Quote:
Originally Posted by pogs4ever
[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
So we reached out to AG leadership and we got Octaveous 13 minutes later on his mobile out of game because the AG leadership in game was presumably busy bagging dragons. We had already dragged and rezzed when AG offered to send a cleric.
The issue was we had to clear a *second* round of WToV mobs to get a clear shot again at LTK.
Our next target after LTK was Yelinak (we had officers moving coth bots for a smooth transition).
AG admitted that the train was bad and clearly set us back but downplayed that they set us back like 45+ minutes on a quake with several still very good dragons up. AG killed Yelinak in that time frame so he was no longer available to us.
We wanted the concession of LTK + Yelinak. But AG/F gave a LTK and instead of Yelinak - Gozzrem and Telk. Naturally, we declined it.
|
I'm not wanting to get all super-angsty here, but what you said here is very interesting, and feel it merits a level-headed response. Before I get to that though, yes it sucks you got trained, and it sucks even more that we (AG) took a while to get back to you about it. Poor form, on our part, hence going above and beyond in trying to make things right.
However, you're literally saying you wanted to set a new precedent/raid-rule on the fly, one based on missed opportunity.
All raiding guilds have been trained and wiped by other guilds before, but it has never been the policy or agreed-upon precedent to concede OTHER mobs, when an infraction occurs. Requiring this would be extremely murky waters.
For example, you're saying that if it quakes, and Riot trains AG on Dozekar, that Riot then needs to concede... what mob(s) exactly? AG can pick the target(s) that they'd like Riot to concede, in addition to Dozekar? Seeing as AG is capable of moving on to any other major target next, would Riot have to concede all of ToV? Doze + any other Velious target of AG's choosing?
That's just not how it has ever worked before in the raiding scene. The precedent has been set & agreed upon as conceding that mob that you got trained on/at.
AG actually went well above the precedent, *genuinely* trying to make things right, and conceded 3 different targets, not just the one required. This was turned down/scorned, as you stated.
By all means, a new precedent based on "opportunity lost" can indeed be discussed in the UN channel, but again, things like that can't be requested/demanded on the fly, Ultimately it's really murky waters though, and seems really lawyer-questy to me, which is something we're currently putting a lot of effort into trying to move away from, not toward.