Ryzom

iphdrunk wrote:Since it is a scenario that you are entering at your own will, let's GO BIG so broaden gameplay rules so the creator of the scenario can allow:

- full blown PvP regardless of tag allowing indiscriminate attacking and healing any other entity, including guild and team members. Real AoE spells and no "you cannot heal this player because we haven't figured how to do it properly yet".

- perma death (within the duration of the scenario) so unrezzed fallen combattants are gently invited to exit and cannot rejoin. Go King of Nexus go!

- full looting of corpses, including the equipment you are wearing.

- permanent (within the duration of the scenario) loss of stats and characteristics for every death.

uh? what? why not?

Yes indeed to all of them.
I also suggest making a decay system. That penalties your armor/weapon if/when you die in there

sidusar wrote:As long as the scenario gets a big red glowing warning sign on it, I wouldn't even object to that.

As Ani says, it might open up more demand for decent choice gear. That'd be a good thing, I believe.

And if they can loot your dappers, there might actually be some use to leaving them in your appartment

If the scenario is well marked, I won't object to the idea. BUT, I also probably won't use any scenario like that.

Another option would be something that allows the scenario designer to require participants to put a certain amount of dappers or items "at risk". Those items could be looted by the person or team that kills that player. That would allow you to create risk/reward scenarios that still keep with the "pvp should be voluntary" nature of the game.

oldmess wrote:But looting the rest of my gear or dappers? No thanks.

I don't have a problem with this as long as The looting of players is CLEARLY MARKED in the ring terminal as a matter of fact I would agree with any combat option as long as it is clearly tagged/flagged in the terminals and for that matter there should be categories for all ring scenarios I.E. Roll Play, PVP with X option(s) turned on, Lore expansion, or what ever! Having scenarios would just make things easier IMHO and if this is already in play please forgive my nieveity (SP) on the subject. But, I do agree with Oldmess in that the looting of dapper is not fair because you can't put it in the bank then enter the scenario unless I again have missed this in game!

This would be genuinely consensual, provided it is marked as such.
I'd like the opportunity to boot dead players automatically (permadeath) from PVE scenarios though.

oldmess wrote: Another option would be something that allows the scenario designer to require participants to put a certain amount of dappers or items "at risk"

But precisely, if you consider the dappers and the items you enter with being "at risk" in what is that different?

It's a nice trade-off... the gear you enter with in part determines your chances and "performance" yet the stakes are higher. All the combattants think the same. And to some extent, it rewards players who win with real things.

oldmess wrote:Personally, I'd prefer the more controlled outpost-style zones because it force people to pick a side. The side you are picking can be defined by the scenario designer. But as long as the zone is clearly marked that it's full, open pvp, I don't object to your idea being another option.

On that note... aren't we always claiming that we should be marked as picking one side based on our actions rather than enforced by gameplay mechanics? if you want to pick the "defending" side, then go for the attackers and heal the defenders. The drawback I see tho, is that we lose the automatic "tagging" and "targetting" but not sure if that would be a bad thing or more realistic (this does not preclude the customary use of the /tar Jackoba macro tho ).

The ring is the perfect place for people to create their 'Ideal' world space. I am sure many Roleplayers have scenarios prepared, and as this thread shows there are people wanting PvP area to enjoy.
There is already arena areas in the main world....having them in player created ring instances makes perfect sense.
I am sure the tension level will increase when entering an area labelled 'DANGEROUS..PROCEED AT OWN RISK'

grimjim wrote:This would be genuinely consensual, provided it is marked as such.
I'd like the opportunity to boot dead players automatically (permadeath) from PVE scenarios though.

In theory, the "scenaro permadeath" option could be de-coupled from the PvP discussion. i.e. any respawning takes you out of the scenario if this option is turned on. This specific option doesn't need to be marked in the scenario listing since there's no DP or other permanent effect to dying in the Ring. It would be nice if the designer made an npc mention or imply it in someway but it's not a requirement.

iphdrunk wrote:On that note... aren't we always claiming that we should be marked as picking one side based on our actions rather than enforced by gameplay mechanics?

Others have made that argument, but I have not. I like the way the outpost pvp style works, to be honest. You enter the zone and you choose your side. It's clear. If I nuke you, it's not a mistake or a ganking. You're on the other side of some specific competition.

I'm not saying all PvP scenarios should use this option, but since we know this PvP style is available in the code, I'd like to see it made available to the scenario designer as well.

If you want full open PvP style, get rid of the zoned GvG nonsense in the roots and open that area up. The GvG thing is already annoying if your travelling with non-guildies, so open it up fully and have a full risk style. That's fine. But also allow the more controlled style as an option to designers.

iphdrunk wrote:But precisely, if you consider the dappers and the items you enter with being "at risk" in what is that different?

It's a nice trade-off... the gear you enter with in part determines your chances and "performance" yet the stakes are higher. All the combattants think the same. And to some extent, it rewards players who win with real things.

I'm beginning to come around on this issue. Is it possible to put most of your dappers someplace like a bank or your apartment? I wasn't aware of this option. If it is, then I'll agree with the open-looting option.

Well... one restriction and then I'm OK: You can't loot from me anything that I can't trade to you. i.e. No stealing my TP tickets. That creates a potential exploit where an experienced player buys a bunch of TP tickets, goes into a scenario and allows newbs to kill/loot him to get those tickets.

Also, how would inter-shard looting work if I steal an Aniro TP ticket? Ugh, I don't even want to think about the programming problems that might cause.

Yay !! Go Ryzom Counterstrike !!

Like the permadeath idea

dont like the looting.. how much of your valuable gear do you carry because you dont have enough storage space to leave it behind ? and one point of the Ring was nothing from it would transfer over to the ~real~ ryzom

but being able to do small conlficts, and name the sides .. so we arent doing these DAMNED kami/karavan crap all the time would be great.. and for guild PvP training..

I am a supporter of LIMITED PvP, and this certainly seems a reasonable implementation.