40-Man Raid Zone Cap

Status
Not open for further replies.
could also make all raid zones pvp enabled, would make gameplay much more interesting
Click to expand...

A good portion of Legacy is already PvP enabled..

I happen to recall a necro in <Ruin> who got PvPed during a raid because he had PvP tag on and the entire guild cried about it wanting me banned. I highly doubt any member of <Ruin> would ever go PvP.
 
Zhak Morris said:
could also make all raid zones pvp enabled, would make gameplay much more interesting
Click to expand...

A good portion of Legacy is already PvP enabled..

I happen to recall a necro in <Ruin> who got PvPed during a raid because he had PvP tag on and the entire guild cried about it wanting me banned. I highly doubt any member of <Ruin> would ever go PvP.
Click to expand...

When exactly did this happen?

I happen to recall somewhere back when the old world expansion was added that screwing with pvp enabled people on raids was an instantly bannable offense. I could be wrong though since I seem to also recall you getting banned more times then I can count on one hand yet you seem to keep popping back up :10bux: :10bux: :10bux: .
 
I think that pvp enabling is a great idea, the fact that some of Legacy have chosen to go this way is encouraging.

I do however think there should be a rule in the pvp similar of that on Live, which is as follows: no nuke can do more then 75% of the targets hp! This is to prevent ppl from 1shot killing another with a lucky shot... like an ultimate blast that happens to go off RIGHT at that single moment you do fight another player... (damn terate :()
 
If you go raiding with PvP on, it's your own fault.

Also, Duma's warrior will now be known as Vargg One-Finger.
 
The incident occurred on a king raid. I was there, so figure a few months ago when I was able to play.

(edit: the pvp incident where a necro got ganked by Zhak and ruin seemed to raise hell.)
 
I'm speaking as an admin here, not a player. This is the current take. Neither is acceptable and despite my personal involvement in one side's misdoings, neither will be allowed to continue. Ruin may consider this an apology for the leapfrog I was a part of, which was wholly unacceptable behavior for an admin, even if the particular misdoing is not worthy of punitive action for a single occurrence.
Click to expand...
Since you're in such a fair and balanced state of mind...maybe you could tell us how many instances of admin misconduct are grounds for punitive action? And once that number has been reached, what's the appropriate procedure for filing a grievance against said admin? There are more than a few of us who would love to know.
 
Alicia said:
I'm speaking as an admin here, not a player. This is the current take. Neither is acceptable and despite my personal involvement in one side's misdoings, neither will be allowed to continue. Ruin may consider this an apology for the leapfrog I was a part of, which was wholly unacceptable behavior for an admin, even if the particular misdoing is not worthy of punitive action for a single occurrence.
Click to expand...
Since you're in such a fair and balanced state of mind...maybe you could tell us how many instances of admin misconduct are grounds for punitive action? And once that number has been reached, what's the appropriate procedure for filing a grievance against said admin? There are more than a few of us who would love to know.
Click to expand...
Since when did Ruin start farting roses?
 
Beep beep it's the drama firetruck

> If you go raiding with PvP on, it's your own fault.

This is true.

>Since you're in such a fair and balanced state of mind words words words

PM dis to him instead of posting it; also, word differently

>Since when did Ruin start farting roses?

Probably about the same time two wrongs started making a right.

Why cant this thread diiieee ;(
 
Haha I remember the PvP incident... probably last June, maybe late may. Right after the new PvP system was implemented. At first I thought the bitching about it on the forum was a joke. Either way, it was damn funny.

As for the questions (ok, jabs) about admin misconduct, what does that really have to do with anything? When an admin is playing his PC, doesn't he live and die by the same rules as any other player? I don't see why one character being a part of an inter-guild conflict should be considered any differently than another. If he takes punishable actions against the other guild, he should be punished the same way as any other player. Of course, if he used his admin powers or the knowledge that results from it in order to take offensive actions against other players, that's a whole different matter.
 
Alicia said:
Since you're in such a fair and balanced state of mind...maybe you could tell us how many instances of admin misconduct are grounds for punitive action? And once that number has been reached, what's the appropriate procedure for filing a grievance against said admin? There are more than a few of us who would love to know.
Click to expand...

You're free to complain to Wiz about any number of admin misconducts, but I would advise having more than insubstantial accusations if you're to make any kind of serious impact.
 
zodium said:
You're free to complain to Wiz about any number of admin misconducts, but I would advise having more than insubstantial accusations if you're to make any kind of serious impact.
Click to expand...
Last night stole a lollipop from me.

Wiz, make it better.
 
Rambler said:
zodium said:
You're free to complain to Wiz about any number of admin misconducts, but I would advise having more than insubstantial accusations if you're to make any kind of serious impact.
Click to expand...
Last night you stole a lollipop from me.

Wiz, make it better.
Click to expand...
Apparently I quoted instead of editing. I'm drunk.
 
Locking this thread - it's derailed pretty far off from the original topic.

Like zodium said, if you feel someone on the staff is abusing any rules feel free to contact an admin about it. Their play characters are subject to the same guidelines as everyone else.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom