Scaling Suspensions and disputing punishments

[arsenalpow]

I was curious as to how this was being handled. Repeat offenders showing a pattern of behavior should obviously be hit with scaling penalties (1st time 1 mob cycle; 2nd time 2 mob cycles; etc) so TMO and Rampages suspensions look correct. However, I'm not aware of any prior suspensions from Indignation, losing 2 class R Sev's seems odd considering there were no prior incidences.

Is the new starting penalty going to be 2 cycles or was this done in error?

On my second point, there was never an opportunity for BDA to dispute our last punishment (which has since come and gone) but there has been examples in the last of a guild challenging their punishments and having them removed. Is there an official mechanism to process this?

Consider this an open conversation.

[Erati]

seems that loot should start to be deleted again once they hit a '3rd' wave of punishments so guilds cant continue to break the same rules but keep their rewards for doing so

[Pint]

The offending guild/party will have the loots removed (if they got the kill), and will be suspended from the target in question for the next 2 times that target is available to them. If any of the loot was already turned in for quests, the rewards will be deleted and nothing will be restored. In addition to that, any appropriate individual suspensions will also be applied (ie: suspended for training if caught training, etc). If a guild accumulates 5 raid suspensions, they will be suspended for “volume of infractions”, which starts at 5 days of full raid suspension across all targets, and increases by 1 day with each subsequent raid suspension.

[arsenalpow]

What's your thought process behind 2 cycles from the start. A guild just starting out is going to make mistakes. They aren't going to know the exact spawn points, they won't know they need to have factioned characters, and two cycles is especially punitive in class R.

I'm not saying indignation is new or maybe there were other mitigating circumstances, but two right off the bat seems harsh considering the list of infractions in this forum where first time offenders were only suspended for one cycle.

[Nightbear]

Pint is this posted somewhere? List of infraction rules etc.

[Nightbear]

I'm not saying indignation is new or maybe there were other mitigating circumstances, but two right off the bat seems harsh considering the list of infractions in this forum where first time offenders were only suspended for one cycle.

/agree'd

2-3 month suspension (or however long it takes for 2 rotations of class R + current lock out)is pretty brutal for our first infraction ever, in over a year of raiding.

[Erati]

Pint is this posted somewhere? List of infraction rules etc.

I think Pint just wrote that as something he would like to see as the rule and it's a step in the right direction to make punishments cause the violating guild to actually pause a bit and think about re-planning standard operating procedures.

[Pint]

lol guys... http://www.project1999.com/forums/showthread.php?t=189856 new raid rules clarified, at the top of this sub forum.

[Pint]

These rules are in addition to the rules found here – http://www.project1999.com/raid.php
And here – http://www.project1999.com/forums/showthread.php?t=132299

Last Updated: April 19, 2015


A lot of you have questions as to crime & punishment; I hope to address that here:
The offending guild/party will have the loots removed (if they got the kill), and will be suspended from the target in question for the next 2 times that target is available to them. If any of the loot was already turned in for quests, the rewards will be deleted and nothing will be restored. In addition to that, any appropriate individual suspensions will also be applied (ie: suspended for training if caught training, etc). If a guild accumulates 5 raid suspensions, they will be suspended for “volume of infractions”, which starts at 5 days of full raid suspension across all targets, and increases by 1 day with each subsequent raid suspension. The staff strongly encourages players to concede/forfeit targets as soon as possible if they break a rule, and of course to also take a Screenshot of the concession/forfeiture, just in case another guild tries to say it never happened.

[arsenalpow]

But reading! Two seems harsh though for first time offenders.

[bktroost]

But reading! Two seems harsh though for first time offenders.

I think it makes sense to have harsher rule sets in class R compared to class C. I thought it was universally understood that class C requires tactics that have a higher potential of causing infractions--kitings, ect-- which leads to less harsh punishment in this regard.

Nilbog says that kiting was a legitimate strategy on his live server and therefore is encouraged by staff. A kite gone wrong is an illegal training offense. If they encourage kiting, how can they crack down hard on training?

It makes sense if class C is the premium raiding environment. More loot, less bloating, softer punishments.

[Pint]

i like the x2 lock out and the individual player accountability, maybe ppl will think through engages instead of rushing into them in velious.

[Erati]

It makes sense if class C is the premium raiding environment. More loot, less bloating, softer punishments.

Premium raiding environment also means that all the guilds in that tier SHOULD be well versed in the lexicon of rules we have here.
The punishments should also reflect the stakes - the highest.

Every guild that is not in Class C is by default in R- which is Chest's point for stating why he doesnt understand why R has such harsh first infractions- it will be new guilds who do not know the rules unlike the professional C raiders but get punished harder?

Thats BS.

[Pint]

Premium raiding environment also means that all the guilds in that tier SHOULD be well versed in the lexicon of rules we have here.
The punishments should also reflect the stakes - the highest.

Every guild that is not in Class C is by default in R- which is Chest's point for stating why he doesnt understand why R has such harsh first infractions- it will be new guilds who do not know the rules unlike the professional C raiders but get punished harder?

Thats BS.

come to class C

[Erati]

come to class C

not really relevant :)

[Pint]

not really relevant :)

its incentive to join C, seems pretty relevant but i guess thats just from my side of the fence.

[Erati]

its incentive to join C, seems pretty relevant but i guess thats just from my side of the fence.

Its an incentive to let noobies in raiding have harsher punishments so they can learn to not break rules as they graduate their guild into Class C where rule breaking is so common that the punishments are more relaxed that the noob guild has to forget all the PNP stuff they just learned

:)

I like the direction of the rules and I dont mind at all R having harsher penalties, I was just confused like Chest about why a first time infraction was so long when Class R has lockouts. Logic and reason are very import to me and I dont see the reasoning behind this logic.

[arsenalpow]

If you want to learn the high risk strats you obviously need to work them out in class R to start, but one fuckup and someone is going to be taking a 2 month hiatus on a target. That's not really conducive to "graduating" guilds to class C nor is it a worthy carrot on a stick. "Come to class C, where the punishments don't matter" seems like a poor slogan.

[Pint]

im having trouble following both of your arguments bc youre citing noobies in raiding and guilds who are learning, but that is not at all representative of class R as a whole. class R is comprised of long standing guilds who know how everything outside of VP works. if youre afraid of the harsh penalties then you concede the mob and try again next time, everything in the new rules is focused on players being accountable and working things out among themselves, if something ends up in the staffs hands then they want to make sure the punishment is severe, which it is. staying in class R has downsides, i think the new rules reinforce that idea.

[bktroost]

Yeah, that isn't my personal extrapolation, this is a reiteration from conversations with CMs on this rule set.

My personal thought Is that we are wrong for thinking that class R is for up and coming guilds. Because the rotation is beyond top heavy with guilds that should be class C, and the GMs don't want to force people to move, Rogaen will likely remove the class system come Velious. With a time stamp on the rotation, it is not worth discussing specifics for up and coming guilds since we are the last to experience it.

[arsenalpow]

Yeah, that isn't my personal extrapolation, this is a reiteration from conversations with CMs on this rule set.

My personal thought Is that we are wrong for thinking that class R is for up and coming guilds. Because the rotation is beyond top heavy with guilds that should be class C, and the GMs don't want to force people to move, Rogaen will likely remove the class system come Velious. With a time stamp on the rotation, it is not worth discussing specifics for up and coming guilds since we are the last to experience it.

Don't twist this with guilds that you personally think should be moved. There's a giant difference between chasing 1-3 targets in a weekend to the 8-12 that TMO/IB push for. Asgard went to C specifically to pick off class C repop mobs and potentially grab some targets here and there, if BDA were planning to move to C it would be to go after VP targets which we aren't prepared for commitment wise.

Any guild not in C is in R. Anonymous would like to start fighting it out for targets, what happens if/when they punt on something? They don't fit Pint's criteria that he just laid out.

[Pint]

Don't twist this with guilds that you personally think should be moved. There's a giant difference between chasing 1-3 targets in a weekend to the 8-12 that TMO/IB push for. Asgard went to C specifically to pick off class C repop mobs and potentially grab some targets here and there, if BDA were planning to move to C it would be to go after VP targets which we aren't prepared for commitment wise.

Any guild not in C is in R. Anonymous would like to start fighting it out for targets, what happens if/when they punt on something? They don't fit Pint's criteria that he just laid out.

the best thing for anonymous is for you guys to get out of their way so they can use R to learn the raid scene, the only way anonymous ends up with a 2 spawn penalty is if one of you petitions them for messing up. so while the rules might not favor anonymous, all they have to do on a mess up is bow out for the spawn and hope that the guilds in R will treat them fairly. if you work within the framework we have then these perceived issues for noob guilds are not real issues unless y'all make them so.

[bktroost]

the best thing for anonymous is for you guys to get out of their way so they can use R to learn the raid scene, the only way anonymous ends up with a 2 spawn penalty is if one of you petitions them for messing up. so while the rules might not favor anonymous, all they have to do on a mess up is bow out for the spawn and hope that the guilds in R will treat them fairly. if you work within the framework we have then these perceived issues for noob guilds are not real issues unless y'all make them so.


But reporting a noob guild helps solve class Rs biggest, most long-standing problem of guild bloating... And we've gone to such great lengths to correct this atrocity.

Maybe we're saying that if there is a way to suspend these guys then it's going to happen in the name of making them stronger for the future?