Proxy-queuing is (now) a bannable offense.

[Sabindeus]

FYI, as far as I know this has not yet been officialised, but from my observations this has as of recently been enforced by GM’s when reports are being made. The details about the punishment involved vary form source to source, but it is an (observed) fact that those reported for this will be punished without exceptions, providing the GM can verify the infraction.

So essentially this is hearsay and not a published policy.

[fuzzygeek]

Again, I think the problem is the fact it is a pug tank. PvP gear can be enchanted and reforged to make less ... inappropriate. Most idiots who are 1) pugging, 2) pugging as a tank, 3) pugging as a tank in PvP gear -- are unlikely to spend the time and money and effort to do so, either out of sheer idiocy or just good old fashioned ignorance.

I've been that relatively undergeared healer. Hell, my priest still has blue shoulders and hat. I still don't think you can place all of the blame on PvP gear: the fault lies on people being stupid. More gear covers a multitude of sins, but expecting a fresh-geared healer to be able to heal an undergeared tank trying to speedball an instance is, again, the fault of the player, not the gear.

I would think removing PvP iLevel from PvE algorithm considerations would be the most logical way to go, but what happens in the not-entirely uncommon situation where a PvP piece *is* the best PvE piece?

[Worldie]

Sorry, but this sounds like "my friend's cousin's best friend's girlfriend's brother got banned and he said it was because he queued for a 5man as tank", has anybody got any source for this?

This very.

Provide a source, or this topic doesn't make any sense and is just a wishlist.

[fafhrd]

Cool. I used to report people who obviously rigged queues anyway (mostly the tanks that used to zone in with a dps/healer then have the tank drop before they stopped that). Will keep doing so.

Did do a sub 85 instance on my mage recently where the tank and healer dropped, and a frost DK tanked while a BM hunter's pet healed the 3 of us, went rather well, wouldn't have reported anyone from that run.

[Skye1013]

...while a BM hunter's pet healed the 3 of us...

There's a pet that heals?!?

[bldavis]

spirit beasts

[halabar]

...while a BM hunter's pet healed the 3 of us...

There's a pet that heals?!?

But they don't heal the whole party... unless the hunter was doing something manually, which I didn't know was possible.

[bldavis]

...while a BM hunter's pet healed the 3 of us...

There's a pet that heals?!?

But they don't heal the whole party... unless the hunter was doing something manually, which I didn't know was possible.

thats what i was thinking too

[valura]

FYI, as far as I know this has not yet been officialised, but from my observations this has as of recently been enforced by GM’s when reports are being made. The details about the punishment involved vary form source to source, but it is an (observed) fact that those reported for this will be punished without exceptions, providing the GM can verify the infraction.

So essentially this is hearsay and not a published policy.

This is not hearsay (part of it is), as we had to report a Shaman who queued as healer only to show up with Enhancement PvP gear on. When asked to put on his resto gear, he refused, because it wasn't good enough. When asked why he queued as resto then, he said the queues as dps take over 25 minutes, and resto goes much quicker. When asked to leave the group, he refused (and we could not kick him). We couldn't do anything except leave and take the deserter debuff, or sit out the kick timer. We ended up leaving, but reported him. I did not get to speak to a GM myself, but a RL friend who was in the same group did, and he was told by the GM that such behaviour was not tolerated and that a ban was warranted.

Since then I have heard (from 4 people I have known and trusted since late Vanilla) about a very similar encounter with GM's after reporting proxy-queuers, whereas before they were told to "kick them or leave", if they got an answer at all.

[Torias]

This is not hearsay [...]

I don't mean to be rude but I'm not sure you know what hearsay is, in that case.

[Amirya]

I did not get to speak to a GM myself, but a RL friend who was in the same group did, and he was told by the GM that such behaviour was not tolerated and that a ban was warranted.

Since then I have heard (from 4 people I have known and trusted since late Vanilla) about a very similar encounter with GM's after reporting proxy-queuers, whereas before they were told to "kick them or leave", if they got an answer at all.

Er...that's still considered hearsay. You do not have direct knowledge about it (by your own admission), you only know of it from what you were told.

[Fetzie]

GMs are not permitted to discuss penalties given to accounts other than your own.

[masterpoobaa]

GMs are not permitted to discuss penalties given to accounts other than your own.

Which I have always found HIGHLY annoying as it means that the GM's can happily do Sweet Fook All and its next to impossible to find out if anything was done.

Personal Example:
Back in LK I reported a Lock botting in the fire elemental cave in Storm Peaks.
I had to report this bot 3 times over the course of 5-6 days before the bot finally went away.

[halabar]

GMs are not permitted to discuss penalties given to accounts other than your own.

Which I have always found HIGHLY annoying as it means that the GM's can happily do Sweet Fook All and its next to impossible to find out if anything was done.

Personal Example:
Back in LK I reported a Lock botting in the fire elemental cave in Storm Peaks.
I had to report this bot 3 times over the course of 5-6 days before the bot finally went away.

Regarding bots, I was directly told by a GM that often they will watch the bots for a week or more to see the flow of goods, and then do the banning. Moral: If you buy directly from a botter, you run a much higher risk of getting banned if it's obvious that it was a botter. AH is much safer..

[Teranoid]

This is not hearsay (part of it is), as we had to report a Shaman who queued as healer only to show up with Enhancement PvP gear on. When asked to put on his resto gear, he refused, because it wasn't good enough. When asked why he queued as resto then, he said the queues as dps take over 25 minutes, and resto goes much quicker. When asked to leave the group, he refused (and we could not kick him). We couldn't do anything except leave and take the deserter debuff, or sit out the kick timer. We ended up leaving, but reported him. I did not get to speak to a GM myself, but a RL friend who was in the same group did, and he was told by the GM that such behaviour was not tolerated and that a ban was warranted.

Since then I have heard (from 4 people I have known and trusted since late Vanilla) about a very similar encounter with GM's after reporting proxy-queuers, whereas before they were told to "kick them or leave", if they got an answer at all.

Well of course its a bannable offense if you report it. There is no way this will ever become some sort of actual rule given the ticket system would be overwhelmed by it given how many stupid 12 year olds inhabit this game.