Gandelf wrote:Just because you're in a minority doesn't mean your'e wrong. Sometimes you have to go against the majority for what you believe in. Also, I will always take GOA's side because their interpretation of the CoC is totally above any single player's or group of players' opinion. If this were not the case, then it would lead to total chaos, with anyone or any group doing things purely for their own good. GOA has ruled, GOA is right, you have to accept the "law of the land".
EDIT: In other words, you have to respect the "chain of command", whether you like it or not!
In this the "chain of command" goes higher. We have the ultimate power, if we don't like what Goa do, then we can stop giving them our cash. They haven't had any off me for a while, and unless WAR is the best thing since sliced bread and I can't play on the US servers (which is unlikely), they won't be seeing any more.
Belisar wrote:As for chain of command - well even the majority have a say in that, after all did not a majority vote in Blair, Bush etc ?
Not the best analogy, since neither were voted in by a majority.
Might I suggest that we make a new thread and transfer all the non-relevant posts to it? Originally this thread was a farewell from Satyn and Thand and it should remain so (no fingers pointed). I think it would be a good thing to do. Thanks.
And nich, let me know when you are online so i can give you GM status. BB account runs out one of these days and Satyn's account is still payed till end of january so i still have some time to log in and do some promotions. <hug>
PM me your email adress for when WAR comes out, we'll see to get the guild running there then.
Firstly - bye Thand and Satyn. I know we've had our ups and downs but I had a lot of good times with the two of you. Not played for a while myself, but it still makes me sad to see good players leaving DAoC.
Talking about Alarm Clock raids, it's clearly against the spirit of fairplay. Any kind of opportunism or cheap shots are. Apparently this does not make it against the spirit of DAoC, which I suppose it apt or depressing, depending on your view.
I think the problem in DAoC has always been something deeper, that there are no realm numbers balance checks built in to the game. Character creation should limit your choice of realm if one has numbers that are too high, cross-realm migration should be enabled and encouraged to deal with imbalances that occur through attrition. You'd need a lot of imagination and intelligence to build such a mechanism, but the value of having 3 numerically balanced realms would be immense.
Once you have balance, ACs are not such a problem. There's a chance all 3 realms will have the same numbers for nightshift.
I can appreciate both sides of the argument, but there has to be someone or some organisation that has ultimate power to decide what is right and what is wrong. In this case it is (and should be, GOA). That's sufficient for me. If GOA is in the wrong, then yes, players may decide to withdraw their subscriptions and maybe even leave the game forever. If GOA don't take notice, then the consequence of their actions are something they must accept full responsibility for.
The only other option is a form of revolution, where the "proletariat" sieze control and execute the "aristocracy". How such a revolution would happen, I don't know, but as GOA is in France, I guess the guillotine would be the most appropriate means of execution.
If you're not willing to accept GOA's ruling, then you have to make a decision either to leave the game or accept the decision (albeit grudgingly).
Generally, in life, there is no one person who says whether things are right or wrong. I agree that in our situation someone has to set the rules, but they may well be in error when they do so - being in charge doesn't reduce fallability. In those situations, it should be an option for the people in charge to admit fault and reverse/compensate. Having "leave the game if you don't like it" as the only possible resolution is good for neither the players nor the game operator.
However, it is relatively rare to find people in charge who understand this. Generally they think that admitting fault would tarnish their image or some such.
Also, if "spirit of the game" is a serious enough issue to get people banned, there should be some kind of information on what the spirit of the game is. Like most PvP game operators, GOA have tolerated gankings, opting, voice comms, and other elements that clearly lead to unfair fights, demostrating that the spirit of the game does not hinge on fairplay. What does it hinge on then?
tbh the argument that GOA runs the European game and hence should be allowed to set the rules unquestionably is rather narrowminded. What happened to the customer is always right? If this were a free service then that view would hold but when you have paying customers being screwed over it's a different story.
OFFICER XEST - PROTECTING YOU AGAINST FORUM CRIME
Che Xefan, el presidente.
Xest, I agree with you on the "unquestionably" bit. They need to take feedback from the players. The "customer is always right" bit is a little dubious though, for a number of reasons. I'm sure GOA would argue that any action they take is what they think the majority of players would want. Obviously in this case they've misjudged it a bit
