Last Dynasty - Official ACM Policy Change and UCM Procedure

Post by **Panzerfaust** » Wed Nov 05, 2003 1:51 am

After hundreds of discussions and many hours of research, we have decided to adjust our ACM (Attended Combat Macro) policy. While the intent is still not to disrupt the game play of others, we put the responsibility on the individual to be honorable.

Here is the new official policy:

There will be no Unattended Combat Macro's (UCM) period. Attended combat macro's (ACM) are allowed in areas of low population where you will not be disrupting some one's game play.

This also allows for attended combat macro's in dungeons that have a low frequency of players.

While your ACM, should the dungeon or land block you are in become populated and your macro vulns or fires upon others kills you must stop running your macro and return to normal fighting, or leave the area until the population has reached a level you will not be griefing to anyone.

In order to minimize the chance third party utilities from vulning or attacking someone elses kill, your range must be set to an area relatively close to you. This does not mean it will encompass the entire radar. We want to ensure that there is no chance of vulning off radar range monsters in which macro's can do.

New UCM Procedure for Chain Members

If someone is found to be UCMing, instead of waiting and trying to track down the offender, which is extremely difficult when they are not at the keyboard, we will have them removed from the chain without notice. This will not be done without solid proof. We will require solid proof from credible sources to resort to this, but it will preserve the integrity of the chain and more than likely force the "offender" to find us as opposed to the other way around.

If at that time, the offender agrees not to UCM, he/she can (up to the chain managers) be placed back in the chain at the lowest level possible.

This decision was a collaboration between the High Council and the Chain Managers.

Keep in mind, this will not be done if we are just "told" about it. There will have to be enough proof to convince both the HC and the Chain Managers.

So, if you find yourself out of the chain, for what seems like no reason, you may now have that reason.

Flanker · Post by **Flanker** » Wed Nov 05, 2003 1:55 am

It is our hope that this new policy will help clear up some of the areas that may have seemed cloudy to some.

It is clear and to the point and as Panz stated has been gone over many times.

Remember we want to have fun out there, and we want to make sure that we dont distrupt some one else from having fun.

Cheers
Flank

Dave_Mustaine · Post by **Dave_Mustaine** » Wed Nov 05, 2003 3:11 am

Please define:

"Solid proof"

"Credible sources"

Considering the starkness of the action that is undertaken on the accused, I think these two things need to be PERFECTLY defined.

Flanker · Post by **Flanker** » Wed Nov 05, 2003 3:18 am

Dave,

The best Solid proof is screen shots.

If you use a plug in like tank or some others you get a time display on the HUD, this can be used as a time marker for contact.

Showing repeated contact for a period of 5 minutes with the screen shot showing the time as well as the chat logged maximized and getting no response would deem that person to be UCM.

Granted a person may be in a big battle and unable to respond until the spawn is down. If the person still does not repsond even though there is no spawn and nothing attacking said person, they would have no reason not to respond to some one talking to them.

Screen shots are the key. We have used a series of 8 and more screen shots that show people to be UCM.

Ofcourse some one could just walk up and take a few SS then say you were UCM. So no one will just be able to submit the SS without it being reviewed and award certification from the HC that said person was indeed UCM over the period of time the SS were taken.

Best way to demonstrate an elapsed period of time is to take the SS showing the tell and the previous tell so nothing gets cut out.

Starting a chat log (while editable) is another method of proof.

Also contacting an HC member and bringing them to the location will serve as well.

Dave_Mustaine · Post by **Dave_Mustaine** » Wed Nov 05, 2003 3:20 am

Flanker,

Thank you for clearly defining that. I don't mean to nitpick, but I just know that by laying this out now, we'll prevent a miscommunication in the near future.

I don't think you hit the topic of how many sources are needed

One last question, are these new rules in effect starting at the time of this posting, or are they retroactively enforcable?

Flanker · Post by **Flanker** » Wed Nov 05, 2003 3:24 am

Hehe, no problem Dave.

Nothing wrong with needing clarification, helps us all in the end.

How many sources are needed?

If you mean do we need SS or proof from more than one person.

Well the more the better, but as long as the evidence from one person holds water, we see no need to have multiple pictures of the same thing.

Rules are in effect as we speak.

Retro-active? Why you worried about something

Dave_Mustaine · Post by **Dave_Mustaine** » Wed Nov 05, 2003 3:27 am

Sort of. Can you log into mIRC?

edit: for public's knowledge, Flanker has addressed all my concerns. Thanks again for your help there Flanker.

Culticon · Post by **Culticon** » Wed Nov 05, 2003 6:56 am

Thank You

grimly fiendish · Post by **grimly fiendish** » Wed Nov 05, 2003 7:57 am

so would you have to send a tell to the person? or just talk to them in open chat for 5 mins?

also would you have to stand there and watch them for 5 mins? alot of ppl might run by and say hi not get an answer and assume UCM as they stand in another part of the dungeon and send tells not able to see the person trying to deal with a big spawn

i sometimes run 2 comps at once a full system and a laptop right next to it and i play both i dont leave one to macro while i play the other but if im pulling spawn with one character i will miss tells on the other considering they only stay on screen for a second or less

and also what about ppl who say use boardtroll or who take time to configure bandit sight or some other plug in so that they not only miss tells but cant see the full screen and dont know someone is there talking to them

and last but not least some ppl just dont like some others i for one tend to ignore idiots who pimp talk or use pimp names so if they were saying hi please answer or ill report you as UCM i wouldnt know as i wouldnt get past the pimp name

these are all things i think should be considered answered taken into account etc and im not defending all of them for example if you said boardtroll was outlawed in the monarchy because if your on the boards then your not actively playing i would understand but not to say anything just makes ppl nervous and not want to play at all

Nakamuro Zataki · Post by **Nakamuro Zataki** » Wed Nov 05, 2003 9:09 am

grimly fiendish wrote:i sometimes run 2 comps at once a full system and a laptop right next to it and i play both i dont leave one to macro while i play the other but if im pulling spawn with one character i will miss tells on the other considering they only stay on screen for a second or less

and also what about ppl who say use boardtroll or who take time to configure bandit sight or some other plug in so that they not only miss tells but cant see the full screen and dont know someone is there talking to them

and last but not least some ppl just dont like some others i for one tend to ignore idiots who pimp talk or use pimp names so if they were saying hi please answer or ill report you as UCM i wouldnt know as i wouldnt get past the pimp name

Not sure really what board troll is, but this might perhaps answer your question,
http://vnboards.ign.com/message.asp?topic=57663690

Ibn wrote:MMmm. Bradshaw, technically it would appear that being at your computer but alt-tabbed is acceptable. According to a strict interpretation of the CoC. However it could be argued that you are not actually ready to respond to an administrator. I am not sure that I have an answer for that specific question at the moment.

In relation to your comment about pimp names. If their name is very offensive to you for one reason or another, just report them to the ac admins, but you probably should answer their "h1 u ucm?". Also a drive by "hi" is not enough, they should stick around for a while. Just standing there for five min taking screenshots is not enough either, they have to try to actively talk to you as well.

There were some posts ealier about having one person monitoring two computers at once, it should be somewhere on the above vnboard thread or in Ibn's post history, but I dont have time to find it right now.

Summary : When in doubt, kiss the stranger!

grimly fiendish · Post by **grimly fiendish** » Wed Nov 05, 2003 9:42 am

ok thx ill check out that post as it might be important

though i run both comps on the same desk and many times have my hands on both key boards =)

as for board troll its said to be a plug in that allows you to see VNboard posts in game on a decal screen other than that i dont know as it never worked for me

Post by **Panzerfaust** » Wed Nov 05, 2003 11:05 am

One last question, are these new rules in effect starting at the time of this posting, or are they retroactively enforcable?

The new ACM policy is not retroactively enforcable, since it actually removes a reason to take action.

The procedure is not part of policy. We have just changed the way we do things. If we caught someone (non-chain) UCMing, we could boot them immediately if needed. While, this is true in the chains as well, it would create a chain break that, as we know, could take a long time to fix. So, the rules have not changed, just the way we enforce them.

To answer your actual question, yes, if we have the proof, we will chain around someone from a earlier than lastnight.

Lucky Strike · Post by **Lucky Strike** » Wed Nov 05, 2003 9:28 pm

Somehow everytime I enter this topic it turns into a huge debate and somehow I always end up on the wrong side. There is one thing that wasn't clear in the posts above. Exactly who can provide proof of UCMing?

From a private tell from Panzerfaust:

Panzerfaust wrote:You understand that the only way the HC can verify or negate macroing is to personally check, which includes tells and that an LD member is obligated to reply to the HC for verification. Failing to do so will cause removal from the chain and/or clan.

As I understood it only members of HC and Panzerfaust himself can provide verification of UCMing. Is this still the case?

Can anyone in LD submit screen shots to have someone removed/banned? How about someone from another monarchy? Do I have to say "hello" or something to everyone who talks to me?

Another item I wanted to ask about ... but I admit the rule stated above is clear, but I don't think it makes any sense.

This is best illustrated by example. Say we are in the Tusker Holding and there are exactly 9 people in the dungeon. Each and every last one of them is in the same fellowship. Each person within the fellowship is "assigned" a specific area in which he is to kill the tuskers that come to him. Obviously, the dungeon is populated. Can we ACM in that situation? I don't believe we are griefing anyone and/or interfering with anyone's enjoyment of the game.

Last item I wanted to ask about. Most of us have multiple toons. Obviously the rules apply to any toon that has a Panzerfaust tag. Thats a given. What about toons that remain in a different monarchy. Some are obviously mine (ie Lucky Battle, Lucky Vegas) do they have to abide by the clan rules regarding ACMs as well?

I am not trying to spark a debate ... I just would like it clear what rules I have to adhere to. Please note that I am agreeing in advance to whatever Panzerfaust and/or the High Council says. A simple answer without all the fanfare and debate would be more then satisfactory for me.

Thank you.

Post by **Panzerfaust** » Thu Nov 06, 2003 12:05 am

Lucky,

To be brief, the HC will check it out, even when Screenshots are sent. This will not happen as soon as we get screenshots. If someone sends us screen shots, we (HC) will get hold of the accused person, and work from there.

If we verify that this person is in fact UCMing, then we will take action.

Fellowships: We will write in a provision for this. We did discuss, but it didn't get included. I think I must have sent my business partners the part saying that fellowship boundaries do not apply to attack radius, until non-fellows come into play. I wonder what kind of phone calls i'll get.

We have not discussed your third question. I would have to say that only members of the clan would follow our CoC. I would assume an LDer would probably be more inclined to Report Abuse on a non LDer as opposed to contacting their clan.

Opti_Silmara · Post by **Opti_Silmara** » Thu Nov 06, 2003 9:56 pm

Very good changes and clearly thought out well, and well-defined.

Doing a great job there HC!

Opti