Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
choosing not to do rally call.
techninez
Member Posts: 77
if i would like to take my char down the dark path be a bit of a naughty boy will the only way ill be able to do that is by doing nothing? i hope there will be a system just as big to people who want to do good and bad there should be quests where you collect the wood ect and players too stop you or make it harder for you... its all sounding very biased or one sided so far, and is not sounding like a really immersive world the do good-er RP should want that more than anything remember this world was molded by war.. i want looting gangs bandits pirates the list goes on.
Comments
You can chose not to join the rallying calls and do nothing as well as be bad and go down a dark path. With a little bit of research you would've been able to avoid asking this question.
Answer is a big fat NO since rallying calls cannot fail, they just won't progress to the next stage until it's completed.
That makes me suspicious that the game will give the illusion and being told that it is a sandbox when in reality it'll be another on rails MMO of a themepark at it's core with sandbox elements.
Well its a valid question because... supposedly the players on a particular server choosing to not do rally calls (or failing at them) is part of why over time the servers will be different.
When I was on the Interest team in Ultima Online.... my shard (great lakes) was pretty active on the official shard wide content. However, no shard ever actually failed an event and the story progressed the same no matter what.
Altho that has nothing to do with a dark path or being naughty... but it is interesting if they implement as they stated in the debut. Being "bad" would be more like finding a way to stop those "goodies" from advancing... rally call may have more than one outcome... doing nothing or moving it ahead for a particular faction. So you may in fact be "bad" by taking part in a rally call... not sure we know these details yet.
Can good players make it harder for you to do your things too. Would it be cool if you, as a bad guy, were kill on sight by anyone? then had to spend a week in jail everytime you lost? Or do the good guys have to deal with you over and over every 5 minutes even though they beat you down everytime.
Because that's the more immersion breaking than anything.
I love the bad guy role players. They only play in worlds with no law, or justice, or vengeance. Only in worlds were people just want to harvest ore unarmed with no protection or city guards, or worlds without any chance to lose at least what they're willing to take from others, do the bad guys live.
Go play eve and be a bad guy and learn what roleplaying a bad guy actually is.
Otherwise you would be advocating for player freedom rather than an ability to kill guy harvesting wood. In your mind, that's what bad guys do in mmorpgs? You would think a bad guy would want enough freedom so they could dominate all life on the world, not steal a log from an unarmed man. It would be smarter just to pick a log up off the ground rather than chase someone for 20 minutes to get one, but you bad guys never were too smart.
"If the Damned gave you a roadmap, then you'd know just where to go"
Factions are, according to the Dev's, huge in EQN. So is your reputation. Some NPC's won't even talk to you if you have done bad things, or play an evil class or race. Your actions carry weight. For instance, if you want to be a Paladin you have to have lived an exemplary life filled with good deeds. I imagine if you want to be a Necro or Shadowknight you will have to do evil deeds and acts of cruelty. I'm sure we will get more information as time goes one, but yes, your actions have consequences. We just haven't heard about some of the potential ways to be really bad yet in much detail.
Building a city isn't good, it's just building. You could build an evil city full of sacrificial alters and Torture R Us outlets.
If we let everyone tear everything down to the ground we'll have a bunch of flat ground. There's just more people that don't want other people to have fun than a game can handle easily.
I understand that it's probably not you, you just want to have a dynamic interest. I understand that if you can't choose one side OR the other then you're just part of the pack. Your fly in the ointment would be joined by a thousand other flies until no city would get built.
It's like posting on here, there's always going to be more negative replies than positive because there's too many people looking to make other people look bad.
Asdar
Are you absouletly positive thats the way the Rally calls will work?
What if they work the same way as the example of the farmer being invaded by Orcs, to help the farmer you get access to a new class, to help the Orcs you get access to a different class, so the same can easily be applied to the server wide Rally calls.
An invasion is heading to Qeynos, your server decideds to bolster Qeynos or they help the invading forces, both will have different outcomes, Qeynos either stays in the hands of Good and so provides all good aligned players with their daily needs, or it changes hands and the invading forces take over and now it's an evil aligned city.
There was hardly any info on the potential effects that Rally calls will have, and other than helping to build a city it was never really explained if there was the chance to affect who gets access to that city, good or bad, npc or pc etc.
I'm still waiting on more info before I make up my mind about these, I normally play evil aligned so I'm more than interested in finding out will me hindering the good players actions have any effect at all.
Is this pure speculation or is there actual info from an EQN dev or staff that says actions will carry weight? From the remarks about rallying calls and how it cannot fail, that it only does not progress to the next stage gives me the impression that "evil" will not be an option and everything will be one path/objective only and no different than a quest.
So many threads and so many tweets and vids it's a giant mess to sort out info. But there was a thread about this topic and that one cannot work against a rallying call because that would be PvP essentially. Word was that rallying calls cannot fail and will only sit round till advancement to the next stage is completed.
If evil is your thing then I would say EQN will most definitely not be your game. PFO, EVE, MO, or DF:UW will be more your thing. SOE seems to have a different context of freedom than what true sandbox games call freedom. Ryan from Goblinworks even categorize EQ1 as themepark and not a sandbox.
Hmm, that sounds incredibly dull.
I have to ask, because I don't know myself, is it certain that rallying calls can't fail? I mean, is there really only one possible outcome? I had the idea that there might be two possible outcomes, still not as dynamic as they want to make it sound but at least----something. If there is only one possible outcome then it isn't dynamic at all it's just a predetermined thing and the only variable would be how long it takes.
This is from an SOE discussion with Terry from SOE:
Quote:-----------
Last night during one of the panels, the question came up about disrupting a Rally Call if you wanted to be the bad guy. Team gave a definitive yes, that you would be able to do that. I would really like for you to elaborate on what kind of system you'll use to do that.
Destruction probably comes in the form of not doing it. You can choose to not participate, but generally Rallying Calls are not going to go in reverse. If the Rallying Calls is to build up the city of Qeynos, it's not going to happen in reverse.
There are many ways in which Rallying Calls can be progressed and there are ways in which players can disrupt aspects of that progression. For instance, if there was part of a Rallying Call that required you to collect wood in the area, you could disrupt it by going in and cutting down every tree that you see and making sure that there is no wood that anybody else can get. But that doesn't mean that not getting wood is going to stop other avenues of progression.
We're not actually building a game that's set up so that you can grief.
-------END QUOTE-
To me it's like optional theme park. You don't have to help build the city, it's totally optional.
It might be boring at points, collecting wood certainly sounds that way to me, but they also talked about battles where orcs attacked, and even sieges that might take days to beat off. That sounds like more fun.
If you don't want to participate then you can still wander off and dungeon hunt. That's what I plan on doing mostly. This offers one large group of people something to do, it's not for everyone, and shouldn't be.
There's going to be a lot of things to do for people that find this boring and some of the people that build cities won't like that style of play either. It's a big wonderful world when people can figure out they can play a lot of different ways.
Asdar
Exactly this. Rallying calls were explained as the initiation of these server wide events and although I can understand furban's skepticism, since the only example given by Georgeson discussed the progression of the event by hypothetically choosing the "good side," we don't know if the example that was given was the only outcome to end the event or not.
He did state that we can theoretically assume an "evil side" role by opposing the progression of the rallying call, but he did not reveal if the event would progress in another direction by doing so or if it would "reward the evil side" if they successfully stopped the rallying call. Who knows, maybe they are waiting to reveal this info. when they officially announce the existence (or absence) of a playable good or evil side that will be present in the game. We'll just have to wait and see.
I'd expect that SOE would provide an alternate path for 'evil' characters. Instead of helping to build Halas or Qeynos, the 'evil' character would simply amble down to Feerrot or Innuthule and help dig out Ogguk or Grobb. Or drift up North and help build Neriak. These are just as likely to be 'evil' Rallying Calls, and 'good'[ players will not be able to oppose those either.
I don't really see SOE allowing one set of players disrupt others -- that includes non-consensual PvP, knocking over player built property, or directly opposing a rally call. It's just inviting grief in one form or another.
Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.
I would not put rally calls anywhere near a sandbox feature as someone in the thread has. They say servers can be different, but all that is, is one rally call ahead of the other, unless they start to do some random things and let players actually get more involved with it....It would be like saying a open world dungeon made a game a sandbox, because currently players on one server had cleared more stuff than the other, so the servers were technically different. They tried to play up the servers can be different, but in this case, not so much....You may get a rally call done before someone else, and start the next maybe, but they will still get to where you are and have the same stuff.
Now if you could make these rally calls fail, and influence maybe the goblin king to build his own fort, and other things like this, you would technically still have a set of rules, but it would atleast be more down the line they are promoting.
The rally call concept in itself can allow for multiple types of gameplay.
Even though, based on the initial examples given by the developers the most likely first implementation would only have the options of "1. build city and 2. build city slower", the idea of the rally call mechanic would easily allow for future rally calls to have multiple possible outcomes. I don't see anything about the rally call mechanic that would prevent the developers from designing a certain rally call to have outcomes such as "1. good people eventually save slaves and destroy slave mine 2. evil people build mine fotrifications and enslave even more (NPC) people to work in them".
So even if the first implementation of a rally call can only have one outcome, it very much opens the door for multi-outcome rally calls.
I can't wait, this is probably my favouriite announced feature of EQN.
P.S. A "single-outcome" rally call is very much a Themepark feature. If they start making multi-outcome ones, it'll become very awesomely sandbox. Again, they haven't said that they will, but it seems like a very natural evolution of the mechanic.
"Id rather work on something with great potential than on fulfilling a promise of mediocrity."
- Raph Koster
Tried: AO,EQ,EQ2,DAoC,SWG,AA,SB,HZ,CoX,PS,GA,TR,IV,GnH,EVE, PP,DnL,WAR,MxO,SWG,FE,VG,AoC,DDO,LoTRO,Rift,TOR,Aion,Tera,TSW,GW2,DCUO,CO,STO
Favourites: AO,SWG,EVE,TR,LoTRO,TSW,EQ2, Firefall
Currently Playing: ESO
Survivor of the great MMORPG Famine of 2011
I will be very disappointed if its only one sided in a game where the world is to be built and decided by the players.
They gave the example of helping the Orcs instead of the farmer, why couldn't I side with the goblins and destroy Halas instead of building it?
I would keep this in mind when they talk about PVP. Seems like a very critical question that needs answering.
"classification of games into MMOs is not by rational reasoning" - nariusseldon
Love Minecraft. And check out my Youtube channel OhCanadaGamer
Try a MUD today at http://www.mudconnect.com/Yes the devs have said this in better detail on the lore panel, what you chose to do in game has a impact on how npc's and factions react to you. Doing evil deeds will shut off certain parts of the game but open up new ones, so if you save a farmer from orcs trying to kill him , he may send you on a quest to talk to someone in a temple that can lead you to getting a paladin class or if you help kill the farmer then the orcs become your buddies and give a different route to take. My guess is not all ralling calls are going to be good aligned, if they bring in evil cites for the dark elves and such. We will see.
We probably need to wait to hear about what they have planned for pvp. They may not have actually decided yet either.
If they don't just have open world gank everywhere pvp (which they probably won't), but don't want pvp to just be relegated to battlegrounds/some arena zone...I would figure this would be the place where pvp would be appropriate.
I often don't care much about MMO pvp, but it would be neat actually competing in the area in some world pvp where people are really fighting for a goal that will change the server forever.
I am going to refer you to the Panels from last weekend. That information has been said explicitly a couple of times.
There is no such thing as a stupid question but there is most certainly such a thing as a stupid answer.
...if they bring in evil cites for the dark elves and such...
Remember the Teir'dal (Dark Elves) are not naturally evil in this version. No more so than humans. Nor are elves naturally good. There is no Tunare or Innoruuk in EQN and the lore has been changed substantially.
Have people considered the rallying calls might have multiple outcomes.
A rallying call could, for example, have an objective of aid the founding of Halas with several objectives to be fought over. If materials are gathered the town could become more fortified. Enemies cleared could result in a larger spread as the town grows from the safety offered, allowing more trade options or merchants. Such outcomes could then have larger impacts further down the road if Halas gets attacked (no fortifications meaning it may fall much more easily etc.).
Rallying calls also might not be the same across servers. One server could require the founding of Halas, another could ask for the defense of settled lands.
Am I the only one that read's the above interview and without question know his answer was a " Well I guess you could do this to be evil"? Seems real clear there won't be ways for the two "sides" to effect general rally calls, cut and dry. I'll assume both good and evil factions will have their own rally calls, in general ; but the above interview seems like a pretty obvious answer to the " Can I be evil at a rally call and get rewarded for it?" question, and hurtles in the face of the original answer of the definitive yes the panel threw out.
Or then again .... maybe my reading comprehension is at a low today.