I have been avoiding this topic somewhat because I feel like we tend to blow things out of proportion based on our experiences from past games (and I have been guilty of this myself, at times). :) We need to remember that Pantheon is going to be its own game, with its own flavor. It might have similarities to EverQuest, to Vanguard, to FFXI, or to whatever other game we care to name, but it's still going to be unique and different in many ways.
In 20 years and nearly as many different games I have yet to play an MMO that didn't have a code of conduct that people had to agree to when they first signed up for the game. I don't think Pantheon will be the first to lack such a thing.
Obviously, the contents of that code of conduct are important, but that's also something that doesn't have to be finalized until launch. Some things are obvious, like hate speech, harassment, and so on. But other things that are specific to gameplay? I think those depend very much on the game, and at least right now I don't think that the game is really anywhere close to a state where that stuff is all nailed down.
Given how much this subject has been discussed, I think at this point there's not much we can say that hasn't already been said. I think it would behoove all of us as supporters and testers to wait, until we can test, and then provide feedback on what's actually there. When we get into the servers during alpha or beta, do we see the potential for griefing? For content denial? For bad player behavior that would result in a CS burden? If we do, let's absolutely provide that feedback so it can be changed. But let's do it with real, practical examples from Pantheon itself.
That's my plan anyway.
Nephele said:I have been avoiding this topic somewhat because I feel like we tend to blow things out of proportion based on our experiences from past games (and I have been guilty of this myself, at times). :) We need to remember that Pantheon is going to be its own game, with its own flavor. It might have similarities to EverQuest, to Vanguard, to FFXI, or to whatever other game we care to name, but it's still going to be unique and different in many ways.
In 20 years and nearly as many different games I have yet to play an MMO that didn't have a code of conduct that people had to agree to when they first signed up for the game. I don't think Pantheon will be the first to lack such a thing.
Obviously, the contents of that code of conduct are important, but that's also something that doesn't have to be finalized until launch. Some things are obvious, like hate speech, harassment, and so on. But other things that are specific to gameplay? I think those depend very much on the game, and at least right now I don't think that the game is really anywhere close to a state where that stuff is all nailed down.
Given how much this subject has been discussed, I think at this point there's not much we can say that hasn't already been said. I think it would behoove all of us as supporters and testers to wait, until we can test, and then provide feedback on what's actually there. When we get into the servers during alpha or beta, do we see the potential for griefing? For content denial? For bad player behavior that would result in a CS burden? If we do, let's absolutely provide that feedback so it can be changed. But let's do it with real, practical examples from Pantheon itself.
That's my plan anyway.
I would love to have faith in this area as I do in others, but I don't think that Pantheon backers are going to be a good representative sample of players when it comes to testing potential 'bad' behaviours and I think it's an area where if measures aren't in place at release day one behaviours will solidify and be very difficult to retrospectively 'fix'.
disposalist said:Nephele said:I have been avoiding this topic somewhat because I feel like we tend to blow things out of proportion based on our experiences from past games (and I have been guilty of this myself, at times). :) We need to remember that Pantheon is going to be its own game, with its own flavor. It might have similarities to EverQuest, to Vanguard, to FFXI, or to whatever other game we care to name, but it's still going to be unique and different in many ways.
In 20 years and nearly as many different games I have yet to play an MMO that didn't have a code of conduct that people had to agree to when they first signed up for the game. I don't think Pantheon will be the first to lack such a thing.
Obviously, the contents of that code of conduct are important, but that's also something that doesn't have to be finalized until launch. Some things are obvious, like hate speech, harassment, and so on. But other things that are specific to gameplay? I think those depend very much on the game, and at least right now I don't think that the game is really anywhere close to a state where that stuff is all nailed down.
Given how much this subject has been discussed, I think at this point there's not much we can say that hasn't already been said. I think it would behoove all of us as supporters and testers to wait, until we can test, and then provide feedback on what's actually there. When we get into the servers during alpha or beta, do we see the potential for griefing? For content denial? For bad player behavior that would result in a CS burden? If we do, let's absolutely provide that feedback so it can be changed. But let's do it with real, practical examples from Pantheon itself.
That's my plan anyway.
I would love to have faith in this area as I do in others, but I don't think that Pantheon backers are going to be a good representative sample of players when it comes to testing potential 'bad' behaviours and I think it's an area where if measures aren't in place at release day one behaviours will solidify and be very difficult to retrospectively 'fix'.
The initial pantheon demographic is also likely to be older, veteran players, adults. I have, perhaps misplaced, confidence that adults can work things out. Every EQ server I played on there was some kind of guild council where a rotation would be worked out. As soon as people started hearing each others real voices, things calmed down and got worked out. Obviously some scenarios are much better than others. If that one racing guild appears on the pantheon server I pick, I will start over somewhere else. I get it.
I'm not saying we need to have blind faith that everything will be ok and everyone will get along or anything like that. But what I am saying is that I think it will be a lot easier to show where things won't be ok when we have practical examples from within Pantheon itself of where the problems will occur :) That's all.
@Keno Monster I was an adult (and not a 18yo adult) when I played EQ1 from it's launch.
There were plenty of toxic players and plenty of toxic guilds back then. What was different was a fairly agrressive oversight of those players and guilds. Something that stopped happening in MMOs. And is non-existent in any Korean MMO.
And as I have stated in previous posts, oversight was so aggressive that one of the top guilds - BotS, on The Rathe was force disbanded for their toxic actions against other guilds.
Toxicity in players is a genetic trait it seems. It is not age or maturity bound. And only unless there is a known actionable consequence for breaking rules, toxicity and griefing will those type players be forced to be mindful. But they will always be what they are, no matter what.
oneADseven said:The "Wild West" is generally synonymous with "lawlessness." Not really sure how to interpret what has been stated on this thread other than the official policy is that there is an internal policy with potential for abuse, and that rule-breakers will find out what the rules are after they break them and are punished for it. So in order to reverse engineer the process (assuming it's consistent), players exhibit bad behavior on throwaway accounts to learn exactly what they can get away with. Sounds like a Wild West / Judge Dredd hybrid where the world is the wild west ... the players are the inhabitants ... and the GM's are the judge, jury, and executioner. Interesting. That's how I interpreted it, anyway.
Then it is probably best to wait and see how we handle it.
Waiting isn't going to change how I interpret things now. If there are any glaring inconsistencies in my message (your response seems to suggest that I'm off-base) that you would like to point out, that would be great. No big deal either way ... I appreciate having a better understanding of the plan. Hopefully my interpretation isn't too far off but I'm sure that will be squared away, eventually.
oneADseven said:Waiting isn't going to change how I interpret things now. If there are any glaring inconsistencies in my message (your response seems to suggest that I'm off-base) that you would like to point out, that would be great. No big deal either way ... I appreciate having a better understanding of the plan. Hopefully my interpretation isn't too far off but I'm sure that will be squared away, eventually.
I'm confused, I admit. People won't know if they've broken the rules until they break the rules? The power of prevention is zero. If the rules are too lenient it won't prevent toxicity. If the rules are too harsh it will lead to resentment. The lack of transparency will lead to recriminations, mistrust, etc. I don't get it.
MauvaisOeil said:Maybe it's just not the moment to share any EULA or enforced rules ?
Exactly, my friend :)
We will have visible guidelines to follow for in-game like we do with the forums but we will not discuss or show how we come to those conclusions so as to not allow people to abuse the rules or find loopholes in them.
You can expect to see rules/guidelines though, it kind of goes without saying, e.g. Gold selling, Harassment/Abuse, Botting etc. will all be punishable offences and we will cover a lot of others in our guidelines once we publish them.
I have written four policies for the company, two of the bigger ones are focussed on in-game specifically but again, as I have said previously, it will take teamwork from everyone to help police and control these situations, community action is more powerful than many of you may think and when it fails or isn't enough, we can intervene if and when required.
The more serious breaches will, of course, be handled quickly and professionally by VR but if you get "trained" in-game or someone "steals" your kill and you come to the forums to rage and tell us how much the game sucks because we didn't have a GM there within 0.004 seconds to deal with it, then that person is probably going to have a bad day. The more GM's get spammed with frivolous claims/incidents the longer they will take to deal with other, more legitimate incidents, which is why I spoke about teamwork and community power/policing for smaller things.
More on this when the time is right and we are closer to much larger scale testing. :)
So now my interpretation has been changed to consider "training" and "stealing" as "frivolous" incidents. There appears to be an expectation that the community will deal with those things and that GM's are more of a resource for dealing with "legitimate" issues like gold selling, harassment/abuse, botting, etc. The important takeaway here is that the FAQ suggests that training and stealing are in the same category as "harassment" -- if that is no longer the case, it could probably use an update. Again, just my interpretation. Maybe it isn't time to share the exact details of what rules will be enforced but I feel the vague descriptions offered here give us good enough of an idea of what VR considers legitimate/frivolous. There is the caveat, though, that if someone is negatively affected by these frivolous actions, VR may step in if/when necessary. Understanding the if/when seems to be an internal protocol rather than something players will see front and center.
Kilsin said:MauvaisOeil said:Maybe it's just not the moment to share any EULA or enforced rules ?
Exactly, my friend :)
We will have visible guidelines to follow for in-game like we do with the forums but we will not discuss or show how we come to those conclusions so as to not allow people to abuse the rules or find loopholes in them.
You can expect to see rules/guidelines though, it kind of goes without saying, e.g. Gold selling, Harassment/Abuse, Botting etc. will all be punishable offences and we will cover a lot of others in our guidelines once we publish them.
I have written four policies for the company, two of the bigger ones are focussed on in-game specifically but again, as I have said previously, it will take teamwork from everyone to help police and control these situations, community action is more powerful than many of you may think and when it fails or isn't enough, we can intervene if and when required.
The more serious breaches will, of course, be handled quickly and professionally by VR but if you get "trained" in-game or someone "steals" your kill and you come to the forums to rage and tell us how much the game sucks because we didn't have a GM there within 0.004 seconds to deal with it, then that person is probably going to have a bad day. The more GM's get spammed with frivolous claims/incidents the longer they will take to deal with other, more legitimate incidents, which is why I spoke about teamwork and community power/policing for smaller things.
More on this when the time is right and we are closer to much larger scale testing. :)
Good response Kilsin.
Thank you.
oneADseven said:So now my interpretation has been changed to consider "training" and "stealing" as "frivilous" incidents. There appears to be an expectation that the community will deal with those things and that GM's are more of a resource for dealing with "legitimate" issues like gold selling, harassment/abuse, botting, etc. The important takeaway here is that the FAQ suggests that training and stealing are in the same category as "harassment" -- if that is no longer the case, it could probably use an update. Again, just my interpretation. Maybe it isn't time to share the exact details of what rules will be enforced but I feel the vague descriptions offered here give us good enough of an idea of what VR considers legitimate/frivolous. There is the caveat, though, that if someone is negatively affected by these frivolous actions, VR may step in if/when necessary. Understanding the if/when seems to be an internal protocol rather than something players will see front and center.
I do not know why and how you come to this conclusion, but I feel you are on a defensive mindset here. What is frivolous, is the way the situation is managed in the given example : Public ranting and expectation of instant punishment at any hour. It is simply stated that action will be taken, but maybe not at the moment it happened, at least it is how I understood Kilsin's answer.
Whether someone expects action to be taken in 0.004 seconds or 4 hours doesn't change the severity of the issue they are reporting. That would be considered an unreasonable person, not a frivolous incident. It appears that VR is trying to distance themselves from situations that they generally expect the community to sort out for themselves, hence the emphasis on community policing. To be clear, you think that "action will be taken" when kill-stealing incidents come up? Personally, I think that's where the "if/when" caveat comes into play and I expect it to be more of an exception than a rule. I don't think VR wants to be spammed with reports about KS'ing as it will interfere with their ability to quickly process more serious issues. I noticed that KS'ing wasn't included in the "it should go without saying that you will get punished for doing these things" category. It appeared to me that KS'ing was categorized differently but maybe your suspicion will be confirmed again. This isn't a defensive mindset. This is just me saying how I interpreted his message when it comes to managing future expectations of GM intervention.
Kilsin said:MauvaisOeil said:Maybe it's just not the moment to share any EULA or enforced rules ?
Exactly, my friend :)
We will have visible guidelines to follow for in-game like we do with the forums but we will not discuss or show how we come to those conclusions so as to not allow people to abuse the rules or find loopholes in them.
You can expect to see rules/guidelines though, it kind of goes without saying, e.g. Gold selling, Harassment/Abuse, Botting etc. will all be punishable offences and we will cover a lot of others in our guidelines once we publish them.
I have written four policies for the company, two of the bigger ones are focussed on in-game specifically but again, as I have said previously, it will take teamwork from everyone to help police and control these situations, community action is more powerful than many of you may think and when it fails or isn't enough, we can intervene if and when required.
The more serious breaches will, of course, be handled quickly and professionally by VR but if you get "trained" in-game or someone "steals" your kill and you come to the forums to rage and tell us how much the game sucks because we didn't have a GM there within 0.004 seconds to deal with it, then that person is probably going to have a bad day. The more GM's get spammed with frivolous claims/incidents the longer they will take to deal with other, more legitimate incidents, which is why I spoke about teamwork and community power/policing for smaller things.
More on this when the time is right and we are closer to much larger scale testing. :)
Kilsin, thank you for the in sight into the hard nose approach of dealing with these matters. As i have discused further here, directed by you from another forum topic to use this one. I wanted to see what others thought of the current situtation going on in TLP servers. It is the most toxic enviroment to date. We have a few high end guilds using every angle. It amazes me how much the staff are unable to control it.
It now to date has broken down to Epic KSing and training turn in mobs. Non static but the same ones that once the item is turned in, spawns a different version. This is something never heard of, unless it was contested prior and both guilds DPS raced it.
Now they spot it, zone in and scout out ways to KS steal the mobs via training and dispelling your charms. You lose all those epic pieces and are forced to deal with CSR. Not very friendly enviroment.
I wanted to see the hard liner approach once again from the days Verant used to run the scene back in the day, but as i stated so much has changed, but not harassment.
Lets face it, no use in pretending anymore.... people will do what people do best, grief, ks and harass others and most of all exploit the system.
Id personally like to see more server bans and a good bye wave from the devs to be honest. I only care to work with others and help others if they fail. I have no problem killing the mob after they die, then call them in and say Grats come and get your item bud... Its just a game, it isnt a RL twister, however all i see is RMT systems today.
I want to see devs kick some butt this time around, and even look to guild disbands too. At the age of 48, i really dont like argueing with people....
MauvaisOeil said:oneADseven said:So now my interpretation has been changed to consider "training" and "stealing" as "frivilous" incidents. There appears to be an expectation that the community will deal with those things and that GM's are more of a resource for dealing with "legitimate" issues like gold selling, harassment/abuse, botting, etc. The important takeaway here is that the FAQ suggests that training and stealing are in the same category as "harassment" -- if that is no longer the case, it could probably use an update. Again, just my interpretation. Maybe it isn't time to share the exact details of what rules will be enforced but I feel the vague descriptions offered here give us good enough of an idea of what VR considers legitimate/frivolous. There is the caveat, though, that if someone is negatively affected by these frivolous actions, VR may step in if/when necessary. Understanding the if/when seems to be an internal protocol rather than something players will see front and center.
I do not know why and how you come to this conclusion, but I feel you are on a defensive mindset here. What is frivolous, is the way the situation is managed in the given example : Public ranting and expectation of instant punishment at any hour. It is simply stated that action will be taken, but maybe not at the moment it happened, at least it is how I understood Kilsin's answer.
There is no way any company can have 2 Gms per person playing. 1 to reject the other to reject the 1st, so all we can do is deal with each situation and let the GMs do their jobs. I completely agree with you no way in heck will they ever be able to police a server like that. Id rather have 1 expansion per year and having more server control then having 10 expansions a year and no control from bugs, and exploits and having 0 support from CSR.
It can really get out of hand, when things are not well thought out.
oneADseven said:So now my interpretation has been changed to consider "training" and "stealing" as "frivolous" incidents. There appears to be an expectation that the community will deal with those things and that GM's are more of a resource for dealing with "legitimate" issues like gold selling, harassment/abuse, botting, etc. The important takeaway here is that the FAQ suggests that training and stealing are in the same category as "harassment" -- if that is no longer the case, it could probably use an update. Again, just my interpretation. Maybe it isn't time to share the exact details of what rules will be enforced but I feel the vague descriptions offered here give us good enough of an idea of what VR considers legitimate/frivolous. There is the caveat, though, that if someone is negatively affected by these frivolous actions, VR may step in if/when necessary. Understanding the if/when seems to be an internal protocol rather than something players will see front and center.
It may be best to take a breath and re-read my post with a clear head man, I clearly separated the words "Train" and "Stealing" with a full stop/period (.) and then in a new sentence described how frivolous claims would hamper the GMs.
For some reason, you combined the two and twisted my words to suggest that I called kill stealing and training - frivolous, which I did not.
For reference:
The more serious breaches will, of course, be handled quickly and professionally by VR but if you get "trained" in-game or someone "steals" your kill and you come to the forums to rage and tell us how much the game sucks because we didn't have a GM there within 0.004 seconds to deal with it, then that person is probably going to have a bad day. The more GM's get spammed with frivolous claims/incidents the longer they will take to deal with other, more legitimate incidents, which is why I spoke about teamwork and community power/policing for smaller things.
Again - More on this when the time is right and we are closer to much larger scale testing.
evogelion said:Any threads on a "Play Nice Policy" from the devs? Kinda curious on what rules will be set in place for Pantheon and keeping the griefers in check.
I assume we'll be having a play nice policy in Pantheon, especially in the case of PVE servers where if you're griefed, you're typically helpless to do anything.
While I can understand a method of RP in some characters being "bad" or "evil", I personally can't stand those who lurk about to steal kills, cause other players to die through means other than pvp, and muscle their way into your enjoyment while pushing you out.
Nothing is worse than having to be the "little guy" being walked over by the "bully". This is usually in regards to better geared and experienced players taking advantage of newer players or those in smaller numbers such as guild populations. Having a top teir guild just "Play through" while your small guild is working its way to the boss in a raid dungeon, its frustrating.
People generally play MMORPGS to get away from RL troubles and escape to a fantasy where oppression is only part of the lore.
The fault, in my opinion, is mainly those few Elitists who play the game like it was a competatively paid sport who have distain for casual players who make up the bulk of players. While there is no way to snuff this type of attitude other than education (which usually fails more often than not in the face of the more stubborn of players), Pantheon should be hard on those few that ruin the experiences of others for their own enjoyment, ego and greed.
I have a suggestion.
If someone is griefing on PvE server, e.g. deliberately training, kill stealing, being verbally abusive or otherwise they should receive a 2 week ban from the PvE server by...
... transfering their character to a PvP server for 2 weeks.
Add +1 week to the initial 2 weeks everytime it is repeated. Strike 1 = 2 weeks, Strike 2 = 3 weeks, Strike 3 = 4 weeks.
After that, permaban.
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Kilsin said:MauvaisOeil said:Maybe it's just not the moment to share any EULA or enforced rules ?
The more GM's get spammed with frivolous claims/incidents the longer they will take to deal with other, more legitimate incidents, which is why I spoke about teamwork and community power/policing for smaller things.
More on this when the time is right and we are closer to much larger scale testing. :)
Of course you don't want people bothering GMs for every report of camp stealing, etc, which is why we need a clear and decent PNP. Then folks will know what is 'reportable' and what is not and most folks will simply follow the rules.
Some will break them not realising or by accident and get pointed at the rules and comply in the future.
Others will willfully break them and eventually they get a certain number of reports against them hopefully causing action to be taken. I wouldn't expect one report of camp stealing to get a GM's attention. I would expect something like a couple of dozen to trigger an action. That figure could be tweaked.
Sure that system could be abused, but if there's a threshold and there are rules for things like getting your whole guild to report someone (which could easily be spotted) actually getting the guild in trouble for wasting GM time then the potential for abuse of a reporting system is way way outweighed by the good it will do in both prevention and punishment.
Again, I hope you realise that testing amongst Patheon backers isn't going to be respresentative of 'the public' as it will be at general release. You aren't going to see the kind or volume of bad behaviour that 'the average' MMORPG player might get up to.
Kilsin said:It may be best to take a breath and re-read my post with a clear head man, I clearly separated the words "Train" and "Stealing" with a full stop/period (.) and then in a new sentence described how frivolous claims would hamper the GMs.
For some reason, you combined the two and twisted my words to suggest that I called kill stealing and training - frivolous, which I did not.
For reference:
The more serious breaches will, of course, be handled quickly and professionally by VR but if you get "trained" in-game or someone "steals" your kill and you come to the forums to rage and tell us how much the game sucks because we didn't have a GM there within 0.004 seconds to deal with it, then that person is probably going to have a bad day. The more GM's get spammed with frivolous claims/incidents the longer they will take to deal with other, more legitimate incidents, which is why I spoke about teamwork and community power/policing for smaller things.
Again - More on this when the time is right and we are closer to much larger scale testing.
So is training and kill-stealing considered a serious breach or a frivolous claim?
oneADseven said:So is training and kill-stealing considered a serious breach or a frivolous claim?
TWO DIFFERENT THINGS
Two different things, stop conflating.
Training
Repeated training most agree would classify as intentional griefing. It is someone using their class abilities in a manner unintended and probably will be stated as such in the EULA in some manner.
KSing?
KSing I would NOT classify as griefing. One player(s) out-damaging others is not griefing. of course it sucks when you cannot do as much damage as another class/player, but that reality will always exist. The rationale for yelling "KS" sounds like - [nobody should be able out-damage me] or [if I look at a target first it's mine, all mine] that makes even less sense? That goes against an open contestable world design 100%.
KS- Griefing
Now someone 10 levels higher, following you around everywhere you go, killing every target you attack, now that would just be griefing. Fairly clearcut griefing.
BRADs Answer
On one of the Cohh videos, the griefing/KSing question is posed to Brad. His answer is generally the best one. KSing is a thing, one of the best ways to alleviate it as an issue is too have lots of content, and not create "must have" drops that are highly sought out. The rationale being, yes, someone can muscle you out of a camp, but VR's plan is to keep server pop's and quality content at a level where KSing should be much less an issue it was in EQ1.
And for those that played both EQ1 and Vanguard, you know this was more effectively applied in vanguard(ala the true EQ2). Vanguard had much more content and vaster sprawling zones you could travel to, to escape the hoi polloi.
zewtastic said:oneADseven said:So is training and kill-stealing considered a serious breach or a frivolous claim?
TWO DIFFERENT THINGS
Two different things, stop conflating.
Training
Repeated training most agree would classify as intentional griefing. It is someone using their class abilities in a manner unintended and probably will be stated as such in the EULA in some manner.
KSing?
KSing I would NOT classify as griefing. One player(s) out-damaging others is not griefing. of course it sucks when you cannot do as much damage as another class/player, but that reality will always exist. The rationale for yelling "KS" sounds like - [nobody should be able out-damage me] or [if I look at a target first it's mine, all mine] that makes even less sense? That goes against an open contestable world design 100%.
KS- Griefing
Now someone 10 levels higher, following you around everywhere you go, killing every target you attack, now that would just be griefing. Fairly clearcut griefing.
BRADs Answer
On one of the Cohh videos, the griefing/KSing question is posed to Brad. His answer is generally the best one. KSing is a thing, one of the best ways to alleviate it as an issue is too have lots of content, and not create "must have" drops that are highly sought out. The rationale being, yes, someone can muscle you out of a camp, but VR's plan is to keep server pop's and quality content at a level where KSing should be much less an issue it was in EQ1.
And for those that played both EQ1 and Vanguard, you know this was more effectively applied in vanguard(ala the true EQ2). Vanguard had much more content and vaster sprawling zones you could travel to, to escape the hoi polloi.
But there are grey areas which people have different opinions about..
For example, two full groups of equal level characters, one group engages an NPC and then the other group charges in and out damages the first group. Classicaly, this is kill stealing in poor taste. Do people want GMs to police this? IMO this is a community policing event
Another example, six toons who are at max level and full high-end gear set-up outside a raid encounter and are killing trash surrounding event in preparation for one-grouping the event(either for alt gear or quest loot from event) ... when a raid force zones in and goes straight for encounter with the presumption its not fair they lose their lower teir encounters to top-teir player one-groups. IMO this is an itemization and encounter problem- aka Visonary realms needs to change the loot table and/or encounter design such that the encounter is not an attractive target for higher-teir characters.
This post was edited by Defector at June 25, 2018 9:28 AM PDT
@Defector
In all these cases people are presenting I am trying to go back and recall how things went in EQ1 and Vanguard. I was heavily involved in those games. I ran extensive fan sites. Was in raiding guilds, was in casual guilds.
We have all had that happen @Deflector, but expecting others to know you have been clearing lower level mobs for an attempt at a sweet boss camp is simply not realistic. And there are many many examples of players trying to clear their way to a challenging camp to only wipe repeatedly as well. Should a more properly balanced group be required to watch endless while a lower level under-qualified group fails over and over?
And your example is confusing. It sounds like you are mixing mini-bosses with boss with raid target. No single group is going to be taking down a raid target. And no raid group is going to be clearing a boss camp.
It's not much different from the Miner A who has been harvesting the same 20 ore nodes for an hour, then tells miner B nodes are his he has been there 1 hour. Who owns those nodes? Can 1 miner keep them cleared constantly? Obviously if Miner B found a node up the answer was no.
Another fly in the ointment.
Trivial Loot Code
In Vanguard, Trivial loot code was enforced. This was a mechanic coded in to defeat high level characters from easily clearing lower level bosses for tweak loot.
It essentially meant if you were X levels above a Boss, you would never see their best loot items drop from killing them. So a level 55 character could not group with his level 30 twink and kill bosses for drops. TLC would block the best items.
A Bad Mechanic? It's Kind of a Permanant Lockout Timer
I ran a large Vanguard fan site and spent a great deal of time in far away esoteric dungeons collecting data on mob names, drops etc. And it would have been nice to have been able to actually see what some of those bosses best loot table were but TLC never allowed me to.
I understand why they created TLC. And I am sure it was much appreciated by low-level players that enjoyed dungeon crawls. And not seeing high-level players running endless twink toons through, and even just camping boss rooms.
I guess I have not seen yet, what VR's stance on TLC is. I do not recall hearing it discussed in any streams either.