Need System Message for when a player places/removes waymarks

[Hiruke]

So. As you might be aware, Cloud of Darkness (at current average iLVL) requires coordination from the entire group. Most folks agree it's helpful to place waymarks on where each alliance should go for Hyperclouds.

Some folks think it's cute to remove these waymarks, which incidentally, has a high incidence of causing wipes, due to a lot of confused folks running around.

Luckily, there's no way to know who removed the waymarks, so there's no way to kick them, so since it's difficult to herd people into another method of choosing which one to go to, you sit there and wipe, and wipe, and wipe, and wipe.

So, yeah. SE. Make it so people know who removed waymarks, because seriously. Thank you.

[LalaRu]

It will be nice have a message on who put or remove marks too.

Sometime when tanking I get the smart guy that changes the kill order as he please, I am already good to fail marks, no need for more help

[Meier]

I was going to make a similar thread. Yeah last night, someone kept removing the waymarks at Cloud of Darkness, causing wipes. Would be nice to have a message in the log saying who puts them down/removes them, etc.

[Saseal]

Not to be offtopic o.o but I kind of wish there was a way to remove targeted marked, too - like the ground targets window have 'x' to get rid of all of them. I sometimes mark frozen people in Scylla - both party and alliance - so they're easier to see, but I'd like to just clear that off the person once they're up and running off. Mainly for alliance peeps - I found them hard to target when they're running amuck in the chaos. I end up to targeting scylla and pressing the same target sign again, twice, to wipe the slate.
Unless there's something I'm gravely missing. >.>;

I guess an idea to get around both of these is to assign the ground/target marks IDs that lead back to your character so only you can wipe/move them o_o

[Kietsu]

World of Warcraft had this problem way back when they let anyone in the party set marks.
Showing who was doing what with them killed the problem hilariously fast. Definitely a good idea.

[Nyalia]

Not to be offtopic o.o but I kind of wish there was a way to remove targeted marked, too - like the ground targets window have 'x' to get rid of all of them. I sometimes mark frozen people in Scylla - both party and alliance - so they're easier to see, but I'd like to just clear that off the person once they're up and running off. Mainly for alliance peeps - I found them hard to target when they're running amuck in the chaos. I end up to targeting scylla and pressing the same target sign again, twice, to wipe the slate.
Unless there's something I'm gravely missing. >.>;

I guess an idea to get around both of these is to assign the ground/target marks IDs that lead back to your character so only you can wipe/move them o_o

You could write a macro to do it, if you wanted. I'm not sure of the exact syntax, but it's something like
/t <atk1>
/mk <atk1>
/t <atk2>
/mk <atk2>
(etc)
to remove all marks.

You can also remove a mark by selecting something random and hitting it twice. The first moves it from the previously marked person to the thing you have targeted, the second one removes it from the thing you have targeted.

[kyuven]

If they're really intent on trolling you, they'll just wait until the battle with CoD to start to start spamming the waymarks, which will thus spam the raid with system messages. And since you're locked in combat you can't kick them.
Thus this would solve one problem by creating another.

[Nyalia]

If they're really intent on trolling you, they'll just wait until the battle with CoD to start to start spamming the waymarks, which will thus spam the raid with system messages. And since you're locked in combat you can't kick them.
Thus this would solve one problem by creating another.

No it wouldn't. You can choose which tab the messages go to. Put it on the Battle or System tabs and when there's abuse and you wipe, you can check the logs to find out who did it and kick them. You'd never see it in the General tab during the fight, just like I don't see /random spam because I turned it off.

[kyuven]

No it wouldn't. You can choose which tab the messages go to. Put it on the Battle or System tabs and when there's abuse and you wipe, you can check the logs to find out who did it and kick them. You'd never see it in the General tab during the fight, just like I don't see /random spam because I turned it off.

So you leave the situation with 2 options:
1) It's in the general tab by default and you need to move it to another tab. The majority of players won't do this, or won't like NEEDING to do this.
2) It's in the other tabs by default, in which case it's superfluous since the majority of players aren't looking at it UNLESS there's a problem. Meaning its use is limited to a very specific situation in (currently) three different encounters, maybe five if you count the primals that ostensibly require markers. Oh, and it'll also get buried in spam from battle or event text. Though the latter doesn't have as much, it's a little...odd...to include something used in battle in the event tab.

If something is worth adding, it needs to provide a tangible benefit without an actual cost. Having something that needs to be hidden or requires the player to exert effort to hide is a waste of resources. It would be easier if all the labels had nameplates on them based on who moved them last.
Yes, I'm aware you would "just click this button" but by default a lot of players aren't going to know to do that, ESPECIALLY with how many chat options we already have.

In short, you're trying to solve people messing with the take-a-penny tray at a convenience store by requiring people to ring a bell to get one.

[Nyalia]

1. Your analogy makes no sense. No extra action is required on the part of the person making/clearing the mark.
2. There's already an option to hear when a mark is placed on a person.
3. I never argued for it to be included as an option, I merely pointed out that your argument is flawed. Personally, I'd like this change it if happened, but I agree with you that it's not sufficiently beneficial to warrant development time (not that it'd take much - maybe a line of code, the rest would be QC/project management time).