Runes of Magic US / AU

Quoted from "Rougetopriest"

Yea breaking it down very quickly, and slowing its approach are the only counters, otherwise what i meant was they will cap with fearless inside the rams, so the only fearless counter (P/r) will not even work at that moment, which is the only thing strong guilds are able to do at the end of a easy won siege to ensure they dont get 4-5 towers capped under them in the last 30seconds.

I'm not against this being a viable way to cap towers in a siege, its just that in sieges that magio was describing, which is sadly the case for many EC and VVV sieges currently, they can waste the whole hour sitting on their towers to a no show who wont let them in castle with 10 gate alts, and get beat with nothing to do about it more easily then before with using p/r alts.

I don't think this would be a problem because of something that I just found out. I think we both may have missed this but if you look up at the OP, he mentions that rune pull works on rams. In a tester siege, we've already confirmed that if you move the ram at all during your capture, it interrupts you. With that in mind, it doesn't matter if the player inside is under the effects of fearless because the ram is still susceptible. If the ram is pulled off the tower, the capture will be interrupted by that logic. We have not tested that specific scenario, but that seems to be a quick and easy solution if it works. I suppose that if this solution works, it perhaps could be hindered by people throwing three to four rams at a tower at once to confuse the player on rune pull duty.

If you didn't want to go with that, or if it turns out that it doesn't work... then the only thing I can come up with is that people would need to prevent the enemy from getting to the mids with rams. I'm pretty sure that the time needed for a ram to travel to a mid-tower is more than sufficient for it to be killed. This would make it so a guild can only cap their own homes. If they try to cap anything else, it will be by a player and not a ram b/c any ram trying to get there would have been destroyed. This would enable p/r's to still be stationed and do their job in terms of preventing players from fearless capping.

I'm just trying to throw out as many suggestions as I can and trying to come with as many tactics as I can.

Must be nice to have all these people to do all these things. I got 4 people up front and 4 farming home balloons and towers. If a Ram comes across we are lucky to notice it when it starts on gate. Up to now, in our seige tier, we have not seen this "exploit" though now that it is in the forums I expect we will see it soon.... Fix seige vehicles RW now, or all us mid level seigers will join the lower tiers and just log on to farm packages.

Sw is already ALTs of magic, to require a p/r and champ on every single tower you own just to stop people capping it is dumb. Declare it an exploit please and ban people using it ty.

Quoted from "Auros"

Must be nice to have all these people to do all these things. I got 4 people up front and 4 farming home balloons and towers. If a Ram comes across we are lucky to notice it when it starts on gate. Up to now, in our seige tier, we have not seen this "exploit" though now that it is in the forums I expect we will see it soon.... Fix seige vehicles RW now, or all us mid level seigers will join the lower tiers and just log on to farm packages.

Off-topic here - you can put gates and other buildings on focus, that way you will see when they get attacked.

Quoted from "Auros"

Must be nice to have all these people to do all these things. I got 4 people up front and 4 farming home balloons and towers. If a Ram comes across we are lucky to notice it when it starts on gate. Up to now, in our seige tier, we have not seen this "exploit" though now that it is in the forums I expect we will see it soon.... Fix seige vehicles RW now, or all us mid level seigers will join the lower tiers and just log on to farm packages.

Well, now you have 4 front liners to fight and 4 farmers that can assist you guys on the front lines. That all depends on your stance however, so do whatever you feel is right.

Quoted from "Cenre"

Sw is already ALTs of magic, to require a p/r and champ on every single tower you own just to stop people capping it is dumb. Declare it an exploit please and ban people using it ty.

P/R's and Champ's are not required for siege, but rather they are just wanted by the players for the buffs and skills. It's our fault SW has become like this because we want to utilize everything at our disposal as long as it's within the rules. So if you can bring alts in siege, why not. They're not needed but they are nice. I believe that ram capping is just another tactic that everyone can add to their disposal list for siege. Demanding that it be declared an exploit and to ban people isn't the right way to go about it. Better way to say it would have been, "I think this is an exploit, hope it gets declared one, and that anyone using it after the declaration be disciplined," but that's just my opinion.

Another opinion of mine is that this shouldn't be declared an exploit and probably is going to be allowed. I'm guesstimating a 60% chance of it being declared legal until fixed. Here is my reasoning, and yes I'm using my previously 3 stated bugs as examples, but I will go into detail so prepare for a wall of text.

Let's look at the facts about the three previously mentioned siege bugs.

1. Treaching the Gates:

• Was this intended? No
  
• Was it still allowed? Yes
  
• Why was it allowed? It could easily be done by both sides and it could be easily countered (Destroy the Treaches). If this tactic succeeded, the affected gate could be rebuilt and the damage undone.

2. Chaining the Honor Guard:

• Was this indented? No
  
• Was it still allowed? Yes; changed to No; redacted back to yes.
  
• Why was it allowed? It could easily be done by both sides and it could easily be countered (Kill the Honor Guard or the Towers being used to chain him). If this tactic succeeded, the affected gate could easily be rebuilt and the damage undone.

3. Breaking the rebuilt point via Electric Tower:

• Was this intended? No
  
• Was this still allowed? No, it was eventually addressed and declared exploit.
  
• Why was it declared an exploit and not allowed? While it could be done by either side easily, the damage done was permanent. This put the recipient at a permanent disadvantage and the performer and a permanant advantage through use of this bug. This is where the definition of exploit comes into play. Exploits are defined as taking advantage of a flaw in a computer system to make a gain often through malicious ways. Since breaking the hammer gave an irreversible advantage, it was logically declared an exploit

Now lets take a look at Vehicle capping and then compare it to the above three.

4. Capturing towers from within a Vehicle:

• Was this intended? No
  
• Was this still allowed? Not stated yet, so Yes until otherwise I assume.
  
• Technically, since this hasn't been declared yet, lets examine and compare to see what this sounds the most similar to. Treaches/Honor Guard? Or Rebuild Breaking?
  
  • Can this be done by anyone? Yes
    
  • Can this be easily countered? Yes (Kill the ram, slow the ram, rune draw the ram, place electrics and sea-washed stones to interrupt the driver.)
    
  • Is the damage done permanent? No. The capped tower can be flipped again via counter capping with a ram and/or other methods. This does NOT give anyone a specific advantage nor does it put anyone at an disadvantage. If capping a tower via ram permanently flipped it, then it would be an exploit, but that is not the case.
    
  
  

With all that being said, it's clear that the ram bug is more akin to the Honor Guard/Face of Treachery bugs and therefore will probably be okay'd until it's fixed. Look at the four bugs I listed side by side and see that one of these things is not like the other. The Rebuild break was an exploit but they other two were not, and this ram capping should fall in the same category as the other two.

So, in closing, I honestly do not think this is going to be labeled an exploit based off of all the above text. I also would like to point out that Zidlef did have a post on this thread yesterday that disappeared. I'm assuming that it was deleted by a FM/GM which means that they are aware of this thread and have read it over. They probably have already sent word up the chain and are waiting for a reply back before they tell us anything. I don't think they want tell us something now only to have it change when they receive official word.

Take this however you want, but until I see a post from one of them, it's fair game in my book. If you believe it to be an exploit, then more power to you for having that opinion and abiding by it. Both of our stances are only opinions and until word is given, no one is right, and no one is wrong here. You have made your stance clear as I have done as well. I just like supporting my opinions with evidence and research from past events.

After looking over all my posts including this one, I think I've said all I would ever need to on this matter. I don't think I've left anything untouched so unless a response is made that contains a valid enough point to peak my interest, I'm jumping ship from this thread.

~Cheers