Code of Conduct regarding OP battles needs to be changed - IDEAS FOR RYZOM

#23 Added by Daomei 8 years ago Multilingual

Kimmerin

Daomei
So that clear violation of CoC happened up to 2 years ago, and was inquired by the CSR. The accused side asserted a mistake and was warned, so case was settled. What has that to do with the recent OP conflicts?
This is another example of system abuse ..

No, it is an example demonstrating that CoC and its enforcement are working. That there is shoplifting in RL is no example that laws against theft are not working and one has to go back to hanging thieves or chopping their hands.

Kimmerin

OK, let's pretend none of the events I described before have been started for harassment purpose. There is no guarantee, that q50-100 declarations will not be used for harassment later. ..

Indeed. There is no guarantee that rules never be violated. Moreover, it is even possible that they be bent inappropriately.

An example: As stated, "a number of players reasonably sufficient to pass the threshold against the NPC defense squadrons alone" is required to stay inside the CoC for OP war declarations. Now, I am fairly confident (informed contradiction welcome and invited) that Diwu and me as launcher masters, with appropriate equipment and logistics (max stats q250 launchers, 2 times 3 packers + 1 mount), be able to kill all guards even of a 250 OP if undefended. Does that mean that we have an unlimited license to click?

In fact, no. There is a general rule:
CoC general rules

CoC

The following rules govern the Code of Conduct of Ryzom Services (including the "Ryzom" game, IRC and the forums)...
1. Any harassment, threat or other offending act causing uneasiness to/against another player is forbidden. ..

In fact, one must not try to exploit loopholes in CoC text like a hack lawyer, this will surely result in a warning or a disciplinary.

Daomei

Did you contact WP people at all?

Kimmerin

Why should I care? The attack itself is a sign of hostile intentions..

You should care. Again, the general CoC:

I. Disagreement with another player ..
In case of a disagreement with another player, you are expected to try to come to an amicable settlement yourself. A ticket should be a recourse of last resort, and happen only if you are not able to resolve the situation and a third party needs to step in.

Such is the correct procedure: First try to settle the conflict yourself, if not possible, raise a ticket. And if that solution does not work, apply for a change of rules or game mechanics.

---

Daomei die Streunerin - religionsneutral, zivilisationsneutral, gildenneutral

#24 Added by Ingfarah 8 years ago [en]

{translate}

I must agree with Daomei. Plus, this is becoming a Wulfpack's hunt. Don't aim for a specific group, aim for a behavior. This happened; all right, how do we fix it?

Well the only possible fix I see is to chat with them when you see think they've gone, and leave the battlefield for more pleasant things you can do if they say they don't come back. Screen the conversation if you feel the need to. Keep a loose eye on the rounds while you do anything you like; come back if someone decides to kill NPCs. Ok, it's not an ideal situation, but it's better than standing there and/or forcing attacker to forfeit any attempt at surprise.

#25 Added by Mjollren 8 years ago [en]

{translate}

I still stand by my proposal to shorten the length of wars, as per my first post in this thread, simply because said activity is plainly boring. This would solve Kimmerin's grief (time wasted defending) while at the same time would encourage more activity on lower level OPs in general.

---

#26 Added by Daomei 8 years ago Multilingual

{translate}

Mjollren: I politely disagree. Outposts in 50-100 regions have the advantage of being reached easily from faction teleporters within a 1-3 minutes range. So, they may be guarded by one player (even a low level alt) alerting the defenders to come for rez and reinforcement (a wicked observer may even be a neutral alt). So the surveillance and defense of a 50-100 OP is easy, why nerfing the attack altogether?

Compare it to the defense of Loria Stronghold, Ginti, Westgrove etc. where I lived through the defense boredom repeatedly. Neither Kami or Kara could afford to withdraw their defense forces as redeployment would take 10-15 minutes at minimum (not to speak of redeploying artillery). Thus the situation was WWI style static, everybody staying inside the trenches.

Declaring war in 50-100 zones may be easier, but so is defense.

Famous proverbs:
"Die meiste Zeit des Lebens warted der Soldat vergebens" (Most of his lifetime the soldier is waiting in vain)
"War is boring"

Edited 3 times | Last edited by Daomei (8 years ago)

---

Daomei die Streunerin - religionsneutral, zivilisationsneutral, gildenneutral

#27 Added by Ingfarah 8 years ago [en]

{translate}

A note here: actually Daomei, redeploying a faction in a level 250 area takes about five minutes at most. Multiple battlefields have proven the only real obstacle was the discipline of the faction in movement.

@Mjollren: Shortening the length of an OP war would make attacking a high level OP from a faction stronger than yours even more unthinkable, because the 2 hours are actually essential to get things done unless your numbers are greater than those of the enemy.

Hey, Mjoll, you're from the biggest faction; we don't mind if you guys come a few people short because of boredom, you know? It may even out the odds a little bit!:D

Now I don't know yet how that last statement I said made you feel, but I assume it to be quite similar to what your recommendation made me feel (except for the part where you're explicitely named/targetted). Shorter battles means the sheer bulk of the troops is even more important to the outcome than it is at the moment. Last battle on Ginti, offence needed less than an hour to get their 10 rounds, while defending party took nearly an hour and a half. Numbers during phase 1 are a bit blurry in my head, although I'm pretty sure it looked like something like 45vs30, while on phase II the numbers looked like 20vs30. In both cases, people killing NPCs were more in numbers, however NPCs will be way easier to manage if you have a bigger bulk of troops. NPCs that are harder to manage means it takes longer to reach the same stage in the battle.

I've been leading battles for groups usually (not always, but usually) roughly 2 thirds of the size of their opponents; please don't make a wipe even more costly for a smaller faction!

Edited 2 times | Last edited by Ingfarah (8 years ago)