Spires query

[grimjim]

why is everyone thinking (well, i did too after new fame), that kami/kara is supposed to have tp to every region ? just because it was from start ?

People feel gypped if something is taken away from them, and quite rightly too. Its poor marketing gamewise to take things away from people. That's why add-ons are called 'expansions', not 'contractions'.

Things like this could bring in additional content associated with them with less fuss and bother.

Honestly, part of me would like to see the factioned having to deal with the same travel issues we neutrals have been wrestling with but I think it would be bad for them, and the game overall, as it has been bad for us.

[thlau]

That will leave the new players that start after Spires goes live; will they get inactive spawn if they ever manage to get to "occupied" territory?

The spawn will only be inactive, when the newcomer is factioned. I don't know if you will be able to use the spawn while not being tagged. I guess the original idea was to allow you spawn there if not tagged, but I dont think this is feasible with the reduced tag up times. I expect to every traveller being able to toggle the spawn, even if they are not able to use it.
In my opinion we have to wait for a reviewed article about the spires, and give Nevrax the chance to work in the changes made to the faction and fame system, since they published the current information.

[michielb]

What happens all the time in threads like this is that arguments get confused. People counter a gameplay argument with a lore argument and a game mechanic argument with a gameplay agrument.

We won't get anywhere like this. So either stop these pointless discussions or take the time tp read and understand whats been said and respond accordingly.

I'll try to make a start here.

If your storyline says there will be a war then it's only natural that travel will be restricted for those involved.

However restricting travel might have an adverse effect on gameplay as it inconviniences a lot of people (this might be different if the travel restrictions would only affect those tagged for PvP)

If your storyline covers two factions and neutrals it makes sense to assign some kind of role to the neutrals.

But if that role isn't supported by game-mechanics it might make for lousy gameplay.

If your storyline involves a war then how to we express that in the game? In other words what are the game-mechanics and what is the gameplay (play-style) they enforce?



An other this thats is frequently used in this type of discussions is the marketing argument.

What is our target audience, what play-style do they enjoy and how do we best support that through game-mechanics?

Ryzom has to find it's own target audience because it can not compete with the established brands on the market.

Adding more PvP (both gameplay and game-mechanics) to Ryzom, in the hope to steel some marketshare away from Blizzard is not going to work. If players turn away from WoW it's because of gameplay issues, creating a similar gameplay won't be at all apealing for them.

Hope this clears things up a bit and helps us to stop comparing apples and oranges...