Jump to content

The Future of Progression Tracking


Recommended Posts

Hello SW:TOR community,

 

I was planning to make a very long post about my opinions the current state of progression and changes that could be implemented to improve it (both by Bioware and by us). I have however decided to cut down on what I have to say in order to get some key points out in time to be discussed before the release of Nightmare Dread Palace.

 

For those of you who don't know me you can call me Fuyri and I've been involved in the tracking of world progression since 2.0, you can find the latest thread over here.

 

The topics I want to touch on before NiM DP are the issues surrounding progression tracking and what to change for the next tier of content, and how to effectively test content without spoiling it once it goes live and how to deal with bugs and exploits throughout various points in release. So lets jump in.

 

 

 

Progression Tracking

 

There's no flawless method of tracking progression and whichever method the person/s running the tracking choose to implement there will be complains.

 

Verification of Kill Times:

 

The current method of verifying times is to make those who post kills show a UTC clock with their verification and to use the time shown. This causes people to complain that they forgot to take the screenshot and don't have an accurate time, it's also not exactly accurate as even the best times will be a few seconds off.

 

The second method is more precise but more work. Everyone gets achievements and each achievement has a time (their computer time). So it's possible to calculate the UTC time for the kill using a screenshot containing a UTC clock, the achievement and the player's computer time. This however creates a lot of work for whoever is running the spreadsheet and introduces extra human error into calculating and inputting the times.

 

There is a third balance between these methods where you allow people to post using the second method but give them a time penalty (say 6hours) for not following the easy method. This would help but is still a weak method.

This has possibly the simplest solution but can only be fixed by Bioware. Change the time on achievements to be UTC time not recorded by the player. (It doesn't matter if it's another time just standardize it).

Bioware creates their own web based tracking system that reads directly from the game. They've shown something similar to this is possible with PvP rankings.

 

 

Ranking Systems:

 

Once you have your times for each of the kills you have to rank them (this isn't just tracking who's killed what, people want to know who's the best.

 

 

Bosses Killed:

 

In this system it will track who's killed how many bosses and will rank them based off the number. It's very limited on it's own as it'll have a large amount or equally tied guilds. This is ideal if you don't want to use time and be strict with getting everything spot on and is the closest thing to what most server progression threads use but is not enough on it's own for world progression.

 

 

Points Systems:

 

In a points system you earn an amount of points for each boss. This amount of points may vary with the time taken to kill the boss (either from the release of content or from the first time it is killed), this amount of points can decrease steadily or at a decreasing rate. There may also be a set amount of points for killing the boss that is granted whenever it is killed. A combination of these aspects can be used.

 

Currently a points system that employs both these methods. The flaw in this system is it punishes guilds that start late more for every single boss rather than just a small amount.

 

 

Combined System:

 

This is what I'm considering suggesting for next wave of progression. A tracking method that will rank based on time but will place increased/total emphasis on the latest boss killed.

 

Before I go into depth about what I mean I just want to touch on boss skipping. Until recently it was possible to skip a nightmare boss by setting the instance to HM, killing it and then changing back to NiM. This caused a large amount of debate with NiM TFB tracking and I am glad the Bioware has separated the lockouts. Using a combined system would not work if boss skipping was possible.

 

So back to the system. Here guilds would be ranked initially based of how many bosses they had killed (5>4>3>2>1) and then within this split up sections they would be ranked using times/points, either from only the latest boss or from all the bosses.

 

This requires a more complicated tracking tool/spreadsheet and will not properly reward early success, but will be more forgiving in guilds starting late and those that mess up with their screenshots/times.

 

 

Overview:

 

Whatever system is chosen there will be complains and it's important to develop the tracking method for future content but even if a better solution is presented halfway though content it's important not to change the rules until new content arrives as this will cause only more disagreements.

 

I currently believe a combined system that ranks primarily in terms of bosses killed and secondarily based off the time of the latest boss is the best and without changes elsewhere will try be looking to use this for DP NiM tracking.

 

 

Speed Runs:

 

 

Speed runs are another topic of debate as to how much importance they should be given and I have had several methods on how to handle tracking them within the system.

 

 

Treating them as an extra boss:

 

This is the currently used method where the speed run is treated like a 6th/extra boss it's the easiest way to include it however is far from the best. It incorporates best into a purely points system as it can be weighted to give equal or less value.

 

 

Separate Ranking:

 

Speed runs test something very different to just killing a boss, to obtain them you need to be more consistant (while this is still important on tough progression kills it's more obvious on speed runs), you also have to not be unlucky (a bug or dc can ruin a speed run).

 

 

Overview:

 

There's no easy solution here, it's just individual opinion on which is the best method, personally I think they should be separated and am moving towards that by seeing how everyone reacted by reducing the value of the speed run in NiM DF and will be looking to seperate the Speed Run rankings next time.

 

 

So most of the issues/debate regarding the progression tracking method is just a matter of choosing the best option. The exception is that Bioware should change achievement timestamps to be a set time (not local time).

 

 

 

Testing Content

 

Each wave of content there's an argument about if everyone should be allowed on the PTS to experience the new content or if we should be waiting until it hits live and the progression race starts. I'll summarize some of the points in each arguments and give a couple of ideas for possible solutions.

 

How the PTS damages progression:

 

 

By making the PTS available to everyone it gives an unfair advantage to those who choose to take advantage of it.

 

The idea here is that those who take part on the PTS gain a clear advantage over those who don't by getting an understanding for the bosses before they are released. There clearly is an advantage gained but it's not an unfair advantage as everyone is allowed to take part and those who don't only have themselves to blame for not doing so.

 

Despite this it does damage progression but not in the initial way thought, some of those who declined to take advantage of the PTS feel like they are in a worse spot than the guilds they are competing against and as a result of this may choose not to take part in the world progression thread. The more guilds that take part the better it is for the spirit of competition and the more the progression community will grow.

 

 

It takes the sense of discovery away from when the raid's released on live.

 

To many discovering new mechanics and figuring out tactics to beat them is the heart of progression. Releasing the raids on PTS means that when the raid is released on live all these strategies are figured out and it's just a matter of defeating the bosses. Of course everyone gets the chance of discovering the tactics on the PTS and they may even change before release to live but it does still take away most of the working out what to do from progression and just leaves behind the execution part of progression.

 

 

How the PTS improves progression:

 

 

It allows Bioware to find and fix bugs along with balancing damage and healing values.

 

Nobody enjoys content being released full of bugs and potential exploits, and it wouldn't be right if the content was impossible or a walk in the park (really difficult is the way top tier progression raider's like it). By giving open access to the content on the PTS it allows guilds test the content heavily and find any of these problems giving Bioware a chance to fix them. However some problems still make it through unresolved and the method of testing is neither flawless or the only option.

 

 

It provides a level of cross server connectivity that isn't normally possible.

 

The main argument is the point above but the ability to copy from every server to the PTS makes is increadible for interactions between guilds that are normally limited by servers. I would love to see the Bioware make better use of this function for special progression events and/or PvP tournaments.

 

 

Alternative Solutions:

 

 

Using a nerfed PTS.

 

It's possible to create a toned down version of the raids that are put up for testing on the PTS. Reducing health and damage values (even up to massive amounts like 50%). This would allow the mechanics to be tested for bugs and exploits without compromising the full difficulty of the fights. This doesn't give the full level of testing but does less to hinder competition when the raid's hit live.

 

 

Closed Testing.

 

This would involve inviting a few select guilds/players to take part in testing, these guilds would have to not reveal anything about the content to the community and would be excluded from progression. A few months ago the progression community wasn't large enough for this to happen without damaging it, however currently I believe it's large enough for a couple of guilds to be taken out of the running while competition will still thrive. This is my personal favorite solution.

 

 

Shift Progression to the PTS.

 

I don't like this solution but will still mention it, this is where progression takes place on the PTS giving everyone a starting point where they have no clue what's new. This will be the same as no testing and it'll be buggy and imbalanced, we also wouldn't get the proper warning and server stability that is provided on live.

 

 

So in conclusion we need some sort of testing and while the current state may not be ideal but there's no perfect solution right now and nobody should be discouraged from taking part either in the PTS or in Progression because of this.

 

 

Handling Bugs and Exploits

 

Problems with the fights can be discovered at any point during the progression cycle. Ideally they'll be found while the raids are being tested on the PTS. But can be discovered during progression or even slip though and be found a few weeks later.

 

Discovered on the PTS

 

 

When a bug's discovered on the PTS Bioware need to fix it in time to allow the fight to be tested without the bug in place or if it stopped guilds from testing later content it needs to be fixed with time for the remaining content to be tested. There's no massive rush on fixing it and any guilds testing the content should just continue as best they can until it's fixed.

 

 

Discovered during progression

 

 

This is the point at which as a community we need to pull together and react as well and fair as we can. If bugs and exploits are discovered here if handled incorrectly they can potentially ruin a wave of content.

 

 

What can Bioware do?

 

The best thing Bioware can do is fix the problem, but depending on what the problem is there other actions can be helpful or a hindrance.

 

An impassible bug (eg. Draxus shield not being removed on PTS). This isn't something like a potentially over tuned boss this is an 100% unbeatable situation. Here it's best for the servers to be taken down and the problem to be resolved ASAP. By leaving the servers up you allow guilds who haven't reached the bug an advantage for progression allowing them to catch up to those that have.

 

An exploit is discovered and used by a guild or guilds. Bioware should lead in saying this is not allowed, roll back characters, provide short term bans, just announce that they're breaking the rules by doing it. By taking the decision of if it's allowed it means the players don't have to argue and judge each other which causes rifts and weakens the community.

 

A minor bug (eg. something loot related). Don't take the servers down for insignificant things, allow people to continue progressing while you work on a solution. The only time servers should be halted is if there's an leaving them up provides an unfair advantage to some guilds.

 

 

What can the community do?

 

The main thing we can do as players is to not take advantage of problems. Stick to the fights as they are meant to be done, methods nobody else has thought of for tackling fights are fine but it's fairly obvious when something straight up isn't meant to be, if that's the case just don't do it. By taking advantage of these exploits you create disagreements and make the whole progression experience worse for those involved, including yourselves.

 

Additionally try and remain calm and don't expect anything too miraculous to happen, Bioware fix things eventually, and while what they do is out of our control we can help improve things by giving reasoned and well constructed feedback rather than raging which will most likely be ignore.

 

 

Discovered after progression

 

 

While a bug may be discovered after you've completed progression there are still guilds out there trying to clear it. Report it to Bioware and don't over advertise it. Let it be fixed and refrain from using it just like if you found it during progression. Remember taking advantage of exploits even after you've cleared the content is still wrong and it may give you an advantage further down the line creating an unfair situation.

 

 

So remember; remain calm, don't take advantage of exploits, give constructive feedback and wait for it to be fixed.

 

 

 

Final Words

 

Congrats to everyone on your Nightmare Dread Fortress kills and progress. I hope everyone enjoys testing Nightmare Dread Palace, if you haven't yet get that PTS fired up and get going.

 

I'll be working on a new spreadsheet when I gets some spare time that will demonstrate some of the improvements that I'm hoping to make. Feel free to give feedback either now or when I finish that up, I'll try to respond to any relevant messages.

 

Fuyri :jawa_cool:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm going to weigh in on just a couple points…

 

Boss Verification

 

There is no reason for the achievement screen + UTC + game clock method of boss verification to involve any human error at all. We're already using spreadsheets to track progression. It is actually quite easy to modify the raw data sheet of the progression tracker to allow for either verification method with no human calculation. I would be more than happy to help out with the development of this feature if you would like, since I know your time is limited. With the method I envision, you would be able to input either a UTC kill time or a UTC time, an achievement time and a game clock time, with the ranked verification computed from whichever input is given.

 

Given that some guilds forget to UTC timestamp at the time of the kill, or want to change their mind after the fact about participation, allowing both verification methods would substantially lower the barrier of entry to world progression.

 

Anyway, as I said, I would be happy to help out with the spreadsheet in this area, since I'm very certain I know how to massage Google Docs into doing exactly what I describe above.

 

PTS

 

I'm a strong advocate of the PTS only containing a nerfed version of the content. I think we all expected this with Nightmare DF, and most guilds expressed a significant amount of dissapointment that the live version of Nightmare DF wasn't really changed from the last few PTS patches. Remove the nightmare power buff on the PTS, and then balance the magnitude of the buff for live based on player feedback and metrics from the PTS. Scripting bugs are isolated, and the live progression race remains challenging and a step up from what had previously been seen.

 

As things stand, with full form content available on the PTS, we are effectively participating in a race where the starting gun is fired a month before the race begins. Maybe this is "fair", since technically everyone could start running when the gun is fired, but there's clearly something very fishy about it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

UTC is fine not hard having a firefox/chrome window open and might delay it 10-30 seconds but isn't a huge deal. Yes, people forget honestly thats on the guild or player.

 

I like the combined point system but feel the current system is fine. I honestly don't pay much attention to the points, I look at it as first-last and enjoy knowing who killed it when/where. As the current iteration of NM DP looks it will be a login boss and council will be the big prize as Brontes was. I don't speak for anyone but when I look back at past progression and DF I look for who killed last boss first, and who got speed runs.

 

Way speed runs are tracked is fine IMO. I feel killing the boss first is far more prestigious than doing a operation to near perfection. Don't care which way it gets tracked.

 

 

PTS is fair ground while I prefer it to be tested internally I don't think that is plausible. The caliber of progression players and the staff bioware could use to test would be totally different.

 

Private testing would be next option but we are already a small progression scene sending 1-2 guilds to privately test content and sit out of the race would leave us with smaller numbers.

 

Progression on pts, don't like idea at all.

 

Think people wanting to push for world firsts kills all understand the pts is fair game and the effort you put in will show up come live. This last pts push Carl wasn't around and we got stuck @ draxxus shield bug and missed a week but that was our own doing for being bad/ un-organized that Tuesday and lacking leadership when Carl wasn't able to sign on.

 

Think only way to look at it is PTS is fair game use it as much as you want. Or a mass petition to bioware to do in-house testing, but if the "implant" scenario was any indication of what bioware thinks of the progression crowd I doubt anything will change.

 

I think the way people handled bugs this last pts was good, Reckoning posted the Brontes bug it was fixed. The infinite implant bug was fixed once bioware got wind of it. Not sure if the Draxxus bug has been fixed, I know I filed a report when I found out about it.

Edited by JDotter
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey Fuyri,

 

First of all i want to thank you for tracking the world progression and always thinking about how to improve it. You are doing that very well !

 

I'm going to give my own opinion, not "Seven Stuck's one"...

 

Regarding Verification of Time:

I see the problem, if you forget to take a valid Screenshot, but if you call yourself a progression guild, you should be able to take a Screenshot after youve killed a boss.

Obviously it would be the best solution if BW changed the Achievement System to be standardized, but as long as BW doesnt seem to change it, we have to work with the current system.

 

Regarding Ranking System:

I really like your combined System, already thought of something like that at the DF NiM Progression, 'cause the number of killed Bosses should be more important than the time you kill it.

 

Regarding Speed Runs:

I agree with you, from my point of view it should be seperated, but i have no problem with treating it like a separat boss

 

Regarding Testing Content:

Personally, i hate all the whining about the PTS… it's just the way it is, and i dont think BW is going to make a change to it, so we have to deal with the situation.

Furthermore it shortens the time of live progression, which - i believe - is a reason that people play SWtOR and not other MMO's.

 

Regarding exploits on liveserver:

I agree with you - nobody should take advantage of bugs. But if there was a guild that does not adhere to the agreement, how would you punish them if BW does not? Would you ban them from your progression tracking?

Who decides if a specific strategy is only "cheesing" or already exploiting? ... the Community?

If we have a look at our strat for Corrupter Zero: the whole raid is standing within 4 yards to Corrupter except one rDPS, so that we only have one Concussion Mine. Is it clever? is it cheesing? or is it an exploit?

... in my opinion this example is clear, its simply clever :cool:, but what if theres a not so clear case in DP NiM?

I myself have no clear answer, it is probably easiest to take the "opinion of the community" (if there is one).

 

 

Once again, thanks for doing this ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

IThere is no reason for the achievement screen + UTC + game clock method of boss verification to involve any human error at all. We're already using spreadsheets to track progression. It is actually quite easy to modify the raw data sheet of the progression tracker to allow for either verification method with no human calculation. I would be more than happy to help out with the development of this feature if you would like, since I know your time is limited. With the method I envision, you would be able to input either a UTC kill time or a UTC time, an achievement time and a game clock time, with the ranked verification computed from whichever input is given.

Thanks for bringing this up, I've never thought of using multiple time inputs, it would cut down on any errors and reduce the workload during progression (although will still be a little bit more than currently). I do like the idea and will build it into the prototype. If implementing it this way, I'd probably go for a from achievement time only as it'll be perfectly accurate for everyone rather than giving an option of either.

 

I should be fine making a the spreadsheet myself but if I have any problems I'll give you a shout, thanks for the offer :) also any further ideas are always appreciated.

 

I like the combined point system but feel the current system is fine. I honestly don't pay much attention to the points, I look at it as first-last and enjoy knowing who killed it when/where. As the current iteration of NM DP looks it will be a login boss and council will be the big prize as Brontes was. I don't speak for anyone but when I look back at past progression and DF I look for who killed last boss first, and who got speed runs.

With a more combined system it would display what you're looking at more clearly rather than rooting through the later pages. I really think ranking number of bosses killed primarily is a better method, it's just a matter of deciding if points should carry forward from different bosses as a secondary score or just base it off the time of the latest boss.

 

Regarding exploits on liveserver:

I agree with you - nobody should take advantage of bugs. But if there was a guild that does not adhere to the agreement, how would you punish them if BW does not? Would you ban them from your progression tracking?

Who decides if a specific strategy is only "cheesing" or already exploiting? ... the Community?

If we have a look at our strat for Corrupter Zero: the whole raid is standing within 4 yards to Corrupter except one rDPS, so that we only have one Concussion Mine. Is it clever? is it cheesing? or is it an exploit?

... in my opinion this example is clear, its simply clever :cool:, but what if theres a not so clear case in DP NiM?

I myself have no clear answer, it is probably easiest to take the "opinion of the community" (if there is one).

This is the issue I hope we never have to face but I expect at some point we will. I think if Bioware is unwilling to step in the opinions of the community are what should make the decision.

 

There are instances when using a cheesy and frowned upon method to progress (such as the case of TFB skipping bosses) which if allowed would have made the tracking system not work as intended. Here we can prevent it by properly planning rules for every eventuality but if something is missed it needs to be dealt with for the greater functionality of tracking even if there's a reprimand for something that is morally debatable for if it should be allowed or not.

 

In a case where there's a debate as to if something is clever/cheesing/exploiting it's where the community needs to make that decision and decide upon a suitable outcome. If the community is split I don't think just reading the forum posts would gives a clear picture of what action should be taken as some voices are louder than others, I would hope to approach the top guilds and get one path of action from each of them and find a middle ground from their opinions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for bringing this up, I've never thought of using multiple time inputs, it would cut down on any errors and reduce the workload during progression (although will still be a little bit more than currently). I do like the idea and will build it into the prototype. If implementing it this way, I'd probably go for a from achievement time only as it'll be perfectly accurate for everyone rather than giving an option of either.

Unless I'm mistaken, I believe people can manually change the times on their computers which would reflect in game and on their screenshots?

 

In a case where there's a debate as to if something is clever/cheesing/exploiting it's where the community needs to make that decision and decide upon a suitable outcome. If the community is split I don't think just reading the forum posts would gives a clear picture of what action should be taken as some voices are louder than others, I would hope to approach the top guilds and get one path of action from each of them and find a middle ground from their opinions.

It is up to BW to decide what is clever/cheesing/exploiting and how to handle what they deem bad behavior. If the community decides, there is nothing but biased opinions and potentially false accusations.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Unless I'm mistaken, I believe people can manually change the times on their computers which would reflect in game and on their screenshots?

 

Achievements are always shown in current game time. Thus, you want a screenshot which shows simultaneously the following three elements:

 

  • Achievement time (in game time)
  • Current game time (the in-game clock)
  • UTC overlay

 

From the latter two elements, you can obtain the precise game time offset. This combines with the first element to obtain the precise UTC time of the achievement. Without editing the image or faking the overlay, you cannot falsify this form of verification. As long as it is one image (and not multiple) which shows all three of these elements, that is.

Edited by KeyboardNinja
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Achievements are always shown in current game time. Thus, you want a screenshot which shows simultaneously the following three elements:

 

  • Achievement time (in game time)
  • Current game time (the in-game clock)
  • UTC overlay

 

From the latter two elements, you can obtain the precise game time offset. This combines with the first element to obtain the precise UTC time of the achievement. Without editing the image or faking the overlay, you cannot falsify this form of verification. As long as it is one image (and not multiple) which shows all three of these elements, that is.

Well, actually you could, using photoshop, etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, actually you could, using photoshop, etc.

If an "unknown guild" or "known low-skill guild" were to Photoshop their way to glory, you can bet your pants that players on the same server would seek out the winners and inspect their achievements while in-game.

Edited by Khevar
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd like to chime in that the point system is flawed in a lot of ways. Guild 5/5 ranking lower than guilds that are 2/5 because they didn't do the UTC clock/verification that day is sort of silly.

 

On the final stage of clears, 5/5, it should be ranked by order of kill for the final fight, in some way or another.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd like to chime in that the point system is flawed in a lot of ways. Guild 5/5 ranking lower than guilds that are 2/5 because they didn't do the UTC clock/verification that day is sort of silly.

 

On the final stage of clears, 5/5, it should be ranked by order of kill for the final fight, in some way or another.

 

 

This kind of put me off participating next time. We started one day late, we did not take the photos, we were amongst the few 4/5 guilds in the game as soon as it hit live and we got put on 27 because of no UTC clock. 90% of the guilds on that list had 2/5 apart from the top 3 and it showed that UTC window was more important than skill. Thanks but not thanks. Goodluck to all next time.

Edited by Leafy_Bug
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This kind of put me off participating next time. We started one day late, we did not take the photos, we were amongst the few 4/5 guilds in the game as soon as it hit live and we got put on 27 because of no UTC clock. 90% of the guilds on that list had 2/5 apart from the top 3 and it showed that UTC window was more important than skill. Thanks but not thanks. Goodluck to all next time.

 

And this is why you don't let a bunch of random forum types decide for you how to view your own progression.

 

If you cleared more bosses than another group, you are further progressed, and any silly rankings using arbitrary points that 'rank' you below another group stuck several bosses back should just be ignored.

 

For rankings, keep it simple. Per boss, rank based on time killed. Overall, rank based on bosses killed, then by time killed on most progressed / final boss.

 

For the PTS, it is open to all. If you don't want to use the PTS to get a head start, don't. But expecting Bioware to change the PTS testing process or for players to voluntarily not participate on the PTS is ridiculous.

Edited by DawnAskham
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This kind of put me off participating next time. We started one day late, we did not take the photos, we were amongst the few 4/5 guilds in the game as soon as it hit live and we got put on 27 because of no UTC clock. 90% of the guilds on that list had 2/5 apart from the top 3 and it showed that UTC window was more important than skill. Thanks but not thanks. Goodluck to all next time.

 

What was the reason why you guys didnt used an UTC clock Yrissa? It was pretty well know requirement I thought. Or is it tricky to get a SS with UTC clock?

Forgive my ignorance in that case, I never participate at competative progression raiding.

 

GZ anyways with the 4/5 kill in the 1st week.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are no more HM/NiM shared lockouts so the answer should be simple. Whoever kills the whole instance wins. Sure, you can track who killed the first 4 first to showcase who did it first, but the log-in boss may be difficult for others. It's a shame that my pug group I ran with on JC was ranked in the 20's, but when people actually looked at the boss' progression there is only 1 boss we're all looking at, Brontes. I have a strange feeling NiM DP will be the same way.

My opinion is have your placement ranking based upon last boss kill (full instance clear). Sure you can pre-rank with 4/5, but once someone goes 5/5 they should immediately be ranked ahead of a 4/5 group no matter when bosses were killed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is up to BW to decide what is clever/cheesing/exploiting and how to handle what they deem bad behavior. If the community decides, there is nothing but biased opinions and potentially false accusations.

 

Is this your way of justifying the way you exploited Nefra for implants? (+ whatever Dread Touched gear she dropped) Laughable.

 

----

 

I agree with Snickerjew about ranking full clear above guilds that got quick log-in kills, if DP ends up like DF. Going by the PTS that seems likely, but I hope they tune the instance and the first four bosses pose a challenge. Brontes was the only challenging kill in DF NiM, so the rankings should reflect that. That means top 3 overall should have been Seven Stuck, Reckoning, and Hatred.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is this your way of justifying the way you exploited Nefra for implants? (+ whatever Dread Touched gear she dropped) Laughable.

 

This particular case is very clear and easy tbh. If anyone would misuse it boot them from the progreslists. Easy enough. Progreslists are community made so the community has to say how to handle it. Make a poll if you like or something, ample opportunity to be civilized.

 

And shame on anyone trying to use dirty tricks in order to compensate for lack of ....... lets not go there. Point being. A competition MUST be fair play else it has 0 value. In any sport that I know are rules which you must follow. Trying to avoid/bending/breaking is just childish.

 

Its not that hard to distinguish between being smart and being deceitful.

- EC NiM Zorn and Toth beserk trick

no exploit since you get punished for it by needing to put out more dps

- Using HM lockouts (pre 2.7)

Exploit since there is no downside besides a lockout on that particular boss

- Nevra bug

Exploit since I don't think anyone would classify a 16 manned ops clearable with 3 people only

- 5 dps to draxus

No exploit since having a 2nd tank can be really handy and might save you wipes

 

Rule of thumb:

Are you getting a punishing factor while using alternative tactics? Than most likely its not an offendable exploit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've knocked up the start of a prototype.

 

It ranks based off most bosses > time of latest boss only.

Speed run is ranked separately.

Going to add a few extra features in the form of statistics but they won't effect the workings of the spreadsheet, any suggestions on what to include will be appreciated.

 

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0Au2fnVW6lDXQdGtsZ3VBUnlOQ3p2MTdaTVRrTmcyMmc&usp=sharing

 

 

Regarding UTC screenshots in past progressions

 

My stance on this is most guilds who took part knew this was required, it's really easy to do and if you don't do it you are the only ones to blame. If you chose not to take UTC shots last time that should not be a reason not to take part next time it should be a reason to make sure you're aware of what to do and get seen for what you're truly capable of.

 

This is however pretty irrelevant as the spreadsheet is changing to allow backdating with an easier method of entering the information. so take part and show off your skill.

 

 

Exploits and Bioware

 

There are many situations where if something is an exploit or not. There are also clear cases where Bioware has acted upon it by fixing the situation but they won't punish (because they care more about money than bringing justice to those who are exploiting). If Bioware wants to take over tracking then it would be completely up to them as to any penalization but as long as it's in the hands of the community it will be the community that makes the decisions relating to what can cause penalties or exclusion from said tracking.

 

Regarding the current topic of implant farming using an exploit, I believe what took place is immoral and unfair and will lessen the achievements gained by those who exploited the situation. I think Bioware should reset the implants of those involved (if they have a reasonable method of finding who did it) but as a community any action we can take towards impacting tracking is overkill and we need to just continue forward.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've knocked up the start of a prototype.

 

It ranks based off most bosses > time of latest boss only.

Speed run is ranked separately.

Going to add a few extra features in the form of statistics but they won't effect the workings of the spreadsheet, any suggestions on what to include will be appreciated.

 

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0Au2fnVW6lDXQdGtsZ3VBUnlOQ3p2MTdaTVRrTmcyMmc&usp=sharing

 

 

Regarding UTC screenshots in past progressions

 

My stance on this is most guilds who took part knew this was required, it's really easy to do and if you don't do it you are the only ones to blame. If you chose not to take UTC shots last time that should not be a reason not to take part next time it should be a reason to make sure you're aware of what to do and get seen for what you're truly capable of.

 

This is however pretty irrelevant as the spreadsheet is changing to allow backdating with an easier method of entering the information. so take part and show off your skill.

 

 

Exploits and Bioware

 

There are many situations where if something is an exploit or not. There are also clear cases where Bioware has acted upon it by fixing the situation but they won't punish (because they care more about money than bringing justice to those who are exploiting). If Bioware wants to take over tracking then it would be completely up to them as to any penalization but as long as it's in the hands of the community it will be the community that makes the decisions relating to what can cause penalties or exclusion from said tracking.

 

Regarding the current topic of implant farming using an exploit, I believe what took place is immoral and unfair and will lessen the achievements gained by those who exploited the situation. I think Bioware should reset the implants of those involved (if they have a reasonable method of finding who did it) but as a community any action we can take towards impacting tracking is overkill and we need to just continue forward.

 

Looks great! Nice job.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...