New OOA Non-aggression agreement

[Nightbear]

Suggestions to making an amendment to the rules? How can we make this a better system.

[wycca]

Since they can't post here themselves - Omni signs. I got a ss of it, just too lazy to put it up atm.

[Ella`Ella]

The bottom line here in this matter, at least with regard to TMO, is that we're going to continue to treat the Noble, OoA, Hand cycle as fully contested content. I'd like you all to keep in mind that TMO has never broken this agreement in the past and has probably benefited the least from the OoA agreement this far (without complaint, mind you). We've forgone a significant number of Nobles and for the entire month of March we didn't engage a single one. In fact, I believe TMO has only engaged about 5 nobles since the start of the year, for an average of less than 1 a month.

Please note that our decision is not to spite any existing agreement or Class-R as a whole. I have spoken with both Cobblestone and Argh and agree that we would be willing to adhere to GM enforcement of protecting Overseers. However, since there is no such agreement and the past few weeks have been sparked of guilds engaging them for whatever reason, we can only logically conclude that the absence of enforcement is going to continue to cause these overseers to be engaged and we're going to take a cut of the action.

That being said, if the GM's or whichever power-at-be can enforce this, if a protective agreement of Overseers were to come to light (GM Enforced) and Noble went to join the Class-R/Class-C/FFA cycle, I will (without reservation) sign TMO to that extent. Until then, the noble cycle will remain FFA/fully contested to us. We came to this measure after the third incident executed by other guilds. We are not placing blame on any of the offending guilds for their actions, nor considering our measure 'a consequence of their actions', however, this is more us reacting to a current 'state of the pixels'.

I understand the language of this Non-Aggression agreement, however it doesn't seem very robust. What I mean is that, by the terms set forward, if I were to sign TMO's name to this and we did break the OoA agreement, we would be punished. However, if I refuse to sign our name to it and then go on to kill the OoA's, there would be no penalty. I would rather abide by the agreement in good faith and reserve the latitude to engage the OoA's if I felt necessary and not fall subject to disciplinary action, than sign our name to it and forgo that same notion.

If you're unable to see the forest through the trees in this post, please default to my TL;DR below.

TL;DR - Unless GM's enforce protection (which we'll support and abide by, but won't urge them to do) and put noble on the same cycle as other raid targets, TMO will continue to treat Noble, OoA and HoV as fully contested FFA mobs.

[Argh]

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

I understand the language of this Non-Aggression agreement, however it doesn't seem very robust. What I mean is that, by the terms set forward, if I were to sign TMO's name to this and we did break the OoA agreement, we would be punished. However, if I refuse to sign our name to it and then go on to kill the OoA's, there would be no penalty. I would rather abide by the agreement in good faith and reserve the latitude to engage the OoA's if I felt necessary and not fall subject to disciplinary action, than sign our name to it and forgo that same notion.

This agreement doesn't become binding until TMO and IB sign. A lack of your signature means that everyone else who has signed can continue to kill OoA's without penalty as well.

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

That being said, if the GM's or whichever power-at-be can enforce this, if a protective agreement of Overseers were to come to light (GM Enforced) and Noble went to join the Class-R/Class-C/FFA cycle, I will (without reservation) sign TMO to that extent.

If this agreement were expanded to include an agreement for treating Noble spawns as a C/R/FFA cycle you would sign?

I don't see us being able to get it changed in an official capacity (getting it included on raid.php) as that would require some additional work for Rogean and doing so may be outside of the scope of this agreement but I do not foresee any issue with all Class-R guilds agreeing to treat Noble spawns like this.

[Derubael]

If everyone were to agree to this, it may ease some of the bad blood we've had recently in the raid scene. Just a thought, and something we'd like to encourage. And for the record, anything you can all agree on is something we will enforce.

In regards to autofire, we are working on a solution to this problem. We hope to get something implemented soon.

[Artaenc]

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

If everyone were to agree to this, it may ease some of the bad blood we've had recently in the raid scene. Just a thought, and something we'd like to encourage. And for the record, anything you can all agree on is something we will enforce.

In regards to autofire, we are working on a solution to this problem. We hope to get something implemented soon.

Will you be banning people that used it in the past? To make it fair I'd like to use it if it is currently not punishable to even the grounds on FTE while you're working on the solution.

[Derubael]

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

Will you be banning people that used it in the past? To make it fair I'd like to use it if it is currently not punishable to even the grounds on FTE while you're working on the solution.

Autofire and other similar programs/hardware is still not allowed on this server.

[Nightbear]

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

If everyone were to agree to this

Who is everyone? Everyone apart of the Sky rotation?

Just wondering how any player agree'd upon rules enforced by GMs affects guild who are completely against the class system.

[Erati]

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

Who is everyone? Everyone apart of the Sky rotation?

Just wondering how any player agree'd upon rules enforced by GMs affects guild who are completely against the class system.

basically everyone that signs will be held to the agreement was my understanding

this particular agreement only becomes one once all the Sky guilds sign it ( only missing TMO and IB off the schedule currently)

so for example: Lord Bob never signs or agrees to this,the GMs cant punish them for killing the Overseer however they also face heavy pressure and public scrutiny...also it becomes a 10+guild versus 1 competition as everyone that signs basically has a vested interest in keeping the Overseers protected

[Ella`Ella]

Maz, which cop am I supposed to be again?