Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst
1
2
3
4
LastLast
  1. #41
    Mechagnome
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Denmark
    Posts
    576
    Quote Originally Posted by LudaKrishna View Post
    So not having unstable sha's spawn in day phase is ok? I don't think people read the whole thing properly...

    No one is claiming raid extending is cheating, the claim is a different guild exploiting tsulong HM by not having Unstable Sha's spawn. Not sure how that is cleaver use of game mechanics when you do something to make them not spawn at all.
    They where spawning, they just had 3 mages doing ring of frost in order keeping them chain-cc'ed. That is good use of cc ability's on a fight where the mobs are suppose to be cc'ed. This is however also the reason why ring of frost was changed to only work on 5 mobs at a time so it couldn't be used for this purpose again. It was NOT an exploit of game mechanics, the adds where suppose to be cc'ed and mages had an aoe cc with no number limit on it with a 30 sec cd that keeps them locked for 10 sec (as it was intended to work). This was not something blizz had taken into account on this fight, but using your normal ability's in a fight is not cheating or exploiting, it was a mistake on blizzards part for not expecting this and that is why they are not punishing the teams that used this strat.

  2. #42
    Quote Originally Posted by kushlol View Post
    It was pretty apparent what was being implied in his guilds " tier summary" he linked...guessing you didn't read that.
    So TM's tanking garajal to avoid mechanics of the fight are legitimate? Pretty sure and I'll quote:

    "In this clip, it is clear that UT knowingly and willingly exploited Tsulong, as some of their membership has told us. Additionally, their members have shared the logs of the kill, verifying that they indeed exploited the fight, by having 0 Unstable Sha's spawn in the first day phase. "

    In the supplied twitch aduio you can hear their own members go "I think it's bugged, no adds are spawning"

    How is that any different than what TM did? Are you saying you are all for cheating?

  3. #43
    It's still a pretty flimsy gripe, imo. One of the things the GM whines about is that they "haven't reproduced" their Tsulong kill...

    ...of course they haven't, they killed H-Sha yesterday, after extending the lockout. ;_; ...I don't even know if I would call what happened an exploit. They killed it on an pull where a mechanic bugged (doesn't seem like it's something they were doing intentionally) and I'm almost positive they would have killed the encounter correctly had they continued progression on it normally, and certainly, had they not extended the lockout, would have gone back to do it again. I know that's the key issue this GM has with "integrity" of guilds like UT, but honestly, extending the lockout let them focus on killing the boss which they, as a guild, wanted to kill first, without having to spend extra time on bosses which they'd already killed.

  4. #44
    Quote Originally Posted by kushlol View Post
    It was pretty apparent what was being implied in his guilds " tier summary" he linked...guessing you didn't read that.
    With reading comprehension like yours I can see why MMOC mods are so respected

    Infracted. Please don't insult other posters, mods or not.
    Last edited by Rivelle; 2013-01-18 at 03:58 PM.

  5. #45
    The issue at hand isn't about raid extending, it's about knowingly forcing an encounter to bug out. It's pretty clear through the audio that they coherently made the decision the bug out the adds. This was weeks after the RoF nerf and you have to go out of your way to make them not spawn by bugging the encounter.

    I posed a question to a community and I fully understand that there will be naysayers and there would be discourse on both sides. I have no qualm with raid extending at all; the issue at hand is knowing that what you're doing to kill that boss is not how it was intended and was replicated On previous pulls before completing the encounter.

    The purpose of this post was to raise awareness of the fact that there are still issues at hand within the raiding community that allow things like this to occur and was not intended to come across as high and mighty or otherwise whiny. I wanted to hear from others on what their thoughts were. However it seems that people are under the assumption that this is about raid extending; which it is not.

  6. #46
    If it's not about raid extending why is that part even in there?
    Exploiting is clearly not something that anyone should support, but then trying to shovel more dirt onto them by implying that extending their raids makes them somehow morally inferior just weakens the whole article incredibly. It makes the post sound like whining and mud-slinging, rather than someone trying to address serious issues.

    If you have a relevant and important point to bring up it should stand on its own. If you feel like you need to bolster it by magnifying ridiculous claims like "It is morally wrong to extend your raid in a progression raid" then it makes it seem like you do not trust your own claims.

    That is why it comes off as high and mighty! The post talks about something clearly irrelevant and perfectly permissible, and then tries to use it to paint another guild in a bad light.

    If you don't want to talk about raid extending, don't write about it and then try and say that because of raid extending, a guild that is ahead of you in progression are using underhanded tactics.
    If they are exploiting, that's all that needs to be said!

  7. #47
    I can certainly see how that would make it come off as high and mighty; that was not the intention of the post and that part of the "blog" was more of a personal opinion (my GM's) about raid extending. It went over our guilds personal plight through the tier and was to highlight the fact that even through raid extending you are not going to guarantee that you kill "x" boss sooner than "z" guild - but that it is something you can use to get ahead for "y" boss but set you back (potentially) for boss "q".

  8. #48
    That's not what was written.

    One of the tools that blizzard incorporated back in 2009 was the ability to extend raid lockouts. This was implemented to "allow players to progress through instances at their own pace". In theory, it was for guilds/people who were more casual, did not raid every week or those who did not have enough time in a given period to reclear previous content. It gave these people the ability to extend the lockout in order to see the later content more often. Somewhere along the lines, certain progression guilds began using this as a tool to circumvent reclearing an instance in the hopes of downing an end boss faster, thereby artificially propping up their Progression Ranking.
    "Artificially propping up their progression ranking".
    There is nothing artificial about killing a boss first, using tools provided for their exact intended purpose.
    In this part of the post, your GM accuses their kills of being "artificial" rather than "real" in order to imply that somehow because they decided to take a gamble on killing a boss first, their kill is no longer legitimate. Maybe it will slow them down later in the race, yes! But that does not make it "artificial ranking padding", because if their gamble fails they will end up lower than you!
    They kill the boss 100% legitimately! There is nothing artificial about that!
    This is whining and lowers the legitimacy of the entire post!

    It's not my place to judge the decision making of other guilds
    "But I'm going to anyway"
    In my opinion, this is disingenuous to the raiding community, to your members, and to the progression system.
    Again, this clearly isn't someone saying "you might set yourself back if you extend".
    This is someone saying "If you extend, you have betrayed the entire concept of progression raiding".
    That is literally what was written in the post and I think the fact that you're trying to gloss over it is pretty disingenuous in itself! As if you know that your GM is spouting nonsense in order to discredit another guild, but want to pretend that's not happening.

    You're right, there's nothing wrong with extending. Your GM disagrees though, and you linked his opinion in the OP to get us to talk about it.
    What I am reading right here is absolutely ridiculous, and boils down to mud-slinging to someone jealous of another guild's success.
    They were ahead of you before they killed Tsulong, and this part of the post is just his attempt to make it look like they only got that far because they exploited when the "exploit" actually happened when you were already lagging behind.

    I can 100% understand your leader being upset that another guild gets ahead through exploiting, but he lists four weeks of raid extensions and one exploit. He is fabricating offences to make the guild look worse, to make his own guild look better, because they got further in progression.

    We value integrity.
    in·teg·ri·ty
    /inˈtegritē/
    Noun
    The quality of being honest and having strong moral principles; moral uprightness.
    The state of being whole and undivided: "territorial integrity".

    If there's one thing I can say about this blog post, it's that it definitely doesn't show "strong moral principles and moral uprightness".
    The word I would use is "spite".



    That is why everyone is focusing on that part of the blog post.
    Nobody is in support of exploiting, but when your GM goes out of his way to make another guild look bad by pretending something is "against the spirit of competitive raiding" when it clearly isn't, it turns his entire post into a farce.
    And then he has the temerity to talk about "integrity"! Such hypocrisy.
    Not to mention this whole topic only exists to name and shame a guild higher than you in progression rankings in the first place...
    Last edited by Imnick; 2013-01-18 at 01:48 PM.

  9. #49
    Quote Originally Posted by Woz View Post
    I can certainly see how that would make it come off as high and mighty; that was not the intention of the post and that part of the "blog" was more of a personal opinion (my GM's) about raid extending. It went over our guilds personal plight through the tier and was to highlight the fact that even through raid extending you are not going to guarantee that you kill "x" boss sooner than "z" guild - but that it is something you can use to get ahead for "y" boss but set you back (potentially) for boss "q".

    Sigh... You never learn Not

  10. #50
    Quote Originally Posted by Imnick View Post
    If it's not about raid extending why is that part even in there?
    Exploiting is clearly not something that anyone should support, but then trying to shovel more dirt onto them by implying that extending their raids makes them somehow morally inferior just weakens the whole article incredibly. It makes the post sound like whining and mud-slinging, rather than someone trying to address serious issues.
    This is exactly how I felt after reading the blog. No clue as to why anyone would think extending a raid is immoral, against spirit of competition, or whatever. Just too much emphasize on that.

  11. #51
    Dreadlord kushlol's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    927
    Quote Originally Posted by LudaKrishna View Post
    So TM's tanking garajal to avoid mechanics of the fight are legitimate? Pretty sure and I'll quote:

    "In this clip, it is clear that UT knowingly and willingly exploited Tsulong, as some of their membership has told us. Additionally, their members have shared the logs of the kill, verifying that they indeed exploited the fight, by having 0 Unstable Sha's spawn in the first day phase. "

    In the supplied twitch aduio you can hear their own members go "I think it's bugged, no adds are spawning"

    How is that any different than what TM did? Are you saying you are all for cheating?
    You are in Demise so I'm not having this argument with you because your stance has been chosen and you're siding with your guild. Also If you don't see the glaring difference between intentionally glitching a boss in a wall to disregard every mechanic of the fight and not being sure if tsulong adds are bugged from spawning then I don't know what else to say to you.

    When did I give any kind of indication or hint I am in favor of cheating?

    Made by dubbelbasse

  12. #52
    Just a point to make.

    Most of the first 1-25 kills on Tsulong heroic involved the guild exploiting.

    Whether it was using Rallying Cry, or the Druid 4 piece from DS. Whether it was AG + Snake trap. Tsulong got exploited to hell and back by the top guilds. Guess what though?

    The only thing that matters is "the Fearless" kill. Sha of Fear HC is the only thing that matters if you're playing for a rank.

  13. #53
    It's aaaaaall good - Homer Simpson

    Do what you can to push as high as you can, I suppose.

    Don't really know if this thread is about guild integrity or raid-extensions or exploits anymore.

  14. #54
    Just wanted to throw my two cents in, <Demise> is the guild I raid with. I could care less about raid extends, if you choose to extend and rot gear, ok, that's why blizzard implemented the system. About the exploit, we know it, they know it, that is enough for me, blizzard can handle it with the information they have been given. We ended up beating them to Sha, and that is what counts.

    On a personal note, it was great to have competition when it came down to it, We had a 7% Sha wipe, they had a 3% wipe. It makes us strive harder as a guild to succeed in our goals.
    Looking forward to next tier.

    #yoloswagyakcitymercoutlegitpandaisntevenpandasomeonetellmewhatthismeans
    Cyner#1996

  15. #55
    It somewhat baffles me that people look at the post and say that we consider extending cheating. Read it again, we do not.

    However when you use the extension tool on a instance that you bugged an encounter you could not kill correctly to keep ranking and not have to rework the boss then there is a problem. And that's not what people are apparently getting.

    I don't understand how you can listen to the audio. And say that sounds like a unintentional kill. It's pretty clear that they wanted to bug it again. The logs also show the lack of 100 million damage from Unstable Sha. That's not because of amazing CC. Only way that could of happened was they kept all those Sha's cced all the way through the second night phase and into day phase.

    Audio pretty much sums it up.

    "Just bug it again so we get by it."

    "I think it's bugged."

    "Fuck it go."

    "Don't F this up."

    "Nobody say shit."

    "If you say anything I'll kill you."
    Last edited by alywins; 2013-01-18 at 06:02 PM.

  16. #56
    Quote Originally Posted by alywins View Post
    It somewhat baffles me that people look at the post and say that we consider extending cheating. Read it again, we do not.

    However when you use the extension tool on a instance that you bugged an encounter you could not kill correctly to keep ranking and not have to rework the boss then there is a problem. And that's not what people are apparently getting.

    I don't understand how you can listen to the audio. And say that sounds like a unintentional kill. It's pretty clear that they wanted to bug it again. The logs also show the lack of 100 million damage from Unstable Sha. That's not because of amazing CC. Only way that could of happened was they kept all those Sha's cced all the way through the second night phase and into day phase.

    Audio pretty much sums it up.

    "Just bug it again so we get by it."

    "I think it's bugged."

    "Fuck it go."

    "Don't F this up."

    "Nobody say shit."

    "If you say anything I'll kill you."
    From your post: This tier, for whatever reason, UT decided that in order to compete, they needed to use raid extension as a primary means for maintaining/gaining rank.

    From your post: and at this point has become a trite example of the lengths certain guilds will go to improve their rank

    No, you're not saying its cheating but you're saying its bad because they extended their lockout to make it easier to get a server first. Which by the way, who cares? It's not world first so basically it doesn't matter but anyway, to each their own.

    I think the GM of the guild is acting rather childish. Publically calling the guild out on their site and then linking it to MMO-Champ to try and shame them. Ok, so they bugged the encounter, if Blizz cares to they will strip the ranks and ban them. If they don't, well then I guess Blizz doesn't agree with you. But I fail to see why YOU are coming here naming and shaming a guild because they beat you. Suck it up and move on, stop acting like a baby.

    Also the whole post reeks of "they beat me so I'm gonna come up with everything I can to say they cheated to make myself feel better about losing".

    Bottom line, it's up to Blizz to ban them if they feel they should, not you. And it sure as hell doesn't belong on here. As far as I know naming and shaming is against the rules here and you did it to an entire guild.

  17. #57
    Kush, you may have read the front page post, however I get the distinct impression you mostly just glossed it and claimed to have read it. When I read that post I get the distinct impression that Fuga feels that extending lockouts to achieve kills for rank is a dishonorable practice. I do NOT get the impression that he believes it to be cheating. I believe that what Unholy Trinity did with Tsulong is cheating and they should be penalized for it. No adds spawning is clearly something wrong. Ensidia got banned for noticing something wrong on their world first Lich King kill and not only didn't report it, but used it to their advantage. This is clearly what UT did.

    The fact that their leadership choose to not wipe it and pull it correctly is a huge slap to their raiding core and all of their recruits. It is also a huge slap at the entire server community. They have shown their skill to be good enough in the past to not need cheap tactics to win, however they choose to employ them anyway. They also still lost. Rankings on some website ultimately doesn't matter. What does matter is completing the tier and how you got their. Demise won. 2/3 Realm Firsts is pretty decisive win.

    FOR THOSE WHO QUESTION THE THREAD TOPIC ON GUILD INTEGRITY:
    This thread is indeed just about that. And like every other discussion on integrity in sporting, or with power, or with politics, or with religion it must include a discussion of those who violated their integrity to get ahead. If there were not any specific examples to point out then such discussion would never be needed. Ever since Tier 2.5 all tiers have had some kind of cheating occur by some high end guild somewhere in order to get ahead. Whether it was by a well known world ranked guild or an unkown server ranked guild World of Warcraft has had to deal with its own fair share of cheaters.

    The incident with Unholy Trinity is just the latest one. If you want the latest sports hoopla you can find tons of stuff about Lance Armstrong's admissions to doping all over the place. It happens. Only by holding those who perform at high levels under close scrutiny and to high standards can we ensure that those we admire stay true.

  18. #58
    Quote Originally Posted by NightZero88 View Post
    I think the GM of the guild is acting rather childish. Publically calling the guild out on their site and then linking it to MMO-Champ to try and shame them. Ok, so they bugged the encounter, if Blizz cares to they will strip the ranks and ban them. If they don't, well then I guess Blizz doesn't agree with you. But I fail to see why YOU are coming here naming and shaming a guild because they beat you. Suck it up and move on, stop acting like a baby.
    As I previously mentioned, for the first week terrace was open the exploit for Tsulong was pretty much made public. Anyone could've gotten a kill. The first week meant nothing in terms of progress, the main thing people cared about was Sha of Fear which sadly was a) bugged/broken and b) a terribly boring fight. It was a fight that was definitely unfinished.

  19. #59
    Quote Originally Posted by Manamontana View Post
    As I previously mentioned, for the first week terrace was open the exploit for Tsulong was pretty much made public. Anyone could've gotten a kill. The first week meant nothing in terms of progress, the main thing people cared about was Sha of Fear which sadly was a) bugged/broken and b) a terribly boring fight. It was a fight that was definitely unfinished.
    Not sure what this statement has to do with what you quoted from mine. Or even what this statement has to do with anything really.

  20. #60
    I find it amusing that in a world of text (online forums), so many have reading comprehension issues. The main point was that the guild used a lockout extension to bypass re-defeating a boss that they exploited for a kill the first time around (and the exploit was likely fixed by the next week). And no, exploitation is not OK just because a couple of others did it as well.

    Anyway, I'm sorry to hear that you feel cheated (haha pun intended) on your realm first Sha. I can see why you feel the topic is important and want to bring it to the attention of the playerbase as a PSA, although I'm not sure shoving it into a post reflecting your guild's tier is the most appropriate way to do so. It's not like this is a new issue, and as several have already mentioned, it makes it seem as if your guild spends a lot of time focusing on external issues rather than working to better themselves, though as a top US 50 guild I doubt this is true. Personally, I would have put it in a separate post, perhaps anonymously on realm forums, with no mention of how it impacts yourselves; the issue should be strong enough in of itself without trying to push what seems to be a borderline sob story.

    As for extensions, I like the idea of extending lockouts because it puts the decision-making further into the hands of the guilds, where they get to decide between face time on progression vs. gear from farm. Yes, I am aware that this wasn't the main message of your post, just wanted share my thoughts since it was brought up.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •