More On The Chaos Server Situation

[fsbkun 23]

Some defenders during the lag wasnt able to got to deed and defend, I personaly spend a half a hour trying got my horse back lol

 

all sides took risk during that raid - wurm lags heavely during last days - so dont thing now we need cry about results

 

Some one said: MR managed to group up under these conditions, mount up and sail in these conditions, launch a raid uner these conditions, enter and raid a deed in these conditions, successfully take loot under these conditions. Mr thought none defenders come cause of low online and dead time.

 

anyway I was there killed some horses lol and come back to wild.

 

A or D.

 

A more fair - we all lost our time - not only defenders

D more random - and not really fair to ppl who cant play lot during week and come to that raid during freetime.

 

 

What about loot? no idea how many was taken from outer houses - but during all game A LOT of loot was not got or lost because of BUGs

and never was given back - that is normal for Wurm.

[RomaN 890]

Some defenders during the lag wasnt able to got to deed and defend, I personaly spend a half a hour trying got my horse back lol

But the lag did not occur until you guys had abandoned the deed and left our local... in the time you guys were absent, we had already broken into and looted 3 buildings.

 

We made the decision to leave once the lag came and grew unbearable.

[Orb 259]

Anything but A. Let pvp run it's course. (coming from a person who will probably die)

[Bittereinder 265]

Anything but A.

 

Disable PvP for 24 hours?

Edited November 11, 2013 by Bittereinder

[ZarmaZarma 192]

Some defenders during the lag wasnt able to got to deed and defend, I personaly spend a half a hour trying got my horse back lol

 

The server wasn't lagging during the raid, so I'm afraid you must be lying. I would request that you did not try to manipulate information to skew the results of what was an entirely fair pvp event. When the lag began both sides were forced to stop. JK was in no way inhibited in defending the deed prior to that, and the condition of the server entirely stable until the lag began. Many of the would-be-defenders seem to be making the claim that the lag somehow prevented you from defending the deed, but such claims are entirely fictitious. How could the lag affect one side more than the other? Please stop fabricating events to change the game in your favor.

Edited November 11, 2013 by ZarmaZarma

[Daolin 894]

Wouldn't A affect everyone on the server, especially those who were not present?

 

Yes it would, but a few hours is not much to quibble over really and it was one of his previously chosen options which considering the serious stability issues of the server lately (login problems, severe lag .etc) would seem like the fairest of the listed.

 

I just want the server started at this point, I don't really care what he does regarding your raid or whatever loot. 

 

you werent an attacker so you dont have a say

 

No but i'm a paying customer who would like the server to be back up at some point, which it seems like they are close to being now.  Just because I wasn't part of an event doesn't mean I am not allowed an opinion, my opinion that a group of people complaining should not stop an entire server of people being able to play is a very valid one.

[Lau 302]

D is the fair option. The raiders stated in the other thread that they teleported away with some loot, thus will will keep that and lose whatever they died with. People who choose to raid on a night, when the previous 4 nights have had lag should not be compensated because "they could not foresee it coming".

Edited November 11, 2013 by Lau

[fsbkun 23]

But the lag did not occur until you guys had abandoned the deed and left our local... in the time you guys were absent, we had already broken into and looted 3 buildings.

 

We made the decision to leave once the lag came and grew unbearable.

Sure - check your boats then:3

 

anyway that is not place for discussion - GM will decide I guess.

As i said - lost/not got loot because of lag/bugs - normal practice for wurm - and no way to be compensated

 

I dont know what really will be with rollback - but i remeber some of old rollbacks - no terrain was rollbacked, so maybe damage of TD will be still present

 

So A then. D will cause to MUCH dramma then.

[ZarmaZarma 192]

I'm asking because you literally just said "It isn't fair to the other residents on the server who were unaffected by this raid to be further penalised by downtime because of it", and then suggested the one course of action that would penalize all the uninvolved parties.

[creed1 5]

Th only important for me is to play and play fast.

 

i think the most people will play today and log back online.

 

 

I think the only realistic option is C. There is nothing you can do here, you can complain things are unfair but the server crashed in a raid, this CANT be solved fair.

Best you can do is start the server, immideatly have a GM move to the location that is being raided, let people get their corpses (or let GM move them out) and deal with it

 

from 

whykillme

[Hordern 2,177]

Is there a way to roll back all the servers but the one that was raiding?  I am on Inde and was in the middle of repairing a wall where my animals were kept.  We prevented a couple from leaving.  But if you do not roll back the server to the point the server went down then I will lose all my animals.  And that is not fair to me just like it is not fair to those raiding.

 

I am sorry I guess i am being selfish but I want to see a rollback at least on Inde

There was no rollback mentioned for any of the other servers at all, it was ONLY going to affect Chaos.

[Daolin 894]

I'm asking because you literally just said "It isn't fair to the other residents on the server who were unaffected by this raid to be further penalised by downtime because of it", and then suggested the one course of action that would penalize all the uninvolved parties.

 

What I mean't was further downtime, I assume rolf intends to bring the other servers up if he's ready and keep Chaos down until the GM's rule on what to do with the JK/MR situation.

[Protunia 735]

TBH.......I would say Deal with it.....stuff happens.

 

 

What happens the next time a server crashes during some other raid in the future??

[RomaN 890]

A is not fair for anyone because it punishes the progress of everyone on the server skillwise and what MR gained in that raid.

 

D essentially puts MR back onto a server under completely different conditions from when they began the raid. We began the raid with overwhelming odds and numbers on our side. If option D is selected, we are going to end up with MR logging into enemy territory with little chance to escape OR MR is going to log in en masse and create more chaos on an already vulnerable deed. Niether side should not be punished because of a DDOS attack, likewise JK should not gain the upperhand because of it either.

 

 

C is the fairest option. I don't believe anyone died from either side due to DDOS attack but if they did, they should be given their corpses and belongings back because this DDOS was nobody's fault and nobody needs to be disadvantaged by it.

MR gained their loot legitimately before the lag and DDOS halted the server. JK also fought valiantly to try and stop us. It was fair up until the DDOS.

 

Let's terminate the raid, sending all MR fighters back to MR lands, return any corpses if anyone from either side died and temporarily suspend PVP until everything has been cleaned up and the server is stable again.

Edited November 11, 2013 by RomaN

[Druidnature 1,118]

C/d sounds the most fair unless defenders where unable to get to the deed to defend (it's possible they where hit with lag before the deed. Just being on one part of deli can be a deciding factor of completely being frozen or lag free during these events)

If this is however false- b/c.

Or let it be realistic, these are pvpers after all. Go with d and let them fight it out, no matter how unfair that is. Sure both sides will whine then.

Edited November 11, 2013 by Druidnature

[Torgrim 403]

Most simple and least fuzz for Rolf is D. In fact, why not state it in game rules that D will always occur in these cases and never have to bother with it again?

 

That Rolf wants to do something else here shows that he cares about the players, he wants to do good. In doing that he will inevitably piss someone off. Life is not easy

[RomaN 890]

C/d sounds the most fair unless defenders where unable to get to the deed to defend

 

They got into the deed and fought us from house to house for about 20 minutes. They then retreated out of local after we broke through into their house.

 

The lag and DDOS came about 20minutes after they retreated.

Edited November 11, 2013 by RomaN

[Mattown 349]

Rollback or leave it as it is really.

[Nadroj 3,554]

C/d sounds the most fair unless defenders where unable to get to the deed to defend (it's possible they where hit with lag before the deed. Just being on one part of deli can be a deciding factor of completely being frozen or lag free during these events)

If this is however false- b/c.

Or let it be realistic, these are pvpers after all. Go with d and let them fight it out, no matter how unfair that is. Sure both sides will whine then.

 

Problem with D is it isn't really a case of everyone fighting it out, its just "whoever logs in earliest will get out safe and the stragglers are guaranteed to die."

[Druidnature 1,118]

Most simple and least fuzz for Rolf is D. In fact, why not state it in game rules that D will always occur in these cases and never have to bother with it again?

That Rolf wants to do something else here shows that he cares about the players, he wants to do good. In doing that he will inevitably piss someone off. Life is not easy

Tbh that's not a bad idea... Because picking any other favors someone over the other

[Finnishpkt 21]

Anything but A,

the lag really affected the raid after we started leaving.

+ the first downtime at around midnight gmt just gave jk time to group up. So they really didn't suffer from the lag anymore then we did. Doing nothing will obviously cause some damage for the people who cant log in and are or will be dead cos of that...

[leanderj 1]

Most simple and least fuzz for Rolf is D. In fact, why not state it in game rules that D will always occur in these cases and never have to bother with it again?

 

That Rolf wants to do something else here shows that he cares about the players, he wants to do good. In doing that he will inevitably piss someone off. Life is not easy

 

This! 

[TABs 5]

there was defenders, and there were skirmishes, but no one died from it.

 

When the lag hit, neither side could do any action, so even if they had not been there the ddos effectively ended the raid and left everyone just able to move, and rubberband, and nothing else

[Dorian 865]

Kill everyone....let the gods figure it out.....  (just kidding!  I couldn't resist!   )

[Alyeska 2,621]

While I understand that is blows big-time the server crashes during a raid, it goes to another point to. Say we puts pvp ban, so attackers safely leave with their loot. What's to say that is what would have happened if the server had not crashed? Putting a full ban on pvp removes the chance for people to defend if they were going to. The servers were acting up a few hours beforehand already - I have logs if you insist - and its usually on retreat that some actual pvp may happen.

I think the fairest option is none of the ones mentioned. Teleport the corpses of those who

died , its safe to assume that any deaths were because the crash. Teleport the attackers to outside the deed that was under attack, in one spot. Spot would be outside the deed and not in a towers range but still in enemy territory. That puts the attackers out of direct danger on login and gives defenders a - albeit small - chance to fight back.

You can not say for certain that the planned retreat would have gone as planned and just putting a full out ban on pvp ensures only a safe walk home for the attackers, something surely convenient if people say they were already starting on a retreat.