What should be bannable...

I never had any problem with it. And if everything else fails, there's still that sweet shift key.

Mostly i find a lot of mounts around a npc more troublesome, especially if i'm looking for a npc i've not used before, like event npc's

I wouldn't really consider it a big problem and it would be too much of a bother to report such people and actually have them banned

They should code it so that catshops cannot be created within 5 meters on an NPC, and should also cancel mounts/wings/pets in that area as well.

Mor_Toran - Sanctuary wrote: »

They should code it so that catshops cannot be created within 5 meters on an NPC, and should also cancel mounts/wings/pets in that area as well.

The catshop part wouldn't suck, but the mounts/wings/pets is stupid. So, If I'm on my mount and want to use a teleporter I will be forced to dismount -> teleport -> mount again? Or land -> teleport -> fly again? That much more of a disturbance than shift+clicking.

One can also just walk a few meters away, turn of the "show players" thing and double click the teleporter. Then you can click it again and go back to normal mode. also, shift click. Being too lazy to click shift is no reason to get other people banned/**** with mounts/flying mounts.

"I'm too lazy to do quests, so we should eliminate those from game".

Selling instances and chars with offensive names.

Sirrobert - Dreamweaver wrote: »

You mean give us the reward without doing them b:laugh

Hence why I am bored with the game now... It is dumbed down and a mockery to the original game.

No, I don't think other people should be banned just because some is too lazy to hit the shift key. And it's not anyone else's fault you play the game on a toaster but still want maxed out distances in cities if lag is preventing the shift clicking.

MANray_ - Sanctuary wrote: »

I'm voting yes on this one. The problem isn't the behaviour itself but its being continued despite repeated warnings or the offender being made aware that it may be disruptive to other users. In a larger sense what would be punished here is defiance of authority, although strictly speaking any rule that does not result in significant sanction is unenforceable. Now, you could start this off with 2-3 day suspensions, then immediately move to bans after repeat offenses. Once word got out GMs mean to enforce this you would rarely see the rule being broken...

Is this practical? No, this is very trivial stuff compared to much more urgent matters requiring GM intervention and anyone making too much of an issue over this should really get some perspective. This doesn't mean this is acceptable behaviour, it is being inconsiderate of others in order to get near negligible personal advantage. But it really is too much of a waste of time to give this matter much thought.

b:lipcurl

Just like to respond to this for a moment. Autopath puts you right on top of NPCs. There should be zero threat of banning for using game features as they were intended to be used. Especially when the came is already been coded in such a way as to give both players a way to do what they want. There is best performance, there is holding down the shift key, there is minimizing the distance sliders and standing behind the NPC, there is turning effects sliders all the way down, many events have multiple NPCs in different locations so you do not HAVE to even talk to the blocked NPC in most cases. There are wide variety of options for you to utilize if you can't click the NPC. There is only one autopath. SO tell me, whose authority are you disrespecting by using the game features the way they were intended? One player does not have more authority over another and just because you tell someone to move doesn't mean that they have to do so.

VenusArmani - Dreamweaver wrote: »

There should be zero threat of banning for using game features as they were intended to be used.

This is a blanket statement and an old favourite of some players in PvP servers. You don't need to glitch or **** in order to be in violation of ToS (eg most griefing) and there are in fact some bannable offenses which can come as a result of rather innocent behaviour. Autopath can also land you on top of bosses, and I don't usually see that as an excuse for using veno air pets. Of course you could argue that they weren't intended to be used in this manner, but there's no indication in this scenario that allows an unexperienced player to realize that their tactical brilliance is not the reason the boss went down easy. And it really does come down to common sense, you can't really expect any team of developers in the world to code against any and all forms of behaviour that could potentially be used by players to cheat, inconvenience or annoy others.

Now, I don't consider setting shop on top of an npc to be a particularly heinous offense (on the contrary, its kind of pathetic and ridiculous to be discussing this) but there's no doubt it does inconvenience others. You're wasting somebody else's time (which in cities can be a bad enough thing for those experiencing lag issues) and forcing others to go out of their way just so you can marginally increase the chances someone will click on your pathetic little catshop. The Bounty Hunter NPC, as an example, its one of the more frequently used by players, it doesn't show up in your minimap whether it holds quests for you and it's located in a high traffic area where already it may be obscured by flyers, sometimes even mounts. So instead of taking just a glance while visiting the adjacent attendance npc and be done with it, you're basically forced to land, bring up some screens, turn on/off features, shift sliders, move around and blindly shift click while on a platform where a small mistake will land you some meters down in water. All just so some jerk, likely catering to only a small segment of the population visiting that npc, can get a slightly increased chance of selling his/her wares. Its inconsiderate to label others lazy because they won't go out of their way to accomodate you. Please realize this, regardless of whether this should be considered a bannable offense or not, it simply is rude.

The fact is you're disrespecting authority every time you break a rule (which isn't always bad) no matter how irational or moronic it may seem to you. And the fact is that, as I expressed in my commentary, a rule that's not backed by any significant form of punishment is unenforceable (which is not always bad either). What we are discussing here is, to me, a simple matter of respect for others. Yes its a rather inconsequential issue but still... If policy is to enforce then you should obey regardless of personal opinions or face the consequences. It doesn't get any more clear cut than that.

I don't think it should be bannable, players can use shift if they have trouble to click on the npc.

poll sucks poll fail.Game states hit left shift and select the npc of choice..that is all..if ya to lazy then cry

VenusArmani - Dreamweaver wrote: »

The same shoe goes on the other foot.No, it doesn't. It is a basic societal principle that your liberty ends where mine begins. When faced with the choice one should always prefer the lesser of two evils and this means that the needs of the many do outweight those of the few. Why should the person lose money just to accommodate you using a PC that doesn't even meet the minimum requirements to play the game? This is leetist bull, no one can possibly play this game on a computer that's unable to actually run the client, but this isn't what you meant, did you? No, what you meant is that those who can't afford state of the art rigs shouldn't make demands those who do would find inconvenient. BTW I play the game on fully maxed settings even when on an event or in west Archo. You don't need that good a computer to pull it off and while mine is not the latest, it's still pretty decent. I also get a pretty stable connection but then things such as the weather could get in the way of that... Or I could be playing on window mode while doing other stuff... Or with just 1 hand as I could be taking a phone call or eating a freaking sandwich. Your assumption that this is a problem that has to do with any given player's economic status, and your horrible reaction to it, reflect very poorly on you.It can easily be seen as rude ask someone else to give up money just so you don't have to press the shift key. And here's another assumption, do you think it takes most players that long to figure out that if you're going to buy something in a catshop you may want to check up on a couple more to see if you can't find a better deal? You're assuming placing a catshop on top of an npc transaltes into extra revenue but it may not. I never check catshops on top of npcs, and it isn't out of principle, I simply find it faster more convenient to click through those at ground level.And then when they don't listen to "your authority," Not mine's, only PWI staff can enforce rules.and this player-made because it is not in the ToS That's your opinion, I say this clearly is interfering with others enjoying the game.unlike griefing, attempting to get that person banned. You missed that the point I was making is that sanctions are the only way to enforce rules.Some people spend thousands of dollars on this game Which has absolutely no relevance to the issue.and they should have that taken away from them because you'd have to spend 30 seconds getting your sliders in order?That is the point of the thread, once again I consider this whole thing ridiculous but as a thing of principle I do hold to my opinion that those inconsiderate of others should be subject to rule enforcement. I find that far more offensive.Because spending thousands of dollars means others should spend 30 seconds adjusting sliders if you decide to open a catshop? And you're the one offended? Come on, I thought R9r should be enough of an advantage for you guys. A half a second for you, potentially weeks of investment for them So time does matter?because all those little purchases do add up. Which, once again, you really can't tell for sure.And there is NO rule against putting a catshop next to an NPC. I may have missed something, but this was about placing them on top... It doesn't prevent you from doing anything in-game No, it just wastes your time.and so therefore cannot be considered as griefing. I've never stated it should be.

Exploiting glitches is not the way the game was intended to be played, You missed the point here.using autopath and check marking the "cancel fly" button is how that feature is supposed to be used.I didn't realize setting a catshop required autopathing. In fact, this game did not even always have shift+click. It was specifically added so people could click on NPCs that were being blocked. Because it was a better solution than expecting certain players to exercise restraint.That's the solution to it because they didn't want to ban people who were following all rules Your assumption.and whose clients could get them banned with no input from them.Because they had absolutely no control of where they were setting shop? This isn't about the autopath, you know. Banning is a big deal,History proves otherwise were those spending thousands of dollars are concerned. shift+clicking is not.Because once again, it comes down to others accomodating you.

Griefing is against the rules. It's spelled out in the ToS. Exploiting glitches is against the rules. Using autopath is an intended feature is not against the rules. No argument on this, but once again there's the enjoyment thing. You see, the ToS argument works both ways and pretending any one interpretation is correct is speculation if it isn't backed by actual GM precedent.Players do not have to move on your authority Again, this is a strawman, I mean to have no one recogize any authority of mine.and it sets a rather unpleasant precedent that anything that can be seen as "annoying," should become bannable. Great sounding bit, but once again you're using nothing but generalizations to back your point. There's plenty of certainly bannable offenses that are certainly annoying behaviour to other players.

You do not have to utilize the distance sliders and best performance because someone's mount is there. You have to utilize it because your computer cannot handle the graphics all at once. Most people's computers can. Nobody else should be penalized because of your choice in computers especially when the game gives you so many options to rectify the problem.Once again with the leetist argument, get over yourself. It's none of your bussiness what other people can afford or choose to use as a gaming rig, and as I've explained earlier, there are plenty of reasons other than your "choice" of computer that make this behaviour inconvenient for others. EDIT; I removed part of what could have been interpreted as an overly harsh response.

b:lipcurl I think we may have reached an impasse, I don't think either of us will concede the other's point.

MANray_ - Sanctuary wrote: »

No, it doesn't. It is a basic societal principle that your liberty ends where mine begins. When faced with the choice one should always prefer the lesser of two evils and this means that the needs of the many do outweight those of the few.

Yes, it does. You want them to prohibit people from having the freedom to open shops wherever they please so that you don't have to use features in the game specifically made so that you can both be free. Your freedom to play with any graphical settings you feel like should end at the point where it prevents other people from getting on the game period. The argument can easily be seen both ways. So it comes down to a choice. The lesser of two evils to you maybe to prevent others from playing period. The lesser of two evils to me is that holding the shift key is a much, much smaller infraction on a person's ability to play than not being able to access the game. Which is probably the reason that it isn't bannable.

This is leetist bull, no one can possibly play this game on a computer that's unable to actually run the client, but this isn't what you meant, did you? No, what you meant is that those who can't afford state of the art rigs shouldn't make demands those who do would find inconvenient. BTW I play the game on fully maxed settings even when on an event or in west Archo. You don't need that good a computer to pull it off and while mine is not the latest, it's still pretty decent. I also get a pretty stable connection but then things such as the weather could get in the way of that... Or I could be playing on window mode while doing other stuff... Or with just 1 hand as I could be taking a phone call or eating a freaking sandwich. Your assumption that this is a problem that has to do with any given player's economic status, and your horrible reaction to it, reflect very poorly on you.

My computer isn't great either. My internet has been getting disconnected due to bad weather. I live a state in the US with notorious amount of precipitation. But that doesn't mean that the minimum requirements of the game should change to meet me. If you cannot run the client without those sliders up, that is your problem. Why should someone else be banned because I choose to play this game with my sliders up on a **** laptop? That is my decision. Nobody is making me. And the game already has SEVERAL options to allow me to continue to play in a way the does not disrupts or god forbid, prohibits others gameplay.

As far as the ridiculousness of taking a phone call or eating a sandwhich or tabbing out. Those are not reasons other people should be banned. Other people shouldn't be banned because of your choices. Especially tabbing out. I do that literally ALL the time. The reason I can post so much is because I fly places and post while I'm tabbed out. When I am tabbed out I can't click anything so it doesn't really matter where someone's catshop is. Most of the people that cannot click it are trying to run things on settings that they do not meet the minimum requirements to enable. That's their choice, nobody elses and nobody else should be punished for their decisions.

And here's another assumption, do you think it takes most players that long to figure out that if you're going to buy something in a catshop you may want to check up on a couple more to see if you can't find a better deal? You're assuming placing a catshop on top of an npc transaltes into extra revenue but it may not. I never check catshops on top of npcs, and it isn't out of principle, I simply find it faster more convenient to click through those at ground level.

No. Most people do check prices. But I know for a fact that I can sometimes double my sales just by moving my catshop. it's all about finding a place where you are visible, since many just run up to the first catshop they see and click buy.

Not mine's, only PWI staff can enforce rules

It's not a rule though, so no authority has been breached. So they shouldn't be banned for "disrespecting authority, " because no one with authority has asked them move.

That's your opinion, I say this clearly is interfering with others enjoying the game

So is people saying stupid things in faction chat that isn't necessarily bannable, but annoying. So is kill stealing. So is killing someone 70 levels below you causing them to have to run back. All things that are not bannable. There is always going to be someone who can't enjoy the game because of what you are doing, that doesn't mean that all of it should be bannable. And indeed all of it isn't, and rightly so. The question then should be "can you not accomplish something because of this action," and the answer to that is no. You can still do whatever you want.

hich has absolutely no relevance to the issue

It has a ton of relevance to this issue. As you said, when faced with a choice you have to consider the lesser of the two evils. In order to understand the lesser of two evils you must consider what the damages would be to both parties. Thousands of dollars versus 20 seconds. Hundreds of hours of gameplay versus 20 seconds. That's what is potentialy lost. That kind of punishment grossly exceeds any damage done to the person who had to hold down the shift key for 20 seconds. Annoying or not.

Because spending thousands of dollars means others should spend 30 seconds adjusting sliders if you decide to open a catshop? And you're the one offended? Come on, I thought R9r should be enough of an advantage for you guys.

No, and you don't know the first thing about my economic situation either IRL or in-game if you think I'm one the guys who do. I'm saying that you cannot just completely ignore the damage to one party or refuse to acknowledge it's existence. In order to truly understand anything when a rule is made enforced, you must take into account both sides of any argument. You can't just ignore the damage to the catshops. As I said earlier, the same shoe can go on the other foot. You and the people who want them banned want to disrupt their gameplay so that you can play the game as you please.

So time does matter?

Absolutely. Measure the time and money wasted by a given person because that catshop is there. Now measure the time and money taken by a given person forced to put their catshop in a less than desirable location. Who has the most remedies to address their problem? Who is injured more by the catshop placed on the head of the npc? The answer is that catshop.

Which, once again, you really can't tell for sure

We can because people keep doing it. What other rational reason is for it to be a persistent problem amongst a random sample of people? That is likely to take into account a wide variety of personality types, and economic means? Why is it a problem from server, to server, to server. A noticeable catshop is likely a catshop that's getting customers. Especially if the price is reasonable.

I may have missed something, but this was about placing them on top...

Misspeak, you are right. Although it's not just catshops others have suggested mounts and flyers as well.

No argument on this, but once again there's the enjoyment thing. You see, the ToS argument works both ways and pretending any one interpretation is correct is speculation if it isn't backed by actual GM precedent

This issue has been around for years. And the GMs have never once stated that it was against the rules. They have stated things like griefing are against the rules. They have stated that things like kills stealing are not. There is no GM precedent despite the fact that numerous gms have had ample opportunity to set one. It is therefore reasonable to assume that it isn't against any rules until we are notified otherwise.

Again, this is a strawman, I mean to have no one recogize any authority of mine

You're the one that brought in disrespecting authority so we must establish whose authority is being disrespected. That's not a strawman, it's a logical conclusion based on the fact it isn't GM authority being disrespected. There are only two groups of users after all, GMs and players. Players authority means zilch and should therefore be no ban.

Great sounding bit, but once again you're using nothing but generalizations to back your point. There's plenty of certainly bannable offenses that are certainly annoying behaviour to other players.

Those things all make people unable to play the game. What is the key difference between "griefing," and "killing a lowbie," two offenses that are very similar in nature. One prevents the other person from being able to do what they want to do at all. The other is merely annoying. The annoying one isn't bannable. Offensive behavior in world chat is only banned when the person goes over the top and makes it impossible for numerous players do basic things like find squads. This is fundamentally different you guys want to make it bannable ONLY because it annoys a very limited subsection of the playerbase.

Once again with the leetist argument, get over yourself. It's none of your bussiness what other people can afford or choose to use as a gaming rig, and as I've explained earlier, there are plenty of reasons other than your "choice" of computer that make this behaviour inconvenient for others. I wonder if you go through life with the same sort of mentality you've demonstrated on this issue, or whether you would make potentially hurtful comments such as these in front of your mother...

I have never once stated that people who have bad computers shouldn't play. Only that they should be made to use the performance enhancing capabilities that are features of the game if they find something they cannot handle. That is not unreasonable or elitist. There are times when I myself have to use those features. During event times I cannot access those NPCs without them and being able to screenshot things is a huge factor in my enjoyment of my game. So my gaming experience is affected by all those people in one area. But that is not their fault, nor their problem. It is mine. The game has already given me a TON of remedies for my problem. Other people shouldn't be banned just because I cannot afford a better computer. The quality of your computer and the quality of your connection are the only things that should be reasonably taken into account with regards to shift clicking. There is nothing else that matters about why you can't do it. Nobody should be banned because you don't want to put the phone to your ear or on speaker. Nobody should be banned because you're eating a sandwich and just cannot put it down for 10 seconds to shift click. Those kinds of arguments are even more absurd.

And you're making a lot of assumptions about who I am based on my stance on one tiny aspect of a video game. You yourself even admit that the issue is a small one. Yet you would take away someone's ability to enjoy the game permanently for what is at worse a minor inconvenience thanks to the wide variety of performance enhancing options. I would not. If you find that elitist, so be it.

augustfinknottle wrote: »

I've never had absolutely any problem with that. Much worse is when catshops place themselves EXACTLY over another one, so its almost impossible to click one of them.

I've actually had competing shops do that to try to stop me from getting business. I've fixed that problem a couple times by coming out on an alt with a giant mount and plopping that on top of them. b:chuckle