Best Of

These hindsight arguments don't really hold a lot of weight for me. For any of these 'If I had known' arguments being presented, the simple fact is had we known this would occur, we would have enacted changes to ensure it didn't and all of you would be back to where you were. The fact is none of us knew so it is irrelevant to talk about hindsight in that fashion. Again, that's not any player's fault, that's our fault.

On top of that - I think it is a fallacy to do things just because that is how it was done in the past. In my line of work (outside Lusternia), I don't want to do something because that is how it has always been done, I want to do something because it is the best way to do it. Changing and adapting as you learn and improve is vital and it's the only way for Lusternia to progress. That doesn't mean we're going to retroactively go back and change things that happened in previous Ascensions or events (so don't ask). Those decisions were made and the consequences dealt with, we're moving forward and trying to learn from the past.

Those two points are why I don't think it really makes sense to have additional Ascendants beyond Parhelion and Ixion. Choices were made about who to award seals to and who to support. Additionally, a big factor in this decision was how close the score was. We already stated that we don't know if we'd have done the same thing had Ixion won when Choros was at 700ish points.

As far as fair decision - I think both sides are getting a fair deal. Glom/Celest/Halli got the TA they fought for in Parhelion, Mag/Gaudi/Seren get the TA they fought for in Ixion. 

We keep seeing terms being thrown out like 'moving forward in full awareness that it's hurting one competitive group.' I've already said this multiple times, -any- decision we made was hurting one competitive group. These sayings keep getting bandied around as if there was a solution that nobody would be upset by. We know that players were upset, and they were going to be upset no matter which we way we went. So we decided to do what we felt was best.  

Our counter to that was intended to be Bonecrusher Groundslam.

Citinia said:

However most notably I just have to state the obvious here really fast -Rancoura, how did you go from this

Rancoura said:

If it's not certain who the winner would have been without the lag, declare none instead of handing out participation prizes which were not offered in the past.

to this

Rancoura said:

If it were known that a TA in both groups was going to be raised, I daresay many contributors in either group wouldn't have invested so much time, effort and work into preparing themselves and their allies for the competition, as the outcome might not have mattered so much. However, given it was not known, they did. 

You just ran circles around yourself and didn't realize it. You've negated your argument while attempting to make an argument. How ANGRY would you and others have been if they said no one was winning, after all that effort? (Answer: Significantly more than anyone is now)

Perhaps you skimmed over the part where I also wrote:


which, in essence, means that I do not believe the current decision is fair to all. Nullifying the event, since the lag affected all parties and according to some is the sole reason why the more likely victor didn't achieve victory in the end and apparently gave Celest/Glomdoring/Hallifax some kind of advantage, could be considered fair.

I don't want to see Parhelion stripped of Ascendancy. I don't want Ixion to not have TA if there is hard proof that he would have won it if the game servers behaved (which there isn't). What I do want is this toting around of "fair decisions" to have some semblance of truth to their adjective.

Hopefully that clears things up for you, but regardless, paint me in whichever colours you like in your mind's eye; you're certainly entitled to do so.  

Mirae said:

Ayisdra said:

It has been said that Ixion will get TA and a special event to go along with it. This is just more salt to the wound. It will be even worse if he is claimed as a TA of Time like it seems like it will be. Even if there are no domoth powers to Time, having him be the first and only TA of Time would be an insult. Could I be wrong? Absolutely, but any sort of special TA-ness is just wrong and makes Ixion seem like the actually winner over Choros.

Where is it stated that Ixion would receive the TA of Time? As for what I know, he was the Sealbearer of Chaos. Considering that this Ascension has been particularly chaotic, it would make sense that Ixion would receive TA of Chaos instead.

It hasn't been said, no. But this an important point of the arguement. How does raising Ixion to TA differ from Choros? Choros is the one who won Ascension (regardless of why). That's first place. So, there are a few choices. Give Ixion TA of Chaos (and the 3 free powers that come with that) and have 2 first places and it is like Ascension never really happen. Or give Ixion TA of Time (or something similar) that gives 0 free powers and does feel more second place on the surface until you get to the whole 'special event and unique title' part which is much more of a first place feeling. It is just I don't see how the admin are going to do the RP this and not have it feel like Ixion got the better prize.

Mboagn said:

Rancoura said:

I don't want to see Parhelion stripped of Ascendancy. I don't want Ixion to not have TA if there is hard proof that he would have won it if the game servers behaved (which there isn't). What I do want is this toting around of "fair decisions" to have some semblance of truth to their adjective.

Okay, I'll bring up something that your side pointed to: we were able to handle Creeping (even 3-wyrdenwood Creepings) all right during timequakes and domoths because it wasn't anywhere near as laggy, and we could react in time (well, those of us not running on 500ms ping, anyway...). We can therefore assume that, had the lag not been there, we should have been able to react in time to any and all Wyrdewnood Creeping drops (we didn't, because of the lag).

edit; as an aside, the fact that I am also a TK that uses Super channel also contributed to my less-than-stellar reaction time to Creeping (Super is a 6s eqbal loss).

Myself losing the staff after we stripped it from Choros wouldn't have necessarily meant a win, I don't think anybody can say 100% if the lag wasn't there Ixion would have won either. But it certainly would have changed the final stages and could have given a win. The admin's decision here is acknowledging that fact that we can't say with certainty who would have won between Choros and Ixion - the two competing sealholders.

I'm sorry to see Ciaran or any other player leaving the game over this decision.

I think its one that was necessary and that this thread could use a healthy dose less toxicity and gaslighting.

Rancoura said:

I don't want to see Parhelion stripped of Ascendancy. I don't want Ixion to not have TA if there is hard proof that he would have won it if the game servers behaved (which there isn't). What I do want is this toting around of "fair decisions" to have some semblance of truth to their adjective.

Okay, I'll bring up something that your side pointed to: we were able to handle Creeping (even 3-wyrdenwood Creepings) all right during timequakes and domoths because it wasn't anywhere near as laggy, and we could react in time (well, those of us not running on 500ms ping, anyway...). We can therefore assume that, had the lag not been there, we should have been able to react in time to any and all Wyrdewnood Creeping drops (we didn't, because of the lag).

edit; as an aside, the fact that I am also a TK that uses Super channel also contributed to my less-than-stellar reaction time to Creeping (Super is a 6s eqbal loss).

We do need to look at toxic motivations that have been displayed. While people may say that it's all completely IC, it has been proven that it is not, at least for some players, and that is harmful to the game environment of Lusternia. "Playing to Win" is one thing, but "Playing to Destroy" is quite another.

My most important question to everyone:

@Ciaran, genuinely sorry to see you go, you were solid PK competition!