Difficult experience in Forked Tower – a reminder to respect public content

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aravell

Let me ask you then, if you go through all the effort to get 48 people into one instance to clear FT and someone chucks in 3 ciphers and takes the spot of a key role, which then makes the content unclearable, would you happily accept them? No annoyance at all? Just pure acceptance to raise them happily even though they can walk themselves into a trap and annihilate 23 other people? It's not a gotcha to point out the fact that it works both ways, if one says clearing FT isn't compulsory to discount the organised group, then the random person also has no reason compelling them to be there and can freely leave.

It's the same as people raving on about how good third party sites are in clearing out "prog liars" from their savage PF, discord organisation is just done to improve the chances of a clear.

Like it or not, it's not against the ToS to politely ask people to allow the organised group to enter uncontested. It's also not against ToS to not heal and raise someone not in your party, it may be rude to the person that just died, but it's still not against ToS.

---

Yes I would. Believe it or not. I know some raidbros fail to understand that. This is clearly the intent behind the entry system. I don't get what's so hard to understand about that.

And I actually agree, it does work both ways. If they leave? Great! If they don't? Refer to my other post then. If you really don't wanna deal with randoms just instance hop again, wait for the weather to change or whatever because according to you the run is over anyways as soon as the random gets in. So either way you waste time (according to yourself). At least if you instance hop you don't need to spend that time leveling up again eh?

And while it may not be a ToS violation I am pretty sure telling people you will not rez them on purpose is actually harassment (I would count it as such). But that's for the GMs to decide at the end of the day.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ChrysOCE

Resentment and frustration, aimed at the wrong people, for CBU3 utterly screwing up what should have been an easy and simple implementation of Field Ops?

---

I suppose people always want to have a boogeyman. Mentors, casuals, raiders, now discord groups.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kasumii

It is content in the game they pay for. This isnt some "Haha gotcha" moment for you.
Nobody is saying one person is worth more than 48 others. We are saying they are both equal. You have no more right telling Johnny Random to go away than Johnny Random has a right to participate in the content. It is not on Johnny Random (or the discords). This entire system is flawed and is 100% SEs fault. Johnny Random just plays by the games rules and participates in the cipher lottery.

Basic empathy also goes both ways. Basic empathy is *not* bowing down to the mighty discord/streamer overlords who told them to "piss off" (But Im saying it nicely uwu).

If Johnny Random gets in is it basic empathy to then tell them "We wont rez you."? Doesn't sound very empathic to me.

---

They aren't both equal though. One spent the time to organize a group, plan out all the required jobs, make sure they have the numbers to clear, and ensure everyone knew the mechs going into it to ensure the highest success rate. They then spent the time ensuring everyone was in the same instance. Once everyone met all those conditions they then had to wait for the weather of that instance to spawn. The other just showed up and popped a cypher. Especially given there's multiple instances where they could wipe a run and you can't ensure beforehand they understand the requirements or mechanics. If i'm running a tower run why would I not try to ensure the success of the group who put forth the effort over one random? Its fine if the group is ok with them tagging along but forgive me if i'm not sympathetic for the person who ignored a polite request not to join. Call me toxic but I 100% support putting them on the floor so they don't have the chance to ruin hours of work.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by YovelaLindswood

They aren't both equal though.

---

They are equal in the eyes of CBU3, just by the fact that they are able to enter and participate.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by YovelaLindswood

They aren't both equal though. One spent the time to organize a group, plan out all the required jobs, make sure they have the numbers to clear, and ensure everyone knew the mechs going into it to ensure the highest success rate. They then spent the time ensuring everyone was in the same instance. Once everyone met all those conditions they then had to wait for the weather of that instance to spawn. The other just showed up and popped a cypher. Especially given there's multiple instances where they could wipe a run and you can't ensure beforehand they understand the requirements or mechanics. If i'm running a tower run why would I not try to ensure the success of the group who put forth the effort over one random? Its fine if the group is ok with them tagging along but forgive me if i'm not sympathetic for the person who ignored a polite request not to join. Call me toxic but I 100% support putting them on the floor so they don't have the chance to ruin hours of work.

---

Funny how "showing up and popping a cipher" is all you have to do to enter this piece of content.

They are still both equal. The random pays their sub just like you and me and you are not more entitled to the content just because you organized it. This isnt your savage PF where you get to kick people for not playing ball. These are people playing the game by the games rules. Like it or not.

And yes. I will gladly call you toxic for that and hope we never ever have to interact in-game in any way shape or form.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by YovelaLindswood

They aren't both equal though. One spent the time to organize a group, plan out all the required jobs, make sure they have the numbers to clear, and ensure everyone knew the mechs going into it to ensure the highest success rate. They then spent the time ensuring everyone was in the same instance. Once everyone met all those conditions they then had to wait for the weather of that instance to spawn. The other just showed up and popped a cypher. Especially given there's multiple instances where they could wipe a run and you can't ensure beforehand they understand the requirements or mechanics. If i'm running a tower run why would I not try to ensure the success of the group who put forth the effort over one random? Its fine if the group is ok with them tagging along but forgive me if i'm not sympathetic for the person who ignored a polite request not to join. Call me toxic but I 100% support putting them on the floor so they don't have the chance to ruin hours of work.

---

I personally wouldn't support putting the random player on the floor, because that would be MPK and 100% reportable. But if the random player somehow dies, it's fair to leave them on the floor for the highest chance to not impact the progression of the other 47 people.

It's also worth noting that once the random player has died, some raid leaders do try to negotiate with them. If they are open to cooperating and are close to the prog point of the group, the group might invite them on, or if they understand the difficulty of the content now and want to leave, the leader can call for a raise on them and let them leave without delevelling. Raid leaders aren't heartless monsters after all, most are reasonable and don't want to just sour the experience for the random.

Its actually pretty simple, since people throwing here the "reports" through the the thread, lets see it from another perspective, i would let the random join, and if see him death on the ground because he didnt watch a guide and prepared for the fight i would straight up let the 47players report him because of griefing, which would probably work because if killing someone is against the ToS then there is probably without question a way to find a hole in the ToS for "He is a burden to the group, so he griefed 47 players"

I agree this is pure toxicity trying to stop random players joining in because they've got a premade group i can't believe they can't see how anti social that actually is. The game allows randoms in. Simple as that, you can harass, shame, reject etc but that's a reflection on you and your 'amazing chill discord' not them. I've only just reached this content myself and planned to try it out but reading all this is very off putting. I have no desire to seek out any of these discords at all so far. Also Ieaving somebody dead is reportable because you're disrupting their enjoyment of the game.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AvoSturmfaust

Its actually pretty simple, since people throwing here the "reports" through the the thread, lets see it from another perspective, i would let the random join, and if see him death on the ground because he didnt watch a guide and prepared for the fight i would straight up let the 47players report him because of griefing, which would probably work because if killing someone is against the ToS then there is probably without question a way to find a hole in the ToS for "He is a burden to the group, so he griefed 47 players"

---

You would be wrong because there absolutely is not any hole in the ToS where a GM is going to punish someone for being a burden to others with bad play. There would have to be solid proof they had violated the griefing ToS parameters and just being bad or inexperienced is not going to fulfill that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AvoSturmfaust

Its actually pretty simple, since people throwing here the "reports" through the the thread, lets see it from another perspective, i would let the random join, and if see him death on the ground because he didnt watch a guide and prepared for the fight i would straight up let the 47players report him because of griefing, which would probably work because if killing someone is against the ToS then there is probably without question a way to find a hole in the ToS for "He is a burden to the group, so he griefed 47 players"

---

You can absolutely do that if you so choose. The key difference to me is that someone saying "I will intentionally not rez you" and then doing just that is a lot easier to prove and much more clearly targeted harassment towards said player than saying "this random INTENTIONALLY AND MALICIOUSLY killed our run". But feel absolutely free to report any random you see. That's what the report button is for after all.

I see a massive difference here. You don't have to agree, just my own personal take.