"You pull, you tank" is a bad mentality

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jojoya

Thanks for the screenshots but I'm wondering if you're getting incidents confused. You had said your ban occurred when Hullbreaker Isle was the new dungeon but that was July 2014 and your notice is dated Feb 2015. Four other dungeons were released between the two. There's also no mention of a ban in your screenshots, only a warning being issued to your account. There's no loss of game time with a warning.

It wouldn't make sense for the GMs to only issue a warning if the account had previously received a ban unless you had appealed the ban and the decision was reversed.

Not trying to say you didn't get a ban at some point, just that what you've shared doesn't seem to be from that incident.


I'm sure other players feel the same way about a nobody like you trying to tell them how to play.

In the end, it's group content and it's better for everyone to communicate to come to some sort of agreement. If they attempt that but still can't agree, then it's hard to say what decision GMs will make.

---

Was only 1 incident. I know was hullbreaker. My bad for thinking was the current. As I said I was at work at the time. Couldn’t check date. Assumed based on the duty of occurrence and my playstyle of raiding and expert roulette only back then

So you're using "gamble your account if you say anything" based on a single suspension that happened almost a decade ago that you can't really remember clearly, and you have no evidence that shows that what you said happened, actually happened as you said.

lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Boblawblah

So you're using "gamble your account if you say anything" based on a single suspension that happened almost a decade ago that you can't really remember clearly, and you have no evidence that shows that what you said happened, actually happened as you said.

lol

---

You do you. If you feel it’s worth the risk. I put out there what happened. You can clearly see my account had a violation. Violations can turn into suspended accounts. You can clearly see it was about participation. That’s open for interpretation by the GMs. You can try all you want to discredit me. But I’d rather focus on keeping my account free from any other reports. Go ahead and “lol” because you don’t want to believe that what you advocate for is griefing and a violation of the ToS which can result in consequences. It’s your money

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jojoya

Thanks for the screenshots but I'm wondering if you're getting incidents confused. You had said your ban occurred when Hullbreaker Isle was the new dungeon but that was July 2014 and your notice is dated Feb 2015. Four other dungeons were released between the two. There's also no mention of a ban in your screenshots, only a warning being issued to your account. There's no loss of game time with a warning.

It wouldn't make sense for the GMs to only issue a warning if the account had previously received a ban unless you had appealed the ban and the decision was reversed.

Not trying to say you didn't get a ban at some point, just that what you've shared doesn't seem to be from that incident.


I'm sure other players feel the same way about a nobody like you trying to tell them how to play.

In the end, it's group content and it's better for everyone to communicate to come to some sort of agreement. If they attempt that but still can't agree, then it's hard to say what decision GMs will make.

---

Then basically if 3 of you tell a tank what and how they play then that is a harassment and bullying. Who are you to tell someone how they should play. Good to see them true colors this community is fantastic! ( more like a steaming pile of dung)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Velvet_Lunarfang

Then basically if 3 of you tell a tank what and how they play then that is a harassment and bullying. Who are you to tell someone how they should play. Good to see them true colors this community is fantastic! ( more like a steaming pile of dung)

---

So it's bad if 3 want to go fast, but okay if 1 wants to go slow...

Okay, let's make it a vote. 3 want to w2w, 1 doesn't. Majority rules in favour of w2w. Tank now has a choice of staying and realising they have the easiest role to play, leave and take the penalty, or risk getting suspended/banned because they refuse to work with the Party (demanding to be kicked, going afk, "disconnecting," etc).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nestama

So it's bad if 3 want to go fast, but okay if 1 wants to go slow...

Okay, let's make it a vote. 3 want to w2w, 1 doesn't. Majority rules in favour of w2w. Tank now has a choice of staying and realising they have the easiest role to play, leave and take the penalty, or risk getting suspended/banned because they refuse to work with the Party (demanding to be kicked, going afk, "disconnecting," etc).

---

god are you all not intelligent. the reverse is true. you folks aren't cooperating with the full party either., just 3/4 people. so what if tank wants to pull. let him and get the run done. you don't get a speed bonus for completing the run anyways lol. it boggles the mind how this community was voted best community when its the most toxic when it comes to stuff like this.

oh herp derp since 3 of us say we wanna go fast we don't care about the 4th. they can either adapt or i will be a whiny karen and report them for not cooperating. total joke of a community.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nestama

So it's bad if 3 want to go fast, but okay if 1 wants to go slow...

Okay, let's make it a vote. 3 want to w2w, 1 doesn't. Majority rules in favour of w2w. Tank now has a choice of staying and realising they have the easiest role to play, leave and take the penalty, or risk getting suspended/banned because they refuse to work with the Party (demanding to be kicked, going afk, "disconnecting," etc).

---

(bolded by me)
This is really the part that confuses me the most here. Nothing changes for the tank. You still just hit aoe and mitigation. Doesnt matter if it's 3 enemies or 300. There cant even be a difference in playstyle. It's just sandbagging.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Saraide

(bolded by me)
This is really the part that confuses me the most here. Nothing changes for the tank. You still just hit aoe and mitigation. Doesnt matter if it's 3 enemies or 300. There cant even be a difference in playstyle. It's just sandbagging.

---

its not really the role itself. it comes down to a player. its been painfully obvious since the shadowbringers changes the skill levels of players. this is across all roles. some tanks are super good, some new to the class and don't know their kit, new to the game and trying to learn their role (or not new but trying to new)...or like the tank i ran into, bought their unreal clear but didn't know to put tank stance on. most mobs are pretty easy but theres some mobs that hit really hard so you have to watch that as well. so you have to learn to adapt to all scenerios that might be presented. however if people had their way here it wouldn't matter lol. they would take tank busters then whine they keep wiping because no tank. players tend to forget that some old mechanics can still hurt alot and one shot if its not a tank taking the hit.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ravenblade1979

god are you all not intelligent. the reverse is true. you folks aren't cooperating with the full party either., just 3/4 people. so what if tank wants to pull. let him and get the run done. you don't get a speed bonus for completing the run anyways lol. it boggles the mind how this community was voted best community when its the most toxic when it comes to stuff like this.

oh herp derp since 3 of us say we wanna go fast we don't care about the 4th. they can either adapt or i will be a whiny karen and report them for not cooperating. total joke of a community.

---

I'm just gonna repeat what I said.
Okay, let's make it a vote. 3 want to w2w, 1 doesn't. Majority rules in favour of w2w.

Now if 3 people voted to go slow (for whatever reason) and 1 doesn't (this is a true reverse), then the party has chosen to go slow. If I'm the 1 who wanted w2w, then I leave. Easy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nestama

I'm just gonna repeat what I said.
Okay, let's make it a vote. 3 want to w2w, 1 doesn't. Majority rules in favour of w2w.

Now if 3 people voted to go slow (for whatever reason) and 1 doesn't (this is a true reverse), then the party has chosen to go slow. If I'm the 1 who wanted w2w, then I leave. Easy.

---

equally breaching tos in that 2nd sentence.