Server Raid Rules - New and Improved

[girth]

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

If that was directed towards me... I don't speak for my guild fyi. What I said on the previous posts is just my opinion, I have always been an advocate for FFA rules.

Nah man. It was directed at GMs. [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

They KNOW how the population is here, yet they make a ruleset that still allows people to camp bosses and adds shitloads of gray area and they expect to have LESS GM intervention???

OOOOOOOOOOOK

[Loke]

Like I said before, I like the new rules and applaud the server staff for making them. As far as everyone in here bringing up all these instances the rules don't cover - it's going to be one of those things that will have to be worked out among guilds. These are the rules they have chosen, stop sitting here and trying to get them to make changes and just learn to live with them. If we start adding all sorts of changes, these are just going to get bogged down and ridiculous like the rules were before.

[Skope]

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

Like I said before, I like the new rules and applaud the server staff for making them. As far as everyone in here bringing up all these instances the rules don't cover - it's going to be one of those things that will have to be worked out among guilds. These are the rules they have chosen, stop sitting here and trying to get them to make changes and just learn to live with them. If we start adding all sorts of changes, these are just going to get bogged down and ridiculous like the rules were before.

What changes?

No Camping.

Done! [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

[Dukat]

While I think these rules are a massive improvement, theres still a very large GM presence in our raid scene. People can still get banned, people are still going to petition, players are still going to cry to mommy and daddy when things do not go as planned.

Honestly I'd rather be looking over my shoulder watching for trains and ninjas, then to look over my shoulder watching my whole guild get banned because of petitions over some "he said she said". Or having to run fraps 24/7 in an attempt to catch the other guild redhanded and tell on them like its the school playground (I've never been a tattletale and im not looking to start now).

All in all, gratitude to Nilbog for loosening his grip on the raid scene a touch. I know it is not easy to satisfy the various demands of a growing playerbase. I urge the raiding scene to act responsibly with the trust the GM's have extended to us. I also hope that eventually the GM's will build enough confidence in our guild leaders to cut the apron strings and let us handle the endless drama on our own.

Dukat 50 SK [SUSPENDED]
Dural 28 Wizard

[Nedala]

Thanks a lot for putting much work into this and listening to our players. I think this raid rule is way better than what we had.

There is just one thing i dont really get still:

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

Q: Why is there a spawn variance? This isn't classic!
A: While we strive to be as accurate as we can in terms of classic content, this is something that we feel is necessary to keep things running smooth. We believe the spawn variance method promotes both fairness and competition. Please note that we do not refresh the mob spawn times with a crash or patch. On live all raid targets re-spawned with a patch which usually caused bunches of raid targets to spawn. So on live Nagafen or Vox kills were not always exactly one week apart.

Wouldnt it be better if we had no spawn variance combined with the new raid rules? Would prevent permacamps even more now. I really wish we had no spawn variance.

I actually think there would be less drama without a spawn variance now.

[Noleafclover]

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

Wouldnt it be better if we had no spawn variance combined with the new raid rules? Would prevent permacamps even more now. I really wish we had no spawn variance.

I actually think there would be less drama without a spawn variance now.

Well, if people knew to the minute when the mob was spawning, it would get poopsocked like usual, to the highest time bidder. And then there'd be no downside to camping, since you could afk till 10 min before mob was due, buff up, and wreck.

[Samuel]

So it's clear, apparently you can claim a raid mob by kiteing it around with two players. Even if the other guild is ready to engage.

[Noleafclover]

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

I said have the zone trash NOT respawn with him. Right now the entire zone respawns when CT pops and changing that would avoid guilds being leapfrogged while killing trash to clear the zone for CT.

I prefer leapfogging stratagems and intricacy to poopsocking. At least there's some judgment in that, and arguably some skill (when you med, when you pull, to try to be FTE).

But generally... shitstorm inc... no doubt...

[Jayko]

1.) Samuel- No, two people engaging a mob cannot, by definition, establish claim. It's the same issue that Bootleg was addressing, even a 13 person raid force cannot legitimately hold claim and could be steamrolled by a larger force. However, technically unless you can prove they didn't have 15 WHEN they engaged, and not just 15 or more alive, well, yeah, could be enjoying that suspension.

2.) Being an advocate of ffa and then saying they should make anti-camping rules is hilarious in its inconsistency. Camping is a mobilization strategy now, not a guarantee to a mob. That's the best you'll get.

These rules should make it much clearer who has claim because of the FTE aspect of it. No more arcane sequences of screenshots, /whos and timestamps, no more leaving my computer on while I'm at work either to help 'claim' a mob. The increased variance will discourage camping as a strategy because it just won't be as effective. All of these I think are steps in the right direction.

I do, however, think these rules will result in increased asshattery. The problem is that per my reading of the rules the 'don't be a douche bag' thing is a suggestion, not a rule, and as such is not enforceable. There is no requirement that you respect another guild's presence in the zone, merely a suggestion. There is no rule against leap frogging: no rule against moving through their camp as they clear to a raid target so that you can engage it after they cleared to it.

Expecting guilds to work this out consistently on their own without having a ruleset backing it shows either indifference or naivete. It definitely should make less work for GMs, and it certainly gives the guilds that were incapable or unwilling to poopsock mobs more access, but in the end I think without addressing the leapfrogging issue at some point down the road it's going to be a mess.

To be fair, I don't see a way of addressing the issue outside of Fear where the zone repops on boss repop without once again legitimizing AFK camping or making a ridiculously complex ruleset which prompted the rule change in the first place. So, I guess mission accomplished?

Jayko
50 Shaman, Dark Ascension

[Serith]

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

So it's clear, apparently you can claim a raid mob by kiteing it around with two players. Even if the other guild is ready to engage.

kiting*