Roshen, tell us more about your enforcement plans.

Discussion in 'Time Locked Progression Servers' started by Hateseeker, May 6, 2015.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Hateseeker Augur

    It's folly to think that you can sail in X amount of time later (after complaints mount) with brutally random enforcement; all you're really going to accomplish with what was said in today's announcement, is that the more aggressive players will KS/DPS-race/monopolize until they run into GM resistance, while others will try to be nice all along, and those nice players will suffer as they try to follow rules others are not following.

    So what's it going to be? Will you suspend PnP and allow those who are able to use their character's abilities to secure the loot to do so? Or will you continue on the current path and let the players who will stop at nothing have the run of the place, until physically stopped by random and capricious enforcement actions?

    You know that the nature of this server is going to lead to you throwing up your hands 3 months later and asking us if we just want DPS racing...why not address it now?
    MaestroM likes this.
  2. PeppeLePeu Elder

    I honestly would not be surprised if it gets as bad as we all fear that they just extend the instancing software into all parts of the game. We are already more or less beta testing it from the get go with instanced starting zones.
    jagarr likes this.
  3. Vaclav Augur


    Seems contradictory to the "We absolutely won't instance raids" part of the voting results post.

    My hunch is it will be something more 'nuclear' in nature. Like banishment from the server. Eventually making it a nice server where people get along, because if they don't they'll get rights to the server revoked from their account.

    That seems like the harshest sane method I can think of.
    Fallfyres and MBear like this.
  4. Ltldogg Augur

    It will get bad and immediately. No doubt about it and the GMs will not be able to handle it, stop it or correctly police it. We need code in place to deal with the issue.
    Irbax_Smoo likes this.
  5. Hateseeker Augur

    Except that they'll sail in weeks after people realize that fighting for your loot is the only way you'll get any; and once people come to that realization, any enforcement they inflict will be absolutely unfair.

    Besides, if they actually start banning people for trying to acquire loot in a situation where the loot is so undersaturated*, what's next? Making rules against boxing software?

    * People try to claim that instancing oversaturates gear, but since we have a lot more raiders or aggressive group players than a classic server did in 1999, gear is actually going to be undersaturated.
    Irbax_Smoo likes this.
  6. Vaclav Augur

    They've already made it clear with the Hans Gruber stuff that they'd be very oppressive.

    And I'm not suggesting banning - banishment - revoking the right to log into the TLP servers, but allow them to freely play on whatever other current server where the same shenanigans would have no real impact on others.
  7. Batbener Augur

    Read between the lines, people. They want us to rotate the mobs, like a lot of servers did back then. If "they" have to decide on a solution, they are going to make sure the top raid guilds don't like it. "The people" voted for a 6 month classic game. That tells them that "the people" want to take their time and get to the content at their own pace. Make room for them, or daybreak will make room for them, and high end raiders wont like it. They are looking at it(probably correctly in my opinion) that the rush to end content raiders ruined it for the majority of people the first 2 progression rounds, so they are going to make it more friendly to the casual this time. So play nice, or get booted.

    I could be wrong, but I doubt it.
    fazool, Barton and Ltldogg like this.
  8. taliefer Augur

    0 chance they ban people over raid drama.
  9. Hateseeker Augur

    I know, that's why I'm using the words brutal and unfair when referring to what they will do.

    As for "shenanigans" , my point is that a lot of people will realize that they need to do these things to have hope of loot. Thus, it won't be fair to come in and brutalize people that have adapted to the reality of the overcrowding.

    And after the people get to that content, at whatever pace, they will not be able to consume it due to overcrowding/undersaturation. Even people who might want to take it slow will begin DPS racing, even if in group content because they don't raid, as they realize it's either that or come back 2 weeks later and hope no one is camping the mobs they want.
  10. Darth Augur

    FTFY
  11. Batbener Augur

    And after the people get to that content, at whatever pace, they will not be able to consume it due to overcrowding/undersaturation. Even people who might want to take it slow will begin DPS racing, even if in group content because they don't raid, as they realize it's either that or come back 2 weeks later and hope no one is camping the mobs they want.[/quote]


    So you missed the part about they want a player based rotation system? Set a rotation early, and set rules for how you get into the rotation. Or be prepared to get decimated in the Roman army sense. That's just the way I read it.
    Barton likes this.
  12. Hateseeker Augur

    I didn't miss anything. I just know that it will not work that way just because they say. Your decimation reference at least shows you acknowledge that there will be unfair enforcement. See below:

    You had pointed out somewhere that there would be 10-12 guilds raiding, compared to 3-4 back in 1999. Classic just can't sustain that many camped mobs (both raid and group) without people beginning to realize that if they intend to get anything done within the 6 months, that they have to step up and fight for it - which means DPS racing or other tricks.

    Something has to give. Asking the server to support that many people is like asking someone who can deadlift 400 pounds to deadlift 600 pounds.
  13. MBear Augur

    Seems like there is a reasonable chance he might be able to, right?
  14. Batbener Augur

    Well, I can tell you when I started playing, Velious had just arrived. I was raid capable about 5 months later. The wait on epic mobs was nothing like what happened on any Vulak raid. There were 3 guilds wanting to kill Nagy. There were 130 clerics wanting to kill their guy in Sol Ro. One of my favorite stories was a cleric that spent 53 hours waiting for his turn. Then his monitor started screwing up and all the colors skewed. He got up and went to get a drink and realized it was his eyes, not the monitor. We had a system, and we enforced it. That's what they want.
    MBear likes this.
  15. Barton The Mischievous

    The way I read it is The players need to find an Equitable way to divide raid mobs meaning some way that is fair or they will step in and as they don't have the man/woman power to spare often, if they have to step in the players will not like it at all. KS'ing is not equitable or fair nor is poop socking and DPS race is just a nice way to say KS and hope people think it is something else. I expect we will see them step in and have to do something in less than 2 months but I'm cynical about human nature and expect that a lot of a'hats will not abide by any agreement anyway
  16. Oberon Augur

    Will we have a GM or do I need to roll enchanter first so I can settle all dungeon disputes myself
  17. Detheb Augur

    It comes down to this. We need to know what your plans are before hand Roshen. Without a doubt, this server is going to be terrible, especially considering the poll results. I'd wager that 80% of the raiders(Aka those that are actually going to be playing on the server in 2 years), are disappointed in the poll results as a whole. Because, basically, the results are the absolute worst mix for anyone that intends on raiding, even more so considering you wont instance raid content.

    With 1 guild alone probably reaching over 350 paid subs, knowing what your plans for enforcement if it isn't a play nice enviroment, which it wont be, would be probably beneficial in people either A. Coming to an agreement or B. Not playing at all. This cannot be a Fippy/Vulak 2.0 scenario in which GMs randomly enforce rules that they never enforced before. It was unacceptable then, and will for sure be unacceptable now.

    Also, it would probably be a good idea to open a poll in regards to voting, speed of server, etc about a month into the server and only players within 11(or 21?) levels of cap can vote on it. The CURRENT poll was set up in a way that you basically forced people who had absolutely 0 care in the world, to vote. So anything that was "Option 1" obviously had a far larger voting share than It realistically should have. Find out what the players who are actually playing the server prefer, and you may see a pretty drastic difference in your polling results.
  18. Barton The Mischievous

    Highlighted the point that they already said if the players on the server decide they want a change they would investigate doing so, that implies to me that at some point they will poll only the players on the server and see if any acceleration in the timeline is wanted by the majority that play on the server
    Irbax_Smoo and Cloudous like this.
  19. Fallfyres Augur

    ------------------
    But they didn't code it. ;o/
  20. Vaclav Augur

    Detheb, no offense - but a sensible thing based on what they already said would be to be proactive to avoid the "Hans Gruber" solution.

    It's a mystery bag solution that they're trying to make very clear will not be fun to be on the receiving end of.

    So rather than trying to figure out the specifics to ride as close to the line as possible, why not extend an olive branch to the other guilds from the get-go and try to be reasonable thus avoiding any potential risk?

    It's quite clear that they're saying that the existing rules are meant to be followed - but it will largely be hands off most of the time - however if they're pushed to actually get involved punishment will be quick and harsh to make sure that it doesn't continue happening.

    I'd suggest starting to work on an equitable council of some sort to make sure things end up being handled reasonably if I were you - rather than trying to think how you can game the system to take best advantage.

    The former will certainly not have any risk of harsh punishment attached - the latter however absolutely has some degree of risk attached.
    Fallfyres likes this.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page