A Discussion

[pip]

His right i'm wrong, His right i'm wrong ? who cares? to much male testerone in this thread, just sort out this relic stuff imo, all no on this dying server ac'ing is wrong end of? words don't fix it action does?

 

[Everz]

1: People on Dyvet AC raided for many reasons. Mostly because they were awake and wanted to RvR. We do not consider and will never consider keep taking to be against the rules. It cannot be griefing.
2: There were better things they could have done. Actions could have been taken to express their point of view without sabotaging their realm. They were entitlted to their opinion, they were not entitled tot enforce it on the rest of the realm.
3: My comment was with reference to a keep containing a relic, not just to any keep.
4: I am not aware of any similar incidents on Mythic servers.



This situation has never happened before. We look at all incidents ona case by case basis as it's not possible nor desirable to have a blanket policy to cover ever eventuality.

Not happened before...ofc..right.. its happened on nearly all of the US clusters, mythic did nothing and even dismissed those who complained against it.

 

[Sharkith]

1: People on Dyvet AC raided for many reasons. Mostly because they were awake and wanted to RvR. We do not consider and will never consider keep taking to be against the rules. It cannot be griefing.

1) its a fact Requiel wether you like it or not that people did it to grief others. It has been stated here several times over that the game mechanics were used to giref people. You cannot ignore that. Sure people did these raids for other reasons but you cannot ignore what they are telling you. It was also done to grief others.

You are being manipulated and you cannot even see it.

2: There were better things they could have done. Actions could have been taken to express their point of view without sabotaging their realm. They were entitlted to their opinion, they were not entitled tot enforce it on the rest of the realm.

2) people were sick of it and had been expressing their point of view for over a year on this. You did nothing as a company to try and produce a compromise as a company. Nothing. You were told countless times that it was causing problems. Then when some people took an action to try and lead it to a solution. You foreclosed that action and supported by fait those doing the AC raids. I told you this in the PM's. Your position is hypocritical people can see that and I did try to warn you they would see it.

3: My comment was with reference to a keep containing a relic, not just to any keep.

3) I know what your comment was about I have not said otherwise. I still think your wrong - what you haven't done is justify your perspective which is partly why this keeps coming up.

I will put this to you again now I have your attention. If I own a keep where a relic is and I feel my realm has damaged its reputation by acting underhandedly why can't I react to that by lowering that keep? Why can't I roleplay in this roleplaying game Requiel?

4: I am not aware of any similar incidents on Mythic servers.

4) You have been made aware that similar things have happened there through this thread and you are choosing to avoid that difference. Check two pages back one person who plays there pointed out it has happened on his server and nobody did anything. It is a fact Requiel. Best not deny it or you risk calling those people liars.

You acted. If you act you should do it impartially and that is precisley why this won't go away. If you had not acted it would have been much more impartial.

 

[joap]

2: There were better things they could have done. Actions could have been taken to express their point of view without sabotaging their realm. They were entitlted to their opinion, they were not entitled tot enforce it on the rest of the realm.
3: My comment was with reference to a keep containing a relic, not just to any keep.

Requiel, this will sound very stupid, but i'm honestly confused. Can you elaborate on how you see this as sabotage?
Is this sabotage because the keep had an enemy relic?
Was it sabotage because other guilds had offered to take over the keep and TT refused to /gc release?
If my guild had, let's say glenlock at lvl 5 and another offered to take it and set at lvl 10 and i refused, would i be sabotaging mid?
What if there was a relic in glen at that time, would that change things?

This situation has never happened before. We look at all incidents ona case by case basis as it's not possible nor desirable to have a blanket policy to cover ever eventuality.

Actually it is desirable to have such a policy. Then the rules of the game are out much clearer. Problem is, you can't really set a suficiently robust set of rules that can handle every possible scenario, simply because it's not humanly possible to do.


And people have said that there was at least one time when an event with certain similarities happened (AoD setting a keep to lvl1), and GoA did (to my knowledge) nothing.

 

[Thorwyn]

You might think the point is moot but it is not that simple. If I pay for a product I expect it to deliver. If it turns out to be something else than what I thought I am going to get upset.

But the product is still the same. It´s the players (i.e. you, me and all the others), who have changed their point of view abut the game. Because when we started playing the game, we didn´t know jack shit about relic raids and the word "adding" was a distant thing from the math lessons in school.

When a community or game is changing, it´s always frustrating. I can either chose to change it (which is what you and TT and all the other people here are so eagerly doing), or just head on to another game. If you´re going for the first option, you will sooner or later come to a point, where you have to ask yourself if this is really worth the wasted energy. I`m not telling you to stfu and fook off. But some things just won´t change. "Never grieve over the irretrievable"... those Keltoi muppets are not that stupid.

And finally: just turn the situation around. Imagine Mythic would have handled situations like this in the same way as GoA did, while GoA would have Mythics stance. And all of a sudden, expecting GoA to "follow the people who invented the game" isn´t that attractive anymore.

 

[Sharkith]

But the product is still the same. It´s the players (i.e. you, me and all the others), who have changed their point of view abut the game. Because when we started playing the game, we didn´t know jack shit about relic raids and the word "adding" was a distant thing from the math lessons in school.

When a community or game is changing, it´s always frustrating. I can either chose to change it (which is what you and TT and all the other people here are so eagerly doing), or just head on to another game. If you´re going for the first option, you will sooner or later come to a point, where you have to ask yourself if this is really worth the wasted energy. I`m not telling you to stfu and fook off. But some things just won´t change. "Never grieve over the irretrievable"... those Keltoi muppets are not that stupid.

I couldn't agree more to be honest it is quite a complex thing.

And finally: just turn the situation around. Imagine Mythic would have handled situations like this in the same way as GoA did, while GoA would have Mythics stance. And all of a sudden, expecting GoA to "follow the people who invented the game" isn´t that attractive anymore.

You see you can't wriggle out of this by imagining a perfect world. Fact Mythic don't ban people for dropping relic keeps to 1. Fact.

The fact doesn't go away. See?

 

[Thorwyn]

You see you can't wriggle out of this by imagining a perfect world. Fact Mythic don't ban people for dropping relic keeps to 1. Fact.

Yes.. and fact Mythic don´t care about people like Dark Wolves and Nerner, who´re playing (or have played) the game with the declared intention to grieve other players. I`m not imagining a perfect world. I just want to point out, that your recomendation to follow the people who have made the game can quite easily lead to a selfpwnage situation.

 

[Everz]

afaik since goa bought the license they have to follow the rules set by mythic.. why are they making up there own?

 

[Oneeyedjack]

1: People on Dyvet AC raided for many reasons. Mostly because they were awake and wanted to RvR. We do not consider and will never consider keep taking to be against the rules. It cannot be griefing.
2: There were better things they could have done. Actions could have been taken to express their point of view without sabotaging their realm. They were entitlted to their opinion, they were not entitled tot enforce it on the rest of the realm.
3: My comment was with reference to a keep containing a relic, not just to any keep.
4: I am not aware of any similar incidents on Mythic servers.



This situation has never happened before. We look at all incidents ona case by case basis as it's not possible nor desirable to have a blanket policy to cover ever eventuality.

Sigh.

I have been hoping that at some point GOA would have come to their senses and see their customers is not happy the way the game is being played. I have seen 100s and 100s of posts expressing their frustration and trying to explain why they dont like to invest time and energy in large scale RvR. Any normal company would try and take actions to help their customers get a great experience by buying their products and services. I have been closing my eyes for a long time and hoping GOA would take a stand against AC raids. But this has not happend. All I have seen is Requiel expressing that he personally find it lame to do AC raids and then go on and defend it and those people doing it. I fully accept is not easy for GOA to do much about those people that clearly grief 3 realms, by repeated AC raids. But what I cant accept is there has been NO actions, NO statements and NO attempts to sort out a clearly messed up situation. I has been hoping and searching for a shred of oblignigness towards a huge part of the community that feels they have been griefed and made fools of by the people ACing our realms over and over and over again. Im not looking for a complete solution to the problem, Im not looking for bans being handed out to people ACing and Im not even looking for major changes in the game or the socalled SOTG. The only thing I was hoping for was an acceptance of this issue as a problem and GOA telling us that they will ofc try their best to help sort it. This is basic knowledge in handling any minor and major conflicts that both sides must feel like they have been heard and a willingness from the opposite side to help sort the problems. Instead I feel like GOA has been nowhere near accepting that AC raiding has been griefing 3 realms for the last year or more. In other words a great deal of their customers (maybe even the majoraty) has been wrong in feeling greifed by numorous of AC raids done by a small part of the players.

Like Sharkith says, this feels to many people, including me, that GOA has taken a side in this conflict and by their statements and actions (or the lack of it) is telling us to accept it. Since GOA dont provide us any alternative or hope that things can change, I sadly only see 1 option left - leave the game. I have been avoiding this option as long as possible, because I love this game and still find it to be the best online game on the market, but the alternative would be to go against my feelings, way of thinking and offers no solutions. It has nothing for me to do with declining population on the servers (I have tons of friends still playing and a big strong guild), it has to do with I dont like the way this game has been played lately and I simply cant see GOA do ANYTHING to improove the situation. I feel betrayed by the company that I pay to provide me a good time online and instead they tell me to suck it up and basically I dont have a right to feel griefed by the AC raids the realm of Albion have done several times.

I have even seen lots of players from Albion has tried to help this situation and they expressed views that they dont like AC raids and dont condone it and want to stop them from happening, but the fact remains, they cant do anything about it. Its still up to a very small precentage of players in Albion to stop and we all know they wont do it. They clearly only think of themselves and how it would be fun for them to annoy as many people as possible (even posted tons of times by their own realm mates). They have posted on this forum they dont care and they do it to grief the other realms (even tho Requiel says they dont).

The problem is if Albion would loose their relics tomorrow, we all know they would AC them back again (not the realm of Albion but the same people that has done it over and over and over again, who just happen to play in the realm Albion). There is zero trust from Midgard and Hibernia towards the realm of Albion, because of a small group of people grieving playstyle. GOA wont help or accept the problem and that leaves us with 1 option - leave the game (change server). I feel like shit doing it, I love the game, I love most of my realm mates, I even love many of my enemies and the great times we have been battling each other, but due to a small group of people I dont feel I can play the game as it was intended and I cannot see any solutions. It a sad day for me, but I think I have to accept I have payed my last subscription, and it was WAY sooner than I have hope for.

 

[Tuthmes]

1: People on Dyvet AC raided for many reasons. Mostly because they were awake and wanted to RvR. We do not consider and will never consider keep taking to be against the rules. It cannot be griefing.
2: There were better things they could have done. Actions could have been taken to express their point of view without sabotaging their realm. They were entitlted to their opinion, they were not entitled tot enforce it on the rest of the realm.
3: My comment was with reference to a keep containing a relic, not just to any keep.
4: I am not aware of any similar incidents on Mythic servers.



This situation has never happened before. We look at all incidents ona case by case basis as it's not possible nor desirable to have a blanket policy to cover ever eventuality.

1. https://forums.freddyshouse.com/showthread.php?t=208864

Keep abusing these walls banshees good rps for you, we will try to avoid the bridges and just take your keeps/relics from now on.

Have reported banshees to rightnow and they dont do anything about it, then you keep reporting our midnight relics from now on that they wont do anything about.

You stop abusing that, we wont pve your relics anymore.

well proberly does not matter if we leave relics/keeps alone since we get the blame anyway so we just might do that every night to shut down the server

Etc, look it up for once Requiel...

2. Yet they have (you give them) the "option" to lower the keep. If no one reported it, you wouldnt have done anything. Also looking this board for relic dropping (prydwen), you come across some threads.

3. So relics matter all of a sudden to Goa aswell ^^.

4. People have stated this over and over, yet you keep on deny'ing it. Wake up Requiel.

 

[IainC]

1) its a fact Requiel wether you like it or not that people did it to grief others. It has been stated here several times over that the game mechanics were used to giref people. You cannot ignore that. Sure people did these raids for other reasons but you cannot ignore what they are telling you. It was also done to grief others.

And as I have explained we do not consider taking keeps to be griefing. It is not possible to grief someone by taking a keep, it's the whole point of the game. It would be like saying 'I levelled up to annoy those other people' - it's simply not a way of griefing.

2) people were sick of it and had been expressing their point of view for over a year on this. You did nothing as a company to try and produce a compromise as a company. Nothing. You were told countless times that it was causing problems. Then when some people took an action to try and lead it to a solution. You foreclosed that action and supported by fait those doing the AC raids. I told you this in the PM's. Your position is hypocritical people can see that and I did try to warn you they would see it.

We did nothing because we could and should do nothing. We absolutely will not make a call that part of the game is off limits at offpeak times. We will never tell people that they are not allowed to play the game in the way that it is intended. Our decision was not taken to support the AC raiders, it was taken to show that the action taken in response to that was unacceptable. We as a company have no agenda to push on this. If people want to object to AC raids then that's fine, if people want to take part in AC raids then that's also fine.

3) I know what your comment was about I have not said otherwise. I still think your wrong - what you haven't done is justify your perspective which is partly why this keeps coming up.

Your point suggested that I said dropping any keep to level 1 weould be against the SotG. That wasn't what I said or implied. Just clearing that up.

I will put this to you again now I have your attention. If I own a keep where a relic is and I feel my realm has damaged its reputation by acting underhandedly why can't I react to that by lowering that keep? Why can't I roleplay in this roleplaying game Requiel?

Because your actions affect your entire realm. You have the right to your opinion but you do not have the right to enforce that opinion on others. You can roleplay all you like as long as your roleplay does not impact other people negatively.

4) You have been made aware that similar things have happened there through this thread and you are choosing to avoid that difference. Check two pages back one person who plays there pointed out it has happened on his server and nobody did anything. It is a fact Requiel. Best not deny it or you risk calling those people liars.

I'm not calling anyone a liar. I don't have the details on those other incidents and I am not convinced that they are analogous. I won't draw parallels unless I am in full possession of all the facts.

You acted. If you act you should do it impartially and that is precisley why this won't go away. If you had not acted it would have been much more impartial.

It would also have been the wrong call.

Requiel, this will sound very stupid, but i'm honestly confused. Can you elaborate on how you see this as sabotage?
Is this sabotage because the keep had an enemy relic?
Was it sabotage because other guilds had offered to take over the keep and TT refused to /gc release?
If my guild had, let's say glenlock at lvl 5 and another offered to take it and set at lvl 10 and i refused, would i be sabotaging mid?
What if there was a relic in glen at that time, would that change things?

Fundamentally, yes it would change things.
As I saids above the individuals involved (or their guilds) did not have th right to enforce their opinion on the rest of their realm. By downgrading the keep rather than releasing it, they were undermining their realm and were putting themselves over a line. If they had released it, that would have been fine.

I don't want to get drawn into specifics here as we evaluate each report on its own merits. Generally we wouldn't take action over those kind of incidents unless it was very clear what was going on and we were convinced of the reasons behind it. In any case where we can't absolutely determine the intention beyond any reasonable doubt then we will do nothing as we do not want to punish people wrongly. In most cases like this that I've investigated, the details are sufficiently foggy that it would have been impossible for us to justify acting. This incident was unusual in that regard. We had very clear evidence of exactly why this was done and so we were able to take action.

Normally we don't worry too much about keeps from a CoC/SotG perspective unless there's some other motive. For example there was an incident some time ago where a guild lowered a keep so that they could capture it with their characters on a different realm - that sort of thing is totally unacceptable. In other cases we normally don't act as these things tend to average out. This case however crossed a line, we absolutely don't want to sanction the undermining of an entire realm by a small group of individuals. By not acting we would have said that it's fine to do so and set a precedent that we did not want to set.

 

[Oneeyedjack]

we absolutely don't want to sanction the undermining of an entire realm by a small group of individuals. By not acting we would have said that it's fine to do so and set a precedent that we did not want to set.

Hmmm how about undermining 3 realms and intentions of the game???

ACing relics over and over again to annoy the other realms and even realm mates.

 

[Jesta]

*yawn*

 

[pip]

And as I have explained we do not consider taking keeps to be griefing. It is not possible to grief someone by taking a keep, it's the whole point of the game. It would be like saying 'I levelled up to annoy those other people' - it's simply not a way of griefing.


We did nothing because we could and should do nothing. We absolutely will not make a call that part of the game is off limits at offpeak times. We will never tell people that they are not allowed to play the game in the way that it is intended. Our decision was not taken to support the AC raiders, it was taken to show that the action taken in response to that was unacceptable. We as a company have no agenda to push on this. If people want to object to AC raids then that's fine, if people want to take part in AC raids then that's also fine.


Your point suggested that I said dropping any keep to level 1 weould be against the SotG. That wasn't what I said or implied. Just clearing that up.



Because your actions affect your entire realm. You have the right to your opinion but you do not have the right to enforce that opinion on others. You can roleplay all you like as long as your roleplay does not impact other people negatively.


I'm not calling anyone a liar. I don't have the details on those other incidents and I am not convinced that they are analogous. I won't draw parallels unless I am in full possession of all the facts.


It would also have been the wrong call.


Fundamentally, yes it would change things.
As I saids above the individuals involved (or their guilds) did not have th right to enforce their opinion on the rest of their realm. By downgrading the keep rather than releasing it, they were undermining their realm and were putting themselves over a line. If they had released it, that would have been fine.

I don't want to get drawn into specifics here as we evaluate each report on its own merits. Generally we wouldn't take action over those kind of incidents unless it was very clear what was going on and we were convinced of the reasons behind it. In any case where we can't absolutely determine the intention beyond any reasonable doubt then we will do nothing as we do not want to punish people wrongly. In most cases like this that I've investigated, the details are sufficiently foggy that it would have been impossible for us to justify acting. This incident was unusual in that regard. We had very clear evidence of exactly why this was done and so we were able to take action.

Normally we don't worry too much about keeps from a CoC/SotG perspective unless there's some other motive. For example there was an incident some time ago where a guild lowered a keep so that they could capture it with their characters on a different realm - that sort of thing is totally unacceptable. In other cases we normally don't act as these things tend to average out. This case however crossed a line, we absolutely don't want to sanction the undermining of an entire realm by a small group of individuals. By not acting we would have said that it's fine to do so and set a precedent that we did not want to set.

Such a narrow view? Exc/Pry server as died to this ac'ing? and yet you stand by your stupid morals about how this game should be played? if you spent 5% of your time to see what is going on in this server it would be a better place?if you think ac'ing is not against the sotg then why is there so many moaning about it? The people do not want you to ban folks for ac'ing but just make the keeps harder to take so a fg can't pve the relics? Now is that to much to ask for? Well i quess for a gm that thought relics was 5% bonus i wont hold my breath.

 

[Sharkith]

Requiel,

you have been told here that people took keeps and took relics to grief other players. They used the tools of the game to upset a lot of your playerbase. Your in the funny position of telling those that have told you they did that that they didn't and they are wrong. You are telling them that when they took those relics they were not griefing in your eyes.

You started this discussion and now your in the unenviable position of denying us our opinion now. Even when you say we are entitled to it? How funny is that?

You seemed to be honest when you started the discussion you asked why do people get so worked up about relics.

We told you people were griefing us.
Some people even told you they took relics to grief us.
And your now saying it cannot be griefing.

Requiel why did you start this discussion?

Lets go over it again.

We are claiming that people can use the in game mechanics to grief others and that they have done so here. We are asking you to acknowledge that this has happened.

On the difference between GOA and Mythic.
I will cut you some slack what TT did might be very different to what has happened elsewhere. However, and you have to admit this. It has happened and people were not banned. Now you said to me that such an action could never not be against the SoTG. That position is simply incompatible with Mythics. That is the point - don't try to deflect it onto the specifics of this case.

In taking that stance you hand the whole situation over to a bunch of griefers and you risk losing even more players. In fact you hand the game to them on a platter.

I will put it to you that this could have been sorted out much easier by us without your intervention. You as a company with this stance are refusing us the right to find our own way because you have removed possibly the only option we could have had to try and take our stand. Most of us agree this was bad and most express the view that they would like to try and sort it out. You are denying people the ability to do so.

 

[IainC]

Requiel,

you have been told here that people took keeps and took relics to grief other players. They used the tools of the game to upset a lot of your playerbase. Your in the funny position of telling those that have told you they did that that they didn't and they are wrong. You are telling them that when they took those relics they were not griefing in your eyes.

You started this discussion and now your in the unenviable position of denying us our opinion now. Even when you say we are entitled to it? How funny is that?

You are completely entitled to your opinion. I'm not denying that. I'm simply stating that playing the game in the manner intended is not griefing, no matter what.

Requiel why did you start this discussion?

As I've said, to allow the different sides of the fence to reach an understanding in a reasonably moderated thread which isn't tied to any one specific incident.

We are claiming that people can use the in game mechanics to grief others and that they have done so here. We are asking you to acknowledge that this has happened.

And I am saying that this is not possible. We will not make the call that taking a keep can be grief play. To do so is to set a very dangerous precedent and to instantly remove legitimate game play choices.

On the difference between GOA and Mythic.
I will cut you some slack what TT did might be very different to what has happened elsewhere. However, and you have to admit this. It has happened and people were not banned. Now you said to me that such an action could never not be against the SoTG. That position is simply incompatible with Mythics. That is the point - don't try to deflect it onto the specifics of this case.

I'm not admitting anything. I simply don't know the specifics of those cases on the Mythic servers. In any case I am no more bound by their precedents than they are by mine.

In taking that stance you hand the whole situation over to a bunch of griefers and you risk losing even more players. In fact you hand the game to them on a platter.

Only because peopel made it into that issue. TT/BF could have made their point in a different way and we would not have intervened. Our decision had nothing to do with AC raiding, it was purely to do with the action taken by the two individuals. We made no judgements at all on the wider aspects.

I will put it to you that this could have been sorted out much easier by us without your intervention. You as a company with this stance are refusing us the right to find our own way because you have removed possibly the only option we could have had to try and take our stand. Most of us agree this was bad and most express the view that they would like to try and sort it out. You are denying people the ability to do so.

Not at all. We are saying that there are lines you should not cross. You can hold your opinions and play according to your principles however you cannot enforce those opinions and principles on others.
Let's divorce this from the AC issue (as in fact we did when we made the decision in the first place). We looked at the precedent we were going to set from this ruling and considered other situations where we may have to implement it. In all of those situations acting was better than not acting and thus the precedent was a good one. Let's say there was a prime time RR and the relic is placed in a friendly keep. The GM who is claiming that keep decides that he doesn't want the relic - perhaps he wants relic balance, perhaps he doesn't like the person who led the RR - the reason isn't important. Are you honestly saying that he has the right to undermine the rest of his realm and drop his keep to level 1 because of his personal opinions? Can you not honestly see that there would be an expectation that we would get involved by a large part of the playerbase? The AC issue was entirely irrelevant to our decision, we considered only the action by BF/TT, to do otherwise would have been grossly unfair.

 

[Thadius]

TBH, GOA should have just kept out of it

 

[Gahn]

1: People on Dyvet AC raided for many reasons. Mostly because they were awake and wanted to RvR. We do not consider and will never consider keep taking to be against the rules. It cannot be griefing.
2: There were better things they could have done. Actions could have been taken to express their point of view without sabotaging their realm. They were entitlted to their opinion, they were not entitled tot enforce it on the rest of the realm.
3: My comment was with reference to a keep containing a relic, not just to any keep.
4: I am not aware of any similar incidents on Mythic servers.



This situation has never happened before. We look at all incidents ona case by case basis as it's not possible nor desirable to have a blanket policy to cover ever eventuality.

Wtf Requiel, this summer AoD dropped Crim to level 1, judging by your ACTUAL meter, that action was against the SoTG also and raised alot of bitching both in Game and in Forums (as did when the relic was dropped in front at APK in Old Frontiers). Now don't try and fool us, we play day in day out and we live these things 1st person.
Maybe if u would have looked closer to the game and be more in touch with the community u would have smelled the shit u were about to raise with that tragic decision.

 

[Kagato]

Wtf Requiel, this summer AoD dropped Crim to level 1, judging by your ACTUAL meter, that action was against the SoTG also and raised alot of bitching both in Game and in Forums (as did when the relic was dropped in front at APK in Old Frontiers). Now don't try and fool us, we play day in day out and we live these things 1st person.
Maybe if u would have looked closer to the game and be more in touch with the community u would have smelled the shit u were about to raise with that tragic decision.

There was no relic in crim, it was completely unrelated incident and done to stop irvr in emain.

Though personally i'd rate that equally as lame and said so at the time, there was NO relics involved.

 

[Gahn]

There was no relic in crim, it was completely unrelated incident and done to stop irvr in emain.

Though personally i'd rate that equally as lame and said so at the time, there was NO relics involved.

Just stop being childish Kagato, we are talking about a principle (what's the line that's drawn to affect others/griefing their rights in game).
So let's stop bsing about the relic and let's try to discuss from a Rule perspective.
Also u don't talk (conveniently i'd say) of the OF incident.

 

[Tuthmes]

Give it up for gods sake - its not even worth replying to the statements above as you could pick the holes youself.

indeed.

 

[Cromcruaich]

1: People on Dyvet AC raided for many reasons. Mostly because they were awake and wanted to RvR. We do not consider and will never consider keep taking to be against the rules. It cannot be griefing.
2: There were better things they could have done. Actions could have been taken to express their point of view without sabotaging their realm. They were entitlted to their opinion, they were not entitled tot enforce it on the rest of the realm.
3: My comment was with reference to a keep containing a relic, not just to any keep.
4: I am not aware of any similar incidents on Mythic servers.



This situation has never happened before. We look at all incidents ona case by case basis as it's not possible nor desirable to have a blanket policy to cover ever eventuality.

Give it up for gods sake - its not even worth replying to the statements above as you could pick the holes youself.

 

[charmangle]

Not at all. We are saying that there are lines you should not cross. You can hold your opinions and play according to your principles however you cannot enforce those opinions and principles on others.
Let's divorce this from the AC issue (as in fact we did when we made the decision in the first place). We looked at the precedent we were going to set from this ruling and considered other situations where we may have to implement it. In all of those situations acting was better than not acting and thus the precedent was a good one. Let's say there was a prime time RR and the relic is placed in a friendly keep. The GM who is claiming that keep decides that he doesn't want the relic - perhaps he wants relic balance, perhaps he doesn't like the person who led the RR - the reason isn't important. Are you honestly saying that he has the right to undermine the rest of his realm and drop his keep to level 1 because of his personal opinions? Can you not honestly see that there would be an expectation that we would get involved by a large part of the playerbase? The AC issue was entirely irrelevant to our decision, we considered only the action by BF/TT, to do otherwise would have been grossly unfair.

But Requiel, didnt you set a very dangerous presedence this way also?

What I mean is, you argue that a GM of a Guild shouldnt be able to undermine the rest of his realm by lowering a Relic keep. But as we have brought up before, AoD choose to lower a Irvr keep in hib (crim) because they simply didnt like the Irvr situation. Apprently that was okay, even though it influenced the entire realm.

Where is the line drawn? What are you allowed to do? What ingame features arent you allowed to use?

These are all questions you invoked by ruling to ban someone as an offence, when there was no clear rule against it. Had you instead posted about the ruling, that it is not allowed to lower a relic keep and specify what why and how, you would have clearly shown us what goes and what not. By baning people for somethat that you your self agree on is a grey area, you make everyone feel unsafe on what is allowed and what is not.

A rule like: "Spirit of the game" is ofc necessary to prevent disasters ingame and still have a rule to fall back on, but it is NEVER to be used in my opinion, unless the future of the game is on the line. Because it isnt a real rule, that anyone can understand or be aware of what it encaps, and therefor cant be expected to follow.

As it stands now I would really really like a clarification on exactly what a GM is allowed to do in RvR to not risk a ban.

Am I ever allowed to lower/release a tower or keep ?
If so, at what times might it not be allowed? (during a big raid on my realm,
am I allowed to lower any keep or tower or not?)

Am I allowed to release a relic keep?
If so, at what times might it not be allowed? (during a big raid on my realm, during a small raid by CM + likes at 03.00?)

Is the relic a factor in how you set lvls on a keep?
If so, what is considered a relic keep? Only those with a relic in it, or those that effectivly help the other sides to relics?

Does Irvr keeps play a factor in this at all?
If so when are you not allowed to lower/release those keeps/towers?

Does keeps in other frontiers at all play a factor in this? (during a raid by our own realm on another realm, are we allowed to release/lower keeps/towers)

There are probably more questions, but atleast these are important to have clarified, for us who dont want to risk a ban...

/Charmangle

 

[IainC]

There are probably more questions, but atleast these are important to have clarified, for us who dont want to risk a ban...

/Charmangle

Play the game in the spirit and manner in which it's meant to be played and you won't get into trouble. If your actions are likely to be controversial then you should take the time to think very carefully about what you are doing and whether there's an alternative. In most cases, there's no controversy and thus nothing to get concerned about. Most people I would think have the common sense to know when their actions are likely to draw comment.

 

[Sharkith]

You are completely entitled to your opinion. I'm not denying that. I'm simply stating that playing the game in the manner intended is not griefing, no matter what.

Once more Requiel define griefing. You always hide behind this in this instance and yet I have been open with you on a definition that works quite well. What is your definition of griefing? You hide behind this and refuse to come clean on this.

Not only that your still denying that those that said that they took keeps and ralics to grief others are not griefing?

How stupid is that?

As I've said, to allow the different sides of the fence to reach an understanding in a reasonably moderated thread which isn't tied to any one specific incident.

The irony is that the players have a fairly good understanding of each other but your position is becoming more and more unclear.

Not at all. We are saying that there are lines you should not cross. You can hold your opinions and play according to your principles however you cannot enforce those opinions and principles on others.

...and an AC raid is not enforcing a view on everyone?

Let's divorce this from the AC issue (as in fact we did when we made the decision in the first place). We looked at the precedent we were going to set from this ruling and considered other situations where we may have to implement it. In all of those situations acting was better than not acting and thus the precedent was a good one. Let's say there was a prime time RR and the relic is placed in a friendly keep. The GM who is claiming that keep decides that he doesn't want the relic - perhaps he wants relic balance, perhaps he doesn't like the person who led the RR - the reason isn't important. Are you honestly saying that he has the right to undermine the rest of his realm and drop his keep to level 1 because of his personal opinions? Can you not honestly see that there would be an expectation that we would get involved by a large part of the playerbase? The AC issue was entirely irrelevant to our decision, we considered only the action by BF/TT, to do otherwise would have been grossly unfair.

You cannot divorce it from the situation Requiel and then re-create an easier situation to make yourself look right.

In fact if there was a prime time relic raid and a guild did drop the relic keep to 1 I would argue that they are well within their rights to do so. It is their choice Requiel.

Once more I totally accept that your position was difficult from the outset. I understand that and I have some sympathy for you. Up to a point. Where I am mystified is when someone comes and tells you "We took the relic in an AC raid to grief people" and you then say that it is not griefing.

I will be clear now. What do I want from this discussion. I want you to recognise that the population was under attack by a very small group of people set on griefing the server. At the very least I would like you to admit that this was a possibility.

I would then like you to recognise that dropping a keep to level 1 is one possible solution that players could have used legitimately to respond to the attacks by the few. I can concede that perhaps TT could have done it differently and that case is something we could set aside and move forward from.

Now you might not want to agree on the second point in which case we will have to agree to disagree. But Requiel I would just for once like you to recognise or at least hint to us that you can appreciate there was something very nasty going on here.

I don't get that from you at the moment. All I get are logical arguments aimed at avoiding confronting the issue.

 

[Thadius]

There are probably more questions, but atleast these are important to have clarified, for us who dont want to risk a ban...
/Charmangle

If they suddenly turned around and banned you all now for past actions, ie months gone by, that would be a case of shutting the door after the horse as bolted sort of thing.

Only thing that GOA can do now to save face is admit that they did wrong by banning the TT lot

 

[charmangle]

I'm simply stating that playing the game in the manner intended is not griefing, no matter what.

I forgot one important question also to what is allowed and what not:

Are we allowed to suicide with a Relic on us? (Or is this also a banable offence even though its been done multiple times. For example: Mids attack in force, take Hib Power Relic from Albs, a small group then runs to DC and sucides with the Relic on DC gates to be picked up by Hibs, thus equallying out the Relic situation.)

There are probably follow up questions to this...

/Charmangle

 

[Appollo]

SOTG is gonna differ from person to person, we all play this game with different goals. How the fuck you can ban ppl because 1 didnt agree with anothers SOTG ill never know.

 

[IainC]

Once more Requiel define griefing. You always hide behind this in this instance and yet I have been open with you on a definition that works quite well. What is your definition of griefing? You hide behind this and refuse to come clean on this.

I've already said that I don't believe there is a simple mechanical definition of griefing. In general however we define griefing as action designed to disrupt or harrass other players. This isn't something that can be applied without caveats however otherwise anyone who takes part in RvR is automatically grieifing their opponents.

Not only that your still denying that those that said that they took keeps and ralics to grief others are not griefing?

Absolutely they aren't. They are engaged in legitimate game activities. Even if their primary motivation was to elicit a response, their activity remains legitimate. It is not griefing.

...and an AC raid is not enforcing a view on everyone?

Of course it isn't. No more so than any other legitimate RvR activity. Are people who take keeps prime-time 'enforcing' anything on those members of the realm who have no interest in siege warfare? Of course not.

You cannot divorce it from the situation Requiel and then re-create an easier situation to make yourself look right.

It has to be divorced from the situation. The later example was simply to illustrate the absurdity of the arguments from the people who supported TT's action based on their dislike of AC raids. Our point all along was that this was nothing to do with AC raids and everything to do with a small group of people trampling over the rights of the rest of their realm. Whether you agree or disagree with AC raiding isn't important, their action has to be considered without that as a distraction.

In fact if there was a prime time relic raid and a guild did drop the relic keep to 1 I would argue that they are well within their rights to do so. It is their choice Requiel.

You very well might. I suspect however that many people would disagree with you and if we took your stance we would be seen to be lacking the will to support the players against grief play.

Once more I totally accept that your position was difficult from the outset. I understand that and I have some sympathy for you. Up to a point. Where I am mystified is when someone comes and tells you "We took the relic in an AC raid to grief people" and you then say that it is not griefing.

Taking keeps will never be considered griefing. It simply isn't.

I will be clear now. What do I want from this discussion. I want you to recognise that the population was under attack by a very small group of people set on griefing the server. At the very least I would like you to admit that this was a possibility.

I disagree. I believe that the community created a problem which spiralled out of proportion. This is mostly due to some very divisive attitudes on the server which is why I created this thread in the first place. There was no griefing but people were reacting as if there was. This led to a rapidly deteriorating spiral effect.

I would then like you to recognise that dropping a keep to level 1 is one possible solution that players could have used legitimately to respond to the attacks by the few. I can concede that perhaps TT could have done it differently and that case is something we could set aside and move forward from.

Excellent we have made progress then.

Now you might not want to agree on the second point in which case we will have to agree to disagree. But Requiel I would just for once like you to recognise or at least hint to us that you can appreciate there was something very nasty going on here.

Absolutely there was something nasty going on. Attitudes had become so entrenched that people playing the game came under fire for doing precisely that. Several battle lines were drawn up and attitudes on both sides deteriorated. Unfortunately we can't make people change their attitude through policy, we can only encourage players to play nicely and share their toys.

I don't get that from you at the moment. All I get are logical arguments aimed at avoiding confronting the issue.

I honestly don't know how I can be clearer. I have tried to be as open and forthright as possible. If you still believe that I'm trying to dodge issues or avoid questions then I don't know what else I can do. I'm sorry but I've answered all the questions I've been set as openly and fully as I can. Several of the questions you accuse me of dodging have already been answered by me in this thread many times.

 

[charmangle]

I've already said that...

Any particular reason why you choose not to answere my questions about what offenses are banable?

It would be nice to know, so that all of us can try to stay within what GoA considers to be the SoTG.

/Charmangle

ps. The questions were not meant to be sarchastic, but actual concerns. ds.