Raid Rule Madness

[Detoxx]

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

and if you insist that TMO is not telling the truth, i'd say that you're probably right, and that Taken was never in danger of wiping to begin with.

Wow, you are pretty dense. It does not matter if they were wiping. Period.

[Samoht]

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

Wow, you are pretty dense. It does not matter if they were wiping. Period.

you're right because no rules were broken.

[Fael]

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

you're right because no rules were broken.

Raid rules say that guilds may only have 2 representatives at a spawn. The Additional Raid rules FAQ defines a "Raid" as any group of players unite in the common goal of killing a particular mob at a particular time.

There is no question that here BDA unilaterally united with Taken in their goal of killing naggy. So, the raid rules would consider them a raid.

Whether or not you broke the rules depends upon whether or not the 2 tracker limit applies to Raids. GM's apparently have said so in the past (FE/IB). It makes complete sense that it would apply in cases like this. BDA's punishment was fair. But as others have said here, I think its not fair at all the BDA would be reprimanded in an incident like that, yet GM's look the other way after blatant disruption here by Catherine, fresh out of her suspension for auto fire.

[Locust]

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

I think its not fair at all the BDA would be reprimanded in an incident like that, yet GM's look the other way after blatant disruption here by Catherine, fresh out of her suspension for auto fire.

nailed it

[Samoht]

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

Raid rules say that guilds may only have 2 representatives at a spawn.

do you admit that this rule was not broken? y/n?

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

The Additional Raid rules FAQ defines a "Raid" as any group of players unite in the common goal of killing a particular mob at a particular time.

that's nice.

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

There is no question that here BDA unilaterally united with Taken in their goal of killing naggy. So, the raid rules would consider them a raid.

this is where your logic falls apart. you simply assume that it was BDAs goal to unite with Taken. there's nothing to prove your claim. how do you know that it wasn't simply their goal to punch the mob that they had just spent 16 hours socking independent of the success of Taken? at that point, it's not a joint raid, it's a Taken raid (the one that had FTE) and a BDA raid that had conceded the mob to Taken and decided to just have a little fun at the end. and then TMO cried.

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

Whether or not you broke the rules depends upon whether or not the 2 tracker limit applies to Raids.

who cares, it was two separate guilds and it was two separate raids.

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

GM's apparently have said so in the past (FE/IB).

who cares about this, either. FE and IB were clearly an alliance that split their loot. there was no split in the loot between taken and BDA because they're not an alliance and weren't working together.

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

It makes complete sense that it would apply in cases like this.

only if it fits the TMO agenda, amirite?

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

BDA's punishment was fair.

no it's not, it was unfounded and needs to be overturned and any rule against hitting another raids target without disrupting their raid needs to be fixed before velious comes out because people will be tagging tormax/dain/yelinak kills for faction.

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

But as others have said here, I think its not fair at all the BDA would be reprimanded in an incident like that

lol, fake sympathy.

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

yet GM's look the other way after blatant disruption here by Catherine

only truthful thing in your post

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

fresh out of her suspension for auto fire.

and then you go back to posting dumb shit

[Man0warr]

Raid rules say that guilds may only have 2 representatives at a spawn. The Additional Raid rules FAQ defines a "Raid" as any group of players unite in the common goal of killing a particular mob at a particular time.

There is no question that here BDA unilaterally united with Taken in their goal of killing naggy. So, the raid rules would consider them a raid.

BDA understands this rule, so if we were CLEARLY going to team up with Taken - why would we break it by having 4 trackers there? This completely invalidates your argument.

If BDA wasn't working with Taken at the tracking stage, then how is it illegal to have our own trackers?

[Hitpoint]

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

do you admit that this rule was not broken? y/n?

No. It absolutely was broken. Navir was your mage and Taken had a warrior and cleric on spawn. That's 3 people.


this is where your logic falls apart. you simply assume that it was BDAs goal to unite with Taken. there's nothing to prove your claim. how do you know that it wasn't simply their goal to punch the mob that they had just spent 16 hours socking independent of the success of Taken? at that point, it's not a joint raid, it's a Taken raid (the one that had FTE) and a BDA raid that had conceded the mob to Taken and decided to just have a little fun at the end. and then TMO cried.

It doesn't matter what their goal was. However lets be honest, we all know you wanted to make sure class C didn't kill Naggy. Not that it matters, we weren't even mad about that.

What you, and many others fail to understand is that many raid disputes are more about setting a precedent than just getting a free mob here or there. The loot off this naggy was trash, and nobody cared that we lost the kill. The bigger issue was that IF we had let this slide, Taken/BDA could engage with as many trackers as they wanted to make sure mobs stay between them. This was back when trackers could FTE mobs. So Taken could have a warrior and a cleric, and BDA could have a warrior and a cleric and they could engage, hold FTE safely, and kill the dragon together with no chance at wiping. That's a tremendous advantage, not just over class C, but over any other guild competing. That's why this couldn't be allowed to slide.

who cares, it was two separate guilds and it was two separate raids.

It was two seperate guilds, but one FTE and one engage. Thus it's one raid.

who cares about this, either. FE and IB were clearly an alliance that split their loot. there was no split in the loot between taken and BDA because they're not an alliance and weren't working together.

FE/IB did not always split their loot actually. Many times all the loot from a kill would go to one guild or the other.


only if it fits the TMO agenda, amirite?

Sure


no it's not, it was unfounded and needs to be overturned and any rule against hitting another raids target without disrupting their raid needs to be fixed before velious comes out because people will be tagging tormax/dain/yelinak kills for faction.

I do think that this very mild punishment is more or less fair. I can see how this rule could be overlooked, class C didn't even notice that a rule had been broken at first. It was almost completely overlooked by us too. You did the same thing on a Vox a few weeks before that we didn't even think of challenging. Too bad about the statute of limitations right?

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

Where did all the fraps of the naggy incident go? Why destroy the evidence if you could prove taken was wiping? Did any taken admit they would wipe if BDA had not interfered with their Naggy?

I assume most of them have been deleted because they are huge files which take up a lot of space, and generally they are deleted immediately when we don't need them. I deleted mine probably 15 minutes later, before we even realized a rule had been broken. We didn't need them here, and still don't.

You guys keep bringing up tagging for faction, or just running in and hitting a mob that is about to die. However, encounter logs show how much damage and hate was done to a mob, per person, in addition to how long they are on the encounter log. So if you had just run in to tag for faction, like you guys keep repeating for some reason, then the GMs would be able to tell. However that's not the conclusion that they came up with. You engaged and killed Nagafen when a significant amount of his health was still remaining, and did a significant amount of threat and damage.

[Samoht]

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

Navir was your mage

i always knew navir was a troll, and i always thought that when he left BDA, he'd join omni, but he joined taken instead? guess i need to get up to date.

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

Not that it matters, we weren't even mad about that.

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

The loot off this naggy was trash, and nobody cared that we lost the kill.

you guys sure did cry a lot on this one for people who didn't care...

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

we all know you wanted to make sure class C didn't kill Naggy.

dumb assumptions

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

The bigger issue was that IF we had let this slide, Taken/BDA could engage with as many trackers as they wanted to make sure mobs stay between them.

dumber assumptions. we all know that TMO is the scum of the server and that Taken gives them a close race. why would anybody choose to work with either guild?

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

So Taken could have a warrior and a cleric, and BDA could have a warrior and a cleric and they could engage, hold FTE safely, and kill the dragon together with no chance at wiping. That's a tremendous advantage, not just over class C, but over any other guild competing. That's why this couldn't be allowed to slide.

just because TMO has tried to do this twice with their alts/feeder guilds doesn't mean the rest of the server has the same hard-on for denying pixels to other players that htey do.

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

It was two seperate guilds

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

Thus it's one raid.

these two guilds are not in an alliance and you said so yourself that they weren't working together. you're just trying to bend facts to fit your agenda.

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

but one FTE and one engage.

and only one guild got loot. so it was clearly not a joint raid.

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

FE/IB did not always split their loot actually. Many times all the loot from a kill would go to one guild or the other.

nobody gives a fuck if class C guilds are abusing their relationships. go bitch about this somewhere else.

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

I do think that this very mild punishment is more or less fair.

TMO would want to punish people for having fun.

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

I can see how this rule could be overlooked

because it's not a rule.

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

class C didn't even notice that a rule had been broken at first. It was almost completely overlooked by us too.

and then in stepped dumbrella, a young lawyer.

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

You did the same thing on a Vox a few weeks before that we didn't even think of challenging. Too bad about the statute of limitations right?

what the fuck are you talking about? i don't think i've ever done a vox raid on this server. dragons raids here are too much of a clusterfuck thanks to TMO.

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

I assume most of them have been deleted because they are huge files which take up a lot of space, and generally they are deleted immediately when we don't need them.

or when they prove that you're lying.

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

You guys keep bringing up tagging for faction, or just running in and hitting a mob that is about to die. However, encounter logs show how much damage and hate was done to a mob, per person, in addition to how long they are on the encounter log. So if you had just run in to tag for faction, like you guys keep repeating for some reason, then the GMs would be able to tell

nobody said that they tagged naggy for faction. they said that they killed it for the hell of it. it's YOUR stance that they assisted explicitly to deny TMOs right to pixels.

what i keep bringing up is how bad of a precedent you're trying to set. it's going to cause serious issues in velious if TMO wants it to be considered a joint raid force just for jumping in at the end of a kill that's already been secured. people will be doing it all the time on tormax/dain/yelinak. it's classic and definitely deserves to be allowed on this server.

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

However that's not the conclusion that they came up with.

no it's not. but that didn't stop dumbrella from bitching and moaning until he got his way.

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

You engaged and killed Nagafen when a significant amount of his health was still remaining, and did a significant amount of threat and damage.

how is this even pertinent? it's not like they tried to KS or make any kind of claim to the loot.

[Detoxx]

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

needs to be overturned and any rule against hitting another raids target without disrupting their raid needs to be fixed before velious comes out because people will be tagging tormax/dain/yelinak kills for faction

Crazy idea, since this is the 145th time you brought it up, you can simply tag someone with a spell, see invis bracer, crown of rile...etc....so your point is moot

[Samoht]

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

you can simply tag someone with a spell, see invis bracer, crown of rile.

and then get raid banned for being present on the hate list thanks to TMO throwing a fit. fix it now before velious is released.