And I raaaaaan, I raaaan so far awaaaayyyy

[Tanthallas]

What is or is not a tactical failure in fighting anything is outside the boundaries of the rules of what determines who has claim to a mob.

Also, you are an idiot.

[Alarti0001]

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

What is or is not a tactical failure in fighting anything is outside the boundaries of the rules of what determines who has claim to a mob.

Also, you are an idiot.

backpedal more. haha
Here is what makes you mad.... your guild acts douchey and a gm publicly calls you out on that. This is bad for your because your guild is founded on the premise that TMO is douchey and you are some righteous warriors coming to take us down.
Sorry your pride is hurt, stop being a douche and start......engaging mobs and you might get some kills.
But if Faydedar is any indication maybe you should talk to BDA about a potential merger.

[Autotune]

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

backpedal more. haha
Here is what makes you mad.... your guild acts douchey and a gm publicly calls you out on that. This is bad for your because your guild is founded on the premise that TMO is douchey and you are some righteous warriors coming to take us down.
Sorry your pride is hurt, stop being a douche and start......engaging mobs and you might get some kills.
But if Faydedar is any indication maybe you should talk to BDA about a potential merger.

BDA seems happier without them.


LEAVE BDA ALONE!!!!!memethingy.jpg

[Tanthallas]

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

BDA seems happier without them.


LEAVE BDA ALONE!!!!!memethingy.jpg

It is ironic that BDA has kicked it up a notch in response to us leaving to do the exact same thing.

I am happy they are. It is just sad that they had this potential and more the whole time.

[Eccezan]

Tanthallas plans on pushing the limits of fail to heights previously unthinkable.
Go get em Sloan.
[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

[arsenalpow]

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

It is ironic that BDA has kicked it up a notch in response to us leaving to do the exact same thing.

I am happy they are. It is just sad that they had this potential and more the whole time.

No notches have been kicked up.

Carry on.

[Tanthallas]

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

backpedal more. haha
Here is what makes you mad.... your guild acts douchey and a gm publicly calls you out on that. This is bad for your because your guild is founded on the premise that TMO is douchey and you are some righteous warriors coming to take us down.
Sorry your pride is hurt, stop being a douche and start......engaging mobs and you might get some kills.
But if Faydedar is any indication maybe you should talk to BDA about a potential merger.

Unfortunately for your thesis, we do not give two shits about TMO being douchey or not. We are here to take your precious loots, not win a popularity contest. To do so, we need to act under rules which are clearly understood by both parties. This means that, to an extent, we will both push the limits of these rules. When these limits are pushed and the rules are not upheld but instead undermined under the auspice of 'fairness', well, there is a problem. If you wanted fairness to be the name of the game, you would have done so long before you had actual competition.

[Tanthallas]

Thanks for the trak teeth.

<3

[hatelore]

But please, more vids and meme's , the shit had me rolling! Hah

[Tanthallas]

Well I will say I appreciate the tone of your responses.

First:

A: A mob is classified as engaged as long as it has aggro on at least one player.

First to 'engage' is defined as aggro on at least one player - not a group of players or raid. The parameter on this is that a sufficient raid force must be present. This has nothing to do with the tactics employed in pulling the mob, etc.

Second:

If an engaged mob has aggro on atleast one player, then an 'unengaged' mob has aggro on no players. When CT DT's someone as a result of his zone-wide DT, that person enters and simultaneously exists the criteria of engagement. However, when someone is on the aggro list and CT DT's that person, that person is engaged from the time he or she is on the aggro list to the time he or she is DTed.

Third:

Engaging in 'good faith' can mean many things. Attempting to aggro CT before another raid-force and pull him to your raid force may be tactically unsound, however based on the rules and the competition for FTE that they create it is a completely legitimate 'good faith' attempt to get on the aggro list before the other raid. IF there was not a raid force present, then this would obviously not be in 'good faith'...

You must see that, given Scorchin's being first on the aggro list, if all of the raid-force present simply rushed CT after he was DTed then this ruling would have gone differently. And that is the problem. FTE is not based upon proximity of the raid to the mob - if this is now the case, well, expect people to start forming their raids closer to mobs rather than at otherwise chosen locations and simply throw their force at the mob the second they see a puller from another guild tag them.