Pinski

Before anybody says this is anti-Chaotic Legion, shut the fuck up. This is a post I had thought about posting back when I first learned about the Avatar of Valor being up in CL1 and CL2. I decided not to post it because I didn't see a need. But anyway, I'll list you the events that have led up to this post:

Situation #1:
Avatar of Valor is up on Server #1, Guild #1 is trying it in CL1, Guild #2 is trying it in CL2. After several hours, Guild #2 kills it in CL2, guild #2 is still trying it in CL1, and runs out of "Crystal of Dark Energy"'s. They petition and a GM despawns it so that Guild #2 does not kill it.

Situation #2:
Avatar of Valor is up on Server #2. Guild #1 is trying to get enough people in CL1, so that they can zone into CL2 and kill it there first, then go back to CL1 and kill it there. However, during this period some outsiders petition them, and by the time they get a CL2 open(this is with Avatar of Valor up still in CL1), they find that when they arrive at where the Avatar of Valor is, there's a GM and no mob, and the GM says "I hear this is where an Avatar spawns ".

Situation #3:
Avatar of Valor is up on Server #3. Guild #1 is trying to kill it in CL1, Guild #2 and #3 show up. Guild #1 goes to CL2, and kills it there, comes back to CL1 and kills it there.

Now, notice the problem here is enforcement of similar situations. This is a problem with enforcement of the rules that they seem to decide to ignore. In reality, all GMs should be despawning the mob in CL2 so that you do not get loot that you're not supposed to. Therefore, this is technically an exploit by the way of GMs deciding that you aren't supposed to have 2 Avatar of Valors up at a time, and 1 should be despawned.

__________________

Manyak

The only reason it is considered an exploit is because, unlike all the other contesteds in instanced overland zones, there is no limit to how many times you can force it to spawn as long as you leave it up in CL1.

And still, personally, I dont even care if anyone exploits it, doesn't ruin the game for me.

__________________

LFG

The main problem here is CS discretion and inconsistent enforcement.

CS doesn't decide game policy, they enforce game policy, or what they believe it to be.

It's the devs who designed the game and these encounters, they know what was intended and what wasn't.

It's always been the case in this game that 2 or more different GMs can handle a situation and end up with diametrically opposed results.

Just because one GM does something one way, and another does something differently, doesn't mean either is correct, or incorrect.

Stated differently, when a GM allegedly despawns Valor in an instance of CL, that doesn't necessarily mean that it is improper, or even a technical exploit, for a guild to kill Valor twice, if it is up in both instances.

If the devs wanted to change this feature, they would change the code so that it stopped happening, or one would post here and say this was not intended, you guys shouldn't do that.

Until one of those two things happens, IMO it is fair game to kill as many contested mobs as exist in this game, and a GM despawning a contested is an isolated incident that doesn't establish what game policy is with respect to that issue.

As we've seen from this board, reasonable players have disagreed on this very issue - some have automatically assumed it was somehow wrong, on its face, to kill multiple Avatars in different instances. Others, like me, consider it to be no problem, provided no game mechanic was exploited to spawn the addtional instance and encounter.

I agree CS should be instructed to handle this situation uniformly across servers, if, as is believed by some people, this was not intended. But all this is speculation, it shouldn't be our job as players to ever have to figure crap like this out or argue about it.

The biggest problem in all of this is as it was in the Rumbler situation - players are having to decide what is proper conduct, and what isn't, based on circumstances that reasonable people can disagree about. We shouldn't have to do this, SoE should make the game work in a uniform manner, and CS should enforce policy based on what was intended for the game, rather than based on their interpretation of what should be allowed in the absence of that policy.

__________________

"Bottom line: we're not all being honest with ourselves here." Become, Kraken forums

Artwat

You mean how they allowed the Rumbler to be yelled because he was unkillable, then they made yelling not possible once they fixed it?

Claria

Isn't this the exact opposite stand you had on the Rumbler issue..... I mean.... based off this one comment you made.... the Rumbler would have been fine until the devs changed the code...... Also.... you said at the time that was an exploit.... yet you're also saying now people shouldn't do that and just leave it up to the devs to decide....

Skaer

If I remember correctly didn't Disso, SD, and numerous other guilds kill matron in two Mystic Lake instances a while back?

__________________
Forgotten.

I hate fat chicks.

FFS.

Ishbu

They fixed the matron so it will not spawn in mystic lake 2.

That said, its not an exploit, fuck that. We know the developers dont want people killing the avatar in CL1 and 2, but its up. If the guilds who didnt kill it didnt kill it, some other guild woudl. I dont know about your raid guilds but in mine we dont leave contested mobs up that we want loot from for other guilds to get said loot.

Should it be fixed? Yes. Until it is though, I say keep killing them both.

__________________
"We are looking into ways to reduce the feeling that you must always be pressing a button to contribute to the group or raid" - Aeralik, aka Chris Kozak.

"So standing around doing nothing makes you a better player and for a more satisfying game experience you dumb fucking idiot?" - Me

Claria

If I remember correctly.... the reason they changed that so zones didnt instance, was to prevent contesteds being killed multiple times per spawn.

LFG

All we know from the fact they changed the Matron so it can't spawn in Mystic Lake 2 is that they didn't want the Matron to spawn in ML2.

Because they only changed the Matron encounter without changing other encounters and zones, we can't just assume they intended all other encounters game wide to stop spawning addtiional raid mobs when one was already up in the first instance.

Because they didn't change this gamewide when they changed the Matron, it is very clear they didn't intend for that same change to happen in other zones.

The devs are smart people. They know how to change something in just one zone, or to change it gamewide instead, if they wanted to do that.

Because SoE only made that change to one zone, and not globally, that is the clearest possible statement that doing this is allowed in other zones, just not in Mystic Lake for the Matron Encounter.

This has been a consistent feature of EQ2 in every expansion now. This was possible with Terrorantula in T6, with the dragons during the Spire building event that launched KoS, and is now happening in the EoF expansion with the Avatars. Clearly, SoE has no problem with us doing this, if they didn't want us to do it, they would have prevented it from happening in more zones than just Mystic Lake.

__________________

"Bottom line: we're not all being honest with ourselves here." Become, Kraken forums

Artwat

LFG, you can't say that they could have just changed it globally just as easy. You have no idea how the code is set up. More than likely, to avoid multiple contested being up in instances of zones, they would have to change the zone files of every zone.

Also, it was stated that only ONE avatar is supposed to be up at a time. So, how exactly is this not as much of an 'exploit' (as you claimed) as the rumbler? Personally, I think there is nothing wrong with killing both, since if you don't, someone else would have. However, I think its lame to say the rumbler was an exploit since the devs didnt allow that, yet were completely aware of this and meant for two Avatars to be up at the same time when they specifically stated there was only supposed to be ONE avatar at a time.