Ryzom

vguerin wrote:If you mean to test our resolve at defending our townsfolk and come into Yrkanis combat ready (pvp flagged), we will not ask you your intentions. Too many times in the past this method was used to enter our cities to conduct acts of war.

I'm sure you have good intentions at heart. But aren't you condemning a whole faction for a few bad apples? The Karavan has their own bad apples, but I don't see the Kamists throwing up similiar "rules" around Dyron.

(Dyron being the one place I've seen repeated faction fighting)

kostika wrote:I'm sure you have good intentions at heart. But aren't you condemning a whole faction for a few bad apples? The Karavan has their own bad apples, but I don't see the Kamists throwing up similiar "rules" around Dyron.

(Dyron being the one place I've seen repeated faction fighting)

Most of us on both sides would not advocate going into an enemy town for no reason other than to taunt or to harrass. Some people on both sides have done this, as is their choice, but I do not find it to be very honorable. Put me on a battlefield and I will fight to the best of my ablities, but I really do prefer consentual combat over guerrilla tactics.

As for the situation in Dyron, I think most Karavan supporters tend to stay out of it. I understand that it has occurred in the past, but I haven't heard of any recent attacks. Either way, it is not our responsibility to chastise those in our faction who do so. It IS our responsibility to protect our most populated town from random attack.

I support this declaration with every ounce of my being. No longer will Kami slaves come into our cities and cause trouble in the home of our fathers. While I realize this problem is primarily an issue in Yrkanis, i choose to extend my own support to any Lake or Forest town.

Listing who is, who isn't guilty of such acts and memorizing them wouldn't work. Maybe some exceptions will be made for those with good reputations.

/OOC
-Alt creation is a factor.
-With the new PvP timers coming de-tagging shouldn't be too much of a bother. It's an option, take it or leave it.

kostika wrote:I'm sure you have good intentions at heart. But aren't you condemning a whole faction for a few bad apples?

Not at all. Kamists who have disarmed are welcome. Kamists who are armed for a fight are not. With the new changes in pvp timers, this really shouldn't be a problem except for those looking for trouble, IMO.

OOC:

mmm, interesting thread once again about PvP...

Wasnt it the whole idea of the tags you could attack and be attacked with your tag on, at any time, at any place? Or did I, once again, didnt understand anything of it? (probably the latter, i think)

And what happened to the people who shouted 'when I am AFK with PvP tag on, I dont mind being killed?'

/OOC

*reads the parchment on the bulletin board, then notice the shockwaves and lighning flashing through the air... *

*shakes her head, teleports to Fairhaven and orders a cocktail at the bar*

ajsuk wrote:Listing who is, who isn't guilty of such acts and memorizing them wouldn't work.

Besides your fine reasons why this won't work, Jayce, there is one other issue. Making specific accusations just leads to a thread filled with anger and poison. Since this policy is aimed at those that make the choice to enter an enemy town "loaded for bear" and they have the choice to disarm, it should be implemented consistently. I don't want to hear whining about how we "let so-and-so into town, but not me".

I have no ill will toward Rushin (who indicated that he had never killed a crafter or other defenseless indivual) or any other individual Kamist. And, I do not question Rushin's veracity in this. But, I will back this policy without prejudice.

Disarm or enter Yrk at your own risk.

mtsmith wrote:While I realize this problem is primarily an issue in Yrkanis, i choose to extend my own support to any Lake or Forest town.

I concur with this. I will not enforce this policy in the Lakes without a solid request/consensus from the Lakeland's inhabitants; but if we get that, I am willing to extend this protection.

OOC

I hear every time the argument 'With the new timeout for switching off the PvP timer'. Can someone explain me the difference from the Kamis visitor to a Karavaneer crafter? If you don't like to be killed while crafting with supreme mats, switch of the PvP flag (it only takes 30 seconds).

/OOC

I heared your threat against the kamist atysians, and in my opinion do what ever you want in verdant heights. I hope you will think twice before extending the Shielding Act to Aeden Aqueous.

mtsmith wrote:Most of us on both sides would not advocate going into an enemy town for no reason other than to taunt or to harrass. Some people on both sides have done this, as is their choice, but I do not find it to be very honorable. Put me on a battlefield and I will fight to the best of my ablities, but I really do prefer consentual combat over guerrilla tactics.

....snip

This still doesn't answer my question about condemning a while faction for a few bad apples. Each side has bad apples. I'm sure you wouldn't wish to be descriminated against, so why should you (as in the Karavan) discriminate against others for a few bad people.

That's be like me hating all of Evolution because Sxarlet called me a meanie pants.

Mind you I only ask out of curiousity. I would like all cities to be peaceful, but I'm unsure this is the best route to that.

ooc:
this post and my last are both completely IC.

sx4rlet wrote:OOC:And what happened to the people who shouted 'when I am AFK with PvP tag on, I dont mind being killed?/OOC

That was until recently, when poor 7 year old Viccia Chialdo, daughter of a poor merchant family was killed when she wandered too close to the city stables. She was laughing and pointing at the mektoubs one moment, and struck by the bomb effects of a Kami attacker the next.

Surely this rogue intended to only harm warriors who may be carefree when it comes to battles, but attacking in our cities which should be safe havens created this fatal event. At her funeral we swore to do our best to prevent this from happening again. After a brief meeting we decided there cannot be any hostile Kamists in our towns any longer.

I was an honored to be a casket bearer for this child, for her family, but felt shameful for not having prevented such a loss one so young and full of life.

The light of Jena will shine like a nova over this child, and we will honor her memory by preventing this from happening again.

vguerin wrote:That was until recently, when poor 7 year old Viccia Chialdo, daughter of a poor merchant family was killed when she wandered too close to the city stables. She was laughing and pointing at the mektoubs one moment, and struck by the bomb effects of a Kami attacker the next.

Surely this rogue intended to only harm warriors who may be carefree when it comes to battles, but attacking in our cities which should be safe havens created this fatal event. At her funeral we swore to do our best to prevent this from happening again. After a brief meeting we decided there cannot be any hostile Kamists in our towns any longer.

I was an honored to be a casket bearer for this child, for her family, but a shame to lose one so young and full of life.

The light of Jena will shine like a nova over this child, and we will honor her memory by preventing this from happening again.

Sounds to me like your Karavan and Jena are slacking on their resurrections...

I don't understand all this. You have the option to participate or not. If you are going to stand around or have an out of body experience while you are "hostile" then you should expect to come back at the closest respwn point.

It all sounds like typical Matis snobbishness to me...

/shrug