Sullon/Training Rules

[naez]

Well more drama is a +, so now I am torn

[redghosthunter]

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

Well more drama is a +, so now I am torn

I know right. Normal EQ life needs MORE color.

[naez]

u,mymain,etc
[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

[Envious]

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

O my fault, I forgot Wynch was a slut character in PDM.

I'm all for having no rules, but the majority will not be. Not all trainers are created equal -- some people are a lot better at it than others. No rules on the shit box would have led to a much quicker server death.

Only 4 ppl had access to Wynch, 2 of them brothers. You still mad Wynch was above you in the tanking order or someshit?

Some people are better at PvP than others, so remove pvp?

There being a higher pop without training as opposed to with it is debatable. Remove all the GM intervention from VZ/TZ and it would have lasted alot longer IMO (sans the zonecmd routine, which, if not for possible GM favoritism would have never occurred either... GG GMs.).

Personally I am simply advocating a more live like experience, and attempting to avoid the problems of VZ/TZ that ran off DROVES of the population. Which at the time, was constant qq'ing shit about GM favoritism, and people catching bans based upon hearsay and a GM /zone'ing into a plane after 2 trains and banning the third.

The server, to truly attract and retain players, needs to be stable. Period. GM enforced PnP will not add to stability. You will constantly have people trying to get others banned, or trying to redefine "training", or when one GM burns out and a new one comes in you will have a different interpretation of events.


And by drama, I meant forum drama. Training, I would think, would create more in game drama, and some QQ / "I wanna fight you IRL" posts. Subjective banning would create more forum drama and people flipping out on the forums with the same shit we have heard for 3? 4? years on VZTZ.

I just dont see how you guys can be so blind to think GM intervention will help with longevity of a EQ PvP server.




Imo, the only thing, ONLY THING, people should get banned for is blatant exploiting / hacking. I personally, will not waste the time on a server, where it takes months to hit level cap, and can be banned on the subjective whim of a GM. Esp when I know the causes for VZ/TZ declining, are not being avoided.

[Macken]

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

I just dont see how you guys can be so blind to think GM intervention will help with longevity of a EQ PvP server.
.

If Gm intervention is code for "no training" then you are sorely confused my friend.

[Dojii]

macken are u the enchanter from Hate

[Pudge]

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

Only 4 ppl had access to Wynch, 2 of them brothers. You still mad Wynch was above you in the tanking order or someshit?

Some people are better at PvP than others, so remove pvp?

There being a higher pop without training as opposed to with it is debatable. Remove all the GM intervention from VZ/TZ and it would have lasted alot longer IMO (sans the zonecmd routine, which, if not for possible GM favoritism would have never occurred either... GG GMs.).

Personally I am simply advocating a more live like experience, and attempting to avoid the problems of VZ/TZ that ran off DROVES of the population. Which at the time, was constant qq'ing shit about GM favoritism, and people catching bans based upon hearsay and a GM /zone'ing into a plane after 2 trains and banning the third.

The server, to truly attract and retain players, needs to be stable. Period. GM enforced PnP will not add to stability. You will constantly have people trying to get others banned, or trying to redefine "training", or when one GM burns out and a new one comes in you will have a different interpretation of events.


And by drama, I meant forum drama. Training, I would think, would create more in game drama, and some QQ / "I wanna fight you IRL" posts. Subjective banning would create more forum drama and people flipping out on the forums with the same shit we have heard for 3? 4? years on VZTZ.

I just dont see how you guys can be so blind to think GM intervention will help with longevity of a EQ PvP server.




Imo, the only thing, ONLY THING, people should get banned for is blatant exploiting / hacking. I personally, will not waste the time on a server, where it takes months to hit level cap, and can be banned on the subjective whim of a GM. Esp when I know the causes for VZ/TZ declining, are not being avoided.

bro, i like your passion, but basically everyone is done listening to you in this thread. GMs will have to make decisions. if you're afraid of getting banned, then dont do the shit that will put you in jeopardy.

"Remove all the GM intervention from VZ/TZ and it would have lasted alot longer" -- this is absolutely false, server would have lasted 6 months instead of 4 years.

[Envious]

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

bro, i like your passion, but basically everyone is done listening to you in this thread. GMs will have to make decisions. if you're afraid of getting banned, then dont do the shit that will put you in jeopardy.

"Remove all the GM intervention from VZ/TZ and it would have lasted alot longer" -- this is absolutely false, server would have lasted 6 months instead of 4 years.

Right, because nobody left b/c of cries of GM favoritism. As far as putting ones self in jeopardy, you either didnt read or didnt think about the post I had earlier. Again, trying to drive a point home to someone that is simply not able to understand it is futile.

Its not going to be a big of a deal to me as it would be to you either way, I simply dont have tons of time to invest in any game atm. Like Xant, school is chewing my ass up for the next 6months to a year. I am only advocating what I know to be true.

[Envious]

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

If Gm intervention is code for "no training" then you are sorely confused my friend.

GM intervention = Everything besides game mechanics. So the only times GM's should be hassled is for bugs, exploits, hacks, 3rd party issues.

Not CRs, not CC, not bind camping, not training. Those were the tools you used to make people understand things in EQ, not things to be petitioned over.

[Macken]

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

GM intervention = Everything besides game mechanics. So the only times GM's should be hassled is for bugs, exploits, hacks, 3rd party issues.

Not CRs, not CC, not bind camping, not training. Those were the tools you used to make people understand things in EQ, not things to be petitioned over.

Gm's should be appraised of bugs, exploits, hacks and trains.

Training was the tool you used to run the population into the ground and marginalize those classes who couldn't train well.

Maybe everyone doesn't want to play a training class.