#81
|
|||
|
there's also a material difference between, say training the other guild pulling mobs over the aary stairs in the hall, vs. the train incubo dumped on kwsm at the west exit.
one is just a consequence of the competitive atmosphere, and should be handled exactly as you have described. The other wasn't really a raid-related mistake made in the heat of the moment, and should not be treated the same way. It's like in football - personal fowl during play? 15 yards. Personal fowl after the play / on the side lines? ejected from the game. You need to look at this more critically than just "train = the same in all situations." | ||
|
#82
|
||||
|
Quote:
Assume as in your example that Riot trains AG at Doze then concedes Doze. While AG recovers, Riot goes on to knock off a couple NToV dragons and then as AG prepares to killed Doze for the second time Riot trains them again "accidentally". By apparently established precedent Riot should now concede Doze twice in a row? By the time AG has recovered even more high priority targets are dead. Can Riot train AG at the same mob over and over again, assuming "accidental" and by the rules as you've outlined them only fairly be expected to concede that one mob abet multiple spawns of it? Thinking about it in this manner more accurately describes the situation at hand. Kittens were in west and had been there for quite a bit clearing for LTK. This was known. Assuming the train was intentionally designed to set them back, is concession of that one mob and two far less valuable targets the appropriate penalty especially when AG had very little interest in those targets conceded? If Kittens knowns TSS is preparing to move from Velk to LTK, a target they too desire, can they "accidentally" train them at Velk and offer concession of Velk and Lord Bob as apporpriate recompense, AFTER Kittens has gone on to kill LTK? | |||
Last edited by Duckwalk; 10-27-2020 at 06:23 PM..
Reason: coherence
|
|
#83
|
||||
|
Quote:
But yes I do imagine the Hydra bank became the Aegis bank since it was essentially the same alliance in the same Sky slot with one less member. Fun times. | |||
|
#84
|
||||
|
Quote:
| |||
|
#85
|
||||
|
Quote:
| |||
|
#86
|
|||
|
Right, and from what I remember the video was very convienently cut right at that moment seeming to indicate there was more discussion on the matter let out of the video.
Maybe thats just paranoia but prior immediate history between Kittens and AG would lend to the notion that the extremely reckless at best actions of Incubo were potentially far most malicious, especially considering the circumstances and competition for similar mobs during an EQ. | ||
|
#87
|
||||
|
Quote:
__________________
Zigzagwanderer
Zigzagdreams | |||
|
#88
|
|||
|
From what I've seen in the UN channel, Freedom has been proven to not get as many targets as KWSM but wants to continually use bully tactics (Dogpiling, veiled threats, etc.) to keep them from joining in the discussion. It's disturbing that this behavior is playing out not only in the UN but in RNF as well with no oversight from GMs and nothing from AG leadership calling it out. If they wanted to actually curb toxicity it's playing out right in front of them. I'm hoping that the wheels of justice turn slow, and the GMs are monitoring RNF as well as the UN.
| ||
|
#89
|
||||
|
Quote:
1. Why is AG leadership responsible for what Freedom does? 2. There has been response from the GM's. They told Kittens that this new agreement had to be made by AG/F/R. As had been originally banned and asked to come up with an agreement between them to reduce the petition quest. Why does kittens think they are part of that? | |||
|
#90
|
|||||
|
Quote:
Quote:
| ||||
|
|
|