Is this against the rules: holding zones hostage for ransom

From where I’m sitting, If a player chooses to not engage with the Alliance toon translating by simply putting him on /ignore…the two scenarios are exactly the same. The lowbie dies and cant quest until the Horde are killed.

And we agree that in that situation there is no problem what-so-ever. I just fail to see how adding an third-party changes the situation in any meaningful way. The lowbie dies and the Horde will die when enough Alliance 60s roll through. The fact there was an Alliance translator doesn’t seem to change the situation in the slightest to me.

1 Like

Okay this is epic. We’ve got a modern day crassus here.

Wake me when they take Loch Modan. An actual good zone.

You’re ignoring the actual issue because you’re too focused on the fact that some pvp also happened.

You argument is essentially “I don’t see what big deal with drug cartels is, if they sold pepsi instead of drugs nobody would care. And if you don’t like cartels just pretend they don’t exist”. Ignoring them doesn’t change the fact that what drug cartels do is illegal.

Also if the pvp solution is always the right one why does blizzard even bother banning bots? There’s a pvp solution to botting right? Blizzard need to enforce its own rules, and that starts with people reporting other players for breaking said rules

It’s more fun when the players police their own confrontations. Like you’re doing right now on the forums but in game!

Sounds terrible, sorry. I’m not spending my time fixing other people’s problems in game.

Welcome to community. Maybe tick the offline mode so you can play completely solo.

I would ask you not to rewrite my argument in a strawman sort of way.

They’re not “drug dealers” in this situation because they’re not breaking any rules on a PvP server. “Selling Permits” is so silly and nonsensical in this game to the point of being a farce. They’re just doing PvP with a little bit of trolling thrown in. The whole idea breaks down completely if you think of the situation if the “seller” is put on /ignore…then this is run-of-the-mill lowbie camping which you agree is fine.

First off, because these people are explicitly doing activities that are against the rules. Second, they cannot be killed on PvE servers. PvP on a PvP server however is explicitly fine.

1 Like

Zone disruption is also against the rules, and exploiting players who can’t fight back on their own for gold if pretty much the textbook definition of zone disruption. Just because you choose to ignore it doesn’t make it magically go away.

Blizzard has stepped in on these kinds of issues before. People made the same exact argument regarding safespotting “pVp HaPpEnEd oN a PvP sErvEr hUr DuR” luckily blizz disagreed with these type of players and stepped in on something that is against their rules. Obviously this all hinges on if what the OP described actually happened, there’s no screenshots, video or anything. Also how long did they do this? Were they there for an hour, got bored and left? Or did they control lakeshire for a few days and not let up until they got their gold?

Like I said in other posts here it’s all about intent. If I camp you for 4 hours for fun, it’s pvp. If I follow you around to every zone, and merciless camp you and prevent you from playing in any way for 2 weeks while taunting you on the forums because I don’t like you, it’s harrasment, and I’ll probably get banned.

Both scenarios have a “pvp solution” yet one gets me banned due to the intent.

I simply don’t understand why you’re caught up on the “for gold” part when it literally does not change anything in the scenario. A group of players killing a quest NPC is the exact same if there is a “permit seller” there or not. The gold part of this is utterly, completely and entirely irrelevant because it doesn’t change the situation at all.

I keep bringing it up, but if you /ignore the guy then the 2 scenario become IDENTICAL. Literally.

This is also NOT analogous to safe spotting. And this is the second time you’ve mentioned that here. That is an exploit. I am not saying “everything that has a PvP solution is permitted” and the fact you’re keep bringing things like this up makes me think you’re really not reading what Im saying.

What I am saying is this is not zone disruption because there is zero difference between a group of gankers going to Redridge and a group of gankers going to Redridge with an Alliance translating for them. “Intent” doesn’t change the essence of what is happening here.

1 Like

Then who do I raid with? Or do BG’s with? Or dungeons? Not my fault you’re in the minority that “likes” world pvp.

I dont understand how you don’t see that the permit seller is the issue, not the pvp. Read the OP again. If horde players were just killing quest givers in lakeshire for fun this thread literally would not exist.

Tell me…if they simply /ignore the “seller.” In what way is it any different than if that seller never existed in the first place.

I can just ignore the people who send spam mail to sell me gold too. Does that make gold selling ok?

Okay, i guess you cannot address it. Oh well.

I think I did. Ignoring a problem doesn’t make it go away. What stops then from bringing in another alliance alt?

No, you skipped it by asking a strawman hypothetical that is not the same issue.

Its exactly the same as trying to dismiss it by bringing up safe-spotting again. Completely irrelevant and borderline disingenuous.

I am trying to get you to realize that /ignoring the player doesn’t stop it from being against the rules. I am trying to make it clear that /ignoring shows that it was never against the rules to begin with.

If you have not figured out that is what im trying to say after 2 days of conversation…then bluntly, you have not comprehended a single word ive said.

Zone disruption is against the rules. Idk how you don’t understand that. It’s no different than safe spotting or botting. This is not a case of "pvp happened on a pvp server. You’re just incapable of seperating the pvp from the exploitation. Ignoring the exploitation doesn’t make it go away and it is still against the rules

1 Like

Its not zone disruption. I’ve been trying to explain to you for days now that the situation is EXACTLY THE SAME as if people went down to kill them for fun…which you have all ready stated is absolutely fine. Especially since yes…the problem is solved with good-ol’-fashioned PvP.

You agree that its fine to kill people trying to board a boat? Yes. Does it suddenly become wrong if someone tries to “sell a boat ticket?” And can you see how down-right absurd that notion even is?..especially since you can…just get on the boat anways. Or fight your way on the boat. What happens if the guy selling the tickets logs out for a bit…is it suddenly okay for those same people to kill people on the boats? Its all nonsense to suggest that it would change anything.

And this is where we part ways in this conversation. I’ve all ready brought up safe-spotting is an exploit. Telling me that I cannot tell the difference is now just insulting levels of disregard for the things we have gone over at length. You whole-heartily just did not read a single word I’ve said if this is what you think i have said.

1 Like

Except it’s not, which you are incapable of understanding.

Yes it does. Once again it’s all about intent. There’s a fine line between what is pvp and what is zone disruption. Same way there’s a fine line between camping a player and harrasing a player.