Guild Wars 2

All pathways that are designed to block progress through the path must be opened. You may not have any party member(s) get past blocked passages until the required sequence/dialogue has been completed.

Reason for this discussion is that there have been few questions about it and it’s very unclear what it’s supposed to mean. Rule 8 already bans getting out of bounds by any means.

Some situations where rule 5 may or may not apply:

• AC Story: People have just jumped over the gate which blocks progress.
• CoE Exp: But people don’t jump over the gate here.
• Arah P2: Getting past a blockade before it activates.
• Arah P4: Jumping over a blockade.

So what do you guys think this rule should mean or is it simply unnecessary? Why some jumping is ok but some aren’t?

I don’t really think rule 5 is being violated in any of these cases

• AC Story: When the thief steps on the gate, the required sequence/dialogue has been completed so the party members are free to progress. From there, the thief is simply using a teleport on an open area in the game.
• Arah p2: The bone wall that spawns after you aggro the boss isn’t intended to stop progress, it’s intended to prevent you from running away from the fight. Since the fight hasn’t started yet, running past there is fair game.The wall that blocks the spider tunnel further up is the wall that’s intended to block progress, and it’s not skipped in any way.
• Arah p4: Not sure what you mean here. If you mean the teleport that the mesmer did after Dwayna, it’s not bypassing any walls blocking progress because he waits until after the boss dies, which removes the wall. From there it’s just a teleport up a ledge that avoid a long walk around, similar to how the teleport at the end of Arah p4 works.

Is the rule unnecessary though? I’m not sure myself. Do we consider any part of the dungeon that is not normally accessible at that point to be “out of bounds”? If so, then bypassing any progress blocking walls automatically places you out of bounds, and thus the rule is redundant. If not, then the rule is needed.

This is exactly what I’m talking about. If you can pass the gate with a teleport why can’t you pass with it jumping? If you can just jump over something is it really progress blocking?

Or if you can pass a blockade before it appears why can’t you pass it after it appears?

With AC story do you mean people teleporting while the gate is open or using Ride The Lightning above the gate without standing on the pressure plate? The former is totally legit to me, the latter is open to discussion.

P2 is fine to me, the Mesmer is just walking/rushing.

Not sure what you mean with P4, do you mean the skip to the Bloodstone Shard after getting out of the Water? Imo that is completly fine, otherwise jumping over rocks might be disallowed as well

To make the rule clear, you might change it to ‘jumping over gates/blockades that are cleared by an event in the dungeon is not allowed’ or something along the lines of that. In addition to the ‘out of bounds’ rule this should cover everything.

What do you think?

Ive personally always been against this rule. Ive always felt more interesting tactics can come from being able to send people through blocks early. Aslong as all objectives are complete (and in order?) and noone goes out of bounds it should be fine. So when a block can be bypassed by simple jumps or a blink which doesnt result in out of bounds then i think it should be allowed. And i dont consider the jump from tree to bloodstone as out of bounds.

And if you are going to keep the wait for blockades. Then the p2 thing should be banned. Its inconsistant. Its no different to blinking up the bridge before it vanishes on TA story to skip the gather ingredients event.

I agree spoj, and what about the arahp3 start? Who finds it more interesting to wait for the door and kill them? You’re using a trick to get past a door there too.

I would consider the tree jump at the end of p4 as out of bounds though, the fact that you have scenery that isn’t solid there pretty much screams “this isn’t where you’re supposed to be.”

Yeah p3 door is another good example.

The p4 out of bounds is debatable. And the route i take looks perfectly legit and like normal terrain to me. So not sure what part you are referring to with non solid terrain.

spoj.9672:

Yeah p3 door is another good example.

The p4 out of bounds is debatable. And the route i take looks perfectly legit and like normal terrain to me. So not sure what part you are referring to with non solid terrain.

Not sure how to describe it and it’s been a while, but there are parts of some of the debris that don’t have actual substance such that you’ll walk right through it. Going through the water isn’t all that much slower anyways and much faster if you suck at jumping.

I don’t see a problem with any of these already allowed things, except the p4 tree jumping puzzle after Simin. The arah p2 and ac story seem to be working fine. coe explorable jumping over the door is clearly an exploit.

NikeEU.7690:

I don’t see a problem with any of these already allowed things, except the p4 tree jumping puzzle after Simin. The arah p2 and ac story seem to be working fine. coe explorable jumping over the door is clearly an exploit.

The CoE doors are the same as the p3 door and the p2 wall. The only difference is those barriers dont appear straight away. If you are going to consider one an exploit then clearly skipping through a door before it appears is an exploit aswell.

The P2 Wall isn’t anywhere close to the same as the others. The p3 door I’d be happy to ban but the community voted for allowing it, iirc I voted to stop it too.

Just to be clear, by p2 wall, are you talking about the bone wall north of Belka?

Its a barrier which appears when the boss spawns. Meaning you arent supposed to get passed it before killing the boss. Just like every other door. This is exactly why i dont like these overly restrictive rules. They create inconsistencies which most people seem to just casually overlook when it suits them.

The arguement for allowing it is it doesnt effect objectives or their order. It only saves a small amount of time for a portal. But the exact same arguement can be made for COE doors, TA fw archer room door and many others. Yet those two are banned. It doesnt make sense to me. A better rule would be to just make sure all objectives and doors are opened in the correct order and no out of bounds. This allows people to go ahead in some areas but keeps the path relatively linear (still dont know why people want things to be as linear as possible).

If you have a rule saying dont go through blocked passageways before they open then stick to it and ban the p2 and p3 instances aswell. But we all know noone wants that because it doesnt improve the path in anyway. Just like banning them in TA and COE certainly didnt improve those paths. In fact it made them less entertaining and just slowed them down for no real reason.

PS. Yes im talking about the bone wall.

I’m not even sure if there is any easy solution. The dungeons are pretty fragile and obviously people try to stretch the limits as much as possible to get the best time. Even if we reached a consensus with current cases more will surely appear in the future.

I think we need to make some kind of a plan how we will deal with these kind of things. Do we want that people play dungeons as “intended” or as “fun”? Do we want the community decide or some individual how rules are interpreted?

I guess I have to further elaborate why current situation is problematic.

At the moment, what is allowed or not allowed is chosen randomly. Sometimes exploits are allowed to make the path “more fun”. Sometimes something very small is disallowed because “it’s an exploit”. Sometimes the community decides what should be allowed. Sometimes I make the decision.

All in all, this leads to an inconsistent rulebase where it’s hard to decide what should be allowed and when people figure out something new they have no idea whether they can use it not.

So the options from my previous post:

1) Focus on what’s intended. Don’t consider how it affects the path.

This leads to more restricted rules and would ban some stuff which is currently allowed. I don’t think this is a good option because sometimes unintended stuff can make the path more interesting.

or

2) Focus on how it affects the path. Don’t consider is it intended.

This leads to less restricted rules. I prefer this option because the paths should be as interesting as possible for a fun competition.

1) Use a vote for every decision. Every major guild (leader) has one vote.

I prefer this option because decisions would be final and guilds could affect their own game. However guilds would have to publish their questionable tactics to know whether they can be used or risk unrestricting their record.

or

2) Allow me to change rules as I want. A vote can be used to override my decisions.

I think this is the worst option because things might go back and forth. Guilds could verify their questionable tactics private with a small risk of their record getting unrestricted.

or

3) Allow me to change rules as I want.

This would be ok too but there probably would be some complaints about bias, etc. Guilds could verify their questionable tactics private.

For voting, I could add a simple system for gw2dungeons. Guild leaders would get login details which they could use to log in a special page. I would add any pending votes there with options, yes, no or don’t care and a time limit. There would also be a topic on forums for a discussion and a reminder.

I agree we do need to enforce more consistancy. Its ok for those of us who are clued in. But for people that are less in the know its confusing. They have no clue whats allowed and what isnt. Making 100 path specific rules for every dungeon isnt a realistic solution either.

And im sure its no secret. But im in support of option 2. Same for most of the veteran members of rT.

Isn’t this why we have an unrestricted rule set in the first place? So that people who don’t care about dev intention can have at it?

But also – just for use-ability, how is a record team going to determine if something is “fun” enough to be allowed? I realize that dev intention is not the best metric but it’s a hell of a lot easier to intuit then “will the dungeon community find this fun?” If this is how rules are made going forward, I don’t think it will solve the consistency issue at all because it’s entirely subjective.

I don’t think the system we have now is bad, I think that sometimes people haven’t looked past a specific exception they want to see how it effects the rules as a whole. Consistency in the ruleset is going to mean compromise, and I don’t think people have taken that to heart. It means you don’t always get what you want all of the time. Sometimes you won’t like a decision, but it makes the ruleset more workable for everyone. When we don’t compromise, we have the current situation where all the little exceptions make the ruleset hard to interpret.

With that in mind I think your #2 option would be best for resolving disputes. Someone whos main priority is keeping rulings consistent and keeping the ruleset useable should have the first and most weighted say in what is or isn’t allowed. Those “in the action” have a hard time seeing the bigger picture. On the other hand, the rules are for the community to use, and I think people would like to feel they have some say in contentious decisions. Maybe make it 2/3 majority to over-rule.

Even if there are ambiguous cases, I think keeping the spirit of “running the path as intended” gives people at least a starting point when trying to determine what is allowed. If similar types of questions keep being brought up, the rules can be adjusted, like in this case. It sounds like the consensus is jumping or bypassing barriers is fine so long as you don’t cross into out-of-bounds terrain and don’t do events out of sequence.

Just consider -“paths should be as interesting as possible for a fun competition”, those exact words could come out of the mouth of an anti-stack anti-zerk phiw to justify fighting every single trash mob. Using “interesting” or “fun” as the only rulemaking metrics just seems like a recipie for more arguing.

The thing is people who are clearly in favour of restricted are currently bending the rules to suit them. Like supporting the p3 and p2 blocks yet being against the CoE doors. And theres no way to run anything in this game completely as intended. Its impossible for anet to account for every little thing in design.

The only thing i would say is non negotiable in terms of intended design. Is event and boss order in dungeons. And staying within the boundaries of the map. Getting through a door a bit early is just smart play aslong as you are still completing events in the correct order.

The rule as written is perfectly consistent. The rule as enforced is not, clearly. I’m all for enforcing the rules as written, even if it means making Arahp3 records for the current meta (is there even one?) invalid.

I can’t support the gradual breakdown of the restricted ruleset by suddenly allowing jumping over doors or outside of maps or whatever, which is pretty clearly also the opinion of the majority of the community too.

Well is the majority of the community ok with us removing the p2 and p3 records? And maybe even CM p2? Waypointing back to start before the door after trap room opens? What about all the times where people break NPC dialogues to speed up triggers? Should we enforce that aswell?

You guys picked the rules. The rules were intended to create a fair playground without turning people away from competing. Which is why we are reluctant to just go super strict and enforce them so stiffly. But if thats what you want im sure that would be really popular.

Theres two approaches. Leave it as it is and continue to deal with all the bent rules and inconsistancies. Having to deal with constant questions about what is and isnt allowed. Or re-evalute the rules to make things consistant without completely destroying the majorities drive to compete. And unfortunately this will probably mean allowing a few things some people dont like. Because most people are two faced about it.

PS. Its also difficult for us as approvers when rules are inconsistant and generally unclear in special cases. (See CM p2 discussion recently with killing the rifleman).

Jumping over a closed door and walking past a barrier that has not spawned yet are two completly different things. And someone doing a jumping puzzle over arah is something completly different to jumping over a rock.

Skipping event-made barriers is fine to me as long as it does not use a jumping puzzle or obvious bugging (SE p1 first barrier before it was fixed for example) to do so.

Like, jumping over the gate in CoE to me is an obvious exploit because Alpha is still inactive when you reach it.

But they are both unintended. Do you see where im coming from?

I see why you think it’s inconsistent with the current ruleset but I don’t see why you feel the need to allow one or forbid the other.

How it works atm is open for creativity but dismisses exploits. That’s what I like at the moment and I’d rather have the rules adjusted than the records.

The Arah p3 skip is the most obvious exploit in the world to me. I mean, you’re running through a closed door during a split-second glitch while the door-closing animiation is playing.

If you don’t pull it off the first time, you can’t do it again without restarting the instance because you’ve bypassed a scripted event (killing the elites to unlock the door).

I’ve never really heard a satisfying explanation of why that’s allowed.

IMO, the CoE skip is less problematic because there’s a clear gap that you can pass through at anytime. It doesn’t bypass a gameplay event (like killing the elite mobs), just a timegate (HURRY THE HELL UP, SPIRE). I’d agree that attacking Alpha while he won’t fight back should be disallowed, but the skip itself looks far more acceptable than skipping the p3 elites.

LOL Arah p3 is obvious exploit but jumping over COE door is A-OK.

NikeEU.7690:

LOL Arah p3 is obvious exploit but jumping over COE door is A-OK.

Try again:

dlonie.6547:

the CoE skip is less problematic … the skip itself looks far more acceptable than skipping the p3 elites.

If the rules are going to be strictly enforced, then neither should be allowed. I’m just surprised that CoE is disallowed while p3 is more or less embraced by the community. Seems backwards to me.

An actual response with some logical arguments would be appreciated over snide one-liners that twist my words. Thanks <3

NikeEU.7690:

LOL Arah p3 is obvious exploit but jumping over COE door is A-OK.

Well COE is just a JP. The other is exploiting faulty mechanics. You’re not even going out of bounds in the COE one, you’re just exploiting a poorly designed environment.

Fact is the whole idea of a restricted rule set is subjective. The idea behind it is to create a better competitive environment. The rules exist simply to do that. Whatever rules there are you’re going to have fringe cases that are up for interpretation. And as such, the technicalities don’t matter as much as the spirit of what is being attempted. If the competitors feel something is better done a certain way, that’s the route that should be taken. This means votes on things will have to happen. Arguing against the collective will is pretty silly (fun, but silly) as the point of the rules aren’t to strictly enforce things but to create a better environment if the rules are stretched to do so, it’s in the spirit of the attempt and should be considered over the rules themselves.

I always liked this quote "And thirdly, the code is more what you’d call “guidelines” than actual rules" because I think it applies to a lot of things. If the goal is accomplished in a positive manner nitpicking “the rules” is just stupid.

I think back to a situation that happened last year with my cousins football team. There was a fight in the JV game and a few kids on each time got suspended. Rules say suspended players can not even be on the sidelines of a game. Some of the kids that were suspended showed up at the Varsity game the next day just standing around and watching from the sidelines. When they won the other team petitioned to have the game a forfeit for breaking that rule… technically it should have been, but the comity that makes the rulings laughed because upholding the ruling would go completely against the spirit of the competition.

Spirit of the competition > Rules. And such if players enjoy the p3 skip as they seem to have voting to allow it. It’s allowed. If they don’t like the COE skip, then no. Sometimes these decisions won’t be consistent but who cares if it’s achieving the goal of creating a better environment for competition as defined by the majority of the competitors.

spoj.9672:

Well is the majority of the community ok with us removing the p2 and p3 records? And maybe even CM p2? Waypointing back to start before the door after trap room opens? What about all the times where people break NPC dialogues to speed up triggers? Should we enforce that aswell?

Waypointing about which door? If you mean the closed one where you have to give this heal-backpack to the NPC, there is another way out.

dlonie.6547:

The Arah p3 skip is the most obvious exploit in the world to me. I mean, you’re running through a closed door during a split-second glitch while the door-closing animiation is playing.

If you don’t pull it off the first time, you can’t do it again without restarting the instance because you’ve bypassed a scripted event (killing the elites to unlock the door).

Wut? The door instantly opens if you are already passed the triggering point of this event and stays open forever

Jerus.4350:

Fact is the whole idea of a restricted rule set is subjective. The idea behind it is to create a better competitive environment. The rules exist simply to do that. Whatever rules there are you’re going to have fringe cases that are up for interpretation. And as such, the technicalities don’t matter as much as the spirit of what is being attempted. If the competitors feel something is better done a certain way, that’s the route that should be taken. This means votes on things will have to happen. Arguing against the collective will is pretty silly (fun, but silly) as the point of the rules aren’t to strictly enforce things but to create a better environment if the rules are stretched to do so, it’s in the spirit of the attempt and should be considered over the rules themselves.

I always liked this quote "And thirdly, the code is more what you’d call “guidelines” than actual rules" because I think it applies to a lot of things. If the goal is accomplished in a positive manner nitpicking “the rules” is just stupid.

I think back to a situation that happened last year with my cousins football team. There was a fight in the JV game and a few kids on each time got suspended. Rules say suspended players can not even be on the sidelines of a game. Some of the kids that were suspended showed up at the Varsity game the next day just standing around and watching from the sidelines. When they won the other team petitioned to have the game a forfeit for breaking that rule… technically it should have been, but the comity that makes the rulings laughed because upholding the ruling would go completely against the spirit of the competition.

Spirit of the competition > Rules. And such if players enjoy the p3 skip as they seem to have voting to allow it. It’s allowed. If they don’t like the COE skip, then no. Sometimes these decisions won’t be consistent but who cares if it’s achieving the goal of creating a better environment for competition as defined by the majority of the competitors.

Thanks Jerus. So it’s purely because “when the votes were cast, that’s how they landed”.

I was just curious if there was a more developed line of reasoning for it, since it seems at odds with the relative “exploitiness” of each instance, as I see it. I get it now, though.

MasterBlaster.6827:

dlonie.6547:

The Arah p3 skip is the most obvious exploit in the world to me. I mean, you’re running through a closed door during a split-second glitch while the door-closing animiation is playing.

If you don’t pull it off the first time, you can’t do it again without restarting the instance because you’ve bypassed a scripted event (killing the elites to unlock the door).

Wut? The door instantly opens if you are already passed the triggering point of this event and stays open forever

I was rather vague, wasn’t I >.<

To clarify, “if you don’t pull it off the first time”, meaning if your group isn’t stealthed and ready to go at the door when the path is locked in.

Cheezy.2039:

I see why you think it’s inconsistent with the current ruleset but I don’t see why you feel the need to allow one or forbid the other.

How it works atm is open for creativity but dismisses exploits. That’s what I like at the moment and I’d rather have the rules adjusted than the records.

Im not saying allow one and forbid the other. Im saying allow both. Did you not see the old CoE records? Those were incredibly creative compared to how they are now. The only questionable thing about them was killing alpha while he was doing nothing. Then again thats probably something anet should fix by making him neutral until the path finishes selection.

How it works at the moment is inconsistant and technically we should be banning p3 and p2 if we follow the rules to their exact wording/meaning.

MasterBlaster.6827:

spoj.9672:

Well is the majority of the community ok with us removing the p2 and p3 records? And maybe even CM p2? Waypointing back to start before the door after trap room opens? What about all the times where people break NPC dialogues to speed up triggers? Should we enforce that aswell?

Waypointing about which door? If you mean the closed one where you have to give this heal-backpack to the NPC, there is another way out.

Except all the bandit mobs dont spawn until later. Meaning you can completely bypass them without stealth. Surely thats an exploit?

Honestly its really hard to take some of you seriously when you accept some of these things and not the others. Especially when some of the banned things are far less exploity than some of the allowed tactics. Its almost like all the old previously discovered semi exploity tactics got banned. But all the new ones are allowed because they are cool, flashy and new. Kind of amusing if you ask me.

And i know exactly why it happens. Because when you come up with these ideas in your own record. You think to yourself “thats really cool I want to show that off”. And thats fair enough, you deserve to display the ingenius tactics you come up with (the whole point of records). And as someone who personally loves the unrestricted ruleset i really appreciate those tactics and i dont want to devalue your attempts by disallowing them. In reality we should be disallowing them according to the rules. We could probably ban every last record done in the last 6 months for NPC dialogue breaking if we wanted to.

Just to add.

The very idea of rules goes against the purpose of speedruns. Although some restrictions are fair such as no limited time gemstore items.

And this is why we keep having this discussion. Its very difficult to properly manage rules for a competative scene where rules dont make sense.

The problem is when there is a lack of these rules there is no competitive scene.

At the same time, Jerus, we need to have some starting point in interpreting what fair play is beyond “I think this is cool”. If you want to be reductive and say “everything is subjective anyway so eehh just do what feels good.”, it becomes hard to have a constructive discussion about what the rules should be.

" If the competitors feel something is better done a certain way, that’s the route that should be taken." – if everyone was in agreement all the time, then it wouldn’t be an issue. The problem is when competitors disagree. That’s what we see here, everyone is drawing a different line in the sand at what they think is exploity and what is just “creative”. The rules are meant to be a compromise that is easiest to work with for everyone, even if it isn’t perfect for each individual.

People who want the flashy tactics need to embrace the unrestricted set more. It’s there for people to use if they want to push the game to its limit. To get creative. If it’s too open to be workable still, change it – its not being used in it’s current form anyway. If the unrestricted ruleset got used there wouldn’t be so much pressure on the restricted set to be everything to everyone. The easiest way for that to happen would be to enforce the restricted ruleset as written.

You can’t make everyone happy and have a consistent ruleset. Right now we are trying to make everyone happy, at the expense of consistency, but the ambiguity is becoming a problem. The alternative is sacrifice some happiness for consistency, and hope that people realize the unrestricted set is there to be used.

Completely agree.

And to Nike. Too many complex rules just complicates things and doesnt actually cover everything anyway. Speedruns are about innovative tactics. You cannot cover everything without completely butchering innovation.

I feel its better to have less and more simplistic rules. For the sake of consistency. You wont please everyone. But its better to have consistency and please as many people as possible while maintaining that. Instead of trying to please as many as you can but forsaking consistency.

spoj.9672:

Cheezy.2039:

I see why you think it’s inconsistent with the current ruleset but I don’t see why you feel the need to allow one or forbid the other.

How it works atm is open for creativity but dismisses exploits. That’s what I like at the moment and I’d rather have the rules adjusted than the records.

Im not saying allow one and forbid the other. Im saying allow both. Did you not see the old CoE records? Those were incredibly creative compared to how they are now. The only questionable thing about them was killing alpha while he was doing nothing. Then again thats probably something anet should fix by making him neutral until the path finishes selection.

How it works at the moment is inconsistant and technically we should be banning p3 and p2 if we follow the rules to their exact wording/meaning.

That’s why I said ‘or’ not ‘and’

I don’t think jumping over a door is “creative”, in a competitive manner, I don’t think doing a jumping puzzle in Arah P4 to skip to a boss is creative in such a way.

I still don’t get why people say that walking past a barricade that did not even spawn yet is more of an exploit than doing a jumping puzzle over one that is in place since the start of the dungeon.

About rules: in an ideal world they would be simple and cover a huge variety of single cases and have an official stance by ANet saying that it will be fixed or not. We don’t have such an environment, that’s why we need specific rules, see the recent Wahlen one-shot discussion (although it was about general play and not about speed runs).

I see someone jump over the CoE door I roll my eyes at them. I see someone successfully stealth the Arah p3 door and go “Nice coordination”. Regardless of the intent, one seems lame to me and one seems like a fine and neat trick of the path. In general, jumping over barriers just because of terrain has a major stigma associated with it because in the past ANet has repeatedly fixed these sorts of issues (same exact skip as the CoE skip used to be present in CoF p2, and it was fixed). In lieu of that, it really seems to me that the CoE issue is one they just haven’t fixed yet, whereas the Arah p3 one is probably okay.

It wasnt the jumping over the door that was creative. It was what it allowed.

https://youtu.be/WXl24NYr9Mc

Its the second door which creates the play.

@Cheezy
Im not sure what jumping puzzle you are referring to. The simin to bloodstone is the one i was talking about and is on the same level as the bone wall. Neither are intended but you arent breaking anything to do them and you arent really out of the map either. The big one at the start is different because it allows you to skip intended dungeon events and bosses. And I completely agree thats a major exploit.

My problem with CoE door is that you can bug the dungeon by getting alpha to 50% so it just appears to be an exploit where as other door skips won’t bug the dungeon. If we begin path selection for CoE at the start and killing alpha early triggers the laser room event, I probably wouldn’t have a problem with the door skip.

spoj.9672:

I feel its better to have less and more simplistic rules. For the sake of consistency. You wont please everyone.

“well, it’ll please me and that’s what’s relevant”

But its better to have consistency and please as many people as possible while maintaining that. Instead of trying to please as many as you can but forsaking consistency.

“it’s better to have consistency because … I said so”

tl;dr opinions are opinions but mine is a better opinion so you should follow what i say

Its easy for you to take that stance when you dont have to worry about approving records. Inconsistency makes it harder for us. And it creates constant reoccuring discussions about special cases. Most of us would rather avoid that if we can….

And i wont deny those are my personal opinions. But i volunteered to help with records despite the rulesets not being how i want them. And im willing to accept whatever the community decides. But dont expect me to just sit here and say nothing when there are obvious problems.

The problem is the enforcement of the rule, not the rule itself. I’m all for Wethospu enforcing the rule as written.

But heres the thing. Whats going to happen to the people who are actually submitting the records? Are they going to be happy with this? Its kind of irrelevant what spectators think at this point.

spoj.9672:

It wasnt the jumping over the door that was creative. It was what it allowed.

https://youtu.be/WXl24NYr9Mc

Its the second door which creates the play.

@Cheezy
Im not sure what jumping puzzle you are referring to. The simin to bloodstone is the one i was talking about and is on the same level as the bone wall. Neither are intended but you arent breaking anything to do them and you arent really out of the map either. The big one at the start is different because it allows you to skip intended dungeon events and bosses. And I completely agree thats a major exploit.

I know that record and it doesn’t really change anything, does it? Still skipping the door, and using a waypoint is not an exciting strategy. I personally find the current strategy with the Mesmer Portal way more interesting than that

Also if you are talking about the tree skip, how on earth is that not out of bounds

You are only above the intended path. Its a debatable skip.

Here is a quick (1h) prototype for the voting page: http://gw2dungeons.net/dev/voting

While it may look fancy, even these forums have pretty much the same functionality. So it’s one question whether the whole page is even needed. I think it would only be needed if we go “all-in” with voting. With the page, it would be really easy to manage lots of polls. For example for every little exploit.

Do you guys think we should have a proper rule meeting? Or just scrap the whole idea and start discussion and voting whenever anything pops up.

I definitely think whatever it is, it should go to votes among the guild representatives. The whole speedclear community exists because people enjoy the runs, and first and foremost I want rules that are representative of what the majority feels fair and appropriate. If the guilds want to keep doing actual meetings, that’s fine, but I’m not sure what they accomplish that a simple vote on key topics wouldn’t address.

EDIT: While we’re here, can we discuss and maybe vote on whether the record here is restricted or unrestricted? I personally approved it as restricted because the jumps to speed up the NPCs seem fair to me, none of them skip any events, nor do they leave the bounds of the fractal. I was told by someone else who looked at it (not an approver) that this was similar to the Arah p4 tree skip, but I’m actually unfamiliar with that skip and couldn’t find a video of it. If someone could show me a video of that for comparison, that’d be great.

The tree skip is using a tree near the waypoint before simin to jump above all the danger and avoid all the trash in between. There are elements up there that “have no substance” if that makes sense (You can walk through them even though the graphics of them look like they’re objects). I personally think that the area in question constitutes out of bounds on the tree skip.

I think the Molten Facility one though is just jumping on top of something that’s there, and is perfectly fine… same reason I see the COE jump over the door as OK, so I could see that as questionable, but they are different in that when you approach the area the NPC isn’t sitting there in a stupor waiting for you to attack it. /shrug In the spirit of the entire restricted rule set I think it’s a solid tactic, as it’s simply manipulating the NPCs to move how you want them and start things faster, you’re not avoiding content, you’re just avoiding a timegate. So it’s just increasing the speed, not glitching something to make it easier.