And I raaaaaan, I raaaan so far awaaaayyyy

[Tasslehofp99]

Originally Posted by Splorf22 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

The question is whether its better to have simple, well-defined rules which are sometimes unfair or to have flexible, more ambiguous rules that attempt to cover more situations correctly. It seems that FE was basically trying to exploit the FTE rules, this offended you, and so you awarded the loot to TMO. I agree that one guild charging a raid mob with another guy sneaking in and trying to FTE snipe is silly. But when you break your own rules you lose credibility.

What this should tell you is that you need to fix the system. There are lots of ways, for example: after a person from guild x gets FTE, the mob enters in to a 'guild seek and destroy mode' where players from other guilds cannot damage the mob or enter its hate list for ~20 seconds. This gives the non-FTE guild time to back off and let the sniper wipe. Or you could ditch FTE and add up damage by guild.

The point is you need something consistent without too much potential for exploitation.

This.

[doraf]

OK, this thread is boring again. I got the GPS coordinates for Altari's mom and anybody needs them! Let's keep a good woman happy. [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

[Diggles]

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

OK, this thread is boring again. I got the GPS coordinates for Altari's mom and anybody needs them! Let's keep a good woman happy. [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

who is altari?????

[doraf]

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

who is altari?????

Alarti. "and" also = "if" if we're correcting my posts.

[Tasslehofp99]

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

Alarti. "and" also = "if" if we're correcting my posts.

God doraf, post your rants and flames with precise grammatical acuity or gtfo. [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

[radditsu]

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

But enough of the de-rail... So the new rule is, have fte and be sure to run your 4 or 5 men to the mob and braveheart it? Clarification humbly requested .

[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

This is my face on every engage from now on.

[Karafa]

Alarti talking about exciting a woman, yet his RL photo on the TMO threads from back in the day is beyond embarrassing

[Hailto]

So it only took a few weeks before FE and TMO started to shit all over eachother. I gotta hand it to you guys though i thought it would take less time before we started to see threads like this.

[Alarti0001]

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

Alarti talking about exciting a woman, yet his RL photo on the TMO threads from back in the day is beyond embarrassing

LOL oh really?

[Paumad]

Originally Posted by Splorf22 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

The question is whether its better to have simple, well-defined rules which are sometimes unfair or to have flexible, more ambiguous rules that attempt to cover more situations correctly. It seems that FE was basically trying to exploit the FTE rules, this offended you, and so you awarded the loot to TMO. I agree that one guild charging a raid mob with another guy sneaking in and trying to FTE snipe is silly. But when you break your own rules you lose credibility.

What this should tell you is that you need to fix the system. There are lots of ways, for example: after a person from guild x gets FTE, the mob enters in to a 'guild seek and destroy mode' where players from other guilds cannot damage the mob or enter its hate list for ~20 seconds. This gives the non-FTE guild time to back off and let the sniper wipe. Or you could ditch FTE and add up damage by guild.

The point is you need something consistent without too much potential for exploitation.

I pretty much agree Loraen. But the FTE rule was never implemented to let a couple people snipe an encounter. The latter is a loophole exploited by players, not a GM misinterpretation, hence the case by case ruling needed sadly. I always understood the FTE thing with a tacit "must at least attempt at killing the target" part. The snipes are just rule lawyering, and you'll always have that as long as you have rules and competing guilds I'm afraid.
I'm all for clearer rules,as you are, but I think GM rulings will always be necessary, especially when they're present at said encounters.