Ragnarok requirement level

[Winter]

But while on this topic= it seems you are quite set on the idea that "[me] and [my] players" are the only ones that do this? Someone close to you (genetically and socially) used the same undesirable tactic well over a month before (November) "[me] and [my] players" did. They saw players they didn't like, we all tried to leave to another server to get necessary members in, but were thwarted and created an impromptu event. And the password to said event was "carrytrash." It's well documented in this post (click here) with the following quote:

Spoiler

Chris, Roman, and Legit were on a Ragnarok Server. Gold_Drop then told them to leave the server to bring in a tome bringer. These servers are public and are first come first serve. After arguing, the players left the server and left Roman, Chris and Legit alone. They then hopped around 4 servers to get back in with them. Winter then made the last Server VLKA_Event. Later on I found out this was a real event. Legit was then kicked and banned from the ts server.

"I and [my] players" don't have the luxury the create events with no advance notice, so we simply leave. If you take a closer look, you might see how long ago the "cancerous" behavior started to occur, that "I and [my] players" aren't the sole ones doing this (though you seem to imply we are), and how widely the "cancer" has spread.

Since you seem intent on bringing up anything and everything to justify your actions (and I must say, you *are* rather good at it), I've wanted to not have to post here.  However, since you are specifically talking about me, I should probably say something on the matter.  Yes, we wanted our second tome bringer in on the run.  Yes, we decided to do an impromptu event because there were many VLKAs on and we didn't relish the idea of playing with people that had just the other day insulted us in game several times.  Your group, however, does this to avoid anyone you don't deem "worthy" of playing with you, which happens to be a very large portion of the NI community.  I have done this one time and never again since, other than following your little group around in hopes of a run.  The idea did not come originally from me, as you seem to imply by saying I did it long before you did, but rather from Dan, another leader in your group.  Furthermore, Legit's kick and ban from TS was due to harassing people in TS with pokes, many of which were abusive and downright rude.  The "carrytrash" joke fit along nicely with the attitude in the Teamspeak at the time, an attitude that I have quickly learned is fit only for the assholes of Nord Invasion, which I am glad to no longer be a part of.  Thank you for trying to deflect any scrutiny onto another, but that tactic can only get you so far.

[Hawkens]

Everyone here has good ideas so here's another one to  ponder on. Why don't we raise the amount of assist xp that you get it hard so that it is similar to ragnarok. That way you could raise the level requirement to get into rag. With this being said it would make sense jus to play hard if you wanted and easy way of levelling. So ragnarok should give more gold with each kill. And seeing as most players that play ragnarok are level 52 they should be after the gold more then the assist xp. with ragnarok also giving better drops. so there's my idea have fun fighting over it.

[Malong]

Since you seem intent on bringing up anything and everything to justify your actions (and I must say, you *are* rather good at it), I've wanted to not have to post here.  However, since you are specifically talking about me, I should probably say something on the matter.  Yes, we wanted our second tome bringer in on the run.  Yes, we decided to do an impromptu event because there were many VLKAs on and we didn't relish the idea of playing with people that had just the other day insulted us in game several times...The idea did not come originally from me, as you seem to imply by saying I did it long before you did, but rather from Dan, another leader in your group.

Not at all, I am just pointing out that the claim that one group of players are the sole group that uses this tactic is false. The quoted post was simply the earliest reference on the forums since I started playing again. I freely admit I was there that night (both the public run and the subsequent event) and agree with the course of action. I apologize, please take no offense nor misinterpret my previous post. Its citation was simply to show that this has been going on for longer than people let on, and it's not practiced only by "my group," which people want to point the finger towards.

Your group, however, does this to avoid anyone you don't deem "worthy" of playing with you, which happens to be a very large portion of the NI community.  I have done this one time and never again since, other than following your little group around in hopes of a run.

We mostly leave when one of the people in TS could not join due to someone else getting a spot in the server. The "anyone you don't deem 'worthy'" part should really be amended to the people that follow us around to troll, and that list is quite small (started with only two or three people). This practice is pretty new for us, and you have even been present many times for runs as recently as one month ago when we stayed despite the presence of certain players we would not have preferred to play with.

[Spirit]

We mostly leave when one of the people in TS could not join due to someone else getting a spot in the server. The "anyone you don't deem 'worthy'" part should really be amended to the people that follow us around to troll, and that list is quite small (started with only two or three people). This practice is pretty new for us, and you have even been present many times for runs as recently as one month ago when we stayed despite the presence of certain players we would not have preferred to play with.

I am sorry, but I personally think this is bad form.  This is server manipulation in order to get in the people you want.. as you freely admit to here yourself.  Just because you have 16 people in your TS does not mean you can guarantee them all a spot.  Each house gets 2 events per week.  Only in events can you control who occupies those spots on a server.  If someone else happens to get a single spot and then your entire teams leaves, waits for the server to drop to zero again, and then rejoins en masse, then I believe that should be considered a violation of the event rules.  In my opinion, the punishment for such activity should be the loss of event privileges for a period of time. 

If someone who is "trolling" you happens to get onto the server and is actually "trolling", then follow the NI rules.  Join IRC to get an admin to handle the situation, or post a report in the appropriate forum topic along with the screenshots to support the "trolling".

I appreciate my employer's office's janitorial staff's contributions to the operation of my employer, but I'm in no rush to add them to my direct deposit.

Your analogy is off.  You don't pay the Janitors. Your employer does. But since you raise it, let me add to it...

If your employer decided that the Janitors are doing an excellent job of cleaning up the toilets that others piss all over and decides to give them a raise but at the same time tells you that there is not enough funds to also give you a raise, then who will you be angry towards... the Janitors or your Employer?  Being angry, harassing the janitors, and intentionally pissing even more on the toilets is the right thing to do?

I don't care what your groups does on their events, but public servers are exactly that... PUBLIC.

After seeing the report made today and being in the NI channel (before your removal to a non-NI ts) when you are plotting which server to take over, I know exactly what is going on.  I have no doubt that you and your group of people descended on a server and refused to join in until they wiped and quit and then your group would be able to take over the server.  Were all the other Rag servers already in use at that time, or that was the one you wanted because of ping?  I know that you guys typically look for one that has zero players and then make a coordinated entry so that no "underserving" player sees it and joins in before it fills up.

I had nothing to do with that. Furthermore, the bolded excerpt seems to imply I can remotely control others' bodies and direct them into not joining the game. I'm not even present and it seems you want to fault "[me] and [my] group" for this. But since you brought it up (somewhat unprovoked), all "we" do is join an already-empty server (with a map and region we like), and check if everyone who is in the TS channel is in the server. If someone who was promised a spot did not join the server successfully, then we all leave the server and try rejoining shortly afterwards. Our contingency never involves staying and plotting their wiping/departure.

I stated before that you typically do target empty servers and coordinate the join such that other do not see it in time to actually join before it is full.  However, in this latest report, there is clear evidence that some people joined the server, sat in spec, and went as far as to say that others should "stay in hard and let the good players have the Ragnarok" (or something to that effect).

While you may not have been part of that activity, you as an officer of your house must lead by example.  If you regularly condone or even promote such activities, then you must bear the responsibility of being held accountable for the actions of said house and all its members/affiliates/followers.

Your "contingency", as I stated above, is server manipulation.  If even a single one of your selected group fail to get onto the server you target, then you all leave, target a different server, or wait for the server to go empty again, and then again coordinate your join - as you once again freely admit here.  Every run cannot be a controlled "event" where only the people you want are allowed to play.  That is not the intent of PUBLIC servers.

Other than that, I have also heard of your entire group leaving a server mid-run because someone you didn't like was able to join the server and you didn't want to "carry" them to the boss.  I don't have the details of that so there may be a legitimate reason such as an event starting.. but I find it very unlikely.

I do hope that the Dev's and Sr Admins take serious look at these behaviors and take immediate and decisive actions.  The only way the NI community is going to heal is if the attitudes of hatred changes.  If that means some players that are inciting others are permanently banned, then so be it.  The mod should be open for all of us to enjoy.. not just those whom some people deem "deserving".  Those that are creating the rifts should be cut out like a cancer.

And what determines the "legitimacy" of any reason? Nothing binds anybody to a server or session. Players have also been (by devs and admins) told that they can easily avoid players by leaving, rather than getting into in-game arguments. People that do this are merely applying that principle.

But while on this topic= it seems you are quite set on the idea that "[me] and [my] players" are the only ones that do this? Someone close to you (genetically and socially) used the same undesirable tactic well over a month before (November) "[me] and [my] players" did. They saw players they didn't like, we all tried to leave to another server to get necessary members in, but were thwarted and created an impromptu event. And the password to said event was "carrytrash."


"I and [my] players" don't have the luxury the create events with no advance notice, so we simply leave. If you take a closer look, you might see how long ago the "cancerous" behavior started to occur, that "I and [my] players" aren't the sole ones doing this (though you seem to imply we are), and how widely the "cancer" has spread.

I have discussed these topics with Winter directly. 

In regards to INDIVIDUAL players leaving a server to avoid confrontation, then yes.. it is absolutely a good thing to do.  However, if an entire group of people intentionally manipulate the servers to monopolize them to the exclusion of everyone but their select few, then that should not be allowed.  If there is in fact someone trolling your server, then use the documented and approved methods of dealing with it.

{edit - sorry, got disconnected before I finished}

As you also say here, players do not have the luxury to create events with no advance notice.  That is because "events" are limited to two per house per week.  With Tricksters and WS combining their events, your group actually gets four "official" events per week.  The frequent, I would guess daily, manipulation of the servers to create your "unofficial" events should be considered a violation of that standard.

However, since you have admitted to doing as much several times here, I am hoping the Devs/Sr Admins are taking note and formulating an official response.  If such actions are deemed "illegal" and there are other groups performing this same action, then please do report them on the appropriate forum topic [if or when the Devs/Sr Admins comment]

[Malong]

I am sorry, but I personally think this is bad form.  This is server manipulation in order to get in the people you want.. as you freely admit to here yourself.  Just because you have 16 people in your TS does not mean you can guarantee them all a spot.  Each house gets 2 events per week.  Only in events can you control who occupies those spots on a server.

By definition of others joining the server, we are not controlling the spots on the server nor manipulating it in any way. All we do is try again, which wouldn't be necessary if it was true circumvention or manipulation. If you want to relegate us to a fixed number of events per period of time, then you are stifling impromptu playing. At this stage of the game, can't we just play with the e-friends we enjoy spending leisure time with?

Your analogy is off.  You don't pay the Janitors. Your employer does. But since you raise it, let me add to it...

You're right, I don't, and they already get their wages (assist XP and gold). I was implying giving them additional pay on top of that.

I stated before that you typically do target empty servers and coordinate the join such that other do not see it in time to actually join before it is full.  However, in this latest report, there is clear evidence that some people joined the server, sat in spec, and went as far as to say that others should "stay in hard and let the good players have the Ragnarok" (or something to that effect).

While you may not have been part of that activity, you as an officer of your house must lead by example.  If you regularly condone or even promote such activities, then you must bear the responsibility of being held accountable for the actions of said house and all its members/affiliates/followers.

They were in the server, the map changed due to a wipe, they were AFK when spawning (which you are allowed to do for 5 minutes or 2 waves), so they missed the spawn. The rest of the team did not pass the spawn wave, so there was no spawn delaying. This does not generate extra bots, and they nor other people who would subsequently join the server would spawn anyway (no spawn wave reached, not able to be tomed). And the only person who typed anything like that is not even in my house. Look at the evidence: they did nothing to harm the progress of the players on the server, and the sole in-game chat offender is not even in Tricksters.

Your "contingency", as I stated above, is server manipulation.  If even a single one of your selected group fail to get onto the server you target, then you all leave, target a different server, or wait for the server to go empty again, and then again coordinate your join - as you once again freely admit here.  Every run cannot be a controlled "event" where only the people you want are allowed to play.  That is not the intent of PUBLIC servers.

If you saw the screenshot from a public run on Saturday where Nanja got a legendary (from wave 17), you can clearly see six names (far more than "even a single one of [my] selected group") amongst the death spam that do not play with "my group" yet all the players stayed (and beat Odin). This disproves your claim, and is as recent as two days ago.

In regards to INDIVIDUAL players leaving a server to avoid confrontation, then yes.. it is absolutely a good thing to do.  However, if an entire group of people intentionally manipulate the servers to monopolize them to the exclusion of everyone but their select few, then that should not be allowed.

This does not create a monopoly on the servers. There are four public Ragnarok servers, and no time when 64-68 concurrent players are playing Ragnarok. If you are trying to say that everyone must only play with other players, then there is no precedent for that. Just because one or more player leaves a server does not mean the remaining cannot stay and play.

[Malong]

As you also say here, players do not have the luxury to create events with no advance notice.  That is because "events" are limited to two per house per week.  With Tricksters and WS combining their events, your group actually gets four "official" events per week.  The frequent, I would guess daily, manipulation of the servers to create your "unofficial" events should be considered a violation of that standard.

We have not registered more than two events either of the past two weekends, nor have we even had consecutive days where we had public Ragnarok runs in the past two weeks let alone daily. And that statement was in reference to registering and starting an event in the span of 15 minutes. The event coordinator would never let us do that without the formal forum message, and so on. It had nothing to do with event limits.

[bossculeur]

This is a pretty wicked internet debate. Normally these things turn into shitshows of insults and grammar corrections but everyone has been really respectful and are advocating well for their point of view. The whole thing was quite enjoyable to read. I'm not really interested in taking sides, partly because everyone is doing so well, but I just wanted to clarify something. This is rather irrelevant and a bit nitpicky.

52. A post stating the intention of Ragnarok and Hard can be found here:
The sharing has, for the most part, ended. The system has already driven the group that can consistently succeed in public rag runs to create coordinated runs (basically unofficial events) where people all join a server comprising only that group. Compare this to just two or three months ago when people would not feel this coordination was necessary. Hopefully upcoming changes would repair the schism in this relationship.

We mostly leave when one of the people in TS could not join due to someone else getting a spot in the server. The "anyone you don't deem 'worthy'" part should really be amended to the people that follow us around to troll, and that list is quite small (started with only two or three people). This practice is pretty new for us, and you have even been present many times for runs as recently as one month ago when we stayed despite the presence of certain players we would not have preferred to play with.

PCK, in regards to these quotes, are you implying that the practice of server bombing by "your" (hahahahahaha) group has only been going on for a month or two? We started doing that back in June, soon after 0.5.0 came out. The group of players has changed a bit since then but it was the same core. It seems as though you may be talking about something else but if so I missed your point. Now carry on, entertain me!

[Malong]

[quote author=Malong link=topic=23179.msg166358#msg166358 date=1392666401]
We mostly leave when one of the people in TS could not join due to someone else getting a spot in the server. The "anyone you don't deem 'worthy'" part should really be amended to the people that follow us around to troll, and that list is quite small (started with only two or three people). This practice is pretty new for us, and you have even been present many times for runs as recently as one month ago when we stayed despite the presence of certain players we would not have preferred to play with.

PCK, in regards to these quotes, are you implying that the practice of server bombing by "your" (hahahahahaha) group has only been going on for a month or two? We started doing that back in June, soon after 0.5.0 came out. The group of players has changed a bit since then but it was the same core. It seems as though you may be talking about something else but if so I missed your point. Now carry on, entertain me!
[/quote]
You should recall I was in some of those same runs back in June (albeit not many and not regularly). But the new method, so to speak, refers to joining with a set 17. Back then we would just join, with no AFK check, no countdown, no coordination on connection, and just say "___ spots left" telling others to join in. In this time, people rarely ever left when we did not have a set group in the server. Also, I kept typing "my group" (with quotes) because that is how another poster phrased it. Please read more carefully in the future.

[bossculeur]

[quote author=bossculeur link=topic=23179.msg166382#msg166382 date=1392677611]
[quote author=Malong link=topic=23179.msg166358#msg166358 date=1392666401]
We mostly leave when one of the people in TS could not join due to someone else getting a spot in the server. The "anyone you don't deem 'worthy'" part should really be amended to the people that follow us around to troll, and that list is quite small (started with only two or three people). This practice is pretty new for us, and you have even been present many times for runs as recently as one month ago when we stayed despite the presence of certain players we would not have preferred to play with.

PCK, in regards to these quotes, are you implying that the practice of server bombing by "your" (hahahahahaha) group has only been going on for a month or two? We started doing that back in June, soon after 0.5.0 came out. The group of players has changed a bit since then but it was the same core. It seems as though you may be talking about something else but if so I missed your point. Now carry on, entertain me!
[/quote]
You should recall I was in some of those same runs back in June (albeit not many and not regularly). But the new method, so to speak, refers to joining with a set 17. Back then we would just join, with no AFK check, no countdown, no coordination on connection, and just say "___ spots left" telling others to join in. In this time, people rarely ever left when we did not have a set group in the server. Also, I kept typing "my group" (with quotes) because that is how another poster phrased it. Please read more carefully in the future.
[/quote]

It's not a huge deal but we actually were doing server bombs with 16/17 people in ts very frequently (almost every evening) back then. Coordinated connection, countdowns, etc. were all being done. We would also do the leave/rejoin when there was someone we didn't want to play with. Winter or anyone else that participated can confirm this.

You misunderstood at my laughing at the use of "your". I wasn't mocking your use of it, just the use of it in general. I can see how that may have been unclear.

[Malong]

It's not a huge deal but we actually were doing server bombs with 16/17 people in ts very frequently (almost every evening) back then. Coordinated connection, countdowns, etc. were all being done. We would also do the leave/rejoin when there was someone we didn't want to play with. Winter or anyone else that participated can confirm this.

"We only did the countdowns at Christmas" - Dan just now in TS.