search | Login Forums | New posts | Last 24h

English
uiWebPrevious1234567uiWebNext

#55 Added by Nehrie 9 years ago [en] 

{translate}
ah hahahha thanks for info rikutatis :)

---


The Clan


#56 Added by Fyrosfreddy 9 years ago [en] 

{translate}
Placio
Why would a person who adheres to Kosher dietary restrictions want a cheeseburger? And what would they do if they had one, stare at it?

The outpost materials and pvp skirts are the product of pvp fighting; why would PvE players want these bloodstained rewards if PvP is such a bad thing?

I'm sure the Rangers will have their own rites and rewards at some point. I'm not against that as long as it makes sense- Rangers can't give out OP mats since Rangers are not involved in OPs at all. If anyone says, "Hey, I want that Ranger weapon which does 10% more damage to kitins," then the response should be "Then become a Ranger."


You have just made Gidget's point "it doesn't benefit me so I'm against it" PoV being described. And your examples turn the table to create an argument that isn't there and was never presented.

Table Turn No. 1 - Exactly, the kosher person doesn't want a cheeseburger...THE problem is it is the ONLY thing being oiffered.... Two people walk into a restaurant, one easts one can't, they both get the same check ... you thinks that's fair ?

Table Turn No. 2 - Rangers are not involved because again, it is not being offered. Why can't Rangers own an OP near a kitin mound that defends Atys from Kitin Invasions ?

---

#57 Added by Tumbleweed 9 years ago [en] 

{translate}
That's like telling someone who adheres to kosher dietary restrictions that "no one is stopping you from eating a cheeseburger".

If a player restrict himself from certain activities, he also restrict from the rewards, provided through them. That's the drawback. If I'm too lazy to do multiple daily runs looking for bosses, or find it boring, I restrict myself from the boss loot. If I don't want to deal with aggro and weather, I restrict myself from harvesting supremes. If I don't participate in a football game, I get no shiny medal in the end. Oddly enough, I don't ask for a medal, because I was sitting on my couch with beer and chips and not sweating on the field.

In Ryzom PvP stuff is a reward for high-end content, just like boss loot or harvested supremes. This sort of content supposed to provide a challenge and requires training skills, gathering gear and quite often a team work. That's why it's called high-end or end game. Doing missions all day long, or visiting OP's hardly can be considered a challenge and barely requires any skills or gear, let alone a team work.

So instead of asking for equal access for all, you better ask for equal challenges. Or real game economy with all items being up for trading, which can be a sort of equalizer, but not in Ryzom, considering that dappers are worthless and any serious change on that front likely to be met with fires and pitchforks by the community.

#58 Added by Fyrosfreddy 9 years ago [en] 

{translate}
Placio
If Ranger guilds want to take, buy, or negotiate for an OP thats fine. I might even have a q50 Greslin OP that might be for sale :P They would eventually need to defend or hire someone to defend the OP though if it is attacked.

What I understood of Freddy's hypothetical mission was that it would just reward OP mats, without actually obtaining an OP. This wouldn't make sense to me; how would a ranger mission/rite give out q250 egrios, for example, if that OP is already owned by another guild/faction. Did they sneak into someone's GH and steal it? Do the Rangers impose a tax on outposts?

I think the most logical stance on OPs for PvE players, Trytonists, and Marauders would be to destroy the OP system completely. The Kami and Kara created those drills just to incite division amongst homins and to reward conflict. If you are opposed to the religions and conflicts you should take the OPs and refuse to build a drill on them, not say you should have access to the materials without owning the OP.


Two things:

1. Your points are not responsive to the actual proposals put forth but create a new straw man which wasn't actually suggested.
2. You need to "look outside the bubble" that is the current rewards system and look at it from a) what the game was purported to be 12 years ago and b) what is possible.

No ... the suggestion that you have to "break in and steal it" is a facetious argument.

A. What is the basis of your supposition that Q250 Erigos is available at only 1 place on the planet ? Even w/o a big faction drill, enterprising homins would find a way to mine it tho less efficiently and therefore in smaller numbers. These would make their way to market vendors both legal and black market.

B. The planet has way way more than 28 OPs. The game opened in 2004 with just 28 OPs with the built in capability and stated intent of making more OPs live as when either a) population made it appropriate or b) storyline progressed. Given the limited quantity of different materials, these materials must be there.

C. In our own or any created world, if there is a demand for a product. means will be found to obtain the product whether legally or thru the black market. In our world, if someone wants boner pills, you can go thru proper channels and get a prescription or you can just order them online. In the game world, if 250 Erigos exists, it is totally illogical to assume that there will not be alternate sources available.

D. These mats are something currently obtained with the assistance of the higher powers. So, since a ranger can do any Kami / Kara missions, what logic dictates that a ranger could not do a kami / kara mission to obtain same ?

"Wipe out 10 Kitin patrols and the Kami / Kara will be extremely grateful to you and ... "

E. What logic dictates that the goals of the Rangers and Kara / Kara must never coincide ? Aren't K / K anti-kitin ? Why can't Rangers earn those same K / K points and earn rewards just as factioned players earn civilization based rewards ?

F. There are serious advantages to having 100 fame in a civilization; what logic dictates that there couldn't be an advantage to having max fame with all civilizations ? What if there was an Encyclopedia (Fame 50 requirement) rite that allowed you to get 1/4 of the ingredients to make say rubbarn and, like with the Restoration Specialist for NPC armor, you could spend points and dappers to get a single mat.

If i said I was going to watch the recently released [insert movie name here] tonight, would you say that "The stores are closed, what are you going to do break in and steal it ?". No, I'll just stream it from Netflix or one f the other (legal) services.

G. The Q50 Q50 Greslin straw man doesn't work for the reasons you stated. It would involve homin vs homin conflict. It also was not one actually suggested as a) it was clearly stated that the ranger Ops would have equivalent but not the same OP mats so this straw man fails there and b) the Ranger OPs could not be declared on so the scenario could not arise. The Ranger OPs would exist to defend kitin invasions (game mechanics already exist) ... so essentially the Kitins would be the declarers.

As defined, located next to kitin mounds, entrances to PR or near civilized areas, these OPs would be the 1st line of defense against invasions. Just like OP declares, a Kitin Observer would list the "declaration" by observing kitin activity nearby so as the OP owners could have time to prepare an appropriate defense which would include signing on defenders from potentially all factions who would in turn earn points / rewards for doing to ... tho obviously not at the rate that Rangers would .... much like someone who is 50-50-50-50 in racial fame doesn't get the same rate of reward as someone with 100 fame.

---

#59 Added by Fyrosfreddy 9 years ago [en] 

{translate}
[quote=Tumbleweed]

So instead of asking for equal access for all, you better ask for equal challenges. Or real game economy with all items being up for trading, which can be a sort of equalizer, but not in Ryzom, considering that dappers are worthless and any serious change on that front likely to be met with fires and pitchforks by the community.

Don't understand .... Equal challenges aka "equivalent time and effort" is EXACTLY what was stated.

---

#60 Added by Rikutatis 9 years ago [en] 

{translate}
Tumbleweed
Or real game economy with all items being up for trading, which can be a sort of equalizer, but not in Ryzom, considering that dappers are worthless and any serious change on that front likely to be met with fires and pitchforks by the community.

This. They tried to make the economy work again during the merge, greatly increased the price of picks and tools, diminished the profit from selling junk craft and mats, etc. It did help a little. Dappers are worth more now. Specially for guilds that need dappers to declare OPs. Used to be before, spending 60 mil on a fancy tattoo was no big deal =P

But dappers can only be used for certain things, like TPs or OP wars. Outside of that they have no value. Because there's no dapper based economy of players buying and selling goods and services. I think a large part of that is due to the player base. Supply and demand. The player base is very small, so there is more availability of mats, bosses, supremes, etc, than players to use them. Guilds and friends give everything for free, from grinding gear all the way up to boosted OP weapons. That kind of kills any chance for a dapper based economy. If something like that existed, you could for example do Dante boss hunts with your guild, then sell a full Dante set for some 30 mil to a solo player who hates npc boss fights, and with those 30 mil you buy a boosted vedice axe from a pvp player who needs the dappers to go and buy a bunch of supreme materials because he hates digging. You get the gist.

Last edited by Rikutatis (9 years ago)

---

"We are Kami. We are here to be you. We are many as you are of many minds. We are one as you are one in Ma-Duk."

#61 Added by Rikutatis 9 years ago [en] 

{translate}
Fyrosfreddy
As defined, located next to kitin mounds, entrances to PR or near civilized areas, these OPs would be the 1st line of defense against invasions. Just like OP declares, a Kitin Observer would list the "declaration" by observing kitin activity nearby so as the OP owners could have time to prepare an appropriate defense which would include signing on defenders from potentially all factions who would in turn earn points / rewards for doing to ... tho obviously not at the rate that Rangers would .... much like someone who is 50-50-50-50 in racial fame doesn't get the same rate of reward as someone with 100 fame.

I could certainly get on board with this idea. In fact it sounds very fun! I think at this point the major problem with it is that it'd require the development of new OP mats that don't currently exist. And it seems like development manpower atm is severely limited and already invested in other tasks, which means we probably won't be seeing that anytime in the foreseeable future.

---

"We are Kami. We are here to be you. We are many as you are of many minds. We are one as you are one in Ma-Duk."

#62 Added by Fyrosfreddy 9 years ago [en] 

{translate}
Nehrie
The more I read the better understanding I obtain.

I see as part of the problem here that this was a non-pvp game for what 7 years before pvp was added in.

But the non-pvpers use different weapons. They don't stand and face someone. They have a different style.

So it's not really PvP vs PvE it's Pvp vs Diggers. ( no offense intended )

So I disagree with Haniel's list on that ground. PvPers are more liable to loot mats than dig mats. Though I know PvPers who are good at recipes and digging.

What I feel like is wrong is if PvP is not wanted and considered not needed here then why offer it on the website. Why take our money and then try to drive us out of the game? Just take it off the website. Make it not part of the game. Then all the little diggers can be happy again.

Otherwise we need to learn to get along. It's not fair to offer PvP on the website, take our money and then make it virtually an unplayable option.

Your assumptions are based upon a false premise. PvP and areas have existed since the 1st day.... PvP oriented guilds were established in the 1st month

http://forums.ryzom.com/search.php?searchid=963744

And it didn't take 7 years for even OP PvP to be part of game ... Outost PvP came in about 1.5 years post release (September 04 => March 06 = 18 months). Here's an example of the results

http://forums.ryzom.com/showthread.php?t=22504

There was a reason why so many non pvp players were attracted to Ryzom. It was different than the multitude of existing PvP oriented MMOs, so it did draw a large PvE base and, at least on NA server, we lost over 50% of our player base when PvP expanded beyond defined areas and "claiming regions" (Jessica Mulligan's idea) was slated for introduction.

Later on, with population dwindling, there was a resurgence when the NA community decided to ignore game mechanics and the community chose not to engage in any form of non-consensual PvP. All was well with the world, OP battles took place .. those that didn't go didn't go and afterwards no one was walking around with packing grudges.

Yes PvErs do have a different style... it involves not forcing ones views or play style on anyone else or not trying to take anything from anyone else.

No one is trying to take anything away from PvP players other the "assumed right" to force it on anyone else. I see no evidence of anyone trying to force PvP out of the game, (examples please) only to be able to escape it.

Don't understand why you look down on diggers, I don't enjoy digging ... I was 220 in melee and 20 in harvest (from the Fyros newb island) before I did my 1st dig on mainland. Simple fact of life was, if I wanted good gear, digging would be a fact of life. I don't like having to go to work everyday but I like eating and having a roof over my head. If you don't want to dig, then your choice is the same as IRL, pay someone else to do it for you. Not an unreasonable alternative ... as opposed to hiring a 'hit man' to take someone out.

I find the take our money comment quite ironic. On top of the lack of even a single example of Ryzom trying to take something away from PvP, it simply can not be argued that PvErs have access to the same amount of rewards as pvp does... and yet they pay the same subscription rate.

Where we agree is that we do need to get along ... and when you force someone to do something they don't want to do, that is not conducive to that happening. Neither is the dwindling population conducive to the long term viability of the game. If you want the game to continue to exist, disenchanting 505 of the population is not that way to do it.

When PvP was introduced to Ryzom and we lost so many people, I looked at WoW which my sons were playing and noticed one thing that very much surprised me. I counted the number of PvP versus PvE servers and frankly was shocked to see that the number of PvE servers was slightly higher. If we want the game to survive, steering the game to one side or the other is not a wise course of action.

And while PvErs are content to exist outside of PvP activities, it's not unreasonable to ask that they be afforded equivalent opportunities for IG rewards. Most PvPers have no objection to this. Over the last 12 years, the friendships I have established and people I spend time with are primarily PvP oriented, many of them among the best in game.

There is a segment however that thrives on a) having stuff that others don't have, b) working very hard to make it difficult for them to get it and c) objecting to any change that allows them to have the same opportunities they do.

I have no objection to any increase or change in PvP opportunities or anything that will bring more PvP payers in game unless that change a) continues to drive other players from game, b) discourages more PvE players from joining the game or c) furher divides the community into separate classes of "haves' and "have nots". These goals need not be mutually exclusive.

---

#63 Added by Fyrosfreddy 9 years ago [en] 

{translate}
Rikutatis
I could certainly get on board with this idea. In fact it sounds very fun! I think at this point the major problem with it is that it'd require the development of new OP mats that don't currently exist. And it seems like development manpower atm is severely limited and already invested in other tasks, which means we probably won't be seeing that anytime in the foreseeable future.

Well the viability of manpower I have noted as far as player views is concerned seems to be sometimes related to how well the individual likes the idea :). But again while new would be nice to create something different, even as an interim measure I see no real harm in using the same

However, creating an new OP mat is certainly easier than creating a new region or transport system. But make it simple ....

Gresigos - has half the benefit of Erigos and half the benefit of Greslin. Coding would involve little more than a copy / paste and a bit of editing.

Vedorn - As above but with Vedice and Tekorn

MagChen / Rubillo - you get the idea



Flowers - Combine two attributes ...

Warrior Flower - 50% of QL HP Boost and 50% of QL Stam Boost
Mage Flower - 50% of QL HP Boost and 50% of QL Sap Boost
Harvesters Flower - 50% of QL HP Boost and 50% of QL Focus Boost


I'd like to close by complimenting you on your approach. While as a PvPer, your goal in creating this thread was to improve your enjoyment as a person who enjoys PvP, I appreciate your recognition that this need not come at the expense of PvErs and that the game and the community is best served by both groups enjoying all that the game has to offer.

Last edited by Fyrosfreddy (9 years ago)

---

#64 Added by Placio 9 years ago [en] 

{translate}
I want what Freddy is smoking :D
(no disrespect, just those hybrid mat names are hilarious)

Last edited by Placio (9 years ago)

#65 Added by Nehrie 9 years ago [en] 

{translate}
Gees Fryosfreddy can you hold your post down to 1500 words or less lol


blah blah blah I disagree with most of what you said. Just too boring to argue with you.

Last edited by Nehrie (9 years ago)

---


The Clan


#66 Added by Fyrosfreddy 9 years ago [en] 

{translate}
About the answer one would expect when one is unable to counter with a logical or factual argument. I think Maragaret Thatcher said it it best:

"I always cheer up immensely if an attack is particularly wounding because I think, well, if they attack one personally, it means they have not a single political argument left."

You made a series of blatant false statements and then complain about a factual rebuttal with linked / dosumented sources proving them to be false. You can't disagree with the history of the game .... what happend happened and what didn't ... didn't.

Edited 2 times | Last edited by Fyrosfreddy (9 years ago)

---

#67 Added by Fyrosfreddy 9 years ago [en] 

{translate}
Placio
I want what Freddy is smoking :D
(no disrespect, just those hybrid mat names are hilarious)

Placio....

You keep creating artificial strawmen and then arguing against them instead of proposals actually put forth

"A straw man is a common form of argument and is an informal fallacy based on giving the impression of refuting an opponent's argument, while actually refuting an argument that was not advanced by that opponent.

The so-called typical "attacking a straw man" argument creates the illusion of having completely refuted or defeated an opponent's proposition by covertly replacing it with a different proposition"

Just as you changed the analogy about a person wanting access to kosher food, into a strawman about why would a kosher person want a cheeseburger, you are doing it again here.

If two people go to a conference and are obliged to pay for meals, then one of two things must happen. a) The site should offer a meal compliant with those dietary restrictions or b) they can not force the kosher adherenmt individual to pay for a meal they can not eat.

As detailed in past posts (i,e. #26) the idea was not to promote "specific examples" but to reinforce the idea that "equivalent but not equal" rewards could be offered while **not** putting any real examples forward. As I said previously, "using something we are familiar with", I created those hybrids tounge in cheek because and only because they were something everyone was familiar with. Each is different but each has its use. I would exchanging ideas, pluses and minuses, but can we stick to ideas actually being proposed and not create artificial strawmen just so that they can be easily shot down ?

Last edited by Fyrosfreddy (9 years ago)

---

#68 Added by Daomei 9 years ago [en] 

{translate}
Freddy ..

While I originally did not want to jump into the debate once more, my impression was not that Placio wanted to refute your arguments or to devaluate your proposals. He just found the naming funny, to my impression, and it was, indeed. It did, of course, show exactly what your proposal meant.

I would much welcome the realization of those proposals, yet it would be a lot of work. I believe all you told about game history on the NA server and later on Arispotle. I was not there at that time, but it resembles much I heard on Leanon concerning the same period. There, also, many PvE players left when PvP was introduced. Promises were reportedly made that there would be OPs to be won and maintained by PvE/RP means, but that was never realized. Btw., on Leanon, there were also player initiatives which granted OP mat access for guildless and non PvP players, especially the highly popular mobile traders' player event every week.

Yet, the situation nowadays is that PvE offers lots of opportunities, so does RP. I am playing now the sixth year, at insane accumulated times, but cannot say that there is nothing left to me to do on Ryzom (if this were the case, I could still join Ryzom Forge or Core, participate in development, documentation, and translation). I would welcome extensions such as new rites, missions, and regions, and I think they could raise the attractivity of the game and lure old players back. Same goes for the proposals you made.

The players who left in the 2005-7s due to the introduction of PvP won't come back, even if PvP were completely abandoned. And PvP practitioners are part of our community, so I consider it legitimate and important to address their desires. And as much as I welcome your proposals I do not see how they would improve the situation of PvP on Ryzom. When players are leaving because their expectations are not met, it is always a reason to consider improvements. So far, we read much about reasons discourageing PvP players, and some complaints seeming overblown to me, such as accusations that crafters and diggers wanted to expel PvPers. But still, the question how to improve PvP gameplay without damaging the rest, seems open to me.

---

Daomei die Streunerin - religionsneutral, zivilisationsneutral, gildenneutral

#69 Added by Rikutatis 9 years ago [en] 

{translate}
Daomei
But still, the question how to improve PvP gameplay without damaging the rest, seems open to me.

Ok fair enough, this thread has been all over place, let me try to summarize my own thoughts here. Please note I have no coding experience and have no idea how feasible these ideas are given the current state of ryzom's development:

1) Encourage OP wars by making the system more simple and easy for smaller groups. First of all, lower the price for a declare. That way people can declare more often without feeling they wasted all their guild funds for nothing if they loose. Ideally, completely get rid of the second phase of the war and raise the TH of the first phase to something between 9-12. That way a smaller force will have higher chances of winning a war. OPs will change hands more often.

2) Make lower quality OPs matter. This can be as simple as giving ALL OPs a % to pop a q250 mat (the lower the OP lvl, the lower the chance), or as complex as introducing an occupation to exchange lower quality OP mats for higher quality ones.

3) Grant PVP points when killing other players in PVP zones as well (such as Matis arena, Prime Roots, Nexus, etc). That way there's more incentive for PVP in those areas on top of the dispute over resources. Because quite frankly, I can get a lot more sup mats if I go dig solo in the non-pvp regions than fighting over supernodes with my faction. At least getting pvp points there would be an extra incentive.

4) The PVP alignment system needs to change. I understand the original goal might have been to make PVP between civlizations matter, but the truth is, people PVP by faction, not civilization. It's completely silly that I kill a Karavan in tagged PVP now and get zero points out of him because his civ fames are similar to mine. You should get points from anyone who is not a part of your faction by default.

5) This one I'm not sure how it can be achieved, but some way to discourage cheesy farming of pvp points. Maybe if you keep killing the same person(s), the amount of pvp points you get from him keep diminishing until it goes to zero (or very low) for a cooldown period of several hours?

6) Add more items to PVP vendors. The skirts and shields are awesome, so some new exclusive items like those. Maybe even craft patterns for faction gear. I know this one is more difficult to achieve due to staff limitations though.

---

"We are Kami. We are here to be you. We are many as you are of many minds. We are one as you are one in Ma-Duk."
uiWebPrevious1234567uiWebNext
  

This topic is locked

Last visit Thursday, 28 November 03:29:39 UTC
P_:G_:PLAYER

powered by ryzom-api