Alliance Raid Roulette Dynamic AIL Enforcement? Yes, please!

[BLaCKnBLu3B3RRY]

it still doesn't seem right to just simply ignore the behavior. regardless of how low the potential is, there is always that possibility people are going to be adversely impacted by someone who would manipulate the roulette outcome.



it seems like it should be a simple fix, but again, i don't know how much server resource it could cost.

it would just be something like your highest achieved AIL for each job equipped will be recorded. and, when having that job equipped, you are forced to meet that AIL to queue in the roulette. now... it doesn't really need to record the exact number, and can just set stages. even if it does record the exact number, there could be some room for wiggle. this way anyone willing sacrifice a small amount of AIL to trade a piece of gear for something that is best-in-slot for the stat they want to stack won't have to worry about that.

[Iscah]

If you want to run daily roulettes AND use that to get into Orbonne for your weekly loot, possibly you need to take a two-part approach: run the roulette, but then queue directly for Orbonne if it's getting towards the end of the week and it still hasn't come up yet.

Also there's a (relatively small) possibility that people might queue with a "stripped i-level" by accident. I don't know how common it is exactly, I have some casual outfits for my character that involve glamour pieces mixed with real equipment - eg. could be wearing a Lv1 shirt and pants but filled out all the extra slots like weapon and jewellery with up-to-date i380-390 gear, just so I don't get "inventory full" errors when trying to switch gearsets. If I was wearing that, and decided I was going to queue for alliance raids, I wouldn't have even thought about that being an issue as long as I'm currently set to the job that I want to queue with.

[WaterShield]

hello. it has come to my attention that people are abusing manipulating the Alliance Raid Roulette. they are removing pieces of gear to make their AIL low enough to roulette only the very first 2 Alliance Raids. this is unacceptable and must be against some kind of rule somewhere.

they are stealing away the possibility of up to 23 other players from getting relevant content with relevant drops and currencies. they are cheating other players out of this possibility, and themselves too.


only thing i can suggest...

it would just be something like your highest achieved AIL for each job equipped will be recorded. and, when having that job equipped, you are forced to meet that AIL to queue in the roulette. now... it doesn't really need to record the exact number, and can just set stages. even if it does record the exact number, there could be some room for wiggle. this way anyone willing sacrifice a small amount of AIL to trade a piece of gear for something that is best-in-slot for the stat they want to stack won't have to worry about that.

i am sure there is a flaw in the idea somewhere... and maybe it isn't entirely worth the effort/time to implement. but i think if the developers could find even the smallest inkling of time, even here & there, then something to that effect would certainly put an end to manipulation of roulette results.

i understand that there is the scenario where people don't even have the most recent Alliance Raids unlocked. and that the possibility of not getting relevant content is always ever looming. but i still feel that the dynamic AIL check is still important.

I warned everyone that this sort of stuff would happen with vaguely worded rules!!! It makes people think they can report anyone for anything.

FYI though OP... this is not actually covered by anything in the rules so you've started a crusade over nothing. I fail to see how people doing this harms anyone in any way.

[BLaCKnBLu3B3RRY]

i have laid out at least 2 or 3 situations in which this type of behavior has a potentially adverse impact on others. other then it being relatively uncommon, nobody has given a single reason as of to how it couldn't possibly impact others. and yet, people are still so opposed to having this type of behavior addressed. that just blows my mind. well, whatever. it doesn't matter... the only one who can do anything is Square Enix.

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.

[Mavrias]

i have laid out at least 2 or 3 situations in which this type of behavior has a potentially adverse impact on others. other then it being relatively uncommon, nobody has given a single reason as of to how it couldn't possibly impact others. and yet, people are still so opposed to having this type of behavior addressed. that just blows my mind. well, whatever. it doesn't matter... the only one who can do anything is Square Enix.

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.

at the end of the day, other players playtime is not owed to you. if for their roulette they dont want level 70 content and just want say 60 n below for whatever reason, thats their choice, not yours. you will get into an instance regardless, thus its a nonissue.

[Valkyrie_Lenneth]

i have laid out at least 2 or 3 situations in which this type of behavior has a potentially adverse impact on others. other then it being relatively uncommon, nobody has given a single reason as of to how it couldn't possibly impact others. and yet, people are still so opposed to having this type of behavior addressed. that just blows my mind. well, whatever. it doesn't matter... the only one who can do anything is Square Enix.

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.

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.

[BLaCKnBLu3B3RRY]

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!

[Gula]

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.

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.

[Sigma-Astra]

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.

[Racen]

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