The Dragon & Morgan

**_____________Kungwho** · Sep 30th, 2002, 23:00:28

Yes Asmoran, I suspect that you are correct regarding the incident relating to Truuth. I was not there, and admittedly know Truuth's side only. Mature communication seems often in short supply in RK lol.

Regarding whether Morgan belongs in the playfield though (and aside from the Truuth incident), there does seem to be something wrong about a noob MA being forever banned for trying to win Morgan loot. Was the MA even given a warning? But yes, you are prolly correct in assuming that without the "collective," Omni are sure to loot Morgan more than without it. But I think this is a price I for one would be willing to pay (and Davedread also it appears), in order to regain the unfettered freedom to loot Morgan.

Tara is a different story though, and I support the Tarabot Administration until the majority of clanners--if ever--become so bored with its efficiency as to want a change back to the Wild West days. But in this latter case, I would hope that it dies the natural death of apathy without clanners have to lob salvoes at one another.

**aaronb** · Sep 30th, 2002, 23:06:37

All I can really say is that I think a warning should have been issued more than a ban. I wasn't there either until the tail end of it and at that point the tempers were already flared.

The only things I think people should be permanently banned for is intentional ninja-looting of Tarasque, as was the case with Eedaba, or intentional efforts to sabotage the cooperation.

Please understand that it's a small percentage of people that have major problems with the system we have right now. For the most part, people are supportive and appreciative of the efforts. I don't know that we have a way to make everyone happy.

**_____________Kungwho** · Sep 30th, 2002, 23:23:55

Yes, those are my own impressions as well. Without judicious exercise of the banning power however--and perhaps some manner of appealing perceived unfair applications of it--folks (like a number from my guild atm) will flinch under perceived arbitrary exercises of power by the guilds controlling Tara. Mature communication is key, but--lol--rarer even than Tara loot.

As to the situation relating to Truuth, if you exercise power over Tarabot Administration--and it appears you do--please consider this a request by CAS to have Truuth un-banned if she agrees not to kill Morgan. Not sure where my guild stands on the Morgan/playfield issue, but my hunch is that they would prefer Morgan to be removed from the playfield. Guess I'll revisit this issue in a bit.

**aaronb** · Sep 30th, 2002, 23:35:02

It's my code and my account it's running on, but I do not exercise power beyond the conditions under which I will run the bot (I will not permit the bot to be used to distribute loot in a manner that I view as unfair).

I will discuss the ban with the other administrators, but it is a service I provide, not something that I use to get what i want. How they handle my request is entirely up to them.

CAS is more than welcome to participate in the raids, including killing Morgan and participating in the raffles. Doing so outside of our organized "collective" would be opting out of our cooperative effort, and I know that you understand the reasoning behind that from our conversation above.

I really just want people to get along and get what they want out of what I consider to be broken in this game (unique mobs with unique loot). Unfortunately this is an idealistic desire, so we can only do the best with what we have to work with.

**Brutal Truuth** · Sep 30th, 2002, 23:53:01

Again , People are mis informed over what actualy happened . I never set foot in the dungeon when Morgan was being Killed . I only had words with Javaschick about The little Ma and the people who helped her . I admitt that my words were harsh and that when i get into an arguement i tend to go overboard . After awhile You lose site of the point you are trying to make , much the same way this thread has become . I am not here to debate whether what Tarabot is good or evil or abused , I am here to support the Ma n00b that killed Morgan and her/his right to kill it .

**DaveDread** · Oct 1st, 2002, 00:08:30

First, a little note: I really appreciate Tarabot, it's creator and the "collective". I completely agree that it is the best solution for how AO works in regards to uniques, especially since it's a PvP area.

I just remember when I was a young noob MA and heard about Morgan, I sooo wanted that Tool. Reading that first post kinda broke my heart. I recognised myself so much.

I just wish that something "special" could be setup regarding Morgan. The "normal" TT drop (QL110 or thereabouts) could easily be wielded by a MA far below lvl 125. (Lvl 80ish is a rough guess.) Perhaps an option for sub-QL125 TT's to be raffled to sub-lvl125 MA's?

She really shouldnt be at the same spawn timer/same playfield as Tara, that is the main problem methinks.

**aaronb** · Oct 1st, 2002, 00:15:35

And in case you missed it, Kungwho and I have been having a rather friendly and rational conversation regarding our perspectives on the issue and moving forward.

This "noob MA" has every right to organize a team to kill and loot Morgan. Additionally, the players that miss out on raffling this item through our normal raid raffles have every right to "kick this person from their team" by not permitting participation in the organized raids. Please consider both perspectives when you are arguing for "rights."

In defense of the MA, it is likely that he/she wasn't aware of our views on the matter. This is why I do oppose anything more than a warning from our raid organizers. Also, the item that dropped was given to me by a friend who was involved so that we could raffle it, meaning that the MA didn't get to keep it anyway.

So perhaps an issue to address here is our raffle entry requirements and how Morgan is handled. From what I can tell, the torture tool QL is generally around 100-120ish, which I'm sure many MA's below L125 would find useful.

Also, please understand how much crap Javaschick, myself, and others get already. Sometimes it's just a bit too much and we respond to things a little harshly. We aren't perfect and the system isn't perfect, but we're doing the best we can to make this work for as many people as possible. I don't see a lot of other people stepping up to the plate to lead this group.

**aaronb** · Oct 1st, 2002, 00:19:35

Originally posted by DaveDread

I just remember when I was a young noob MA and heard about Morgan, I sooo wanted that Tool. Reading that first post kinda broke my heart. I recognised myself so much.

I just wish that something "special" could be setup regarding Morgan. The "normal" TT drop (QL110 or thereabouts) could easily be wielded by a MA far below lvl 125. (Lvl 80ish is a rough guess.) Perhaps an option for sub-QL125 TT's to be raffled to sub-lvl125 MA's?

She really shouldnt be at the same spawn timer/same playfield as Tara, that is the main problem methinks.

I'm not opposed at all to changes here. It would require some mechanics changes in Tarabot for the raffles or it could be raffled using a separate system (perhaps the old helpbot rolling method).

It's interesting how this topic could be related to the desire some people have to raise the raid participation level to 150 or even 175.

**Brutal Truuth** · Oct 1st, 2002, 00:32:51

Keep in mind that by doing so you lose alot of people . How many times have i came in and seen greens ? Before you decide that , make sure you know you have the numbers 150+ to deal with things .

**aaronb** · Oct 1st, 2002, 00:35:12

Originally posted by Erinsuin
Keep in mind that by doing so you lose alot of people . How many times have i came in and seen greens ? Before you decide that , make sure you know you have the numbers 150+ to deal with things .

I'm opposed to raising the level limit. I was merely expressing the correlation between how people below 125 are being excluded from torture tool raffles now as people below 150 or 175 would be from Tarasque loot they could use if the limit was raised.

As a side note, we would be fully capable of handling Camelot with the level limit raised. The reason why I and many others oppose such a change is that we don't consider it fair, not because we don't feel that we can handle it.

**Cemetarygate** · Oct 1st, 2002, 01:56:42

Originally posted by aaronb
So what is it that you would like to see happen here? Your definition of "most fair" is subjective and based on the former view. Assuming we were to shift into that perspective, how would you address the issues described above?

"we lose frequent participants as they get all of their toys and there is absolutely no motivation for them to participate again."

How is this an issue? Limited or not, people will still leave once they have all the toys they want. People raffle for 2 and 3 HPCs so they can trade them for items they don't have. Again, once they have all they toys they want they will leave anyway.

"we lose infrequent participants as they feel they have such a slim chance that it doesn't justify going."

Which is why a need exists to guarantee them loot. Look at it this way...

(example)
We have 1 adult, 1 box of ice cream (with only 3 scoops of ice cream), 1 ice cream scoop, 3 bowls, 3 spoons, 3 kids and 1 icecreambot. Each child already has a bowl and spoon in hand. Adult turns to icecreambot.

Icecreambot chooses child 1. Child 1 gets scoop of ice cream. Adult turns to icecreambot. Icecreambot chooses child 2. Child 2 gets scoop of ice cream. Adult turns to icecreambot. Icecreambot chooses child 2. Child 2 gets another scoop of icecream. Sorry child 3, there will be another box of ice cream in 18 hours. Child 3 runs off crying because child 2 got 2 scoops of ice cream. Had icecreambot limited each child to 1 scoop of ice cream, each child would have ice cream.

The point being, by limiting the amount of loot people receive you spread the loot out giving other people chances of winning. The "infrequent" will keep comming back because he/she knows you've guaranteed them a chance at winning.

Now, the only persons I've seen state that people don't want the loot limited are the administrators of tarabot. Everyone in tarabot chat complains about frequent winners. So, who exactly is saying this?

I can respect this is a difficult task for the administrators-keeping track of who wins what. But I'm sure tarabot can be programed with a database of persons names and what loot they've won. I don't mean to point fingers, but again, the only people I hear saying this is the administration.

"we have some people winning more than others over time and a lucky newcomer could potentially win without a clue as to how the playfield works"

Again, if everyone is guaranteed loot the long term player will get theirs just like the short term player.

Edit: fixed typo

**Cemetarygate** · Oct 1st, 2002, 02:01:45

Originally posted by aaronb
It's interesting how this topic could be related to the desire some people have to raise the raid participation level to 150 or even 175.

Or to even bring up loot distribution.

**aaronb** · Oct 1st, 2002, 02:31:12

Cemetary,

I need more information on how you would see the mechanics of this work. Each raid has different participants. At which point do we say everyone has won an item and we can start the cycle over?

Also, what keeps the people who have now won a single item going instead of waiting until some time when they are eligible for loot again?

The icecreambot analogy is good, but fails if you introduce new children every 18 hours.

The database already contains who wins what raffle (though with some winners misspelled, hehe).

**Brutal Truuth** · Oct 1st, 2002, 02:56:22

That part is kinda easy . Useing the Icecreame analogy you come up with a bit of codeing that places a number to an item ie

1 = heart
2= padded coat
3 = globe
and so on and so forth

Each time a person wins an item that person gets a number assigned or checked off . When the bot rolls it checks the avalible people against what they have won against what is being raffled off .

If john has won a padded coat and during the next raid it comes up again , the bot then looks at all the people and picks out those that are there that have not won the padded coat . Hence John isnt entered into the raffle .

I like the sound of that . I am no coder but that seems basicaly what Cemtary is saying . To deal with the influx of people you just do a number wipe once in awhile so that people keep coming back and to accomidate new players .

Just my 2cents on making the system better for all .

**_____________Farside** · Oct 1st, 2002, 04:35:01

I didnt know this would be such a hot topic .

To all the people posting and with ideas , I think Tarabot is a good thing and i would not undermine what people have done to orginize such an event in such a grand scale , But as others have mentioned , the torturing tool does drop at a ql that someone of my level can use . As for Me not knowing the rules nor anything like that , no one bothered to tell me anything . I feel like the elitest groups have come off with the attitude of " We dont know you so you are SOL "

What can be done about this ? How am i or anyone else for that matter , to know who to talk to as far as admins and rules ? I have yet to see a real set of rules placed here for all to veiw .

All i want is an insignifigant item , a torturing tool that is Ma only . Are people that selfish that they take these items when they themselfs dont meet even that criteria ? wait , i forgot , its a game with loot hogs .

aaronb seems to have the answers , so i ask these questions of you . PLs dont take anything i said offensive , i am just trying to find my answers . Thank you all for the support in this thread , i apreciate it .

**aaronb** · Oct 1st, 2002, 05:18:26

Originally posted by Farside
I didnt know this would be such a hot topic .

To all the people posting and with ideas , I think Tarabot is a good thing and i would not undermine what people have done to orginize such an event in such a grand scale , But as others have mentioned , the torturing tool does drop at a ql that someone of my level can use . As for Me not knowing the rules nor anything like that , no one bothered to tell me anything . I feel like the elitest groups have come off with the attitude of " We dont know you so you are SOL "

What can be done about this ? How am i or anyone else for that matter , to know who to talk to as far as admins and rules ? I have yet to see a real set of rules placed here for all to veiw .

All i want is an insignifigant item , a torturing tool that is Ma only . Are people that selfish that they take these items when they themselfs dont meet even that criteria ? wait , i forgot , its a game with loot hogs .

aaronb seems to have the answers , so i ask these questions of you . PLs dont take anything i said offensive , i am just trying to find my answers . Thank you all for the support in this thread , i apreciate it .

Farside, you are 100% correct and that's why I'm here discussing it. Based on recent events, including this one, I'd like to work together with all of the participants in seeing what we can do to improve the system. I am not really here to force decisions on people or to try to exclude groups. I am just part of the active "administration" as it may be, and my contribution has been the code.

We have difficult issues and in many cases there isn't a good solution. I am drafting up some notes and maybe I'll put together a questionnaire for everyone to answer so we can get some community decisions made that at least people will recognize as the "majority rules". The policies that get put into place will be on my organization website where we can refer new people.

My primary issue right now is that what policies we've had in the past have been inconsistently enforced. But before you blame anyone for this, realize how difficult it is to be the raid leader with fifty clanners screaming at you. This is something I hope to resolve with the other people that are involved in leading raids.

**aaronb** · Oct 1st, 2002, 05:21:11

Originally posted by Erinsuin
That part is kinda easy . Useing the Icecreame analogy you come up with a bit of codeing that places a number to an item ie

1 = heart
2= padded coat
3 = globe
and so on and so forth

Each time a person wins an item that person gets a number assigned or checked off . When the bot rolls it checks the avalible people against what they have won against what is being raffled off .

If john has won a padded coat and during the next raid it comes up again , the bot then looks at all the people and picks out those that are there that have not won the padded coat . Hence John isnt entered into the raffle .

I like the sound of that . I am no coder but that seems basicaly what Cemtary is saying . To deal with the influx of people you just do a number wipe once in awhile so that people keep coming back and to accomidate new players .

Just my 2cents on making the system better for all .

This is possible, but it would take some work.

We need to get the opinions of the participants before I'm making any changes, however. Tarabot is here to serve them.

**Killrmeta** · Oct 1st, 2002, 06:45:47

I for one would love to see a system implemented where you can only get one of each tara loot. I'm sure I'm not the only one with this view because when a frequent winner wins....the *****ing on tarabot starts.

Another possibility you could do is maybe 1 month after winning a HPO, etc your once again eligible to win one.

**___________Villianic** · Oct 1st, 2002, 09:45:18

Is there a big sign outside Morgan's door stating the "rules"?

This is the first time I've even heard of these "rules" as I don't read this forum much, and I know people who don't read the forum at all.

SO, without knowing there are "rules", if I took my MA, and killed Morgan for the TT I would then be unknowingly "banned" from Tara loot raffle? Thats quite a load of BS.

I hope theres no rules about wearing green pants in Borealis on the 3rd Tuesday of each month.. I mean I've never seen the rule, but I guess it could be there and could get me banned from certain things <rolls eyes>

**______________Znails** · Oct 1st, 2002, 10:17:28

...

The admins of Tarabot dedicate time and effort to help us players organize raids... the rules are simple and i dont understand how you can missinturpret them..

as for the lvl86 MA issue.. well its a rather sad story and i do feel sad for her/him .. but keep in mind also that many other MA:s in tarabot is there for the torture tool also (and mebbe some adv that has his/her head screwed on backwards (gutting hook)).. i know i spent like 25-30 raids before i got my tool.. i would have gotten mad as hell if a lil lowlevel came and got the loot when others have dedicated loads of time and waiting in line ( its anoying as it is when a first timer winns it also, hihi, but thats a quite ok, random is random, but fair )

tho i think its ok to bring their own team to kill morgan.. but dont expect us to embrase them and inviting them when the are aware of how things is .. ok the lil ma prolly didnt .. but you who helped him/her did..

As for the neutral issue, i a bit torn in this issue coz i like neuts and kinda sux for them not having any chance at tara due to the attack thingy, but i think the main argument would be: why should we help ppl that is outside our own faction and for all i know might be helping the other side the day after?

Thread: The Dragon & Morgan

Thread Tools

Posting Permissions