Ryzom

To say "I know nothing about this issue" is an understatement. But that's never stopped me before! So FWIW, based solely on what I've read in this conversation, take it or leave it...

Unlike true war, you cannot truly cease functioning forever on Atys. Therefore, unlike true war where the concept of attrition is defined by ending enough lives to reduce/eliminate opposition, in a game like this, the goal of reducing/eliminating opposition is accomplished by putting your enemy in a position where they no longer wish to participate.

The reduction of Kami participation and OP's is indication that the Kara are "winning". Who wants to fight a war that can never be won or lost? That type of situation would be akin to the instanced PvP BG's of WoW. While it might be an enjoyable experience for an individual to participate for a period of time, it ultimately serves no larger purpose within the game context.

It seems as though few things are put into this game as self-perpetuating entertainment systems, and that most of the elements are not simply plot devices but established for a purpose within the larger context of the story. If that's truly the case, then I'd suspect that this is a "war" which someone is meant to win or lose. Otherwise, the implication is that its created to be mainly an amusing time-killer.

And so if the OP struggle between Kami and Kara is indeed a function of a larger plot line, as has been suggested, then artificial balancers may be contradictory. Balancing mechanics maintain the viability of an existing system, and keep things relatively static...but "static" is diametrically opposed to "dynamic", and it seems that Atys is a world meant to be the latter and not the former. By keeping things 'balanced', it might prevent the actual evolution of the storyline.

Also, mechanics which might re-balance or reset the system indefinitely is counterproductive to a sense that your character's actions are having impact on the environment. If the scale more or less always gets reset to zero, then the weight of your actions ultimately equal zero as well.

At any rate, as I said I may be completely talking out of my own you-know-what. If I am, then please forgive me and just ignore this post.

Great post. I think it does a good job of summarizing this collaborative effort.

ajsuk wrote:lol yeah... that must be it... uh huh.

And you're cheap

grimjim wrote:And you're cheap

but look how cool my hair looks!

<---

oldmess wrote:There's an irony calling for a balancing system in a situation like this: Everyone says they want a game where the players actions affect the world. If I'm reading the various idea correctly, we want someone to come in and take away the effect the players actions have on the world and make it all even-steven.

The actions are still affecting the world. Think of it like WWII, as the Germans began to lose they began throwing more and more resources into the war that had been held back, child soldiers, suicidal tactics, desperate investment in 'wonder weapons'.

This could be refected here in a counterbalance from faction support, that's why I think a dynamic balancing mechanism is called for, one that can cope with a server going either way. The winners get a challenge more proportional to their participation and interest, the losers get a bit of backup.

Remember, whatever the later changes and fiddling to the lore OPs were concieved of, presented as and developed for guild Vs guild conflict and turning it into FvF smacks of duct-tape and rubber-banding together some FvF content to me, and it doesn't really work that well. Tying it into crystals and OP mats just exacerbates the problem so long as there are no alternate routes to getting such things.

OPs aren't the war, they're 'the war', a sort of proxy made that way partially by players and partially by Nevrax out of something that wasn't really intended to be part of that initially. A cricket bat can be used as a club, but it's really intended for playing cricket.

oldmess wrote:Again, as I've stated, if this war is intended to be the permanent status-quo and the devs have no plan for what the story does if one side wins, then I might be willing to agree. If that's the case, then I'm extremely disappointed because I assumed we were living/affecting an actual story that moves forward.

OPs aren't the war, they're 'the war', a sort of proxy made that way partially by players and partially by Nevrax out of something that wasn't really intended to be part of that initially. A cricket bat can be used as a club, but it's really intended for playing cricket.

oldmess wrote:Assuming there is an end-war scenario that's been planned, then we should push forward and move toward that so we can get this story moving. Balancing mechanisms would just delay that.

While it might be interesting to have everyone (factioned) go Karavan, to see how Nevrax (and the community) act in that instance, I don't see it happening. I rather suspect the Karavan hardcore would just continue to smack down the 'formerly known as Kami' or neutral guilds in order to have something to fight.

oldmess wrote:Im not sure how we could quantify that; a forum poll would only tell you about the forum users and not the overall server. Regardless, does it matter? If it were true that US players are more PvP-positive, what then? Ban us? Give us our own server? (didn't we already have that?) What change do you suggest based on finding out whether we are or are not more aggresive?

I just find it interesting from a game design point of view. The US mindset in gaming - of all types - is rather different in my experience, perhaps closest to the Russian mindset (of all places) then Britain somewhere halfway between and then mainland Europe having tendencies all of it's own. It all sort of ties in with sociological and political differences as well and it's quite interesting but it doesn't help particularly much.

Other than that it also means that there's a greater concentration of PvPers - on one side - in a particular timezone as well! Something the other servers don't have to worry about so much either.

The English server has, I think, a broader gamestyle, timezone and cultural mix than the other two servers, which may be responsible for a great deal of the problems that afflict us.

ajsuk wrote:but look how cool my hair looks!

<---

I guess...

http://graphics.ink19.com/issues/octobe ... sfits.jpeg

http://www.mmorpg.com/gamelist.cfm/thread/84277/page/2

That post I was looking for re. hypothesis for population difference on the Euro/US server.


See the post from GRIMACHU about 1/3 down the page. Long one but good.

akede wrote:http://www.mmorpg.com/gamelist.cfm/thread/84277/page/2

That post I was looking for re. hypothesis for population difference on the Euro/US server.


See the post from GRIMACHU about 1/3 down the page. Long one but good.

That was me, so I've read it

lmao...Good to see the active players here participating on those boards. Great place to advertise.

grimjim wrote:I guess...

http://graphics.ink19.com/issues/october1999/covers/misfits.jpeg

Jayce isn't fat, at least. Im doing you a favor in not paying for your merc hire, you'd only drink more at the bar and get larger.