Boosting Rule Adjustments

[Yotca]

https://github.com/zeizei336/turtle-w

Kestrel tongue in cheek isn't the right way to go about this all while ignoring very serious points:

• Server economy especially for small populations is very dependent on leveling alts for the CD materials, that was the case on all Blizz servers and was the case on Twow -- you can disagree as you stated but you'd be wrong -- supply & demand isn't rocket science
• Turtle increased arcane crystal/black lotus drop rate via the survival trinkets for a reason -- both to fight RMT and allow players with less game time to be able to afford these materials
• A smaller portion of the player base will be coming much later than the rest due to trust issues with the server, vacations -- insert reason -- etc and they will be "solo" leveling due to lack of people to run dungeons/quests with which is why boosting friends/guildmates is a thing ; basically whoever missed the train is left out hanging in the rain
• On a PvP server staying lower level longer means being food for that much longer especially when a larger part of the server population is 60
• Most of us care about end game raiding and end game PvP -- having to play the "shit version" of the game for much longer simply isn't the fun people come here for

Those points are all addressed in other responses. The response you quote was to a post that brought up none of the points you did so I am not sure your point. When given a low effort post people will receive a low effort response unfortunately.

First — that's mendacious — you believing you addressed points while you disregarded and sidelined them doesn't constitute an elucidation; I argue for a living, Kestrel.

Second, most people on this forum and in the game aren't brats you can dismiss with a wave of the hand and a smug comment — just in this thread, that's several similar replies — a good deal of us have children and some might even be closer to your age than ours.
Acting that way doesn't help with how the dev/GM team handled the transfer situation or this one and the resulting mess.
Dismissive replies don't work in any situation — ever.

Third, going forward: poll things in game and per server. As much as you'd like to believe this is yours and the dev/GM team's project, it's still based on Turtle WoW and will die without the support, trust and input from the community. It's ours as a community as much it's yours.
Moreso if you maintain donation shop points as a functionality; we're the reason Turtle thrived for 7 years and could have endured longer.

I genuinely appreciate the time and effort you and others are putting in and I think many thousands who don't post here share the same feelings, but cogent, articulate, polished replies that elaborate and remove any sort of ambiguity is what's expected. The proof is in the pudding — the sheer amount of replies saying they perused all then 9-13-15 pages and found no solid answer to work with or legitimate explanations as to why such decisions were being made other than: "we felt like it" should be sufficient evidence.
As another person commented, this is silly.

If you and the team have ambitions as grand as claimed, accept the backlash for the mishandling without attempts to downplay or minimize the shit storm and trivializing replies and reactions, all while skirting from actual clarification as I've seen in several situations already, be it transfer communication fuck up or this one.

Your most recent answer shows exactly what I'm describing; a healthy enough output via alts for all players to be able to purchase moderately priced craft mats doesn't equate to your near unlimited supply answer — you'd also quickly realize that there isn't enough felcloth for that specific interaction, because the effort required to produce mooncloth via having to actually level an alt and it's professions is where the drawback is and reducing the cooldown makes that effort near irrelevant. No one other than yourself has claimed it would be healthy for the server. The reductio per absurdum weighs on you, not Holydruid, and the sophistry to add that it's a balancing act when that's precisely what he's arguing for all while you purposely misconstrue his claims is downright ridiculous.
You're also seriously underestimating who purchases lower level materials to level said professions on those alts and allows the minority of lower leveled characters to sell their peacebloom, light leather etc at prices that would be considered steep when servers release, which in turn is what allows them to near seamlessly integrate into the existing economy. Hint: it's lvl 60's leveling professions on their lvl 35 alts mainly.

You can only erect wonders from a solid socle and in this context it's trust and humility, so start by accepting that on this server many people know more about what's healthy or balanced than you or the team members and in certain cases by quite a bit; I could out theorycraft your entire dev team regardless of the class for instance as shown here.
I raided in one of the best guilds on the planet <Method> from Vanilla to the end of WotLk and interacted with GM's on nearly every topic — shared guild factory alts were very much an obligation back then because so few people had crafting professions and very few people had reached level 60. The sheer amount of players that will be clearing what is a nearly fully solved game on Octowow despite attempts to change certain things is much more than you imagine and the required materials for that huge mass of players is why factory alts are a necessity.

https://web.archive.org/web/20090227035 ... y_mp3/p30/

Accepting you're not always right and can make mistakes you have to make amends for is truly very simple once you realise that you being wrong or right on an issue doesn't make you a bad or good person, but how you react to being wrong or right does.

[Lemurcatta]

All I've seen on this thread was like three people crying foul and defending boosting as if their life depended on it. Much more people supported the ban. Someone was referring to the Discord server? Pig's message about boosting been banned has overwhelming support in reactions. Make a poll or something, let's see how the support measures for real.

[Hepallzx12]

Ok Kestrel, hear me out, we were discussion in the poll thread whether instance dropping group is an exploit or not. I’d argue that it’s essentially the same as mob tagging in the open world.

The way it worked is the alt must get the tag on the mob before the level 60 hits it at all. After which the 60 drops group and has a minute to kill the mob. This is the same way it works in the open world just without the minute timer. The alt must get the tag. I see this as the same mechanic.

I think you’re concerned about pulling an entire instance worth of mobs.

I propose this as a middle ground. Only allow xp to be given to the alt in the instance if they get the tag while not grouped. This would make it so there’s a minute timer between when the tag happens and when the kill happens making it impractical to pull a whole instance. As it were implemented, once the tag occurred the 60 could drop group at any time and the alt would get full xp. I am a bigger fan of the instance version since it doesn’t disrupt the open world levers as much.

Those are my 2 cents

[Spicyahi]

Here's a comparison: when I was a kid, I had the game Final Fantasy Tactics on the PS1. Loved that game, but grinding for job points to unlock all the jobs and their abilities was a tedious, repetitive experience, similar to leveling in classic wow, and it made replaying the game to try different team combinations significantly less appealing because it would take more time to get the job points than I would get time enjoying/testing any given build. There was an error in the game code that allowed you to speed this process up by getting infinite job points on certain jobs, that could be used to unlock some of the grindier abilities.

This single feature enabled me to replay the game 100s of times as opposed to just 5 or 10. This also didn't make the game any worse for anyone who wanted to experience the "intended grind experience".

On Twow, classic wow, and many other classic mmos, we boosted alts and friends so they could catch up to us or have alts to craft on, and the economy was fine and the community was great. I just don't see how this change is good for the community, it feels more like a philosophical difference, that, once enforced, is just pissing people off who otherwise would game here while having almost 0 negative impact on anything on the server. This change is selfish, and doesn't respect our time as players.

[Holydruid]

You also are sidestepping the other questions I asked, why not also reduce or remove other CD's for these mats you say are so necessary for the "economy"? Would that fix your complaint? How do you define a healthy wow economy? If you cannot provide what you consider qualifies as a health wow economy we can't have this conversation. And I doubt I would agree with your definition anyways.

Lowering the crafting cooldowns wouldn't fully fix it. It's not really about the CD number by itself, it's about how many people are actually crafting the stuff at all. Cutting mooncloth's cooldown in half means each crafter makes more, sure, but it only matters if enough people are willing to sit there tailoring every couple days for months on end. Shortening the CD helps a bit, but the bigger issue is that alts let more people casually contribute to that supply without having to relevel a whole new main just to cover one profession. Take that away and you've still got fewer people willing to bother, even with a shorter CD. Example.. I have enchanting and mining, so i am depended on alts or others people. But for the rare materials we will need for T3 Naxx. People will focus on their own tier first. S

As for what I'd call a healthy economy, since you're asking straight up: supply keeps up with demand well enough that gear doesn't cost a fortune for a normal raider, not just the guys who play 8 hours a day or RMT. And it shouldn't be hard for regular players to become a supplier of stuff people need, so it's not just a handful of crafters controlling the market. By that definition, cutting down the number of people who can realistically craft this stuff and driving prices up is moving away from healthy, not toward it. That's regardless of whether you think that tradeoff is fine.

You might not agree with that definition, that's a real difference in values and that's fair. But I'd rather just say it out loud like this instead of "healthy economy" getting thrown around in the original post without either of us actually knowing what it meant.

Halving the CD (in theory) would double the output server wide. Removing boosting (lets say for the sake of the conversation) cuts the amount of tailors by half. That in theory events out. The point I am making that by your definition if we allow boosting and also halve the moon cloth CD that is only a good thing as it "makes the economy healthier" and I firmly disagree.

Why stop at halving it? Why not a 1 hour cooldown? Then everyone can get whatever they need nice and cheap. There is a balancing act, and the answer is not "cheaper = better".

Okay that's fair, and you're right that "cheaper = healthier" isn't a real definition if it justifies a 1 hour CD and everyone swimming in mats. That would break progression entirely, gear needs to actually cost effort and time, otherwise there's no point having it be a goal at all. So let me actually fix that instead of pretending I didn't need to.

I think the difference isn't cheap vs expensive, it's about who gets to participate in supplying it. A CD change affects every tailor equally, it's a dial you control precisely and can tune up or down as needed. Banning boosting doesn't tune a dial, it just cuts a chunk of the population out of being viable crafters at all, specifically the more casual players who'd have run an alt for it but won't relevel a whole new main just for one profession. So even if the math nets out to a similar total output on paper, it's not the same thing, one is "everyone makes a bit more," the other is "fewer people are making anything at all, so the ones still doing it have more leverage over price." That's a market getting more concentrated, not more balanced, even if raw supply numbers land in the same place.

So I'll actually answer straight: a healthy economy isn't just "cheap," it's supply staying tied to effort and time in a way that still lets a wide range of players participate in providing it, not just the ones willing to fully relevel a main from scratch. Scarcity's fine and even good for the game, I'm not arguing for a 1 hour CD. I'm arguing that concentrating who's allowed to supply it into a smaller group is a different kind of problem than making it more or less scarce.

[Holydruid]

All I've seen on this thread was like three people crying foul and defending boosting as if their life depended on it. Much more people supported the ban. Someone was referring to the Discord server? Pig's message about boosting been banned has overwhelming support in reactions. Make a poll or something, let's see how the support measures for real.

there is already a poll and it clearly shows people want boosting. like 75% lol

[Yarmum]

Lowering the crafting cooldowns wouldn't fully fix it. It's not really about the CD number by itself, it's about how many people are actually crafting the stuff at all. Cutting mooncloth's cooldown in half means each crafter makes more, sure, but it only matters if enough people are willing to sit there tailoring every couple days for months on end. Shortening the CD helps a bit, but the bigger issue is that alts let more people casually contribute to that supply without having to relevel a whole new main just to cover one profession. Take that away and you've still got fewer people willing to bother, even with a shorter CD. Example.. I have enchanting and mining, so i am depended on alts or others people. But for the rare materials we will need for T3 Naxx. People will focus on their own tier first. S

As for what I'd call a healthy economy, since you're asking straight up: supply keeps up with demand well enough that gear doesn't cost a fortune for a normal raider, not just the guys who play 8 hours a day or RMT. And it shouldn't be hard for regular players to become a supplier of stuff people need, so it's not just a handful of crafters controlling the market. By that definition, cutting down the number of people who can realistically craft this stuff and driving prices up is moving away from healthy, not toward it. That's regardless of whether you think that tradeoff is fine.

You might not agree with that definition, that's a real difference in values and that's fair. But I'd rather just say it out loud like this instead of "healthy economy" getting thrown around in the original post without either of us actually knowing what it meant.

Halving the CD (in theory) would double the output server wide. Removing boosting (lets say for the sake of the conversation) cuts the amount of tailors by half. That in theory events out. The point I am making that by your definition if we allow boosting and also halve the moon cloth CD that is only a good thing as it "makes the economy healthier" and I firmly disagree.

Why stop at halving it? Why not a 1 hour cooldown? Then everyone can get whatever they need nice and cheap. There is a balancing act, and the answer is not "cheaper = better".

Okay that's fair, and you're right that "cheaper = healthier" isn't a real definition if it justifies a 1 hour CD and everyone swimming in mats. That would break progression entirely, gear needs to actually cost effort and time, otherwise there's no point having it be a goal at all. So let me actually fix that instead of pretending I didn't need to.

I think the difference isn't cheap vs expensive, it's about who gets to participate in supplying it. A CD change affects every tailor equally, it's a dial you control precisely and can tune up or down as needed. Banning boosting doesn't tune a dial, it just cuts a chunk of the population out of being viable crafters at all, specifically the more casual players who'd have run an alt for it but won't relevel a whole new main just for one profession. So even if the math nets out to a similar total output on paper, it's not the same thing, one is "everyone makes a bit more," the other is "fewer people are making anything at all, so the ones still doing it have more leverage over price." That's a market getting more concentrated, not more balanced, even if raw supply numbers land in the same place.

So I'll actually answer straight: a healthy economy isn't just "cheap," it's supply staying tied to effort and time in a way that still lets a wide range of players participate in providing it, not just the ones willing to fully relevel a main from scratch. Scarcity's fine and even good for the game, I'm not arguing for a 1 hour CD. I'm arguing that concentrating who's allowed to supply it into a smaller group is a different kind of problem than making it more or less scarce.

It doesn't cut you out at all... if ur not cheating at the game you will find that theres a variety of options for making levelling your alt faster, that ppl without a main will typically not be able to enjoy, and in turn you create more demand and supply in the economy rather than just multiboxing and brainlessly vendoring everything that drops.. or just not even looting at all

It's hilarious that dualboxers will spend 24/7 here complaining about implications and vagueness/ambiguity in the rules, but with enabling multiboxing, where does the line get drawn for you guys between enabling botting or running more than 2 clients? When does it become the same as a typical blizzard server where everything is enabled up to RMT as long as you're giving that 10% cut to the big guy microsoft. What is the point of a game without rules?

[Yotca]

Here's a comparison: when I was a kid, I had the game Final Fantasy Tactics on the PS1. Loved that game, but grinding for job points to unlock all the jobs and their abilities was a tedious, repetitive experience, similar to leveling in classic wow, and it made replaying the game to try different team combinations significantly less appealing because it would take more time to get the job points than I would get time enjoying/testing any given build. There was an error in the game code that allowed you to speed this process up by getting infinite job points on certain jobs, that could be used to unlock some of the grindier abilities.

This single feature enabled me to replay the game 100s of times as opposed to just 5 or 10. This also didn't make the game any worse for anyone who wanted to experience the "intended grind experience".

On Twow, classic wow, and many other classic mmos, we boosted alts and friends so they could catch up to us or have alts to craft on, and the economy was fine and the community was great. I just don't see how this change is good for the community, it feels more like a philosophical difference, that, once enforced, is just pissing people off who otherwise would game here while having almost 0 negative impact on anything on the server. This change is selfish, and doesn't respect our time as players.

Hi, Ahi! Horde again? Didn't know you were a man of culture spamming focus every turn with JP boost equipped. The real question is did you grind as mimes to 99 and delevel as chemist or bard/dancer?

[Yotca]

All I've seen on this thread was like three people crying foul and defending boosting as if their life depended on it. Much more people supported the ban. Someone was referring to the Discord server? Pig's message about boosting been banned has overwhelming support in reactions. Make a poll or something, let's see how the support measures for real.

We literally have proof of otherwise... overwhelmingly so.

[Yotca]

Halving the CD (in theory) would double the output server wide. Removing boosting (lets say for the sake of the conversation) cuts the amount of tailors by half. That in theory events out. The point I am making that by your definition if we allow boosting and also halve the moon cloth CD that is only a good thing as it "makes the economy healthier" and I firmly disagree.

Why stop at halving it? Why not a 1 hour cooldown? Then everyone can get whatever they need nice and cheap. There is a balancing act, and the answer is not "cheaper = better".

Okay that's fair, and you're right that "cheaper = healthier" isn't a real definition if it justifies a 1 hour CD and everyone swimming in mats. That would break progression entirely, gear needs to actually cost effort and time, otherwise there's no point having it be a goal at all. So let me actually fix that instead of pretending I didn't need to.

I think the difference isn't cheap vs expensive, it's about who gets to participate in supplying it. A CD change affects every tailor equally, it's a dial you control precisely and can tune up or down as needed. Banning boosting doesn't tune a dial, it just cuts a chunk of the population out of being viable crafters at all, specifically the more casual players who'd have run an alt for it but won't relevel a whole new main just for one profession. So even if the math nets out to a similar total output on paper, it's not the same thing, one is "everyone makes a bit more," the other is "fewer people are making anything at all, so the ones still doing it have more leverage over price." That's a market getting more concentrated, not more balanced, even if raw supply numbers land in the same place.

So I'll actually answer straight: a healthy economy isn't just "cheap," it's supply staying tied to effort and time in a way that still lets a wide range of players participate in providing it, not just the ones willing to fully relevel a main from scratch. Scarcity's fine and even good for the game, I'm not arguing for a 1 hour CD. I'm arguing that concentrating who's allowed to supply it into a smaller group is a different kind of problem than making it more or less scarce.

It doesn't cut you out at all... if ur not cheating at the game you will find that theres a variety of options for making levelling your alt faster, that ppl without a main will typically not be able to enjoy, and in turn you create more demand and supply in the economy rather than just multiboxing and brainlessly vendoring everything that drops.. or just not even looting at all

It's hilarious that dualboxers will spend 24/7 here complaining about implications and vagueness/ambiguity in the rules, but with enabling multiboxing, where does the line get drawn for you guys between enabling botting or running more than 2 clients? When does it become the same as a typical blizzard server where everything is enabled up to RMT as long as you're giving that 10% cut to the big guy microsoft. What is the point of a game without rules?

That's a non argument. Any third party program is explicitly banned and easily enforced as they interact with the game itself not just your mouse — a bot that dodges that would be exclusively using your mouse/keyboard and would be repeating actions like spam tab targeting and spellcasts in a specific order for a very limited result; there's also no incentive to allow it as there's no monthly subscription to generate revenue from. Multiboxing multiple accounts is also a non argument because of efficiency:

• 1 player gets 100% xp divided by 1 (100%)
• 2 players get 100% xp divided by 2 (50%)
• 3 players get 116% xp divided by 3 (39%)
• 4 players get 130% xp divided by 4 (33%)
• 5 players get 140% xp divided by 5 (28%)

So while you're getting slightly more xp by adding more accounts to the boosting for the specific craft alts we're talking about you're also multiplying the time it takes to level to 35 and then you still have to level the professions, meaning you need to have the space for the materials for 5 craft alts with 2 professions each, which simply isn't practical — very far from — we're talking thousands of stacks. You want to level them one by one to get the use of the cooldowns asap.

To address your RMT claim, most of us in large guilds are here exactly for the guild experience. Blizzard cut off 40 man raids and guilds went from several hundred active members to 50 or less on average. GDKP and RMT are closely knitted and Twow was against both, rightly so. It kills the guild experience and the community interactions we come here for.

So once again... a non argument. If you've played on Turtle, you've enjoyed low cost crafting materials regardless of the character or professions you choose to level, because other people were putting in the time and effort to level crafting alts. If you joined a server that was already established and sold your peacebloom, light leather, sungrass, thick leather etc at rather high prices, it's because there's a demand created — not by new levelers as most of them have gathering professions — but by people who need the materials to go 0-250/275 very fast and have the financial means to do so. Most "mains" are also leveled with gathering professions and stock them for later.

Factory alts from boosting are huge part of the economy be it for the low level players who join a server late and can sell their mats far above what the prices should be or the high level players who get to enjoy cheap materials for their necessary tier3/3.5 crafts or even various entry level blues and epics that demand mooncloth, arcanite or rugged leather.

If Arcanite bars were 50-100g per I doubt you'd try to acquire an Arcanite reaper to be "MC ready" instead of simply waiting for others to do it instead, while you convince yourself that you're not being boosted by players with better gear or even simply more skill. Everyone is constantly being boosted in this game be it from skill or gear at any moment of their leveling or raiding.