Multiple Attack

[rundll32]

PvP is an easy version of this scenario - nobody is within striking distance, where they could inflict genuine pain. Everyone is just a chat message away - a license to insult and inflame. It allows these people to compete as fiercely and dirtily as possible, with little or no consequence or thought for other people's feelings.

maybe you should work on your hypersensitivty - the pvpers are allowed to fight fiercely and dirtily. They can do whatever they please within the game constaints. Maybe theyre naieve enough to think that no one would get so angry and enraged about having their char killed in game.

OFC, if u dont want to pvp - dont put yourself in the situation, just dont whinge about it afterwards

[cygnus]

I think "false attacks" as a diversionary tactic have some valididity with regard to OP's but I think there should be something done to stop it being done by a guild created 10 mins previous. Maybe a minimum member limit, it doesn't have to be high or even a min number per zone, the higher the zone the higher min member requirement. I think the annoyance factor for most stems from the fact that it is pretty much anonymous.

Ani's idea of real time attacks is a good one. I always thought OP's would have npc guards that auto spawned if you got too close (as in Aens guards) and that tactically they would play a much larger role but alas it was not meant to be. Imagine the adrenalin rush, your op is suddenly under attack and you have to marshall a defence force as quickly as possible, gathering allies as quickly as possible... hrm or maybe not as your attacker has had time to plan and gather his forces so you are massively outnumbered and have no hope of defending.

I still like the idea though but I feel it would just give the attacker too much advantage, oh well back to work

[petej]

I think "false attacks" as a diversionary tactic have some valididity with regard to OP's but I think there should be something done to stop it being done by a guild created 10 mins previous. Maybe a minimum member limit, it doesn't have to be high or even a min number per zone, the higher the zone the higher min member requirement. I think the annoyance factor for most stems from the fact that it is pretty much anonymous.

Good idea but why not do it on the player who makes the challenges max lvl instead ?

50+ to challenge a 100 OP , 100+ to challenge a 150 , 150+ to challenge 200 , 200+ to challenge a 250

[dazman76]

maybe you should work on your hypersensitivty - the pvpers are allowed to fight fiercely and dirtily. They can do whatever they please within the game constaints. Maybe theyre naieve enough to think that no one would get so angry and enraged about having their char killed in game.

OFC, if u dont want to pvp - dont put yourself in the situation, just dont whinge about it afterwards

It was probably a bad choice of words - I was actually referring to smack talk, and feelings of animosity or even hatred towards other players. More importantly, I'm talking about the attitudes that come with PvP, and the fact that bad PvPers use these attitudes in a way that only generates further dislike between players. Not wanting to get your char killed has little or nothing to do with it, for most players at least.

I don't PvP - I've tried 3 implementations now, and didn't enjoy any of them. To be honest, PvP fails for me much earlier than the smack talk and argument phase. I have little interest in a system of combat where equipment can be as or more important than player skill and tactic. But that's just my personal opinion. A situation where the outcome could already be decided before you've even started, doesn't sit well with the description "competitive". There's some fun to be had, but the balance is incredibly difficult. WoW's battlegrounds are a solid idea, but fall apart due in part to class imbalance, but more heavily connected to equipment imbalance. I'm sure there's a way to make PvP truly competitive, but nobody has found it yet - even in games that are designed for PvP before anything else, massive debates exist concerning balance - essentially the same debates time after time, dressed differently.

[dbritt]

I had never been that much of a PvP'r. Even after 8 years of playing onine games and the old pen and paper games before that. The implimentation here in Ryzom is the most solid I have found. It is pretty simple, like it, then do it, dont like it, then dont do it.

even in games that are designed for PvP before anything else, massive debates exist concerning balance - essentially the same debates time after time, dressed differently.

I am so tired of hearing the vocal ones that are always "Oh my, theres going to be a fight". Out of all the posts in the last freaking 3 threads, there have really been only 2-3 people of the whole group that spoke up and caused the thread to be closed....give me a freaking break. Do NOT try to push your ideals on me here, because I dont come up to you in game and say 'pvppvppvppvppvppvppvp'. Leave it alone, voice your opinion ONCE, then leave it the hell alone. If you want to debate, take it to a tell. People keep talking about how the game community is going away, and how these forums have gone to crap....posts like YOURS are the reason for the forum problems, you start a debate because of YOUR opinion, not neccessarily everyone elses.

Notice my post count. I have played since Dec 12th, 2004 and have not stopped. The reason I do not post here is because after reading the few crybaby posts in 75% of the threads of 'why isnt this game perfect for me' I try to control myself. This time I'm not.

You have made your point....drop it and let people make up their own minds.

I am not trying to offend anyone personally or otherwise. But there have been a very minority of people that shouldnt have learned to type that have just fustrated me to no end.....again I say, there will be a battle this weekend, it has the makings of one of the biggest yet, so win or freaking lose, I for one am going to have fun....and I hope the people that enjoy the occational break from things do to.

Oh yeah, one more thing while I'm ranting...as far as I know, if someone loses an OP, I really think they can probably plan and gather people to take it back. Dont think theres a rule that states you can only own an OP once.....Souls, am I correct, cause I know your reading

H

[forever]

Outposts are not a home or a permanent structure for a guild to own. The outposts are temporary resource points that guilds have till another guild takes it.
I think the threshold on outposts should drop to 0 and you lose the outpost to the NPCs. A this point any guild is free to try and take the outpost. This would fix the problem we have now where guilds sit on an outpost and cry if someone tries to take it.

[dbritt]

Some good ideas thrown around that should go in the suggestion box.

I personally have no problem with multiple attacks, it seems to be a fair tactic. But as I believe the thread topic initially was, most of the problem comes from the fact that it cant be done by a reputable "real" guild. This is just childish....if your real feelings is 'Karavan Haters' the be proud of that, discuse it with your real guild and declare as a team. THs are low enough who knows, you really could take more than one.

Dont be scared, speak up, let everyone know who you are that hides behind an alt. Well, I doubt it will happen, but it was on my wish list.

Neva--good idea, only adjustment I'd see is the ability for the owning guild to actually declare first, or early....only fair it seems.

Annisa--another good idea, instant battles. My question about it though is only that wouldnt a guild that loses an OP in an instant battle because it was done at midnight still start a bad thread here? You know, the typical "OMG, some bast@#$ took our OP!!"

and no Chrono, that was not aimed at you, as I said, you put out a call for help and that was it...as i've said many times in the last two days, get your help, lets just have some fun.

(personal note, I have recieved alot of tells here in the last couple days. I am not ignoring people when i dont answer right away or at all, I've just got a RL I'm dealing with too so i'm frequently afk without /afking. Try again, I'll talk to anyone.)

[petej]

I think the threshold on outposts should drop to 0 and you lose the outpost to the NPCs. A this point any guild is free to try and take the outpost. This would fix the problem we have now where guilds sit on an outpost and cry if someone tries to take it.

or when it drops to zero you keep possesion but you will be attacked by the NPC's who originaly owned that Outpost , I dont think Guilds should just be kicked out of an OP once the threshold drops but certainly they should have to hold (Defend) it and have an opportunity to increase the threshold once more

[marct]

or when it drops to zero you keep possesion but you will be attacked by the NPC's who originaly owned that Outpost , I dont think Guilds should just be kicked out of an OP once the threshold drops but certainly they should have to hold (Defend) it and have an opportunity to increase the threshold once more

I think they currently stop at 5. I like the idea of rogue attacks, some kind of maintenance or other things as stated previously.

Point at the start of this post is this:
1) Don't make a fake guild to declare on an Outpost.
2) Don't declare and not show up.
3) If you are going to declare on more than 1, do so, but show up and fight, and mix it up.

[kyesmith]

well at least this way the battle will be a true Guild vrs Guild, the way OP battles should be, with everyone protecting their own OPs AP and PF can fight, and i wish them all the best...