Project 1999

Go Back   Project 1999 > General Community > Rants and Flames

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 12-08-2013, 05:32 PM
HeallunRumblebelly HeallunRumblebelly is offline
Planar Protector

HeallunRumblebelly's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Roanoke, Indiana
Posts: 1,353
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Autotune [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
It's in your best interest to pull raid targets instead of rushing them when you know the competition is around.



Well, little stupid fucknugget, when you have your entire raid force rush across a zone and the competition has spies running around, it's in their best interest to fuck your entire engage and make you back off/camp out. If they snag fte, you have back off and deal with any aggro you managed to take from them, this means your entire engage is now fucked and the competition only has to wait until you're all dead/camped to die as well and blame it on the fucked aggro.

Basically, charging guild stands to lose multiple people and spy guild stands to lose 1 (maybe up to 3).

If you had just sent out 2-3 people to pull CT just a little towards your camp and then have your force charge the rest after FTE confirmation, you'd not of had that happen. The NPC charging factor is more acceptable than the bullshit troll snipes.
Obvious answer is to perma root all raid mobs.
  #2  
Old 12-08-2013, 05:30 PM
HeallunRumblebelly HeallunRumblebelly is offline
Planar Protector

HeallunRumblebelly's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Roanoke, Indiana
Posts: 1,353
Default

Just sounds like a rules clarification is needed. Raid rules are patched together as it is, and GMs seem to have the final say regardless of the rules. P99 is basically mega city 1.
  #3  
Old 12-08-2013, 05:34 PM
Tiggles Tiggles is offline
Banned


Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 1,693
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by HeallunRumblebelly [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
Just sounds like a rules clarification is needed. Raid rules are patched together as it is, and GMs seem to have the final say regardless of the rules. P99 is basically mega city 1.
[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
  #4  
Old 12-08-2013, 05:49 PM
Clark Clark is offline
Planar Protector

Clark's Avatar

Join Date: May 2012
Location: Metropolis
Posts: 5,147
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by HeallunRumblebelly [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
Just sounds like a rules clarification is needed. Raid rules are patched together as it is, and GMs seem to have the final say regardless of the rules. P99 is basically mega city 1.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tanthallas [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
1. We had three FTEs before your snipe wherein you obtained the fourth and final FTE; if you are really that fucking retarded to think that at this point it was possible to camp people out without wiping an entire force, I feel very bad for you. The ability to snipe FTE, especially in the context of one guild getting the first three FTE messages while another gets the fourth and last - should not allow one guild to force the other to wipe. IF you are not prepared to engage and hold aggro, do not go in and try to snipe FTE - it would be one thing if Imba sank in insane amount of aggro generating clickies, but as evidenced in the FRAPs he did not. TMO was CLEARLY not prepared at all to actually engage CT at the instance where they snipped FTE, which is evident by even their own members admitting that their raid was at the North-East corner while all of FE / IB forces where directly ontop of CT. Actually, their whole raid wasnt even at NE corner - half of them were RUNNING to NE corner from the zone in. This used to be punishable by suspension and other action if it continued; when the fuck did this become a legitimate raid maneuver - it is douchbaggery at its finest.

2. FTE sniping, per the staff, is now completely legal and not frowned upon in any effective way. To say that this isnt a recent change due to the implementation of yellow text is pure blinders / ignorance. When FE first started competing with TMO, Sirken himself refused me loot many times on many instances where FE had FTE simply because 'FE did not have a sufficient force engage'. This was regardless of what TMO did during our FTE and in what way TMO caused any harm upon our ability to engage on our FTE.

3. FTE messages WERE NOT put in to make FTE sniping the standard for raiding - they were put in to minimize confusion as to who had FTE so that people who SNIPED were not rewarded. FTE sniping was punished in the past quite frequently, and for a long time considered as a form of raid interference. Instead of FTE shouts being a way in which their initial purpose could be fulfilled, this wonderful yellow text has become an easy way for the staff to avoid the context of any situation and merely point at what the yellow text says for the solution to everything. This ALLOWS FTE sniping to run rampant - any guild which chooses to not behave accordingly - i.e., not FTE snipe / react to FTE snipes in some idealized fashion - gets fucked, as is evident by the recent rulings. The mechanism put in to allow guilds who are attempting to get clean engages and to hurt douchbag sniping behavior is now used to defend sniping - how ironic.

4. Sorry dad.
^ This

Also what's with all the TMO Tomfoolery in here. Is embarrassing you guys are low class lmao.
  #5  
Old 12-08-2013, 05:52 PM
Tiggles Tiggles is offline
Banned


Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 1,693
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Clark [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
^ This

Also what's with all the TMO Tomfoolery in here. Is embarrassing you guys are low class lmao.
Care to comment on you being a banned RMT scumbag?
  #6  
Old 12-08-2013, 05:54 PM
Clark Clark is offline
Planar Protector

Clark's Avatar

Join Date: May 2012
Location: Metropolis
Posts: 5,147
Default

[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tiggles [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
Care to comment
Prove it
  #7  
Old 12-08-2013, 05:33 PM
Yapas Yapas is offline
Banned


Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Grass land
Posts: 81
Default

lol without Abraham we are not able to kill a dragon [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.] Sorry "Dear Leader Sloan"
  #8  
Old 12-08-2013, 05:34 PM
Tanthallas Tanthallas is offline
Fire Giant

Tanthallas's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 577
Default

Except that your own logs just show your members asking to zone in, and those same members on your /who 25 seconds later
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Daliant17447 View Post
more ducktape than exploit
  #9  
Old 12-08-2013, 05:36 PM
Zeelot Zeelot is offline
Fire Giant


Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 625
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tanthallas [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
Except that your own logs just show your members asking to zone in, and those same members on your /who 25 seconds later
Singular just became plural in sloanworld
__________________
Zeelot <TMO>
  #10  
Old 12-08-2013, 05:37 PM
Tanthallas Tanthallas is offline
Fire Giant

Tanthallas's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 577
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zeelot [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
Singular just became plural in sloanworld
I assumed the guy wasnt sitting out there alone like a retard - maybe he was, who knows!
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Daliant17447 View Post
more ducktape than exploit
Closed Thread


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:54 PM.


Everquest is a registered trademark of Daybreak Game Company LLC.
Project 1999 is not associated or affiliated in any way with Daybreak Game Company LLC.
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2026, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.