PSA: ATTN - If you are bound in raid zones, read this

[Nirgon]

There should be no unlimited level range in solb/perma, there wasn't in classic.

Sirken, Nizzar views the rules here as optional and don't be suprised when he moves his bind at the very last second when push comes to shove.

Heartbrand, that's enough coats of shine on the wheel chair, shut up about it and do as Sirken says.

[heartbrand]

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

There should be no unlimited level range in solb/perma, there wasn't in classic.

Sirken, Nizzar views the rules here as optional and don't be suprised when he moves his bind at the very last second when push comes to shove.

Heartbrand, that's enough coats of shine on the wheel chair, shut up about it and do as Sirken says.

So what you're stating then if I'm correct, is that Sol B and Perma were never FFA zones, and hence the definition of what is or is not a FFA zone has been arbitrarily applied and therefore open to criticism, on red99? So that would mean that we should potentially revisit then what zones have this FFA [non-classic] tag as well I would think.

[Nirgon]

Hence stfu do it

[heartbrand]

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

Hence stfu do it

I expect better out of you Nirgon on a subject of non-classic changes to EQ with a ruling that makes no sense and has no basis in classic EQ. Your bias and hatred for people on a server you don't play is clouding your vision and leading you to espouse views that are contrary to your very core and essence, "Classic".

[Andis]

again dont matter what was and what is currently

these zones were labeled raid zones for a reason

life isnt fair, there will be no explanation for everything, is all i can say

[heartbrand]

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

again dont matter what was and what is currently

these zones were labeled raid zones for a reason

life isnt fair, there will be no explanation for everything, is all i can say

The "reason" is not classic, it has no basis in classic EverQuest, which supposedly is what the vision of this server is. Therefore, since the application of FFA to zones was arbitrarily made over a year and a half ago, I would think we could re-visit the issue now to see if it's working as intended or not. My belief is that there is no need for this non-classic addition now that casters spawn with zero mana, but if you're going to stick with it then you MUST make KC a FFA non-bind zone as well since bind-rushing tactics have been used there repeatedly during VS raids, which is supposedly the reason the FFA tags and non-binding change were instituted to prevent.

[Nirgon]

I see your point and ban Nizzar and Tune for stripping Beo

[heartbrand]

Please point me to the rule about transferring items from shared accounts.

[Sirken]

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

How is it an "exploit" if there was never a written or even verbal rule against it?

LOL. really man?

so by your logic, its technically not an exploit until someone makes the staff aware of it? logic so incredibly flawed

[heartbrand]

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

LOL. really man?

so by your logic, its technically not an exploit until someone makes the staff aware of it? logic so incredibly flawed

Amelinda was well aware of it. It has been FOURTEEN months with ZERO comment on the issue, and even at the time of the debate of changes to red, not once was there a proposal of retroactive change to peoples binds. NO ONE, not a single person, EVER took the stance that retroactive removal of binds was appropriate or would be enforced, over the course of a two month debate of changes to Red, and not one post or comment was made by a GM on the issue, including ones such as Amelinda who witnessed it. To now call it an "exploit" seems pretty ludicrous to me given these facts. I have ZERO issue with now going forward instituting this rule, I just take issue with it being called an "exploit", and it seems to be in line with everything else on this server, rules made up and changed on the whim with zero idea for the players what is an exploit what is not what is legal what is not.