Guild Wars 2

Description

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]
• Senior Magic [iG]
• Juliverine [Yoga]

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

Results of week 28 voting

67% agreed to ban using an immobilize on bosses before they have activated. Rules have been updated. There were some concerns whether people understood what they are voting for so I asked some voteholders and the reasoning was “vC went too far with their record”.

Additionally I have updated the voting page. On top, it now tells if there are any polls without your vote. Also the poll description has been added so you aren’t required to check these discussion topics anymore. Hopefully this fixes any problems with “careless voting”.

There have also been criticism about too much and too pointless voting. That’s understandable, even I agree with that. The biggest issue has simply been my inexperience with the system. Additionally the “burst of votes” was done on purpose before the specialization patch.

Anyways, to improve stability, the decisions now include 1 week discussion time. So if there are any issues, we will first discuss about them, their options and whether to vote at all.

Lots of people have asked me about the meeting hosted by [LOD]. I have nothing to do with that so no idea about it. But I will keep this official way up until we get some results from it.

Discussion 1: TA Up bugging the champion at gate

There is a champion and a elite at front of the gate before Nightmare Tree. These enemies bug out very easily and just stand still. This is banned according the rules but perhaps there should be an exception?

In the recent duo record (https://youtu.be/u7L-p8pGAa8?t=7m56s), the enemies are pulled behind a tree where they bug out. In earlier record (https://youtu.be/l-NOwbvYbV0?t=4m15s), the enemies are fight on spot but they still bug out (might be because they were pushed back).

I would like to get more information about this encounter. If those enemies bug out more or less randomly, it makes the path frustrating to run. Either you have to restart because they bugged or get bad time because they didn’t.

If there is a simple way to prevent them from bugging, then no change is needed. If not, then I think it would the best to vote about it.

Discussion 2: Unrestricted rule set

I would like to get ideas what to do with the unrestricted rule set. Currently it’s more like a place for records which get rejected. The unfortunate fact is that we don’t really have a big playerbase, so I’m not sure if we can realistically even have two rule sets.

Discussion 3: Integrity of all time records

Currently the rules are not enforced for all time records. The question is, do people want that? This would keep all time records more competitive since they would follow the current rule set. Obviously we don’t have enough manpower to enforce this for all previous records, so the whole thing would rely on the community pointing out any wrong records.

Consider these cases:

An all time record gets done. It uses a shady tactic, and some people don’t really like it. I make a poll about it and the tactic is banned. The record doesn’t get approved.

An all time record gets done. It uses a shady tactic, and some people don’t really like it. The record gets approved. A meeting is held 6 months after and the tactic is banned. The record remains restricted.

Wethospu.6437:

Lots of people have asked me about the meeting hosted by [LOD]. I have nothing to do with that so no idea about it. But I will keep this official way up until we get some results from it.

Is there a reason why you don’t want anything to do with it? You’re not excluded or anything.

Last time I checked, I wasn’t invited. I assumed you guys wanted to do it yourself considering all the talk how I shouldn’t be able to influence the rules, etc.

Wethospu.6437:

Last time I checked, I wasn’t invited. I assumed you guys wanted to do it yourself considering all the talk how I shouldn’t be able to influence the rules, etc.

I listed the same people you did for the votes and said

This is the people who were listed as voters on Wethospu’s weekly discussions. If you’re interested in attending, please post here or send me a message. Similar to how we did the previous meetings, up to 3 people per guild should work.

I’m not excluding anyone.

In that case it would have been “If anyone is interested..” instead of “If you’re interested..”

From what Cookie has said, in GW1 all-time records remained all-time records even after metas shifted, skills were nerfed and exploits patched. The idea was to preserve them for posterity even if the times aren’t achievable anymore. If something is Approved and goes on the board, even if a tactic is banned two weeks later it should stay as the all-time record.

Wethospu.6437:

In that case it would have been “If anyone is interested..” instead of “If you’re interested..”

NikeEU.7690:

From what Cookie has said, in GW1 all-time records remained all-time records even after metas shifted, skills were nerfed and exploits patched. The idea was to preserve them for posterity even if the times aren’t achievable anymore. If something is Approved and goes on the board, even if a tactic is banned two weeks later it should stay as the all-time record.

The issue with that is what to do with records with shady tactics. Should we first verify validity of tactics before approving? The order of approving and verifying affects whether a record becomes a restricted all time record, or something else.

Which kind of leads to the question whether restricted all time records make any sense. Especially if a record which should be unrestricted gets there because of a loophole in the rules.

Another option would be “eras”. Instead of valid/all time, there would be current, after might nerf but before specialization, before might nerf, etc. Basically autoselect for before and after dates. When an era changes (basically a big reset), records wouldn’t get moderated any more.

Yeah, what Weth said is really the clutch point here.

Let’s say a record is submitted as restricted, but the approvers find some tactic therein shady. They discuss it amongst themselves for several days, and then put it to a vote of the guild leaders. The guild leaders decide to ban it. Should the record that was submitted as restricted with the now-banned tactic be approved retroactively as restricted (and therefore go to all time) because it “technically wasn’t banned for a week”, or should it be approved unrestricted, or should it not be approved at all due to the usage of the now-banned tactic?

I think it makes the most sense to not approve it at all if we’re getting rid of unrestricted and opting for just a restricted ruleset, otherwise if we keep unrestricted to approve it as such.

As cookie said, all time records are meant to be an example of what was possible even if that is no longer possible. If the rules change and its no longer restricted that doesn’t particularly matter because it was restricted when it was legal. If something is changed and the all time record can’t be beaten… that’s what all time record is about.

It’s not always 100% clear how rules should be interpreted. So a poll doesn’t necessarily lead to a rule change. The current all time definition means that I have do the decision “does this get to all time or not?” by myself. The point of voting was to move this kind of decisions to the community and that always takes a week or two.

Weth, sent you an invite to the meeting anyways since you said what was stopping you from joining was that you felt you weren’t invited.

If anyone else messages you about it, please let them know that anyone is welcome at this for their input.

Having eras just adds a complex filter system that noone will use. Which is why all times should just be left as all time regardless of whether they are beatable or not and regardless of rule changes. Doesnt our filter system work on all time records anyway?

Eras would mean that the dropdown with “Only valid” and “All time” just had more values on it. The benefit would be that people could more easily see records just before big resets. While also providing more freedom with approving records with shady tactics.

I suppose. I just dont think anyone would care to use the feature. Most are only concerned with current records. And the only all times people care about are the true all time records. As in never been done faster on any version of the game or ruleset.

spoj.9672:

I suppose. I just dont think anyone would care to use the feature. Most are only concerned with current records. And the only all times people care about are the true all time records. As in never been done faster on any version of the game or ruleset.

Anyone who is doing serious analysis of existing tactics for a path in preparation for trying for a record on that path might want to use it. (Just like they might want to be able to see all submitted records, even ones that were beaten)

For example, if you look at a bunch of Arah p1 records, you’ll notice that the start time to the first door open time varies by a handful of seconds. This alone wouldn’t be obvious initially, unless you were looking at different attempts for your group and timing this point for each of them.

But then that raises a question. Is speeding this up just RNG, or is there something specific going on (accidentally) for those groups? You can form some hypotheses from footage, and test them out with your group.

Is a lot going to be terribly useful? Not really. Boss kill times will be pretty meaningless, although it has to be a great morale boost should you manage to kill a boss faster than people killed it in the past with FGS, for example. But skip times and tactics could still be interesting to take note of. How puzzles are solved could be interesting to take note of. And so on and so forth. Heck, even if you just see some strategies that are less efficient than the current one, it could give you an idea for something even better.

First Issue:
If you don’t push them, they should fight back i think.
Second Issue:
Either leave it alone as it is, or start experimenting by disallowing stuff until it gets popular, maybe make a survey to find the reason for its unpopularity?
Third Issue:
All Time should simply be the fasted record ever approved under a restricted ruleset, no matter how out of date the gamebuild or ruleset are. If a record used shady tactics that got banned, prior to the approving of the record (like with vCs Record), it’s not an All Time.

The “issue” is that I can decide whether I approve a record before rule changes/clarifications or not. This could be formalized some way to be fair for everyone. Otherwise I just make decisions by myself.

I think that depends on how fast we will be able to clear any shady tactic. With the current vote-model i would think it would be best to wait with the approving, until the community had a vote. If we go back to a static ruleset, it should be approved because the wait time for the meeting would be much too long.

I think the problem with deciding if a tactic is ok or not after a record’s been posted is that its very unmotivating to even work on a record when you don’t know if it will or will not be approved. If it doesn’t break a current rule, then it should be approved. If it’s going to the all time board, if it was ever approved then it should be allowed to go there. If the ruleset changes things still would stay on the all time board but then again, previously the ruleset only changed with major updates to the game.

People could just use common sense. Like its fairly obvious when a tactic is questionable. Which is why i really dont understand why people were in such a hissy over getting called out on the fimbul immob thing. Anyone could see that was getting into major unrestricted territory.

But yes i think if its not on the rules it should be allowed. However thats for a ruleset which doesnt have the intent of being “restricted”. Which is why starting over and re-branding is a good idea.

spoj.9672:

People could just use common sense. Like its fairly obvious when a tactic is questionable. Which is why i really dont understand why people were in such a hissy over getting called out on the fimbul immob thing. Anyone could see that was getting into major unrestricted territory.

But yes i think if its not on the rules it should be allowed. However thats for a ruleset which doesnt have the intent of being “restricted”. Which is why starting over and re-branding is a good idea.

Kind of agree with the rebranding thing. I’m still seeing people mention the words “not as intended” despite restricted not meaning that anymore since it was changed to “whatever you want”.

Discussion 1: TA Up bugging the champion at gate
No exception or poll will be made for this. It will stay banned for now (I will approve that duo record to unrestricted). This may come up later when someone starts to seriously doing TA Up records.

Discussion 2: Unrestricted rule set
The meeting may address this some way so I will wait until it’s done. So far the options seem to be:

• Just leave it as it is.
• Remove it because it’s pointless.
• Remove everything and start from a scratch with everyone being on the same line.

Interesting question is whether option 3 would really end up with a different rule set than at the moment.

Discussion 3: Integrity of all time records
The meeting may also address or affect this some way. My current stance is to resolve any shady tactics before approving. If people want to use one they can always ask me about it so we can vote if needed.