okey, of course, but it's always better have consent or reason for it. It's more polite way to do stuff. It's not really reason, that PvP is allowed in that area. Just because someting is possible, does not mean it should be done.

[lupine04]

I mentioned this in a previous post, but I'll say it again here ... I doubt the griefing or ganking is going to come from the current populace - or at least not much of it. I could be wrong, but I just don't imagine Ryzom being a game where that type of person would hang around waiting for the opportunity to be implemented. Too many other games that will offer it up now.

However, again, once the game has it and advertises it, people are going to begin coming to this game whose only intention - their *only* source of enjoyment - comes from griefing others and making them as miserable as possible. They're not doing it in the spirit of competitive PvP. Asking them why they did it and expecting any kind of sincere role-play oriented answer is giving them too much credit. They'll tell you "I'm role-playing" and it's completely sarcastic. It's a lie. They're actually mocking you if they say so. Don't believe me? Go see what griefers'/gankers' opinions of role-players is in other games' forums. Many actually *target* role-players as their key victims - even in a game that by design promotes role-playing. Role-players are seen as weak "carebears". Easy targets. Their sole reason for killing another character, 100% of the time, is because they want to and they can. That's it.

I've played far too many PvP enabled games where this pattern has happened - without fail - to believe any different will come of PvP in Ryzom. There's a difference between PK'ers, and griefers/gankers. PK'ers will PvP with reason, like was mentioned above... control over an area, or a resource node, or an in-game rivalry, etc. PK'ers will also go after anyone for the same reasons.. no matter what the level or their chance of losing. Griefers and gankers will only go after people they know they can easily beat, and need no other reason than their own sense of fun at someone else's expense. There's an important distinction there that people need to understand.

If it's going open PvP, I hope Nevrax are *real* careful about how they state as much and don't really let players just have at it with no restrictions - or that they place very clear and firm anti-griefing/ganking rules in place. Given what I've seen from the Ryzom community as it is now, they're looking to lose alot more players if they're not careful with how they implement PvP and let gankers/griefers run rampant with impunity.

[vinnyq]

So basically, what you are saying is, if you PK to make yourself feel better, that's bad. But if you PK because you think you have a reason to in game context, that's ok.

Where's the line? That's the hard bit to pin down. Kye (and the pple who supported what he did) does not think that their way of PK'ing is causing problem. It's PVP zone, treat us like a Vorax, we're just spicing up the game, etc. Their reasons are valid if you are able to switch mental gear a bit and look at it in their shoes.

The gloatings and insults are probably what turned it ugly moreso than the actual act of PKing.

[grimjim]

I mentioned this in a previous post, but I'll say it again here ... I doubt the griefing or ganking is going to come from the current populace - or at least not much of it. I could be wrong, but I just don't imagine Ryzom being a game where that type of person would hang around waiting for the opportunity to be implemented. Too many other games that will offer it up now.

Most of the pro PvPers in game already do already grief and gank.

[grimjim]

So basically, what you are saying is, if you PK to make yourself feel better, that's bad. But if you PK because you think you have a reason to in game context, that's ok.

Where's the line? That's the hard bit to pin down. Kye (and the pple who supported what he did) does not think that their way of PK'ing is causing problem. It's PVP zone, treat us like a Vorax, we're just spicing up the game, etc. Their reasons are valid if you are able to switch mental gear a bit and look at it in their shoes.

The gloatings and insults are probably what turned it ugly moreso than the actual act of PKing.

Indeed. I'd love to find out what this elusive 'Noob' beast it is that they're hunting and how they keep mistaking decent homin for it.

They're not spicing up the game though, they're jarring it. There's no RP or context for it and you even see people from the same guild fighting each other.

Nor is there any real challenge to it, its predictable by levels and healing makes it ridiculously drawn out and stupid, as does the overpowering of elemental magic.

There's also no real point and no real consequences to either the PKer or the PKee.

If they played as bandits, that might work out, but then you'd see them taking payments and then killing people anyway. To the person, often harvester, being killed there is a drawback, annoyance and wasted time and effort. To the Pker, none. They don't care about the bad reputation and don't mind being killed, if you form anti-PK groups you're just playing into their hands and giving them the game they want. Passive resistance doesn't work either, you just get killed again and again and called 'n00b'.

It remains pathetic and childish, a little RP effort and some consequences/rewards might give more of a context but would probably just encourage more silliness.

[lupine04]

Again.. I explained that in my last post.. Someone who is a PK'er, for one, will generally attack anyone, no matter what the level... win or lose.

The point that Kye is making, if I understand correctly, is not the same as what I'm talking about. There's a clear distinction that is very obvious once you've seen it a few times in other games with open PvP. PvP'ers who are playing in the competitive sense will do so consistently and against people who are their level. If they win, they win. If they lose, they lose.

Gankers are people who will only hunt and kill players many levels lower than them that they know they can beat easily. They will almost always run at the first sign of someone they know is more powerful than them is coming after them.
Griefers are basically Gankers who will seek out and torment those same people consistently to make the player miserable, for their own enjoyment.

It's not the action, it's the mentality behind it. And it's very very obvious if you've experienced it from both sides.

Case in point, to illustrate what I mean...

Lineage II is completely open PvP. Nothing is off-limits within the context of the game.

I was playing a new character one evening, there was a guy who was hanging around the lowbie area, hiding behind a tree somewhere and one-shotting any lowbie character who came by, then sending them /tells and taunting them. He had no point to doing it. There's no item drops or xp loss for someone under level 5 in that game, so he had nothing to gain from it. I was level 3 and he, by his own admission, was level 19. He just kept doing it and then gloating about how he "pwned" me and any other "stoopid noob" who came out of the starting village. That's a classic Ganker/Griefer. When I said "Okay, I got the point. You can one-shot me. Good job.. how about hunting something more worthy of your skills?" He replied, "because killing your noob a-- is so much more fun. Come out and I'll kill you again!" So, I sent a message out across the /shout channel reporting him.. A couple people responded that they'd be there right away (higher level players do not like gankers/griefers because it turns off new players and keeps more people from coming into the game). He sent a message to me about being a "carebear" and to leave the game if I couldn't handle it. Yet, as soon as a couple higher level players came by to deal with him.. He left. He logged off immediately. Why? Because he's not into PvP - he's into getting his kicks off of picking on people who can't defend themself.

Now, by contrast. A few levels later, I was out farming for a certain item I needed for a quest. A higher level player came by who apparently had been farming the same creatures and I was infringing on his territory. He said "Leave, this is my area". I said "Why? I'm collecting necklaces." He said "this is my area. Leave or I'll kill you." and hit me with a warning shot. I healed myself and said "Sorry.. this isn't "your" area." and continued attacking another orc. He two-shotted me and went about his business. I headed back out there, figuring okay, point made. Not gonna whine about it or whatever. I'll just farm a different group of orcs. He ran past a little bit later while I was fighting an orc with another on my back, killed off the second orc and healed me to full HP, bowed and ran off again. We actually went on to chat later on and became pretty friendly with one another. That wasn't the last time he helped me out, either.

*That* was someone PvP'ing in the spirit of competition. He could have easily kept killing me just like the first person did.. but there was no reason to. I was in his farming area, he wanted claim to it and in the context of the gameplay it was his right to do so. So he did. But beyond that, there was no more reason for him to give me trouble.

That's the difference. That's how you can tell one from another. There are many other examples I could give, but that does a good enough job, I think.

[kyesmith]

Again.. I explained that in my last post.. Someone who is a PK'er, for one, will generally attack anyone, no matter what the level... win or lose.

The point that Kye is making, if I understand correctly, is not the same as what I'm talking about. There's a clear distinction that is very obvious once you've seen it a few times in other games with open PvP. PvP'ers who are playing in the competitive sense will do so consistently and against people who are their level. If they win, they win. If they lose, they lose.

Gankers are people who will only hunt and kill players many levels lower than them that they know they can beat easily. They will almost always run at the first sign of someone they know is more powerful than them is coming after them. .

I really like the idea of ALOT more PvP organised events, then the people who want to take part can and those who dont like it can carry on doing what they like.
and i am working on a few ideas for events, which i hope to keep all PvPers happy :)

[nanaruto]

if i can say something, on french server , there is a lot of player who used primes roots to pk, we dont considere its only for events. but however, its often for personal vendetta or something like that. when somebody is attaking you by rear without any rp justification he generally dont return in prime roots for a long time. I thing pk for pk will be a probleme one day , only if there is nobody to react and to punish that kind of people, killing enemis for role play is normal...and i personnaly like to kill the player who pk for pk :D
----------------------------------
Kyos, Grand Sase, Maitre de l'ordre des proselyte de la confrérie du grand Dragon

www.confrerie-grand-dragon.net

[keoni]

Most of these points have already been raised by others, so I'll be relatively brief.

I am fine with the fact that there are limited PvP zones in Ryzom. Although I'm not a PR digger, I do travel in those zones and I recognize that I am subject to attack by other players when I do, with or without reason. Yet that does not mean that I will hold that player blameless. If I am attacked, or one of my guildmates/friends/allies are attacked, then I will do my best to make sure that their actions have consequences--either to that player personally, or to their guild if they condone it.

As for those who publically identify griefers and gankers, as far as I'm concerned they are doing a service to the community. Preferably with a screenshot to put things in context, especially if there is any follow-up trash talk. That way, people will be able to make informed decisions about how they deal with that guild or individual. I understand that a lot of people will see those sort of reports and either not care, or think it's fine. But no matter what your opinion on PvP, I don't see why some seem to have a problem with this sort of reporting. If you let the facts speak for themselves, that's not whining. People should have to live with the reputation that comes with their actions - if you can't do the time, don't do the crime.

I am not anti-PvP. I am looking forward to outposts, and whatever other well-defined and meaningful opportunities they might come up with for PvP-with-purpose. But I also think that the game should allow those who don't like PvP at all to continue to do their thing in peace. If the game ever became 100% PvP, everywhere all the time, I am firmly convinced it would quickly TTS. I hope that day never comes.

[vinnyq]

what does TTS stands for?

[keoni]

what does TTS stands for?Er... well, to paraphrase a bit - "turn to shiznit" ;)

[vinnyq]

Er... well, to paraphrase a bit - "turn to shiznit" ;)

lol. oh.

thanks. I learned something new today. Yes, I agree, it will defn T to very very much S.

[kashius]

Hello all.

Some of you may have read my posts in the last little PvP discussion/Debate. I am of the group of people that like PvP and think it helps games in a fun sense and in terms of RP.

Open PvP as stated previously would/could work if a couple elements currently missing existed.

- Faction meaning something in terms of PvP. If open PvP were to exist, faction (Kami/Karavan/Other) would need to mean something. If I'm Karavan and kill a Kami supporter, doesn't mean anything. If I kill Karavan...still doesn't mean anything. Fame/Honor/Reputation for defending your factions beliefs and territory would make it so that PvP had a purpose. Gaining territory for your faction earns you rewards of course. Who knows...get enough people ticked off at you (PKing people at random regardless of faction); and you could be hated by both sides. Making you have to go through some trial/quest series/gauntlet to bring yourself back to neutral.

- Influence over areas. Kami heavy areas are controlled by the Kami supporters. Guilds/Individual players etc...have free reign in those areas to go anywhere, do anything. Karavan may enter at their own risk. They cannot attack first and if their reputation (by killing too many Kami folk) is very bad, they risk attack at the hands of the guards when nearing towns under opposing influence. This would open the gateway for embassadors in the event of Kitin attack. A not so despidsed Karavan could approach a Kami controlled area, not get whomped on and ask for assisstance against a common enemy. Whereas if Joe-I kill Kami supporters for kicks-schmoe thinks he can stroll into Zora at will, he will be met with formidable opposition. Make the town guards earn their wages in other ways than zapping Suckling Yubos with Mega Destroy Rank 5. Neutral players/guilds could roam freely, but on the same token would not be able to initiate a conflict outside of PR. People who die in areas not in their areas influence will have to respawn at small (I mean small like 2 dudes and a teleporter) outposts controlled by their faction in a surrounding area.

Going along with that if players don't take the initiative to seek outpost control, NPC factions would be able to take them, spreading their influence over the area. Making Homins want to seek to control the lands in which they farm for mats, level and do whatever else.

I believe these things would help in allowing open PvP to work in this game and allow those who do not wish to be part of it to have a limited role. The people who are PvP nuts can be as active as they want, taking control of areas for the honor of their faction and slaying those who try to oppose (most likely other PvP heads). Those who PK for the hell of it will be able to, but not without consequence. Diplomatic embassadors would emerge, warlords can rise in fame/power and outright criminals would be treated as such.

-Kash-

[trenker]

I think any system with character levels in, will cause ganking and player misery. There will always be a gross imbalance and that will be exploited by gankers and griefers alike.

To make a PvP therefore there should be an absence of levels or the ability to all max out fairly quickly. Take Guild Wars for example, you can get to the max level 20 quickly, thereafter the PvP is 'even'; voila, no ganking problem.

Any other game that allows a huge number of levels (250 say) and allows such open PvP areas that anyone can attack anyone else, has basically created a scenario for many many people to get ganked or griefed and finally annoyed or fed up.

So, as much as I like 'sensible' PvP, I don't see how it's going to work with 200 or so levels dividing the community.

[iwojimmy]

Apparently, fame will be coming into PvP, (which is one reason the devs want to reduce healing efficiency) but if it is just going to be a Kami/Karavan thing then -whats the point ? The Fame which was supposed to be a measure of your standing and recognition with the factions of Atys becomes little more than a FPS frag score.

If they are going to bring fame into PvP, make it affect all your fames. If you defeat an opponent, you should gain fame with all who dislike them, and LOSE fame with ALL who like them.
So you gain some fame with every faction (already known to you) your opponent has red fame levels with, and lose fame with those your opponent has blue fame with.. even if it is your own faction. The opponent was considered a good person and friend by that faction, why should they let you kill them with no consequence ?

Dedicated PvP players will find their fame polarising, ultimately to the point where they cannot enter an opposing races city (if there was any justice).
Diplomats can gain fame with multiple factions to discourage people from attacking them (wont stop the hardcore, of course)
Casual PvPers may have to put some effort into fame management, if their actions are driving them in a direction they dont want to go.

and there is no reward for killing newbies - again, wont stop the griefers, but nothing ever has..

A system, using stuff that is in the game already, that will encourage greater involvement and reward differing play styles.

[calel]

I think you hit the nail head up here; THIS would be something I' d like very, very much to see implemented.
It would make a) Fame more rewarding outside of the Outposts/Rite box and even within it could mean to affect a guild' s fame enormously, especially if Guildleaders, HO' s and Officers are involved;
b) It would give a much needed consequence.

The way I see this dedicated PvPers can still go doing their business but will have to pick targets carefully; actually anyone would.

Silly question: do cityguards attack if you have red fame levels? I suppose they should but I' m left out of the blue here.

[basicart]

Apparently, fame will be coming into PvP, (which is one reason the devs want to reduce healing efficiency) but if it is just going to be a Kami/Karavan thing then -whats the point ? The Fame which was supposed to be a measure of your standing and recognition with the factions of Atys becomes little more than a FPS frag score.

If they are going to bring fame into PvP, make it affect all your fames. If you defeat an opponent, you should gain fame with all who dislike them, and LOSE fame with ALL who like them.
So you gain some fame with every faction (already known to you) your opponent has red fame levels with, and lose fame with those your opponent has blue fame with.. even if it is your own faction. The opponent was considered a good person and friend by that faction, why should they let you kill them with no consequence ?

Dedicated PvP players will find their fame polarising, ultimately to the point where they cannot enter an opposing races city (if there was any justice).
Diplomats can gain fame with multiple factions to discourage people from attacking them (wont stop the hardcore, of course)
Casual PvPers may have to put some effort into fame management, if their actions are driving them in a direction they dont want to go.

and there is no reward for killing newbies - again, wont stop the griefers, but nothing ever has..

A system, using stuff that is in the game already, that will encourage greater involvement and reward differing play styles.

LMAO that would suck so much no one would ever PvP cos almost everyone works on getting all race fames into the blue if not 100 personal. No one would fight for Outposts cos it would nerf all race fame and Outpost would soon be cast into the looks nice but not worth it corner. Outposts / PvP is the big selling point in days to come it they want to atract more people and bring back some they lost.
Fame and PvP dont mix well IMO

[grimjim]

LMAO that would suck so much no one would ever PvP cos almost everyone works on getting all race fames into the blue if not 100 personal. No one would fight for Outposts cos it would nerf all race fame and Outpost would soon be cast into the looks nice but not worth it corner. Outposts / PvP is the big selling point in days to come it they want to atract more people and bring back some they lost.
Fame and PvP dont mix well IMO

I don't think you could be more wrong on that.

This over concentration on PvP seems like a wasteful and potentially deadline sideline for the game and doesn't make sense in the context of the game as played or built up.

Best case scenario there's more to it than it seems and the outposts are enough of a reward by themselves without the dubious 'bonus' of PvP.

Worst case scenario, PvP doesn't attract new players because its not what SoR's rep or appeal is based on and it drives away the current players who fairly resoundingly (as a whole) aren't that keen on free for all griefing.

[basicart]

I don't think you could be more wrong on that.

This over concentration on PvP seems like a wasteful and potentially deadline sideline for the game and doesn't make sense in the context of the game as played or built up.

Best case scenario there's more to it than it seems and the outposts are enough of a reward by themselves without the dubious 'bonus' of PvP.

Worst case scenario, PvP doesn't attract new players because its not what SoR's rep or appeal is based on and it drives away the current players who fairly resoundingly (as a whole) aren't that keen on free for all griefing.

There really are alot more people that PvP then you think and more still that would fight for / defend Outposts quite alot of guilds and players took part in the PvP Hostage event so it just go's to show that they will do it if its fun.

[hans1976]

There really are alot more people that PvP then you think and more still that would fight for / defend Outposts quite alot of guilds and players took part in the PvP Hostage event so it just go's to show that they will do it if its fun.

This post hits me in the wrong spot for several reasons.
Firstly, I hate the "Invisible masses" argument used in any discussion. You are not the one to speak for the masses, you can only speak for yourself.

Secondly, PvP on outposts is *not* the random killing of people who set foot in the open PvP area's we have now. It will (hopefully) consist of declaring war, making alliances and diplomacy. These two are different things.

Lastly, open PvP (random killing in the open PvP area's) is *not* the same as an event. That is a PvP event, as the Matis arena events would be. Storyline and so on.

My opinion is that PvP can be fun if put in the right setting for me. Look, I mentioned for me. A fun thing for me would be to help a allianced guild defend their outpost in war. Another fun this is moving war away from my door through diplomacy. And most fun I would find to be able to fight side by side against the Kitin with the one I fought or will fight with over an outpost.

[ixianuk]

In my expriance pvp is major fun if you can let go of your fear if being killed. And don't give anything about the loss of your own characters life.
(I played AO/UT that's about all my pvp experiance comes from)

Running around with 12 other people in a instagib deathmatch is something everybody should try once and see if they still don't like pvp *ZAPP* *SPLAT* :D

Snaring everybody (even your own side by accident) can get you some new words for the foul language collection :p Trying to kill a much superior adversairy with 4 people and still beating the dust every time :( But that is war, somebody is alway's stronger and better organised or equiped and 1 must win) Sniping off wounded and stuck people was low and fun at the same time. *evil grin*

One thing that botherd me was the hatred and insulting name-calling caused by pvp.
LOL do you play UT 2k4 i do for sure :D its an ace game tbh

[basicart]

This post hits me in the wrong spot for several reasons.
Firstly, I hate the "Invisible masses" argument used in any discussion. You are not the one to speak for the masses, you can only speak for yourself.

Secondly, PvP on outposts is *not* the random killing of people who set foot in the open PvP area's we have now. It will (hopefully) consist of declaring war, making alliances and diplomacy. These two are different things.

Lastly, open PvP (random killing in the open PvP area's) is *not* the same as an event. That is a PvP event, as the Matis arena events would be. Storyline and so on.

My opinion is that PvP can be fun if put in the right setting for me. Look, I mentioned for me. A fun thing for me would be to help a allianced guild defend their outpost in war. Another fun this is moving war away from my door through diplomacy. And most fun I would find to be able to fight side by side against the Kitin with the one I fought or will fight with over an outpost.

Would you rather then that Umbra was non PvP and there was Patrols back in there?

[grimjim]

There really are alot more people that PvP then you think and more still that would fight for / defend Outposts quite alot of guilds and players took part in the PvP Hostage event so it just go's to show that they will do it if its fun.

No, it goes to show they'll do it if there's some point or a bit of story behind it. The hostage event was a bit of a disappointment on that score but the earlier one chasing down/protecting the Guild of Elias reps was good. That's PvP in a context, as part of the story, with a genuine point to it.

[hans1976]

Would you rather then that Umbra was non PvP and there was Patrols back in there?
I really am getting the impression you totally missed my point.

1: Open PvP is not MY thing. You may OPvP all you like, just I choose not to be part of it. This game enables me to stay out of Umbria, so no problem there. If I choose to go out there, obviously I adhere to the rules there, hence OPVP could find me, even if I wasnt looking for it.

2: Open PvP without any meaning is something I CONSIDER to be stupid. Just not my thing. See point one.

3: Every one can play the game they desire, just one has to take responsibility for one's actions. How this is accepted or not accepted by others is their game. Respect that.

4: Using arguments that are based upon nameless masses that just didnt spoke up, is something I find a horrid thing. Speak for yourself and for yourself only.

And to fire this thing up:
Respect is something I give you for free, please do the same to me and to others. I respect the way you choose to play this game, please respect me and my gameplay. This implies that if you find me in a OPvP area and you have the massive urge to nuke me without warning, I can respect that. Badmouth me in region, you loose respect. Flame me when I choose to report you as a ganker/griefer, you loose more respect. Respect is given, respect can be taken away as well.

Now Basic, looking back at my post, I see most is not personal and nothing touches the Umbria question. About Umbria: either patrols of Kitin or roaming bandits killing me, what is the difference. If it happens too often, either I can stay away or arm me against that thing that gets me killed. Be it players or the environment killing me in a place I want to be, this killingentity can expect a reaction sooner or later.

Well, clearer like this I find hard to do. I just hope you understand.

[vinnyq]

Power to the People, Frydeswinde, Power to the People!

You know, the PEOPLE!

heh.

Just like to add that in a previous ... not so pleasant ... thread, somone stated that it's just a game, get over it! Getting killed on Atys doesn't mean you get hurt in RL. You cant do magic and fly around in RL!

While this is true, I see a weird reversal of casuality in virtual worlds, where words hurt more than actions. In game like RYL, the opposing Human an Demons can not talk to each other at ALL, so they treat each other as MOBs. "Oh no! Demons on the Radar! Run! or, Oh no! Demons on the Radar, let's get him!". It's fun, exciting, and not one ounce of bad blood. The purpose and intention are clear, kill or be killed.

But on Atys, that can't happen, all homins have to learn to both fight and co-exist with each other, even if they are enemies. I can't just "treat you like mobs", because MOBs can't talk, and you can.

As long as you're respectful of other players, PKing isn't bad at all, and can be loads of fun.

(disclaimer: this is just my opinion I am not deciding for others how to play the game)

(do I need to put this disclaimer in every post? )

[grimjim]

NEW ANNOUNCEMENT!

Roleplay only zones!

Whole areas of Atys will now be declared Roleplay Only zones.
Anyone not roleplaying, making OOC statements or using inappropriate language or acting out of character for their avatar in these areas will be instantly killed and respawned at the nearest spawn point, regardless whether they like roleplaying or not.

Additionally, a new feature, in game Academies, which can only be gained, maintained and protected through roleplay and that give considerable in game bonuses will be enacted. To get an academy your entire guild must display knowledge of the game lore, demonstrate roleplay ability and write at least 1,000 word character backgrounds for their characters.

****
Now... how would that go down with you PK fanatics, eh?

[basicart]

I would love a RP only Zone would give me a chance to play extremist Karavan and PK with out peeps getting overy upset about it :D (maybe)

[vinnyq]

How tall are you Basic? :D

*make swoooshing noise*

[basicart]

That the sound of my blade coming for ya in PR? :D

[grimjim]

That the sound of my blade coming for ya in PR? :D

Actually, I think it was the sound of the USS Cluestick passing over your head at warp factor nine :)

[basicart]

wouldnt know im not a sad trecky :D

[grimjim]

wouldnt know im not a sad trecky :D

Take your pick then...

The Firefly Trading Vessel Common Sense.
The ISD Intellect (Interdictor class)
The Goodyear Smarts Blimp

And I don't think MMO players are particularly in any position to look down on any other aspect of geek culture or fandom you care to mention. Not that I'm an especially huge fan of Star Trek, I just don't like balkanised subdivisions of people who are all in the same boat pretty much.

;)

[basicart]

sorry im in the "i love ryzom boat" Im a Ryzom geek i play 20 hours a day every day subs up for a year at a time cos i have faith in the game and love it and yet you seem to think we are in the same boat? ya dont have the Ryzom bug anywhere near as bad as me mate :D

[grimjim]

sorry im in the "i love ryzom boat" Im a Ryzom geek i play 20 hours a day every day subs up for a year at a time cos i have faith in the game and love it and yet you seem to think we are in the same boat? ya dont have the Ryzom bug anywhere near as bad as me mate :D

I'm thinking in broader strokes.

[basicart]

like paralised down one side?

[grimjim]

like paralised down one side?

Why I'm even dignifying this with a response is beyond me.

I'm thinking in larger terms of geek culture.

EG: Computer gamers, comic book fans, SF fans, rpgers, wargamers etc, etc. It seems silly for one group of nerds to look down upon or disparage any other - simply by virtue of what they're into.

Except furries, everyone looks down on furries.

[basicart]

ya got to say Ryzom is best man :D

[grimjim]

ya got to say Ryzom is best man :D

Ryzom is the best MMO I've ever played.

But it doesn't match up to tabletop RPGs :)

[mitijea]

Except furries, everyone looks down on furries.

Going way off topic here, but:

Ah, come on man, what could possibly be wrong with furries? Some of my favorite characters have been furries - what would life have been like without looney tunes? I remember wanting to be Bugs Bunny when I grew up - he's one cool rabbit, he is.

Coming back on topic:

IMO if you think high level items are hard to get now in the shops, wait until PvP is rampant. Who is going to want the competition getting any of the better weapons or armor when it will only be used against them? Same will go for jewelery and materials. I think that any guild serious about the competition would be in their right to put pressure on any members selling this stuff. One member shouldn't profit from an action that puts the whole guild at risk.

At the same time, if any good stuff makes it to the market, I wouldn't put it past a rich guild to buy them all up as quickly and as often as possibe, even if all they do is destroy the items (if they cannot use them). The money spent could well be worth it in the long run if it keeps the other less experienced guilds from building up their own arsenal. Sure, in the long run, any guild should be able to eventually make their own stuff, but until they can harvest/loot the best materials and have the experienced crafters, they will be at a distinct disadvantage. If a guild can control both the best resources (through PvP) and the stores for anything that leaks through, then there might be nothing to stop them (or at least slow them for quite some time).

Oh, and another thing: Non guildmate groups - that is bad for so many reasons. Shouldn't be helping the competition level up, nor find good hunting/harvesting locations, nor teaching them your fighting techniques... I could go on and on about this. Really, a serious PvPer should never group with anyone outside their guild (well, unless you are spying; that might work...hmmm). Okay maybe there are some advantages, if you play it right.

[vguerin]

IMO if you think high level items are hard to get now in the shops, wait until PvP is rampant. Who is going to want the competition getting any of the better weapons or armor when it will only be used against them? Same will go for jewelery and materials. I think that any guild serious about the competition would be in their right to put pressure on any members selling this stuff. One member shouldn't profit from an action that puts the whole guild at risk.

At the same time, if any good stuff makes it to the market, I wouldn't put it past a rich guild to buy them all up as quickly and as often as possibe, even if all they do is destroy the items (if they cannot use them). The money spent could well be worth it in the long run if it keeps the other less experienced guilds from building up their own arsenal. Sure, in the long run, any guild should be able to eventually make their own stuff, but until they can harvest/loot the best materials and have the experienced crafters, they will be at a distinct disadvantage. If a guild can control both the best resources (through PvP) and the stores for anything that leaks through, then there might be nothing to stop them (or at least slow them for quite some time).

Oh, and another thing: Non guildmate groups - that is bad for so many reasons. Shouldn't be helping the competition level up, nor find good hunting/harvesting locations, nor teaching them your fighting techniques... I could go on and on about this. Really, a serious PvPer should never group with anyone outside their guild (well, unless you are spying; that might work...hmmm). Okay maybe there are some advantages, if you play it right.OMG OMG OMG

Without a SIG I am gonna swear you have stole my DT/Melinoe persona... friends and enemy alike have seen me say this for WELL over a year...

GIVING stuff away cheap makes potential enemies stronger... if they do not follow Jena they should pay higher prices or not have access to Karavan wares.

DoubleTap IC believes this absolutely... Melinoe holds many of these values as well as supporting the rest of our awesome High Council... I applaud you, I believe this mindset makes for a better game for all... "I" take nothing away from anyone else gameplay (Hell, my wife dont like my role in SoR... I have ALWAYS been a Paladin type in the past)... We all need to play our game and respect other gameplay types...

Unlike some... I believe you want to quiet those you dont agree with, you become better than them at it... poems wont stop your azz beating... preparation will !
___________________
DoubleTap - Disciple of Jena - Master Swordsman
Matis Dual Blader & Medium Gladiator Champion (Undefeated) (http://www.ryzom.com/forum/showthread.php?t=15173)
Member of Team Melinoe, Matis 5V5 Champions (Undefeated) (http://www.ryzom.com/forum/showthread.php?t=15173)
Click here to join Melinoe (http://ryzom.twazz.net/modules.php?name=Forums&file=viewtopic&p=916#916) or read Ultimate Harvesting Guide (http://ryzom.twazz.net/modules.php?name=Forums&file=viewforum&f=4)
Melinoe - Atys Harvesters http://ryzom.twazz.net/
WWJD - What Would Jena Do ?

[aelvana]

One thing that made PvP so much fun on the MUDs I played was that you could get to max level (50) in days or weeks of hardcore play, and then take part in the more active fun game that everyone was doing.

In Ryzom one on one fights are mostly pointless, but team play is great.

Just a random thought.

[bobturke]

Might be a bit late for this but tough.

Turke, why did you had to go out and make the exact same post I was planning on typing somewhere today?
To save you the work so you would give me a discount on my next HA set ;)

If you check the last "Pvp report" thread, the killer didnt like having their name on the forums... well suits him right. If we all just shut up about it people will go on doing what they please then call who speaks whiners, when they are the offending ones. If people got reasons to do stuff like going after one another they can answer in the forums too, but giving "server fame" imunity to pvp'ers is just wrong
For the record I didn't think the "Pvp report" your mention was a whine. As the poster said several times, they weren't complaining just warning others.


If it's going open PvP, I hope Nevrax are *real* careful about how they state as much and don't really let players just have at it with no restrictions - or that they place very clear and firm anti-griefing/ganking rules in place. Given what I've seen from the Ryzom community as it is now, they're looking to lose alot more players if they're not careful with how they implement PvP and let gankers/griefers run rampant with impunity.

I don't think Nevrax are planning on going open PVP are they?

Another thought for the poster/s who say more PVP will destroy Ryzom as most of the players don't like it and leave. The exact same thing was said before they introduced the current PVP in PR areas (I should know I was one of them saying it). Guess what, Ryzom didn't stop. Players didn't leave in droves. New players didn't leave saying "we love the game but it has PVP so we're leaving". They still say similar things like "looks great but seems to be missing decent quests", "wheres the content?", "where is everyone?", etc).

PVP is certainly a topic to get people posting...

[akm72]

One thing that made PvP so much fun on the MUDs I played was that you could get to max level (50) in days or weeks of hardcore play, and then take part in the more active fun game that everyone was doing.


Got to ask. Why bother with the lvl'ing bit at all? Why not have people enter the game at the max level, so they can get straight on with the fun bit, without having to go through the boring grind up through 50 lvl's?

[hans1976]

Got to ask. Why bother with the lvl'ing bit at all? Why not have people enter the game at the max level, so they can get straight on with the fun bit, without having to go through the boring grind up through 50 lvl's?
Lessons. It is to teach one how to use all that power.

[larwood]

Got to ask. Why bother with the lvl'ing bit at all? Why not have people enter the game at the max level, so they can get straight on with the fun bit, without having to go through the boring grind up through 50 lvl's?


Hey, I personally think that going through the levels is fun and invigorating. :) Progressing, to where you can handle the next q gear or get the next spells. Its a challenge the entire way, and can be very fun.

I think its just how you approach it. A game where you start at max lvl... well, go play counterstrike or another PvP game... Ryzom is not that. :)

edit: you were being sarcastic? I read your post and who you were replying to... ah well. :)

[akm72]

edit: you were being sarcastic? I read your post and who you were replying to... ah well. :)

Not exactly. I'm new to MMORPGs, but I am coming to the opinion that levels and PVP don't mix well. This might be exagerated by the SoR combat system, where you can barely hit anyone more than a couple of dozen lvl's higher than yourself; while they are able to both take and give more damage. This results in the effect that solo high lvl characters could probably take on entire squads of lowbies in PVP and win (in fact it might be interesting to see how many lvl 50-100 fighters are needed to take on a single lvl 200-250 fighter - baring in mind that lvl 50-100 fighters are supposed to be competant). To me, this just feels kinda dumb, and not fun at all. One of the things I was interesting in looking at in SoR was how PVP would work - so far, I'm not very impressed. So I was wondering why, in a PVP-optimised MMOG/MUD, you would bother with lvl's at all. Especially if you just grind your way through them in a few days/weeks to get to the "real" game.

[grimjim]

Not exactly. I'm new to MMORPGs, but I am coming to the opinion that levels and PVP don't mix well. This might be exagerated by the SoR combat system, where you can barely hit anyone more than a couple of dozen lvl's higher than yourself; while they are able to both take and give more damage. This results in the effect that solo high lvl characters could probably take on entire squads of lowbies in PVP and win (in fact it might be interesting to see how many lvl 50-100 fighters are needed to take on a single lvl 200-250 fighter - baring in mind that lvl 50-100 fighters are supposed to be competant). To me, this just feels kinda dumb, and not fun at all. One of the things I was interesting in looking at in SoR was how PVP would work - so far, I'm not very impressed. So I was wondering why, in a PVP-optimised MMOG/MUD, you would bother with lvl's at all. Especially if you just grind your way through them in a few days/weeks to get to the "real" game.

Yeah, I think my holy grail of MMORPGs is a skill based one where, after creating your character they DON'T SUBSTANTIALLY CHANGE!

Where the difference in skill isn't a completely crippling issue when it comes to combat and its more to do with equipment and familiarity with the system.

A sufficiently deep MMO character creation system would give plenty of options for having different characters but everyone would be able to compete on an even basis.

[shippou]

Not much time to post, but I did want to insert some thoughts on PvP.

First off, I don't PvP much at all, because it's not anything which has interested me to this point. I much prefer cooperative play.

However, I do see a role for PvP that benefits the community in general. There is good PvP and bad PvP. The high-level 1337 kiddies knocking over a digger or caravan of travellers in Roots without warning is bad PvP.

Good PvP requires that the conflict be consensual at some level. It may be a tournament intended as a friendly competition with a guild, or between guilds. It could be an ongoing "rivalry" or "war" between two
consenting guilds that is played out at all times. Or it might be a one-time mock battle set up, where each side has a goal, and rules agreed upon before starting.

I have commonly seen one-on-one battles where both sides are fighting for the sake of pride, or to determine how strong they are in a skill, sometimes handicapped in favor of the weaker. Such battles are usually a friendly way to pass time while waiting.

But the key to PvP playing a positive role in the game is that all sides must show respect; towards teammates, towards opponents, and towards those who wish to remain uninvolved in the conflict. If respect is shown all-around, there will be no permanent enemies, and all will likely enjoy their time, no matter what the end result.

[vguerin]

Not much time to post, but I did want to insert some thoughts on PvP.

First off, I don't PvP much at all, because it's not anything which has interested me to this point. I much prefer cooperative play.

However, I do see a role for PvP that benefits the community in general. There is good PvP and bad PvP. The high-level 1337 kiddies knocking over a digger or caravan of travellers in Roots without warning is bad PvP.

Good PvP requires that the conflict be consensual at some level. It may be a tournament intended as a friendly competition with a guild, or between guilds. It could be an ongoing "rivalry" or "war" between two
consenting guilds that is played out at all times. Or it might be a one-time mock battle set up, where each side has a goal, and rules agreed upon before starting.

I have commonly seen one-on-one battles where both sides are fighting for the sake of pride, or to determine how strong they are in a skill, sometimes handicapped in favor of the weaker. Such battles are usually a friendly way to pass time while waiting.

But the key to PvP playing a positive role in the game is that all sides must show respect; towards teammates, towards opponents, and towards those who wish to remain uninvolved in the conflict. If respect is shown all-around, there will be no permanent enemies, and all will likely enjoy their time, no matter what the end result.Good post and I think you have found a decent middle ground that the majority should agree with.

The best PvPers in this game are good at it... and only the minority are the clowns that cause problems for all the others. You can check other threads and see who they are.

PvP in a 5 man team is about as fun as this game gets... PvP is not killing a digger...

It has come to that in the past because some just dont know when to STHU and others use that as a simple way to threaten and keep them out of the PvP zones.

I PvP any chance I get... When is that ? Thats during the Gladiator tournament series, recently the Samasara knife fights and anytime it matters...

People run from me in the PvP zones because I am good at what I do (though not a mage), and because they are uninformed as to my intentions. I have NEVER killed another player in a PvP zone that didn't ask for it or agree to it.

"I" get labeled because I believe that if you enter a PvP zone for any reason you CHOSE to be a victim or a victor... Respect is earned, I am not messed with because killing me is no fun... I say gg and go back to digging... I respect my enemies as I do my friends... I have no respect for whiners or carebears... My gamebox clearly states "Guilds and Factions - Meet new friends and form your own Guild to compete against other players (PvP) or build strong alliances to face common enemies in mass combat."

I enjoy RP that remembers that PvP is RP as well... if ya wanna sit on a hill and write peoms... more power to ya... You wanna sit on a hill in a PvP zone and write peoms... yer azz iz mine !
___________________
DoubleTap - Disciple of Jena - Master Swordsman
Matis Dual Blader & Medium Gladiator Champion (Undefeated) (http://www.ryzom.com/forum/showthread.php?t=15173)
Member of Team Melinoe, Matis 5V5 Champions (Undefeated) (http://www.ryzom.com/forum/showthread.php?t=15173)
Click here to join Melinoe (http://ryzom.twazz.net/modules.php?name=Forums&file=viewtopic&p=916#916) or read Ultimate Harvesting Guide (http://ryzom.twazz.net/modules.php?name=Forums&file=viewforum&f=4)
Melinoe - Atys Harvesters http://ryzom.twazz.net/
WWJD - What Would Jena Do ?

[vinnyq]

what if it's a poem about PVP, would you let me go?

[vguerin]

what if it's a poem about PVP, would you let me go?It's have to be a purty good poem :P I hope your goofing here... My point should be obvious that there is room for all without blasting others playstyles...

[vinnyq]

was being goofy :P

Here's a serious question, what if their playstyle IS to go after diggers? Would telling them to stop be infringing on their play styles?

(I always luv these dble loop meta discussions :P)

[aelvana]

Got to ask. Why bother with the lvl'ing bit at all? Why not have people enter the game at the max level, so they can get straight on with the fun bit, without having to go through the boring grind up through 50 lvl's?

People able to jump right in after making a char would have opened up too many doors for ninja griefing, and the game might be lost on new players if they jumped into PvP without knowing how to play (you can only kill within a few levels of yourself typically).

People would also constantly be changing their chars and names as they went to kill certain people without marring their reputation. Things would be a lot more anonymous and a lot less social that way. I think it would be a much nastier environment, actually...

[akm72]

People able to jump right in after making a char would have opened up too many doors for ninja griefing...

Not sure I agree with this, as ninja griefing is surely a result of have a significant lvl advantage over the victim; no lvl's, no advantage.

...the game might be lost on new players if they jumped into PvP without knowing how to play (you can only kill within a few levels of yourself typically).

How does it help new players if they are handicapped in PVP not just by unfamiliarity with the game, but also by being unable to hit higher lvl players, doing less damage and being unable to take as much damage.

People would also constantly be changing their chars and names as they went to kill certain people without marring their reputation. Things would be a lot more anonymous and a lot less social that way. I think it would be a much nastier environment, actually...

Fair comment, I can't disagree with that one :)

[grimjim]

"I enjoy RP that remembers that PvP is RP as well... if ya wanna sit on a hill and write peoms... more power to ya... You wanna sit on a hill in a PvP zone and write peoms... yer azz iz mine !"

Unless you're playing some kind of cannibal hillbilly a la Wrong Turn or The Hills Have Eyes then randomly assaulting anyone or anything that comes through your territory isn't roleplaying.

Attacking people from the opposing faction is just barely roleplaying, as would be defending a particular material spawn or playing at bandits and extorting a toll.

Not seen anyone go to that much effort yet.

[aelvana]

Not sure I agree with this, as ninja griefing is surely a result of have a significant lvl advantage over the victim; no lvl's, no advantage.

By ninja griefing I just meant being able to kill/mess with anyone immediately with no consequences. I guess the same thing I said in the paragraph after lol:P

How does it help new players if they are handicapped in PVP not just by unfamiliarity with the game, but also by being unable to hit higher lvl players, doing less damage and being unable to take as much damage.

It was actually protection for newbies and lowbies -- from being smacked with no chance of escape, that kind of thing:P It was a great idea for a 50 level MUD where everyone could hit the cap in a reasonable time. Prolly would be bad for Ryzom, since there isn't a common high level that almost all players are at now.

EDIT: Oh yeah, I just went back and read my last post...I meant it was discouraging people when they'd come in as a newbie and a level 50 would start killing them in 1 hit.