1
Forum Settings
       
Reply To Thread

BST Nerf - SpinShark Weighs InFollow

#102 Dec 14 2005 at 12:48 PM Rating: Excellent
Quote:
Sioux/Kubla is not a guy, and has since tried soloing and realized the folly of that post.


Yow, wait, let me weigh in ;;

That tactic works (I got about 8k exp with it last night, about my usual amount of EXP), but it only works in specific areas. We lost Toraimorai Canal, because we can't drag slimes...

We lost Yhoator, we used to drag a couple Coerls over and use those...

We lost Bostaneiux Oubliette, because we used a slime from another area.

We lost a lot of spots. It's still possible and and almost pre-nerf-like to level this way in some spots, like Boyhada, Kuftal, and other areas with wide pop areas.

The problem is, we lost a lot of areas that were out-of-the-way, and kept us out of the hair of EXP parties. Now, we're coming back to the CN, and we're coming back in droves, because it's the only place we have an option to go at that level.

We're coming back to the GC basement, because almost ALL of the other zones at that level are kaput.

Now we're going to be wrestling with the EXP parties for our mobs. Yes, guys, this does still suck for all BST, and it's going to make the job much more aggravating both for us and for you.

Give it some time, and you'll see how difficult this is going to be. It's in everyone's interest to find some other solution for this, and most of my disgust that you see in these later posts is motivated by SE's complete betrayal of the BST community. We were all grateful for the chance to level solo; SE tried to ***** us. Yes, I'm still torqued at this update.

No problem about thinkng I'm a guy, it happens and I don't care, it's no thing. ;)

Edited, Wed Dec 14 12:54:38 2005 by Sioux
#103 Dec 14 2005 at 12:49 PM Rating: Decent
*
233 posts
I'm sorry I come off that way, and I'm sorry you seem to be incapable of posting once without an insult. This is my last post here, period. Most Beastmasters are over the patch.

Take care.

Edited, Wed Dec 14 12:53:28 2005 by Shopee

I just realised some confusion probably occured. The above comment about being insulting does not apply to "you" plural (i.e. the Beastmasters, it applies only to Warchief.)

Edited, Wed Dec 14 13:03:02 2005 by Shopee
#104 Dec 14 2005 at 12:56 PM Rating: Default
Right again.

/bow

#105 Dec 14 2005 at 12:58 PM Rating: Default
No, no we aren't. And you're still a trolling ******* with pitifully little idea what you're talking about.

But hey, it makes your E-***** a little larger when you kick us when we're down, so I guess that's fine for you.
#106 Dec 14 2005 at 3:46 PM Rating: Default
It needs to be clarified that I'm not a main job beastmaster. So all of you fu[/i]cktards that are lumping me in with the collective mentality of the BSTs on this forum can stop talking. My actual main is RDM.

I've been at odds with some of the BSTs here in the past, but that's for another thread.


Metah wrote:
MARRY ME SPINSHARK


Ah, Metah, one of my favorite old-school groupies.

If this had been 4 months ago, I would've said you can have my babies. However, now it's a toss-up between yourself and Solichan. Solichan's rant in one of my threads was just damned arousing.

You're going to need to PM me a pic (preferably without all of that pesky clothing, provided you're female of course, which I think you are) to put yourself over the top.

Quote:
Wow can it be? Spinshark Karma whoreing?


See my base rating? Yeah, I don't think trying to get rated up at this point is going to do much, nor do I give a flying fu[i]
ck about it. I know you're beyond an idiot, but I don't think this concept is too difficult for even you to grasp. The last thing I need is rate "validation" for my posts from a bunch of ADD children and dumba[/i]ss adult failures.

Also, there is no "flock" in this case. from what I've bothered to read, opinion is split down the middle.

Again, when I make threads, popular opinion is never a consideration. If truth happens to fall in line with popular opinion (only occasionally in this forum), then that's just dandy. I'm simply here to fact-check morons and provide a beacon of truth in a sea of low IQs.

[i]Edited, Wed Dec 14 16:16:58 2005 by SpinShark
#107 Dec 14 2005 at 5:16 PM Rating: Good
27 posts
T: SPINSHARK

I think, looking back, the reason why you enrage me so, is because you embody everything I despise about the internet.

You're stupid. You're misinformed, and yet you revel in your misinformation to the extent you're proud of being wrong.

You go out of your way to ignore positives and wildly exaggerate even the smallest negatives for the sole reason of serving your pathetic agenda.

You're falling over yourself to be the 'only one'; the one that realizes what the 'sheep' don't, the one that sees the emperor has no clothes - yet in truth these facets exist solely so that you have something else to look down upon.

You're sneering and arrogant when there's no call for it. Unable to even recognize or acknowledge quality or ambition you scrabble around in the dirt for sarcasm or the chance to be patronizing instead, lazily deflecting possibilities of positivity at every turn and instead trying to pull everything into the same ****** swamp of faked indifference as you yourself festers in.

You know nothing but act like you know everything. You could never hope to achieve anything yourself but you still sit there, smirking archly, smugly, shaking your head and congratulating yourself over the latest crushing victory.

You're like one giant ******* MEH flashing out at me from my monitor from Alla. It's like LOL METROID FPS and DURR KILL BILL CASH-IN somehow came to life and made an account and it makes me almost physically ill and ***** dngfdljgndhgfdssad
#108 Dec 14 2005 at 6:47 PM Rating: Decent
Quote:
I think, looking back, the reason why you enrage me so,


Good, I'm glad you're enraged. This is all you really needed to say, as the rest of your childish diatribe is useless anyway.

Dance for me, my puppet.

Quote:
You're stupid. You're misinformed, and yet you revel in your misinformation to the extent you're proud of being wrong.


This is an example of the type of person I was talking about earlier that clearly lacks the synapses to keep up with me, but tries to anyway. By employing the ages-old tactic of projecting his/her/its own introspection, it tries to somehow match me.

Look kid, If I am wrong and misinformed, then by all means prove me wrong and state your case. You can't though. I haven't been challenged yet in this thread, so perhaps your weak intellect and teen angst can provide some minor amusement.

Quote:
yet in truth these facets exist solely so that you have something else to look down upon.


So, you've inwardly recognized that I'm intrinsically better than you, and now you're just pseudo-intellectualizing a bit in some kind of pathetic attempt to challenge me. Sadly, you're the poster child for a moron, and you should quit while you're behind.

Quote:
You could never hope to achieve anything


If you could claim a fraction of my real-life accomplishments, you would be one happy child. You'd better go to sleep now and stop trying to write a bunch of bullsh[/i]it to strangers, you've probably got some shelves to stock or food to serve tomorrow. You'll need your energy.

No hard feelings, someone has to do it.


[i]Edited, Wed Dec 14 19:39:43 2005 by SpinShark
#109 Dec 14 2005 at 7:20 PM Rating: Decent
46 posts
SpinShark, you are Alla's Savior.
You're never afraid to speak your mind for rate-downs and do it insultingly, and the majority of the time, you're right.

And no, I don't care if I get rated-down for posting this.
#110 Dec 14 2005 at 7:26 PM Rating: Decent
SpinShark may I interject one more time just to say once again..... I love this guy! Awesome job bro.
#111 Dec 14 2005 at 7:27 PM Rating: Good
***
1,996 posts
I just think its funny that spinshark thinks he's important enough to start his own thread on the matter and think its not just a repeat of everything thats already been said.

And what's really funny is it has devolved into the exact same thread that all spinshark threads do by the time they reach page 3. Everyone that responds is simply bumping the post and providing reinforcement that he does, in fact, deserve his own thread. Oh damn....I just did it too.

In the end though, you are just giving him what he came here for...... attention. Nobody that has done all spinshark has claimed he has accomplished waste's their time talking about a minor adjustment to a video game and continues to check in and respond each evening thereafter. You are giving him the highlight of his day.
#112 Dec 14 2005 at 7:33 PM Rating: Decent
Quote:
Nobody that has done all spinshark has claimed he has accomplished waste's their time talking about a minor adjustment to a video game and continues to check in and respond each evening thereafter


It's really neat how this works. I'll let you in on a little secret.

I'm making money by killing time talking to imbeciles on the internet! Amazing, isn't it?
#113 Dec 14 2005 at 7:40 PM Rating: Decent
BarberofSeville wrote:
I just think its funny that spinshark thinks he's important enough to start his own thread on the matter and think its not just a repeat of everything thats already been said.


What I think is funny is that you believe that you have the right to come post a post or thread of yours that you want and he doesnt despite how many times the topic has been discussed. In fact lets shut down the forums completely and just let everyone search for the information since the same issues get posted 4 million times a week.
#114 Dec 14 2005 at 7:52 PM Rating: Decent
**
283 posts
I don't Know, didn't $E come to this form asking the player base how the could solve the MPK problem. And Im pretty sure a few people suggested the depop thing. Or maybe it was just a dream.

Look at this thread, even though the first post might be a lil retarded, further down they make some good points.



Edited, Wed Dec 14 19:55:58 2005 by Nutino

Edited, Wed Dec 14 19:58:35 2005 by Nutino
#115 Dec 14 2005 at 7:53 PM Rating: Good
****
4,592 posts
It's funny to read these threads and see the exaggerated straw-men that you prop up and subsequently tear down, SpinShark. I like the conspiracy theories, too, some of 'em are downright wacky (especially the RMT ones). Sometimes the people who make ham-fisted attempts to deflate you are amusing, as well.

I don't agree with your solution, though. This is a PvE game with a large population of carebears, the fact that people can abuse mob AI to MPK each other is pretty boneheaded. Threats should come from the environment, not from other players. Griefing must be cut to a bare, reasonable minimum, within the limits of the technology. If this game were PvP, I'd be singing a different tune, but Shadowbane it isn't.

The solution, as I see it, is to prevent MPK without making the game risk-free (like removing mob aggro completely), ******** BSTs (the current system). If mobs wandered back to their camp after being released, but didn't aggro/link until within that radius, I'd consider that an acceptable compromise. Granted, I haven't thought through every possible exploit, and am willing to consider another solution if someone brings a serious flaw in the plan to my attention.

I suppose that means someone could train every mob to a zone line, and make the whole zone safe for crossing (until the mobs walk back anyway), but is this a big deal? I can't say. An alternative would be to make a specific exception for the "Leave" command, so that only those mobs would de-aggro. They could also change the BST class to work with the new system, I suppose, but that would be a lot of work (and I don't think they will bother with it).
Quote:
$€ decided to attack the MPK symptom, rather than the disease. The fact is, the majority of MPK occurs within the ranks of RMT "players."

I find it ironic that you use "$€" as an epithet, as if you were some M$-hating Linux fanboi from Slashdot, considering some of the things that you insult people for.

Anyway, I think you missed the mark. You are correct that MPK is just a symptom of a larger problem, but you didn't go far enough. RMT is also a symptom of a larger problem. If you want SE to reverse the anti-MPK changes and deal with the real issue, it stands to reason that you actually mean annhilating the roots of RMT... correct? Note that I'm not talking about banning gilsellers, because they will continue to keep coming back as long as it is profitable to do so (and it's hard to crush the profit advantage of someone employing workers in a 3rd world country working for beans).

That's a bigger problem than any of this, maybe you should focus your vast intellect in that direction. Plenty of opportunity to insult people, too, so it's be worthwhile, eh?

Back on topic for a minute, I think solo BST needs to be fixed, end of story. It's unfair what was done to them, even if it was the path of least resistance to half-*** fixing a "greater good". I agree with you that complaints need to be worded careful and concisely, so that we don't lose the attention span or blow the minds of the minimum-wage CSRs forced to read them all. I plan on submitting a differently-worded comment on this BST change every week, for as long as I think it's worth the time to do so. It's a worthy cause.
#116 Dec 14 2005 at 8:45 PM Rating: Default
Quote:
It's funny to read these threads and see the exaggerated straw-men that you prop up and subsequently tear down, SpinShark.


Point out one straw-man that I have used in this thread. Hell, point one out I've made in any thread. When I list the various arguments, for example, I make sure I get the meaning across exactly as it was presented by the person using it. These are actual arguments I've seen; there are no straw-men here.

I may write them out in a stupid way, but the meaning and logic behind them is, again, unchanged.

Quote:
I like the conspiracy theories, too, some of 'em are downright wacky (especially the RMT ones).


Again, point out these "wacky conspiracy theories," rather than just making the claim. Give me something to work with here.

Quote:
Threats should come from the environment, not from other players. Griefing must be cut to a bare, reasonable minimum, within the limits of the technology.


You can keep it PvE by banning the culprits, and being proactive in a way that doesn't have to necessarily involve changing the game. Altering the system clumsily and destroying jobs in the process is not the only way, nor the right way, to go about solving the MPK problem. This game is most definitely care-bear though, more now than it ever was.

Quote:
If mobs wandered back to their camp after being released, but didn't aggro/link until within that radius, I'd consider that an acceptable compromise.


This is what I have thought of as well. The only reasonable opposition I've seen to this is that people could easily do escort quests and certain missions by training mobs to zone. The good outweighs the bad in this case though, and it's a hell of a lot better than the current system.

Quote:
I find it ironic that you use "$€" as an epithet, as if you were some M$-hating Linux fanboi from Slashdot, considering some of the things that you insult people for.


I already explained my reason for its usage. Read the thread.

Besides, you gotta admit it adds a sexy twist to boring old "SE," no?

Quote:
You are correct that MPK is just a symptom of a larger problem, but you didn't go far enough. RMT is also a symptom of a larger problem. If you want SE to reverse the anti-MPK changes and deal with the real issue, it stands to reason that you actually mean annhilating the roots of RMT... correct? Note that I'm not talking about banning gilsellers, because they will continue to keep coming back as long as it is profitable to do so (and it's hard to crush the profit advantage of someone employing workers in a 3rd world country working for beans).


The whole enterprise that is the RMT racket, of course, is a whole other issue. I'm not even going to get into that right now. MPKing RMT are the only relevant part of RMT involved in this discussion, and coincidentally, they commit the majority of MPK.

I'm saying that SE didn't need to focus on fixing a player's capacity to MPK other players so much as they needed to actually actively enforce their current rules. In other words, MPKing is against their little TOS, so ban the people engaging in it, and stop being complacent.

When people are still in the game that MPK day after day despite constant complaints, that suggests apathy on SE's part.

And no, the banning of a couple-hundred accounts (and not even getting most of the culprits, at least on my server) and then being apathetic again is not acceptable.

Of course, like weeds, MPKing RMT will come back again. However, they're forced to do everything all over again, like levelling up for example. It makes their lives difficult. You still have to ban the people doing it, despite the apparent hopelessness of getting rid of them permanently.

Doing nothing to the offenders at all, well, does nothing at all to alleviate the situation.


Edited, Wed Dec 14 21:11:10 2005 by SpinShark
#117 Dec 14 2005 at 9:38 PM Rating: Good
****
4,592 posts
SpinShark wrote:
Point out one straw-man that I have used in this thread. Hell, point one out I've made in any thread.

Please tell me you're not serious. The fact that you're using actual (summarized) arguments by stupid people doesn't mean a hill of beans when you look at how your framed your post, no matter how accurate your mocking may be. You fling up paper-thin "arguments", and easily refute them. Your real opponent is either SE, or the idea of the change in general.
Quote:
Again, point out where I'm creating "wacky conspiracy theories," rather than just making the claim. Give me something to work with here.

I thought this one was obvious, clearly I consider your opinions on SE's involvement with RMT to be tinfoil-hat-worthy. It's not the only one, but it's the best one.
Quote:
You can keep it PvE by banning the culprits, and being proactive in a way that doesn't have to necessarily involve changing the game. Altering the system clumsily and destroying jobs in the process is not the only way, nor the right way, to go about solving the MPK problem.

By the same token, playing whack-a-mole with every griefer using human resources is not the right way to do it either, from both a business and a logistics standpoint. It's usually not possible to tell the difference between innocent trains and delibrate MPK without someone actually watching it happen, assuming they aren't stupid enough to talk about it in-game. Do you care to make a wild prediction on how much it would cost to police every potential MPK site on every server?

You'll saddle yourself with an unending money-sink. If there's a cheaper technological way, that's significantly effective, to combat the problem, SE would be fools not to leap on it. The REAL solution, like most, falls somewhere between both extremes. There will NOT be a quick programming fix, and throwing people at the problem is just as dumb. What needs to be done is that they curb MPK with game mechanics as much as is reasonably possible without unintended consequences (note that this change fails there because of BST), and then use people to fill in the gaps.

Quote:
This is what I have thought of as well. The only reasonable opposition I've seen to this is that people could easily do escort quests and certain missions by training mobs to zone. The good outweighs the bad in this case though, and it's a hell of a lot better than the current system.

I also agree that the downsides of this idea are clearly outweighed by the positive. I'll change my mind in a heartbeat if someone points out something I missed, but for now I think this is the least painful and most effective solution.

Quote:
I already explained my reason for its usage. Read the thread. Besides, you gotta admit it adds a sexy twist to boring old "SE," no?

What makes you think I didn't read it? Your intentions, hindsight or otherwise, have no bearing on the irony of your "SE" twist, which is all I commented on. I didn't take it to step #2 and call you a hypocrite (just in case that's what you thought I was implying), because I think the truth or untruth of statements should stand on their own merit.

Quote:
The whole enterprise that is the RMT racket, of course, is a whole other issue. I'm not even going to get into that right now.

But you really should, if you're going to lambaste people for conflating symptoms/problems, otherwise your analysis is incomplete. Banning RMT MPKers is still not far enough up the ladder of symptoms.
Quote:
When people are still in the game that MPK day after day despite constant complaints, that suggests apathy on SE's part.

But it also suggests ignorance, or incompetance, or a lack of resources to deal with the problem. And, if you beleive their story on the POL site, it also suggests an inability to consistently reach the standard of proof required to ban an MPKer.
Quote:
Doing nothing to the offenders at all, well, does nothing at all to alleviate the situation.

Fortunately, it's not an either/or situation. Technical solutions and GM ban-sticks are not mutually exclusive, and I personally think they work better in tandem.
#118 Dec 14 2005 at 10:06 PM Rating: Default
MargavineLiselle I hope you are not Liselle from the fishing forums, that would be dissapointing.

First of all, he can't help it if the arguements made by the "stop whining and bend over" crowd ARE PAPER THIN BECAUSE THEYRE WRONG.

Second, when the same as$holes are MPKing people for months in the same spot being reported regularly and they're STILL HERE, it certainly suggests apathy, don't try to split hairs just to be pompous.

I don't know what you have against this guy because I don't read these forums very much (until now and sorry I'm not leaving), but his OP is right on point, like him or not.
#119 Dec 14 2005 at 10:14 PM Rating: Decent
**
633 posts
I compleatly agree with the statement that this update to eliminate MPK was only nessesary because SE's policy and the GM's actions against MPK was shotty at best and pathetic/non-exixtant at worst. If more effort was put into eliminating the players who MPK, this would not be nessesary.

Here's my idea on how everyone could be happy. We have all read the idea to make mobs non agro until they get back to their spawn point, and we all know this would be exploited. How about if only mobs that a beastmaster has released would act like that?This way, no exploits, no MPK, and bst get their solo ability back.
#120 Dec 14 2005 at 10:40 PM Rating: Good
****
4,592 posts
Riel: Disappointing for what reason? Clearly you haven't actually read my post (on EITHER forum), since I'm for fixing BST solo. We are on the same side. I haven't killed any of your sacred cows, unless you think new BST partying options are unacceptable and need to disappear (note that they are not tied in any way to BST solo).

Yes, SE's actions (or lack thereof) suggest apathy, and it also suggest three or four other things. If you latch on to "SE doesn't care" without considering other possibilities, eventually you'll start to beleive it, correct or no.

Quote:
I don't know what you have against this guy because I don't read these forums very much (until now and sorry I'm not leaving), but his OP is right on point, like him or not.

What I have against SpinShark is an axe for another day. His OP was alright, except for a few glaring things that I pointed out. You think just because I don't like SpinShark that I can't agree with him where he's fully/partially correct? Don't be foolish.
#121 Dec 14 2005 at 10:44 PM Rating: Good
***
2,603 posts
Sioux wrote:
Quote:
(I'm beginning to agree with Beastmasters on one thing: keep 'em solo! I don't want to party with people this vicious)


Oh CRAP, you don't want me in your slow-****** downtimed, die-on-the-way-to-camp, hours-lfg honor roll of an EXP party?

No thanks. You can take your exp party and keep it, have fun....for the next six hours...as your behind slowly fuses with your chair.

Make sure you find a replacement, when you do crawl back to real life.


Don't worry. You can join my 8k per hour party any time instead! :D I've had some really good experiences with the few BSTs I've invited and I have no objections to inviting one again. ^^

Now on subject, I''ve been a RNG for well over a year and I can't honestly see any similarities between what just happened to BST and what happened to RNG. Let's face it, RNG got hit because a big part of the FFXI population saw it as a broken job. Now, I didn't really agree with that, if anything it was peoples veiw of RNG that was broken. The damn job was simply overhyped and overused due to peoples lazyness (why think of a strategy when we can just get more rangers?? D:). So what happened was probably inevitable, was it annoying for me? Yea but I'll coop. Anyway, I digress.

The way I see it BST just got crossed in the crossfire, it wasn't done to correct a so called imbalance in the game. It shouldn't really have happened and I hope they correct this. I must say that I haven't played BST higher than 20 so no personal experience, but I've never heard that the job was overpowered in any way. Doing something about MPK is a good thing in its own, but this side effect is bad as I see it. I'm not saying that they should change things back, but the way things are now Leave seems to have lost it's use. That can't have been the purpose. What if they just made the mob idle for 1 minute or two after you use Leave and after that time is up the mob disapears? Wouldn't that fix things while still making Leave useless for MPK purposes?

Oh and while on the subject, stop bashing the people who leave the job after this. I've said this before about the RNG patch, if the changes to the job was so big that it isn't enjoyable there's no shame in leaving. I personally didn't have much trouble adapting after the RNG change but some of my friends had. Sure, they could still get the job done well but they just didn't enjoy it the same. Now, what happened to BST seem to have an even bigger impact on the job so it's natural that some people will react in that way. I would still advice everyone to wait another couple of weeks before they give up completely on the job though, see what happens. The issue might still be adressed.

And now, [I'm tired]. G'night~
#122 Dec 14 2005 at 11:14 PM Rating: Default
Quote:
You fling up paper-thin "arguments", and easily refute them. Your real opponent is either SE, or the idea of the change in general.


Sure, the change/SE are the real opponents here. I never said otherwise. So what? It's not like I'm trying to pass these people and their arguments off as the only resistance to people against the change, nor am I claiming them to be SE's justification for the change.

They're simply common arguments that I've seen posted on multiple boards that didn't have decent refutation. It's that simple.

So, you've failed to provide an example of a straw man argument that you claimed I used. Do you even know what one is? Here, let me give you the definition of "straw man" used in the context of your post:

source: dictionary.com

3 entries found for straw man.
straw man
n.

2. An argument or opponent set up so as to be easily refuted or defeated.

(two other entries omitted)

Now, as you can see by the definition, in order for me to have used a straw man argument as you claim, I would need to have "set [it] up so as to be easily refuted or defeated." The definition implies a change in the integrity/meaning of the argument in such a way as to be easily knocked down.

I did not do this, as the arguments presented were fundamentally the same as they were when spouted by the original moron.

Quote:
I thought this one was obvious, clearly I consider your opinions on SE's involvement with RMT to be tinfoil-hat-worthy. It's not the only one, but it's the best one.


I don't care what you think is "obvious," nor do I particularly give a sh[/i]it what you deem "tin-foil-hat" worthy. I'm not going to make your case for you. Either quote one example so I can address it, or don't make the claim. This is debate 101 here.

If something is so "tin-foil-hat" worthy, then refute it. Otherwise, the accusation is just baseless.

Quote:

You'll saddle yourself with an unending money-sink. If there's a cheaper technological way, that's significantly effective, to combat the problem, SE would be fools not to leap on it. The REAL solution, like most, falls somewhere between both extremes. There will NOT be a quick programming fix, and throwing people at the problem is just as dumb. What needs to be done is that they curb MPK with game mechanics as much as is reasonably possible without unintended consequences (note that this change fails there because of BST), and then use people to fill in the gaps.


Sure, I can agree with that. The solution does fall somewhere between the extremes. Massive detrimental overhauls of the game, and GMs doing nothing are failures on both sides of the extreme, those being human resources banning people, and game mechanic prevention.

Quote:
It's usually not possible to tell the difference between innocent trains and delibrate MPK without someone actually watching it happen, assuming they aren't stupid enough to talk about it in-game.


The assertion I often see made claiming that GMs don't ban MPKers simply because it's "always [or usually] hard to tell" or some other variation of the above quote is specious. I submit that because the majority of MPK committed is by RMT, who are terrible at concealing it, a large percentage of MPK attempts are obvious enough to be ban-worthy. Based on this, I'll estimate the figure of "obvious" MPK attempts to be at no less than half. I think that's being extremely generous. The lowest figure may well be much higher than that, but it's impossible for me to know exactly how it is on every single server, although I have a pretty good idea.

Consecutive days of RMT training every mob in GC onto parties during a Serket pop, for instance, is an extremely obvious MPK attempt. This occurred on my server practically every day. It was reported by several witnesses who saw it happen. This was multiple days, at close to the same time. The culprits were never banned.

This is just one example. I have plenty more. It was a rare day when a GM actually did something about an MPK issue. Oddly enough, when a GM did do something, it was against the minority non-RMT MPKers more often than not. Make of that what you will.

The fact is, next to nothing was done about MPK, even incredibly obvious attempts, before these changes were considered. There are many people across all servers who will back this up.

How effective simply banning MPKers would be to the practice of MPKing will never be truly realized because of the apathy shown by SE and the GMs. Hell, if a worthwhile enforcement policy was put into place earlier, who knows if we would've even needed to consider the change. I'm not saying we definitely wouldn't have needed a gameplay mechanic change, but rather that it was a possibility that it wouldn't be necessary.

Once again, most of this problem is concentrated among RMT, and when RMT MPK, it's almost always blatant, due to their lack of surreptitiousness. Nothing was done, as mentioned. Again, a small minority of actual players participate in this, and while it might have been difficult to pin them down as MPKers, the problem would likely have been less widespread than it was if the heap of obvious MPKsellers would've been dealt with.

Quote:
What makes you think I didn't read it? Your intentions, hindsight or otherwise, have no bearing on the irony of your "SE" twist, which is all I commented on. I didn't take it to step #2 and call you a hypocrite (just in case that's what you thought I was implying), because I think the truth or untruth of statements should stand on their own merit.


What irony? Explain. I'm not sure what "truth or untruth" you think is left standing on its own merit at this point.

Quote:
But you really should, if you're going to lambaste people for conflating symptoms/problems, otherwise your analysis is incomplete. Banning RMT MPKers is still not far enough up the ladder of symptoms.


The RMT companies (like IGE, not the ****-world "employers") are irrelevant considering they have nothing to do with RMT farmers and their MPK tactics. The only thing relevant to this discussion are the people who participate in MPK, and that is MPKing RMT gil-farmers, and the small minority of the playerbase who engage in it.

The RMT MPKers are a part of the disease which causes MPK, not the symptom. To say that they are a symptom of the RMT money-machine would be accurate, however.

The whole rotten structure of that empire, again, is for another discussion.

Quote:
And, if you beleive their story on the POL site, it also suggests an inability to consistently reach the standard of proof required to ban an MPKer.


The "standard of proof" was quite frankly absurd. You practically had to know the phone number of the MPKer, have a log of them deliberately saying "I MPKED YOU, IT'S A-OK TO BAN ME SE," and then be required to contact them for a reasonable time in which SE could give them a call and talk things over.

Quote:
Fortunately, it's not an either/or situation. Technical solutions and GM ban-sticks are not mutually exclusive, and I personally think they work better in tandem.


I think it's safe to say that the fusion of the two, as implemented by SE at this point, has left much to be desired, no?

[i]Edited, Thu Dec 15 01:27:33 2005 by SpinShark
#123 Dec 14 2005 at 11:24 PM Rating: Decent
Quote:
What I have against SpinShark is an axe for another day.


No it isn't. Let's hear it. I'm curious now.
#124 Dec 14 2005 at 11:37 PM Rating: Default
Quote:
What I have against SpinShark is an axe for another day.


I don't even know what your problem with me is, as I've offended so many people here I just lost track of why people dislike me for whatever reason. Oh, and the whole "not caring" had a lot to do with my forgetfulness.

Are you a chick "margavineliselle?" Since both "Margavine" and "Liselle" sound feminine to me, I'll just assume you are and that one of those are your first name.

Anyway, if you knew me in real life, you'd love me. You'd be infatuated. I'll bet I could get you to give me a hummer and put out on the first date.

Quote:
You think just because I don't like SpinShark that I can't agree with him where he's fully/partially correct?


Except you haven't shown where I'm only "partially" correct. Let's just make clear that what you believe I'm "incorrect" about is your opinion only. It doesn't mesh with the facts.

EDIT: Anyway, I'm no longer getting paid, so I'm finished poking the retards tonight. I'm off to get an overdue blo[/i]wjob; have fun refreshing this page.

[i]Edited, Thu Dec 15 00:11:01 2005 by SpinShark
#125 Dec 14 2005 at 11:56 PM Rating: Decent
**
945 posts
Quote:
If this had been 4 months ago, I would've said you can have my babies. However, now it's a toss-up between yourself and Solichan. Solichan's rant in one of my threads was just damned arousing.

You're going to need to PM me a pic (preferably without all of that pesky clothing, provided you're female of course, which I think you are) to put yourself over the top.


I'm a guy ;_;. I'm not gay, but I'll totally make an exception for you. To be fair, this is the fourth time someone has mistaken me for a girl /sigh.

You kick *** in every topic I've ever seen you make. The rebuttals of the opposition crumble beneath the might of your words.

I agree wholeheartedly with what you've said about the Beastmaster ruination. I'm Red Mage and Beastmaster main. They hit us all hard. And not even just the Beastmasters... I can only imagine what camps like the waterfall camp in Boyahda is like, damn Processionaires lose scent of you the second you make into the water.

Or even training NMs for Dynamis? That must be a *****.

It only makes me wish my account wasn't revoked for RL reasons so I could join the fight.



...Keep fighting for justice Spinshark. You words are uncensored and speak only truth.
#126 Dec 14 2005 at 11:56 PM Rating: Default
MargavineLiselle wrote:
Riel: Disappointing for what reason? Clearly you haven't actually read my post (on EITHER forum), since I'm for fixing BST solo. We are on the same side. I haven't killed any of your sacred cows, unless you think new BST partying options are unacceptable and need to disappear (note that they are not tied in any way to BST solo).

Yes, SE's actions (or lack thereof) suggest apathy, and it also suggest three or four other things. If you latch on to "SE doesn't care" without considering other possibilities, eventually you'll start to beleive it, correct or no.

Quote:
I don't know what you have against this guy because I don't read these forums very much (until now and sorry I'm not leaving), but his OP is right on point, like him or not.

What I have against SpinShark is an axe for another day. His OP was alright, except for a few glaring things that I pointed out. You think just because I don't like SpinShark that I can't agree with him where he's fully/partially correct? Don't be foolish.


First off, I wasn't saying your opinions can't be valid, I was saying that it sounds like you have some vendetta against this guy, to a point where you're picking at his post.

The more I read, and think, the more I believe that this was an intentional ruining of our job, to make room for SE's new idea of solo play (NPCs, the lvlers of which I grief any chance I get). I'm very defensive because I don't want to be thrown in the garbage so people can play with dolls. I see any attempt to "deal with this" other than CHANGE IT NOW, to be counterproductive. People need to act NOW, or SE will think they got away with this BS.

What could not banning obvious RMT griefers suggest other than apathy or complicity?

Edited, Thu Dec 15 00:00:02 2005 by TheRielist

Edited, Thu Dec 15 00:00:32 2005 by TheRielist
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 191 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (191)