A Possible Solution to the PvP/PvE Clash

[uhuhu]

bored by people like you who speak speak speak, u dont know me **Text removed as swearing is not permitted on these forums. Please refer to the noticed displayed here for more information**
http://www.ryzom.com/?page=support_policies

[svayvti]

Would this still allow players to be "all-friends"? I, for instance, have worked very hard to achieve 100 fame with all civilizations, spending a great deal of time, and dying alot, to prove myself to them. I would hate to see all those months go down the drain. Currently, they see me as a friend, alligned with homins in general, instead of a race in particular (both my Kami and Karavan fames are ever so slightly negative). Would they not see the murder of someone they trust and respect as a bad thing, regardless of who else trusts and respects them?

(I'm going to call the idea being "sworn" to a side or sides)

Depends on what you mean by "all-friends". Part of the idea is to allow someone to be a Kami/Karavan Crusader, and not loose 2 dozen other faction ratings when they fight their sworn enemies the Karavan followers. Kami/Karavan guards will defend their sworn allies in a fight. Yet his civ fame is seperate so they remain free to enter all the cities and travel all the lands.

on the other hand, someone could be a Tryker who is neutral to Kami/Karavan. They work to declare themselves part of the Tryker government and can raid and defend against Matisians and Zorai, without effecting their neutrality to Kami and Karavan. Civ guards will defend their sworn allies in a fight. This person knows who their enemies are on sight, though attacking Kami/Karavan sworn (if allowed under mechanics) should come with a penalty to those groups.

Perhaps a Matis guild could work to declare itself loyal to the King, and another loyal to the Prince. Their tribe fames could be impacted, but their civ and faction fame left intact as they war against each other. Tribes could defend their sworn guild in a fight.

The reason being that these conflicts are entirely different from each other, and that open pvp or region based pvp are entirely meaningless. How am I supporting the Kami Vs. Karavan conflict by merely harvesting in one prime root and part of a civ conflict or guild conflict by entering another? This would give PvP a meaning, it would also give it a scope as to clearly limit even for PvP participants who enemies and friends can be.

I do believe it should be more than a pvp mechanic, but also a RP, fame, and rite mechanic.

[mtsmith]

I think You missed the point.

Because only open PvP is not possible with the limit what I have with PvP. This is because I don't wanna play victim for someone else. I have notting agaist PvP. Are You saying that open PvP is only way Nevrax is able to do the PvP for You?

What PvP possibilities does someone have in Saga of Ryzom, if he/she does not wanna have open PvP? Duels, what else?

Open PvP is same as You can't say, who You fight with and when You fight. Basicly anyone can attack You anytime.

sofiaoak, I think you misunderstood. I was applauding you for your stance and the fact that you use the guidelines set by Nevrax to play the game as you enjoy it. You do not go into a PVP zone, get killed, and then complain that you got killed in a PVP zone. I commend you for that and truly wish that others not interested in PVP would follow suit.

[grimjim]

sofiaoak, I think you misunderstood. I was applauding you for your stance and the fact that you use the guidelines set by Nevrax to play the game as you enjoy it. You do not go into a PVP zone, get killed, and then complain that you got killed in a PVP zone. I commend you for that and truly wish that others not interested in PVP would follow suit.

Unlink important 'content' from the requirement to open oneself up to PvP and you wouldn't have a problem.

[grimjim]

You can't PvP because u're WEAK and if I like PvP, I can, so **Text removed as swearing is not permitted on these forums. Please refer to the noticed displayed here for more information**
http://www.ryzom.com/?page=support_policies

"He will win who knows when to fight, and when not to fight."
- Sun Tzu

[mtsmith]

Unlink important 'content' from the requirement to open oneself up to PvP and you wouldn't have a problem.

As usual, your point is flawed. There is no requirement for any player to participate in PVP or to engage in such activities. With very few exceptions, every aspect of Ryzom is voluntary without restriction. Go save some owls, will you?

[mtsmith]

"He will win who knows when to fight, and when not to fight."
- Sun Tzu

That would entail your actually having fought or having the intention to do so when and if necessary. Please, leave the quotes at the door. I don't suppose you were ever a soldier in the real world or you might believe differently than you do. What kind of a mercenary are you? Just like your namesake (close enough, at least), you seem to be a walking contradiction.

[grimjim]

As usual, your point is flawed. There is no requirement for any player to participate in PVP or to engage in such activities. With very few exceptions, every aspect of Ryzom is voluntary without restriction. Go save some owls, will you?

There is, as has already been explained to you several dozen ways several score of times.

You might have a mildly valid objection to the current state of play in the PvP PR, but that is an effective enforcement caused by requirement. With outposts however you won't even have that leg to stand on.

So long as there is a matter of choice, a greater point to the PvP then I imagine a lot of the objections will melt away.

I still haven't had an answer to the question I posed in the previous thread from anyone.

Why is it a requirement, for the pro PvP lobby, that their fun come at the potential and likely expense of someone elses? Can you not still have what you need from PvP by engaging purely with others who desire to be involved with it?

Depending on the implementation of the PvP flag, that might solve that problem but I doubt it will apply to PvP/FvF areas or outposts.

[grimjim]

That would entail your actually having fought or having the intention to do so when and if necessary. Please, leave the quotes at the door. I don't suppose you were ever a soldier in the real world or you might believe differently than you do. What kind of a mercenary are you? Just like your namesake (close enough, at least), you seem to be a walking contradiction.

A wise mercenary fights for the least risk and the greatest reward and many mercenaries are employed in terms of protection and bodyguarding duties (at least in the real world). Employment in terms of conventional battles is relatively rare.

The current state of cold war/tension between lands and factions should, in theory, be far more lucrative with underhanded and sneaky stuff going on. Even outposts could help a merc 'faction' stay solvent with people needing protecting.

An all out war, however, has less room for clandestine or private endeavours and it much more risky and costly. Its often fought over 'higher' ideals which makes people who work for cash less trustworthy.

It is then, perhaps paradoxically but nonetheless true, in a merc's best interests to hold people back from all out war, if at all possible.

A soldier doesn't concern themselves with tactics, a soldier does what they're told like a good little robot and gets killed if need be. An officer or higher official sets the objectives, overviews the higher plans or aims and gives the orders. One need not be a soldier in order to understand tactics or the philosophy/economy of war. Indeed, it can be detrimental to a soldier's performance if they understand the situation beyond their immediate orders.

Back onto topic (though it is peripherally all related). I was merely pointing out that by fighting, all Audrey/Uhuhuhuhuhuhu does is defeat herself without the opposing 'force' needing to do anything at all. This equally applies to the game as a whole. We'll be fighting, but its not clear what for exactly yet and, in terms of story and the good of the game it may be wiser not to.

As to the name, it comes from an old tabletop character of mine.

[uhuhu]

blablabla - stop speak, go act