Why is training allowed on p99 in veeshan's peak? (poll asking your opinion)

[LordSterben]

Holy crap...forget all the other nonsense...I want the "non-fantasy names" rule enforced again! It ruins my immersion when everyone is named "Anulblaster" and "Bonghit." This isn't WoW, people...have some class! XD

[Tiggles]

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

Holy crap...forget all the other nonsense...I want the "non-fantasy names" rule enforced again! It ruins my immersion when everyone is named "Anulblaster" and "Bonghit." This isn't WoW, people...have some class! XD

Agreed also copyrighted names like Tasslehof should be removed as well.

[Cecily]

Would settle for just Tasselhof being removed.

[Alarti0001]

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

Then there are the other 20-50 people in the zone wanting to kill a dragon wasting 3-4 hours (a few times 8+ hours of training) of their evening dead or constantly camping in and out, while a half dozen people get their jollies.

so majority of raid mobs are set up for the majority of players.... seems fair....unless you hate minorities

[timhutton]

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

You'll have to do some research for the exact news post that implemented it, I'm sure that contains information. Or perhaps your fellow players will help. I'm not here to answer your question about why every policy exists, just to fix your misconceptions.

You're still comparing it to eqlive in the rest of your post. It's not an EQLive related policy. You should stop doing that.

I decided to be a helpful fellow player, but I cannot determine why such a decision was ever made. If anything, it feels like it was made behind closed doors, and the reason was never presented to the players.

It's entirely possible I am missing or overlooking something though, so in that case please show me any discussions I missed. I will layout what I've found.

The thread where VP was announced is located here:
http://www.project1999.org/forums/sh...ad.php?t=52232

In this thread, a question concerning CSR within the zone is presented:
http://www.project1999.org/forums/sh...2&postcount=22

The way the question is worded, it seems as if Rogean had prior conversations with Nilbog about this situation and that they were already leaning towards a no-CSR stance. A disclaimer was added to the post to clarify it was not official until stated so.

Over the next 15-20 pages people discussed VP, and whether CSR should or should not be allowed in the zone. Some notable highlights:
http://www.project1999.org/forums/sh...3&postcount=30 - discussing SoW original intent and keys being soul-bound

http://www.project1999.org/forums/sh...1&postcount=32 - a prophetic post discussing possible ramifications

http://www.project1999.org/forums/sh...2&postcount=33 - Nilbog's stance

http://www.project1999.org/forums/sh...4&postcount=36 - at the time head-GM Amelindas thoughts

http://www.project1999.org/forums/sh...2&postcount=37 - another prophetic post?

http://www.project1999.org/forums/sh...0&postcount=61 - A discussion of the differences between "No CSR" and "No-pnp" much like this thread

http://www.project1999.org/forums/sh...3&postcount=97 - TR Officer's opinion

http://www.project1999.org/forums/sh...&postcount=151 - post in support of ffa

After 10-15 pages of people discussing VP a decision is stated, however why is never given:
http://www.project1999.org/forums/sh...&postcount=174

Now as far as actual patch notes go, I'm having serious difficulties finding them.

In this thread, it was announced that Red would go live november 18th:
http://www.project1999.org/forums/sh...ad.php?t=53281

The thread for the launch does not include patch notes. Were they posted later? Does anybody have a link?:
http://www.project1999.org/forums/sh...ad.php?t=54865

According to the VP announcement thread, VP was supposed to open the very same night that Red went live. The past 2 threads would indicate that the date for this was November 18th, and I cannot locate any patch notes for that date.

That leads me to believe that the only information as to why training is allowed in VP has to come from the thread where VP was announced, and aside from Rogean's original inquiries, and 10-15 pages of varying player opinion, no information (aside from the decision itself) was ever given.

I'm just as confused as Tassle, and I played during the time in question as well as just spent an hour researching this and I am honestly more confused about the original intent and why training/griefing are allowed than I was when I began.

[Ele]

Originally Posted by Alarti0001 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

so majority of raid mobs are set up for the majority of players.... seems fair....unless you hate minorities

I clicked "show post" for this? sigh

[Thulack]

Really TMO agreeing to any kind of rotation or fair play would be like the government vetoing a pay raise.

[Alarti0001]

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

I clicked "show post" for this? sigh

Derp...... when you can't think.... you can't reply.

[Tasslehofp99]

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

Agreed also copyrighted names like Tasslehof should be removed as well.

Aye, I've petitioned for a name change already.
You should as well since there is an NPC with the same name as your rogue in EQ.

[Tasslehofp99]

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

I decided to be a helpful fellow player, but I cannot determine why such a decision was ever made. If anything, it feels like it was made behind closed doors, and the reason was never presented to the players.

It's entirely possible I am missing or overlooking something though, so in that case please show me any discussions I missed. I will layout what I've found.

The thread where VP was announced is located here:
http://www.project1999.org/forums/sh...ad.php?t=52232

In this thread, a question concerning CSR within the zone is presented:
http://www.project1999.org/forums/sh...2&postcount=22

The way the question is worded, it seems as if Rogean had prior conversations with Nilbog about this situation and that they were already leaning towards a no-CSR stance. A disclaimer was added to the post to clarify it was not official until stated so.

Over the next 15-20 pages people discussed VP, and whether CSR should or should not be allowed in the zone. Some notable highlights:
http://www.project1999.org/forums/sh...3&postcount=30 - discussing SoW original intent and keys being soul-bound

http://www.project1999.org/forums/sh...1&postcount=32 - a prophetic post discussing possible ramifications

http://www.project1999.org/forums/sh...2&postcount=33 - Nilbog's stance

http://www.project1999.org/forums/sh...4&postcount=36 - at the time head-GM Amelindas thoughts

http://www.project1999.org/forums/sh...2&postcount=37 - another prophetic post?

http://www.project1999.org/forums/sh...0&postcount=61 - A discussion of the differences between "No CSR" and "No-pnp" much like this thread

http://www.project1999.org/forums/sh...3&postcount=97 - TR Officer's opinion

http://www.project1999.org/forums/sh...&postcount=151 - post in support of ffa

After 10-15 pages of people discussing VP a decision is stated, however why is never given:
http://www.project1999.org/forums/sh...&postcount=174

Now as far as actual patch notes go, I'm having serious difficulties finding them.

In this thread, it was announced that Red would go live november 18th:
http://www.project1999.org/forums/sh...ad.php?t=53281

The thread for the launch does not include patch notes. Were they posted later? Does anybody have a link?:
http://www.project1999.org/forums/sh...ad.php?t=54865

According to the VP announcement thread, VP was supposed to open the very same night that Red went live. The past 2 threads would indicate that the date for this was November 18th, and I cannot locate any patch notes for that date.

That leads me to believe that the only information as to why training is allowed in VP has to come from the thread where VP was announced, and aside from Rogean's original inquiries, and 10-15 pages of varying player opinion, no information (aside from the decision itself) was ever given.

I'm just as confused as Tassle, and I played during the time in question as well as just spent an hour researching this and I am honestly more confused about the original intent and why training/griefing are allowed than I was when I began.

Thanks, I also spent a few hours looking around for this information last night and wasn't able to come up with anything. My best guess is that any discussion which held any valuable information was probably had in the "Raiding guild Discussion" area? I'm not entirely sure but I do remember a time when that section of the forums was used regularly. Perhaps someone else knows?