It's official: Riot is done.

[Twochain]

Originally Posted by dk0 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I'm not up on the discussions (or much of anything tbh), but if this is being considered I'd think it would be pretty well supported. I'm surprised to see it presented like it's a dumb idea here, or is it just because of who it's coming from?

Out of curiosity, what are the arguments in favor of keeping the tracker fte rule?

Tracker FTE is an outdated relic of days gone by. However, a GM wouldn't just be able to say "Tracker FTE concedes are no longer a thing" because than suddenly the Meta is camp your entire raid at targets. So then the change would become wordy, and have a bunch of different stipulations, and ends up being a hassle.

Maybe, If you accidentally FTE a mob, where it would have no obvious benefit to your guild to FTE at that time, you may call accidental and wipe it clean. But already we're operating on good faith.. so it's a little complicated.


Tracker FTE concedes are really fuckin dumb though. Imagine losing a mob for your whole guild because you forgot where your toon was camped out at last week.

[Detoxx]

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

Tracker FTE is an outdated relic of days gone by. However, a GM wouldn't just be able to say "Tracker FTE concedes are no longer a thing" because than suddenly the Meta is camp your entire raid at targets.

Wrong. 2 Tracker limit is still in play. You cant camp a raid at a target if theres a 2 tracker limit.

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

Yes it does.
You're the one who qualified your statement with "current" which opens up the question, which non current member is on staff?
And you still have not answered the question.

Also wrong, please look up false equivalencies.

Originally Posted by dk0 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I'm not up on the discussions (or much of anything tbh), but if this is being considered I'd think it would be pretty well supported. I'm surprised to see it presented like it's a dumb idea here, or is it just because of who it's coming from?

Out of curiosity, what are the arguments in favor of keeping the tracker fte rule?

100% this and also the only ones who have responded are the only ones who arent affected by any tracker FTE type rule so I dont know why they care. Oh wait, please see bold highlight above.

[dk0]

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

Tracker FTE is an outdated relic of days gone by. However, a GM wouldn't just be able to say "Tracker FTE concedes are no longer a thing" because than suddenly the Meta is camp your entire raid at targets. So then the change would become wordy, and have a bunch of different stipulations, and ends up being a hassle.

Maybe, If you accidentally FTE a mob, where it would have no obvious benefit to your guild to FTE at that time, you may call accidental and wipe it clean. But already we're operating on good faith.. so it's a little complicated.


Tracker FTE concedes are really fuckin dumb though. Imagine losing a mob for your whole guild because you forgot where your toon was camped out at last week.

You still have rules that say only 2 past the line, and they can not be part of the engage, right? Still no insta coth engages e.g. for twins?

Completely agreed it's a stupid rule with no relevance today, especially with mages in trips. But I think if you keep the rest of the tracker rules you can get rid of this with no issue and probably don't need to wordsmith much else.

Tracker FTE is already horrible on its own. It mostly means your coth mage is dead so you'll be behind. It frequently means you trained other trackers so you may be conceding anyway. No point in further punishing an action that everybody is already desperately trying to avoid. Calling accidental seems reasonable to me.

I'm sure there's a weird specific situation I'm not thinking of now that would challenge this but I dunno, guess that's why I was asking about why people wanted to keep it, I can't think of any good reason a tracker fte could be beneficial to a guild. I guess something stupid like having your tracker DA and running one of the non rooted dragons away so other teams can't engage lol

[xdrcfrx]

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

Tracker FTE is an outdated relic of days gone by. However, a GM wouldn't just be able to say "Tracker FTE concedes are no longer a thing" because than suddenly the Meta is camp your entire raid at targets. So then the change would become wordy, and have a bunch of different stipulations, and ends up being a hassle.

Maybe, If you accidentally FTE a mob, where it would have no obvious benefit to your guild to FTE at that time, you may call accidental and wipe it clean. But already we're operating on good faith.. so it's a little complicated.


Tracker FTE concedes are really fuckin dumb though. Imagine losing a mob for your whole guild because you forgot where your toon was camped out at last week.

don't forget where your toons are camped out, then. tracker FTE is a good rule because it's a bright line test which is easy to implement and enforce: were you over the race line when the mob spawned, and got FTE? So sad too bad, you must concede. I'm sure that if we blurred that line, we wouldn't start to see frequent Vanq. "accidental" tracker FTE's that interrupt other guilds going for mobs.

Along the same lines, trying to remove the 2 tracker limit is dumb, because it turns any coth required raid (e.g.: a lot of encounters) into a contest of who can park the most mages. Vanq. already using 3 mages at Vulak for several weeks running, i guess it's obvious why you'd want this: because you assess that you'd be able to park more mages and/or counting to 2 is vry hrd.

You mention "good faith" but from where I sit, pretty much no one puts any stock in Vanq. operating in good faith - your leaders and other public facing people frequently demonstrate that you have none. To this point - yes, people are skeptical and/or against the idea because of who proposed it. Detoxx has a long history of being awful, and Vanq. has spent the last year demonstrating repeatedly that it will not operate in good faith.

[Samoht]

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

You mention "good faith" but from where I sit, pretty much no one puts any stock in Vanq. operating in good faith - your leaders and other public facing people frequently demonstrate that you have none. To this point - yes, people are skeptical and/or against the idea because of who proposed it. Detoxx has a long history of being awful, and Vanq. has spent the last year demonstrating repeatedly that it will not operate in good faith.

You must be a KRIOT member because all the shit they post in the UN shows that this is not specific to Vanquish.

Juicebox literally cannot type a post without being passive aggressive.

Arcler is types in lies and circles to get his way.

Why the fuck would you call out Detoxx specifically unless you're sucking Juicebox and Arcler dick?

[xdrcfrx]

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

You must be a KRIOT member because all the shit they post in the UN shows that this is not specific to Vanquish.

Juicebox literally cannot type a post without being passive aggressive.

Arcler is types in lies and circles to get his way.

Why the fuck would you call out Detoxx specifically unless you're sucking Juicebox and Arcler dick?

because, you dullard, it was detoxx that suggested removing the tracker FTE rules in the UN like 3 days ago, and also detoxx who called someone else's idea in this very thread "dumb."

try to keep up.

[Samoht]

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

because, you dullard, it was detoxx that suggested removing the tracker FTE rules in the UN like 3 days ago, and also detoxx who called someone else's idea in this very thread "dumb."

try to keep up.

This is exactly how KRIOT "diplomacy" works. Thank you for demonstrating.

[xdrcfrx]

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

This is exactly how KRIOT "diplomacy" works. Thank you for demonstrating.

I have lots of great conversations with plenty vanq. people. you've earned the scorn, though.

[dk0]

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

don't forget where your toons are camped out, then. tracker FTE is a good rule because it's a bright line test which is easy to implement and enforce: were you over the race line when the mob spawned, and got FTE? So sad too bad, you must concede. I'm sure that if we blurred that line, we wouldn't start to see frequent Vanq. "accidental" tracker FTE's that interrupt other guilds going for mobs.

Along the same lines, trying to remove the 2 tracker limit is dumb, because it turns any coth required raid (e.g.: a lot of encounters) into a contest of who can park the most mages. Vanq. already using 3 mages at Vulak for several weeks running, i guess it's obvious why you'd want this: because you assess that you'd be able to park more mages and/or counting to 2 is vry hrd.

I'm still really curious about this and I'm not sure I'm clear on why you think the rule is a good thing to have. You mention being over the line and getting FTE-- you're allowed to have trackers over the line. What is the perceived benefit of getting tracker FTE? Why would any guild want that?

The only thing I landed on was what you said--intentionally interfering with another guild's engage. But that's pretty nonsensical and trivial to handle. FTE from a tracker lasts all of half a second while a mage gets one-shotted, and anything that would blatantly interfere with a team's engage would mean a competing raid force is there with substantial fraps. At that point it's literally no different from having any rando member interfere with the engage. What am I missing?

[xdrcfrx]

Originally Posted by dk0 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I'm still really curious about this and I'm not sure I'm clear on why you think the rule is a good thing to have. You mention being over the line and getting FTE-- you're allowed to have trackers over the line. What is the perceived benefit of getting tracker FTE? Why would any guild want that?

The only thing I landed on was what you said--intentionally interfering with another guild's engage. But that's pretty nonsensical and trivial to handle. FTE from a tracker lasts all of half a second while a mage gets one-shotted, and anything that would blatantly interfere with a team's engage would mean a competing raid force is there with substantial fraps. At that point it's literally no different from having any rando member interfere with the engage. What am I missing?

"oops my tracker got FTE and pulled that sev/gore/other pulled mob away from where it was, and then instead of losing the engage it just became a total mess! who would have thought it could happen. aww shucks."

why would you want to open up this can of worms? right now, it's a very clear and easy to apply rule. anything you replace it with is going to be more difficult to apply. certainly the history of this server, and especially it's current M.O., suggests that nuanced rules which require detailed analysis will only be the source of conflict. ambiguity = bad.

it's already the case that people argue that anything you do during the course of an FTE doesn't matter, if a new FTE goes out. doing away with tracker FTE almost certain to result in the following: tracker gets FTE; DA's and/or bumps the mob; caps out or dies; new member of same guild gets fresh FTE after mob has been significantly affected; that guild kills mob, argues that it's initial tracker FTE is meaningless because of subsequent yellow text.

you say you don't like the lawyerquesting? then stop trying to do away with the simple rules that are easy to enforce.