PDA

View Full Version : "Locked Out" rule (GM response would be lovely!)


phiren
05-06-2014, 02:33 PM
Successfully killing a mob spawned under Class R puts that guild on lockout for that mob's next two class R spawns.

I understand exactly why this rule was implemented, and like the rule. The rule needs to stay.

As an example, (and apologies if I'm WAY wrong), but it sounded like TMO / IB have worked out some kind of deal in VP that allows them to 'break the rules', but since neither guild will petition it, the GMs don't care. (I remember a post about IB being banned for camping too close to a mob, but was taken back since TMO / IB agreed this would be acceptable).

Can R work out some kind of deal as well for the "Locked Out" rule? No one will petition or bug the GMs, so I don't see why this would be an issue. But I would definitely like to get an official "okay" from a GM BEFOREHAND.

You (GMs) seem to be all about player-made-agreements and less GM involvement.

Example:
Azure Guard is locked out of Trak at the moment. Guild CasualScumBags asks Azure Guard if they can send a few guys to help kill Trak.

So -- if I can assure you no one will petition and not involve the GMs, would it be acceptable for Azure Guard to send some guys to assist? And do you have a preference on limit? Can we send 5? 10? 50? As long as no one petitions?


~Phiren
Azure Guard

phiren
05-06-2014, 04:26 PM
Since I've gotten a few PMs on it ... to clarify ... I didn't mean any offense towards TMO / IB. The rules that were broken but allowed applied to only Class C / VP. So Class R doesn't care AT ALL what they do in VP or any agreements they make with each other. I personally think it's great that TMO agreed to lift the ban on IB when they easily could have gone with the GMs and had open season all Class C mobs for a couple weeks.

The thread I'm referring to is:
http://www.project1999.com/forums/showthread.php?t=142673

What I'm asking for here in this thread about Lockouts is an OK, since it is a written rule. No one wants to get banned.

Am I asking to remove the rule? Absolutely not. This is a great rule in place to protect Class R guilds from being kept out of the raiding scene. It's not an issue today, but might be in the future.

What I'm asking is... if the guilds in Class R can agree to a different interpretation of the 'lockout rule', will the GMs be OK with that?

It SOUNDS like Derubael's previous post on that thread makes it acceptable.. but again.. just want to be sure ... no one wants to get banned.

We are moving to a system where raid disputes are player adjudicated and resolved. If there is a dispute involving two or more parties in which a rule has been broken, bringing that dispute to the GM's is a last resort, after all other options have been explored. We greatly encourage players involved in disputes to work with each other to find their own solutions to situations that arise during raids, and reaching a compromise that will almost always be preferable to GM intervention. Obviously this is not a new notion by any means - but from here on out it will be the regular procedure for handling a dispute, as opposed to the exception.

In the past, the go-to solution for a raid dispute was to put in a petition and let the staff decide what to do. We feel there are few, if any, situations that cannot be resolved through cooperation and compromise. If a dispute needs to be brought to a GM, it is very likely both sides will walk away unhappy with the result. It is therefore in all parties best interest to work together to come to their own resolution.

This change will largely affect Class C guilds, as Class R guilds have their own prearranged agreement as to how Class R spawns should be handled that is conducive to an environment that produces fewer disputes. This system, however, is not class exclusive, and if one or more groups are involved in a dispute, we expect the situation to be handled in a similar fashion regardless of class affiliation.

From this point forward we expect players to exhaust every possible option to reach an agreement during a dispute before involving the staff. We do not believe this to be an unreasonable request, as everyone here has the knowledge, capacity, and understanding to be able to work out these problems on their own.

We are confident this will provide less staff intervention, more cooperation between competing guilds, and an overall better raid scene for everyone. We look forward to an exciting and fun year of raiding across Antonica, Kunark, and Velious!

Derubael
05-07-2014, 10:08 AM
There's two potential problems here:

1) If Guild R1 helped from Guild R2 to down a mob, Guild R3, R4, R5, R6 and Rx would need to agree that this was ok. I understand that you guys have a rotation worked out, but since there are so many guilds involved in Class R, and CSR doesn't recognize the authority of said rotation, all the guilds would need to agree this was OK, not just the two involved in killing the mob. Given the amount of cooperation and communication within Class R, I don't see this being a huge issue. It still means we have to track down each guild and get with their leadership to verify it was acceptable.

2) The bigger problem is that the lockout system is hard-coded into the game. The system allows for a couple 'oopsies' on an encounter log to account for close FTE battles, but this limit is probably lower than what you would like to help another guilds raid. If more than that is added to the encounter, your guild gets put on lockout, we get a flagged warning in-game, and Rogean would have to go in and manually change the board. Basically whether we want them to or not, loud alarms start blaring, staff batphones go off, Sirken and I have to stop everything to come rage at our computer screens, and then we have to call Rogean to whip out his sonic screwdriver and fix the board.

All that being said, I'm hesitant to say "if all of Class R is OK with Guild R2 breaking lockout, we're ok with it" because I'm not a huge fan of everyone starting to break the lockouts over and over. Each time a guild does that, we'd need to go around and ask each guild if they were OK with Guild Rx breaking the rules. Also keep in mind that if one guild decides to be an ass and says "Nope, we're not OK with what happened" then Guild Rx would need to have a sit down with that guild and likely need to provide compensation. If we give this the go-ahead I can see this very quickly getting out of control and providing a lot of extra work for us.

Also keep in mind that the policy regarding disputes and petitions is not a 'break the rules' clause. The rules are still in place and still need to be followed; this system was only provided to give us a break, to keep people from being suspended, and to let the players have more direct control on the outcome of a screw-up.

I know it sounds like a simple thing, to just be able to help another guild out on a mob, but it's more complicated than that. To give you an idea, this:

...but it sounded like TMO / IB have worked out some kind of deal in VP that allows them to 'break the rules', but since neither guild will petition it, the GMs don't care.

Took the entirety of 2 full days to mediate, work out, discuss, and finally close, not including the time it took to do our initial assessment of the situations that were being reviewed. It definitely was not as cut and dry as a lot of people seem to think it was. It also wasn't a case of "lets break whatever rules we want so long as both agree its ok" - those rules are still active and enforced in VP and for Class C mobs.

And finally, after that wall of text, any changes to the raid rules themselves requires a Rogean seal of approval, so you guys would need to all work out, agree on whatever, and then submit it to him for the final OK.

phiren
05-07-2014, 11:54 AM
Thanks for the informative reply..


There's two potential problems here:

1) If Guild R1 helped from Guild R2 to down a mob, Guild R3, R4, R5, R6 and Rx would need to agree that this was ok. I understand that you guys have a rotation worked out, but since there are so many guilds involved in Class R, and CSR doesn't recognize the authority of said rotation, all the guilds would need to agree this was OK, not just the two involved in killing the mob. Given the amount of cooperation and communication within Class R, I don't see this being a huge issue. It still means we have to track down each guild and get with their leadership to verify it was acceptable.

Correct -- but if no one petitions, you SHOULDN'T have to check. It would just be noted on the raid page who is locked out. Azure Guard was (2), Trak was killed, and now Azure Guard is (2) again... so obviously they helped.

Us R guys have our forum and we all sleep with each other. There wouldn't be any problems. There is also a huge difference between:
Situation A) BDA solo-killing Trak when they are locked out (not approved by R)

Situation B) Azure Guard sending 5 guys to help Europa kill Trak (approved by R, but not by GMs since we are locked out)

Class R guilds would know the difference between the situations, but the GMs would not unless some petitioned.



2) The bigger problem is that the lockout system is hard-coded into the game. The system allows for a couple 'oopsies' on an encounter log to account for close FTE battles, but this limit is probably lower than what you would like to help another guilds raid. If more than that is added to the encounter, your guild gets put on lockout, we get a flagged warning in-game, and Rogean would have to go in and manually change the board. Basically whether we want them to or not, loud alarms start blaring, staff batphones go off, Sirken and I have to stop everything to come rage at our computer screens, and then we have to call Rogean to whip out his sonic screwdriver and fix the board.

Enough said! I was hoping this WASN'T the case and even if 'alarms went off', you would just be able to ignore them (or simply turn off the alarms).


And finally, after that wall of text, any changes to the raid rules themselves requires a Rogean seal of approval, so you guys would need to all work out, agree on whatever, and then submit it to him for the final OK.

As I mentioned, we definitely do NOT want a change in the raid rules here. This isn't that big of a deal.

I was unaware of the manual work involved, and was hoping it would not be the case here... that 'the code' would handle it accordingly.. and you guys could just ignore the alarms and move on in life.

So -- no biggie. We are shaking things up in Class R a bit and are teaming up a lot more. As of now, we are having to dance around the Lockouts, so this was merely a suggestion that would make things easier/more fun for R.

We appreciate the work that has been done, and will continue to respect the 'lockout rule' until further notice!

Thanks again,
Phiren
Azure Guard

Artaenc
05-07-2014, 12:33 PM
I don't know about the other class R guilds but this would definitely be ok with me as long as the guild that's getting help is actually capable of killing the target on their own if it spawned during their prime time. Let's face it, some people in class R have jobs and other responsibilities and trying to balance between game and RL. Sometimes class R guilds falls a little short of a few critical players. Either way I like to help out individuals or guilds that's why I leave my characters not anon/role and when people give me a tell about a rez/c2/port/cr I do it if I have time otherwise I let them know I can't at that moment.

What's the hard code limit anyway on getting flagged? Is it 2 or 3 players? I know that 4 will trigger the alarms and I would hate to waste the staff's time experimenting and get raid suspended.

phiren
05-08-2014, 01:21 PM
I too would also think this could be a quick/easy fix. I have asked a couple times for the magic # and it always gets buried/skipped :(

If the magic # is 4 to set off alarms, and 3 is okay, R can work with that... we just don't know FOR SURE if 3 is OK or 2 is OK at this point.

The majority of Class R is pretty casual and have 'normal hours'. The odds of mobs spawning within their available windows are pretty slim. Furthermore, the odds of the mob spawning within your available window AND your guild being 'up' for the mob is even slimmer.

Knowing that 4 people from my guild could go assist on a Raid mob without fear of bannage / hassle for the GMs would just be more fun for everyone.

At this point, it's not even about assisting and expecting anything in return. I know most of AG would like to help on kills just so they can experience the content (me included).

I agree with the "rule" in not allowing me to send 20 to 'assist', but I would REALLY like to see that magic # finally released by the GMs!

~Phiren
Azure Guard