We need another "Monopolizing Scout in WW" thread

[Rabitz]

neckbeards do this quest 10 times for their alts

Last night, Llaithe <SAVAGE> did the turn in himself to bank a set of bracers for "corpse runs"...presumably because he could not find a buyer.

It saddens me to see he's not even doing it for plat at this point, but actually relishes in preventing others from advancing.

Reminder that if you buy loot rights you are part of the problem.

This server is old and memories run long.

Take care of each other.

<3

[Fingurs]

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

Last night, Llaithe <SAVAGE> did the turn in himself to bank a set of bracers for "corpse runs"...presumably because he could not find a buyer.

It saddens me to see he's not even doing it for plat at this point, but actually relishes in preventing others from advancing.

Reminder that if you buy loot rights you are part of the problem.

This server is old and memories run long.

Take care of each other.

<3

I suppose you are protest A/A over their farming of raid mobs for their 6th alts too?


..... Didnt think so.

Go Llaile!

[Rabitz]

I suppose you are protest A/A over their farming of raid mobs for their 6th alts too?


..... Didnt think so.

Go Llaile!

I see your point and appreciate the discourse, but in my eyes they are different beasts. Kromzek Captain is not a raid mob. I would guess that if Scout Charisa was "won" by FTE, it would bring some useful competition to the scene. But that's beside the point.

When A/A downs raid targets and loot goes to an alt, it's still going to THEIR alt. That's a huge distinction in my eyes, and worlds apart from selling the loot rights or worse yet, having it rot in a bank to merely spite other players. You may disagree- this is just my opinion.

The fact that there are so many allegations and suspicions of cheating doesn't help paint this as a "may the best man win" scenario either. When <SAVAGE> shows up to Scout pop, they sit in the back and watch as Llaile makes the turn in. If there was even a chance someone else could win, wouldn't you expect everyone with a set of tools to attempt the turn in? I sure would.

What would really put this whole issue to rest would be a live stream of the turn in on Llaile's part, but I know he is under no obligation to do so, and don't expect it. So we are left to lamentations and conjectures in this thread.

Still have keeping my Short Beer handy to award to the next non-Savage Scout winner...I'm rootin' for ya!

<3

P.S. Sorry for spelling Llaile's name incorrectly in previous posts.

[jejukin]

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

Technical knockout

Not really. There's not a near consensus on the server to adopt an equitable roll for the raid mob comparison they were trying to make there. It's not similar.

On the other hand, with Scout, tons of people have come together in a cooperative and mature way, to fairly and honestly for make content work for everyone... and now this guy/gal shows up, and it's a mess again; apparently just because he/she wants to troll.

If it's a TKO, it's to the server. It could support its vast majority of cooperative and equitable players, but instead it allows a truly tiny number of the worst to prove that everyone has to play his/her way or not at all... while letting those same disruptive players capitalize on behavior that is disruptive to the whole community.

[trite]

this quest should be removed from the game, it's too easy versus the reward, one of the worst designed quests in the game and causes nothing but problems.....spam clicking is dumb, it encourages cheating. Rolling is dumb, have to roll against 20 people, half of whom wouldn't have the ability to kill it if everyone else didn't hang around and finish the quest for them in 30 seconds.....worst quest ever

[jejukin]

Here's a question for everyone else, those who want the roll to work - if this has to be player enforced, is there an enforcement mechanism that won't violate server rules?

For example, can we adopt broadly agreed upon sanctions among the top guilds (who as far as I can tell were all on board) against the players who disregard the roll (do not group, do not buy from/ sell to) or even against guilds who refuse to drop said players and/or help them with the encounter after their ill-gotten turn in? Or would such political agreements amongst players and guilds violate a server rule?

[Ikon]

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

Here's a question for everyone else, those who want the roll to work - if this has to be player enforced, is there an enforcement mechanism that won't violate server rules?

For example, can we adopt broadly agreed upon sanctions among the top guilds (who as far as I can tell were all on board) against the players who disregard the roll (do not group, do not buy from/ sell to) or even against guilds who refuse to drop said players and/or help them with the encounter after their ill-gotten turn in? Or would such political agreements amongst players and guilds violate a server rule?

Having CLASSIC server rules on a CLASSIC server would be a good idea. Ridiculous that his is still going on and has been for years.

The CLASSIC PnP meant you could not monopolize a spawn, its the only reason there were lists in classic. If the PNP hadn't existed (as I've proved it did) the servers would have been as toxic as this is when it comes to rare spawns.

A few ignorant people will argue that "PnP was never enforced" or "I played for 55 hundred years and don't remember PNP", it was, your memory sucks, theres a threadnaught in bugs which I started suggesting that there was Lazy Aggro in Kunark and Velious, its a threadnaught because it was filled with people with vested interests trying to lie, pretend, or ignorantly claiming LA didn't exist, it did and while it took 3 or more years to convince people it was added.

PNP is the same, it was an essential part of the classic experience.

[Naethyn]

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

Here's a question for everyone else, those who want the roll to work - if this has to be player enforced, is there an enforcement mechanism that won't violate server rules?

For example, can we adopt broadly agreed upon sanctions among the top guilds (who as far as I can tell were all on board) against the players who disregard the roll (do not group, do not buy from/ sell to) or even against guilds who refuse to drop said players and/or help them with the encounter after their ill-gotten turn in? Or would such political agreements amongst players and guilds violate a server rule?

CSR has said multiple times that if the server can come together on an agreement they would enforce it.

[Rabitz]

CSR has said multiple times that if the server can come together on an agreement they would enforce it.

Seems like the entire server is for the roll minus the 5-10 remaining members of <SAVAGE>. I wonder if this would be enough to be seen as the server "coming together".

To be fair, it did really feel like the server was coming together when we all showed up, had our fair shot at a winning roll, quickly dispatched the Kromzek Captain, and congratulated each other on getting some nice items. The fact that it was never promised but players acted honorably and allowed the roll to persist was really heart warming.

[Rabitz]

Not really. There's not a near consensus on the server to adopt an equitable roll for the raid mob comparison they were trying to make there. It's not similar.

On the other hand, with Scout, tons of people have come together in a cooperative and mature way, to fairly and honestly for make content work for everyone... and now this guy/gal shows up, and it's a mess again; apparently just because he/she wants to troll.

If it's a TKO, it's to the server. It could support its vast majority of cooperative and equitable players, but instead it allows a truly tiny number of the worst to prove that everyone has to play his/her way or not at all... while letting those same disruptive players capitalize on behavior that is disruptive to the whole community.

I think JayDee was being sarcastic, but I could be wrong.