RE: Camping

[Pheer]

I dont get how some BDA members still seem to think it was ambiguous that having half a raid killing mobs right next to trak lair was against the raid rules

[YendorLootmonkey]

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

I dont get how some BDA members still seem to think it was ambiguous that having half a raid killing mobs right next to trak lair was against the raid rules

Because the rule said "at the raid spawn" which we took to mean within aggro radius. Then it went from "juggs was too close" at the time of the ruling to "anywhere in the zone at the time of spawn" being the spirit of the rules we violated. What part of that is so hard to understand? The same way "in the vicinity of the raid target" is now being evaluated for the purposes of camping toons before someone gets suspended for being camped in the same zone as a raid target, logging in, and engaging.

[Tanthallas]

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

The same way "in the vicinity of the raid target" is now being evaluated for the purposes of camping toons before someone gets suspended for being camped in the same zone as a raid target, logging in, and engaging.

You are the only one evaluating that, however.

Yendor has been an outcast ranger for so long he has started arguing with himself. I always wondered what he did when he was hidden in the corner as far away from engages as possible.

[Pheer]

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

Because the rule said "at the raid spawn" which we took to mean within aggro radius. Then it went from "juggs was too close" at the time of the ruling to "anywhere in the zone at the time of spawn" being the spirit of the rules we violated. What part of that is so hard to understand? The same way "in the vicinity of the raid target" is now being evaluated for the purposes of camping toons before someone gets suspended for being camped in the same zone as a raid target, logging in, and engaging.

I'm just saying that you guys seemed to be the only ones who needed it explicitly stated that "in the vicinity" means more than just out of agro range. IB/FE/TMO arent dumb, don't you think if we were allowed to be "coincidentally" clearing juggs with 25+ people during trak window than we would have been doing it all along?

[YendorLootmonkey]

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

I'm just saying that you guys seemed to be the only ones who needed it explicitly stated that "in the vicinity" means more than just out of agro range. IB/FE/TMO arent dumb, don't you think if we were allowed to be "coincidentally" clearing juggs with 25+ people during trak window than we would have been doing it all along?

But the rules do not say "in the vicinity" though, do they?

The rule is, from http://www.project1999.com/raid.php :

"Guilds may not have any more than two representatives present at a raid spawn location."

Which we took to mean "within aggro range". If I am "at Trakanon's spawn location", that is not Juggs. That is not Shrooms. That is, at the very least, in the lair. The map showing the location of where we were does not put us in the lair:

http://www.project1999.com/bdajugg.jpg

Can you at least see some confusion on our part how the rule morphed from "at a raid spawn location" to "in the juggs caves"? If the rule said "Guilds may not have any more than two representatives present in the vicinity of a raid spawn location." then yes, I fully admit there should have been zero confusion and zero need for clarification. But they do not say that. We found out what was intended the hard way. We do not want to make the same interpretation mistake for camped toons and where they are allowed.

[Pheer]

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

But the rules do not say "in the vicinity" though, do they?

The rule is, from http://www.project1999.com/raid.php :

"Guilds may not have any more than two representatives present at a raid spawn location."

Which we took to mean "within aggro range". If I am "at Trakanon's spawn location", that is not Juggs. That is not Shrooms. That is, at the very least, in the lair. The map showing the location of where we were does not put us in the lair:

http://www.project1999.com/bdajugg.jpg

Can you at least see some confusion on our part how the rule morphed from "at a raid spawn location" to "in the juggs caves"? If the rule said "Guilds may not have any more than two representatives present in the vicinity of a raid spawn location." then yes, I fully admit there should have been zero confusion and zero need for clarification. But they do not say that. We found out what was intended the hard way. We do not want to make the same interpretation mistake for camped toons and where they are allowed.

Why would you think anywhere outside aggro range would be ok? Before the new policy TMO/FE/IB were camping out chars on the ledge around the corner from lair, even that is technically "out of aggro range"

[YendorLootmonkey]

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

Why would you think anywhere outside aggro range would be ok? Before the new policy TMO/FE/IB were camping out chars on the ledge around the corner from lair, even that is technically "out of aggro range"

Because that's what being "at a spawn location" means. You are physically at a spawn location. How is this so difficult to understand? If I am at Inny's spawn location, for instance... where am I? Not on the ramp. Not at Maestro. Not at the zone-in. Not at the bottom of the ramp. At Inny's spawn location, and the best assumption is that includes anywhere Inny could potentially aggro once he spawns because we are assuming we don't mean at his precise /loc.

Again, we found out the hard way and we won't make that mistake again. And it sounds like others don't want to find out the hard way either regarding camping toons out. There's nothing wrong with asking for clarification so we can make sure we're all on a level playing field for competition.

[Ahldagor]

could just have everyone's starting point be toxxulia forest and no ports allowed

[Burrito]

Let's start a player agreed rotation of guilds to see where camping in toons is acceptable to eat raid suspensions. That way each guild can learn equally on mistakes. /sarcasm

[Lazie]

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

But the rules do not say "in the vicinity" though, do they?

The rule is, from http://www.project1999.com/raid.php :

"Guilds may not have any more than two representatives present at a raid spawn location."

Which we took to mean "within aggro range". If I am "at Trakanon's spawn location", that is not Juggs. That is not Shrooms. That is, at the very least, in the lair. The map showing the location of where we were does not put us in the lair:

http://www.project1999.com/bdajugg.jpg

Can you at least see some confusion on our part how the rule morphed from "at a raid spawn location" to "in the juggs caves"? If the rule said "Guilds may not have any more than two representatives present in the vicinity of a raid spawn location." then yes, I fully admit there should have been zero confusion and zero need for clarification. But they do not say that. We found out what was intended the hard way. We do not want to make the same interpretation mistake for camped toons and where they are allowed.

Funny thing is I happened to be one of FE's people on ledge when you guys were down there...12 minutes before trak spawned you guys ran into Trak's lair...you didn't leave ledge till maybe 3 minutes before he spawned. Seriously how would you think 3 minutes later when he spawned it would be ok to engage him ? Considering you were still a 30 second run from ledge.