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

[p-niner]

Sirken snapping slim jims and cold stone stunning scrubs

[heartbrand]

I'll try to spell it out for you one last time. We have custom rules here, one of which is the deeming of certain zones to be "FFA". This was applied to Sol B and Permafrost but not to KC. What I'm saying is that if you're going to apply this rule to Sol B and Permafrost, under the fear of bind rushing and raid disruption, then it should apply to KC as well where said bind rushing and raid disruption has actually occurred regularly, unlike Sol B and Permafrost where even prior to the implementation of the bind removal it was a low occurrence issue.

[heartbrand]

Just because Sirken has a green name on the forums doesn't mean that his logic is somehow superior to others just because he gets to decide who lives or dies here. Plenty of people get to do the same thing in tons of oppressive countries and it doesn't make their decisions any more sensible. The only reason I even posted in this thread wasn't because I truly care what happens in the future with binding in "raid zones", it really is a non-issue to be honest, but because people were saying we have been "exploiting" it here when all post history on the subject suggests strongly the opposite.

[Sirken]

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

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.

i give zero fawks what amelinda was aware of. the entire reason bind was apparently removed from these zones was due to players abusing the privilege of being bound there, and giving themselves unintended advantages. when we as a staff removed binding from these zones we did not do that to further grant an advantage to players bound there, we did it to put an end to all that. now its been pointed out that some players are still bound there.

so in short, until Everyone can bind there, Nobody can bind there.

[p-niner]

Kc can pull mob to zoneline and 100% of nihilum have faction. Shut up you have 1 week for your exploiting guild leader to change bind. Plz put all vox loots on 1 account for Rogean to delete.

[SamwiseRed]

ye common sense would have told me if they removed binding from those zones and I was still bound there, i should probably change my bind.

[heartbrand]

Why are you allowed to remain bound in TD? Doesn't that present an unintended advantage, after all it was an oversight by Verant to allow it to begin with, one that was removed only four days after Kunark release. I can use the exact same logic. Again, I don't really care what happens going forward, though I do think KC should be flagged FFA IF we are to keep FFA tags, which we probably shouldn't since there's no need post caster mana pvp death change. But, I do take issue it with being called an "exploit" suddenly fourteen months later. It's an argument of semantics to me, one that has irked me for quite some time here when rulings are suddenly made up on the spot, a la mage bolting at one time. One GM would death touch people for bolting through walls, another said it's ok, then that person changed his mind, back and forth. It all goes back to the fact that there's still no written rules for this server or clarification for a variety of issues.

[Nirgon]

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

[hagard]

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

As to Hagard, there's a huge difference between exploiting pathing or money dupes or something that doesn't have a rule written about it but is clearly wrong, with something like this, retaining your bind post change following a vigorous two month debate during which not once was it suggested retroactive bind removal should be applied.

how is it not clearly wrong if you are the only one capable of binding there? IE people arent able to bind there now???

[SamwiseRed]

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