Stalling on engages

[arsenalpow]

Here's what the raid policy states

Originally Posted by Raid Policy - Play Nice Policy

Invulnerability spells used on engagement may only be for mechanic strategies, and may not be used to stall engagement.

So the whole point of this is to prevent stall tanking right? What about the new escalation of tactics where the two "trackers' are face tracking characters armed with discs and soulfires?

Inny popped, TMO's two monks popped up, 1 took the DT, the other stalled long enough with whirlwind+soulfires until the cavalry arrived and burnt the god down. Wouldn't this be a violation or at least a bending of the rules? The whole point is this is supposed to be a race and it's not really a race with these escalation of tactics.

Would like a staff response please.

[arsenalpow]

Have received 3 TMO private messages so far defending their actions. I don't care who had the first FTE or who got charmed thus preserving their life or if IB used discs and soulfires too. Having a bunch of non trackers in zone watching for a mob spawn while FD so everyone can blow discs and soulfires removes all of the race component. It's stalling. It's why DA idols are only to be used for positioning.

Admin response desired.

[Yaolin]

Every mob should either be pulled to a raid or a full raid engage, shouldn't really matter if you are stalling with DA Idol, Disc, or Soulfires, stalling is stalling.

Shouldn't be able to park a pet on a spawn point either, but pixels get people really really hard on this server.

Pixels > Fun/Skills

The shinier you are the better you are, I have never heard anyone say "Hey bro, look at how hard I out auto-attacked you!"

One EQ Server in 2000 was only meant to have MAYBE 5% of the LvL 60s we have on this server currently. All fun and skill has been removed from end-game competitive raiding and as long as people believe that raid mobs can only be up for a matter of minutes then shit will probably stay this way.

If it isn't monks using Whirlwind and soulfires it will be something else down the line because the only thing that matters is the W, not how you actually achieved it.

24/7 or die!

[Derubael]

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

Lets get a Rogean (not Sirken/Deru anti-casual bias) ruling on what he meant by stall tanking and the intent of the rules, then. Is all we're asking.

You guys need to stop calling for the CSR staff every-time you can't work something out on your own. We implemented a number of rules to curb poopsocking and try to give guilds like BDA, Taken, AG, more of a chance to hit FFA targets. But instead of curbing poopsocking, everyone just socks at the entrances now. It's clearly a failed experiment, but at least for now it's being left in.

Rogean in particular is extremely busy doing code work for both servers. Every time you guys want a rule change he has to pull the senior staff into Skype and we have to talk about whatever that change is, sometimes for hours. It takes time, it takes energy, and when it's something you guys are capable of working around on your own, that needs to happen. We've already spent countless hours on this trying to make things better for everyone, but it's just never going to be enough. Somewhere the line has to be drawn - the raid community on this server is a small - albeit important - percentage of the server. Let's try to figure things out like adults without needing to ask the staff to make our decisions for us.

Furthermore, you don't get to pick your GM's. There's a reason why Rogean has Sirken and myself. It's so he doesn't have to deal with front line CSR, raid disputes, et al. His time is much better spent doing the work that he's doing right now, as it impacts everyone's play experience.

For reference, here's the new raid policy regarding disputes (and, by extension, player rule changes). We tried to stress this at the meetings we had back in January, but apparently everyone (and I'm not singling out either class here - both sides are guilty of this) thought we were just kidding, so I wrote this up for clarification:

Originally Posted by Derubael clarifying the Project 1999 player dispute policy

We are moving to a system where raid disputes are player adjudicated and resolved. If there is a dispute involving two or more parties in which a rule has been broken, bringing that dispute to the GM's is a last resort, after all other options have been explored. We greatly encourage players involved in disputes to work with each other to find their own solutions to situations that arise during raids, and reaching a compromise that will almost always be preferable to GM intervention. Obviously this is not a new notion by any means - but from here on out it will be the regular procedure for handling a dispute, as opposed to the exception.

In the past, the go-to solution for a raid dispute was to put in a petition and let the staff decide what to do. We feel there are few, if any, situations that cannot be resolved through cooperation and compromise. If a dispute needs to be brought to a GM, it is very likely both sides will walk away unhappy with the result. It is therefore in all parties best interest to work together to come to their own resolution.

This change will largely affect Class C guilds, as Class R guilds have their own prearranged agreement as to how Class R spawns should be handled that is conducive to an environment that produces fewer disputes. This system, however, is not class exclusive, and if one or more groups are involved in a dispute, we expect the situation to be handled in a similar fashion regardless of class affiliation.

From this point forward we expect players to exhaust every possible option to reach an agreement during a dispute before involving the staff. We do not believe this to be an unreasonable request, as everyone here has the knowledge, capacity, and understanding to be able to work out these problems on their own.

We are confident this will provide less staff intervention, more cooperation between competing guilds, and an overall better raid scene for everyone. We look forward to an exciting and fun year of raiding across Antonica, Kunark, and Velious!

Basically this means it's time for you guys to start working out your own problems, no matter how difficult that may be. And again, I'm not saying anyone hasn't been trying here - but from this point forward everyone is going to try harder. This means both sides - all guilds - work hard to try and communicate with each other, schedule meetings, and be available for discussions. It means putting aside your differences, both game related and out of game, holding hands, and hugging it out (just kidding, but you get the point). As I stated before, this is not an unreasonable request. Everyone is fully capable of doing this on their own without the need for CSR intervention.

In the meantime, the rules state invulnerability items specifically, and while I agree that realistically Soulfire's should only be clickable by paladins, that isn't classic and I don't see it getting changed anytime soon. In the meantime, everyone can employ the face tracking tactics being used, and this should be easier to accomplish with the reduced variance windows (IE, you don't have to track for +/-48 hrs plus extended variance).

The CSR staff does not need to take out more time to set more rules that will only increase our work-load, both in their implementation and planning, and their enforcement. We are already swamped enough as it is. What we need is for everyone to come together and start cooperating with each other. Good luck, and I have 100% confidence that every possible option and avenue of discussion will be exhausted before any more disputes or rule changes get elevated beyond the senior ranking officers among the player guilds on this server.

We're giving you guys the power to make your own enjoyable raid scene, with less headaches for us and more fun for you. Let's make that happen.

[Ella`Ella]

Since we still have no resolution (25 days later) on IB vs TMO, case number 212205, can we move to summary judgement that Class-C guilds will not longer be subject to CSR support and we can act accordingly?

[Derubael]

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

Since we still have no resolution (25 days later) on IB vs TMO, case number 212205, can we move to summary judgement that Class-C guilds will not longer be subject to CSR support and we can act accordingly?

No, this is going to get dealt with.

[arsenalpow]

Derub can you not cherry pick an RnF comment to make a point. I posted in the raid discussion to get a response this allowing anyone else to comment as needed. We can attempt to work this out but nothing in RnF could ever lead to a productive result.

[Ella`Ella]

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

Derub can you not cherry pick an RnF comment to make a point. I posted in the raid discussion to get a response this allowing anyone else to comment as needed. We can attempt to work this out but nothing in RnF could ever lead to a productive result.

Your question was answered in his above post. Consider who have you spoken to in the other guilds to try and get a better understanding of what is going on or who have you approached to maaaaaybe ask if we'd/they'd consider alternative tactics if you feel slighted by this one. Might be more effective than coming straight to the raid discussion forum every other FFA encounter.

[arsenalpow]

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

Your question was answered in his above post. Consider who have you spoken to in the other guilds to try and get a better understanding of what is going on or who have you approached to maaaaaybe ask if we'd/they'd consider alternative tactics if you feel slighted by this one. Might be more effective than coming straight to the raid discussion forum every other FFA encounter.

Hyperbole, whee!

I have yet to engage about these escalation of tactics so that's why I'm bringing it up. As a representative of your respective guild I assume your position is that your tactics were completely plausible, at least I'm gleaning this position based on how you seem to be approaching the conversation.

So pretty please with sugar on top can we stop putting two fucking people on every fucking spawn point?

[phiren]

The name of this board is called "Raid Discussion". I think the Raid Discussion is a fine place to bring up issues for discussion.. on raiding. Without this post, I wouldn't have known what the issue is ... and this is something *EVERY* guild needs to agree on... otherwise it won't work.

If ONE guild doesn't want to change tactics, it makes no sense. I know exactly why TMO does things the way they do -- and I don't blame them at all. Why would TMO want to change their ways and give someone else an advantage?

Why would TMO not use whirlwind/Soulfire if IB / BDA use it?

Unfortunately -- if these aren't eventually GM written -- they also hold no weight.

Let's say all ~12 guilds agree that Whirlwind+Soulfire = stalling.
Let's' say the next week, one of those guilds uses Whirlwind+Soulfire on the Inny pull.

Now what do we do? Ask the 1 guild to please hand over the loot... OR ELSE? Ask them nicely to please don't do it again?

I'm sorry -- but the only way is to have the GMs involved. Guilds will never agree to better/cleaner raiding tactics and actually follow them unless there are ACTUAL penalties involved.

I would love it if we could enforce player rules... "If TMO Whirlwinds+Soulfires Inny again, all the other guilds will stop porting them, buffing them, and selling them items in the EC Tunnel". And good luck finding a group !!!!!!!!!!!! oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo? [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

~Phiren
Azure Guard