English


uiWebPrevious12uiWebNext

#1 Report | Quote[en] 

Good day Atys and happy weekend. I had this idea about a week back but now decided to see if anyone else agrees or a total push-back. I was thinking that since toons are taking role-play way too seriously; I want to push the envelope further with regards to TP’s in Prime Roots.

I think that we should have all TP’s in Prime Roots be only “faction-specific” with regards to “safe-zones”. Meaning; if you are Kami and you park your butt next to a Kara or Marauder TP, you are still attackable and argo food and vise-versa for the others. For Rangers and “Neutral” toons like myself (I am not aligned with anyone); we enter at our own risk and roll-the-dice with our own safety. When a Ranger dies in Prime Roots, they now have additional respawn points at every TP, so they are safe to rest and heal once they are in that zone. For toons like me, the dev team can either give us the “Ranger” respawn points or just the portals at each end of the region.

Far too many toons say that they are “role-players” but none are really serious about making it truly “role-play” because my last idea everyone hated saying that I was going hard-core and too extreme, then what you really want is (which you have now) a slightly harder area than Silan.

Oh well…

Zatarga

#2 Report | Quote[en] 

Think you've got your facts mixed up, Zat.  It's not rp'ers that are against this.+1 for the idea.

---

#3 Report | Quote[en] 

Is the worry that people are abusing the safe zones to camp bosses, etc- or do we just want PR to be even harder? Personally, I can't remember the last time I used a non-kara or portal safezone to afk in...

Edited 2 times | Last edited by Placio (2 years ago)

#4 Report | Quote[en] 

+1 about removing TP protection. But there is corner cases: just one example, there is kamis tp near to some bosses, you can go aggro the boss, your team stay under the TP protection and they will never be aggro by patrols and so on. With your actual proposal, kamis will still benefits of this while others can't (which is giving them a small advantage let say).
Just to say it again, I'm just giving an example of a specific case I do NOT say kamis have any advantages or anything similar.

@Placio I would be for both actually, removing the potential abuse and making the PR more difficult.

#5 Report | Quote[en] 

From a lore point of view someone told me once, that it was the TP itself that was disturbing the senses of the mob. So it has nothing to do with faction. And even the herbivors could be protected near the TP.

---

Kyriann Ba'Zephy Rie
Cheffe de la guilde Bai Nhori Drakani
Taliar
Mère de famille

#6 Report | Quote[en] 

I don't think herbivores are protected by altars.
I remember Raj attacking mobs at altar, and even hurting everyone when it triggers its shout attack.

Safe zones at altars and vortex are there for gameplay reasons, imo. Other explanations are only to embellish.

---

Beauté, curiosité, virtuosité !

#7 Report | Quote[en] 

I'm all for it... so long as the coding required does not introduce a cascade of bugs.

On a semi-related note, I think the Kami TP in Sunken City should be relocated if this idea is implemented. That is the one TP I have seen all factions take advantage of the safe zone on. If it's that popular, there is a reason, so making it Kami-only would be unbalancing.

---

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.

#8 Report | Quote[en] 

Zatarga
Far too many toons say that they are “role-players” but none are really serious about making it truly “role-play” ...

Lots of people here have a very distorted view on what Roleplay really means.

Apart from that, I'm against this idea. It's removing an integral game-mechanic (which is likely to break way more than it's worth) for the sole reason of having a change that wasn't needed and which ressources would be better spend on actually creating something (that is actually challenging) instead of tinkering around for the sake of ... whatever your intentions are.

Don't fix what ain't broken.

#9 Report | Quote[en] 

Removing all altars / pathway to PR would be an idea.

---

#10 Report | Quote[en] 

Ekoh
Removing all altars / pathway to PR would be an idea.

Yes, a terrible idea.

While there is at least some justification for only your faction's teleporters providing protection (even though I disagree with this idea, it's an unnecessary change), there is literally no good reason to remove PR tps altogether outside of an arbitrary effort to "make the game harder". All it would do is make PR annoying to go to.

Last edited by Luminatrix (2 years ago)

---

Luminatrix

Explorer, storyteller, universalist, fighter for freedom and equality.

"Without contraries, there is no progression" - William Blake

#11 Report | Quote[en] 

Terrible because teleport are -the only way- for you to travel around the PR ?

No one is in trouble when going to the PR, the only thing is that when you find a boss you have to deal with KP if there are no more TP and therefore no safe zones.

Will it be harder to kill boss, yes, but fighting a boss must be harder than it is actually.


Removing altars lead to a more balanced game but some improvements must be made elsewhere in order to reduce travel time a bit.

---

#12 Report | Quote[en] 

It's so funny to read a Larmes asking to remove altars in PR because game is too easy, after having jumped on Rangers to benefit the pathways, and moaning to transform them as rez points.

Last edited by Zendae (2 years ago)

---

Beauté, curiosité, virtuosité !

#13 Report | Quote[en] 

Zendae
It's so funny to read a Larmes asking to remove altars in PR because game is too easy, after having jumped on Rangers to benefit the pathways, and moaning to transform them as rez points.
Don't get me wrong, it's not because the ranger is the faction that best suits our needs that we have no desire to improve the game.

The ranger pathway even if it's innovative, it's unfortunately defective by design. 6 years of work for a defective system just because the conception have been made up-side down.

Any change that go toward balance between faction is welcome.

---

#14 Report | Quote[en] 

Ekoh
The ranger pathway even if it's innovative, it's unfortunately defective by design.

What is defective on pathway design?

#15 Report | Quote[en] 

The whole thing actually, this system don't fit in Ryzom as is.
With some real changes in the game it'll be a nice system.

---

uiWebPrevious12uiWebNext
 
Last visit Tue Nov 24 18:09:11 2020 UTC
P_:

powered by ryzom-api