Proposed Raid Rule Adjustments/Changes

[Komodon]

TMO would like to suggest the following changes to the current raid rules, in the spirit of improving the raiding environment for all involved:

- A reduction from 2 trackers per guild per zone to 1. We would like for VP/Trak to be an exception and remain at 2. With a specific two rangers only limit in VP, each of which must be parked in the 2 drake lava tube.

- When a raid mob spawns, any character already logged into the zone, including trackers, forfeit the right to contribute in any manner on that target for their guild. This includes securing FTE, any/all forms of stalling, healing/dps, the training away of mobs, and the opening of any doors. With the exception of a single coth mage at Trakanon, trackers are there to track and observe only. Inside VP, a designated exception period will also be given to each guild post-dragon-death to allow for CR'ing/rebuffs/looting, in the event of a back-to-back dragon spawn.

We believe these changes should help address the longstanding concerns regarding spam clicking/claims of autofire use/pet pulling, while hopefully reducing the zone-in poopsocking on select targets.

To reiterate on some grey areas:

- Fear/Hate - Nobody other then the tracker can be logged out in Fear/Hate. Period.

- If you have a 2 man coth team linked up in Seb, that's your 2 man limit at spawn and nobody else should be logging in down at the ledge.

- No guild may log in any more than 2 characters at any raid mob's spawn point, as per current rules.

[Troubled]

I like the concept of not allowing trackers to engage, for whatever that's worth. Not sure most of the rest of it really makes much difference and won't comment on the VP stuff.

[Erati]

Small question for some clarity:

Taggers have to be parked at the designated 'accepted' parking spots in the zones and run from there to the dragon?

Fay- Ogre Isle
Sev- TT/EJ zone
KC- Zone line
Gore- ?
Tal- OT zone
Naggy- Lavastorm Zone in
Vox- EF zone in

Opinions on that thought?


Also I would like to see all guilds support a push to possibly get the outdoor dragons to spawn randomly along their pathing nodes....that way if we do use this proposal of no trackers tagging, the people running out to FTE, taggers are not bee lining to ONE location

they still have to 'find' the dragon and that is sometimes a skill within itself.

Not sure how hard this would be to code, and I know coding change suggestions give people trepidation...but it seems this would be a very classic change and I have heard alot of support for this.

thoughts?

I posted the OP proposal in the Taken officer forum for the officer group to comment, but I would be curious to hear what TMO and others think about my first question in this post.

[Komodon]

Taggers have to be parked at the designated 'accepted' parking spots in the zones and run from there to the dragon?.

No. They'll still camp at or near spawn, essentially replacing the previous duty of the trackers.

Problem with your idea being (and we gave this a previous try in VP btw) that it adds an extra layer of potential issues and policing needs to the equation. Was the guy that got in first really parked on spot X, or was he cheating up a few steps to get an edge? That will simply always be questioned by the losing side. Not to mention, is a bard race to every mob a better solution then at least allowing the opportunity for multiple classes to log in and snag an FTE for their guild? I personally don't think so.

It's like i told both Chest and you the other day when i approached you guys about our desire to get rid of the spam clicking FTE, this may not be a picture perfect answer but it is the lesser evil on the table atm/imo.

[Komodon]

I like the concept of not allowing trackers to engage, for whatever that's worth. Not sure most of the rest of it really makes much difference and won't comment on the VP stuff.

That really depends on what type of "difference" you are looking for here. I mean if you are not willing to match our one/half afk coth link in Seb and call in the troops for what has become an infinitely cleaner race to the successful engage, then yeah...you still won't be getting any FFA Traks.

Same goes for the proposal to reduce zone in poopsocking down to pre-camps only. The people willing to push the effort will still have an edge, but now that edge and it's "requirement" could only be pushed so far.

The above which should be fairly straight forward and easy to police among ourselves btw, especially in the event we were to all agree on a universal punishment for offenders beforehand. Which then doubles in the event it has to go to GM intervention and the offender is found in the wrong. For example:

Sirken: Hey Mazam, i hear Taken came to you immediately post-kill offering logs and asked that you forfeit that Sev TMO got an FTE/Kill on, with the understanding you'll be forfeiting the next one as well on grounds that Sericx never logged out and dps'd the dragon. You refused on your own claim that Sericx wasn't logged in at pop. Turns out he was, so now you'll automatically be forfeiting that kill and the next 2 per your own agreement. It's your problem why he never logged out, not mine. Have a nice day"

[Erati]

I would like to see a greater push for randomizing the outdoor dragon spawn points

it would lessen the need to play "IP exemption"-Quest as that is the current fear most my other officers have with these changes. We love the tracker only tracking and informing, but camping out the second tracker at a known location to instantly tag the dragon upon loading still is far from a classic experience.

I would love to see people 'hunting' for these mobs rather than log,tag,bag

if we garner enough support to get the dragons spawning in various places along their paths the IP exempt accounts and the people waiting at character select will have less of an impact.

I appreciate that we are having this conversation however, I think there are answers here somewhere.

[Splorf22]

get rid of the spam clicking FTE, this may not be a picture perfect answer but it is the lesser evil on the table atm/imo.

I tend to agree with this: the SSD/ip exemption login race isn't great but at least its easy to enforce and better than jav spamming. Kudos to TMO for trying to improve things! Of course, let's be honest here: I would bet quite a bit of platinum that most of the people "spam clicking" for FTE (or Ragefire handins, for that matter) are actually using autofire programs or programmable keyboards. Daliant has shown us the way!

In an unrelated note, why do I still have access to this forum? Really should be argh, qelen, and wycca (Cobblestone) at this point.

[Komodon]

I tend to agree with this: the SSD/ip exemption login race isn't great but at least its easy to enforce and better than jav spamming. Kudos to TMO for trying to improve things!

Heh, I've actually been been pushing for a ceasefire on spam clicking for quite some time now. At least with IB and in VP to start, since in theory that would only take a simple 2 guild agreement atm.

Of course, convincing Hokushin/Getsome of a need for this has proven...difficult to say the least :)

[Sirken]

In an unrelated note, why do I still have access to this forum? Really should be argh, qelen, and wycca (Cobblestone) at this point.

if only u could see how many times ive tried to have Rogean update this forum for new guilds, dead guilds, and players switching around.

sadly, he just enjoys making me cry so that he can consume my tears and continue to grow ever stronger.

[williestargell]

race to loggin at the spawn point will always be won by the guild that has all the extra toons with ip exemptions...in other words, TMO is suggesting a rule that gives them a greater advantage.

Why not everyone just agree not to use auto-firing macros to target/fte?

[Splorf22]

Why not everyone just agree not to use auto-firing macros to target/fte?

I don't think this is enforceable.

[Ella`Ella]

race to loggin at the spawn point will always be won by the guild that has all the extra toons with ip exemptions...in other words, TMO is suggesting a rule that gives them a greater advantage.

Why not everyone just agree not to use auto-firing macros to target/fte?

You can't police it, you can't detect it, you can't enforce it. Best bet is to eliminate the ability for a person tracking to FTE - it voids out FTE. Like Mazam said, it's not a picture perfect solution at all, but it's the best we're going to get. We don't like making more and more rules to moderate the raid scene, so this is as clean an attempt without polluting the raid scene with complex guidelines - that's just going to leave loopholes open for the p99 Attorney's at Law.

[Striiker]

I proposed this approach in the past and it was not met favorably. I am pleased to see that a change of heart has occurred. As always, there are those with a suspicion of why this is coming about now (and not previously) but it's hardly worth worrying over. (put away those tinfoil hats)

I am in favor of seeing the trackers no longer being allowed to be the taggers. Allowing taggers to be camped at / near the spawn still pushes a significant advantage to those with exceptionally low latency and high speed disk systems. Adding those with IP exempt accounts to the mix adds to this advantage for some at the cost of fairness to others.

I accept that no solution will ever be 100% "fair" to all involved however I do suggest that we all add to this proposal; a request to the server admins to randomize the spawn location of the raid mob such that it will be somewhere along its normal path route. It is my belief that this minor change would significantly mitigate the multi-account / faster system / lower latency disparity which would otherwise exist and open up these FFA targets to more guilds on the server.

Adding the spawn randomizer is not 100% "classic" but it's a very minor change and would not break the classic feel of the server. It is an attempt to address other factors of the modern computing environment which were not also present in the classic era of Everquest. We also already have other policies which are not classic in place because they make the server a better place for those who play here (no boxing rule for one).

Partial Summary:

Guilds to agree to a policy where trackers are not also taggers.
Guilds to agree to a penalty for violating the policy. (This would often require GM assistance).
Guilds to request a change to the spawn mechanic such that the mob spawns at a random location along its normal path. (If Nilbog is willing to agree to this and can commit time to code it)


We could all then hammer out the final details of where guilds can pre-stage etc. if we can get agreement to the above. Thoughts?

[Troubled]

TMO would like to suggest the following changes to the current raid rules, in the spirit of improving the raiding environment for all involved:

- A reduction from 2 trackers per guild per zone to 1. We would like for VP/Trak to be an exception and remain at 2. With a specific two rangers only limit in VP, each of which must be parked in the 2 drake lava tube.

- When a raid mob spawns, any character already logged into the zone, including trackers, forfeit the right to contribute in any manner on that target for their guild. This includes securing FTE, any/all forms of stalling, healing/dps, the training away of mobs, and the opening of any doors. With the exception of a single coth mage at Trakanon, trackers are there to track and observe only. Inside VP, a designated exception period will also be given to each guild post-dragon-death to allow for CR'ing/rebuffs/looting, in the event of a back-to-back dragon spawn.

We believe these changes should help address the longstanding concerns regarding spam clicking/claims of autofire use/pet pulling, while hopefully reducing the zone-in poopsocking on select targets.

To reiterate on some grey areas:

- Fear/Hate - Nobody other then the tracker can be logged out in Fear/Hate. Period.

- If you have a 2 man coth team linked up in Seb, that's your 2 man limit at spawn and nobody else should be logging in down at the ledge.

- No guild may log in any more than 2 characters at any raid mob's spawn point, as per current rules.

What's to stop every encounter from turning into a CoH/anchor where you invite the FTE'r that logs in? Or is that going to be the new acceptable practice?

The mage would be the sole tracker with the anchor at the acceptable rally point. Would CoHing be considered contributing, and thus not allowed? (For mobs that aren't Trak) Wouldn't mind Trak being blanketed in that as well, with people racing down old school style.

[Komodon]

What's to stop every encounter from turning into a CoH/anchor where you invite the FTE'r that logs in? Or is that going to be the new acceptable practice?

The mage would be the sole tracker with the anchor at the acceptable rally point. Would CoHing be considered contributing, and thus not allowed? (For mobs that aren't Trak) Wouldn't mind Trak being blanketed in that as well, with people racing down old school style.

Yes, coth'ing would be considered a contribution thus not allowed outside the Trak encounter.

I don't think any of us (well, Unbrella in our case) have enough time in the day to deal with the mountain of train QQ, petitions, and fraps that would undoubtedly come out of every old school race down to Trak :)

[-Catherin-]

The propsed ruleset by Fearstalker, and randomizing where the dragon spawns rather than the static spot that everyone knows about will fix all of these problems.

It is a possibly non classic adjustment that takes into mind modern advantages, and in effect creates a more classic environment.

[quido]

I understood that requesting source-supported raiding changes was basically out of the question.

[Ella`Ella]

It is a possibly non classic adjustment that takes into mind modern advantages, and in effect creates a more classic environment.

Randomizing the spawns would not have that great of an effect and is only limited to world dragons. I don't think we ever see real problems with this on the dragons it would apply to; Gore, Tal, Sev or Fay.

VP, Trak, Nagy, Vox, VS nor Inny would be impacted by a randomized spawn and would still be exposed. The simple solution, without making things overly complicated and not nagging devs to input more source code, which in absolutely no way "creates a more classic environment", would be to simply exclude trackers from FTE.

[-Catherin-]

simply excluding trackers from tagging only takes care of half the problem, because after that it becomes bind and ip-exemption-quest without a randomized spawn.

I see us working towards a good solution, but I think these need to go hand in hand for it to have any effective result.

[Erati]

I cant speak about VP for obvious reasons but

I am unaware of Jav-Questing going on for any Naggy/Vox/Inny or VS pops. Most those encounters are train your way into the boss room / semi race. Trak is a COH race now as well, nothing to do with autofire / 16 hour jav spam.

Gore. Tal, Sev, Fay are the dragons ( besides VP ) that are exposed to this autofire / 16 hour Jav quest the most and which is why randomizing would solve the problem greatly.

I do not like suggesting code either, however if its something simple and takes mere min to add to the existing code, it might be a good idea that our developers might fall in love with to bring about a healthier raiding environment on their box.

A simple comment from a Dev on this matter would be all we need to squash the idea of that code change, and its my opinion that it never hurts to ask, especially if its a widely supported idea that people agree to ( a challenge within itself ).

[Striiker]

I appreciate that devs are busy. This adjustment was proposed for consideration at some point. If it's a relatively minor tweak, then it could be a candidate for a more immediate implementation. If there's a lot more to it, then it can be set aside for future contemplation. We are all trying to be creative to address the problems which crop up with a solution to a problem.

Concerning the advantage that a larger guild would have, this is mitigated by restricting the number of taggers camped near the spawn location (although a guild could send out more pullers from the raid location to assist). Also, it's not too difficult to figure out the roaming path and they can play smartly with a couple good trackers running along that path to find the target. The intent was to have a specific area for the raids to camp out.

I just don't know if it's better to replace one broken system with another (auto fire keyboards vs. IP exempt accounts on fast computers with low latency connections). Perhaps it's worth a test run for a month?

[Anichek]

im not a dev, so this is not by any means set in stone.

however i will say, every dev is busy as fuck right now with velious and fixing things that are broke that are already on the server.

i would absolutely not hold my breath waiting for non classic dev changes to the raid scene.

evenm if it was randomized spawn spots, you guys realize that guilds like BDA/IB/TMO/Taken and anyone with a very large playerbase will still find and roflstomp those merbs before guilds with half the member count can do the same. if anything, not knowing where the spawn would be will hurt the smaller guilds imo.

i'm not saying im right, or my word is law, just sharing my opinions

I think that the major point on the randomization (which probably can't happen anyway) is that when it's a Class C or FFA mob, the spirit of competition is heightened, yet somewhat equalized, by the randomization. Smaller guilds have absolutely zero chance in a known spawn point engage race vs. bigger guilds (as you state) - but randomization would add some intrigue to it.

...until zones start to have 30 trackers from a dozen guilds walking from ZL to ZL doing a police call, picking up trash and cigarette butts until they stumble upon a dragon on accident.

[Komodon]

I just don't know if it's better to replace one broken system with another (auto fire keyboards vs. IP exempt accounts on fast computers with low latency connections). Perhaps it's worth a test run for a month?

Again, it really just boils down to a lesser evil factor here. Personally, i know i'd rather lose FTE to the puller with a fast pc then some pet agro'ing .1 seconds after spawn and who's owner i suspect wasn't even sitting at the keyboard.

The potential of seeing spam/auto-fire tracking is something that's likely only going to expand and get worse in Velious, so the sooner we nip it in the butt the better for everybody imo. Not to mention if you choose to keep it simple with a basic "people in the zone at the time of spawn can not secure an FTE"...it's still a pretty easy fix. Boom, no more tears or finger pointing about auto-firing ever again :)

If a few of you class R guilds (who plan on going for FFA mobs) want to give it a try this weekend, TMO is game. Just give the word here.

[Ella`Ella]

I would like to revisit this thread, specifically to seek commentary by Inglourious Basterds' thoughts on the matter.

Hokushin, I know you and I both agreed on this matter in the past and would like us to reconsider it's mutual benefit to both Class-C guilds and to Class-R.

[Nightbear]

Great ideas overall in this post. If the Dev Team is willing to look at even the minor changes addressed in this post I think it would be an improvement in our raid scene.

[Hokushin]

I would like to revisit this thread, specifically to seek commentary by Inglourious Basterds' thoughts on the matter.

Hokushin, I know you and I both agreed on this matter in the past and would like us to reconsider it's mutual benefit to both Class-C guilds and to Class-R.


My PM to you 3 weeks ago was that I was not agreeing to the ranger tracking in VP, since you guys trained us on 5/14's full repop.. we still have not got the petition resolved.

If you would like, I will agree to a temporary ranger tracking over the next 2 weekends in VP only, and we'll see how that goes. Unfortunately for IB our pull team is outnumbered 4 to 1, but on the plus side, doing it this way allows an extra couple minutes for people to log in.

So if you would like to do the 2 week VP ranger trial, then reply here for all to see please.

[Ella`Ella]

Signed.

We'll start the trial run next weekend to allow for 2 full cycles of VP.

[Hokushin]

Signed.

We'll start the trial run next weekend to allow for 2 full cycles of VP.

Any rules you want to state before the repops?

1: No pullers camp past entrance bridge, Ranger trackers will be frapsing
2: No more than 1 ranger in zone
3: Anyone in zone when the dragon spawns will not be allowed to FTE, or assist
4: Forfeit the current spawned dragon if the rules are broken

I believe these are what we discussed in our vent meeting 6 weeks ago

[wycca]

I wanted to echo some of Sirken's concerns and add some. Basically, you now will require some very specific tracker classes and setups. All in all, it would end up hurting the more casual or smaller guilds competitiveness without changing the raid scene much. You'd just end up requiring specific classes. It would only be a bard rush setup in PoHate really IMO.

All in all, I'd rather go with the current FTE lottery - which about any class can participate in - rather than some specific sniping setups. I think we'd be trading something that is silly (ie 10+ guilds contesting spawns that are engaged immediately and die in like 15sec) for something that is worse.

In the end the problem is that we have 10-13 guilds competing for 32k hp mob spawns - this is why they implemented instanced raid content on live. Fiddle with the rules all you want, you just end up creating new abominations of raid/tracking strats as guilds compensate to gain an advantage.

[Komodon]

Any rules you want to state before the repops?

1: No pullers camp past entrance bridge, Ranger trackers will be frapsing
2: No more than 1 ranger in zone
3: Anyone in zone when the dragon spawns will not be allowed to FTE, or assist
4: Forfeit the current spawned dragon if the rules are broken

I believe these are what we discussed in our vent meeting 6 weeks ago

1. Like we talked about then, the problem with trying to police where the FTE'ers are logging into is that it adds an extra layer of potential issues and policing needs to the equation. I thought we compromised with limiting it to 2 FTE'ers logging into any one spawn point. Anymore then that and we can both agree ahead of time to forfeit the mob on spawn.

2. We agreed to 2, pending you guys getting a second ranger in there. If that didn't happen then we are fine going with the one if that's what we need to do to make it work.

3. Sounds good

4. Sounds good

[Hokushin]

1. Like we talked about then, the problem with trying to police where the FTE'ers are logging into is that it adds an extra layer of potential issues and policing needs to the equation. I thought we compromised with limiting it to

2. We agreed to 2, pending you guys getting a second ranger in there. If that didn't happen then we are fine going with the one if that's what we need to do to make it work.


1. Camping players out at doors will only make it a race to see who's computer is faster, not really the point of this test. If we are camping at doors, then #3 is pointless. By not passing first bridge, this gives all dragons equal opportunities. Rather than policing how many people are at each door, there is only 1 spot that needs to be watched. Since you are the larger guild, you could easily just camp 2 pullers at each dragon door and only log in certain ones for that dragon when multiple are in window. IB does not have that luxury, especially since our numbers are low 20's now in VP. We will agree to zone in bridge camping, otherwise it won't be worth wasting our time.

2. 1 ranger is what you initially proposed, I mentioned 2 if we could get a second, but we only have 1.

[getsome]

1. Like we talked about then, the problem with trying to police where the FTE'ers are logging into is that it adds an extra layer of potential issues and policing needs to the equation. I thought we compromised with limiting it to 2 FTE'ers logging into any one spawn point. Anymore then that and we can both agree ahead of time to forfeit the mob on spawn.



Once you get on the same page, get back to us. As of now you can forget it until you agree in public to the terms you already proposed.


05-23-2014, 06:09 PM

Unbrella: Let's ranger track this round of VP instead of Jav Spamming. We've talked about it before and seemed to be in agreement that it would be best for all parties. max of 2 ranger trackers and all pullers start at the zone in and race. Easy enough.

[Komodon]

Once you get on the same page, get back to us. As of now you can forget it until you agree in public to the terms you already proposed.

We are on the same page. You are putting up a quote that was made a week before i even put up this thread, and after further speculative discussion was had on the matter.

Nice try though (which is also why we latter decided to try going straight through Hoku in our attempt to do away with the autofiring, btw).

[Hokushin]

1: No pullers camp past entrance bridge, Ranger trackers will be frapsing
2: No more than 1 ranger in zone
3: Anyone in zone when the dragon spawns will not be allowed to FTE, or assist
4: Forfeit the current spawned dragon if the rules are broken



IB Signing to these rules.


Please quote and sign if you would like to do the test, starting from 6/19 until 6/30 :D

[getsome]

I would like to revisit this thread, specifically to seek commentary by Inglourious Basterds' thoughts on the matter.

Hokushin, I know you and I both agreed on this matter in the past and would like us to reconsider it's mutual benefit to both Class-C guilds and to Class-R.


05-23-2014, 06:09 PM

Unbrella: Let's ranger track this round of VP instead of Jav Spamming. We've talked about it before and seemed to be in agreement that it would be best for all parties. max of 2 ranger trackers and all pullers start at the zone in and race. Easy enough.


We are on the same page. You are putting up a quote that was made a week before i even put up this thread, and after further speculative discussion was had on the matter.

Nice try though (which is also why we latter decided to try going straight through Hoku in our attempt to do away with the autofiring, btw).

[Komodon]

1. Camping players out at doors will only make it a race to see who's computer is faster, not really the point of this test. If we are camping at doors, then #3 is pointless. By not passing first bridge, this gives all dragons equal opportunities. Rather than policing how many people are at each door, there is only 1 spot that needs to be watched.

Again, the problem with not simply camping at the door is that we don't want to turn it into a constant petition quest over every little issue that will undoubtfully arise in a mad dash up that sees multiple mobs getting trained around. Plus it enters the need to both position and run yet another full time fraps guy.


Since you are the larger guild, you could easily just camp 2 pullers at each dragon door and only log in certain ones for that dragon when multiple are in window. IB does not have that luxury, especially since our numbers are low 20's now in VP. We will agree to zone in bridge camping, otherwise it won't be worth wasting our time.

While i understand your surface concern on this, how is that any different then what we are doing now, and would be doing in the event you called off this deal?

Well, other then the fact nobody is going to be autofiring FTEs anymore. That shouldn't be a hangup here.

[Komodon]

*sigh*

Again, that's an old quote Getsome. Unbrella and you throwing around ideas in general theory on the need to get rid of spam clicking in VP wasn't what you are trying to portray it as here. Further debate, official posts, and conversations were had after-the-fact.

In fact, other then the attempt to pull a VP rotation for yourself out of this, you've already made it pretty clear that the road to getting rid of the spam clicking/autofire wasn't going to go through you.

[getsome]

The quote is from a conversation between Unbrella and Hokushin.

[Ella`Ella]

Maybe we should hold off until my petition on auto-firing and IP expemtion abuses is answered before we go any further with this?

*sigh*

Again, that's an old quote Getsome. Unbrella and you throwing around ideas in general theory on the need to get rid of spam clicking in VP wasn't what you are trying to portray it as here. Further debate, official posts, and conversations were had after-the-fact.

That's between me and Hokushin. TMO leadership doesn't communicate through Getsome.

[Komodon]

The quote is from a conversation between Unbrella and Hokushin.

Ok that makes more sense to me then, although my point on it being a dated conversations still stands.

It really shouldn't have to come down to Unbrella's suggestion that we hold off here. There is zero reason our guilds can't come to an immediate compromise that moves the autofire issue forward, even if it's a simple agreement that we do everything we are doing now anyway except allowing the trackers (whether it be rangers or face trackers) and anybody in the zone to get/secure FTE.

Trying to use autofire use as some sort of negotiating chip is beyond retarded though, so round and round we go i guess.

[Ella`Ella]

To further the point Mazam is trying to reinforce, there is no real concern over where FTE'ers are camped. We'd like to maintain the 2 person limit that we currently have, but making sure that every person is camped at the zone-in is going to be a matter or micro-managing and policing. Yes, TMO may have a larger base membership, but it is a rare occasion that more than 2 dragons in VP are in window at the same time. I believe each guild can afford 4 members for a pull team. I know even TMO couldn't afford to expect a minimum of 12 members (2 camped at each spawn) to be 100% reliable upon the batphone. We both know, as with both our guilds, every FTE and pull comes down to the same dedicated members, and to be honest - our number of those players is relatively on par with the number of players you have that fit that bill. Ultimately, roster numbers would not effect the scenario to the extent that you may currently be considering.

Neither guild in Class-C is in favor of heavy policing/more rules, so we're trying to make this bare-bones simple with only the ambition of ruling out auto-fire and IP exemption abuses. This isn't a personal attack on any particular guild, more a guideline to help steer us away from any occurrences that might arise.

I understand the concern of fastest computer wins, but really, we're never going to be able to tell who has the fastest computer and even in that case, it's not always going to be consistent. There is always going to be some X-factor in whatever rule set we try to employ. And to be honest, I'd rather leave that X-factor to some manner of random chance than abuse/player manipulation.

[Hokushin]

Any rules you want to state before the repops?

1: No pullers camp past entrance bridge, Ranger trackers will be frapsing
2: No more than 1 ranger in zone
3: Anyone in zone when the dragon spawns will not be allowed to FTE, or assist
4: Forfeit the current spawned dragon if the rules are broken


PD is going into window soon, please let us know if you are signing off on your original proposal or not. Your members have came to me with concerns of your ranger not being at the zone in able to fraps the FTE'ers running from bridge.
The solution is simple: Ranger keeps entrance racnar targeted, and bind sights, giving full view to police. It is easier to police just the entrance bridge, than police who or how many are logging in at each door at any given time..

If you cannot agree to the rules you initially offered us, then the FTE race can continue.

[Komodon]

PD is going into window soon, please let us know if you are signing off on your original proposal or not. Your members have came to me with concerns of your ranger not being at the zone in able to fraps the FTE'ers running from bridge.
The solution is simple: Ranger keeps entrance racnar targeted, and bind sights, giving full view to police. It is easier to police just the entrance bridge, than police who or how many are logging in at each door at any given time..

If you cannot agree to the rules you initially offered us, then the FTE race can continue.

The "simple" solution here is to keep doing what we are doing, while "simply" taking autofire out of the equation.

Your way isn't as simple, as we've already seen anytime we didn't have people parked up there. This will just lead to the "petition every kill" type of shit we are trying to avoid, with everybody screaming bloody murder over what happened on the run up and constant calls for the other side to concede.

Just because you feel your way gives *you* (and i stress the you in that btw, since you seem most concerned with how this effects you as an individual player) the best chance to win without autofire, that doesn't make it the right choice for everybody Hoku.

So again:

Trying to use autofire use as some sort of negotiating chip is beyond retarded, so round and round we go i guess.

[wycca]

Despite what some think this would not become a race or bardquest. This would become gatequest in many zones.

Autofire is bad, gatequest/bardquest/anti-small guild quest is worse. The best solution is to remove autofire.

[bktroost]

I hesitate to get involved in this because Sirken continually has posted that there are new changes coming to the raid scene that will make Autofire a non issue, however, there has been claims that changing spawn points will turn it into a IP exemption abuse war.

When we talked about doing the 1/1/1 discussion we talked about the increase of earthquake repops and how FFA encounters would increase training and Trakanon ect. Sirken's response was "training is always illegal and we will throw down some SERIOUS ban hammers."

Since then training has gone down considerably on the raid scene and I think the same will apply to IP exemption abuse. At least that is detectable.