Three weeks of Ring Wars

[Doujou]

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

Detoxx calling other people terrible leaders is funny as hell.

[xdrcfrx]

1 - not in riot.

2 - agree that current turn in is better than previous dynamic.

3 - citing the written rules to argue for your competition to be barred from contesting you is kind of the definition of "lawyerquesting," is it not?

4 - honestly, I actually don't gaf, was mostly just trolling. there should be some consequence to failing a ring war, but forced cessions would make more sense in the context of an actual agreed upon rotation than in a fully FFA dynamic.

[karadin]

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

but forced cessions would make more sense in the context of an actual agreed upon rotation than in a fully FFA dynamic.

Eh, there really should be some consequence of failing if nothing else to prevent risky turn ins at bad hours of the day. We called off our BP this morning for RW because we weren't comfortable with the numbers that showed up for it. It's not like a normal mob where you can fail and then someone else gets a shot.

I do think 3 weeks is pretty rough but that is what Arcler wanted in negotiations.

[xdrcfrx]

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

Eh, there really should be some consequence of failing if nothing else to prevent risky turn ins at bad hours of the day. We called off our BP this morning for RW because we weren't comfortable with the numbers that showed up for it. It's not like a normal mob where you can fail and then someone else gets a shot.

I do think 3 weeks is pretty rough but that is what Arcler wanted in negotiations.

that's a fair point w/r/t failure denying anyone else the encounter, but a fully FFA environment to me means you're fundamentally just willing to accept that the chips are going to fall however they may. I'd at least want something a little less reflexive than a strict failure = 9 conceded ring wars policy. Good faith attempt with a reasonable number of people shouldn't be treated the same as 15 people turning in to LOL at the giants murdering the poor citizens of Thurgadin.

I thought there had been some discussion following that document's original posting about whether what was meant was "3 weeks" or "3 ringwars" (was it 6 weeks v. 6 ringwars? been a long time at this point), but the self_improvement_workshop channel appears to have been nuked, and I can't go back to see.

[Erati]

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

Good faith attempt with a reasonable number of people shouldn't be treated the same as 15 people turning in to LOL at the giants murdering the poor citizens of Thurgadin.

The failure was on the final wave right before Narandi...so I agree this punishment as a server standard doesnt fit the crime.
My napkin math suggestion is:
Fail Waves 0-1= Skip 3
Fail Waves 2= Skip 2
Fail Wave 3/Narandi= Skip 1

Makes a hell of alot more sense when guilds are going to be failing on legit attempts making internal progress each time. Not saying Riot should deserve a lesser sentence for this, but should be a wakeup call for policy makers to get the penalty more in line w the actions that cause it.

[xdrcfrx]

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

The failure was on the final wave right before Narandi...so I agree this punishment as a server standard doesnt fit the crime.
My napkin math suggestion is:
Fail Waves 0-1= Skip 3
Fail Waves 2= Skip 2
Fail Wave 3/Narandi= Skip 1

Makes a hell of alot more sense when guilds are going to be failing on legit attempts making internal progress each time. Not saying Riot should deserve a lesser sentence for this, but should be a wakeup call for policy makers to get the penalty more in line w the actions that cause it.

yeah, that kind of a sliding scale makes a lot more sense to me as well. Certainly conceding 7 ring wars or whatever seems excessive.

[Vianna]

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

1 - not in riot.

2 - agree that current turn in is better than previous dynamic.

3 - citing the written rules to argue for your competition to be barred from contesting you is kind of the definition of "lawyerquesting," is it not?

4 - honestly, I actually don't gaf, was mostly just trolling. there should be some consequence to failing a ring war, but forced cessions would make more sense in the context of an actual agreed upon rotation than in a fully FFA dynamic.

No that is called following the rules. No lawyerquesting needed.

[xdrcfrx]

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

No that is called following the rules. No lawyerquesting needed.

vanquish: Pursuant to Paragraph 2, Section 1 of the Agreed Upon Document, I hereby demand that you concede three weeks of ringwars, or else I will be appealing to the adjudicator.

also vanquish: guys we're totally not lawyerquesting lol

[Bardp1999]

You have had 300 weeks of Ring War - maybe move on

[Yinein]

Tldr, failed ring war and now want less concedes then the agreed upon ruling? Seems legit