Ryzom

turjake wrote:Of course PvP can be even a significant part of roleplay, but usually having roleplayers with the UT2004 crew in the same battle works about as well as pouring water into sulphuric acid.

Oh you defo dont wanna be trying that!!! *starts thinking of burning skin and lungs*

doustin wrote:I know many ppl participate in PvP events and then complains and insults to ppl that play PvP. In the kami/kara temples event it was clear that kami npcs tell you something like kill all karavans you can. So i cant understand how ppl that were digging complained about being killed meanwhile they were digging. The point was to kill all enemies, diggers or not. In fact it was better to kill diggers cause in that way they couldnt finish temple so fast. That was the reason of the event, not just a bunch of diggers digging in both sides and just the faster wins. Killers were also important in all this.

So, if you dont like PvP dont go in a PvP event. If you want to complain complain to Nevrax. Indeed i was killed many times digging, and it was right, cause i knew in what event i was. Ppl forget that kamis and karas have a war, and you CHOOSE to participate or not.

Even as a hugely pro PvP (for RP purposes of course) person, I think you're missing the point. While I find PvP necessary for the war to actually be a war, there are also possibilities for a great event to not have PvP involved, and I think that's the point that was made. In order to participate they HAD to be subject to PvP.

However, to balance that scale, I think a lot of Anti-PvP people aren't giving it the chance in Ryzom that they could. Personally I believe that a lot of Anti-PvP people are going on biases from experience in other games, which makes sense, but I think the experience in Ryzom would be far different. For the most part we have a much more mature community which doesn't seem subject to as much ganking and grieving as other games.

Sum it up, in a perfect RP game, PvP would be ever present, player vs. player pvp, not GvG or FvF but people would act maturely. Only killing people that the character they're role playing would actually kill, not killing everyone in sight. I.E. The extremist I play would kill certain Karavan players to further the cause, but not just randomly kill everyone I see, kara or not. In order to create the best RP environment, that kind of thing needs to be possible, but not over played, the same as it is in real life.

sk8rss wrote:.......
Sum it up, in a perfect RP game, PvP would be ever present, player vs. player pvp, not GvG or FvF but people would act maturely. Only killing people that the character they're role playing would actually kill, not killing everyone in sight. I.E. The extremist I play would kill certain Karavan players to further the cause, but not just randomly kill everyone I see, kara or not. In order to create the best RP environment, that kind of thing needs to be possible, but not over played, the same as it is in real life.

For PvP to be anything more than thrill-killing, it needs to have consequences inside the game (apart from irritating other players - which is actually outside the game.. ) This is why I participate in OP battles but otherwise refuse to do the faction/PvP thing.
The consequences should be good AND bad, before fame MKII came along I had hoped it would do something - People would lose fame for killing someone with high fame in a faction/civilisation, gain fame for killing people with negative fame, etc etc. Unfortunately it didnt work that way ..

iwojimmy wrote:For PvP to be anything more than thrill-killing, it needs to have consequences inside the game (apart from irritating other players - which is actually outside the game.. ) This is why I participate in OP battles but otherwise refuse to do the faction/PvP thing.
The consequences should be good AND bad, before fame MKII came along I had hoped it would do something - People would lose fame for killing someone with high fame in a faction/civilisation, gain fame for killing people with negative fame, etc etc. Unfortunately it didnt work that way ..

agreed, or even some sort of fine/arrest issues from the civ you killed that person in. I agree that there need to be consequences, but that was assumed in my post.... You know what they say about assuming...

Theres a couple of things some of the strongly Pro-PvP (im actualy Pro-PvP but in a controlled way) players tend to ignore , Truces are a part of War and if it realy was PvP instead of FvF they would be at as much risk of being killed by their own side for breaking a Truce as by the Enemy , as it was in the Old-Lands Truce breakers were often left to respawn by their own Faction

There are "Rules" in War and War Criminals , unfortunately theres no game mechanic in FvF to set Truces or punish players for breaking them , atleast in Outposts Battles you can Kick players off , gamewise its also alot more complicated than just Side-A v Side-B if you believe Faction is everything and its Kill or be Killed in all circumstances then youre missing out

I do beleive the comunity is having a dampening effect on random/excessive-PvP behaviour but theres little that can be done apart from a stiff talking too lol , maybe a Kick-vote system as some FPS have would be good -excluding players of your own side from a Region for 15mins or maybe even sending them to Jail ?

Edit opps back on topic - "Do MMORPG's need PvP to be fun ?" well you can read that question two ways , MMORPG's can be fun without PvP , PvP in MMORPG's must be fun

sk8rss wrote:Even as a hugely pro PvP (for RP purposes of course) person, I think you're missing the point. While I find PvP necessary for the war to actually be a war, there are also possibilities for a great event to not have PvP involved, and I think that's the point that was made. In order to participate they HAD to be subject to PvP.

However, to balance that scale, I think a lot of Anti-PvP people aren't giving it the chance in Ryzom that they could. Personally I believe that a lot of Anti-PvP people are going on biases from experience in other games, which makes sense, but I think the experience in Ryzom would be far different. For the most part we have a much more mature community which doesn't seem subject to as much ganking and grieving as other games.

Sum it up, in a perfect RP game, PvP would be ever present, player vs. player pvp, not GvG or FvF but people would act maturely. Only killing people that the character they're role playing would actually kill, not killing everyone in sight. I.E. The extremist I play would kill certain Karavan players to further the cause, but not just randomly kill everyone I see, kara or not. In order to create the best RP environment, that kind of thing needs to be possible, but not over played, the same as it is in real life.

I dont know what point you say i am missing but in the end it seems we think similar. What would happen in real life if there was not death and there was not jail or any punishment for killing others ? tons of ppl just would kill ppl for fun and other aberrations. This is not even real life, just a game. It depends on the personality of each one, some ppl dont like to be just cooperative, they like to take properties, kill ppl and that kind of things.

If you have a game similar to reality, where you have a real chance to die forever and where there are authorities that look for criminals THEN ppl would act in other way.

Ppl dont RP, RP is not talking in a guild chat, talk in tells to miles with miles of distance, talk about the game just as a game, that is not RP. For the ones that played pen & paper games like D&D, players wouldnt RP if characters started to talk "in game" about things of real life or for instance they said a weapon has a +5 bonus ( they dont know it has a bonus, just that its a magical weapon )

So, i see that many ppl talk about RP and dont even have an idea of what is RP. They even complain that ppl dont RP when they dont RP AT ALL as well. Also i dont RP in SoR just cause ITS IMPOSSIBLE cause it has no inmersion at all, it is mostly a mix of a chat channel and a grind game. Actually without chat channels noone would play this game i think.

petej wrote:Theres a couple of things some of the strongly Pro-PvP (im actualy Pro-PvP but in a controlled way) players tend to ignore , Truces are a part of War and if it realy was PvP instead of FvF they would be at as much risk of being killed by their own side for breaking a Truce as by the Enemy , as it was in the Old-Lands Truce breakers were often left to respawn by their own Faction

There are "Rules" in War and War Criminals , unfortunately theres no game mechanic in FvF to set Truces or punish players for breaking them , atleast in Outposts Battles you can Kick players off , gamewise its also alot more complicated than just Side-A v Side-B if you believe Faction is everything and its Kill or be Killed in all circumstances then youre missing out

I do beleive the comunity is having a dampening effect on random/excessive-PvP behaviour but theres little that can be done apart from a stiff talking too lol , maybe a Kick-vote system as some FPS have would be good -excluding players of your own side from a Region for 15mins or maybe even sending them to Jail ?

Edit opps back on topic - "Do MMORPG's need PvP to be fun ?" well you can read that question two ways , MMORPG's can be fun without PvP , PvP in MMORPG's must be fun

OMG a kick vote system???? I prefer playing Mario bross that a game with that. That would make that just ppl you dont like cant play the game unless they play as most in that region want. If SoR doesnt have any inmersion now that would be one of the few ways to give it even less inmersion and yes more problems. This is not just a chat channel where you cant kick or ban ppl out of your chat area.

I think pvp has made this game fun to a certain degree.

Last night a group of five Twilight Whispers were running through Bounty Beaches all PvP tagged. We approached the karavan teleporter when we bumped into a similar sized group of karavan factioned players that were also flagged for pvp (sorry guys i cant remember who you were).

It was fun because we clearly had our two lines there and we were jostling about with itchy trigger fingers making some small talk and imo im sure both sides were unsure if there was going to be a ruck. I dont think there would have been a fight in hindsight, yet the uncertainty of it was good fun.

doustin wrote:OMG a kick vote system???? I prefer playing Mario bross that a game with that. That would make that just ppl you dont like cant play the game unless they play as most in that region want. If SoR doesnt have any inmersion now that would be one of the few ways to give it even less inmersion and yes more problems. This is not just a chat channel where you cant kick or ban ppl out of your chat area.

Some UT (FPS) servers have it too works well at removing trouble makers that refuse to play along with the majority , doesnt have to be a Kick from the server it could be used to untag/jail whatever

petej wrote:Some UT (FPS) servers have it too works well at removing trouble makers that refuse to play along with the majority , doesnt have to be a Kick from the server it could be used to untag/jail whatever

I know, i have been playing to some of them. But you dont have to pay anything monthly. I have been kicked lot of times from Jedi Outcast online cause i got to kill 95% of ppl and they didnt like that i used really well some movements in duels that they didnt like/know to use but that was part of the game. It was just pathetic to be kicked for that. But in those games you can create your own game, so you would be the one kicking ppl out as well, so you can get fun anyway. What i say it is that ppl usually kick you for stupid reasons. What say that majority doesnt mean that its something logical. Maybe you find just a bunch of pvp haters and they kick you out for that. I am not going to spend months of gameplay just to be kicked for a bunch of players.

What would happen if you were kicked out for the majority ? would you still like the game ??