Raid Suspension: Azure Guard

[arsenalpow]

Originally Posted by Powtle [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

What I don't get is why an FTE KS is not an automatic ban and this lockout infraction is automatic?

That's an entirely different conversation. Let's not talk that in this thread.

[Powtle]

I don't see how it's offtopic. AG should not be banned if no R-guild complained, that's pretty simple.

[Derubael]

There are two reasons why the lockout system specifically needs to be enforced regardless of whether or not the other guilds in Class R would like to waive a petition:

1) Class R, being the "entry class" by its very nature has no limit to the number of potential participants on each target. By that I mean RandomnewguildX decides they want to kill a Trakanon - they are most likely going to go after a Class R Trak. Was <Insert New Guild Name Here> sitting outside the entrance to Seb getting ready to mobilize on Trakanon while AG and Europa engaged? No, probably not, but they could have been mobilizing somewhere, and there's no way to know what would have happened if Europa had needed to tag that dragon alone. We need to keep the Class itself open to the entire server when it comes to killing Class R mobs.

2) The lockout system is in place specifically because being in Class R is supposed to put you at a disadvantage - Class Restricted - we had really wanted to encourage some class mobility (even though we knew this would probably never happen) and clearly make "the more difficult class" the "more profitable class" due to its competitive and challenging nature. We had briefly considered making lockout violations something that could be waived if the other guilds agreed but quickly decided against it. That would quickly dissolve the lockout system entirely once everyone started making agreements with each other over who gets what, and then the entire system becomes less accessible for new guilds and removes a large part of the motivation for moving to Class C.

That is why the lockout system specifically gets enforced and can't be waived. In regards to the board being down/malfunctioning, AG could have easily checked with the staff before or even after the kill if they were worried that maybe they were crossing a lockout. I would rather have a guild come ask us how many times mob X has been killed since their lockout started when the board is down than to have them kill targets they aren't supposed to be killing.

[arsenalpow]

Originally Posted by Derubael [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

There are two reasons why the lockout system specifically needs to be enforced regardless of whether or not the other guilds in Class R would like to waive a petition:

1) Class R, being the "entry class" by its very nature has no limit to the number of potential participants on each target. By that I mean RandomnewguildX decides they want to kill a Trakanon - they are most likely going to go after a Class R Trak. Was <Insert New Guild Name Here> sitting outside the entrance to Seb getting ready to mobilize on Trakanon while AG and Europa engaged? No, probably not, but they could have been mobilizing somewhere, and there's no way to know what would have happened if Europa had needed to tag that dragon alone. We need to keep the Class itself open to the entire server when it comes to killing Class R mobs.

2) The lockout system is in place specifically because being in Class R is supposed to put you at a disadvantage - Class Restricted - we had really wanted to encourage some class mobility (even though we knew this would probably never happen) and clearly make "the more difficult class" the "more profitable class" due to its competitive and challenging nature. We had briefly considered making lockout violations something that could be waived if the other guilds agreed but quickly decided against it. That would quickly dissolve the lockout system entirely once everyone started making agreements with each other over who gets what, and then the entire system becomes less accessible for new guilds and removes a large part of the motivation for moving to Class C.

That is why the lockout system specifically gets enforced and can't be waived. In regards to the board being down/malfunctioning, AG could have easily checked with the staff before or even after the kill if they were worried that maybe they were crossing a lockout. I would rather have a guild come ask us how many times mob X has been killed since their lockout started when the board is down than to have them kill targets they aren't supposed to be killing.

I don't think contacting the staff is an option with a time sensitive scenario like this. You've both been pretty MIA lately, and it is what it is, but when the system to let you know if a lockout is active or not is malfunctioning there isn't another way to figure it out.

[bktroost]

Azure Guard understands the situation and the implication of redacting a sentence just because the rest of class R agrees to it. That sets a precedence that can easily be manipulated. We thank you for the short longevity of the sentence and realize that it is indeed possible for us to have figured out how often Trakanon popped had we the time to do so. I was out of town and usually handle inter-guild politics. When the request came to ally I quickly checked the raid page and replied with a "sure thing, we'll be there for you." We certainly didn't try to gain the system or manipulate anything in any way. This is us apologizing for not being better stewards of our resources.

Thank you Chest for arguing Class R and Class C raid scene policy discrepancies, but as Deru stated, the server staff favor the Class C guilds and permit them certain privileges we do not have as a reward for being the more competitive class. This is new information for us as a group and we'll have to consider this in the future when disputes arise.

[Funkutron5000]

I just want to say Kudos to AG for taking this with grace. It's rare that a guild gets slapped (with a pretty lame suspension, IMHO) and takes it on the chin without bitching. Tip of the cap, boys and girls. It's also pretty cool to see the Class R guilds rally around and try to fight it. The cooperation between you all is both respectable and admirable.

But, like Sirks and Deru said, if the rules are there for a reason and if they don't enforce them, the whole thing falls apart rather quickly.

[Derubael]

Originally Posted by bktroost [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

the server staff favor the Class C guilds and permit them certain privileges we do not have as a reward for being the more competitive class. This is new information for us as a group and we'll have to consider this in the future when disputes arise.

I think you misunderstood, or I'm misunderstanding your message here. The only privilege Class C is awarded is no lockouts. Other than that the two Classes are largely the same. The lockout mechanic is what differentiates and defines the two classes, and we don't want the option to waive that mechanic to be available for the reasons stated above.

[arsenalpow]

Originally Posted by Funkutron5000 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I just want to say Kudos to AG for taking this with grace. It's rare that a guild gets slapped (with a pretty lame suspension, IMHO) and takes it on the chin without bitching. Tip of the cap, boys and girls. It's also pretty cool to see the Class R guilds rally around and try to fight it. The cooperation between you all is both respectable and admirable.

But, like Sirks and Deru said, if the rules are there for a reason and if they don't enforce them, the whole thing falls apart rather quickly.

Well technically their logic is flawed. It's a slippery slope fallacy. No one disagreed that a rule was broken, what I'm arguing is that mitigating circumstances need to be taken into account. Everyone seems to agree that it's a pretty poor use of the disciplinary system considering the factors involved. A-Team was briefly suspended and the mitigating circumstances were used to waive the suspension.

Common sense needs to be the barometer here. Intent means something. The black and white letter of the law shit needs to stop. Black and white is fine for settling FTE disputes but this is an entirely different situation. The intent wasn't malicious and the system in place to determine lockouts was down. Yes, Rogean said "know if you're locked out" but outside of the raid policy page what means did AG have of determining their ability to engage Trak? They could have asked a staff member but with something that time sensitive it seems unlikely that a response would have been received in time.

[arsenalpow]

Originally Posted by Derubael [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I think you misunderstood, or I'm misunderstanding your message here. The only privilege Class C is awarded is no lockouts. Other than that the two Classes are largely the same. The lockout mechanic is what differentiates and defines the two classes, and we don't want the option to waive that mechanic to be available for the reasons stated above.

Again, we aren't attempting to waive the mechanic to circumvent the system entirely, we want to waive this incident due to the extenuating circumstances that have been discussed ad nauseam.

[bktroost]

Originally Posted by Derubael [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I think you misunderstood, or I'm misunderstanding your message here. The only privilege Class C is awarded is no lockouts. Other than that the two Classes are largely the same. The lockout mechanic is what differentiates and defines the two classes, and we don't want the option to waive that mechanic to be available for the reasons stated above.

I am referring to the advantage of being considered a competitive class and how that innately has an standard for entry. That standard provides them with an additional ability in raid disputes. As stated on the forums by yourself and Sirken in disputes past, guilds are encouraged to come to an equitable solution for all parties before involving GM staff.

I am personally unconvinced that class R should not have some form of standard for qualification-- there are any number of guilds that are incapable of killing Trak, Gore, or even Fayd-- but they are considered class R guilds by default. As you have already said, due to our nature that still means they would have to agree even if they are not physically present. I understand the dilemma, the cause for it and your reasoning behind your decision to allow this privilege to Class C. My comment was not intended to be a rhetorical attack by any means. Its just the way it is with our current set up.