Guild Wars 2

Sorry for the delay. I have been really busy with stuff and took me a while to figure out how to write down that issue about blockades.

Description

Simple voting system has been added to http://gw2dungeons.net/Voting. Each week I will create a discussion topic on forums and add relevant polls there, if needed. Guild leaders are given an account which can be used to vote. Polls stay up for one week.

Guild leaders can apply for a vote by sending me your preferred login name and reason why you should have a vote (was in previous rule meetings, have records, etc.) via in-game, forums or email. Optionally you can also give me your email so I can send a reminder about new polls if there hasn’t been any for a while.

Current vote holders:

• Daemoniic [HeX]
• Enko [LOD]
• Deathly [qT]
• Skywalker [TDN]
• Der/p/y Moa [vC]
• Ashlee [geek]
• Jerem [SC]
• Nikephoros [DnT]
• Sanderinoa [rT]
• Veckna [QQ]
• Senior Magic [iG]

Keep in mind that anyone is free to give their opinion and ideas on this topic!

Results of week 23 voting

I have refactored the rules (merged some stuff, reordered, etc). Please check http://gw2dungeons.net/Rules and verify that the meaning has not changed (except for changed stuff below).

There was some confusion so the vote from 21 week about allowing exceptions with “case by case” vote was reopened. This changed the outcome. 56% wanted to enforce consistency while 46% wanted to allow exceptions. Unfortunately that means some of last weeks votes were pointless. But moving on.

89% agreed to disallow safespotting trash. I have updated rules to reflect this.

71% agreed to allow the leaping on Molten Facility. I have changed “out of bounds” to “inside geometry” to clarify that it’s allowed.

75% agreed to allow Arah p3 first door trick. While I could update the rules to actually allow it, I will make one more vote about this, just in case.

Issue1: Event abusing

Currently rules quite strictly ban any kind of event abusing. But for example delaying path selection on Arah P3 to abuse the first door is allowed. This was voted last week but I want to be sure before I make any changes.

A) Allow delaying path selection to disable or break events and encounters

B) Don’t allow

• Bans ArahP3 gate trick.
• First burrow must be triggered in AC exp.

Issue2: Blockades

Current rule: 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.

This splits to two issues which affect each other so this is bit complicated. If things get messed up we can have another poll. Also if no option gets over 50% votes, this will be voted again next week but with two options.

A) Allow being past blockades if you get there before they close.

• Allows AC Story gate skipping with a teleport but not jumping over it.
• Allows being past Belka bonewall if you get there before it closes.
• Moves votes of option C to option A on the next vote.

B) Ban being past any blockades. All blockades must remain open if anyone is past them.

• AC Story would require boulders on pressure plates.
• Locks the next poll to option B.

C) You are free to be past any blockades but they may have to be opened.

• Other rules still prevent getting out of bounds, etc.
• Allows AC Story gate skipping with any means.
• Allows CoE Exp gate skip but rules prevent attacking Alpha while he is inactive.

The other poll:

A) All blockades must be open at some point.

B) All blockades must be open at the end.

• AC Story would require boulders on pressure plates

C) Blockades don’t have to be opened.

• Other rules still prevent getting out of bounds, etc.
• Simplifies the ruleset and removes overlap.
• May allow exploits (can be plugged next week)

Issue3: Unrestricted path completion

Currently in unrestricted you only have to kill the final boss. This means you can literally go straight to the boss and kill it. It has been proposed that to a record be valid, path completion must trigger. If no option gets over 50% votes, this will be voted again next week but with two options.

A) Keep the current rule. Only the final boss has to be killed.

B) Require a path completion to trigger.

C) Require a completion of same events as in the restricted category (but in any order).

What are we defining as events? Things that pop up in the event display on the right side of your screen or scripted triggers like NPC dialogue? Are we only including events that impede progress? Even if the AC burrow has to be triggered, it doesn’t impede progress and people would just run past it anyways.

On a semi related note, is NPC dialogue considered an event or scripting?

Thanks for clarifying the out of bounds rule from last week. The geometry description works very well to pretty much address everything with what constituted “out of bounds”

Id assume events is all intended mandatory bosses. Obviously there are bonus bosses and optional events that do pop up. Those wont count.

So going with that, should the burrow even be considered to affect the rule since its an optional event anyways?

With mandatory bosses, this should be pretty clear since you obviously won’t be able to continue normally if it’s still alive.

Are things such as scripted dialogue going to be counted as events that have to run their course or as long as you can get the end result to trigger, its fine?

“Abusing of event scripts is banned. This includes but is not limited to manipulating event spawns, disabling event mechanics, etc. All cutscenes within a dungeon that are relevant to the path must be triggered. "

So this includes event spawns. Would forcing a NPC’s dialogue to not happen to cause event spawns to happen faster be considered manipulating an event spawns? In the past, we have allowed this so most people are probably fine on it. I’m not looking to change how it’s implemented but just want the wording clarified so if we get any new people looking at doing records, it won’t be a question for them.

Yeah i personally would consider the burrow optional and so it shouldnt effect any of the rules.

As to the NPC dialogue stuff. I like the intelligent play used to do that stuff. But i always felt it fits more with unrestricted. But it looks like by the current votes restricted is going to become a little more lenient. Which means it wouldnt be a bad thing to allow npc dialogue abuse if thats what people want.

I can’t tell what was originally meant when the rule was created but I would say an event is any enemy spawn, enemy death, NPC dialogue or geometry modification.

I realize that the AC burrow is a very minor thing and doesn’t really affect anything. But if you want a consistent rule set, all cases have to be treated equally. Otherwise you have an exception which means you have to think whether any future case is an exception or not.

By the way, are there any severe exploits which are prevented by the blockade rule?

Not really as far as im aware. All the serious exploits are major map glitching but those involve boss skips and the like anyway. So they wouldnt really be allowed/used as long as events are completed in order for the restricted ruleset.

If the rule states mandatory spawns (ie progress blocking. doors don’t open until they’re killed), then that would take care of the AC burow, right?

The Arah P3 is probably the one that’s actually in question here since normally that door is closed until you kill the mobs.

For the dialogue issue, I agree with Spoj that it’s neat to see tricks like that but feels like it belongs more in unrestricted where the mindset is pull out any tricks you can manage.

I had always interpreted event scripts to include NPC or boss dialogue such as at the end of SE P3 and end of CM P3 but since it seemed like people were allowing those just thought it was one of those unstated exceptions that people put in to see if the record would be approved or not.

The rules sound alittle too complicated, it doesn’t sound like it is catering to fresh blood.

EcoRI.9273:

The rules sound alittle too complicated, it doesn’t sound like it is catering to fresh blood.

Do you have input on how you think they should be worded then?

Enko.6123:

EcoRI.9273:

The rules sound alittle too complicated, it doesn’t sound like it is catering to fresh blood.

Do you have input on how you think they should be worded then?

Well I know when I was practicing for the DnT trio tournament, alot of the rules were very ambiguous and were later cleared up or special cased.

Rule 7 is confusing, you can do a legit JP in arah p3 which then makes rule 11a. ambiguous. Since the JP is legit and within bounds, what is “All cutscenes within a dungeon that are relevant to the path must be triggered.” Are the crusher Cutscenes truly relevant?

Rule 11 is confusing as hell. Current volcanic fotm record bugs the Shaman AI and cause it to break for a good 10seconds.

Abusing of event scripts is banned 11a. Killing NPCs disables event scripts for se p3 and CM p3 final boss areas. Confusing wording.

Things like that are exactly why we are doing this. The CoE door jump is completely within the bounds of the map and would be considered legit apart from rule 6 in its current form. But people were against that because of alpha. But we can simply add to rule 11 clarifying that you cannot engage inactive bosses. Then the issue is resolved with a more consistent rules.

If your issue is just wording then feel free to suggest adjustments.

Which way do I have to vote to be against people jumping the door to the first alpha?

NikeEU.7690:

Which way do I have to vote to be against people jumping the door to the first alpha?

Vote for B on the second question?

spoj.9672:

Things like that are exactly why we are doing this. The CoE door jump is completely within the bounds of the map and would be considered legit apart from rule 6 in its current form. But people were against that because of alpha. But we can simply add to rule 11 clarifying that you cannot engage inactive bosses. Then the issue is resolved with a more consistent rules.

If your issue is just wording then feel free to suggest adjustments.

The thing about that is, the gate after first alpha can be “exploited” too and will be the go to strategy since it will unlock the laser room WP.

I dont see any problem with that. You still have to wait for alpha to activate before you can kill. And the last door before the laser room doesnt open until after he is dead. So all it does is create a split for a slight time save. This is the kind of strategy that is used in countless places in other dungeons.

This is all assuming people vote to allow getting through blockades. :P

Enko.6123:

If the rule states mandatory spawns (ie progress blocking. doors don’t open until they’re killed), then that would take care of the AC burow, right?

The Arah P3 is probably the one that’s actually in question here since normally that door is closed until you kill the mobs.

—

Just to verify, you think that “Issue1: Event abusing” should have another option for allowing delaying path selection to break non- mandatory events? Or perhaps all rules should go more towards that direction?

I think the Arah P3 issue would be more related to the blockade issue we’re voting on now since that door is supposed to be closed until you kill the mobs.

If we wanted to allow/disallow path selection in regards to event abuse, the litmus test for it should be if the event that’s people are trying to bypass is a progress blocking one or not.

I think the general consensus is that non mandatory events that don’t block progress can pretty much be ignored (burrow at start okittenholer, burrow on the way to essence collectors on P3, etc). The Arah P3 is something that the rules need to address since that is something that would normally actually block progress that we’re bypassing. The CoE door jump is the same issue.

As far as I know, the door remains open if you abuse the path selection. So the blockade rule doesn’t apply.

When you select the path and approach the door, there’s a threshold that closes the door. Tried out a few things to see specifically what closes the door.

Select path.
Approach threshold
Door closes when threshold is crossed.
4 mobs at door must be killed to open door.

Select path.
Stealth.
Approach threshold while stealthed.
Door closes when threshold is crossed.
4 mobs at door must be killed to open door.

Stealth.
Approach door.
Pick path.
Let stealth run out.
Door does not close when mobs agro on you.
Door does not close when threshold is crossed.

It looks like what’s happening is that all the doors defaults to being closed, then when the path is picked, it opens that door so players know which way to go. If path 3 is picked, the game opens so door so you know which way to go and creates a trigger that when players cross a threshold at the door, it closes and players have to clear the doorkeepers to open it again.

If the four mobs agro before anyone crosses the threshold (because you’re already inside it), it looks like it breaks the trigger since the threshold would normally need to be crossed.

This seems like its bypassing event scripting which is supposed to activate a progress impeding event.

What if the wording of the rule for blockades was that the blockades must be closed at some point and opened by a player action to allow the team to go by.

For AC SM, the door starts closed. Player action to open it is to step on the weight panel to open it and let your team through and you get through via a teleport. Getting past this accomplishes the event of stepping on the weight panel which would be allowed..

For Arah P3, this wouldn’t be allowed since breaking past the threshold means that the door is never closed. Breaking past this without completing the event to open namely killing the 4 doorkeepers would move the usage of this to unrestricted.

For Belka bone wall, someone got by it before it closed. The player action to normally open this wall would be killing Belka so this wouln’t be allowed. Going past the bone wall without completing the event to open namely killing Belka would move the usage of this to unrestricted.

For CoE jumping over the door, it starts closed and the player action that opens it is to select the path. Breaking past this without completing the event to open namely selecting a path would move the usage of this to unrestricted.

CoE door jump, Arah P3 and Belka bone wall have event script triggers that you’re bypassing. These skips have generally always felt like they belonged in Unrestricted but have been allowed through probably through ambiguity in the rules.

AC SM does not.

For AC, if we didn’t allow someone to teleport past the door with a blink skill, the other 4 could go split and kill a boss and spawn a waypoint to let that person through or let the other 4 through and then go get a rock by himself to let himself through later.

It looks like most people are voting for blockades dont have to be opened. Which means all of them would technically be allowed. Which simplifies things.

Other rules prevent the problems tied with skipping ahead.

spoj.9672:

NikeEU.7690:

Which way do I have to vote to be against people jumping the door to the first alpha?

Vote for B on the second question?

I voted for option A. That allows Arah p3 but doesn’t allow for COE.

If somehow the rules are construed to allow jumping the door of COE I’m going to have a lot more to say about all of this.

Well yeah both A and B restrict CoE.

Next week there will be (at least) these polls:

Is triggering every cutscene required?

Is triggering every dialogue required?

I think it would be nice if people could list current usage of these tricks so everyone could see how much effect they have on the runs.

“triggering every cutscene” is also ambiguous due to cof p2. If you fail the bomb part, you get a cutscene. Of course you can special case cof p2.

Why would you fail the bombs in a record?

to obey the “trigger every cutscene” rule obviously :-D.

I don’t think triggering every dialogue or cutscene should be necessary, really. I find that killing NPCs to skip dialogue (like in CM or Arah) is extremely clever and takes an extra layer of micromanaging the path for teams. The important part for me is that mandatory by-design events aren’t skipped. This means you can skip Kohler, but you can’t skip the scepter collection event, etc.

For what it’s worth, I agree with Nike in that I vehemently oppose being able to jump over doors like the CoE door. I’m okay with bypassing a door if you have to move fast enough at the onset to pass it before it closes, but I’m not okay with jumping over it after it is closed. Therefore I would vote option A for that one. Then I would support option C for the follow-up in that blockages that you bypass legitimately don’t have to later be opened.

I think the dialogue vote will probably be in favour of allowing the exploiting of NPC’s. Its been done in all recent records so i would find it shocking for people to vote against it.

Can i ask just why people are so opposed to the CoE door thing and not all the others? Saying its unintended isnt really what i would consider a valid reason. Theres a lot of unintended things we do and allow and some could be considered far more exploity than the jump (breaking trigger thresholds, blinking through floors etc). Nothing is broken or exploited with the jump. It has no effect on anything other than the position of the player. So whats the reason?

A closed door is literally a physical manifestation of the developers’ desire for you to open the kitten door. To skip it feels extremely exploitative. Things like killing an NPC to skip some of its dialogue, in contrast, feels clever because you’re still completing the event and killing the boss, you’ve just discovered a tricky way to speed up the prerequisites for that boss’s activation. Another example of things I like is the cutscene in CM where if you have someone stay in the cutscene the Riflemen don’t spawn, allowing players to get into position before starting the boss’s burn.

Because people don’t want to constantly have to restart the dungeon because they suck at jumping?

The developers made those dialogues and cutscenes for you to listen and watch them. Its no different when you look at it like that.

Also just look at the CM p2 records. Dieing and running to the boss before mobs spawn, blinking through a floor, getting turmaine stuck near the tree and so on. Yeah theres no way what is and isnt intended can be used as a valid reason. As weth said to me earlier. Its not about whether something is an exploit or not (intended/unintended). “It can be a good exploit or a bad exploit”. But why do people consider jumping over a door worse than breaking/teleporting NPC’s and skipping/exploiting triggers? I dont understand it at all.

I agree the NPC exploits are cool and add to the records but they are far more exploitive than a harmless jump in my opinion.

Rising Dusk.2408:

A closed door is literally a physical manifestation of the developers’ desire for you to open the kitten door. To skip it feels extremely exploitative. Things like killing an NPC to skip some of its dialogue, in contrast, feels clever because you’re still completing the event and killing the boss, you’ve just discovered a tricky way to speed up the prerequisites for that boss’s activation. Another example of things I like is the cutscene in CM where if you have someone stay in the cutscene the Riflemen don’t spawn, allowing players to get into position before starting the boss’s burn.

So if there’s a door that is supposed to close but players glitch it so it doesn’t close and they’re able to go through, is this ok?

spoj.9672:

The developers made those dialogues and cutscenes for you to listen and watch them. Its no different when you look at it like that.

Also just look at the CM p2 records. Dieing and running to the boss before mobs spawn, blinking through a floor, getting turmaine stuck near the tree and so on. Yeah theres no way what is and isnt intended can be used as a valid reason. As weth said to me earlier. Its not about whether something is an exploit or not (intended/unintended). “It can be a good exploit or a bad exploit”. But why do people consider jumping over a door worse than breaking/teleporting NPC’s and skipping/exploiting triggers? I dont understand it at all.

I agree the NPC exploits are cool and add to the records but they are far more exploitive than a harmless jump in my opinion.

A lot of those things because they’re exploitive feel like they should really be in Unrestricted.

When the split between Unrestricted and Restricted first happened, there were a lot of people who didn’t want Unrestricted to exist or participate in it because it was seen as just who can glitch the most. Restricted seems to be moving in that direction anyways.

This may all just come down to exactly what Restricted and Unrestricted are supposed to represent.

Enko.6123:

When the split between Unrestricted and Restricted first happened, there were a lot of people who didn’t want Unrestricted to exist or participate in it because it was seen as just who can glitch the most.

I’m glad someone remembers.

Restricted seems to be moving in that direction anyways.

Which I predicted would happen when the community opted to organize things as they are.

This may all just come down to exactly what Restricted and Unrestricted are supposed to represent.

Because the people who want to do Unrestricted type records know that no one gives a crap about them. If someone posts an 8 minute unrestricted Arah path 4 that will be met with a collective “who cares” from the community. The only way to get people to care is to do restricted records, and so rather than work within the unrestricted framework there is a constant push by segments to ruin the restricted rules.

And the people who want to do restricted records end up exploiting anyway. So its more of a case that people dont know what they want. Which is what ive been saying since the beginning.

Personally i would enjoy a decent middle ground. And thats kind of how it was until we created the two rulesets way back when. I think the rules went too far when that happened. We should have just banned consumables and said all bosses must be completed (to address the p3 stuff that happened then). But instead people wanted to go rule crazy and split the community.

NikeEU.7690:

Because the people who want to do Unrestricted type records know that no one gives a crap about them. If someone posts an 8 minute unrestricted Arah path 4 that will be met with a collective “who cares” from the community. The only way to get people to care is to do restricted records, and so rather than work within the unrestricted framework there is a constant push by segments to ruin the restricted rules.

I don’t even know why some people call some of their records “Restricted” when they’re doing as you stated and are constantly pushing against the restricted rules by arguing that its a creative use of game mechanics so should be allowed. At the rate we’re going, the only differentiation between Restricted and Unrestricted is that one you can’t use gem store items or random consumables available in the game and the other you can.

spoj.9672:

And the people who want to do restricted records end up exploiting anyway. So its more of a case that people dont know what they want. Which is what ive been saying since the beginning.

Restricted originally meant we run the dungeons as close to what we think Anet intended (since we can’t really tell sometimes). I’m pretty sure Anet didn’t intend for us to kill their NPCs, break past doors, jump over doors, glitch things so normally triggered events don’t occur, etc.

Some of the things that were banned such as consumables seem like they were intended to be used since Anet actually are the ones that programmed them into the game but are not allowed.

BTW Spoj, I was on board with you supporting the Unrestricted ruleset for a long time.

As I said earlier in these discussions,

Enko.6123:

Standardized ruleset would look something like:
No gemstore exclusive items
No third party programs like teleport hacks and such
No breaking out of maps like going under the map.
All required events to advance progress must be completed.

Other than that, have at it. Basically if something is available to everyone then it should be allowed. This is sounding pretty much like Unrestricted at this point.
This was pretty much how records were done in GW1 and there was a heck of a lot less drama then.

If we still wanted rules like no non food or oil consumables, then fine but the rules should be pretty much standardized across everything.

This would allow all the tricks that people seem to be wanting instead of arguing between Unrestricted vs Restricted since it seems like that line is pretty much going away anyways.

spoj.9672:

The developers made those dialogues and cutscenes for you to listen and watch them. Its no different when you look at it like that.

Also just look at the CM p2 records. Dieing and running to the boss before mobs spawn, blinking through a floor, getting turmaine stuck near the tree and so on. Yeah theres no way what is and isnt intended can be used as a valid reason. As weth said to me earlier. Its not about whether something is an exploit or not (intended/unintended). “It can be a good exploit or a bad exploit”. But why do people consider jumping over a door worse than breaking/teleporting NPC’s and skipping/exploiting triggers? I dont understand it at all.

I agree the NPC exploits are cool and add to the records but they are far more exploitive than a harmless jump in my opinion.

Because an NPC following players teleporting to those players out of range is intended functionality and is working by design. Because a dead NPC not talking is intended functionality and is working by design. Using these two functionalities in unison is a clever way to speed up functionality. I literally know that this is OK by ANet and do not even have to guess.

Enko.6123:

So if there’s a door that is supposed to close but players glitch it so it doesn’t close and they’re able to go through, is this ok?

I would say yes, they are fine because the door never closes and/or opens early.

Yeah and i fully support that ruleset. Its like we damaged the community beyond repair with our split rulesets. Its frustrating.

Would people really stop doing records just because a few jumps + extra portals become possible? I doubt it. Most just follow the rules as they are. People have their own personal opinions. But very few would outright refuse to compete just because they dont agree with a rule or two. I understand this goes both ways. The reason i bring this up is because of lack of consistency, clarity and a community split between two rulesets.

Why do the rules have to necessarily make sense?

I’ve always seen the restricted set not as necessarily an avoidance of exploit but just an attempt to create a playing field that more people want to participate in.

I’d say the names should just be changed to “Competitive PVE” and “Speed Runs” just my 2cents.

Jerus.4350:

Why do the rules have to necessarily make sense?

I’ve always seen the restricted set not as necessarily an avoidance of exploit but just an attempt to create a playing field that more people want to participate in.

I’d say the names should just be changed to “Competitive PVE” and “Speed Runs” just my 2cents.

I’d be fine with that if people can comply with a consistent ruleset and that the dungeons that are approved all follow that ruleset. This hasn’t been happening though.

Rising Dusk.2408:

Because an NPC following players teleporting to those players out of range is intended functionality and is working by design. Because a dead NPC not talking is intended functionality and is working by design. Using these two functionalities in unison is a clever way to speed up functionality. I literally know that this is OK by ANet and do not even have to guess.

Enko.6123:

So if there’s a door that is supposed to close but players glitch it so it doesn’t close and they’re able to go through, is this ok?

I would say yes, they are fine because the door never closes and/or opens early.

I don’t think anyone is arguing that Anet isn’t ok with those mechanics. I would say that people would probably agree that Anet probably didn’t envision that that was how the dungeon was supposed to be done though.

As for the door thing as well as other rules that are decided, I’m fine with really anything we come up with as long as its applied consistently and is compliant with the posted rules.
The problem we’ve been having is that the same issue is being denied on some videos and being allowed on others. This inconsistency was even shown in last week’s voting with people stating that they were voting in compliance with the listed rules even though they weren’t. Or videos posted with questionable things that were in a gray area because they weren’t explicitly banned but the rule implied that those actions wouldn’t have been allowed. This all led to the creeping in of more and more exploitive things into a ruleset that was originally decided on to attempt to complete the dungeons in the quickest way possible while conforming to what we thought Anet’s intentions were.

WPing and killing NPCs to speed things up would have belonged in a different category which one was provided to submit records for but for some reason when it’s called Unrestricted, no one is interested.

Again, I just want a consistent rule set that is applied evenly. This discussion on the two different rule sets is a separate discussion.

Enko.6123:

The problem we’ve been having is that the same issue is being denied on some videos and being allowed on others.

Regardless of the rules themselves, can you please cite the times these rules have been applied inconsistently? We, as approvers, would like to review them and ensure that things are approved consistently. Furthermore, if you notice this in the future, please let us know so we can look into it!

Rising Dusk.2408:

Enko.6123:

The problem we’ve been having is that the same issue is being denied on some videos and being allowed on others.

Regardless of the rules themselves, can you please cite the times these rules have been applied inconsistently? We, as approvers, would like to review them and ensure that things are approved consistently. Furthermore, if you notice this in the future, please let us know so we can look into it!

I did concerning the Molten Furnace and going out of bounds.

The Belka Bone Wall skip was mentioned when that one first happened and was approved anyways.

MYTH’s post of CM P3 had a lot of pushback on things not based in rules for why it shouldn’t be approved initially and it wasn’t until there was a fairly large discussion on it did it get approved.

If you look at the discussions that have been happening on this week’s thread and last week’s threads, these issues should have been looked at when those records were first submitted since they’re apparent grey areas.

Rising Dusk.2408:

Because an NPC following players teleporting to those players out of range is intended functionality and is working by design. Because a dead NPC not talking is intended functionality and is working by design. Using these two functionalities in unison is a clever way to speed up functionality. I literally know that this is OK by ANet and do not even have to guess.
—

I would say what Anet considers OK doesn’t weight much at this point.

Enko.6123:

I did concerning the Molten Furnace and going out of bounds.

The Belka Bone Wall skip was mentioned when that one first happened and was approved anyways.

MYTH’s post of CM P3 had a lot of pushback on things not based in rules for why it shouldn’t be approved initially and it wasn’t until there was a fairly large discussion on it did it get approved.

If you look at the discussions that have been happening on this week’s thread and last week’s threads, these issues should have been looked at when those records were first submitted since they’re apparent grey areas.

A vote was held regarding Molten Furnace and it was determined to be allowed. The Belka bone wall situation is precisely why we’re having this discussion and poll now because it is controversial. I’ll give you that MYTH’s post of p3 was disputed because it didn’t seem like a serious record and non-serious records waste the time of the approvers, so there was opposition from some people. Once we got over that, however, it was swiftly approved. That said, we should respect the time of our approvers because we don’t want to push them away since it is a thing that needs to be done. Still, I’m unclear on how any of these situations show approvers being inconsistent in applying the actual rules; could you be more precise on what you find inconsistent? If it’s just on controversial topics, well, then the appropriate solution is to have those controversial topics brought up in these polls.. Which is what we’re doing. What would you change?

Wethospu.6437:

I would say what Anet considers OK doesn’t weight much at this point.

What ANet thinks does affect peoples’ perceptions, and relevant guild leaders are much more likely to vote to disallow something if it feels or is known to be exploitative.

Its not really about approvers being inconsistent. Its about the rules not being consistent. They arent clear and are open to interpretation. Like weve all been allowing a few things that could easily be grounds to deny. But we dont because it would be stupid and they have always been considered guidelines.

People are two faced when it comes to whats intended. So no matter how you spin it it will never solve all the issues. The thing with current rules and exploits in records is the old stuff that people discovered ages back and has been discussed in the past is all banned. But all the new stuff is considered fresh and innovating so everyone is against banning it.

I seriously think we would benefit from going back to a standardised ruleset with less restrictions and less open to interpretation. People didnt have a problem with it before until the harpy feather absurdity and the jumping puzzle crap in arah. Both of those could have been avoided with 3 basic changes (timer change, banning of consumables and all bosses must be killed).

spoj.9672:

I seriously think we would benefit from going back to a standardised ruleset with less restrictions and less open to interpretation. People didnt have a problem with it before until the harpy feather absurdity and the jumping puzzle crap in arah.

I think you’re wrong. The community again and again has come down in favor of the restricted rules and has consistently opposed loosening them. I really wish you would end your crusade for changing Restricted from what it was designed to be and spend your time working on getting the Unrestricted rules to a place where people care about them if you have so much energy.

And I don’t think you were participating in records at the time so you might not remember, but when Keep Running did their CoE series with all the door jumps etc the reaction from most of the community was “if this is what records are going to look like from now on, we aren’t really interested in participating.” Then the Harpy feathers happened so we said screw it and did he Arah p3 jumping puzzle record and the community finally had enough.

I dont remember anyone saying anything bad about the KR CoE records. Apart from a few comments from people who obviously couldnt jump.

I wasnt involved in any records back then. But i was following the scene very closely at the time.