Ryzom

Hehe, same old same old arguements.

PVP system is fine as it is except for the age old problem of outpost battle timing with a trans atlantic population.

Would not hurt to have more OP battles heck even many non PvP orientated players I know enjoy them but people need to get away from the factional bickering abit and be honest. OP battles arn't factional they are about cats and who your freinds are.

Would like more proper factional content like the Temple event or the woods but until we get it will continue to fight whatever fight i wish on individual merit as they are a long way removed from any basis in lore.

Although would like to see more proper factional events I am completly opposed to spires or anything that further limits people travel in the game because kicking the casual non pvp digger crafters in the nuts would do no-one any good or the game long term.

Lighten up everyone play how you wanna play but dont try impose your will on others either by aggro dragging or over zealous rp.

Hi and happy new year to friends and adversaries old and new, best wishes to you all but most of all best wishes for Ryzoms future.

edit:for rubbish spelling

gcaldani wrote:2. I dislike anything that prevent any player to enter any region of the planet

Just to clarify, I agree with this, and in my earlier suggestion I didn't mean Kamists would be unable to enter the Canopy and Karavaneers unable to enter the PR. I just meant they'd be forbidden to enter those regions, thus if they do chose to enter, there's going to be some extra penalty or difficulty that neutrals don't have. This in return for getting easier access to the other region.

Sywindt wrote:This is because the people what run the guild have chosen to become civ aligned and only accept people with the correct civ alignment (or neutral.)

Yes Sy, that all makes sense. What never did to many players though was that a neutral aligned guild can't accept people of any alignment. Neutral is not a third/fifth alignment, it's the lack of alignment. If it was an alignment of it's own, neutral people wouldn't be allowed in civ aligned guilds either, as they'd then have the wrong alignment.

If a guild choses to simply not align, why shouldn't they accept members of all alignments? That seems to be a stance of "only the correct alignment!" and pretending that neutral is an alignment of it's own. But it ain't. So the restriction feels like just a cheap ploy to force guilds to align anyways even though the real reasons to align (benefits from the civ you're aligned to) where never implemented.

norvic wrote:PVP system is fine as it is except for the age old problem of outpost battle timing with a trans atlantic population.

That makes me wonder if the problem is much less on the other 2 servers...

sidusar wrote:That makes me wonder if the problem is much less on the other 2 servers...

Good point maybe Acridiel could comment

sidusar wrote:Just to clarify, I agree with this, and in my earlier suggestion I didn't mean Kamists would be unable to enter the Canopy and Karavaneers unable to enter the PR. I just meant they'd be forbidden to enter those regions, thus if they do chose to enter, there's going to be some extra penalty or difficulty that neutrals don't have. This in return for getting easier access to the other region.

Why not?

When i spoke about eventual restrictions, i always had in mind the altars and never the outposts. So i never spoke about something PvP centric.
Ok, i mentioned Spires and seems i did a wrong idea. I never mentioned Spires to speak about PvP, but only to speak about something complex.

I never want PvP restricting player decisions or miss any content. I always stated that the key of Ryzom is the freedom.

So, my statement: i dislike any restriction but, if even you want some, do it with specific content, such us (to be clear, this is PvE, NOT PvP)

to gain the ability to enter a region, you must first be able to run thru a full kitin camp (in example), then once entered you must build a camp (that involve having some npc guards) to counter the kitins attacks. Once you secured the place, then u can hope to get an altar of some sort built at camp. What happens if the kitins, for some reason, invade the camp? well, u lose the buildings and the altar, so you lose the easy access to the region (but still able to force the kitin camps and reenter the region). Of course, it's not that the kitins are going to attack every hour, otherwise people would be too busy all the time, but, maybe, trigger the event with a specific situation (some activity must be done by players, similar to the last kitin invasion event, a mix between harvesting and delivering).

This is only an example, just written at the moment, nothing i tought seriously, but only to show there are many possibilities.... any other idea would be good as well. The concept is: i could accept restrictions if these are not permanent and give players more sand to play with.

Otherwise, i dislike any permanent restriction in accessing any region, based on faction or civilizations (as happens in some mmo where to see the land of opposing faction you are forced to roll another char and join that other faction).

At the end, we already have restrictions, i cannot use kami altars, neutrals can't use PR altars, but no one of us are prevented to enter any region just by walking. So, i cannot use the kami altar to check womkan in Loria in few seconds, but i can go check there by walking/mounting. The same happens for the kami in some other better placed karavan altar (if they want to check Goakan, they need more travel than karas).

About your point on the Syw answer, it was just a curiosity for me (in fact i was considering the question from the opposite point of view, and didn't seen the other way, that's fair enough).

Anyway your consideration is a good point. Probably in the original plans the neutrals were considered a "faction", or able to became one by time. Probably there were no time to improve this aspect of the story.

sidusar wrote:

norvic wrote:
PVP system is fine as it is except for the age old problem of outpost battle timing with a trans atlantic population.

That makes me wonder if the problem is much less on the other 2 servers...

In a well populated server, this would not be a real problem. With a high population would be easy for the aliances to organize Countryside agreements, so that both kami and kara could have guilds from different timezones and able to play the war any time.

The problem is the population not the single server. Imho.

gcaldani wrote:In a well populated server, this would not be a real problem. With a high population would be easy for the aliances to organize Countryside agreements, so that both kami and kara could have guilds from different timezones and able to play the war any time.

The problem is the population not the single server. Imho.

I still believe that during EP2 the population was quite high and the numbers of Kamists and Karavaneer were relatively even, but still there existed timezone issues. During the European day hours Kamist were strong, and in the late afternoon/evening the Karavaneer became strong. So there existed a timezone related affinity to factions, this is at least true for the pvp interested players.

I think if a Homin based faction is developed before the "giant douche" and "turd sandwich" conflict is played out, there is no reason to have a factional conflict at all. I think these boards are proof enough that everyone will go to the "neutral" faction, since every thread devolves into pleas for more stuff for the nonaligned.

The pacific theater of W.W.II is a decent example of the Atys conflict, one faction is the Japs and the other the Americans, Homins are the natives on some small island; who have never seen metal before, much less an air craft carrier. We can choose to help one side or the other, we might even get some stuff, but we are not gonna go from stone age to rocket builders in time to kick both sides ass in the war. So we do our little cargo cult stuff and hope for the best.

I think the major problem with the temple conflict was the amazing disconnect between the event team and the developers, we actually had votes on whether/which temples should be built, not that it counted for anything, but it was presented as something that was going to be political as opposed to open PvP. There was no instruction, no leadership and I would argue that some on the event team were actively undermining development of the factions in hopes of bringing a more Homin based theme to the game.

What I would like to see in the future is a decision made, planed, developed and followed through. I think the present owners/developers are more then competent enough to lead us into the next chapter. I think worrying about making everyone happy, is stagnation. Historically on these boards, you get a whole lot less misery doing and standing for nothing then changing stuff up.

I vote for following the outlined development of the game and let the chips fall.

danolt wrote: The pacific theater of W.W.II is a decent example of the Atys conflict, one faction is the Japs and the other the Americans, Homins are the natives on some small island; who have never seen metal before, much less an air craft carrier. We can choose to help one side or the other, we might even get some stuff, but we are not gonna go from stone age to rocket builders in time to kick both sides ass in the war. So we do our little cargo cult stuff and hope for the best.

Great analogy!

Not taking either side should never be the easiest choice. It should be a dangerous tightrope walk.

weell i don't agree that everyone would go neutral. there are plenty of players that like one faction more than the other. And just because two super-powers are fighting over your heads doesn't count out the third, fourth, fifth view points. I would think that a neutral faction would be very prominent, but not particularly the biggest choice. I think the main reason a neutral faction is mentioned so much on the boards is because alot (but not a majority) of players would like to see one implemented. Actually I think Civ. based factions would be most prevalent of all in the game if they were ever to show up.

The Temple conflict seemed pretty fairly played, trykers did try to build a Kami Temple on Aris. but ran out of time. The all or nothing setup of it was a bit harsh but i guess thats the way the 'super-powers' felt, and the kami trykers lost out sadly.

Each civilisation has its own history with each faction, I think it would be nice to see more of that played out rather than 'this civ is this, that civ is that, thats all there is to it.' just to keep a half/half balance to the game dynamics. Theres more choices and numbers than just 1,2 in life.

I don't want to come across as argumentative, but I am not sure I am getting my point across in this conversation. I doubt it is much of a stretch to say that Pero is considered by many to be one of the most devout followers of the Karavan. If a viable Homin led faction came into being, he would most certainly want to be a part. Atys's future is a Homin based society, not one based on the factions. I tend to look at Atys as a 3rd world country that is occupied by two foreign powers, I really do not think the native populous would pick one of the occupiers in lieu of self-determination.

When I look ahead to the resolution part of the K+K conflict, I see the rise of a united Homin faction, a sort of Camelot time until it subdivides and begins to war amongst itself. The rise of a third faction that represents the middle ground between the two is the resolution of that conflict. New conflicts would then arise to shatter the round table.

Yes, there are more choices then either/or in life, but this is not life this is game, a game that is supposed to be based on a story and a story that is suppose to be sci-fi, meaning it should be plausible. Good stories, have tough dilemmas, a faction representing the middle ground of two polar ideals is not a dilemma, it is a solution.

Ryzom is even less open then good old table top D+D, you could always choose not to go on the prepared missions, but it usually made for boring sessions. Here there is only the material presented, interpretations can be different, they can be used differently but in the end you can not choose to be friendly with the Kitin, a member of bandit tribe, etc... Choices are limited. Yes, I am all for more choice, but it is my opinion that a Homin faction is not an additional choice, it is the removal of choice. Which is fine if more dilemma is added.

And seriously, I can not think of one player that I know well who would stay Karavan, in lieu of a Homin led faction, not one. We may want to bring Jena with us, but the Karavan could certainly be put aside.