Should Ryzom have combat pets?

Come in, pull up a chair, let's discuss all things Ryzom-related.
User avatar
jennaelf
Posts: 250
Joined: Tue Jul 04, 2006 3:55 am

Re: Should Ryzom have combat pets?

Post by jennaelf »

On one hand - yes, would be very neat.

On the other - please, for the love of the gaming gods, no. (Previous MMO experience doesn't translate well to this open skill system, so it's difficult to relate, besides worrying over the impact of combat-pets and the 'balance' issues introduced in PvP, and even PvE.)

I couldn't just say "Yes" to such a question without knowing how such a thing would be intergrated into the Ryzom system, and I am honest enough to say that I don't have any actual suggestions on how "I think it should be done". (Which sounds terribly egotistical anyway. I'm not a game design brain.)
Jeziellia Mara'tyr
Officer, House Etchmarc, Arispotle

Better by far you should forget and smile than you should remember and be sad.
Christina Rossetti (1830 - 1894)


[size=-2]OOC: Jeziellia's Journal is OOC knowledge only. Possibilities of reading it IC should be brought to me for discussion. Thank you![/size]
ark014
Posts: 83
Joined: Thu Jan 05, 2006 7:31 am

Re: Should Ryzom have combat pets?

Post by ark014 »

I know what would be my first combat pet, it would be Amphiaraus and his Merciless Suckling Yubo of Doom. :)

Seriously, a hideous Dominant Ocyx (like the one on Silan Island) would make a very interesting combat pet, even the sound that thing makes freaks me out.

Thanks,
Amphiaraus
User avatar
jennaelf
Posts: 250
Joined: Tue Jul 04, 2006 3:55 am

Re: Should Ryzom have combat pets?

Post by jennaelf »

I think the white ocyx are some of the most lovely predators I've ever seen. But I'm a little strange.

Ocyketh is also very very pretty. Same blue as the dominant Ocyx from Silan.

Honestly, I just want to RIDE an ocyx! (with a saddle, of course!)

*whispers* Jez wants a Lakelands Yubo. Or a PR Arma. *so cute!*

*ahem*
Jeziellia Mara'tyr
Officer, House Etchmarc, Arispotle

Better by far you should forget and smile than you should remember and be sad.
Christina Rossetti (1830 - 1894)


[size=-2]OOC: Jeziellia's Journal is OOC knowledge only. Possibilities of reading it IC should be brought to me for discussion. Thank you![/size]
User avatar
tigrus
Posts: 1344
Joined: Mon Jul 31, 2006 2:18 pm

Re: Should Ryzom have combat pets?

Post by tigrus »

I want a pet Chuck Norris...
Sun Ce, The Devil of Arispotle.

The Sexiest beast alive.

A living Legend.

Alpha and the Omega

&

King of the Universe


"So in a few moments Sun Ce had disposed of two enemies, one crushed to death and one frightened to death. Thereafter Sun Ce was called the Little Prince.!"

User avatar
omsop
Posts: 192
Joined: Fri Sep 24, 2004 1:27 pm

Re: Should Ryzom have combat pets?

Post by omsop »

Bring back the bug where you could fear a Kincher and then it followed you everywhere but never attacked you, thats a sort of taming and it stops you being over run by Creatures (like Arana's, Yelks, Arma's and such) stopping you targetting your sources cause they love to sit on them or block you from getting to them when diggin. :p
[COLOR=yellow]«-®-» Põ§мÖ «-®-»[/COLOR]

Light Armor;

250 Boots, 250 Gloves, 250 Sleeves, 250 Vest, 250 Pants.

Jewels;

250 Anklet, 250 Braclet, 250 Earring, 250 Ring, 250 Diadem, 250 Pendant.

Weapons;

250 2H Pike, 250 2H Axe, 250 2H Mace, 250 2H Sword, 250 Amps, 250 Daggers.

Melee;

250 Pike, 250 Axe

Magic;

250 Elemental, 250 Heal, 250 OA, 250 DA.

Forages;

250 Forest, 250 Jungle, 250 Lake, 250 Desert, 250 PR


(Other Skillz: I'm gettin there)


If you asked me if i had a God complex, let me tell you... I am God.
User avatar
sprite
Posts: 3169
Joined: Thu Sep 23, 2004 12:36 pm

Re: Should Ryzom have combat pets?

Post by sprite »

As a suggestion about how pets could be implemented; having never played a game with non-automated pet training (ie charm once then it attacks what you attack and you do what you like) before, this might be a stupid idea, but I'd like to think that it is at least vaguely sensible. (note, anywhere I refer to "your level" or the level of the pet master, I mean the homin's level in pet training or whatever it would be called)

Firstly the "capturing" the pet - some kind of "charm creature" skill, or a completely new implementation of "immature" mobs which you have to go and capture before they grow up. Either way it should be very very hard to capture a big scary mob (whether or not you would allow people to capture any mob they like is a point of contention, but the theory remains the same... high level or just plain powerful mobs should be dang hard to get). At any rate, it should take a long time to do because I wouldn't want it to be the case that someone just runs around without a pet and then when they get attacked they grab the nearest mob, instacharm, and use it to deal with what attacked them.

Controlling the pet -

I think a nice way of doing this would basically be to force you to maintain an affliction-like link on your pet at all times if you want it to do what you want. This would mean people would basically either use their pet as their sole means of attacking, or not use their pet at all. It also restricts to one pet, and I think kind of fits into the SoR style of gameplay and lore (we can already make mobs attack themselves, run away, go to sleep etc, so other things shouldn't be too much of a stretch of the imagination).

When attempting to control your pet by casting one of these "control spells" you would have to test to see if the pet resists or you fail to cast (same as casting an affliction). Maintaining the link would also suffer some broken links if you're trying to control a mob that is a much higher level than you - I think bsically taking the current affliction rules and making it easier to maintain links would work here (since you've already got some kind of passive hold over the mob).

If you fail / don't try to control it for whatever reason (eg you decided to start nuking the guy who ran past your pet to hit you), the mob reverts to a toned down version of its wild behavior - it only attacks stuff that attacks it (or maybe it runs away because your passive hold over it tells it that attacking random people is bad), if its a herbie then it wanders off to munch some grass, if its a predator it goes to attack its natural prey (excluding homins as per first point here, and so that people don't just get it into combat and then ignore it and let it munch its own way through the opponents), or maybe it just sits down and waits for you to tell it to do something.

Since its a "only use or don't use at all" choice, some way of storing pets that you don't plan on using atm would have to be devised... maybe a "zoo" in all the cities (like a stable but for combat pets)? Or possibly you can tie them up inside appartments/GHs.

People are likely to form an attachment to their pets, and most mobs are easy enough to kill if you have the right levels and numbers on your side, so to make things a little fairer, I think mobs that are being controlled by homins should be tougher (but not stronger) than normal mobs of that species/lvl. There'd be nothing worse than running into an OP battle thinking "Yay, my max lvl ocyx pet is going to do some serious damage :D " and having it killed in less than 5 seconds by all the nukes flying around. This could be a big problem with pets... while mob vs mob balancing isn't bad, when you have a lot of homins in one place mobs die a lot faster than homins do, especially if mobs can't get healed.

Possible balances for the "mobs die fast in pvp" issue would be to apply the fact that damage is halved (or whatever) in PvP to the pets, and also to allow some way of healing them. I don't think it would be a good idea to allow pets to be healed by normal heal spells because anyone with a "steroid herbie" would have the perfect tank :o but maybe have another "control spell" that allows you to increase someone elses' pet's regen by some significant amount while it continues to do what they want. This effectively would mean pet users would have to work in pairs, one with a pet and one without, but I'm not sure this is a totally bad thing - I'd have to see it in action to work this one out I think.

When not in combat, the pet should follow you around and not attack anything you don't tell it to, because of the passive hold you have over it from when it was "charmed" (see 2nd paragraph). Its natural predators would attack it even if they don't attack you, (though I fail to think of anything that attacks mobs but not homins by default) and its natural prey would run away from it even if they don't run away from you.

I can see a sort of contradiction here between the pet behavior when just walking around, and when in combat but without you controlling it... I'm in two minds whether or not to just make it so that if you don't have a control spell on it it will do its "default behavior" combined with following you (ie attack its natural prey if its sees it/munch grass when you stop, but otherwise follow you). This would probably have to be combined with allowing a "follow me and play nice" control spell that you can maintain while moving, but still have to test against (albeit its very unlikely to fail unless the pet is much higher lvl than you) which would let you take it around with you, but would mean it would act like a semi-wild mob if you're forced to ignore it.

Pet lvling - two possibilities... either they gain xp and level like homins do, or they don't level at all and you just upgrade your pet when you need something that does more damage. The first could be thought of as some kind of link between the pet and master, so that it gains the xp you do, while the second would stop people pushing species of mob past their natural limits (uber yubo of doom anyone? it would be entertaining but worrying to see a yubo one-shot a raging varinx)
"the" spriteh
SoTR
[size=-4]Read it, know it, live it
Remember kids, IOWIYAFOO![/size]
User avatar
grimjim
Posts: 2784
Joined: Fri Sep 24, 2004 9:00 am

Re: Should Ryzom have combat pets?

Post by grimjim »

Quick and nasty implementation.

Pets are available from stables (or new vendors) they take up slots that would otherwise be used by mounts/packers.

The ability to buy new/better ones is unlocked by encyclopaedia missions (which are locked to single players to prevent bumping up).

They just do what you do, though some might be able to aid you with things others than just attacking your target if a more full implementation was put in (yubo careplanners!).
--
Jyudas
High Officer in the Samsara
WEALTH & GLORY!
Currently pondering R2, please hold...
We're neutral, you're just too cheap to hire us.
Remember, other people exist than yourself.
mithur
Posts: 352
Joined: Sun Aug 27, 2006 2:58 pm

Re: Should Ryzom have combat pets?

Post by mithur »

Pet is a good idea, so I'll say some more ideas about it:

And it could be much better idea as a separate skill tree. For a start, it could be going specializating in all five environments, and have diferent possibilities.

For one, The control over a mob; "domesticate" a savage mob could be difficult and need some stanzas & actions, probably using focus or similar. The difficulty is the usual for SoR: level of creature vs. your skill level, with stanzas in your action modifing some things. Control a lvl 30 when you are 80 could be very easy, and control a lvl 70 when you are 80 could be much more difficult. Obviously, isn't the same difficulty domesticate an aggro, a social aggro or a herb.

Then, you have a controlled animal, who you can give orders (Each order the animal has a chance to become savage again, and each hour he can become savage too). You can give some orders (Some of them more difficult than others). This orders could be Stop, Follow Me, Patrol around, and you can change the belhaviour of the animal too (be aggro, be peaceful, etc...).

And, at some level, with some stanzas, you could dommesticate animals, probably animals of lower level than you. Then, you could sell this animals, as if a melktoub were, for a price, with the standar set of instructions (Stop, Follow Me, patrol, attack)

At last, you can Train Animals, so they become packers, mounts, fighting animals, familiars and so on. This animals can be selled too.

Ok, all of this is dreaming, but is pretty dreaming. I know that to make this you'll need a big development, and is hard to do. But it could give more variety in all area (Economy, figth, market, etc...) and a pretty good new occupation for all the oldies in the game :)
Mithur (Arispotle)
Nomad Karavaneer & Forest Eremite
Matis Citizen
Proud Officer of Legion Of Atys
User avatar
kurita
Posts: 146
Joined: Mon Mar 28, 2005 9:13 pm

Re: Should Ryzom have combat pets?

Post by kurita »

i faintly recall seeing two screenshots from waaaaay back, beta or even alpha test, that shows Homins with a varyinx, that looked like it was fighting for them, not against them and one screenie with the Varyinx sitting beside the Homins. i think it was in forest or jungle, all with the same 3 - 4 Homins...

i tryed to find it again... but after they have remade the HP all screenies left in Screenshotsection are from after release.
does someone remember them too? or better still, have them somewhere?

back on topic, i think pets would be a great addition, if done right and not overpowered, may even help to creat a dappersink in some way, if you have to buy them from trainers.

greetz

Lyrthis
Lyrthïs
[_~*Arispotle*~_]
Ryzom Reborn!
;) .............Blue is Beautiful............. ;)

ï = ALT+0239 (as in Zoraï, wombaï, Hoï-Cho, Jinbaï...)
² = ALT+0178 (as in R²)
Member of Project Mayhem, Atys Paladins, Merchants of Mayhem, R²-betatester
ashot
Posts: 6
Joined: Sun Dec 24, 2006 8:47 pm

Re: Should Ryzom have combat pets?

Post by ashot »

I remember there was a time in ultima 0nline when everybody and their mother had a pet dragon following him/her. That wasn't fun to look at.

On other hand more skills always equal more fun, so i think a skilltree for controll of pets/mounts/beastsofburden whould be very cool.<<<
"I know not what tomorrow will bring."
Fernando Pessoa
Post Reply

Return to “General”