|
|
#51
03-17-2015, 12:04 AM
|
||||
|
Quote:
| |||
|
|
||||
|
#52
03-17-2015, 12:08 AM
|
||||
|
Quote:
| |||
|
|
||||
|
#54
03-17-2015, 01:03 AM
|
|||
|
The entire "5th time extra penalty" has some flaws. The actual penalty itself is pretty neat in how it works, as it is a potential loss, not an actual one. The problem though, lies in these areas -
- It unfairly penalizes guilds who are more stable and don't need as many mergers. They are accruing 5th (and presumably 10th, 15th, etc) extra penalties while more unstable rivals are merging multiple times and escaping it. - You create an incentive for mergers. This is why Deru's previous ruling was quite clear and correct in that bans follow players, not guild tags. This is a guild tag penalty...and now you've given players something they can can avoid. Yes, EVERYONE in Class C knows if something particularly juicy is in the pipeline. IB conceded Talendor, then after we zoned to clear agro, pulled and killed. Was this done knowing that they were going to reform before the penalty hit? They knew there would be one, they obviously didn't care. Why is that? Additionally, you put yourself in the situation of having to judge what is a legitimate merger and what is a suspension avoidance. This is a bad position to be in, because each time, the guilds will get smarter and you'll have to do more work. The better solution is not have to do it in the first place. - Sirken answers guild petitions against other guilds based on his freetime and motivatiion to plow through the queue. This can result in a haphazard posting of bans. One guild may have ALL of the petitions cleared out against them and have 3 violations in 1 post. Another guild may have a few gone through and get a ban post, then the rest gone through in a few weeks and get another. This gives the 1st guild 1 ban, while the 2nd guild gets 2 bans in this metric. It's completely arbitrary. - There is no accounting for the severity of the violations. Guild A may train the shit out of other guilds trackers - hell, may do it to snag tons of mobs per week. They do this consistently for 3 weeks. They may get 1 or 2 (unlikely even 3 due to the above) ban posts. They're far short of the 5 ban sweetener. Guild B has small snafu's pulling that don't impact the end outcome. Maybe they do this somewhat regularly due to raid scene inexperience and noob members. They get 5 ban posts over time. Which guild is more deserving of a ban? Guild A, but under the current system, it could be Guild B who gets the smackdown. This is why it is problematic to track by # of ban posts. - The new practice of not deleting loot is a bad one. It can create a perverse incentive to do some evil calculus. Maybe Guild A is bad on PD, they've not been getting him much. Let's face it, PD is about 80% of what matters in VP. So they violate the rules to secure him. Guild B is really good at PD, they get him alot. Guild A violates the rules because it has a lesser chance (sub 50%) of nabbing a PD, and could net 0 PD's over 2 weeks. If it violates the rules to gain an unfair advantage, it guarantees itself 1 PD every 2 weeks - the extra ban doesn't matter to it. This is why loot needs to be deleted. - The new practice of being allowed to concede mobs is a good one. It allows guilds who make mistakes to back off and not suffer a penalty. I think EVERYONE appreciates this new development. Alternatively, when you screw up in another way, and concede another mob or mobs, this is a problem. The problem is, when you accepted IB's concession of "the rest of VP" for training 2 dragons on TMO (yes it was 2, not 1) which landed on us while they were leaving to go get VS (leaving TMO hindered by the wipe), you let the violator start dictating what is reasonable compensation. This is not a good situation to be in, because that math could benefit them and it raises perceptions of bias when it is accepted in one instance but not another by a GM> I appreciate your volunteering and hard work on this server, I know petitions and player complains are draining and shitty. So please just accept those observations as constructive criticism, I'm not really boiling mad over them, but I see some significant flaws with those areas. Hopefully there is a better way to implement things like 5th ban penalties that doesn't have some of those downsides. We're all human, and if not for feedback and discussion, we cannot grow in an adult manner.
__________________
First - Monsters & Memories
Argenti | Cobblestone | Animan | ||
|
|
|||
|
#56
03-17-2015, 01:07 AM
|
||||
|
Quote:
Yeah it doesn't take rocket science to see that and look at the timing these changes were mad buddy. Keep being that lone voice in the wilderness though! | |||
|
|
||||
|
#57
03-17-2015, 01:50 AM
|
||||
|
Quote:
| |||
|
|
||||
|
#58
03-17-2015, 02:00 AM
|
|||
|
Yet you can't sleep right now because you are afraid of what might happen to you on an elf simulator.
| ||
|
|
|||
|
#60
03-17-2015, 10:35 AM
|
||||
|
Quote:
This is the same old RnF story with TMO and their bullshit "facts". Here are some actual facts for you. TMO wiped on Hoshkar, Lady Vox, and CT this weekend. <Rampage> killed 11 out of 14 possible raid targets for the weekend. I get the concept of trolling but I also fear that you guys actually believe the shit you post on here.
__________________
 | |||
|
|
||||
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
