Ryzom

chud1 wrote:so as i see it this will be guild skirmishes indefinitely.

No, that's what it was originally supposed to be. Guild level content, even within civs, with competition and assignation of outposts not solely down to PvP. It has become faction content however.

chud1 wrote: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?

The neutral grouping is something of a conglommeration of interests but isn't particularly mechanically supported within the game.

* Trytonists - Followers of Elias Tryton, a figure almost as legendary as Jena and Ma-Duk, said to be a Tryker and appearing in a great deal of lore, a meddler, makes me think of Dr Who to be honest. He's currently MIA in the deep roots.
* Hominists - Those who don't favour the gods and prefer homin to create their own destiny, free of the gods, free of their influence, not trusting them, wanting the homin to determine their own destiny and to work together.
* Opportunists - Mercenaries, pirates, smugglers and rogues of all types. Why pick a side when you can leave your options open and make a profit?
* Moderates - People who follow one god or the other, but aren't fanatics.
* Nationalists - Homin more interested in the advancement of their land than their faction.

There's not a lot, mechanically, to draw people to neutrality. This MAY change a bit with spires as it'll hit factioned players the way neutrals were hit with the loss of a few TPs.

chud1 wrote: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?

Well, Tryton was already written in but his actions have been so irrelevent (especially in the temple building event) that people have lost much thought that the 'third way' was being given any attention. I think the neutral group is too diverse to be truly organised, but a bit more emphasis on it would help again. I also think the following should be done...

1. Restore neutral TP access to all _towns_ not zones.
2. Allow neutrals to select a PvP tag that makes them able to engage, or be engaged by other factions or even other neutrals (I wouldn't use it, but it should be an option).

grimjim wrote:Allow neutrals to select a PvP tag that makes them able to engage, or be engaged by other factions

I may well be wrong but I think this is already possible - once you heal a side you effectively join that one for the duration of the tag. Again, I could well be wrong but a certain wll-known trykerette tried to explain it to me while I was half asleep

grimjim wrote: There's not a lot, mechanically, to draw people to neutrality.

Well, if like me you are not a PVPer and don't want to get involved in any of that junk, that's a major draw of neutrality. You avoid all the factional grief, and get to still play the rest of the game, making your enemies the gingos, the cloppers, etc, rather than other players.

Sure, lots of people prefer PVP, and for those that do, neutrality is probably not much of a draw. But for those who would rather stay strictly PVE, neutrality is very attractive.

C

Homin, hear me.

There are several forces at work.

One, there is a Kitin hive growing in power in the Witherings driven by organization and a figurehead. Only combined forces will be able to withstand any surge from the hive.

Two, should Jena come, those alliances working together may be torn apart at the seams. Jena will not be happy with those who do not seek to meet her half-way. Many don't even believe in her.

Three, once the Kami resistance is shut down, won't Karavan guilds vie for their own Outposts? Won't they wish to be seen as the strongest and seeking Jena's favour?

Four, should the Kami side risk being decimated, is it not unheard of to surrender and save those homin who would be crushed underneath? Then a guerilla based resistance could develop.

There are many paths the conflict may take. Only Jena and Ma-Duk control our destiny.

ooc: 5th point and not sure how to put it in RP terms is the resulting Faction war over the OPs. While the lore and Saga pointed to guild v. guild mechanic, the devs had to realize that alliances may form by Alliance and that it might be faction v faction until one side won. Then the war might turn to guild v. guild if there were incentives for guilds to seek more power. Dunno if those incentives are in game atm. Someone has to win for the saga to continue. At some point the leaders of the Kami will need to sit down and develop terms for a surrender.

akede wrote:Dunno if those incentives are in game atm. Someone has to win for the saga to continue. At some point the leaders of the Kami will need to sit down and develop terms for a surrender.

While I agree in theory, and that would be a real way to affect the landscape and the history, I'm skeptical about its feasibility. Suppose a side wins, and note that the side may be different in the three shards. either it is desguised in terms of "let's accomodate it" meaning that a NPC logs in and says something as "homins, we K, have defeated the evil K, but since we have mercy, we will nevertheless allow them to coexist with us"... which could be unsatisfactory or; if really a change
- Remove losing faction NPCs
- Remove their TPs
- Remove the mission givers
- Faction PvP disabled?
etc. etc.

Only nevrax knows what will happen, but drastic changes like this... I am unsure. There are design problems too, and at what point one side is declared loser? as long as there is one "rebel" and influx of new players; it should remain open, without mentioning that lore would imho lose richness "there used to be 2 factions, now there is only one" (sidenote, pity nevrax wroked on Still Wyler 3D model, will they reuse it? )

One would think that another possible outcome of the conflict could be that it was dropped in favor of another type of conflict; allowing both factions to coexist. Another possibility is that it is indeed planned to be an eternal conflict - always present - which seems the state of things, for Jena has been coming for more than one year. Another option is that devs did plan to be a saga; they have something in mind, they may think that it would be an interesting outcome but they really don't know how, having been focused in other urgent things, this is left FFS (For further study, added to clarify)

just a random thought. you have determined that this conflict is unwinnable by force. so why do you keep on trying to do it with force?

from what i read in this thread the kami side on arispotle is like the monkey with a nut in his hand, which he can't pull out of the bottle, because his fist is too big with the nut inside it.

xenofur wrote:just a random thought. you have determined that this conflict is unwinnable by force. so why do you keep on trying to do it with force?

Is there another way to win it, if one assumes to stick to the lore, obeying higher powers simply out of faith? How does one side win then? convincing every other member of the opposing faction to change sides? -- it could be interesting, cfr. my previous post -- for what is worth, the Karavan envoys were pretty clear about it. Of course, homins could all lead to neutrality in one of its variants. I don't know, as long as we don't have a clear definition of what causes the conflict to end and what causes one side to win, it's still guessing.

from what i read in this thread the kami side on arispotle is like the monkey with a nut in his hand, which he can't pull out of the bottle, because his fist is too big with the nut inside it.

What should Kamists do then? break the bottle? how does this translate into gameplay terms?

iphdrunk wrote:What should Kamists do then? break the bottle? how does this translate into gameplay terms?

Get his hand out the bottle and turn it upside down, silly

iphdrunk wrote: What should Kamists do then?

Negotiate a cease fire.

xenofur wrote:just a random thought. you have determined that this conflict is unwinnable by force. so why do you keep on trying to do it with force?

from what i read in this thread the kami side on arispotle is like the monkey with a nut in his hand, which he can't pull out of the bottle, because his fist is too big with the nut inside it.

ooc:
The concept here would be to let the nut go(stop being so stubborn), stop being so focused on the nut and be able to pull your hand out of the bottle. That is what I am saying with "terms of surrender". And if we liken this war to any IRL war, the losing side doesn't always lose their identity. Some times the terms of surrender include maintaining identity. Really depends on the leverage the losing side has. The Karavan PvE people should push for surrender so they can stop the war and focus on protecting Atys from the Kitin. (example)

You can continue to fight and risk losing both your hard targets(fighters) and your soft targets(non-fighting pve folks who need the cats and materials to further their efforts) or step up to the table and negotiate terms which of course would include saving your soft targets.