New OOA Non-aggression agreement

[Komodon]

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

Noble was downed early this morning, Overseer/Hand no where to be found.

As Unbrella already laid out, our stance at this point is pretty straight forward after last week. If the name of the game here is going to see people doing what they feel is in their own best interests first and foremost, then that's what we are going to do as well. Afterall, we were getting more Noble cycle kills under the old system then we have since and/or would ever have realistically projected to get under a new one.

For the record though, i'd love to hear your answer on the question Deru proposed in the Catt thread earlier. What should be the appropriate punishment for Taken trying to autofire that last noble? Never mind the fact that most of the open-to-reasonable-negotiation voices i run into these days seem to get drowned out by a few select bloodhounds calling the shots for them, and these are the people essentially asking for a "don't be so hardcore" favor here. That Taken was doing it in the first place, before running to sign this agreement after losing out to our spam clicking crew, made us want to sign even less fwiw.

Although i guess now we can extend the autofire issue beyond the "not class R's problem" stance you took with me last time we spoke, and potentially make it a weekly one for everybody. Not just TMO's in VP.

Happy Hunting/Clicking.

[Erati]

This is highly disappointing as it was already explained that

A. The only reason Taken killed the previous OoA was because we were under the impression that someone sniped him after WE left him up in good faith

B. When we killed Overseer an agreement consensus was still no where in sight yet somehow we were suppose to abide by something that had no official rules to abide by...

So now we bring forth something tangible, something other guilds can look to and embrace with real meaning, something that will be enforced as the letter of the law but TMO now refuses to play ball because they are too rustled about 1 Overseer and 1 Hand.

Autofire is not a class R problem, its a SERVER problem, but in all honestly, it gives people a piece of mind because asking someone to slap tab for 16 hours is beyond inhumane...its disgusting.

[Argh]

Could we keep this thread to just signatures/constructive discussion on the agreement rather than conjecture on ooa killings and rnf issues, and continue to use the other thread for everything else?

Also, I'm not sure if you were mentioning the FTE rules you proposed for VP in jest but I certainly would not be opposed to that also extending to Sky for Noble.

[Komodon]

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

Also, I'm not sure if you were mentioning the FTE rules you proposed for VP in jest but I certainly would not be opposed to that also extending to Sky for Noble.

No jest there. I've been pushing to put a dagger in autofire use for months. On every contested raid mob, which would include Noble.

Of course, let's cut through the bs and be honest. Nobody here really seems to care about that kinda stuff unless it's directly effecting them. Which until that day comes, only serves to accommodate the people that are using it.

[Nightbear]

Suggestions to making an amendment to the rules? How can we make this a better system.

[wycca]

Since they can't post here themselves - Omni signs. I got a ss of it, just too lazy to put it up atm.

[Ella`Ella]

The bottom line here in this matter, at least with regard to TMO, is that we're going to continue to treat the Noble, OoA, Hand cycle as fully contested content. I'd like you all to keep in mind that TMO has never broken this agreement in the past and has probably benefited the least from the OoA agreement this far (without complaint, mind you). We've forgone a significant number of Nobles and for the entire month of March we didn't engage a single one. In fact, I believe TMO has only engaged about 5 nobles since the start of the year, for an average of less than 1 a month.

Please note that our decision is not to spite any existing agreement or Class-R as a whole. I have spoken with both Cobblestone and Argh and agree that we would be willing to adhere to GM enforcement of protecting Overseers. However, since there is no such agreement and the past few weeks have been sparked of guilds engaging them for whatever reason, we can only logically conclude that the absence of enforcement is going to continue to cause these overseers to be engaged and we're going to take a cut of the action.

That being said, if the GM's or whichever power-at-be can enforce this, if a protective agreement of Overseers were to come to light (GM Enforced) and Noble went to join the Class-R/Class-C/FFA cycle, I will (without reservation) sign TMO to that extent. Until then, the noble cycle will remain FFA/fully contested to us. We came to this measure after the third incident executed by other guilds. We are not placing blame on any of the offending guilds for their actions, nor considering our measure 'a consequence of their actions', however, this is more us reacting to a current 'state of the pixels'.

I understand the language of this Non-Aggression agreement, however it doesn't seem very robust. What I mean is that, by the terms set forward, if I were to sign TMO's name to this and we did break the OoA agreement, we would be punished. However, if I refuse to sign our name to it and then go on to kill the OoA's, there would be no penalty. I would rather abide by the agreement in good faith and reserve the latitude to engage the OoA's if I felt necessary and not fall subject to disciplinary action, than sign our name to it and forgo that same notion.

If you're unable to see the forest through the trees in this post, please default to my TL;DR below.

TL;DR - Unless GM's enforce protection (which we'll support and abide by, but won't urge them to do) and put noble on the same cycle as other raid targets, TMO will continue to treat Noble, OoA and HoV as fully contested FFA mobs.

[Ella`Ella]

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

For the record though, i'd love to hear your answer on the question Deru proposed in the Catt thread earlier. What should be the appropriate punishment for Taken trying to autofire that last noble?

Happy Hunting/Clicking.

The use of auto-fire destroys the integrity of the game. If Class-C and Class-R were cross pollinating the way they used to on the server, I know we'd hear a lot more cries over its abuse. This is an epidemic that we have the power to stop. Although the Class-R doesn't see the immediate effect on their own class of raiding, it's only a matter of time before it starts to grief you (e.g. when Lord Bob or GT start using it to FTE mobs during your rotation). We have an opportunity to end this now and indefinitely by implement a simple rule - You can park two FTE toons wherever you want (this eliminates bullshit policing and fraps/petition questing over who was where), you can have a maximum of two trackers tracking the mob and those trackers (nor anyone else in zone) engage that mob when it spawns.

The question here is what should be done about Catherin? In my opinion - absolutely nothing. Catherin helped illuminate an epidemic that is running through both Class-C and Class-R. She was also forthcoming with staff and the way I see it, really helped shine some light on exactly how pervasive this situation is on all sides of the fence (as it was previously perceived to be only native to Class-C). I don't want Catherin's blood, I don't want IB's blood, I don't want the blood of my own that might have used it spilled. I want the integrity of FTE (for whatever that is worth) preserved and enforced. That simple rule stated by both myself and Mazam ensures this measure.

[Derubael]

If everyone were to agree to this, it may ease some of the bad blood we've had recently in the raid scene. Just a thought, and something we'd like to encourage. And for the record, anything you can all agree on is something we will enforce.

In regards to autofire, we are working on a solution to this problem. We hope to get something implemented soon.

[Artaenc]

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

If everyone were to agree to this, it may ease some of the bad blood we've had recently in the raid scene. Just a thought, and something we'd like to encourage. And for the record, anything you can all agree on is something we will enforce.

In regards to autofire, we are working on a solution to this problem. We hope to get something implemented soon.

Will you be banning people that used it in the past? To make it fair I'd like to use it if it is currently not punishable to even the grounds on FTE while you're working on the solution.