English

The problem is that your reading is not accurate much less your understanding. In RL there is no PvP vs. non PvP zone. No technical obstacle is hindering abuse and aggression, rather ethics and the rule of law.

The question Salazar raised was about competitiveness, not ethics. There is no competitive gain in shooting down unarmed diggers quite similar to a sniper's shootout which clearly is far from bravery.

The question Tyneetryk raised was indeed about ethics as followed by him/herself. They have their more general value anyway- Everywhere people have the ability, and sometimes the power, to act abusively, which ought not be murder in the first place. The mere technical possibility yet is no excuse for inappropriateness on different levels - where clearly RL abuse, not to speek about murder is a different class compared to any kind of questionable actions inside a game.

Thus the analogies, not equations, were indeed as accurate as fair. Nobody becomes a good and respected PvP Fighter by shooting down unarmed diggers or newbies on trek, and such behaviour is not likely to earn a lot of respect by anybody except a few. And it is at least doubtful that FFA zones are a wholesale license for harassment and bullying.

Clearly any attacks on players in LoU or Nexus are not violations of rules by themselves. And attacks at the supernodes are not disputable except under the aspect of wisdom not to create lose-lose conditions.

Nevertheless ruthless bullying may constitute violations even here. Obviously done for no other reason than causing grief etc. might collide with principles of gameplay as aggreed to in the EULA and possibly constitute violations. I encountered situations where CSR judged in this direction and acted accordingly.

Yet, where I agree is that those discussions have been raised again and again over the years with few result. I think one should pay a bit attention to the fact that here, different narratives and views upon gameplay are in collision. While I have no real solution for, I think that mutual understanding might at least help to mollify the conflicts and take some of the heat and bitterness out of them.

I have the impression that a number of players dedicated to a tough style of PvP gameplay are stemming from worlds of egoshooters and similar, often highly competent in interface usage and knowledgeable of all sorts of tricks (even the less licit ones), and are looking at their player characters as more a technical instrument, drawing satisfaction from speed and virtuosity while not only not caring about killing or being killed yet drawing satisfaction out of the thrill and the adrenaline rush caused thereby. That is clearly nothing bad, and a legitimate way of gameplay in Ryzom.

On the other hand, there are players who are strongly engaged in roleplay and PvE as well as in social activities in the game. They may identify quite a lot with their ingame character, even more than identifying with a literary character when reading novels or watching movies. This way of diving into the virtual world is called immersion, and players engaged in such style of gameplay are rather living than just playing the course of events their character is going through.

It is obvious that there is much potential of clashes between these very different narratives. An immersed player will experience attack and abuse of the character much alike real abuse and violence (though on lesser degree) , and take offense accordingly, even if it was never meant that way. On the other hand, "tough players" will see such reactions as spoilsports' and whiners' ones and may even feel invited to double their efforts to demonstrate the virtues of "real play".

While there is no easy solution (as the conflicts over years reflected in tales and forums demonstrate), I think mutual understanding might help at least to some extent, as well as some restraint when insisting on what one considers a right.

Sorry, i don't read long posts starting with a personal insult.

There was no insult. Misreading and misunderstanding is a common occurrence in human communication, and the hint to have misread and/or misunderstood is far from an insult.

Strange that somebody who insists on the "right" to hack down the defenseless ingame is so touchy about an objective statement.

If you think this, then you are not the type of player who likes pvp. Simply because "killing" diggers and so on can be a part of pvp. Why should I let an enemy dig some materials to build armor and weapons? If you want to be better regarding equipment you have to hinder the opponent to get supreme materials.

I agree to most you write. First, I am indeed not the type of player who likes pvp as done in Ryzom. As far as killing diggers of the "enemy's" side (how ever to figure that out) is appropriate, it reminds me bit too much RL warfare (I have done some work as a military historian and know about) where bombing dams, firebombing cities and hospitals, poisoning harvests etc. is "legitimate" as far as it weakens "the enemy". That is not a condemnation, but this style of warfare like pvp simply does not fit my taste thus I abstain from.

Anyway I take the point as far as constellations as the past temple wars etc. are concerned, and even competition at the supernodes which were set up for the purpose that guilds compete by pvp plus digging for the resources found there. Yet I do not see that anybody questioned the legitimacy of that kind of pvp actions, no matter that they aren't particularly honorable or glorious.

Wholesale killing of any digger in LoU and Nexus is only likely to drive them to Ichor, US and Wastelands where they may find better sup mat.

And the world of Atys is not bipolar anymore. Thus it is more questionable than ever to randomly attack "enemy's" diggers. Even a military calculus will rather fit to the strategems of Zhuge Liang than to simple western/christian dichotomies of us-them, god-satan, good-evil. In a tri- or multipolar world the lines between ally and enemy may blur.

But note that my point is not and never was that "PvP is evil". It is a legitimate and relevant part of the world of Atys.

Thank you, Daomei, for pointing that out. I dislike being taken out of context.


Sorry, Entendu, but that's not mine. It's Casy's. ;)

I enjoy pvp, but I dont like to kill lone diggers in PR, even when they are from the opposing faction. Just not my style. (SN digging is another matter ofc, that's an important aspect of factional pvp). However I dont hold anything against players who do like to kill lone diggers or trekers from the opposing faction in pvp zones. That is a part of the game after all.

Some people though, seem to enjoy killing anything that is attackable in their radar. Including neutrals. *shrugs*

Now what I do find in _very_ bad taste is people who come to a bandit camp, see that you are already engaged and in the middle of a fight with a bandit, and just jump ahead using quick enchants to do more dps and steal the kill from you. Maybe just a communication problem? Maybe he didn't see me? That is highly unlikely, taking in consideration that I've seen this happen at least half a dozen times with me and other friends. And always the same ppl doing it. (going back to the original topic of the thread)

And this is precisely the problem with this mentality of "us vs. them" or that our guild/faction has to be the strongest, so we need to hinder the development of all others. It just breeds really rude and selfish behavior in the game. I rather enjoy pvp, but I'd rather keep a respectful and civil play atmosphere. After all one of the major reasons why I play Ryzom instead of something else is because the players here have always been more friendly, mature and respectful. Not the griefers and ninja looters from other MMOs.

While you are saying many interesting things, I must admit being a bit disturbed by this perception of players. You said so yourself, atys is not bipolar, why believing the players are?

In my expierience, roleplayers looking for immersion want the gameplay possibility of pvp, even when not esppecially interested in pvp for pvp's sake. Because to be able to be attacked as well as being able to attack can be a factor of immersion. I know several such players,as well as some that both love RP immersion *and* pvp challenge, and are even happier when the encounter both in their opponents/fellow players.
This is not to say every roleplayer is like this, of course. Just please don't reduce players to two opposite styles of playing. Most often, those I've seen complaining most against pvp were non/casual-roleplayers who just wanted to enjoy what the game had to offer without being disturbed. (I am not talking about this thread of course since I don't know most of the people on it.)

If I wanted to play a game based on RL rules, I may as well turn off the comp and go down to the pub. I understand that the neutrals and RP'ers don't enjoy PvP but that doesn't give them the right to question or abuse those players that do. a Neutral player is still attackable in a PvP zone or situation.

It's simple, if you are against PvP, go stand by the stables and chat to your RP'ing guildies and stay away from the PvP zones and events.

As for players who steal kills, jump lines and such, there is always going to be a handful of rude players, we can't control this, so jot down their name and atack them when you see them in a PvP zone if that makes you feel better.

My point being we all have different play styles and just because others don't play by your style or rulings does not make them bad or disrepective people. Just people that enjoy playing all aspects of the game the way they enjoy playing the game.

And when you are competing for mats and PvP points etc, killing an digger is quite justified in the world of Atys.

PS. I never dig unarmed, and if you do you deserve to be attacked :P

I've been meaning to post in here for a while now when I noticed the conversation changed from bandit stealing and general rudeness to "ganking"

PvP in Ryzom is consensual. Always. You can not be killed by another player without agreeing to participate in PvP. Everyone is warned when entering a PvP zone, and by not leaving before the timer ends you are consenting to PvP. The reason these PvP zones have the best materials and greatest quantity is because they are meant to be fought over by guilds. It is not every players right to have access to all the PvP rewards without participating in PvP.

On Arispotle, neutral players were allowed to dig freely in PvP zones and even hold outposts without having to fight for them. This is not Arispotle. Everyone must adapt to a new community and different playstyles than we are used to. Supernodes are going to be fought over and all outposts are fair game. If someone doesn't want to participate in PvP they are free to dig in non-PvP zones or trade for OP mats. But noone should be forcing their playstyle on others.

As for kill-stealing and general rudeness: I never encountered someone stealing my bandits or whatever, but communication goes a long way. Try to start a conversation and let them know you were there first.

Very well said Crailus

The right of thinking people is to question everything, if you ask me. The ability to do so makes us human. ;) - Apart from that, I only pointed out that it is hardly the thrill of competition if you slay a digger.

And if you can dig armed, you can also walk over water, I guess. I don't dig, but my, I also never learned that trick - I always had to take a pick. ^^


Same on Leanon, btw.

I agree with this post and I'd add that q250 PR are not pvp so it's not even the best mats that you have to accept pvp to reach.

But on the topic of kill stealling not everyone answe when you try talking to them. Believe me i've tried.
But it's only a minority that doesnt care, most of the peope i've encontered was respectful enough to take into consideration other's situation when pointed out to them in a language they couldd understand.

I dare hope it's the case for most people but can only share my own experience.

That is egregiously incorrect.

This is also incorrect, if you're equating "immersed player" with "roleplayer". Real roleplayers maintain a very strict separation between their character and their self. Only non/semi/pseudo/fail-roleplayers do not.

Daomei did not, if you read it carefully, equate role-players with immersed players, only that immersed characters feel they are playing a role.

There are many types of role-play. One is the aloof, calculating kind where the toon is to be maniupulated according to a thought-out plan. Another one is the immersed role-play where the player, while aware of the difference, immerses himmer self in the aspects of the toon. (There are other kinds, but those are pretty much the extreme ends of the spectrum, imho.) Both types are valid.

I play a cooperative, enterprizing Tryker who has spent time in the world and come to his own conclusions about the Karavan, the Kamis, and everything in between. If someone were to gank me in PR while I am minding my own business, my role-play attitude towards her would be extremely critical. This would not be my OOC opinion of her, though the two might be seen as very close.

I see no reason whatsoever why I should not express these opinions.