Ryzom

We all can almost agree OP's were implemented in a bad way and that there are problems with them currently... will they ever be fixed, will the wrongs be righted?? NO

What i would like to see more of is people that are willing to turn on their PvP faction tag and actually be willing to join in a good fight... i hear so many people say "Oh, i only PvP in OP wars". That statement makes me sick, and i see people that use that statement really saying they would get their butts handed to them if they tried to PvP outside of a op.

In the end OP battles ARE NOT TRUE PvP, it never comes down to skills(not levels... but true skill) and how well you work with your team ( it does help at times but isnt needed). It comes down to organization and politics. Just basicly comes down to how many noob healers (that would die trying to get to the OP on their own) you can get to the battle and to heal and listen to people...

great83 wrote:We all can almost agree OP's were implemented in a bad way and that there are problems with them currently... will they ever be fixed, will the wrongs be righted?? NO

What i would like to see more of is people that are willing to turn on their PvP faction tag and actually be willing to join in a good fight... i hear so many people say "Oh, i only PvP in OP wars". That statement makes me sick, and i see people that use that statement really saying they would get their butts handed to them if they tried to PvP outside of a op.

In the end OP battles ARE NOT TRUE PvP, it never comes down to skills(not levels... but true skill) and how well you work with your team ( it does help at times but isnt needed). It comes down to organization and politics. Just basicly comes down to how many noob healers (that would die trying to get to the OP on their own) you can get to the battle and to heal and listen to people...

funny, but i would think killing diggers in focus gear also fails to meet your definition of "true" PvP, and organisation and politics are -demonstratably- some of the most effective weapons to bring to any battle.
If you beleive the outnumbered side should always win because they are obviously more uber, you are playing the wrong game.
We could look at OP battles as being the perfect example of democracy in action, with the victory going to the side who gets the most supporters

You are all for removing the benifit you see other getting, mostly because you don't want to put forth the effort to get it yourself.
You have no good suggestion about what to replace them with, and it is your fervent wish that they are not replaced at all.

You have no idea which server I play, which guild I have joined, or whether I "benefit" from Outpost rewards or not, so your comment is rather amusing (no, I'm not telling, either) Using your logic, it could be assumed from your staunch tone supporting the present imbalance that you benefit from Outpost rewards and feel a tightening around your throat to think of life without them.
It doesn't matter whether I benefit from these things or whether I do not benefit from these things. It does not impair my ability to see when something needs correcting.

The most important thing that we all have to come to terms with is that life is not fair. This is something so basic, that no amount of meddling can correct it. It is so elemental, that is translates into every human endevor.

I agree with you 100%. There will always be those who want to place themselves above others for various reasons.

Games are part of life. Life is not fair. Games will not be fair.

The logical progression used to reach this point is flawed, primarily because while we cannot change much of what we are handed in life (only react to it), a game is a man-made creation and can easily change or be adjusted when it is found to be lacking. I can't make myself taller to have a better advantage at playing basketball, but I can tweak a setting for a sword to make it more balanced and fair to people who may want to use an axe instead.

The best we can hope for is to create a level playing field. After that, the smart, the strong, the fast, the dedicated and the brave will carry the day to the extent that they were naturally endowed with thier gifts.

Ahh, you have spoken EXACTLY what I am seeking! The problem is that such a playing field doesn't exist. Your argument would have merit if it were not possible for a small subset of players to restrict the advantages of the game to only their clique.

I will never play basketball better than a pro-player will, does that mean the game is unfair? No, the rules are the same for all, and his combination of dedication and natural talent obviously give him an advantage.

Again, you have the same opportunity as anyone else. You just haven't taken advantage of it. It would be different if there were artificial limitations placed upon you preventing you from participating. It would be even worse if those limitations were revealed but no one bothered to correct them.


See, the whole idea is that there is more than one way to play the game and be successful at it. One way of playing the game (such as choosing Kami vs Karavan) should not give one player an advantage over another, whether by game mechanics or player dominance. It's not life, it doesn't have to be "unfair". QA/Game Balance is supposed to make sure there are no advantages to make that possible. If the only way to really succeed is to use a certain sword and wear a certain armour, then where is the diversity? Look at the Fire and Wrath and Icy Touch from the island.

Some games have inherent advantages for a particular way of playing. Once that is identified, if it cannot be changed, then players can look upon that as an added challenge to the gameplay, to try to "win" using the non-favoured aspect of the game. I've played many games like that, and it can be quite enjoyable. However, I have seen numerous cases where imbalances of that sort are sought after and corrected here in Ryzom. When a game makes a pretense at trying to ensure balance, instances of imbalance become important.

Outpost rewards as they presently exist should be nixed. That means they should not come from owning outposts, which easily can become (and stay) a one-sided advantage, in a self-perpetuating cycle. That does not mean such rewards need be removed from the game completely. What DOES need to happen is that the rewards are granted based on merits of the individual or perhaps a Team, rather than who has the most friends or who picks the "right" side.

great83 wrote:What i would like to see more of is people that are willing to turn on their PvP faction tag and actually be willing to join in a good fight... i hear so many people say "Oh, i only PvP in OP wars". That statement makes me sick, and i see people that use that statement really saying they would get their butts handed to them if they tried to PvP outside of a op.

Nah. The most likely possibility is that these people do not generally like PvP style of gaming, but feel forced to do so to support their guild, alliance, or faction in it's fight to gain, or keep from losing, an outpost. Because of the non-PvP rewards it offers. Again, their style of gameplay is being dictated, or at a minimum, heavily influenced in a certain direction contrary to what they might have otherwise chosen for themselves.

People who like PvP, who will tag up and run through Yrk or wherever, will continue to enjoy PvP whether they receive benefits from it or not. A scheduled battle better allows them the opportunity to participate, whereas they simply might not be online (or might be doing something else) when a raiding party runs through a city.

iwojimmy wrote:funny, but i would think killing diggers in focus gear also fails to meet your definition of "true" PvP,

great83 wrote:i dont see killing a digger as pvping btw))

the quote is from my post about killing KA diggers in the PR btw

iwojimmy wrote:and organisation and politics are -demonstratably- some of the most effective weapons to bring to any battle.

I dont agree with this... history shows that politics have lost alot of wars, and in the end a politician has no place on the field of battle.

iwojimmy wrote:If you beleive the outnumbered side should always win because they are obviously more uber, you are playing the wrong game.

I think is would be right for the side that is more skillful to win the battle, will this happen no. Do i think the current system is flawed where 10 to 20 unskilled players able to determine the outcome of a battle, then yes. Also are you stating that kami PvPers are more skillful then KA members??

iwojimmy wrote:We could look at OP battles as being the perfect example of democracy in action, with the victory going to the side who gets the most supporters

democracy or dictatorship??
supporters or forced people??

I think it would be much better to add more rewards to balance out the OP items then remove them from the game. Those who seek "balance" by taking from others are almost always looking for revenge or to punish those whom do not agree with them. It would be refreshing to hear one of them say "I want to dominate and control" but that does not sound as pretty as 'leveling the playing field'.

I think it is a major problem that a new group of players whom join the game, create a guild, and try and get an OP, will be massacred. The only way they can be successful is if it is taken from established players and that can be rather difficult. Veteran players will have more ranks, better equipment and quite a few more allies then the new guys.

Some sort of ability to gather rewards similar to the OP's outside of the existing drills would be a good start. I would like to see it be based on the factions, or national governments.

danolt wrote:"I want to dominate and control" but that does not sound as pretty as 'leveling the playing field'.

I want to dominate and control.
I will build level playing fields with the bodies of those who oppose me.

danolt wrote: Some sort of ability to gather rewards similar to the OP's outside of the existing drills would be a good start. I would like to see it be based on the factions, or national governments.

I am all for that!
I don't dig PvP. I am not a big fan of outposts, and I really wish there were some other reward than crystals...I think they are bad for the game. But, my guild and my alliance are important to me, and I enjoy supporting thier goals.

xfluffee wrote: it could be assumed from your staunch tone supporting the present imbalance that you benefit from Outpost rewards and feel a tightening around your throat to think of life without them

yeah..could be..except that if you check my join date, you can see I predate OPs by quite a bit. I have gained far fewer levels with cats than I ever did without them. So...I think you will have to belive me when I say that lack of crystals don't significanly inhibit anyones ability to progress in the game.

Or you could assume that I don't see an intrinsic good in the idea of "balance"

Or you could assume that I am a mean old man that laughs every time I can make a small child cry...you know..whatever helps you get through your day.

xfluffee wrote: It's not life, it doesn't have to be "unfair".

There are players that will simply have more time to play...can think better in terms of tactics...have faster connections or better computers...can make friends easier...a whole list of things that make the game unfair.

I could go on...but your refusal to grasp this one basic truth would make it pointless. If you simply will not just take a few days and relax for a bit; well then, feel free to rant about how life..and the game, isn't fair.

But, it won't get you anywhere.

iwojimmy wrote: We could look at OP battles as being the perfect example of democracy in action, with the victory going to the side who gets the most supporters

Democracy?! I know there are ppl that think that beating up another (less powerfull) country/faction/etc is democracy in action. Normal thinking ppl have other names for something like that

xfluffee wrote: Elsewhere, that's considered discrimination or possibly harassment, and isn't acceptable. It shouldn't be acceptable in this game, either. It really boggles my mind how anyone could even stand idly by and let it happen, much less speak favourably about it.

Sorry, but I have to say it: Get A Life.

xfluffee wrote: Also, Outposts are a PvP concept, so rewards, if any, should be limited to PvP actions. But they're not, they have a striking effect on PvE gameplay. Even if it only affected PvP gameplay, it would be enough to warrant a serious correction. But it affects every single player who plays on that unbalanced shard, regardless of their stance on PvP.

This is an argument. But I don't think so. My PvE and all my leveling in it have effect in my PvP, and is logical that PvP have effect in my PvE. I don't play Ryzom PvP and Ryzom PvE... I play just Ryzom.

And, like in real life, the people who win a battle have access to new resources. Win a battle have a significance. So it looks good to me that, IG, be the same.

great83 wrote: I dont agree with this... history shows that politics have lost alot of wars, and in the end a politician has no place on the field of battle.

Where one side's politics has lost a war, the other side politics has won one. You only have to see WWII: France, England and Russia have been enemies for all the past century. But their allergiance (And the allergiance with USA for suministers) was one of the thinks that won the war.

That was a big sucess of politicals. All of the people in that alliance hate themselves intensely, but the politic allow them stay united.

xfluffee wrote: The logical progression used to reach this point is flawed, primarily because while we cannot change much of what we are handed in life (only react to it), a game is a man-made creation and can easily change or be adjusted when it is found to be lacking. I can't make myself taller to have a better advantage at playing basketball, but I can tweak a setting for a sword to make it more balanced and fair to people who may want to use an axe instead.

Most of the disbalances in game are caused by human players. I don't want a big brother balancing artificially the game. If I would want a perfect game, there a re a few out there, with exactly equally in two sides, but aren't very fun.

Really I didn't like a Big Brother out there. I just like some watching from CSR to amend that few things that make the game boring (Like false declarations forcing people to stay in OP two hours bored), and that's all.

BTW: The people who don't like PvP isn't morally better. Really, believeme. It migth be if the time I dedicate to PvP you dedicate to help childrens in third world, but I seriously doubt that. So, please, don't speak as if we were warmongers and you were the encarnations of the peace, because this is only a game, not the real thing.

To put it in an easy arithmetics:
there are people who don't like pvp at all
people who enjoy pvp from time to time
who enjoy pvp for pvp's sake (reward is winning)
and who enjoy pvp only with a reward.

The current OP's implementation favours the last cathegory only.

- first cathegory is unhappy because pvp happens at all;
- second cathegory is unhappy because payed pvp tends to replace most controlled environment one;
- third cathegory is unhappy because payed pvp determines huge numbers*: nobody does anymore pvp outside the payed one, and in the payed one it's not the skill that matters but levels, gear and number of characters ;

Last cathegory (because in Ryzom they're payed) provides for and protects a number of the others therefore part of the first 3 ones will shut up and use what's provided by the protectors. In some areas their obedience goes farther: they can be ordered to attack some "military objectives" even if they have an interest for it or not.

But this doesn't provide more peaceful content for the non-pvp ones, more controlled environment pvp for second class, and arenas** where people go to flag up and pvp for third ones.

Besides all that - wars, encouraging piling characters in same spot, while server population is growing (and we see GF preparing to accomodate even more players), will soon lead to total random results because of lag induced.

=====================
*The number importance in game is the direct cause of the current problem of multiple attacks. While 6-8 months ago attacking multiple OPs meant to move an army from one battlefield to the next one, and I might have accepted it as tactics, present day pvp situation proves a faction can have enough warriors to split on two battlefields, making it impossible for the others to defend.


**I don't mean by "arenas" places like Matis arena but rather places where traditionally people go to flag up and where pvp-ers find amusement and challenge for their skills in rather small numbers where the complexity already implemented in game fight techniques matters as opposed to "controlled pvp space": tournaments and duels, as opposed to wars where numbers matter.

I could also add that second and third cathegory are also unhappy because payement for wars became so strong in game mechanics that no immersion in the story is possible. While only few of them are RPers, it's still highly upsetting that the pvp kill has nothing anymore to do with religion, civilisation, lore - all this part of the game goes slowly into oblivion - but with cats, mats, ops.