Apparently there's a new rule that prohibits Bishops from holding Anego maps. https://royals.ms/forum/threads/kill-stealing-staff-impersonation.96018/ I was unaware such a rule was introduced and I can't seem to find announcement of it. https://royals.ms/forum/search/8622979/?q=anego&o=date >To clarify: it is ok to be the mapowner as a bishop and other players should respect that if you are actively playing on that character while being the mapowner. If you user your bishop as a mule effectively and are planning to fight the boss that spawns on that map on another character of yours you do not own the bossmap as we do not allow them to be held on mule characters that do not plan to kill the boss themselves on the map-owning character. This is why we look at KSing reports on a case-to-case basis. Does this rule prohibit players from obtaining "map ownership" with their Bishops if they use their Bishops to search for Anego? A player could be duo clienting on their Bishop and Bowmaster. Since Bishops have better mobility (Teleport >> Mount), they would prefer to use their Bishops to search for Anegos because it is faster and they could also door their Bowmaster to the map before or after Parlor. Does this rule also apply to other classes. I have a Bishop, NL, SE mule, DRK, and Hero. Theoretically, I could kill Anego with NL + SE Mule + Bishop in one channel while holding 2 maps on my Drk and Hero. If people started attacking the Anegos in the channels my Drk and Hero are occupying, are they in violation of the ToS and eligible to be banned? A clarification or an official announcement for a new rule would be welcome to clear up confusion.
That post is relevant but it's 1 year old post, 2 pages into a thread. It seems unlikely for anyone unaware to locate it.
I really dont get why would someone hold another map if you already have one, like its not 150-200 players online anymore, there's more then 600 players who want to anego and if you holding more then one channel ur not cool at all, if some attacker want to take ur bishop's map he obviously won since you cant att it, just holding 2 maps when there only 20 channels for more then 600 players. plz its already hard to find anegos, now you want to hold more then one map? give me a break.
It is the same with cake and afk mules on every damn channel from 5 to 20 who start attacking when the hp approaches 40%. IMO it's really a douche move, especially now. Not only it takes forever to kill the freaking cake if you missed channels 1-4, you better move fast because after 10 minutes all cake channels are full, mostly from these mules.
Not really, for anego by having mapowner of multiple channels you're denying other people the chance to take the boss when you're only allowed to have 1 per person whereas for the cake boss multiple people can get the reward in every channel if they just participate enough.
The post I previously quoted says hogging two maps(killing one and muleing another) is bannable. Does not say that as a main bishop, you can't hold the map for a friend or guild mate to come and help kill it for you. In the third bullet of his statement is where I'm getting at. The only thing it comes down to is assumption of whether the person holding the map is a mule or not.
My point is, if someone entering the map and the person sees someone in it and not attacking, that means he just holding the map for himself or for someone else which is not cool at all. If its bishop\hero\nl or w.e just holding the map without attacking the boss itself is not cool, i dont think its supposed to be bannebale just staying in the map for like 2-3 mins, i think someone have to suggest if the person who holding the map not attacking the boss whitin the 5 mins you stay in it you can take the boss, even if he keep attacking the mobs around the boss.
@John says that map ownership at anego is absolute https://royals.ms/forum/threads/hol...just-2-in-the-whole-server.97665/#post-530356 @Tim, @Yanir, @Michael say otherwise. https://royals.ms/forum/threads/kill-stealing-staff-impersonation.96018/#post-520654 https://royals.ms/forum/threads/abusing-mapowner-in-lyka-map.74241/page-2#post-386076 What's actually allowed?
~mapowner reigns supreme and makes the ultimate final decision. My post is based off of the Terms & Conditions: Kill-stealing - The act of attacking bosses or monsters on a map persistently without the system designation of ownership via the /mapowner in-game command, or alternatively last-hitting any bosses or monsters on a map without that same designation, without the expressed permission of the player who does have that designation. Punishment: First offense - 3 day ban, Second offense - 7 day ban, Third offense - Permanent ban.
If you are going to be acting that way, then ALL GMs should have the same opinion because not all see it the same way. It is not fair for people to not be able to Anego because you have someone online 24/7 monopolizing the maps. Everyone will just start having like 10 clients out to hold boss maps. It was changed for Lyka, it should be the same for ALL bosses in my opinion.
I remember in September 2016 or so that there was a discussion within staff about changing who could and who could not hold ~mapowner. The entire reason for the discussion and the change was that a few select people were hogging all the Lyka maps (hitting once, ccing, rinse and repeat) and people were camping Manon on multiple characters. By using the ~mapowner rule, people effectively had multiple Lyka and Manon to themselves while others got none. I distinctly recall that the rule was changed. I became aware of the rule because I was camping Manon on my two bishops at once. I believe it was Jeen who told me that wasn't allowed. So upon being informed the rule was changed, I took to buddy chat to clarify exactly what was allowed and disallowed. Both Sila and Jeen were involved in that discussion. My understanding then and my understanding now is that the rule is one map per person. This was important because I only main bishop. I was told, and reinforcced by the statements by Tim, Mike, and Yan linked above, that one person may hold one map at a time. The ability of the ~mapowner to kill the mobs in the map is also important. But above all, a person may not use ~mapowner as a character they are holding a second or more map on. It concerns me that an admin is disagreeing with at least five other staff members on what the rule is, two of which are also admins. This suggests to me that yes, the ~mapowner rule was changed and yes, the rule was changed such that a person may only hold one map at a time. This suggests to me that that admin was uninformed about the actual rule and referred to the letter of the Terms and Conditions to inform themselves. This suggests to me that the Terms and Conditions should be amended to clarify exactly when ~mapowner does and does not apply so the players are fairly and properly informed on what the rules exactly are. There are several instances with server rules being elucidated by staff in ban appeals or abuse reports. Players read these for entertainment and landmark cases tend to be saved and quoted around to inform players about the nuances of server rules. So the case handled by that errant admin creates discord and confusion, contradicting all precedent and understanding laid down by the other staff members. To any staff member, clearly state, in this thread, one of three things: 1. That a person may only hold one map at a time. 2. That a person may hold multiple maps at a time. 3. Exactly when ~mapowner does and does not apply, to be stated officially and for it to be inevitably disseminated into the playerbase's knowledge and understanding. Hopefully the question is revisited in staff chat once again and everyone will be on the same page this time.
I don't know how anyone outside of staff is privy to what discussions go on in staff chat, so I am not sure what basis you have to know what was discussed and when. However, I will disclose this time that a conversation was had amongst staff last night. As I said in the report abuse thread and as was stated earlier in this thread, ~mapowner is the end all be all decision maker. If you can somehow have 20 clients open and maintain ownership in all 20 maps, then you own 20 maps. The Terms & Conditions do not make any statement saying one map per physical person, so unless the T&C is updated, this is how it will be. The guide to reporting KSing that is stickied in Report Abuse will also be updated to make this point clear as well as one additional change staff discussed that should make for more successful KSing reports.
Most players serious enough to camp boss maps will have a bishop/HS mule, archmage, SEmule, and an attacker. 5 players can hold all 20 channels. Sounds good to me .
We've had internal discussions about this but can't find an appropriate solution that will work alongside the terms and conditions and the mapowner command. Although we are also hoping that the return of boss timers continuing through server restarts will help diminish the problem. If anyone has ideas or suggestions on how a clear and non-confusing rule can work then feel free to give us your ideas.
