Policy Questions Thread

Some people don't do /who searches every 30 seconds, so the "realize they can't be there" statement is a bit off.

That said, they would need to leave. The proper way to handle the situation is for you or another member of your raid to politely mention in /shout that you have a raid there that would like be raid in the zone. If there's less than 6 of them there just killing trash, then they wouldn't have claim and would need to leave. The polite communication you started would then allow them the opportunity to bow out gracefully.
 
In the above situation, could the raid just allow the small group to continue doing their thing? Not some veiled attempt to raid with more than 18, but if the two groups actually wont interfere with eachother at all, can the raid allow the small group to continue farming?
 
Unfortunately, no, that goes against 'You may have only 18 characters actively benefiting a raid at any time.'

Much like the allowance for people to enter the zone to do a PvP attack and then leave, a short time to finish what they were doing and leave in a timely manner would be reasonable. This, of course, hinges on your hypothesis that the raid would be okay with the group killing those couple of mobs.

For any extended period of time, though, no, that wouldn't be okay just like having 2 raids in a raiding area that hasn't been winged wouldn't be okay.
 
Content skipping-

Explicitly skipping mobs that are obviously intended to be part of the clear to an encounter, for instance training away inner prison statues and beelining directly for the dragons is not allowed. Obviously if mobs do not see invis you can invis past them and things like that. This also includes rezzing your group / raid past mobs.*
Click to expand...

In some situations there are mobs that happen to agro each other and kill one another, despite being mobs one would imagine you should have to kill. In this particular instance, I'm referring to Emberflow. An indentured daemon will kill an infernal advisor for whatever reason. Now in my mind, to take advantage of the situation would be a clear exploit. But on the other hand, waiting for respawns can take a long time in some of the spots. I'm just curious where the line is on this particular issue, so as to avoid a "fat ban". Maybe also to potentially avoid unnecessary sitting around.

[edit] I forgot to add that I have been told by someone with more experience in the zone than I that it is a'ok. I would simply like confirmation of a more authoritan type.[/edit]
 
Last edited:
In emberflow, it was our first time to try anything past Baphomet and we pulled a group of mobs. My group ended up wiping except the monk which FD'd off to the side. The daemon ended up fighting the two mobs that came with him and killing them. So should we wait for the mobs to repop and try again or keep clearing from what was left standing? It feels like an exploit but a few tells from people to my group said it wasn't.

It just has me scratching my head that it doesn't seem right if a mob is killing his buddies but nothing about it has been done for I don't know how many years eflow has been in game. But the dino's don't have any buddies in that zone either so maybe it's supposed to be that way.

I little confirmation in case this happens again next time we venture out that way would be appreciated.
 
I dont know what the legal decision here is, but having been there myself, we just walked past the mobs. Now... if one were to INTENTIONALLY make those mobs fight and kill eachother that would be an entirely different issue, but when things like this happen with a couple trash mobs I usually don't think too much of it, other than maybe letting someone on staff know that it does happen... Feel free to dev edit if im wrong, but I dont really know of any prescedent rule here. Content Skipping? They aren't doing anything to intentionally bypass content, and it would be a 30min or more burden on the group to wait and "do it right"
 
What are the rules governing resuming encounters that allow kiting by running back to the fight after dying?
 
It's WAY old, but Wiz's stated purpose of both respawning with no mana and having death fatique is so that bind rushing becomes impossible in the normal sense. However, once you've passed that time, it would seem to be fine to rejoin the fight. For trash, kiting it until you get your other guys back in the fight is no problem, but doing this on a boss can be way scummy.

However, there was one boss fight I've been on where we lost the character who could make the boss not invulnerable, so when the boss killed her and went invulnerable at 1%, we stayed and tanked and healed until she could run back by herself and get back to us (no outside help, 18-man raid rules). This involved over 10 minutes of just keeping the tank up until we could finish, and it was considered legitimate.

So it comes down to this: you want to do this shady thing on an encounter where (1) you can just kite the crap out of the boss, (2) you can just nuke him from far away, (3) you want to just bind rush him.

Why would you do that, or ever *want* to do that? Care to tell us what magical situation this is in that made you think to ask such a question?
 
IDK... There are a number of fights that last longer than DF and are relatively easy for anyone to get back to. I've heard that if the fight mechanics allow it, its OK.

I think DF makes bind rushing not a viable tactic, but you certainly do find situations where someone died right at the start and has the potential to join back and help towards the end of the fight.
 
A discussion started about porting back up to IS while kiting 2nd pack of golems after all the healers died. We all had wildly different opinions and precedents cited, so, figured I'd ask.

This is also relevant on a number of other trash pulls I can think of, as well as numerous earlier tiered boss fights. Entropy kite, Alpha Wolf, Maysun, etc. One of my most epic fights ever involved kiting on Maysun for 30 minutes straight while the same group of dps died TWICE trying to find their way back.

Personally, I think it is silly not to allow people to port back up if you're able to keep a fight going the 5+ minutes necessary to make it at all useful whether it be via kiting or healing. I can cite one event where this is specifically pooh-pooh'd and, in fact, wrecks your face hard if you try it (thaz1). But the incredible ease of getting an entire raid to get back in there after a 17/18 wipe on a unique endurance fight seems to have demanded a fix.


I know the general rule with stuff like this is not to give specific rulings as they allow people to knowingly circumvent them and claim they're within the wording, but there is just so much grey area with this issue I'd like to not get the iron law on my ass for thinking outside the box.
 
There are a lot of fights where they last long enough to have people return and have a significant impact on the encounter. Returning to fights lessens the punishment of bad play.
You should not be allowed to.
 
The situation mentioned with thaz1 was bad because of using "camping out" techniques, and that's just bad. I suppose an argument could be made about having a similar strategy of killing off 17 characters, having the bard kite for an hour, and the 17 others getting back to the battlefield to do the fights, but at least that's not "camping out".

Under the rules as they stand, if you can get back to the encounter without help outside of your raid (this includes if your raid is not full for reasons of bookkeeping and multiple people getting help from "just 1 outside person" each), then you're good to go.

This is how the policy stands. If the Dev Team doesn't like it (or if they decide that they'd like it changed for any other reason), then there are 2 options: (1) Do like Dev-Marza did in Tur`Ruj with that entrance area that zones you out if there's a boss up to make this situation impossible (2) Discuss policy changes in staff channels (example: the change to pre-requisite content requirements and the removal of that 2/3 rule). EDIT: I should clarify. This isn't meant as a challenge to the Dev-Team, but instead, this is just a notice to the playerbase readers of this thread of how this policy would come under scrutiny and is how the Dev Team would approach the situation by default.



There aren't that many situations where running back to an encounter is actually helpful, at least.
 
Otcho said:
There are a lot of fights where they last long enough to have people return and have a significant impact on the encounter. Returning to fights lessens the punishment of bad play.
You should not be allowed to.
Click to expand...

Part of this might actually be the unintended consequence of the death effects changes. It's just a matter of devs identifying where this might actually happen and then taking steps to prevent it, if desired. But there's a lot of previous content to filter through to do this. Sending a message to staff with specific information on encounters which have this particular issue may be helpful.
 
Generals comes to mind. I've seen raids recover after you down the first general, have the wizard pick up the dead, come back and med to full while rotating healers to gain mana.

Personally, I don't see an issue with this, it's a lot of work and time wasted.
 
I also see no issue, the few situations where its utilized seem like desperate and creative damage control, rather than any sort of exploit. I'm not aware of any fights that get EASIER because of these mechanics, just fights where dumb/bad stuff can be somewhat negated by people being active and smart.
 
What is the policy on name (not surname) changes? Only answers I saw that may have covered this were years old and contrary to each other. Coming back to SoD after a long spell away and would like to have my main named what I play as in all other games, 65 150+ AA's and MQ done to Ikisith if not near done iirc, so I'd really prefer not to re-roll.

Petition, request here through PM or shit out of luck?

Thanks in advance.
 
Arraxin said:
What is the policy on name (not surname) changes? Only answers I saw that may have covered this were years old and contrary to each other. Coming back to SoD after a long spell away and would like to have my main named what I play as in all other games, 65 150+ AA's and MQ done to Ikisith if not near done iirc, so I'd really prefer not to re-roll.

Petition, request here through PM or shit out of luck?

Thanks in advance.
Click to expand...

Traditionally you could petition for a name change if your name violated the naming policy/guidelines, but otherwise would be SoL. My advice is to give it a shot and hope you get lucky....it may not happen but hey, with all the focus on trying to increase/maintain the player-base someone might decide to be human and hook an e-bro up.
 
Is it possible that we can get better, more concrete claim rules for Claw Commander (and probably Ofgats if he were killable by people who would actually use his loot, because he works in a similar way)? I ask because there seems to be issues with certain types of terrible people when it comes to this mob specifically, a little reminiscent of banned player "Arcibu" and the kinds of things he pulled.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom