Nevrax....What if they gave a war and nobody came ?
Posted: Sun Oct 09, 2005 9:07 pm
To steal an old movie title as the thread lead in, I have to ask what is driving development these days ? Back in early 2004 while playing Beta and FBT we had the pleasure of expereincing the Raid engine. Whopper of a good time that was and the planned ideas of Outposts and defending them against such raids was one we all treasured. Now outposts is a whole new thing. Many of us came to Ryzom because it offered something that most other MMORPG's didn't offer to such a degree....cooperative gameplay. I have talked to at least 100 peeps in game and found only 3 who had any interest in any form of PvP. Granted peeps of like mind tend to hang together and I am sure the Pro PvP side would get a differnt set of results among the peeps they regulary hang with. I couldn't help tho, being reminded of the movie title....."What if They Gave a War and Nobody Came".
The key to establishing one's place in the market should come from doing something unique, not doing something that everyone else is doing especially when they have a player base in the millions compared to your hundreds.
The new directions on PvP, FvF and GvG makes little sense, despite the Jena / Makduk hodgepodge of conflicting reasoning, considering the lore of the game. Faced with the threat of kitins, it doesn't seem to make much sense for Civilizations, guilds and individuals not to be united in face of the common threat. Now I understand that a lot of peeps enjoy that type of gameplay but the overwhelming sense from players I see everyday in game is "just leave me out of it".
I have no objection to the inclusion of PvP in game. I object to being required to participate. I object to faulty logic which postulates that I "don't have to" when parts of the game are denied to me if I choose not to. There is NO REASON for PvP, FvF, GvG to be other than consensual. Logic and history dicates that in any conflict there are non combatants. There is a useful and role based sector that they can fulfill in the story development.
in GvG, nuetral guilds can be a source of mercs for GvG wars if the individual players are so inclined. Their outposts can serve as waypoints, supply depots and neutral territory to negotiate truces.
I might be inclined to participate in a GvG "for fun". AFter a mixed guild team where for example, the HP on my pants wore out and a teammate made some jests about my fat bum, I would call upon the honor of my guild to defend it. That weekend we could have our fun and grant 10 dapper to the winner of the "war games". But when all is said and done, no side has lost anything....well other thna the 10 dappie bet....again it is all in fun.
But I would not want to be forced to postpone my scheduled world tour with new guildies because I would have to defend my outpost every time some peep or group of peeps wanted to feel better about themselves by declaring war on a weaker guild outpost.
There is a SIMPLE solution. Let Guilds and indviduals have their PvP, GvG and FvF checkboxes. Let guilds have their outposts and defend them against bandit and kitin raids. If they choose GvG on, they can play the game as outlined. If they choose the "nuetral" position, they can either accept or refuse a challenge to their post.
If they chose neutral in FvF, the penalty of letting FvF players attack them seems silly. With 3k spells no one can take a double hit before they can even start to defend themselves. There must be a penalty for such actions. If an FvF player attacks a neutral player they should lose SIGNIFICANT honor points just as countries who don't comply with accepted conventions face sactions.
Nevrax, Let us choose what part of the game we want to play without penalizing us for our choices. Otherwise we will simply find something else to play.
The key to establishing one's place in the market should come from doing something unique, not doing something that everyone else is doing especially when they have a player base in the millions compared to your hundreds.
The new directions on PvP, FvF and GvG makes little sense, despite the Jena / Makduk hodgepodge of conflicting reasoning, considering the lore of the game. Faced with the threat of kitins, it doesn't seem to make much sense for Civilizations, guilds and individuals not to be united in face of the common threat. Now I understand that a lot of peeps enjoy that type of gameplay but the overwhelming sense from players I see everyday in game is "just leave me out of it".
I have no objection to the inclusion of PvP in game. I object to being required to participate. I object to faulty logic which postulates that I "don't have to" when parts of the game are denied to me if I choose not to. There is NO REASON for PvP, FvF, GvG to be other than consensual. Logic and history dicates that in any conflict there are non combatants. There is a useful and role based sector that they can fulfill in the story development.
in GvG, nuetral guilds can be a source of mercs for GvG wars if the individual players are so inclined. Their outposts can serve as waypoints, supply depots and neutral territory to negotiate truces.
I might be inclined to participate in a GvG "for fun". AFter a mixed guild team where for example, the HP on my pants wore out and a teammate made some jests about my fat bum, I would call upon the honor of my guild to defend it. That weekend we could have our fun and grant 10 dapper to the winner of the "war games". But when all is said and done, no side has lost anything....well other thna the 10 dappie bet....again it is all in fun.
But I would not want to be forced to postpone my scheduled world tour with new guildies because I would have to defend my outpost every time some peep or group of peeps wanted to feel better about themselves by declaring war on a weaker guild outpost.
There is a SIMPLE solution. Let Guilds and indviduals have their PvP, GvG and FvF checkboxes. Let guilds have their outposts and defend them against bandit and kitin raids. If they choose GvG on, they can play the game as outlined. If they choose the "nuetral" position, they can either accept or refuse a challenge to their post.
If they chose neutral in FvF, the penalty of letting FvF players attack them seems silly. With 3k spells no one can take a double hit before they can even start to defend themselves. There must be a penalty for such actions. If an FvF player attacks a neutral player they should lose SIGNIFICANT honor points just as countries who don't comply with accepted conventions face sactions.
Nevrax, Let us choose what part of the game we want to play without penalizing us for our choices. Otherwise we will simply find something else to play.
