who is stalos?

[maverixdamighty]

should have just had sirken ban assault like he proposed and then HB would stfu.

[Buhbuh]

Aren't you guys mis-contextualizing?

We sent Chiggen in deliberately to die to Azrael, which he did, thus giving us the right to LnS. There is no 'granting LnS' on this server. You either have the right to it, or you don't.

You guys were basically looking for any reason to wipe out our rezzers. It was incredibly transparent how faggoty you were being, hence the DTs.

Assault also claims he was goaded by Dango in order to secure a reason to kill us in VP. Who knows.

[maverixdamighty]

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

Aren't you guys mis-contextualizing?

We sent Chiggen in deliberately to die to Azrael, which he did, thus giving us the right to LnS. There is no 'granting LnS' on this server. You either have the right to it, or you don't.

You guys were basically looking for any reason to wipe out our rezzers. It was incredibly transparent how faggoty you were being, hence the DTs.

Assault also claims he was goaded by Dango in order to secure a reason to kill us in VP. Who knows.

guild lns has to be a force of 7 or more. sending one person in to die does not equate to requesting guild LNS when you died to a PVE encounter.

regardless if assault was instigated or not, weta says there is video of dango attacking assault first which i'd love to see, he did what he did. prior to that happening you had multiple rezzers sitting in the middle of our camp for several minutes being left alone.

[heartbrand]

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

guild lns has to be a force of 7 or more. sending one person in to die does not equate to requesting guild LNS when you died to a PVE encounter.

regardless if assault was instigated or not, weta says there is video of dango attacking assault first which i'd love to see, he did what he did. prior to that happening you had multiple rezzers sitting in the middle of our camp for several minutes being left alone.

Yet Azrael will routinely call a pvp fight a "large scale pvp" if it's 6v1. Also Assault attacking Dango is again irrelevant, proven by rules posted prior. Dreadlands was not an affected zone of the large scale pvp. Thank you, you lose I win, NEXT.

[Burgerking]

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

Yet Azrael will routinely call a pvp fight a "large scale pvp" if it's 6v1. Also Assault attacking Dango is again irrelevant, proven by rules posted prior. Dreadlands was not an affected zone of the large scale pvp. Thank you, you lose I win, NEXT.

Guild LNS is not restricted by Zone. It's Guild-wide, you are even allowed to bring in healers and clearer's that weren't in the initial pvp fight. This was set as precedent in numerous guild LNS's in the past, like when Holo called LNS in VP previously and Retti was allowed to travel through each zone to reach VP unmolested.

Attacking other members of our guild elsewhere, BEFORE you finish scooting from VP would violate that LNS. As we would be unable to attack your members as any of them can be deemed part of the corpse recovery effort.

But that's all a moot point because you wiped to PVE you had no right to guild LNS period and would have had to have several of your members DIE in a group battle of 7 or more to be able to call LNS. So technically you only had the right to guild LNS after your rez group died.

I thought you were supposed to be good at lawyer-questing because so far I'm not impressed.

[maverixdamighty]

2 minute difference switched to skar as has already been stated. keep up...

again why would sirken offer to ban skar if he was playing within the rules?

why would sirken force holo out of vp if we were in the wrong?

Won't expect a response.

[heartbrand]

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

2 minute difference switched to skar as has already been stated. keep up...

again why would sirken offer to ban skar if he was playing within the rules?

why would sirken force holo out of vp if we were in the wrong?

Won't expect a response.

Because we called guild LNS, and thats what you do when you LNS, is leave the affected zone. Holy fuck you are one dumb dude.

[maverixdamighty]

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

Because we called guild LNS, and thats what you do when you LNS, is leave the affected zone. Holy fuck you are one dumb dude.

why did he offer to ban/suspend skar?

he killed us all you didn't have to LNS when the zone is clear.

keep lawyerquesting. enjoy the pixels.

[heartbrand]

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

guild lns has to be a force of 7 or more. sending one person in to die does not equate to requesting guild LNS when you died to a PVE encounter.

"In large scale PvP (7 or more players on one side)"

yikes


Also, again: "In large scale PvP there is no limit to the number of zones a force can be locked out of. If a fight took place across multiple zones the lockout will apply to all zones a PvP related death occurred in."


No pvp related death occurred in dreadlands in relation to the VP pvp. If Sirken thought it was, he was mistaken, according to the rules Derubael posted. I don't see how you can read that rule and interpret it to mean somehow that players from the winning force traveling across Norrath to join their force are immune from pvp in zones unrelated to where the pvp lockout is.

[maverixdamighty]

why did sirken offer to ban/suspend skar?

NEXT