Why is training allowed on p99 in veeshan's peak? (poll asking your opinion)

[Tasslehofp99]

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

You seem to think that our "No CSR" rule is related to SOE's "No Guide" Rule (Maybe also called "No CSR"). The live version was a list of zones that guides could not enter due to the possibility that they may unintentionally interfere with the players.

This is not the same. Our "No CSR" Rule was not put in place to mimick live's, it is a separate rule in place for separate reasons. Therefor, your comparison to any relative eqlive policy is invalid.

Disclaimer: This post was made to correct the misconception that the rule was based on an eqlive policy, which is not. I am not posting to say that we would or wouldn't consider removing our "No CSR" policy, which may or may not be up for reconsideration.

I see, so the non-csr rule inplemented here, what was the justification behind it?
Is there some kind of proof out there somewhere that training was ever allowed on live Eq?


As far as I've read(not saying I'm some kind of research whiz) training was always punishable by GMs on live as it was considered interference/disruptive regardless of the zone. In its current form VP is inpossible to zone into without 50 player forces (if 2 guilds are in zone) and the guild with the bigger train team wins. I don't believe that success in everquest was ever measured by such standards.

[Rhuma7]

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

Our "No CSR" Rule was not put in place to mimick live's, it is a separate rule in place for separate reasons. Therefor, your comparison to any relative eqlive policy is invalid.

Originally Posted by Tasslehofp99 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Fear/sky/hate were listed as non-csr zones in the everquest rule books that I was able to locate.

Maybe this was post velious? I'm not sure why they would suddenly change classic zones to non csr though at that point.

[Rogean]

You'll have to do some research for the exact news post that implemented it, I'm sure that contains information. Or perhaps your fellow players will help. I'm not here to answer your question about why every policy exists, just to fix your misconceptions.

You're still comparing it to eqlive in the rest of your post. It's not an EQLive related policy. You should stop doing that.

[Tasslehofp99]

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

You'll have to do some research for the exact news post that implemented it, I'm sure that contains information. Or perhaps your fellow players will help. I'm not here to answer your question about why every policy exists, just to fix your misconceptions.

You're still comparing it to eqlive in the rest of your post. It's not an EQLive related policy. You should stop doing that.

Alright, thanks.

I wasn't calling you or any other gm/dev out with this post honestly just lookong to gauge server opinion as well as maybe acquiring new info regarding the matter.

[Tasslehofp99]

I underatand.
I'm looking for the reasons why the p99 no csr policy was implemented when it seems pretty clear that the live server rules were a bit different. Like, was there a previous discussion that I may have overlooked?


I'm failing to see why my post is warranting troll like responses when all I was looking for is information and opinions jeez. Sorry for being curious and bored at work.

[Tasslehofp99]

There something wrong with asking a series of questions and asking people's honest opinions?

I mean the server health has been great lately and I figured now would be a good time to throw some inquiries out regarding a situation in the raiding scene. Sorry if i came off as combative, ignorant, or misinformed.


Hope you had a good time in vegas rogean, sry if this poll was out of line or done so in such a way that angered you. Mainly was just looking to kick off a discussion to kill time.

[timhutton]

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

You'll have to do some research for the exact news post that implemented it, I'm sure that contains information. Or perhaps your fellow players will help. I'm not here to answer your question about why every policy exists, just to fix your misconceptions.

You're still comparing it to eqlive in the rest of your post. It's not an EQLive related policy. You should stop doing that.

I decided to be a helpful fellow player, but I cannot determine why such a decision was ever made. If anything, it feels like it was made behind closed doors, and the reason was never presented to the players.

It's entirely possible I am missing or overlooking something though, so in that case please show me any discussions I missed. I will layout what I've found.

The thread where VP was announced is located here:
http://www.project1999.org/forums/sh...ad.php?t=52232

In this thread, a question concerning CSR within the zone is presented:
http://www.project1999.org/forums/sh...2&postcount=22

The way the question is worded, it seems as if Rogean had prior conversations with Nilbog about this situation and that they were already leaning towards a no-CSR stance. A disclaimer was added to the post to clarify it was not official until stated so.

Over the next 15-20 pages people discussed VP, and whether CSR should or should not be allowed in the zone. Some notable highlights:
http://www.project1999.org/forums/sh...3&postcount=30 - discussing SoW original intent and keys being soul-bound

http://www.project1999.org/forums/sh...1&postcount=32 - a prophetic post discussing possible ramifications

http://www.project1999.org/forums/sh...2&postcount=33 - Nilbog's stance

http://www.project1999.org/forums/sh...4&postcount=36 - at the time head-GM Amelindas thoughts

http://www.project1999.org/forums/sh...2&postcount=37 - another prophetic post?

http://www.project1999.org/forums/sh...0&postcount=61 - A discussion of the differences between "No CSR" and "No-pnp" much like this thread

http://www.project1999.org/forums/sh...3&postcount=97 - TR Officer's opinion

http://www.project1999.org/forums/sh...&postcount=151 - post in support of ffa

After 10-15 pages of people discussing VP a decision is stated, however why is never given:
http://www.project1999.org/forums/sh...&postcount=174

Now as far as actual patch notes go, I'm having serious difficulties finding them.

In this thread, it was announced that Red would go live november 18th:
http://www.project1999.org/forums/sh...ad.php?t=53281

The thread for the launch does not include patch notes. Were they posted later? Does anybody have a link?:
http://www.project1999.org/forums/sh...ad.php?t=54865

According to the VP announcement thread, VP was supposed to open the very same night that Red went live. The past 2 threads would indicate that the date for this was November 18th, and I cannot locate any patch notes for that date.

That leads me to believe that the only information as to why training is allowed in VP has to come from the thread where VP was announced, and aside from Rogean's original inquiries, and 10-15 pages of varying player opinion, no information (aside from the decision itself) was ever given.

I'm just as confused as Tassle, and I played during the time in question as well as just spent an hour researching this and I am honestly more confused about the original intent and why training/griefing are allowed than I was when I began.

[Tasslehofp99]

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

I decided to be a helpful fellow player, but I cannot determine why such a decision was ever made. If anything, it feels like it was made behind closed doors, and the reason was never presented to the players.

It's entirely possible I am missing or overlooking something though, so in that case please show me any discussions I missed. I will layout what I've found.

The thread where VP was announced is located here:
http://www.project1999.org/forums/sh...ad.php?t=52232

In this thread, a question concerning CSR within the zone is presented:
http://www.project1999.org/forums/sh...2&postcount=22

The way the question is worded, it seems as if Rogean had prior conversations with Nilbog about this situation and that they were already leaning towards a no-CSR stance. A disclaimer was added to the post to clarify it was not official until stated so.

Over the next 15-20 pages people discussed VP, and whether CSR should or should not be allowed in the zone. Some notable highlights:
http://www.project1999.org/forums/sh...3&postcount=30 - discussing SoW original intent and keys being soul-bound

http://www.project1999.org/forums/sh...1&postcount=32 - a prophetic post discussing possible ramifications

http://www.project1999.org/forums/sh...2&postcount=33 - Nilbog's stance

http://www.project1999.org/forums/sh...4&postcount=36 - at the time head-GM Amelindas thoughts

http://www.project1999.org/forums/sh...2&postcount=37 - another prophetic post?

http://www.project1999.org/forums/sh...0&postcount=61 - A discussion of the differences between "No CSR" and "No-pnp" much like this thread

http://www.project1999.org/forums/sh...3&postcount=97 - TR Officer's opinion

http://www.project1999.org/forums/sh...&postcount=151 - post in support of ffa

After 10-15 pages of people discussing VP a decision is stated, however why is never given:
http://www.project1999.org/forums/sh...&postcount=174

Now as far as actual patch notes go, I'm having serious difficulties finding them.

In this thread, it was announced that Red would go live november 18th:
http://www.project1999.org/forums/sh...ad.php?t=53281

The thread for the launch does not include patch notes. Were they posted later? Does anybody have a link?:
http://www.project1999.org/forums/sh...ad.php?t=54865

According to the VP announcement thread, VP was supposed to open the very same night that Red went live. The past 2 threads would indicate that the date for this was November 18th, and I cannot locate any patch notes for that date.

That leads me to believe that the only information as to why training is allowed in VP has to come from the thread where VP was announced, and aside from Rogean's original inquiries, and 10-15 pages of varying player opinion, no information (aside from the decision itself) was ever given.

I'm just as confused as Tassle, and I played during the time in question as well as just spent an hour researching this and I am honestly more confused about the original intent and why training/griefing are allowed than I was when I began.

Thanks, I also spent a few hours looking around for this information last night and wasn't able to come up with anything. My best guess is that any discussion which held any valuable information was probably had in the "Raiding guild Discussion" area? I'm not entirely sure but I do remember a time when that section of the forums was used regularly. Perhaps someone else knows?

[timhutton]

Originally Posted by Tasslehofp99 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Thanks, I also spent a few hours looking around for this information last night and wasn't able to come up with anything. My best guess is that any discussion which held any valuable information was probably had in the "Raiding guild Discussion" area? I'm not entirely sure but I do remember a time when that section of the forums was used regularly. Perhaps someone else knows?

The raid guild discussion forum did not exist until a month later:
http://www.project1999.org/forums/sh...ad.php?t=57633

[Autotune]

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

You'll have to do some research for the exact news post that implemented it, I'm sure that contains information. Or perhaps your fellow players will help. I'm not here to answer your question about why every policy exists, just to fix your misconceptions.

You're still comparing it to eqlive in the rest of your post. It's not an EQLive related policy. You should stop doing that.