Now that we have confirmed the competitive mechanics on p99 can be cheated...

[Naethyn]

Quakes are competitive p99 raiding. Everything else is a poopsock. Anyone who doesn’t want quakes also doesn’t want competition. The reality is they want to keep the old status quo and lord over pixels, not competition. Only want to play competitive Everquest? Don’t show up for the roll.

[-TK-]

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

Quakes are competitive p99 raiding. Everything else is a poopsock. Anyone who doesn’t want quakes also doesn’t want competition. The reality is they want to keep the old status quo and lord over pixels, not competition. Only want to play competitive Everquest? Don’t show up for the roll.

This exactly as long as the staff quakes as often as they are saying they will.

[Samoht]

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

Quakes are competitive p99 raiding. Everything else is a poopsock. Anyone who doesn’t want quakes also doesn’t want competition. The reality is they want to keep the old status quo and lord over pixels, not competition. Only want to play competitive Everquest? Don’t show up for the roll.

Nobody is complaining about increased quake frequency. You're conflating two different things here.

The rolls on respawn are anti-competitive and will just put more life support to a guild that fought tooth and nail against allowing new entities into their happy little rotations.

There are valid concerns regarding the proposed frequency in quakes, however, as in the past the server was promised multiple quakes a month and still averaged less than 1.

Only follow-through on the promise by server staff will ease these concerns, but never eliminate them as the quakes could fall off again like they did last time.

[Reiwa]

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

Nobody is complaining about increased quake frequency. You're conflating two different things here.

The rolls on respawn are anti-competitive and will just put more life support to a guild that fought tooth and nail against allowing new entities into their happy little rotations.

There are valid concerns regarding the proposed frequency in quakes, however, as in the past the server was promised multiple quakes a month and still averaged less than 1.

Only follow-through on the promise by server staff will ease these concerns, but never eliminate them as the quakes could fall off again like they did last time.

What makes you think compliance is optional based on quake frequency, bossypants?

[hotkarlmarxbros]

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

Nobody is complaining about increased quake frequency. You're conflating two different things here.

The rolls on respawn are anti-competitive and will just put more life support to a guild that fought tooth and nail against allowing new entities into their happy little rotations.

There are valid concerns regarding the proposed frequency in quakes, however, as in the past the server was promised multiple quakes a month and still averaged less than 1.

Only follow-through on the promise by server staff will ease these concerns, but never eliminate them as the quakes could fall off again like they did last time.

Why are rolls anti-competitive but having engagements that are exploitable not anti-competitive?

[Samoht]

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

Why are rolls anti-competitive but having engagements that are exploitable not anti-competitive?

First of all, just because something is exploitable does not mean it has been exploited. The only proven cheater at this point is a Riot officer named Kickenit. Nobody wanted a rules change for the infraction. It would have been satisfactory with a punishment for the player/guild.

Second, rolling swings the solution too far into the other direction. At least ring roll allows a week of competitive turn ins. Why wasn't this mirrored for kael/dain? Why is there zero feedback or discussion with GMs for tuning this decision or proposing alternatives?

Players from both sides need to be allowed at the table. Since Riot now has an officer embedded as a GM, the only solution is to also promote a player from Vanquish to be GM.

[Ennewi]

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

Players from both sides need to be allowed at the table.

The table is round, unless you're of the guild vs guild mindset.

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

Since Riot now has an officer embedded as a GM, the only solution is to also promote a player from Vanquish to be GM.

<Vanquish> versus GMs? <Harakiri>

[hotkarlmarxbros]

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

First of all, just because something is exploitable does not mean it has been exploited. The only proven cheater at this point is a Riot officer named Kickenit. Nobody wanted a rules change for the infraction. It would have been satisfactory with a punishment for the player/guild.

Second, rolling swings the solution too far into the other direction. At least ring roll allows a week of competitive turn ins. Why wasn't this mirrored for kael/dain? Why is there zero feedback or discussion with GMs for tuning this decision or proposing alternatives?

Players from both sides need to be allowed at the table. Since Riot now has an officer embedded as a GM, the only solution is to also promote a player from Vanquish to be GM.

So anything short of submitting video evidence of the individuals themselves actively cheating means that no cheating is occurring? Despite the fact that the engagements have been proven to be exploitable? And that nobody actively looking to benefit from said cheating would ever submit proof of themselves cheating unless they were doing it to show the engagement is exploitable so it gets fixed?

I mean, I get it. You're being deliberately obtuse to continue running the distraction in an attempt to get the engagements to remain as-is so that your team who has been actively cheating the engagements can continue being able to do so. I'm more putting this out there for the other people reading to understand how hypocritical you are being when you are saying you don't want /random to kill competition when the alternative is just as anti-competitive, only strictly benefitting any team that cheats. And that the bar for it to be proved that anybody is cheating is to submit a video of yourself doing it, otherwise anything goes.

[Ennewi]

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

First of all, just because something is exploitable does not mean it has been exploited.

06-12-2021, 09:47 PM
Menden
Server GM

Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: The Nexus
Posts: 6,216
Default Tunare
Tunare’s call seems to be broken. Until we determine what exactly is breaking her call, any entity that wishes to kill Tunare, must clear the zone.

[Naethyn]

So we are worried about a hypothetical situation that may occur based on past experiences on this server. That's fine. Lets try this, and when change is needed again it will happen. For now, quakes are competition. Rolls are also training your competition on beating these mobs. This is going to be one of the greatest ages of competition on the server, and worrying about possible future situations doesn't really matter right now.