• Dear Guest,

    You're browsing our forum as a Guest meaning you can only see a portion of the forum in read-only mode.
    To view all forum nodes and be able to create threads/posts please register or log-in with your existing account.

    TwinStar team

Information Warlock Summoning

Status
Not open for further replies.
I’ve already made the few points I wanted to make and I do not intend to bloat this thread further, but I want to make sure it is well understood by everyone, especially our developers, how streamlined summoning chains are, so one more, I suppose.



@ Rock
It does not prolong the process.
First of all, Level 20 Warlocks are sent out into the World with 71 Shards each (Backpack, Runecloth Bags, -1 for HS). Under the new rules, you use a Level 20 Warlock to summon a Level 30, who then summons Level 45, who then summons the Level 60 players. You can do this at every single location and the only Shard stocks that get depleted faster than before the new rules are the ones of the 2 traveling Warlocks, the Level 30 and Level 45.

Secondly, restocking is a process independent of summoning spot or difficulty of reaching it. That is, you always have a Warlock, let us call it A, which is in an easy to reach location, such as the one by the Songflower nearby the Alliance flightmaster in Talonbranch Glade, Felwood. A is the Warlock that can restock completely on its own, by HSing to Redridge Mountains, replenishing Shards, then returning via flightpaths i.e. Redridge Mountains – Menethil – sail – Auberdine – Talonbrach Glade.
Now, when you need to restock your other Warlocks, you simply summon A to each location where you have your other Level 20 Warlocks. You then have the Warlock at that particular location, call it B, HS to Redridge Mountains, replenish Shards, and then you use A to summon B back to B’s original spot. Rinse and repeat for C, D etc.
A Warlock network is autonomous, Shards-wise, and completely independent of any actual travelling once it has been initially set up.

Thanks for your insight.
Seems like a lot of stuff you have to setup. I personally would never bother with all that. Well i am not that hardcore anyway. It is rly cool what ppl can think of. Before feenix e never even heard of summoning alts and i played retail since Dire Maul release XD
 
You could heal the 60s.
I think Ermean wants to say is that low lvl alts which arent in starting areas / capitals (capped up to 2 at 1 account) should be deleted after 2 days. I agree with him.


Greetings


We threw an entire raid of horde at them for hours, which is why they got mad and made the original thread about it, accusing us of having an army of level 1 alliance. I doubt he'd want them deleted, he has many.

My own level 1 alliance got teleported to Ironforge a while back by an apparently rogue GM. Oh well!
 
Last edited:
Looking at everyone's point of view, I believe this is the only feasible solution.

Chero, Gurky and the GMs, along with all guild leaders involved, all just have to "sit around a table" and commonly agree on abuses made possible through multiple accounts - summoning networks included - being illegal. No need for technical restrictions (that will have to be lifted), just the people in charge of their guilds to give a guarantee of their members' behavior, and will answer for it if caught in violation (or actively encouraging it).

How much do you think it would take for a GM to discover if whole guilds use to to teleport themselves around? Above all, do you really think any guild master would risk their accounts to defy the owners?
 
Last edited:
But Moradin they already said they don't want to completely ban summoning warlocks, just want to reduce their numbers. All the time you spend trying to find solutions on how best to ban the warlocks is time wasted since it's not their aim, as clearly stated by them.

I think any further discussion on the topic is pointless and I am only replying to you since you are one of few people a person can have a civil discussion with.
 
I love how you ignore responding to people who call you out or correct you by saying you can't have a "civil discussion" with them.

Blindly throwing accusations around in a public forum is not what I call civility.

Seeing how no Synced people are "complaining" (except Roids who was probably left in the dark and is a "filthy-ex-Vanguard-summoner-addict"), it is clear to us that Synced urged the staff to make this change so you guys have better chance of getting server firsts in AQ with the emerald dragons NR gear.
 
But Moradin they already said they don't want to completely ban summoning warlocks, just want to reduce their numbers. All the time you spend trying to find solutions on how best to ban the warlocks is time wasted since it's not their aim, as clearly stated by them.

Thanks, and of course it's not their aim. But you're still missing the point. If Chero or Gurky ask your guild master to stop using a porting network, you can rest assured that your guild will stop using it.
 
Looking at everyone's point of view, I believe this is the only feasible solution.

Chero, Gurky and the GMs, along with all guild leaders involved, all just have to "sit around a table" and commonly agree on abuses made possible through multiple accounts - summoning networks included - being illegal. No need for technical restrictions (that will have to be lifted), just the people in charge of their guilds to give a guarantee of their members' behavior, and will answer for it if caught in violation (or actively encouraging it).

How much do you think it would take for a GM to discover if whole guilds use to to teleport themselves around? Above all, do you really think any guild master would risk their accounts to defy the owners?

Sadly, there are 2 things that does not match with your solution:

1. Banning that ability is not what the staff aim for (as bl4ckc0d3r already stated).
2. Having to monitor those reports, and watching people to prevent them doing this in a sneaky way, requires a huge effort from the staff, who already are very busy, consuming their precious time. I rather just restrict this to the characters level and focus on more important matters, than have to invest time in this.
 
Last edited:
You, too, are missing the point Tristan. We all know this is not about preventing the poor level 30 sods from being helped in STV by their 60 friend via a summoning. That's an undesired side effect from the current, newly set limitation. We're talking about teleporting around as a guild wide system of transportation countered via a specific realm policy.

1) Kronos rules are updated: "from now on, using summoning alts at a guild wide level is forbidden", or anything in those lines;

2) "To make the rule practically enforceable, guild masters will be held responsible for their members";

3) Guilds will stop abusing summoning alts, goal reached, fairness restored. Unavoidably, wanna bet?

Should a guild disregard their leader and persist (I can hardly even imagine it, can you?), it would take any GM a split second to tell. Mind, we're talking about a guild wide system the guild master can never be unaware of as a matter of fact. The summoning alts wouldn't risk anything, on behalf of the GMs, only the guild masters themselves would, as they're supposed to guarantee for their members that the rules of the realm are respected. That's how you solve widespread problems, acting at their root. In fact, that's how all world problems are faced, when they are dealt with with seriousness.

I don't know what kind of guilds you are used to, but I can tell you all my guildies abid by our rules.
 

You really are missing the point. I suggest you reread the posts you responded too.
Kronos doesn't want to ban summon alts (as we've learned), they just want to reduce the number. It will still be allowed and we will continue to use them.

We threw an entire raid of horde at them for hours, which is why they got mad and made the original thread about it, accusing us of having an army of level 1 alliance. I doubt he'd want them deleted, he has many.

My own level 1 alliance got teleported to Ironforge a while back by an apparently rogue GM. Oh well!

Not this discussion again.
You know as well as me that there a bunch of people making level 1 alts with the sole intent of making Kazzak unkillable. I can't prove they belong to you, but it's a bit weird that they didn't try to stop you.
Other level ones are trying though, so it's clear that if Onslaught (or some unguilded onslaughtfan) is doing this, they're not alone in it.
What I can tell you is that no Vanguard member has ever (to my knowledge) suicide ran level ones into Kazzak. I think this is a disgusting behaviour that should be banned, and if you're able to show any evidence or hints towards Vanguard members doing it (note, spies who have been dead for days are not proof) I would love too see it so I could remove them from the guild.
 
What I can tell you is that no Vanguard member has ever (to my knowledge) suicide ran level ones into Kazzak. I think this is a disgusting behaviour that should be banned, and if you're able to show any evidence or hints towards Vanguard members doing it (note, spies who have been dead for days are not proof) I would love too see it so I could remove them from the guild.


https://vanilla-twinhead.twinstar.cz/?boss-kill=273376#bosskills_players:0+1+5+3


Sadly the timeline has gone for some reason but see (the number obviously being damage taken):

2,258

Ermspykaz

Rogue

[TD="align: right"]0[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]0[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]

[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]0[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]0[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]0[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]0[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]0[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]0[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]0[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]0[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]0[/TD]



I was there, he deliberately ran straight into us because we had to pull Kazzak away and to the side from the usual spots.
 
Last edited:
What I can tell you is that no Vanguard member has ever (to my knowledge) suicide ran level ones into Kazzak. I think this is a disgusting behaviour that should be banned, and if you're able to show any evidence or hints towards Vanguard members doing it (note, spies who have been dead for days are not proof) I would love too see it so I could remove them from the guild.

Happened once when we weren't there and they pulled Kazzak over the hill and I ressed the spy and ran north to see what they are doing. The alt was of course killed, they leashed and pulled even more behind the hill and he got killed without any Alliance knowing what exactly happened. That's the only "argument" they have against us and that happening once by accident clearly justifies those people making 50 lvl1 alliance alts called "kazzakmiddleone", "kazzakeastfive" etc. that were used against us twice after the griefing I took screenshots of. Why does it justify? Because Onslaught logic.
 
when is the last time kazzak was even contested though. its literally been a quarter of a year ago

we got everything we want from him
 
if thats what it takes to get level 1's banned from outside starting zones and cities, i will happily make a bunch to get that banned too.

summoning wasnt banned until doorknob and i started summoning ourselves in silithus. im glad its 'fixed' now
 
You really are missing the point. I suggest you reread the posts you responded too.
Kronos doesn't want to ban summon alts (as we've learned), they just want to reduce the number. It will still be allowed and we will continue to use them.

I believe you're many thread pages behind, assumed you're on the same thread as ourselves at all. I indeed suggested to cancel the level limit and using a policy to reduce the abuse, finding support through common sense among (and collaborating with) those who first decided to promote and spread it in the first place. Clearly a line has to be drawn. Where do you draw it? Setting up a technical limitation? No, because that affects even unconcerned people (i.e. the aforesaid poor level 30 sods that are being camped in STV and have a 60 friend that wants to help them out). You tolerate it on a small scale (tolerated being different from allowed) while you reduce it by countering it on a large scale. And since we're talking about WoW, "large scale" can only mean "guild wide". Everyone should be able to use it randomly, whereas that doesn't constitute an abuse. It's an abuse when you use it systematically, hence on a large (again, guild wide) scale.
 
Chero, Gurky and the GMs, along with all guild leaders involved, all just have to "sit around a table" and commonly agree on abuses made possible through multiple accounts - summoning networks included - being illegal.

1) Kronos rules are updated: "from now on, using summoning alts at a guild wide level is forbidden"

It sure seems like you're trying to remove it completely to me. Either that of we have very different definitions of the words "illegal" and "forbid".
 
It sure seems like you're trying to remove it completely to me. Either that of we have very different definitions of the words "illegal" and "forbid".

Chero, Gurky and the GMs, along with all guild leaders involved, all just have to "sit around a table" and commonly agree on abuses made possible through multiple accounts - summoning networks included - being illegal.

1) Kronos rules are updated: "from now on, using summoning alts at a guild wide level is forbidden"

Highlighted for you. Note the words in yellow.
 
Highlighted for you. Note the words in yellow.

I thought it was obvious we were talking about using several accounts. It's also hard to ban only an organized form of something, there will be a lot of grey area.




On a slightly less serious note; I felt inspired by the great flash animation Peasemold made, so I made a short video of my own. See you guys at level 45! #effortanddedication
Rest in peace all our level 20 locks, never forget!


 
Last edited:
The problem with this change is, this will not affect current world bosses. We quite literally use 1, MAYBE 2 summoning alts to summon our members as they log in, until we have the main warlocks there, then we can continue summoning. We definitely have level 45s over that limit, and 1-2 at a world boss spawn, EVEN IN VANILLA, was normal, and it can be easily done, just as fast.

The main problem with this change is it came from out-of-nowhere, and a giant middle finger to everyone who did go through and level a warlock alt (until this one incident last week it was all "legitimate" leveling) which was well within the rules of the server. This "solution" exists to fix a problem that doesn't exist, and if having summoning locks at world bosses is an advantage, then Horde should level SHARED summon alts like we do if they want to compete for World Bosses.

This feels like it is targeting people who went and made warlock alts, so they can decrease time spent by in-game flight by investing hours of their time leveling an alt, getting them to the zone with 2 clicker alts. The worst part about this, is THIS IS NOT AFFECTING ANYONE, except the players themselves who are getting buffs.

The reason we beat you on World bosses is we have out-of-game communication, and people willing to log in at 3AM to do Kazzak, as we require the messenger app we use to be on when world spawns are in windows. It now feels like because we do try this hard for them, they are trying to balance the issue, when summoning isn't the issue with world bosses at all. The issue with world bosses is we log in at weird hours and are good enough to kill them, even with level 1 alliance alts made by the Horde sacrificing themselves to Kazzak to buy time while the rest of their guildies log in. We are already there, summoned, and trying to pull. Once again, SUMMONING IS NOT THE ISSUE.

Can anyone actually answer my question as to why this change is needed, when world bosses will remain the same, and the only people this affects is legitimate warlocks, and people wanting to save themselves time to get their world buffs, which AFFECTS NOBODY (unless you can show me wrong, totally open to learning something) but has been stated several times that is is "annoying" to those who don't have alts. Is that the reason for a game change like this? Was it just the fact they were levlling AFK? Ban those accounts involved, but leave the game as it is.
 
Last edited:
I think making summoning alts who are not 60 at world bosses a suspendable offense is a better solution. At least it is a change to the rules rather than a change to the actual game mechanics.
 
I think making summoning alts who are not 60 at world bosses a suspendable offense is a better solution. At least it is a change to the rules rather than a change to the actual game mechanics.

But why? So the world bosses go to the people with the most quitter 60 warlocks?

No thanks.
 
I thought it was obvious we were talking about using several accounts.

Oh come on now, it was never about that. It's about what you're doing with those accounts, and that's why they put the level limitation. You're clearly abusing a private servers' "feature" to acquire an advantage over other guilds, leading to a situation where the only way they have to compete is by abusing the same feature themselves. An abuse that can only countered with an abuse is something that needs to be looked into. It can be solved by either implementing technical limitations or through collaboration and dialogue - and let's be honest, we all know the 45 limit is merely provisional, what when more guilds should be there? If we go on along this path level 60s will end up being the only ones impossible to summon. Enjoy your 45 to 60 journey...

It's also hard to ban only an organized form of something, there will be a lot of grey area.

Absolutely wrong. It's actually the other way around, long as there's will to collaborate. The problem clearly originates on (and is limited to) a guild wide scale, and thus can only be solved in a similar fashion. The same people who asked their guildies to level lock alts (and leveled some themselves) can refrain from using them and dissuade their members from doing so, at the risk of bans. Good luck trying to prove me that a guild master can't enforce policies within his guild the realm admins have agreed upon. Even better, a GL is responsible of whatever he encourages among his members, especially if it's abuses of this sort, and if he does so in violation of server policies he's the first culprit, with admins having all rights to intervene against him. It's again one of those scenarios where either you're a part of the problem or a part of the solution. Of course, will to collaborate and common sense is needed for the soft approach to come to fruition, and I can't say I've seen much of either. It's true, the staff themselves could have handled it better, indeed updating the rules and allowing all parts involved a few days before they came into effect, for everyone to understand them, discuss them with each other and abide by them. They didn't, that doesn't mean however that's not the right way to go about it.

I also completely agree, it's actually realistic enough that the whole question of summoning alts might have been raised by another guild, maybe even with staff members in it. That's beyond the point though, and allow me to point out that I've seen their (legitimate imo) claims of unfairness towards you only countered with - sardonic? - questions like "why can't you do this as well", mixed with random rants here and there about "being hardcore" (whatever they seem to believe the term means in their own heads). Indeed suggesting an abuse should be countered with another, honestly the most feeble argument one could come up with.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom