Open question RE FvF

[vguerin]

And to this "balancing", the Thread opener forgets that there are two other shards where there seem to be none such "extreme" problems.

As you admit, and are shown to be ill informed on in another thread... the other servers are just as divided, this is how it should be during a war. Everyone has a different perspective, even those that may believe in the same things.

If something like this was to occur it would be a gamekiller for many folks. We'd be forced to make ourselves neutral (like many Kamists did when the radicals were doing things they could not agree with) and RP our stance to get around it. As there is no true bonus to being factionally aligned IG because of game limitations, getting a penalty would be insane.

[rellis]

We have an Emperor Tryton now? I think Dexton would be quite displeased if he found out

Anyways, leaving aside the fact that I don't agree with the idea at all, why should neutrals get a better deal? If anything they should get the same problems everywhere since they are willing to trade with anyone (including the "enemy") and are more likely to have homins from the "wrong" race in them. ( I may have misread things here, so feel free to correct me if I missed your point )

Of course the whole thing is shockingly racist from the government's PoV, not to mention that the treaty would forbid them from interfering with OPs to begin with.

lol is his name dexton? i thought that was founder, anyways it was a rush of creativity wasnt focusing hehe.

Well in my opinion neutrals are probably looked at with indifference by the religions, either as ignorant homins or perhaps people who they may convert to their ways, i do not think that they would have same disgust as they would for the opposing religion.

(another idea i have could use the ring tools when it comes out, perhaps a mission to escort a band of npcs from the main city to the respective outposts, other guilds or fanantical kami/kara would try to kill these along the journey)

[rellis]

As you admit, and are shown to be ill informed on in another thread... the other servers are just as divided, this is how it should be during a war. Everyone has a different perspective, even those that may believe in the same things.

If something like this was to occur it would be a gamekiller for many folks. We'd be forced to make ourselves neutral (like many Kamists did when the radicals were doing things they could not agree with) and RP our stance to get around it. As there is no true bonus to being factionally aligned IG because of game limitations, getting a penalty would be insane.

to highlight your 'this is how it should be in a war' do you really think that if you take an enemies postion, lands or resources that you can have the same output of production within a few months (ingame calender)

edit*** perhaps you could have a percentage boost of your output if you hold an OP in your own land?***

I do not think it would be a game killer, i believe it would enhance the game with more complexities. The reason i play this game is because it is diverse and complex, is that not the reason for many others?

Plus continue to disect my idea, im not saying its flawless, hehe far from it, but if everyone in community puts in some reasonable input we will all have a possible solution that nevvrax may consider. stress the word may

[grimjim]

"Balancing mechanisms"? Why would they want to "balance" something that the players have worked hard (along the lines laid down for them by the devs) to acheive? If there was some kind of bug that meant one side was more powerful than the other, I would agree balancing was required (yes even if it was my side being favoured), but that's not the case.

If you look at the proposed Spires they DO have a balancing mechanism built in. The more there are, the weaker they are (I don't think that'll be particularly effective by itself, but it is something).

This shows that they can inbuild a dynamic balancing mechanism to other PvP content but this balancing is lacking in outposts.

[akede]

Accept the fact that I have MUCH less experience in Ryzom than most of you posting, but new blood sometimes has perspectives that aid in the discussion.

Couple of points all ooc:

To those that argue that OPs are FvF implementations, would that presume that Neutrals cannot participate because they are not a "true" faction? "True" in the sense that they are not one of the two cults with religious figureheads/gods, Jena and Ma-Duk.

To those who argue that the imbalance is acceptable, do you think the devs want to see the scales so tipped that player experiences are diminshed on BOTH sides resulting in decreased subscriptions and revenues?

Presume that as a living planet Atys must exist with some kind of balance. e.g. if the herbivores consume too much of the land and grow in numbers, the carnivores have more opportunities to feed and thus keep the land from being depleted. The balance of "nature" has many such examples of built in protection mechanisms, but I'm not sure if Atys was designed with "nature" in mind. If we assume that it does, there has to be some force to seek balance, whether that be acts of the Kami/Karavan, bolstered NPC forces, diminished return on investment or any other of the great ideas delineated in this post.

Food for thought.

- Mesh

[acridiel]

Yeah, allright, but again. The situation is not alike on all servers...
So one may need balancing and the other not?
Who´s to decide?
Will it be judged by the amount of demand for it?
Ahwell, sort out your own problems, got my own to attend to.
Just wanted to broaden the horizon a bit.

Acridiel

[oldmess]

To those that argue that OPs are FvF implementations, would that presume that Neutrals cannot participate because they are not a "true" faction? "True" in the sense that they are not one of the two cults with religious figureheads/gods, Jena and Ma-Duk.

No one has argued that the mechanic is FvF. The arguement is that the storyline intends us to treat them as gifts from the factions and to be used to build our forces in anticipation of the larger FvF conflict:

Conquering the Nexuses

Forty years had gone by since the closing of the outposts. On these spots, the nexuses which were throbbing in the depths of Atys were exploited in former times.

As the new temples were accomodating the homins, the divinities' representatives announced that the time had come to reconquer the outposts: their resources had become at stake in the war the Higher Powers were about to wage against each other.

The battle was just beginning. And each one of them knew that the ones who would gain control of the nexuses would control the whole of Atys.

(excerpt from the Chronicles of Erlan)

To those who argue that the imbalance is acceptable, do you think the devs want to see the scales so tipped that player experiences are diminshed on BOTH sides resulting in decreased subscriptions and revenues?

Balance is a very tricky beast. We've seen lots of suggestions, but most break something else to fix the problem.

1. Limited # of participants = only high level folks will be allowed in an outpost battle. Low and mid level folks will just be asked to sit and watch.

2. Limit to only the guild members = larger guilds win and smaller guilds either merge or get left behind. Some argue that better, but I'd say it's just a new problem to replace the old.

Part of the problem, IMO, is that we were not given any clue (OOC) what is the end condition of this war. If you have a war, at some point, you either have a winner and a loser or you have stalemate. Is the argument that statemate is the desired conclusion? If not, then what is the end-condition for this war, so we can work towards it and then move to the next stage of the story?

There seems to be (just my opinion, mind you) a feeling that if the Kara take over all the OP's, then that will be the new status quo of Atys forever and ever. If that's true, then I agree, it would suck. If there's an actual end-war condition and the story moves on from there to something new, then let's move toward that and be done with it. This constant state of bickering doesn't seem to ever end.

[akede]

Dear Nevrax, GMs, Guides, Players,

Since it's quite clear where things are heading, short of some major turnaround. I have a kind of general question regarding the conclusion of the FvF conflict on Atys. Where is it heading?

This can obviously be broken down into several smaller questions...

Whats the "victory threshhold" on OP ownership since apparently controlling the nexus' is key for the FvF conflict? Do the Kara need 90%? 3 times as many as the Kami? No Kami OPs? Do they need to hold every OP on Atys to "win"?

What happens then:

Do the OPs stick around, churning out crystals but only for the lucky few? Or go away to make way for whats next?
Do the Kami remain as a faction? How bout the neutrals? Is everyone a Jena Worshiper by default?
Will we even bother with Spires, given the result appears to be pretty obvious from where I am standing?

Are there "balancing mechanisms" in development?

Or are we looking at "FvF" becoming defunct, as Kami numbers drop off to a few die-hards with no real chance of winning, and more and more Kara share the OPs amongst themselves, and the Neutrals drop to those who are willing to not take a share of the pie for whatever reason?

Yours,

Zahan, somewhat concerned.

Perhaps argue is the wrong verb, but I read the OP's words to mean that the outposts were part of FvF. That is his/her position in the discussion. Yes, "discuss" is the better verb.

Given that perspective, what about the rest of my thought which concludes that if the OPs are FvF then should the neutrals have a role?

[akm72]

1. Limited # of participants = only high level folks will be allowed in an outpost battle. Low and mid level folks will just be asked to sit and watch.

How about limiting the number of players taking part based on the sum of their highest levels? So you might be allowed (for example) 10 x level 250, 20 x level 125, or 50 x level 50.

[oldmess]

Perhaps argue is the wrong verb, but I read the OP's words to mean that the outposts were part of FvF. That is his/her position in the discussion. Yes, "discuss" is the better verb.

Given that perspective, what about the rest of my thought which concludes that if the OPs are FvF then should the neutrals have a role?

(I have no problem with the word "argue"; it just means discussion between peoples that both have a point of view. Let me try to address that specific point you asked about more directly.)

My perspective is that OP's are FvF from an RP/Story perspective, but the mechanic is open; therefore, it allows the faction politics to be much more dynamic. i.e. you can choose to support any side you wish.

But if you claim to be a Kara supporter, but you fight against the Kara regularly, the people involved may be skeptical about your true allegiance. Similarly, if you claim to be a Kami supporter but take very little action in that regards, the other Kami supports are a bit skeptical. In that sense, we're much closer to real politics.

To answer your specific question: Neutrals can play any role they like in OP battles, but again, the reactions of people are not always predictable because we are not game-mechanics; we are people. The Samsara, for example, claim neutrality as mercenaries. But, in most early battles, we (Kara) saw them fight against us. Some people interpreted that to mean they leaned toward the Kami side based on the idea that actions speak louder than words.

I'm not trying to start a discussion (or argument) on whether Samsara are or are not neutral, by the way. I'm just stating that the situation is much more fluid than a simple game mechanic can encompass. And, IMO, that's actually a good thing.

Personally, I'm kinda leary of spires because it puts the FvF back in as mechanic as well as RP/story and removes some of that freedom. But, more than that, what I'm looking for from Nevrax is a sense of whether this war is actually a story element that will end and move onto something else or whether it's just a distraction to keep us busy while we wait for the Ring.