Rules Clarification Request

[Jeni]

Because instead of just solving the situation through pvp means their initial thought was to get cylock to suspend the naked pellers. All that was needed was one bard aoe mesing instead they took their best dps off doze for the whole fight then wiped when the clerics ran out of mana. It's easier to cry and get new rules made then to adapt and overcome.

Hope this trend doesn't continue would love to be able to pvp without fear a bunny will aggro me and I'll eat a suspension.

[Spit]

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

Because instead of just solving the situation through pvp means their initial thought was to get cylock to suspend the naked pellers. All that was needed was one bard aoe mesing instead they took their best dps off doze for the whole fight then wiped when the clerics ran out of mana. It's easier to cry and get new rules made then to adapt and overcome.

Hope this trend doesn't continue would love to be able to pvp without fear a bunny will aggro me and I'll eat a suspension.

Wouldn't really consider Krigara and multiple other mobs who hit for 300s Bunnies. This isn't KC anymore.

Cylock, I think a new sticky thread with the current set of rules on Red 99 would be beneficial and is pretty much what the entire server is asking for

[Lasher]

Few guys in a plane dispelled 140k people in nagasaki japan and that resulted in us having everquest

[grannock]

I for 1 think its good that we have a gm who is around and can deal with issues. It aint easy being a cop, give him a break till he figures out whats what.

[Andrei Chikatilo]

This isn't KC anymore and you're not in Kunark gear anymore.

Quit being a spaghetti boned fruitcake.

We can give him a break but he's going to dramatically alter the server rules based on whining from a new "top guild". Sebilis is still marked as an FFA zone, worry about/fix that first.

[heartbrand]

This ruling opens up a lot of potential PetitionQuest. Is harassing a raid with a few people attacking clerics now illegal? What about if 2-3 groups harass a raid on AoW? Those groups are not capable of killing the mob, is that therefore raid disruption and illegal? The goal with rules should typically be to eliminate as much judgment calls and grey areas as possible, but this ruling seems to open up the door for a lot of PetitionQuest of what is considered a force or not a force, i.e., having 30 people camped out while someone pells, or having people in an adjoining zone, etc.

[GradnerLives]

Some rules just don't scale either.

Intentional XP loss at level 45 is very annoying. At level 60 you'd almost prefer to die to mobs than give the satisfaction of YT in most cases. It's a rule that's designed to protect players that are levelling from having their progress negated, not shield max level raid forces from PVP.

Being a part of a smaller group you should be able to prevent a larger force from gearing up. It's one of the only ways you can fight back since you can't necessarily face them head on at full strength.

[Retticus]

If you are standing next to a zoneout and you think a mob is going to agro you and hurt you in away way, I'd reco zoning.

[GradnerLives]

For example:

Someone roots a kiting bard: no one cares because they put themselves in that situation with the possibility of pvp.

Someone dispells a chanter pet: no one cares because they put themselves in that situation with the possibility of pvp.

Someone dispells a slowed raid mob: suspend them for a week.

Seems backwards given that the first two are almost guaranteed to cause XP loss to a levelling character who has no recourse or defense besides maybe running away. In the last case you're essentially rendering a raid force untouchable unless you have 7+ people when their XP loss is basically meaningless to 99% of their players by comparison to the first two.

[Aesop]

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

For example:

Someone roots a kiting bard: no one cares because they put themselves in that situation with the possibility of pvp.

Someone dispells a chanter pet: no one cares because they put themselves in that situation with the possibility of pvp.

Someone dispells a slowed raid mob: suspend them for a week.

Seems backwards given that the first two are almost guaranteed to cause XP loss to a levelling character who has no recourse or defense besides maybe running away. In the last case you're essentially rendering a raid force untouchable unless you have 7+ people when their XP loss is basically meaningless to 99% of their players by comparison to the first two.