Ryzom

rothimar wrote:
And for the love of all that is sacred, can we leave factional politics OUT OF IT, and focus on a way to IMPROVE the system for ALL players?

Umm..not really, no. Like Sprite said, if it were GvG. it would actually excluide more players from participating.

FvF actually means more people get to play, both in battles and with the spoils. We share the cats and mats with our allied guilds becuase we need the alliance to be strong. This has the effect of the largest possible aount of players getting the rewards of an OP and the duty to defend it.

Aris. is the one server (aside from Cho..yet) that isn't completly overrun by the Kamis. If one faction takes hold, and the FvF ceases, then it becomes a GvG war...and that (as has already been explained) will have the effect of lessening the total amount of people that can be involved.

So, you see, it is the strong FvF on Aris. that is keeping things alive and giving new players a piece of the action. FvF politics have everything to do with it. We should be thankful that we have the balance that we do, and we are not completly controlled by Kami forces like the other servers. Sure, team Jena has a slight edge, but not a huge one.

The only real problem is that on Aris. things didn't work out as they almost certainly should have, with one group holding complete dominion. Some where the system failed (after all, it was designed for hegemony) and on Aris. we have division.

mrshad wrote:If you are arguing that there needs to be more "balance," I invite you to look at the other servers where the Kami devils have taken over entirely. The outposts have become what they were ment to be, as no other outcome was possible. We on Aris are the moderated exception. The "KA" has shown remarkable restraint, and now I think lacks the power to take another outpost. *irrelevent propagandising snipped* That we have reached this equilibrium is an aberation. The logical outcome should have been complete domination by the largest guild/faction. Nevrax HAD to know that before putting in the OPs...after all, every other single PVP game that allows for territory control has turned out that way.

Yep there's a problem in those too. Which argues for a mechanical balancing mechanism IF its to be FvF.

mrshad wrote:Without system level controls, hegemony is the exepected result; as evidenced by the other two servers. As there were no such controls built in, we can infere that complete domination by one group is exactly what Neverax wanted. Therefore, requests that things be changed are futile, as it is all "working as expected".

You can infer that. I'd infer that things were rushed and not completely thought through.

If one style of play can completely overshadow another style of play, the system is bunk. I've seen more petty arguing over factions and OP battles than should ever have disgraced these forums.

The system needs a revamp to allow more participation without the factional politics which can alienate an entire faction. I don't care which way the current factions swing on the various servers... if a player can't play their preferred faction without the same opportunities as other players... well, that's crap.

I'm not stating that stricty switching the whole system to GvG is the answer... I'm still developing some ideas in my head for a suggestion, but I would rather not post unfinished thoughts about it.

But... if people really want to keep up the rediculous bickering and childish "My faction is bigger than your faction" while alienating players of a less powerful faction... by all means. Go right ahead.

It would be nice to log onto the forums and see more posts WITHOUT the bickering. But, I suppose I am asking too much from a community rated as one of the best, eh?

At this point... they should just remove the friggin Outposts and to hell with the whole system.

sprite wrote:Seriously, how can you justify this when you know it would just mean that the only people with an OP would be the ones who can fill their quota with entirely AoD/CG/MasterMelee combos with the best supr gear? All I can see this doing it making it down to gear instead of tactics, politics, etc etc

Lesser of two evils. Alliances still play a role, diplomacy is important for fulfilling that quota and getting the assistance. It is at a - potential - cost of any/all participation and does - somewhat - relegate the OPs to the 'endgame' content they're already being treated as but its impossible to say specifically without putting together a complete vision of a potential change. At the moment we're examining individual aspects.

sprite wrote:I'd be very grateful if you'd explain this one to me; if the OP system was GvG, where would alliances come in? I'm sorry if I'm being dense but I really can't see anywhere that you have said definitively how alliances would fit into a system where no one needs (indeed, cannot need) any other guilds to help them.

Again it depends on the specific change/element being considered.
If we went with...

Guild Only: (Coupled with one outpost each guild) - This still becomes about the biggest guild. There would need to be safeguards against immediate guild-hopping to bolster numbers. This has some problems and de-emphasises alliances (save for gear support etc).

Guild Plus Allies: (Coupled with limited number of combat participants) Preserves alliances but emphasises level and creates an endgame culture around it but keeps the diplomacy, prevents it just being about sheer numbers and reintegrates a tactical element to the fighting.

sprite wrote:A GvG OP mechanic means by definition only one guild may participate on one side.This means that you are unable to get help from another guild in taking your OP. This means the guilds who are the "most uber" (ie can fill the quota with multimasters) get all the OPs, and newer/smaller guilds get none.

Not necessarily. It depends whether you go for a shift in emphasis, encourage mechanically or restrict it right down. There's a graduated way to try and promote a change.

rothimar wrote:At this point... they should just remove the friggin Outposts and to hell with the whole system.

Yep, and take the time to do it right, the same reason they delayed spires.
But they're here now and some people like them. I think the better approach would be to broaden, widen and deepen them with new options and non-PvP approaches.

grimjim wrote: You can infer that. I'd infer that things were rushed and not completely thought through.

Maybe, but they took a long time in delivering outposts. I can't see how we can say they were rushed. And they have had a great deal of time to make corrections since OPs were released, but nothing at all has been changed. We sort of have to reason that this is the intended vision.

Nevrax had plenty of warning about the most probable results (you and I warned them multiple times) and even a small amount of market research would have turned up that information.

Still, they forged ahead with the plan. And now we have what was always intended.
Requests for change will be ignored, as this was "The Vision." The reality is that nothing in regards to OPs will be altered. Ideas, even good ones, are wasted on this topic. The reason, GJ, that you get the "Like it or Lump it" reaction so often is that those are the only two realistic choices...aside from "come to terms with it".

I am not a big fan of the OP implementation. I wish they were gone, really. But that isn't going to happen. I can think of a lot of different ways to make them better, but those things won't happen either. We have what we have, and we should be grateful that we are on Aris were there is a possibility of conflict instead of one of the other servers where there is only totalitarian domination.

grimjim wrote:Yep, and take the time to do it right, the same reason they delayed spires.
But they're here now and some people like them. I think the better approach would be to broaden, widen and deepen them with new options and non-PvP approaches.

I have to agree with you. It would be great to see the system revamped in a manner which will not cause a player to have less opportunities if he/she chooses a faction which doesn't have a chokehold over the lion's share of OP's. I think that people are missing a very simple point.

The faction that controls the majority of OP's control the XP gain of the opposing faction.

If other servers have a huge Kami over Kara OP hold, then those who play Kami are at the mercy of the Kara for those cats. That's a crappy way to go about it, it alientates a playstyle. Of COURSE those servers have a majority faction. Once one faction has control of "most" of the OP's, people are more likely to join that faction, and Guilds who own the OP's can level their people faster which allow for higher level combatants.

The system seems like it was designed to keep the little guy down.

(the rest directed at everyone involved)

But one thing is for sure... I am sick of how much BS comes with the whole thing. People seriously need to start removing their heads from their (insert your own location) and discuss the matter without the insults, jabs, and flames. I'm just about sick of that.

I am sure it doesn't do ANY good for the newbies who subscribe to see people behaving like spoiled children about this. It's time to start looking for a common ground, people. Look past your own agenda, and start looking for what's best for the community as a whole, not just your alliance.

I see valid points posted in several places and cant post my idea of a magic cure-all.

Only thing I will say is game needs too be more balanced for all, newbies, vets new guilds everyone, completly unrelated to factional lines, and although I see cats having a place as a reward item accesable to all through whatever means they should be taken away from OP ownership.

mrshad wrote:Nevrax had plenty of warning about the most probable results (you and I warned them multiple times) and even a small amount of market research would have turned up that information.

True... isn't there a legend about on oracle with perfect vision of the future who was cursed to always be ignored? Yeah

mrshad wrote:Still, they forged ahead with the plan. And now we have what was always intended. Requests for change will be ignored, as this was "The Vision." The reality is that nothing in regards to OPs will be altered.

Well, I'm a pessimist and a cynic most of the time. Thinking that this is what was intended strikes me as... peculiar. I'd be more inclined to think there isn't the time or manpower to go back and examine the problem.

mrshad wrote:Ideas, even good ones, are wasted on this topic. The reason, GJ, that you get the "Like it or Lump it" reaction so often is that those are the only two realistic choices...aside from "come to terms with it".

But I'm not a complete pessimist. I'm a great believer in people power and it is a source of constant annoyance to me that people just shrug and accept things and don't strive for anything better or believe in their own ability to change things. OR think that there is and can be only one way to do things.

mrshad wrote:We have what we have, and we should be grateful that we are on Aris were there is a possibility of conflict instead of one of the other servers where there is only totalitarian domination.

I got into a long chat with a guy from one of the servers the other week, apparently the domination on one server is a cross faction alliance, rather than a factional domination.

If discussing our current system it is NOT FvF. It is clearly AvA, as every battle has mixed faction sides. In fact I will go so far as to say we currently have a roughly equal split of outposts between Side 1 and Side 2, as well as rough balance of people between the two sides.

I propose that the more people that can participate the more people share in the outpost products.

Jyudas, you seem to be arguing you would prefer smaller skill/tactic/level/equipment based battles. But the smaller you make the battle the less people that can participate, and therefore the less people that reap the rewards.

Perhaps you would enjoy more PvP oriented outposts, but I think the majority of us prefer the more social/teamwork/diplomacy based option we currently have. At least until non-PvP options are introduced by the devs.

Would you care to discuss the points I brought up in my original post?

rothimar wrote: (the rest directed at everyone involved)

But one thing is for sure... I am sick of how much BS comes with the whole thing. People seriously need to start removing their heads from their (insert your own location) and discuss the matter without the insults, jabs, and flames. I'm just about sick of that.

Was this really necessary? This entire thread has been point-counterpoint on pros and cons of GvG, AvA, FvF, etc forms of an outpost system. I don't see any of the flames you mention- they may be in other threads but they're not here.