Area of Effect Spells/ammo

[velogfx]

hmmm free loot? why not. maybe do some secure and insecure loot slots. the secure will not drop while the unsecure one drop and can be looted by friend or enemy

[iceaxe68]

I theoretically concur with the idea of magic AoE being targetted to enemies/mobs, and physical AoE (launchers) affecting all in a blast radius. That seems a good representation of the idea of those things. However, I think in practice such things would be intentionally abused without severe consequences for blowing up bystanders.

On the (off-) topic of extensive free-for-all PvP and looting of defeated player characters:

There are a number of games like that on the market. I've found the games to be engaging, but many of the people drawn to them to be unpleasantly sociopathic, such that I do not find it worth my while to play those games. Dead horse topic, no further elaboration on games other than Ryzom.

I think such is not in keeping with the idea of Ryzom, in which we're meant to be rebuilding civilizations. There are conflicts between groups, but they are counter-productive to the overall goal, and to be avoided when possible.

Of course, that only means anything if you happen to care about the lore and the story, as opposed to proving to all who might care (i.e., yourself) that you are "better" at twiddling buttons on a keyboard than some other players.

The suggestion may come up that in order to make Ryzom profitable, it's necessary to accommodate that playstyle. I don't know if that's true or not, but there are some counter-examples. If pandering to sociopaths proves to be the only way to keep Atys afloat, I suppose I'd be finding a new hobby either way.

End of digression.

Back on-topic:

I like the idea, but I foresee difficulties in implementing it. Put it in the suggestion forum and see how it does?

[odofitzg]

I'm not quite sure how the thread got hijacked to the question of PvP looting, but that wasn't my point, nor any of my intent. I do think it's interesting that a really very focused suggestion got interpreted according to various people's hot buttons.

However, while I still think that it would be a good idea, I realized that it would be very hard to implement the difference between members of two teams who are cooperating to bring down Aen and an "innocent" passer-by. (Who would be passing by that close to Aen while being at all innocent? Especially when they can see the fuss going on.)

- Bittty

[hemera]

just for you bittty, i would place someone neutral /on my side pvp HA and put two healer on them, then aim a launcher at that person since they are being constantly healed they wouldnt die but everything around them would. this person can just run through healers/hukers and they all drop.
Sounds like a great idea now?

[odofitzg]

just for you bittty, i would place someone neutral /on my side pvp HA and put two healer on them, then aim a launcher at that person since they are being constantly healed they wouldnt die but everything around them would. this person can just run through healers/hukers and they all drop.
Sounds like a great idea now?

That wouldn't work, now, would it? You can't aim weapons/ele at your own side and you can't aim weapons/ele at a neutral person. (I'm not sure about healing -- I've never tried to heal a neutral person during PvP (OP) battles.)

Even if you could, you've taken two of your healers off of other duties. That's a strategic decision. You may pay for it in losses elsewhere or you may not -- that's how battles play out. The difference from the ~status quo~ is that you would have to take two healers off the line to run that tactic. I don't see that as a problem with the suggestion.

-- Bittty

Edit: I would also note that I mentioned this tactic in my very first post on the thread.

[hemera]

nvm ... you dont see all the different ways your suggestiont can be exploited

[philu]

If the game, box, site or whatever, says that it is a PvP game and that there is a possibility that you could be enagaged in combat at any time in any place is a consensual PvP game.

Ah but it doesn't, the home page says::

"Different types of PvP combat coexist in our MMORPG, and since not everyone likes PvP in an MMORPG, you can choose whether or not to get involved."

So I have a right not to consent to PVP.

The reason why is, you gave your consent to PvP at the time you logged into the game. If you do not want to take the risks or just don't want to deal with other players you have logged into the wrong game.

No I didn't. Show me where it says in the Terms that I consent to PVP. Ryzom is far more than a PVP game, in fact once upon a time it wasn't a PVP game at all.

[cielchan]

hmmm free loot? why not. maybe do some secure and insecure loot slots. the secure will not drop while the unsecure one drop and can be looted by friend or enemy

This is what player wish for? If this becomes reality, then Ryzom is definitely not my game anymore. Don't need Guildwars with a french skin.