Alliance Raid Roulette Dynamic AIL Enforcement? Yes, please!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Valkyrie_Lenneth

It's because you don't understand how the queueing system works, especially for roulettes.

You seem to think that if 1 person lowers their ilvl, the next 23 people who would be chosen for the queue pop get pulled along with them. It doesn't work like this.

The system places a priority on new players to the instance they are queued for. So if there is say, 1 person new who is queued for lighthouse, and 1 person who isn't with their gear cut down to below 300, the newer player will get his queue pop first, assuming there are enough players queued with gear that is appropriate. On the flip side, say you have 2 new people, 1 queued for rabanastre, and 1 queued for weeping city. It will prioritize people with gear appropriate for each person to make the alliances in the roullete.


The system manages multiple 24man queues at once, based on varying needs of the people queued.

Every time I have been placed in a 50 or 60 alliance raid, there has been a new player bonus, for as far back as I can remember.

---

but that is just it... that very 1 person queuing for lighthouse you are talking about has the potential of being impacted by the behavior of someone manipulating the roulette. so, they queue for Lighthouse. but someone strips their gear for the roulette, they are potentially taking away 23 players for that person queuing to the lighthouse. even if the system decides to pass over the manipulator in favor of the lighthouse player, how many times will this happen? what if the player does get their lighthouse entry, and immediately some other player also queues for something that is past the first 2 Alliance Raids? how many times will roulette pass over the manipulator in favor of giving 23 people to the player waiting on the specific Alliance Raid?

no matter how one looks at it, someone will EVENTUALLY be impacted by this type of behavior. uncommon? maybe so. improbable? maybe still yet so, or even more so. but should it be ignored? NO!

it really does seem like it shouldn't too difficult to address this type of behavior and prevent it. so, if the behavior can have a possible adverse impact on others and can be addressed... it doesn't matter how unlikely or how uncommon the behavior is, it should be addressed.


well, either way... i am truly done here. this is my last post. people don't seem care. whatever. hopefully some mod here can just move this blackhole topic to the trash pile. pft!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BLaCKnBLu3B3RRY

well, either way... i am truly done here. this is my last post. people don't seem care. whatever. hopefully some mod here can just move this blackhole topic to the trash pile. pft!

---

Didn't you also say that 3 pages ago?

Edit: Oh here it is.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BLaCKnBLu3B3RRY

i personally don't understand how if something is deemed not common enough, but can still adversely affect others, should simply be ignored. but, whatever... i give up. screw it. whatever. let it die... it apparently doesn't matter. i am done. meh.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jwrigh7784

Sometimes GM's can screw up and tell you something they aren't supposed to. It happened to me in World of Warcraft. It may have happened here too for all we know. Just because they aren't supposed to do or say something doesn't mean they won't by accident, they are, afterall, human.

---

And if a screenshot was provided, there would be evidence. Until evidence for that is provided, the simplest solution isn't that the GM screwed up; it's that OP isn't telling the truth regarding their interaction with the GM.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BLaCKnBLu3B3RRY

but that is just it... that very 1 person queuing for lighthouse you are talking about has the potential of being impacted by the behavior of someone manipulating the roulette. so, they queue for Lighthouse. but someone strips their gear for the roulette, they are potentially taking away 23 players for that person queuing to the lighthouse. even if the system decides to pass over the manipulator in favor of the lighthouse player, how many times will this happen? what if the player does get their lighthouse entry, and immediately some other player also queues for something that is past the first 2 Alliance Raids? how many times will roulette pass over the manipulator in favor of giving 23 people to the player waiting on the specific Alliance Raid?

no matter how one looks at it, someone will EVENTUALLY be impacted by this type of behavior. uncommon? maybe so. improbable? maybe still yet so, or even more so. but should it be ignored? NO!

it really does seem like it shouldn't too difficult to address this type of behavior and prevent it. so, if the behavior can have a possible adverse impact on others and can be addressed... it doesn't matter how unlikely or how uncommon the behavior is, it should be addressed.


well, either way... i am truly done here. this is my last post. people don't seem care. whatever. hopefully some mod here can just move this blackhole topic to the trash pile. pft!

---

Stop acting like people in this game are roulette blocking you on purpose, they're not. Don't get mad or stomp your feet just because multiple people told you that you were wrong and that you don't understand how the roulette system works.

People aren't trying to find ways to ruin your game experience, calm down, it's all in your head. No one cares if you want to queue for certain roulette, not enough to try and literally block you from them.

You never started with a good argument that was feasible and you still don't have one. You have no one to blame for the results of this thread but yourself.

I didn't know you could do this.. hmm..