Goblin Squad Member
|
If you think they do not have a leadership and a plan to play as a kingdom, then you may not have been around these forums long enough.
We already have one gaming group with two settlements. And they are pushing to get others within their group some as well. Hmmm, So it looks to me that The BloodRose Accord will have six settlements. Huh, but that is ok right?You really aren't capable of seeing why this is a terrible argument? To you, 2 Pax groups each getting a settlement = a loose agreement of independent groups saying "let's not be dicks to people in game".
Yeah, OK Xeen.
Yeah, I never made that claim. TEO/T7V's situation is different from Pax's.
Do you think Ryan has the same level of concern for TEO/T7V's affiliation as he does Pax's? I don't. If you read his PM it should be obvious that the 2 situations are different.|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Really? Have you not looked at your posts?
If they wanted to be treated as men, then they should have handled this as men.Nothing about ANY of TSV's posts here have been anything BUT well-mannered...
...You guys just look like fools and cry babies...That is what most people would consider 'ill-mannered'.
If passive aggressive is well-mannered, then you are right.
I am not here to be well mannered.
Then why exactly do you feel you can make boisterous claims about our manners while negating all of your argumentative leverage by being ill-mannered?
You have always come off as a relatively smart guy.. does that not seem hypocritical to you?
Nothing about ANY of TSV's posts here have been anything BUT well-mannered...
I would say that Nihimon's initial attitude was a bit aggressive.
It is this insistence that this blatant, brazen abuse is justified that has me very concerned right now.
Your dancing around technicalities, Rawn, does nothing to alleviate any of my concerns
It is a remarkable display of a lack of honor, although I have no doubt being called out for that will motivate even more Pax Gaming members to come to PFO and support their Guild.
[Hobs is] making a false appeal for Ryan to do the very thing he said he would not do as a means of trying to insulate [Hobs's] Guild from the consequences of [his] actions.
But Nihimon has since moved on from hostile language and accepted that this might be a legitimate misunderstanding. Members of Pax have, in turn, been willing to accept that they are not being deliberately smeared. Both sides have ceased fire to wait for the only word that can settle the matter.
It's time for UNC, which has no actual horse in this race save its general skepticism towards the Roseblood Accord and Nihimon, to chill out and wait with the rest.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
And with that, I've gotta head off and get to work on my three assignments. Try not to step on any more smurf tanks, act more like the not-blue orc, and don't fling anything unpleasant and unwanted that's not a kender.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
The only explanation for Xeens behavior is that he's metagaming as Chaotic on the forums.
He habitually hurls accusations and lies, even when the groups actually involved see eye-to-eye and have clearly explained the truth of it. Even when the issues at hand have evolved over 9 pages of explanation and discourse. Even when the explanation is already on the very page he's posting on, Xeen will bring the conversation back to page 1. He will erect strawmen and burn them. For the lulz.
Anybody that reads the last two pages can see the truth of the matter, and that nobody agrees with Xeen. Possibly ever. Just carry on as if he isn't here; it's the only way to carry on in any polite manner.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Oh to be clear, I highly suspect we are indeed being deliberately smeared. It just has no relevance to whether we did or did not misunderstand the spirit of the rules.
Really? I'm sorry to hear that. I thought the fact that T7V and TEO understand the rules differently than you did, and are following those more restrictive rules, was proof enough that we are really just trying to keep the game friendly and fair.
Alas, disappointment abounds on all sides.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Good
Yay! An atmosphere of hatred, mistrust, and constant borderline flamewars! Best community ever!
I know, I know, I'm gone.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Oh to be clear, I highly suspect we are indeed being deliberately smeared. It just has no relevance to whether we did or did not misunderstand the spirit of the rules.
Really? I'm sorry to hear that. I thought the fact that T7V and TEO understand the rules differently than you did, and are following those more restrictive rules, was proof enough that we are really just trying to keep the game friendly and fair.
Alas, disappointment abounds on all sides.
I am sorry to disappoint.
Nihimon once commended me for not blaming him for distrusting my motives. I see myself in his same position now.
Goblinworks Executive Founder
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Oh to be clear, I highly suspect we are indeed being deliberately smeared. It just has no relevance to whether we did or did not misunderstand the spirit of the rules.
And I have suspicions that, if aired, could be interpreted as a deliberate smear.
To be honest, if an official clarification came down that Lee's statement about trading votes for favors supersedes Ryan's statement the members of the big three should not vote elsewhere, I will publicly change my position on almost every aspect of this issue, and I expect that TSV policy would change to what Aeternum policy was alleged to be.
I think that it is overwhelmingly more likely that any official clarification will be in the direction that I have always believed to be overwhelmingly obvious. If I am wrong about that, feel free to call me out for being very confidently wrong.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Oh to be clear, I highly suspect we are indeed being deliberately smeared. It just has no relevance to whether we did or did not misunderstand the spirit of the rules.
And I have suspicions that, if aired, could be interpreted as a deliberate smear.
To be honest, if an official clarification came down that Lee's statement about trading votes for favors supersedes Ryan's statement the members of the big three should not vote elsewhere, I will publicly change my position on almost every aspect of this issue, and I expect that TSV policy would change to what Aeternum policy was alleged to be.
I think that it is overwhelmingly more likely that any official clarification will be in the direction that I have always believed to be overwhelmingly obvious. If I am wrong about that, feel free to call me out for being very confidently wrong.
Like I have said, my perception of how this was handled has no correlation one way or another on whether we broke the spirit of the rules.
I have not, and will not shy away from taking ownership of my part. If we are wrong, it needs to be corrected. Both Golgotha and Aeterum need to make a public statement owning the situation.
The one has nothing to do with the other, no matter how the situation resolves itself.
|
CEO, Goblinworks
|
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
To me, the question that confronts the community is not the question of moving votes from one group to another. The question should be "is Pax one guild, or several?"
If it is one guild, then no member of Pax, regardless of the history or timeline of that membership should vote for any guild but Pax Aeturnum.
If it is several guilds, then there's no meaningful problem except in the case of people who voted for Pax Aeturnum in Phase I and subsequently shifted their votes in Phase II. It would be scrupulous for Pax Aterunum to clearly tell its members not to vote for anyone but Pax Aeturnum, but that's just optics.
And frankly, I don't necessarily think Pax' opinion about their structure is the defining one. Perception will be the reality in this case.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
To be clear, as long as the community at large agrees that Golgotha is separate from Aeturnum, something the majority of posters in this thread have come to agree on, then the current application of Aeturnum votes is neither against the word, nor the spirit of the current land rush?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It would be scrupulous for Pax Aterunum to clearly tell its members not to vote for anyone but Pax Aeturnum, but that's just optics.
Your quote indicated that members of the Top 3 should not vote for other settlements.
Lee's comment indicated that as long as your vote didn't secure a settlement for the big 3, you were free to vote however you pleased.
This question needs answering, and grey area "let the community decide" answers won't actually do anything. Because the community is not one voice, and the community cannot arbitrate the laws. That is the job of GoblinWorks.
I think Ryan just did answer that, Damocles. Ryan might think it's a bit against the spirit of the Rush for Pax to distribute votes, but it's allowed.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
To me, the question that confronts the community is not the question of moving votes from one group to another. The question should be "is Pax one guild, or several?"
If it is one guild, then no member of Pax, regardless of the history or timeline of that membership should vote for any guild but Pax Aeturnum.
If it is several guilds, then there's no meaningful problem except in the case of people who voted for Pax Aeturnum in Phase I and subsequently shifted their votes in Phase II. It would be scrupulous for Pax Aterunum to clearly tell its members not to vote for anyone but Pax Aeturnum, but that's just optics.
And frankly, I don't necessarily think Pax' opinion about their structure is the defining one. Perception will be the reality in this case.
While the community can voice their concerns, will it really ever matter? If you have a majority of people who do think Pax is one guild, how will you even figure it out? Post a poll somewhere? And then continue on to be viewed as a company that performs witch hunts on its customers? Will you just watch the forums, and take the opinion of the most vocal few?
There's too much ego floating around on these forums for any single person or even small group of people to get together and try to come up with some way to get the opinion of the entire community. But people will hang on whatever you say. You really need to give a cement answer here. You need to make a decision on whether or not they count as two guilds or one. Your (being GW's) perception is ultimately the only one that truly matters, as you (being GW) are the only entity that can enforce said ruling. Aside from Pax themselves, but as has been said, they already consider themselves to be separate.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
To be clear, as long as the community at large agrees that Golgotha is separate from Aeturnum, something the majority of posters in this thread have come to agree on, then the current application of Aeturnum votes is neither against the word, nor the spirit of the current land rush?
I don't think it really matters. There's no way to truly get the opinion of the community at large, sadly. Just the loudest that post on the forums constantly. And it's pretty clear that GW isn't going to lay down any sort of law here.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think Ryan just did answer that, Damocles. Ryan might think it's a bit against the spirit of the Rush for Pax to distribute votes, but it's allowed.
He didn't say that, however. He implied, and he suggested, but he didn't actually say "this is allowed" or "this is wrong". Without a solid answer from GW, this thread will never stop because GW is the *only* one with the authority to do anything about it. And you do *not* want the legal system of a game to be mob justice, where the most votes wins.
He was pretty clear that it was allowed. It's whether or not Pax is one group or two that he wouldn't nail down.
If it is several guilds, then there's no meaningful problem
It would be scrupulous for Pax Aterunum to clearly tell its members not to vote for anyone but Pax Aeturnum, but that's just optics.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
To me, the question that confronts the community is not the question of moving votes from one group to another. The question should be "is Pax one guild, or several?"
Does this same question apply to other meta groups that are fully endorsing mutual benefit?
If it is one guild, then no member of Pax, regardless of the history or timeline of that membership should vote for any guild but Pax Aeturnum.
Should or must?
If it is several guilds, then there's no meaningful problem except in the case of people who voted for Pax Aeturnum in Phase I and subsequently shifted their votes in Phase II. It would be scrupulous for Pax Aterunum to clearly tell its members not to vote for anyone but Pax Aeturnum, but that's just optics.
We got the phase 1 and phase 2 voting stuff down pat.
How about a direct answer here, Yes they can vote for any settlement they want if they did not vote for the big three in phase 1 or no you must vote for whatever guild you are joining.
And frankly, I don't necessarily think Pax' opinion about their structure is the defining one. Perception will be the reality in this case.
Um, Pax defines their structure.
But in the case you speak of. We have the Roseblood Accord, who is promoting mutual in game benefit for joining and have 2 settlements secure and are pushing for 4 more. Lets have an opinion on that.
So if the perception applies to one then it applies to both.
|
Goblinworks Executive Founder
|
He was pretty clear that it was allowed. It's whether or not Pax is one group or two that he wouldn't nail down.
If it is several guilds, then there's no meaningful problemIt would be scrupulous for Pax Aterunum to clearly tell its members not to vote for anyone but Pax Aeturnum, but that's just optics.
What I saw there is "There's no way to tell if the public-facing directives are the same as the hidden ones, and it is impossible to enforce the request that Aeternum members vote for nobody except Aeternum".
I'm not going to argue the intent here- it's obvious that the intent was to describe the case of Aeternum members voting for Golgotha as 'not a meaningful problem' because there's no way to tell if an Aeternum member is voting for Golgotha (unless they voted on LR1).
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
To be clear, as long as the community at large agrees that Golgotha is separate from Aeturnum, something the majority of posters in this thread have come to agree on, then the current application of Aeturnum votes is neither against the word, nor the spirit of the current land rush?
I think it might end this if you can agree that Pax members will not start a third settlement during the land rush, if that many more migrated to this game. Or at least you can say you are against a third settlement but don't have the authority to stop it.
The current 2 settlement situation is too unique to try to undo it , but we can move forward with a better understanding .
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
We have no plans, and have never had plans, to have a third settlement started from inside Pax Gaming for the land rush. We specifically did not run Pax Fidelus for a settlement, even though we clearly have the votes to secure them one, for the reasons brought up in this thread.
If Pax Gaming wanted to do a massive land grab in this land rush then we could almost certainly grab more than two settlements. We have enough votes, right now, to get… eight settlements. More if we are only looking to get the back end of the leader board. We aren’t doing that. We don’t want to do that. And believe me, we would be getting recruits out the ass if we did that; people love to live in the blob. Any large organisation could step into the scene right now and screw everything up. We aren’t that kind of organisation.
I'm not going to argue the intent here- it's obvious that the intent was to describe the case of Aeternum members voting for Golgotha as 'not a meaningful problem' because there's no way to tell if an Aeternum member is voting for Golgotha (unless they voted on LR1).
"Not a meaningful problem" means, to me, that the problem isn't really much of a problem. That's what the phrase generally means.
I know Ryan was a bit vague, but I don't think he'd intentionally obscure his statement to that level.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I know Ryan was a bit vague, but I don't think he'd intentionally obscure his statement to that level.
Really? Ryan has near mastery of the non committal answer. They are by design, vague and subject to competing interpretations.
Forum Wars generate forum activity. Forum activity produces the potential for greater interest. Greater interest produces greater sales.
|
CEO, Goblinworks
|
| 9 people marked this as a favorite. |
Your quote indicated that members of the Top 3 should not vote for other settlements.
Lee's comment indicated that as long as your vote didn't secure a settlement for the big 3, you were free to vote however you pleased.
This question needs answering, and grey area "let the community decide" answers won't actually do anything.
There's no grey area on the rules and admonitions. The only grey area is "Is Pax one Guild, or Several?"
If it is one Guild, Golgatha should not be on the leaderboard.
If it is more than one Guild, then nobody who voted in Phase I for Pax should vote for anyone but Pax Aeturnum, players who intend to play with Pax Aeturnum should only vote for Pax Aeturnum, and Golgatha is free to be on the leaderboard and recruit anyone else to vote for them except people who intend to play with The Seventh Veil and The Empyrean Order.
RyanD
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Forum wars generate forum antipathy. Forum antipathy generates a hostile community.
Ryan Dancey is not shortsighted. He and the people at Goblinworks are not going to try to make the community an unpleasant place just to generate some extra "interest".
I formally request anyone who, despite the evidence, believes Golgotha is the same guild as Aeternum to bring forward their concerns.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
If it is more than one Guild, then nobody who voted in Phase I for Pax should vote for anyone but Pax Aeturnum, players who intend to play with Pax Aeturnum should only vote for Pax Aeturnum, and Golgatha is free to be on the leaderboard and recruit anyone else to vote for them except people who intend to play with The Seventh Veil and The Empyrean Order.
RyanD
Thank you. I believe that will take of the issue nicely.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 10 people marked this as a favorite. |
Right. There we go, a nice clear statement of intent. Any Aeturnum votes being used for Golgotha in the current land rush will be dropped as soon as we have our administrator online. We apologise for the drama that this has caused in the last few days. We hope that we can move past this, and continue on being a part of a positive community.
Just because I'm curious, I'll kick this one off myself.
Pax is clearly one community of friends. They seem to take cues from each other and back each other up on the forums, even to the point of wanting to make sure the other settlement gets land at the start. Despite this, do you believe it likely that Pax's PFO companies could end up going to war with each other at some point?
My definition for "one group" is simple: The group's 'factions' will not undertake actions which might harm other members of the group (and when it does, like in the PFS, it's a sign of something that is going to destroy the one group and create multiple smaller groups).
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Right. There we go, a nice clear statement of intent. Any Aeturnum votes being used for Golgotha in the current land rush will be dropped as soon as we have our administrator online. We apologise for the drama that this has caused in the last few days. We hope that we can move past this, and continue on being a part of a positive community.
I for one never thought Pax was deliberately trying to game the system. People held differing interpretations of what was intended, and I don't disparage people for a difference of opinion. You're a part of the community, and a positive one in my book.
/tiphat
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I formally request anyone who, despite the evidence, believes Golgotha is the same guild as Aeternum to bring forward their concerns.
I was actually in the middle of composing a post questioning if it's even worthwhile to share our opinions if what's done is done. But if you're really interested in hearing this...
With all due respect to Pax, the existence of
All individuals are members of the [Pax] Community first and of a specific Guild or Division second
along with the other elements of The Pax Gaming Charter that I previously pointed out...make it very difficult for me to view the 2 groups as separate.
The charter tips it over the line for me, in seeing Pax as Pax.
This is only my personal opinion.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
To play Slaadi's Advocate here (meaning to advocate for a group I'm also questioning): Maybe that just means they will look out for the interests of this very large, multi-game-spanning community. It doesn't necessarily mean they'll always side with each other within the game.
Kinda like how I'm loyal to the Paizo community first and foremost. Doesn't mean I'll back anybody in the community up in a fight in IC matters. ;)
Just because I'm curious, I'll kick this one off myself.
Pax is clearly one community of friends. They seem to take cues from each other and back each other up on the forums, even to the point of wanting to make sure the other settlement gets land at the start. Despite this, do you believe it likely that Pax's PFO companies could end up going to war with each other at some point?
My definition for "one group" is simple: The group's 'factions' will not undertake actions which might harm other members of the group (and when it does, like in the PFS, it's a sign of something that is going to destroy the one group and create multiple smaller groups).
Yes, they could.
As for it being likely? highly unlikely.
If it were the happen the internal fallout would be of epic proportions. Friendships and ties between Aeternum and Golgotha are strong, since these last few months we have been playing games together in the interrum before PFO launches forging friendships.
The most likely scenario would be Golgotha would break away from Pax Gaming, splitting its membership who would be absorbed in some way into Aeternum.
The war would likely be brutal and short, with whoever had gained the greatest power during the process of the game coming out on top and having to reforge a new empire.
Hopefully that adressed your concern.
Yes, I know it should be proteans. Slaad are cooler.
I'm not gonna vote in that poll. Maybe, once answers have been heard, I will, but even then...well, it's like folk have said. Is "Majority Rules" really the way to go here? Forcing people to vote makes them pin their opinions down.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
And frankly, I don't necessarily think Pax' opinion about their structure is the defining one. Perception will be the reality in this case.
In an effort to work with the developers, I don't think any member of the Pax Gaming Community should have any vote in your poll Nightdrifter.
Just because I'm curious, I'll kick this one off myself.
Pax is clearly one community of friends. They seem to take cues from each other and back each other up on the forums, even to the point of wanting to make sure the other settlement gets land at the start. Despite this, do you believe it likely that Pax's PFO companies could end up going to war with each other at some point?
My definition for "one group" is simple: The group's 'factions' will not undertake actions which might harm other members of the group (and when it does, like in the PFS, it's a sign of something that is going to destroy the one group and create multiple smaller groups).
Yes, they could.
As for it being likely? highly unlikely.
If it were the happen the internal fallout would be of epic proportions. Friendships and ties between Aeternum and Golgotha are strong, since these last few months we have been playing games together in the interrum before PFO launches forging friendships.
The most likely scenario would be Golgotha would break away from Pax Gaming, splitting its membership who would be absorbed in some way into Aeternum.
The war would likely be brutal and short, with whoever had gained the greatest power during the process of the game coming out on top and having to reforge a new empire.
Hopefully that adressed your concern.
It kind of does.
I'm a bit troubled at how Pax's members would take personal OOC offense to IC events, but...well, they aren't alone in that. Some people just don't separate that stuff as well, and it only takes a few bad apples to spoil the bunch.
I can buy them being two separate groups, just like we're all a bunch of separate groups under Paizo's banner. It's not exactly any different from the similarly minimalist Roseblood Accord—"We generally won't f$~+ with you guys."
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Instead of claiming that a majority of people believe X, how about an informal poll on the matter?
Should Pax Golgotha be allowed in the Land Rush?
** spoiler omitted **
If Ryan is unwilling to remove them from the land rush, voting on it by the community is a waste of time.
It does appear the issue is settled. Ryan made a more definitive answer and Golgotha has stated they would adjust their numbers to adhere to it.
Yeah, I heard that Golgotha used to not be part of Pax. I also heard they never would have joined if they knew it would deny them a settlement.
I think it's about time for He Who Must Not Be Narmed to show up again and send us all into disarray once more.
It kind of does.
I'm a bit troubled at how Pax's members would take personal OOC offense to IC events, but...well, they aren't alone in that. Some people just don't separate that stuff as well, and it only takes a few bad apples to spoil the bunch.
I can buy them being two separate groups, just like we're all a bunch of separate groups under Paizo's banner. It's not exactly any different from the similarly minimalist Roseblood Accord—"We generally won't f%*+ with you guys."
Oh, I'm sorry - Are you referring to an in-character Aeternum/Golgotha war?
I already have plans for that, or at least some form of in-character skirmishing between our settlements, and others in the Empire. Border tensions, ruffians and such. Good excuses to practice for when a real conflict may happen.
As for what actually happens OOC? I have no idea, thats murkier than I could imagine. Split ups can be nasty though, I've seen enough of them first hand throughout my gaming career.