Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Sign In

Categories

would you consider this legal or illegal

DrakelordDrakelord Posts: 1,790
in General Discussions


There is no way into the Serpent's Hold Meeting due to all of these Candelabra and since there is no recalling on Siege unless you can gate there is no way out except by picking up all of these, increases your own weight issue and face four skilled PvPs.  Anyone that was using the EM gate to attend this meeting was dumped just outside and would not be able to enter thus being an easy kill.

For me, I consider this blocking and if you were to consider the players that are coming to the meeting monsters then they are blocking the monsters which as far as I know is illegal.
Remove Trap = Bad News
for
Treasure Hunters

Comments

  • DrakelordDrakelord Posts: 1,790
    https://stratics.com/threads/siege-perilous-governor’s-meeting-6-9-18.400163/
    Remove Trap = Bad News
    for
    Treasure Hunters
  • MervynMervyn Posts: 2,208
    edited June 2018
    It's an interesting point, i remember years ago, i think it was illigal to block any path anywhere, and that you had to at least leave one way to get through, i think you weren't even allowed to put a box down on the teleporter in star etc, but when there's no police, i think probably anything goes that's in the mechanics. (in fel at least)
    I tell you the truth, tis better to do 10 damage on the right target than 100 damage on the wrong target.

    Breaking in the young since 2002


  • Uriah_HeepUriah_Heep Posts: 915
    My rule of thumb has always been, they code it, we play it.

    I personally have no issue with it since they did it within the Devs coding and without changing anything.

  • TanagerTanager Posts: 634
    Thank you for the report :) It will be interesting to see what SP does to Minoc's governor chair.

    In war, blocking your enemy's escape is a very sound tactic. IMO, doing this is not something that is violating or exploiting the game mechanics any more than stam-blocking is. However, I think the blocking issue falls into the ''griefing a player'' category that, in Trammel, can sometimes get a GM involved. On Siege... not so much. Here, it is war.

    Then again, I also see nothing tactically immoral or dishonorable about gaining higher ground over your enemy and lobbing poison at their poorly secured roof, inducing a stampede, luring a powerful beast over to an area, or other things people claim are unfair. I do not do these things because I am not interested in interrupting some one else's fun, but nor do I become angry from it. To me, UO warfare is a chess match and quite frankly these unexpected things are why I play on Siege and not a prodo shard (as I nearly die at a wedding ceremony in a guard zone, victim of a conflag potion lol).
  • SuperfrogSuperfrog Posts: 100
    Let's try to find an answer here. @Mesanna is this legitimate or illegal?

  • SuperfrogSuperfrog Posts: 100
    Drakelord said:


    There is no way into the Serpent's Hold Meeting due to all of these Candelabra and since there is no recalling on Siege unless you can gate there is no way out except by picking up all of these, increases your own weight issue and face four skilled PvPs.  Anyone that was using the EM gate to attend this meeting was dumped just outside and would not be able to enter thus being an easy kill.

    For me, I consider this blocking and if you were to consider the players that are coming to the meeting monsters then they are blocking the monsters which as far as I know is illegal.
    Players are not monsters, they are not following a set of instructions from the game.  Personally i believe if it was illegal, wouldn't the EA employees at the meeting done something like call a GM or maybe Mesanna?
  • DJAdDJAd Posts: 290

    Unless I see official documentation stating otherwise I consider this legal.

    To be honest it’s pretty funny. I bet the people doing it we’re laughing their asses off, and that’s what having fun is all about. 

  • DukarloDukarlo Posts: 50
    Legal or not I would at least hope the everyone agrees that this is a ridiculous "feature " and really shouldn't be in the game. I'm sure candleabras weren't put in the game for the purpose of blocking players. 
  • SyncrosSyncros Posts: 116
    Its like what Mervyn said unless things changed.   

    Not enough enforcement to enforce such actions anymore so no action is taken and players continue to do it freely.
  • BoBoBoBo Posts: 21

    This is a legal tactic, and of course you left out some parts of the story.  If you took the em gate into the meeting you had a clear path to run to the guard zone which is all of what 2 screens away.  Why did the Bo do that, hell gotta give you a chance.  The best prey are the ones that run.  As for being stuck inside;  this is an em hall with a crystal teleporter in the corner.  You don't need magery to use that. 

    The Bo cant believe the amount of crying that is happening on Siege.  It is SIEGE!!! if you want Trammel go to it. 

  • MesannaMesanna Posts: 9Dev
    No this is not legal and you should call a GM to get them removed.
  • Max_BlackoakMax_Blackoak Posts: 648
    Mesanna said:
    No this is not legal and you should call a GM to get them removed.
    Even on Siege Perilous and with the crystal teleporter inside as an easy escape?

    When I asked an advisor roughly a year ago about blocking the doors at shadowguard with crates I was told "illegal on prodo, fair game on Siege as long as the items can be picked up" by the advisor who claimed he had discussed the answer with you...
  • DrakelordDrakelord Posts: 1,790
    edited June 2018
    BoBo said:

    This is a legal tactic, and of course you left out some parts of the story.  If you took the em gate into the meeting you had a clear path to run to the guard zone which is all of what 2 screens away.  Why did the Bo do that, hell gotta give you a chance.  The best prey are the ones that run.  As for being stuck inside;  this is an em hall with a crystal teleporter in the corner.  You don't need magery to use that. 

    The Bo cant believe the amount of crying that is happening on Siege.  It is SIEGE!!! if you want Trammel go to it. 

    Let's not forget all the Orcs North of the Palace one screen away, remember this is Felucca ruleset land and you are a mage, not a dexer with enough dex to force their way thru most heavy spawns.   

    Now I was lucky to die inside from the multi-attacks as the full weight of the ambush was not completed, there was only the two, not four and the way in had not been completely blocked, but others that followed faced "four on one odds".  Stratics "Ask me to remove their names from the article I did about the meeting", at the entrance to the palace blocked, Orcs one screen above.  Had you allowed a way into the Governor's Palace then there would not had been any calls of foul play.  And yes that char across the bridge is a mage and gated out of there.
    Remove Trap = Bad News
    for
    Treasure Hunters
  • PawainPawain Posts: 9,940
    BoBo said:

    This is a legal tactic, 
     :'( 


    WRONG


    Focus on what you can do, not what you can't.
  • DrakelordDrakelord Posts: 1,790
    Max_Blackoak said:
    Mesanna said:
    No this is not legal and you should call a GM to get them removed.
    Even on Siege Perilous and with the crystal teleporter inside as an easy escape?

    When I asked an advisor roughly a year ago about blocking the doors at shadowguard with crates I was told "illegal on prodo, fair game on Siege as long as the items can be picked up" by the advisor who claimed he had discussed the answer with you...
    But The question is also about blocking incoming traffic for the meeting and how they are trapped between "a ROCK and four PKs".  Now I did not report this but I will from now on when I see this type of blocking going on, I already have a target on my back on Siege from the Hi5 and the [LB] plus others that take great pleasure in knocking my toons flat because they did not like something I said or did in game, asking for blessed drops, calling them bandits etc..  As far as I am concerned this was nothing more than harassment
    Remove Trap = Bad News
    for
    Treasure Hunters
  • BoBoBoBo Posts: 21
    according to what Drakelord posted in the roc, what bo did was not illegal.  No one was trapped.  We blocked a bridge, people inside were not harmed as we were banned.  They had a way out, crystal telelporter, and when they gated in they were not trapped.  we did not block the gate in spot.  They could have ran to guards zone.  It is not the Bo's fault players are stupid and keep trying to run over a bridge that is clearly blocked.
  • XareXare Posts: 124
    And obviously the Dev statement that its illegal means nothing?  Sounds like Siege.
  • DrakelordDrakelord Posts: 1,790
    BoBo said:
    according to what Drakelord posted in the roc, what bo did was not illegal.  No one was trapped.  We blocked a bridge, people inside were not harmed as we were banned.  They had a way out, crystal telelporter, and when they gated in they were not trapped.  we did not block the gate in spot.  They could have ran to guards zone.  It is not the Bo's fault players are stupid and keep trying to run over a bridge that is clearly blocked.
    you were only banned for the meeting, all bans are lifted once the meeting is over, Kings rules no fighting inside, and one of you was inside during the meeting sitting on a bench just like the rest of us.  The idea is people were coming for the meeting not to run away from the meeting, therefore it was a trap as soon as they appeared they were pounced on, forced to flee where you four killers wanted them to go not where they wish to go therefore harassment.
    Remove Trap = Bad News
    for
    Treasure Hunters
  • SyncrosSyncros Posts: 116
    Max_Blackoak said:
    Mesanna said:
    No this is not legal and you should call a GM to get them removed.
    Even on Siege Perilous and with the crystal teleporter inside as an easy escape?

    When I asked an advisor roughly a year ago about blocking the doors at shadowguard with crates I was told "illegal on prodo, fair game on Siege as long as the items can be picked up" by the advisor who claimed he had discussed the answer with you...
    It just shows that not everyone is on the same page as each other, which is nothing new among GM's  or Devs.   

    Its like some players call a bug a "trick" they sure well know its a bug yet feel better calling it a trick?  
  • MervynMervyn Posts: 2,208
    Drakelord said:
    BoBo said:

    This is a legal tactic, and of course you left out some parts of the story.  If you took the em gate into the meeting you had a clear path to run to the guard zone which is all of what 2 screens away.  Why did the Bo do that, hell gotta give you a chance.  The best prey are the ones that run.  As for being stuck inside;  this is an em hall with a crystal teleporter in the corner.  You don't need magery to use that. 

    The Bo cant believe the amount of crying that is happening on Siege.  It is SIEGE!!! if you want Trammel go to it. 

    Let's not forget all the Orcs North of the Palace one screen away, remember this is Felucca ruleset land and you are a mage, not a dexer with enough dex to force their way thru most heavy spawns.   

    Now I was lucky to die inside from the multi-attacks as the full weight of the ambush was not completed, there was only the two, not four and the way in had not been completely blocked, but others that followed faced "four on one odds".  Stratics "Ask me to remove their names from the article I did about the meeting", at the entrance to the palace blocked, Orcs one screen above.  Had you allowed a way into the Governor's Palace then there would not had been any calls of foul play.  And yes that char across the bridge is a mage and gated out of there.
    I just don't think physical harassment is applicable in fel facets, people follow me all the time, and i trap people all the time, it's what a trap is.
    I tell you the truth, tis better to do 10 damage on the right target than 100 damage on the wrong target.

    Breaking in the young since 2002


  • MariahMariah Posts: 3,235Moderator
    This question has been answered.
This discussion has been closed.