English French German Spanish Russian
Is PVP RP? - English - Ryzom Community ForumHomeGuest

English


uiWebPrevious12345uiWebNext

#16 Report | Quote[en] 

I think PvP can very well be Roleplay.

Lets say this game didn't have the Tag-up flag and everyone was Kill on site all the time, then some of us would be upset, but probably would accept the consequences and continue to play the game because it is a great game. Then, to avoid getting killed on site would depend on how a person got along with others. How they built up friendships, and who their alliances were with. Yes, even across factions. Remember during WW1 on Christmas day, the enemies got together and had a peaceful day and met eachother?
Anyways, The problem lies with certain people who just want to go around Ganking everyone because they can, and they might think it is part of their rolepley, (Which is like letting a cerial killer have his way) hence, those who are not good at PvP, nor care about PvP, or making friendships to protect themselves, have to have some sort of game mechanic to protect them, yes, the tag-up flag. Is it their fault? No, I do not thing so, is it the Gankers fault? I do think so maybe 90%.

The Roleplay part is in the making of friendships, actually, to protect yourself! The other player can view you as someone to rob, beat up, etc. But that doesn't normally happen in real life unless you are a criminal. Are Marauders criminals? I will leave that up to others to define. But I do not think they are. They have to define their role as not a criminal one.
I do not think other Homins should be attacked just because they are attackable and belong to another faction, unless they blatantly support that faction and make themselves an obvious enemy. What I am saying is, if everyone is attackable, then this would blur the lines of alliances and reasons to be attacked or not be attacked, or it should. unless again, you just get these gankers all the time attacking you. That would make the game unenjoyable imo.
The solution? The ability to not tag up and not be attackable, just like it is now. (The other option is to make a completely new game that is 100% PvP for all players that PvP lovers can go play).
So, we have to have a balance. The option not to tag up. The option not to PvP for those who want to be peaceful and not be bothered. But, still, I see room for the Roleplay if it is done correctly now. I do not think Kill on site is proper roleplay personally. I think you have to have a reason for it. Game mechanics dictate we have to belong to some faction. But some could give a rats ass about factions. They are only a faction for the teleports. Maybe we are more inclined to KoS because you are not perma-dead as was mentioned.
Anyways, that is my two cents. Thanks.

#17 Report | Quote[en] 

I am Marauder.. I wonder why i'm not in jail because i must be a serial killer IRL... Oh wait... Are you ok, girl? Seems not.

I don't get why on EACH PvP POST ( It happened on EVERY SINGLE ONE ) you guys say " Yeah, but IRL... bla bla bla " )

THAT'S THE POINT.

We aren't IRL, otherwise.. you would not respawn, but.. Seems like you can't just separate IG from IRL... " Oh noes, he killed me, he must be an ass and hate everyone, even IRL, sad life :( "

Ehhhhhhhhhhmmmmmmmmmmmm..... N.O.P.E

I'm just so much pissed to see every comment like this, I don't get why you play video game if it's to connect every action to IRL.... Just get a life then?

* throw salt *

Edited 2 times | Last edited by Mithian (12 months ago)

#18 Report | Quote[en] 

Geez! You miss the point.
The question was is PvP Roleplay? I tried to answer, Yes, it can be, and proceded to give examples how it could be.
I did allude to situations in real life, yes, that was to help see what I do not like about the thinking of how it is ok to go around Ganking others just for the sake of it. I don't see how someone can call that style of play Roleplay, and why I don't. I just don't see the fun in that and it would make the game unenjoyable.
To clarify, are marauders criminals? No, I do not thinks so, but I also think you have to use your brain a bit more to define your role as not criminals, but to have a cause, or reason to kill EVERYONE on atys. You haven't made your case except to just say: "We are marauders!"
I don't see the reason for a person thinking that they can just go around killing everyone for the fun of it? Even if it is a game. If that is the kind of game certain people like, then maybe they need to go find a 100% PvP game if they can't live with the way things are. This game currently needs the forced balance of allowing peaceful players to play their game.

#19 Report | Quote[en] 

[EDIT] Paragraph deleted because out of topic. Please do not use the forum to settle the score with players. In the event of a serious dispute with a player, please refer to this paragraph of the Code of Conduct: https://app.ryzom.com/app_forum/index.php?page=topic/view/28406/3 #3 Thank you.

@Naema, I think (at least it's my opinion and maybe I am wrong who knows), forcing people to be tag and having more gameplay restriction (it's a bad thing but there is pro and cons) can bring back faction sense (for rangers it's another story I agreed). Right now, it looks like in the game everyone is friend with everyone, which in term of ingame politics is not interesting at all ... etc

Edited 3 times | Last edited by Tamarea (12 months ago) | Reason: Edit for moderation reasons.

#20 Report | Quote[en] 

I've seen so far two kinds of roleplays players about pvp (pvp can be incorporated in roleplay, yes)
- the faction centered
- the individualist

Those are archetypes, people are generally a mix of those two kinds.

In detail :

- the first one is concerned by factions game. Despite not being at ease with RP in arround channel or assembly-event like —or even thinks this is boring bullshit— he is very strict about the logical of his behavior related to the faction he belongs to. For him healing or trading with a enemy is pure nonsense and he will always be in favor of gameplay mechanisms that forbid any exemption. He also dreams that victories and defeats have a leverage on civs' economy.

- the second one is concerned by his character background first and assess to belong to "elite" rp-ers. He recognized the rivalry between factions put often put himself in an antagonist situation. Like being a fyros vassal or a matis patriot or a karavan zorai. He likes to be the exception that confirm the rules. For him any possibilities and combinations could have its justification (at least, for himself) and the gameplay should allow it. He often is not a very good pvper but tag on for some "realism".

what could we change ?
I think the gameplay should reply to both kinds. I think also the current system is much better than the former with the so-called "rp tag", but yet current system is perfectible.
- while being tagged, we should be able to choose between healing or attacking another tagged one. (maybe the choice of healing would create an auto-league or auto-invite him in current league. No heal possible if he is already in another league).
- all friendly actions with "an enemy" (heal, trade) should be sanctioned by little effect on fame, with same kind of balance than pvp points calculation (the more he is a enemy, the higher the sanction).

Edited 2 times | Last edited by Namcha (12 months ago)

#21 Report | Quote[fr] 

@Sinvaders , c'est déjà difficile de trouver des gens qui font du roleplay, alors si en plus on doit tous se "foutre sur la gueule" il va pas y avoir beaucoup de discussions :) (second degré pour éviter les dramas)

Last edited by Eolinius (12 months ago)

#22 Report | Quote[en] 

Namcha did describe exactly what i wanted to write, but better than i, so i won't comment about this.

As Eolinius said, the roleplay tags can be different than the PvP tags, it could add some layer to the interaction game.
Naema
To clarify, are marauders criminals? No, I do not thinks so, but I also think you have to use your brain a bit more to define your role as not criminals, but to have a cause, or reason to kill EVERYONE on atys. You haven't made your case except to just say: "We are marauders!"

Namcha explained it better, but some roleplayer's will do everything to support the gameplay of factions, so if you are not marauder, they will most probably attack you.
It is not personal like some think, its just RP associated with gameplay (faction play?).
Aleesomething
I think my point of view is pretty visible in this chat but, if PvP=RP, then its a very cheap RP

 

[EDIT]  Answer removed because related with a deleted part in a previous post
.

 

For your info, around channel is roleplay driven, for most of Atys.
Kyriann
I think that your fame among the population is not something you can always control.
An homin just passing through the battle area could see you helping someone of the opposite faction and ruin your fame.
So the automated change in fame is not a bad thing, but I agree that it could be balanced by a special demand of an NPC or another RP thing.
RP could also increase your fame not only destroy it. :)

Same as Dukenono and Magez, would be very nice and legit to have fame increase/decrease with your roleplay slash PvP action.

And automation is not a bad idea at all, it can add dynamism instead of been static like almost everything right now.

Last edited by Tamarea (12 months ago) | Reason: Edit for moderation reasons.

---

#23 Report | Quote[en] 

I'll add one type of action as a candidate to be leverage on fame (just a little bit, negatively or positively) : gaining XP with someone.

And I also completely forget one kind of rp player regarding pvp, sorry !
- conchie

again a archetype !

He is a good rp-er on manypoints and involve in many events except one thing : pvp ! His IRL ethical values forbid him to understand pvp which seems immature if not insane (not totally wrong when you read some comments !). Even someone who embraces a citizenship can be already suspect to him. If fact he doesn't really do RP as he plays exactly how he is in real life and figures it's the same for others. He never misses to promote peace and cooperation, sometimes enable to refrain a complex of moral superiority.

For this kind, the main gameplay reply is consensual pvp.

#24 Report | Quote[en] 

[EDIT] Deleted because out of topic and related to a moderated previous post. Please do not use the forum to settle the score with players. In the event of a serious dispute with a player, please refer to this paragraph of the Code of Conduct: https://app.ryzom.com/app_forum/index.php?page=topic/view/28406/3 #3 Thank you.

 

Again, PvP CAN be 100% RP, when there are RP motivations behind it and i recognise many people play great characters. However, when the only ground behind it is sequentially killing others, with the sole purpose of disrupting their game and the intent to not let them enjoy a game feature (see chat)... that's not RP, thats called being an ******* ^^

Edited 3 times | Last edited by Tamarea (12 months ago)

---


High Officer of:






Bisugott(Atys)

#25 Report | Quote[en] 

[EDIT] Deleted answer because related to some moderated part a in previous post.

Last edited by Tamarea (12 months ago) | Reason: Edit for moderation reasons.

---

#26 Report | Quote[en] 

[EDIT] Deleted answer because related to some moderated part a in previous post.

Last edited by Tamarea (12 months ago) | Reason: Edit for moderation reasons.

#27 Report | Quote[en] 

Yes, I think PvP can be more RP centered, but I don't think that means strictly observing factions and fames. Those are game mechanics that apply to basically everyone...

Instead, what is your actual motivation for attacking someone? What benefit does it provide to you? what are the possible consequences or outcomes...

Just running around saying "i'm red team, you're blue team- I must kill you" is boring af (in my opinion ofc).

So when there are ideas that come up where we should make people stay tagged for hours etc, etc, to make PvP more RP- it fails to consider that PvP has extremely weak RP to begin with and it is not related to any tag timer :(

Last edited by Placio (12 months ago)

#28 Report | Quote[en] 

Kyriann
Moniq
A Ranger attacking other homin is no Ranger.

A marauder is attacking a friend of you. You were here you see the beginning of the fight. You can see that your friend is going to die.
What will you do ?
Take part of the fight? Let your friend die?

I will try to make them stop with arguments. I will not fight on either side. If I will be alive after the fight, I will try to ressurect those homins who has died in that meaningless fighting.

#29 Report | Quote[en] 

I believe that it can be, but often isn't.

However, the rewards always seemed a bit screwy to me. For instance, I fail to see how race really plays much of a role, except between Trykers and Matis who have a bit more contentious history than other combinations of races. The tensions between Tryker/Matis and Fyros/Zorai have more of a factional than racial basis. There is also plenty of tension even within factions, as well as some cross-faction alliances.

We all (probably) agree that fighting an enemy should give greater rewards than fighting an ally, the political realities of Atys are such that coding any sort of system that varies rewards based on race/faction is a bit idealistic unless we have someone constantly updating a spider-web map of alliances that changes about every twelve seconds or so. Then again, the rewards are rather irrelevant here. Sure, PvP points can get you crystals and skirts and shields, but why do we PvP anyways? Some do it just for fun, others to grief, but a lot of PvP is for stuff that helps our guilds or faction like sups, outposts, or bosses.

At the end of the day, whether or not PvP is RP or simply gaming depends how such conflicts affect lore.


[EDIT] Deleted because related to a moderated out of topic part into a previous post.

Last edited by Tamarea (12 months ago) | Reason: Edit for moderation reasons.

---

Do not assume that you speak for all just because you are the loudest voice; there are many who disagree that simply have no desire to waste words on you.

#30 Report | Quote[en] 

I think the situation between Fyros and Matis is pretty bad right now. (look at hidden source "desert" + tower defense being build in Thesos (in front of the kingdom border).
uiWebPrevious12345uiWebNext
 
Last visit Sat Feb 22 10:41:42 2020 UTC
P_:

powered by ryzom-api