Ryzom

iphdrunk wrote:Unless of course, hypothetically speaking, that the "challenge" needs further explanation meaning "the challenge, provided that on average most of the times I win, not 100%, of course, or not excessively easy to be considered a slaughter, but a challenge that lasts enough and makes me feel superior"

Not feel superior necessarily, but feel like it was a decent fight. Equal, or at least close to it, and resulted in everyone having a good time. A good example would be the Samsara battle of FF. It was a huge fight and tons of fun. Had we lost it, I'd of felt it was still a good battle and something that kara had earned.
there is a difference between a challenge and a slaughter.

I will admit that I'm still living the dream that was Infinity. When we turned in our amps in early Feb, we were the rallying guild of the Kami. We went to all the OPs, we fought tooth and nail to make sure no Kami OP fell. I returned to game with those memories still in mind and was very disappointed to find it was very different. Its a shame, but thats how it played out, i guess.

one mmorpg used to give extra % exp to the underdog on the servers

eg less kami more % exp its all soon balanced out

is there anything like this in place?

It can be difficult to predict what the numbers will be at a particular battle. Many thought the Kamist side might be larger at this one because of the time. The Kamist side was larger when they won the first rounds of the two Void ops from CoM. Later, on May 8th, the Kamist side was ~ 60 v 40 Karavan when Riders of the Storm attacked Lost Valley and brought it to the threshold 13. When KoO repulsed AA's attack on GoU, the sides were even at 40 v 40. While the KA mustered more at this one, it doesn't mean they always will.

chud1 wrote:is there anything like this in place?

No.
The OP "war" is not meant to be a permanent unwinnable sustainable conflict like RFO or WoW, so artificially balancing it out is self-defeating.

sprite wrote:No.
The OP "war" is not meant to be a permanent unwinnable sustainable conflict like RFO or WoW, so artificially balancing it out is self-defeating.

interesting, is the plan basically to make one outlawed in the future and weaker powers slowly fading? changing the face of the planet, will we be seeing karavan style towns pop up? (jumping the gun but the kami guys seem to be getting a bit downhearted and seem defeated already mentally)

is the neutrality faction under its own agenda? will they nominate someone to lead them, there can only be one afterall!

sorry newer player still getting into the game atm

Its not really part of the topic of the thread, but the 1st post seemed to be basically "I give up" so what the heck...

To be honest we simply don't know what is going to happen. At some point, Jena will/should be arriving and that's pretty likely to stir things up a bit. As far as I'm concerned, this game is still a "sandbox" and the conclusion of the conflict is as much a part of that as anything.

sprite wrote:No.
The OP "war" is not meant to be a permanent unwinnable sustainable conflict like RFO or WoW, so artificially balancing it out is self-defeating.

Note:

The OP war was never meant to be a war, it WAS meant - as far as we can tell from earlier notes and ideas - to be a permanent GUILD fighting dynamic, not a faction based one.

The nature of it was altered from the one, to the other which is probably why I don't consider it to be _particularly_ successful in what it has been changed to.

So I don't think you're entirely right on that one.

grimjim wrote:The OP war was never meant to be a war

Well I agree with you about the "war or not a war" part, which is why I put "war" in ""s. My position on faction v guild mechanic is clearly posted elsewhere so I won't repeat it; however, whatever their original intentions, I'm glad to see that we both agree that is it now in essence a faction-oriented mechanic.

sprite wrote:Well I agree with you about the "war or not a war" part, which is why I put "war" in ""s. My position on faction v guild mechanic is clearly posted elsewhere so I won't repeat it; however, whatever their original intentions, I'm glad to see that we both agree that is it now in essence a faction-oriented mechanic.

Oh no, I don't agree it's an faction oriented mechanic.
I think it's been changed into a faction oriented 'content' but the problems are the result of trying to use a bathtub for a canoe, if you follow.

grimjim wrote:Note:

The OP war was never meant to be a war, it WAS meant - as far as we can tell from earlier notes and ideas - to be a permanent GUILD fighting dynamic, not a faction based one.......

a lil off topic but whaddathehey

so as i see it this will be guild skirmishes indefinitely.

the neutral party has no in game unification and therefore is a result of the players? rewards for guilds is a result of holding outposts not a faction worldwide bonus?

so to get more people involved do you think they shoudl formally write in the third neut party? and possibly advantage or points base the team members?

doesnt have to be direct maybe somthings like global bonuses like speedier focus regen anything really that would not massiveley unbalance the game?

pipe dreaming here just trying to get an idea of the pvp