#1 Added by Eutrigan 1 decade ago
#2 Added by Suboxide 1 decade ago
---
#3 Added by Casy 1 decade ago
#4 Added by Mjollren 1 decade ago
Engaging a named or boss with others close by is a tactical mistake.
#5 Added by Suboxide 1 decade ago
#6 Added by Gkr 1 decade ago
#7 Added by Drogos 1 decade ago
#8 Added by Placio 1 decade ago
#9 Added by Gkr 1 decade ago
#10 Added by Mjollren 1 decade ago
#11 Added by Suboxide 1 decade ago
#12 Added by Gkr 1 decade ago
Usually games separate pve and pvp servers, and for good reasons. Sadly Ryzom can't afford to do that, so we're lumped together with different play styles.
Event a PvEr can want, desire and ultimately need to kill certain bosses or nameds. Even a PvEr can want, desire or plainly need to cross every part of the map.
I remember bunnies trekking with me to get LoU tps, and because of the policy to not attack anyone in PR, we would've been prey for any asshat attacking us. Woohoo, but the attacker would have had his enjoyment, great.
Even in PvP situations there are degrees of violence and degrees of roleplay.
If you propose allowing dumb violence and brute force as a viable stance in a forced pvp situation, I'll propose to gas marauders everywhere, just because that's *my* viable tactic in pve situations where I don't want you present. And no, as a primarily pve player, telling me to tag up won't cut it.
Edited 5 times | Last edited by Gkr (1 decade ago)
#13 Added by Gkr 1 decade ago
Edited 4 times | Last edited by Gkr (1 decade ago)
#14 Added by Mjollren 1 decade ago
#15 Added by Gkr 1 decade ago
Funny, I was writing the analogy myself. The incident described by Eutrigan is exactly that, a low blow delivered street thug style. Can't speak for everyone out there, but I prefer the rules imposed by boxing, let's say.
And while I personally try not to complain when I get killed, do note there can be resentment building up and people wanting your entire faction to go **** itself in the end [1]. Just like the resentment built up and exploded regarding a certain camping issue, you must have seen the outcry.
You keep repeating the "We're allowed to do it" mantra, as if the rules are holy and never subject to interpretation. What you fail to note is that not all rules are liked by the players. Do I need to remind you of the tradition of consensual pvp on Arispotle? There's lots of players who enjoyed that situation, and conversely don't enjoy the current situation. Similarly, players were sent into a rage by blatant camping even though it's technically allowed; what, if it's a rule you're supposed to automatically enjoy it?
If something robs people of their enjoyment to play, that's something worth talking about. There are different play styles clashing here, it's not about one mere incident of a kami hiding behind the technicalities (or a marauder doing same). And, as in any political battle, the winning side will drive everyone else away. I'm just describing what's going on :)
This topic is locked
powered by ryzom-api