Conflict

[raven41]

Well I was just stating why I don't like the Spires idea..

I honestly enjoy OPs alot, And sometimes only log on just for an OP battle ... I think they should focus on making OPs more fun by adding to them... There is so much that could be done with OPs... I would MUCH rather see OPs expanded on then see spires released, Spires is a good idea, Just not for Ryzom... It just dosn't fit IMO...

OPs for the win.

Spires for the loss.

OPs could just be so awsome with some work! *dreams* Take the Spire idea...Break it down, And use that system for towers and add it to OP defense 'instead' of guards, Have the towers maybe be able to do a bit of damage...

But make it so the owning guilds (or allies of the guild) Crafters/Diggers have to build the towers... and in order to take the OP the towers must be destroyed in the 2 hour period(Limit the amount of towers ofc so you can't have a super un defeatable OP )

You can even make it so crafters/diggers can do/repair damage durring the fights... (This too would have to be limited, Atleast on the defending side(they would need to be OP tagged to do it))... Crafters could make ranged weapons and Ammo to install on the tower... And thats what would do the damage(Imagine,A launcher on it... that would need to be reloaded! that would get crafters into the battles more!)... Or an Armor maker could make Armor to increase its defense!

Get the diggers/crafters invovled some...

Those are just a few ideas... I could think of so much more for OPs ahh They would be SO much fun for even more people if they were added too!

[edit] You could even have jewel crafters make resist jewels that would make magic do less damag to the tower.[/edit]

[sx4rlet]

Red,

What I am trying to get across is that it is irrelevant what PvP system is in place. If it were the greatest system ever created a large group of players would condemn, with extreme malice, those who participated in that conflict.

I am suggesting that if there were more conflict, there would be more turn over of outposts and allot more opportunities for new guilds and players to get involved in the game.

Pero

*grin* Now that is a much faster way of saying the same as your first post but then much shorter.

I don't see your neutral = safe reasoning, but I do agree that the OP situation has become static (and therefore, not evolving.) 2 alliances defending / attacking what they have doesnt help. I would rather see a flexible and fast system, where you maybe hold an OP for a few days, then losing it again to other players or npcs.

The 200 players showing up to fight is a good thing too (although I don't really like PvP), but my feeling says that is more like spires should be, fighting for land for your faction. (bit crusade like)
The OP's are more like the castles in medieval times, where the king didnt mind his vasals fighting among themselves, because then they wouldnt attack the king. (not sure if it would fit in the game like this tho...)

(side note to Raynes, there has been when neutrals (tried to) intervene in events like you described, not much, but there were some.)

just my silly thoughts about it.

EDIT: what I forgot. Big part of my char was formed in the first big invasion, it really ment something, it was epic. Some PvP battles can be epic, I agree, but also some part of the story can really be that.

[ruslan]

As for the game being player run, what happens to the losers of the inevitable power struggles. Guilds would be banned, players exiled. I am not saying their accounts would be terminated, but access to cities and events would certainly become very limited. I think North Korea would look pretty hospitable compared to a virtually run nation. The chances of a player run community reaching out to the rest of the players in the game once their political opposition is destroyed is very, very small. Imagine if one faction controlled all the OP's, how many high level OP items would players on the other side see. Now think what a faction would do if they controlled everything and were led by real executives with real in game power.

There is also a stability issue, players do leave the game, they take breaks, they can oversleep and miss events etc... It sounds great in theory but eventually the consequences become to great and the game folds as no one wants to spend their time playing a serf for their beta player overlords.

I take it you are talking from a purely theoretical basis and haven't actually played a game like this to see how it works. It all depends on how it is implemented within the game, but from experience I can say it can work extemely well and very few of the things you suggest need happen.

However, judging by the inflexible and limited guild mechanics and the structure of the economy, Ryzom is a long way from being such a game and was probably not intended to go in that direction....and I'm going off topic here