What were they thinkin ?

raynes · Post by **raynes** » Mon Sep 25, 2006 5:19 pm

Atys is an unsafe place. One must watch out for wild animals while digging. After all every once in awhile a stray one will be away from the pack.

grimjim · Post by **grimjim** » Mon Sep 25, 2006 6:25 pm

raynes wrote:Atys is an unsafe place. One must watch out for wild animals while digging. After all every once in awhile a stray one will be away from the pack.

And occasionally its a Zerx rather than a crazed religious nutter.

jamela · Post by **jamela** » Mon Sep 25, 2006 6:57 pm

Anyway, back on topic ...

jared96 wrote: What's the downside here to allowing either side to heal a neutral who has decided he wants no part of these conflicts and yet is forced to suffer the consequences of them ?

I don't see a downside. Sounds to me as though Nevrax fixed one problem by breaking something else. Very silly.

rothimar · Post by **rothimar** » Mon Sep 25, 2006 7:06 pm

I personally don't understand the outrage, I can understand frustration, but it seems to me like people are taking this way too personally.

The outposts have a sign which display its state, do they not? Letting one know if, and when, an attack is pending? And if there are 50 or so people slashing, nuking, and thumping each other to death at an OP... it's safe to assume that those people are engaged in an OP battle... is it not?

Perhaps I shouldn't be so shocked that this is so controversial, but I am sitting here at work (yeah, I'm slacking) wondering why this is such a hot button issue.

vandie · Post by **vandie** » Mon Sep 25, 2006 7:18 pm

I can definately see from the posts which side of the fence some of the posters are. I am Not a PVP fan in any way imaginable and i am a neutral. The fact that a "neutral" can not be rezed if near an outpost during a battle is a sure fire means of losing customers. If i blow self up fine if i get mob attacked fine i expect that to happen while digging, However If i am not part of the battle and you drag a mob on to me, I can even expect that to happen ,im sure it wasnt done intentionally, However an apology or at least im sorry, would have been the proper response and not being able to rez a person you accidentally killed is beyond reaonable. Yes stuff happens I admit it does but it is wrong to blame the innocent person killed. I think that blaming tyhe digger for digging there for their death is the pinnicle of bad attitued and arrogance.

rothimar · Post by **rothimar** » Mon Sep 25, 2006 7:28 pm

A neutral player can indeed by rezzed, but not by someone engaged in the OP battle. And here's a thought...

Did the person running back to the fray with aggro in tow actually KNOW that they trained someone? I agree that an apology would be in order, but if the OP combatant wasn't aware of what happened... well... that sort of explains itself, wouldn't it?

Not being able to rez a neutral player when engaged in an OP battle is part of an exploit fix, a side effect if you will. I didn't say it was the fault of the digger that they died without getting a rez, I said that a digger should be aware of the danger and accept the risk. There is a difference.

I don't have a bad attitude, and I am certainly not arrogant. I simply believe that an individual should accept the risks of their choices. Is the situation unfortunate? Yes, is certainly unfortunate.

It certainly seems that a lot of the issues between differing opinions regarding this sort of thing come from those who are for, and those who are against PvP. It's unfortunate, because they are simply two different styles of play. PvE players aren't worth any more or less than PvP players, just two groups of people trying to enjoy their evening.

PvP isn't going away, nor is PvE. I think it would be best if everyone could simply accept that and move on. But that might be too arrogant of me to say. /sigh

vandie wrote:I can definately see from the posts which side of the fence some of the posters are. I am Not a PVP fan in any way imaginable and i am a neutral. The fact that a "neutral" can not be rezed if near an outpost during a battle is a sure fire means of losing customers. If i blow self up fine if i get mob attacked fine i expect that to happen while digging, However If i am not part of the battle and you drag a mob on to me, I can even expect that to happen ,im sure it wasnt done intentionally, However an apology or at least im sorry, would have been the proper response and not being able to rez a person you accidentally killed is beyond reaonable. Yes stuff happens I admit it does but it is wrong to blame the innocent person killed. I think that blaming tyhe digger for digging there for their death is the pinnicle of bad attitued and arrogance.

elvigy1 · Post by **elvigy1** » Mon Sep 25, 2006 7:30 pm

I disagree Vandie and am more in line with Rothimar. There is a battle not far from where you are. You chose to dig there. You have consciously chosen to put yourself in a perilous situation.

I can see a quick apology from a tell or something if the player has time (though I can see a situation where the player is trying to help turn the tide of a battle they are losing and is rushing and doesn't want to stop to send a tell). Still, it's the thought that counts.

And as far as rezzing, yeah, it would be great if faction-aligned people could heal neutrals, so maybe that is something that could be fixed.

But I think it's overstating it to say that it's the height of arrogance to disagree on this issue.

From a role-playing side, though, why should faction-aligned players tolerate neutrals right on the edge of the battle? Even more, why waste sap (I almost said mana, hehe) rezzing them? Sap that could be put to better use nuking another enemy. That neutral player could be a spy. And why let them dig out resources that could be better dug and put to use by someone in your faction.

Now don't get me wrong, I'm not advocating server wide nastiness and inconsiderate behaviour. We all are playing and want to have fun and the community here is great. But things happen in the heat of battle....

totnkopf · Post by **totnkopf** » Mon Sep 25, 2006 7:30 pm

Personally, I think Nevrax should of handeled OP fights in a similar manner to which SWG does theirs. In that game, there are two factions and are considered at war with each other. If you are neutral, then you are a civilian and have no right to be in a combat zone. When entering a pvp area, you are auto-flagged on for pvp if you are a member of a faction. If you're not, then it simply prevents you from entering the area. Should be the same with OPs. If you're neutral, you don't really need to be there. Put a 50-100m range around the OP thats considered the combat zone and only those who've picked a side allowed in.

The neutrals can go dig in safety (if you're digging IN the pvp fight, you're being stupid and if you die, well, your fault for putting yourself IN the middle of it all... its not like an OP fight is hard to miss). both sides of the fight don't have to worry about neutrals or spies from the other side or neutral healing (been fixed now, but would accomplish the same thing).

raynes · Post by **raynes** » Mon Sep 25, 2006 7:31 pm

grimjim wrote:And occasionally its a Zerx rather than a crazed religious nutter.

Zerx, crazy Kami fanatic... Does it really matter?

I real life you can't expect to go in the woods and not get shot... Just ask the VP of the United States. So why should Ryzom be any different?

grimjim · Post by **grimjim** » Mon Sep 25, 2006 7:35 pm

rothimar wrote:It certainly seems that a lot of the issues between differing opinions regarding this sort of thing come from those who are for, and those who are against PvP. It's unfortunate, because they are simply two different styles of play. PvE players aren't worth any more or less than PvP players, just two groups of people trying to enjoy their evening.

Two styles of play that don't mix well and, yes, it is arrogant to basically say 'lump it'. If the two are seperated and distinct, with the one not adversely affecting the other then things can go, relatively, fine but the PvP players LIKES to impose upon others. When that's other PvP players, hey, fine go for it, but exclusive access, territory holding, interference in interaction with non PvP activated players, etc, etc, that's all impact on others even if it is indirect. The problem at the heart of it is that the PvPer's fun seems to, necessarily, derive at the expense of someone elses.

One solution I thought interesting was the one being used in LOTRO but the lukewarm reaction of PvPers to the 'Monstering' concept - one I've put forward in these discussions before shows that their internal reasons for fighting are different to those externally expressed. Which is a shame.

Anyway, there's no reason why tagged people shouldn't be able to heal non-tagged people. I think that's a better set of terminology to use than 'neutral' which has other connotations in the game. I don't think it's that drastically important however and it was more important to fix the neutral healing bug.

Ryzom

What were they thinkin ?

Re: What were they thinkin ?

Re: What were they thinkin ?

Re: What were they thinkin ?

Re: What were they thinkin ?

Re: What were they thinkin ?

Re: What were they thinkin ?

Re: What were they thinkin ?

Re: What were they thinkin ?

Re: What were they thinkin ?

Re: What were they thinkin ?