Champions of Norrath

[Hasbinbad]

As my venture into the realm of compromise, I would like to present an alternative to the 3 systems that have been proposed so far as I have seen (lassiez-faire [thank you Tiki for this wonderful $10 junior college word], enforced rotation, and randomized spawn times). It is somewhat of a hybrid system that incorporates the enforced fairness of a rotation, the direction of the more powerful parties involved, and some additional fun thrown in "for her pleasure."

I would like to preface this presentation with an acknowledgment of the fact that this system would seem to benefit my guild first. This initial advantage will be balanced to a degree automatically by the system as it would be put in place, as you will see.

The basic idea is for each guild who feels they are ready to raid should put forth a champion to duel-for-pick. This duel would be an organized server event held at a time which has been deemed mutually equitable by the leadership of the involved organizations.

The champion should be of a given class per duel, cleric vs. cleric, warrior vs. warrior. The class of a given weeks duel should be rotated via some random or ordered method. The champion should not be allowed to duel in consecutive contests. These checks make sure that one person or tactic is not consistently dominant in these duels, and forces guilds to be able to put forth a champion of any class.

The champion should be geared up by all members of their guild for this duel should they need it, but they should only be allowed to use what they can carry into a duel (no outside buffs etc).

The duel itself should be held at whatever location and be on whatever terms the involved parties can agree too (maybe iron this out beforehand).

The winner of the duel (or mini-tourney, should more than 2 guilds become involved) would obtain for his or her guild the right to first choice of raid targets that week. In a 2-guild setup, this would probably go down like:

<Fallen Heroes> wins the duel, <Angels of Light> loses.
<Fallen Heroes> chooses Cazic-Thule as their first pick.
<Angels of Light> chooses Lady Vox.
<Fallen Heroes> chooses Lord Nagafen.
<Angels of Light> chooses Dracoliche (for the sake of argument, pretend that he is a seven day spawn)

In a 3 guild situation, which at this point is much more likely than a 4-guild situation, each guild would get a major raid target for the week.

This will balance itself. <Fallen Heroes> cannot survive on Cazic loot alone, and will eventually take Nagafen first to try for the CoF, leaving Cazic for <Angels of Light>. <Fallen Heroes> might get 2 major targets a week at first, but with as fair as the duelling system is (or, if you don't agree, how fair you can make it), this simply cannot last. Eventually (or maybe to begin with), <Fallen Heroes> will lose the duel, and be forced to chose later.

[Cannot resist saying that although one organization might end up with 2 major raid targets per week, we kicked this servers ass first, we were raid ready well before you guys. We got dicked on our exclusive content rights {garnered by being ready early} due to the ddos's.. We would have had a lot of raiding without you guys being close to ready had everything been set up and stable beforehand, but c'est la vie right? Let's move on.]

As more content is added, it simply comes down to more picks, further allowing the GUILDS to decide how the content is split, while allowing for the spirit of competition to shine over the whole system, and allowing our guilds to, without being a dirty hippie, cooperate and come together as one in peace and harmony in our mutual pursuit of each other's blood.

Please take this proposal seriously, as I have spent a lot of time thinking about it. It can be polished and reworked if you have some major problem with it, but it looks really good to me, even should I be in the <Angels of Light> category. Please discuss this idea and help tug out the wrinkles.

[Bubbles]

psst... I hear that's how VZ/TZ is doing it!

[Hasbinbad]

psst... I hear that's how VZ/TZ is doing it!
Bubbles, I don't know if that's true or not. I don't have any connection to vz/tz, or know anything about it. This is my brain child, and if you don't like it, please debate the post based on it's merits or flaws and not based on some pre-conceived notion of what I am trying to say.

[Bubbles]

I love the concept, I'd like to see this happen as, say weekly events. I think it'd be a lot of fun and would relieve some tension.

I'm not sure anything involving PvP to determine rotation rights is going to be acceptable to all parties involved. And it certainly wouldn't be fair to up and coming guilds as a be-all-end-all version of how to determine spawn rights.

It's a killer idea for a weekly get together. though. :)

[Supreme]

Spawn is on 10 min repop.

Just dilute the spawns and the loot to the point that people dont care.

[Hasbinbad]

It would be fair to up and coming guilds.. they will probably lose, which means they will get LAST PICK of bosses (they would still get a boss)..
With the current content, that gives 3 guilds a major target every week - win or lose.
Over time it will balance itself, because I can tell you that there is only so many alendines a guild will farm before the melee's clamor for a CoF or RBB.

edit: and also until divinity gets the gumption to raid, it gives us more to share.. also more content is coming.. so probably more like 2-3 major targets per week with the opening of hate and sky - AND IT WOULD BE UP TO THE PLAYERS!! We could have fun with this and fix all the problems too.. I know that I for one would sit down with trans and div and work out the details if needed..

[Fanwen]

This system could work. But why go thru the duel process and simply say. Ok this week IB gets first pick. Next week Trans gets first pick. and so on. Then if you dont kill your raid target within 24 hours of spawn then you forfieted that boss and it becomes a FFA.

I like this idea lets expand on it. Could even just do a Simple /random to determine it

[Hasbinbad]

I like both the ideas of rotating pick and /random for pick, but my whole point with the duel was also to bring the server together and create some structured competition. It would allow the guilds with the better plan - pvp oriented tho it may be (other ideas for competition besides duels?) - to have some direction over the content while still allowing other organization(s) to have a hand in determining their content as well. Everyone gets fed, we get a little competition, we get some togetherness, we can even sing kumbaya by the fire if you guys really wanna. I would do some legwork as far as getting this set up. Can the few who have read this (who all seem to agree with it's spirit at least) word of mouth it around please? This situation is much preferable to the others that have been presented, even should it be rotating pick or /random pick.

[Wonton]

I like this because of the drafting idea.. If a guild wins dueling weekly they have the chance to choose whether or not to whore a mob as first pick draft.

Half my fun is ruining yours

[Hasbinbad]

But wonton do you honestly believe every single member of ours is better at duelling in their class than every single member in trans?
..
..
..ok well maybe a rotation is the best solution.

Unless Trans feels like disputing that claim on the battlefield for loot rights that is! ^^

[Fanwen]

If your gonna do it as duel setup then it should be a 6 on 6. that would show teamwork and skill.

but again this needs to be agreed upon by all parties involved.

[Gildiss Gram]

If your gonna do it as duel setup then it should be a 6 on 6. that would show teamwork and skill.

but again this needs to be agreed upon by all parties involved.

That would be totally unfair.
IB doesn't have any bards. It would be a total sweep for Transcendence.

[Hasbinbad]

I'd be open to 1v1 or 6v6 or any other small group or other similar competitive way to handle this.

[Hasbinbad]

That would be totally unfair.
IB doesn't have any bards. It would be a total sweep for Transcendence.

This is absolutely true. As it stands right now, trans would win on bard day hands down. All I can say is that we're working on it! ^^

[dagarath]

CMON lets be honest everyone, its not everquest without the Playnice method...really, need before greed is the jist of it if you've never heard of it before, and its really a major part of what made everquest so great

[Taluvill]

Double post on accident, one below is edited and fixed.

[Taluvill]

I actually really, really like this idea. 6v6 pvp, where any member from the week before couldnt be in the "group" for the next week, or hell the next 2 weeks to encourage the rotation of players and the inclusion of everyone. We could really turn this into a fun event.

If you could only use a certain player per month? How would IB fare without thier major tanks? Transcendence can only use Gildiss and Mythoxxus for 2 weeks out of a month, how strategically do we use them in the 6 man group?

Would be a lot of fun and we could really put an end to a lot of the whining and such. Would love to see the "fan" turnout as well.

Bets per fight? per round? would be a fun diversion from the daily grind (of eq, sheesh hehe)

Cheers hasbinbad, great idea, can really run with this one.
Lets get a Poll going?

[Finawin]

Determining PVE raids based upon terribly balanced EQ PVP? Bad idea.

[Hasbinbad]

I actually really, really like this idea. 6v6 pvp, where any member from the week before couldnt be in the "group" for the next week, or hell the next 2 weeks to encourage the rotation of players and the inclusion of everyone. We could really turn this into a fun event.

If you could only use a certain player per month? How would IB fare without thier major tanks? Transcendence can only use Gildiss and Mythoxxus for 2 weeks out of a month, how strategically do we use them in the 6 man group?

Would be a lot of fun and we could really put an end to a lot of the whining and such. Would love to see the "fan" turnout as well.

Bets per fight? per round? would be a fun diversion from the daily grind (of eq, sheesh hehe)

Cheers hasbinbad, great idea, can really run with this one.
Lets get a Poll going?

I like most of your ideas and I like the spirit of all of them! Whatever the contest details may end up being is open for the guild leaders to decide (upon threat of boring rotation). I honestly think that with the right set of rules this would not only be fair, but solve all of our issues, bring us all together, and be a lot of fucking fun. Not to mention great practice for the rumored BotB??

Win/win imho.

[Fanwen]

Honestly it would be very interesting but also very difficult. Setting it and having nobody interfear would be a problem without GM intervention. a Simple assigning a designated member or each guild who random 100 would be the simplist solution and hard to argue.

easily screen shotted and witnessed by numerous people. If you all decide to to do some 1on1 or 6on6 you could arrange some arena time.

But ultimately the decision is between your two guilds. The GM staff will simply review and agree or disagree. But I can say I like this idea. Simplicity I think is best to start. can always get creative down the line when the anger wears off alittle.

[Taluvill]

Honestly it would be very interesting but also very difficult. Setting it and having nobody interfear would be a problem without GM intervention. a Simple assigning a designated member or each guild who random 100 would be the simplist solution and hard to argue.

easily screen shotted and witnessed by numerous people. If you all decide to to do some 1on1 or 6on6 you could arrange some arena time.

But ultimately the decision is between your two guilds. The GM staff will simply review and agree or disagree. But I can say I like this idea. Simplicity I think is best to start. can always get creative down the line when the anger wears off alittle.

Hes got a point. We could use your system for a bit with randoming or rotating first picks. I'd love to do it where, say we had 3 guilds:

Say its our week. Trans takes Sky, As a whole as first pick.
IB takes Hate, as a whole.
Guild C takes Fear, as a whole.
Guild C takes naggy
IB takes vox
and Trans grabs Phinny.

First pick in first round gets last pick in second round, and vise versa. We could do picks on an agreed upon time during the week, before new spawns are hit for naggy vox and such.

Could go with something like this until we are good and ready with a solid idea and system for pvp, and just use PVP instead of dice or selection system.

Idk. Using your thread to vent some ideas and get some words out there, but tweaked your idea a bit to do it. Gotta find something that works, although im cool with the rotation we have now tbh. Trying to be creative here hehe.

[Hasbinbad]

Honestly it would be very interesting but also very difficult. Setting it and having nobody interfear would be a problem without GM intervention. a Simple assigning a designated member or each guild who random 100 would be the simplist solution and hard to argue.

easily screen shotted and witnessed by numerous people. If you all decide to to do some 1on1 or 6on6 you could arrange some arena time.

But ultimately the decision is between your two guilds. The GM staff will simply review and agree or disagree. But I can say I like this idea. Simplicity I think is best to start. can always get creative down the line when the anger wears off alittle.

Would I be remiss in asking for volunteer GM support ensuring no interference? I totally 100% understand the GM wish to not be hassled over this petty bullshit, but if this was more akin to an event, could we get some support? Seriously if as many people could agree to something like this it would be a big move for the server as far as politicking with each other goes.. All the hatred could possibly be changed to competitive camaraderie which is what I for one - and I am sure many others (including GMs?)- would prefer.

[sever]

Even though I don't play anymore, brilliant idea imo. 6v6 best 2/3 for first pick in a snake-draft lotto.

Hell I might even come back.

[Hasbinbad]

I really like all the ideas. I think if people start beating this drum to their respective organizations, we can take this and run with it.. Get some support! Have your friends come post here!

Please come up with as many ideas as possible, it will be good to have all of this to look at should it actually come down to the bargaining table between guildleaders.

[Fanwen]

Ill make sure to get Wenai, Aeolwind and Nilbog to check this and post thier opinions. Im not sure if at first we have a GM available, maybe a guide. But that ultimate decision will have to be made by Nilbog.

Its difficult to make sure someone will be there as we all have lives outside of this game as you all know. So /random 100 if no GM is available and a 6on6 arena action or 1on1 if a GM is available.

Keep throwing out the suggestions and ill pass this on.

[Takshaka]

OK, I retract my earlier statement in the other thread. This idea blows Dabamf's way out of the water! I think that this could be a really fun event and I am pretty sure that I would take time out from XPing to come and watch it. Cleric duels would be hella boring though.

Unfortunately I am pretty sure that currently it would be limited to 1v1 as the arenas are not working (I think).

I know that the arena in Freeport doesn't work ala Penoy's experiment the other day.

*Edit: If no GM was present to check buffs then you could require that each person fraps their own screen before the duel starts and then they would have to submit that video immediately following the duel to validate the win. Speaking of Fraps it would also be fun if someone attending would record each match and we could have them all archived here for any to watch if they want. Maybe start a new section on the forum and have one thread per week for that week's fight(s).

[Reiker]

This is the third idea I'll put my support behind. Here's the list so far:

1) Free-for-all.
2) Force merge Transcendence and Inglourious Basterds. (Bubbles' idea!)
3) PVP draft.

[Taluvill]

This is the third idea I'll put my support behind. Here's the list so far:

1) Free-for-all.
2) Force merge Transcendence and Inglourious Basterds. (Bubbles' idea!)
3) PVP draft.

I'd go for number 2 or more importantly, number 3.

3>2>1 Imo, But im up for any of them. FFA is honestly just as cool with me as everything else.

I've honestly thought of a force merge, but the only problem with that is that i do know certain people would have issues with other certain players. I'd guess that both guilds would have to be disbanded and leaders would have to re-choose who to invite imo, as to not get fights... Idk. It would definitely be a tough decision and tough to work out...

[Zexa]

I'd go for number 2 or more importantly, number 3.

3>2>1 Imo, But im up for any of them. FFA is honestly just as cool with me as everything else.

I've honestly thought of a force merge, but the only problem with that is that i do know certain people would have issues with other certain players. I'd guess that both guilds would have to be disbanded and leaders would have to re-choose who to invite imo, as to not get fights... Idk. It would definitely be a tough decision and tough to work out...

That's the greatest part of option 2. Could you imagine, after all this drama on the forums for the past 2 months, everyone being plopped together in the same guild without seeing it coming?

I find this idea very appealing. Also, disable the /guildremove ability of said players.

[Taluvill]

That's the greatest part of option 2. Could you imagine, after all this drama on the forums for the past 2 months, everyone being plopped together in the same guild without seeing it coming?

I find this idea very appealing. Also, disable the /guildremove ability of said players.

hahaha.

http://img528.imageshack.us/img528/5448/homereatingpopcornc7873qz3.jpg

[Bigcountry23]

Looks great on paper. Want to know how it will actually play out (based soley on the other posts I have seen today).

Guild 1 wins the dual, Guild 2 says "guild 1 hacked/exploited/charmed "A_Guard_01" and therefore thier win is invalid. We are gonna go kill "A_Boss_mob" when it spawns next to teach them a lesson".

[Allizia]

Looks great on paper. Want to know how it will actually play out (based soley on the other posts I have seen today).

Guild 1 wins the dual, Guild 2 says "guild 1 hacked/exploited/charmed "A_Guard_01" and therefore thier win is invalid. We are gonna go kill "A_Boss_mob" when it spawns next to teach them a lesson".

Most things are fair in duels, and it wouldn't be the end of the world if you don't get first pick any particular week.

I like it, but some details need to be ironed out to make a full draft of the proposal, I'll talk to you about it hasbin

[Allizia]

But wonton do you honestly believe every single member of ours is better at duelling in their class than every single member in trans?
..
..
..ok well maybe a rotation is the best solution.

Unless Trans feels like disputing that claim on the battlefield for loot rights that is! ^^

This is one of the things I like most about it, honest care free shit talking / competition instead of griefing, QQing and drama that will slowely tear the server apart. It would also give up and coming guilds a chance to break into the rotation, but they will have to work for it and they may have to start at the bottom and take what they can get for a while.

Bring it on!

(maybe we could sell tickets and do it in the Arena for all to see)

My main issue is the line up, I think last weeks winner should put fourth their champion and the loser (In order) of last weeks will choose someone they think has a good chance against that champion. (Have you ever see 2 clerics duel? wtf ZZzzz...) This will help combat the same guild winning every week, but any gear advantages still remain.

It has to be a tooth and nail fight though: Went LD? don't care. Forgot a buff? Try again next week.

To ease the boredom that will eventually occur on raid targets(I doubt anyone will be crying about losing 1 Vox a few months from now) and the duels, we could eventually branch out into different skirmishes. 1 vs 1, 6 vs 6, 12 vs 12, guild vs guild etc. IB, Trans and Divinity in a massive explosion arena brawl sounds like a blast to me and it's not the end of the world if you lose.

[Zexa]

Sounds good. Down and dirty.

I've never done a 6v6(or really much of any PVP) on EQ. That sounds like good fun.

[Reiker]

K we're doing this, close the silly spawn variance thread.

[Zexa]

K we're doing this, close the silly spawn variance thread.

Have to have the GM/Dev staff approve it first.

Just like on Live.

[Allizia]

It needs some form of opt out /roll though. While I like the idea and I will fight, I am sure some guilds will come along and pull the PvE argument that they should not be forced to pvp to engage PvE targets.

Something along the lines of a /random with a small penalty for being a pussy. ( /random 100: 80+ = first choice, 60+ = second choice, 0-60 = last in a 3 guild situation)

[Zexa]

I can't speak for them, but I have a feeling that if IB and Trans settle on an agreement the GM staff will support the decision system.

Either way, they don't want to be involved in mediation between anyone. So if guild #3 comes in to poach our mob we'll have to put in even more work between each.

Towards the end of Kunark we'll have a weekly PVP play-off system going on. I can see it now! 6 guilds enter. 1 guild will leave.

[Allizia]

Maintain the current rotation rules (24 hours to kill your target or it goes FFA regardless who won, don't harass other guilds when they are raiding etc.) and use this as the selection process and I'm fairly confident I could get the guild to agree on it.

Inevitably 7 day targets(vox, ct, naggy) will spawn at midnight on Sunday and should be skipped that week in the draft

The planes are the biggest issue, what happens when guild a has Draco but doesn't have the people on to kill it, guild B has CT and is ready to engage but can't? What about trash in PoF and PoH?

[Zexa]

I most certainly would say that content like the planes needs to be "all inclusive." Perhaps the CT spawn day needs to be a special day when the PoFear option isn't just for the clear. It's for CT essentially.

Same with Hate, Sky, VP, NToV. It would be too ugly to start splitting all that up.

[Fanwen]

Personally I agree the planes should be all inclusive for simplicity. As for the yard trash I think that should just be First come first serve.

But again this is totally up to the two current guilds in question. Also we need to address how an up coming guild can enter the rotation.

Do they have to ask for a shot from the current guild in rotation, or do they have to (for lack of a better term) KS and prove they can kill it before being considered. By KS i mean get there first and kill it not attack at the same time.

Keep it going and come up with a fair proposal and im sure this can be agreed upon by the GM staff

[Allizia]

What about:

CT (Plane of fear is owned by this guild for 24 hours from the minute CT spawns or until CT is dead. Any guild currently in PoF must vacate immediately when CT spawns)
Naggy
Vox
Plane of Fear Sunday - Wednesday (excluding CT, Including Dracho/Golems)
Plane of Fear Thursday - Saturday (excluding CT, Including Dracho/Golems)

Not sure if phinny is worth it, but could add it in as well:

Phinny Sunday - Wednesday
Phinny Thursday - Saturday

Days end CST at Midnight, Guild Leaders/Officers can (and should) give permission for another guild to enter for trash if it is not going to be done etc.

[Allizia]

Also we need to address how an up coming guild can enter the rotation.

Phinny Monday - Wednesday
Phinny Thursday - Saturday

Phinny Sunday = Phinny is off limits to all guilds in the rotation on Sunday. It will be FFA for any guild wishing to enter the draft.

If the guild manages to kill Phinny they have the right to enter next weeks rotation and will be limited to ONE choice from the rotation for the first week (determined by the draft)

If they fail to kill that target within 24 hours or if they fail to clear at least 50% of Plane of Fear (approx 150? mobs within 8 hours) within 3 days they are opted out of the rotation and must try again from scratch.

If they Succeed they will enter the next weeks draft with full rights.

Ehh it has flaws but all I could think of atm

[Hasbinbad]

The original idea was to have it be more fair by having interclass duels, but it seems like there is a lot of interest in larger battles which i like too so..

If we can get some agreement on how to have a larger battle in the arena area or work something else out, we can /random 6 to determine the number in next weeks battle and then assemble a small team over the week to put forward

In the case of a duel, you could have your alphabetical list of classes.. /random 14 - to decide next weeks class, giving guilds a week to prep, if the same class is rolled twice, reroll

Seems like it should be no holds barred at first, with agreements on tactics to be outlawed based on precedent. I also think it should be a "better luck next time" contest so that there is absolutely zero possibility of QQ. I say that with one warning about having to police outside buffs and make sure to have mad dispells at the beginning of each fight.

I would say individual contests should be 2 out of 3 wins. I don't know of any tournament structures, but I'm sure there is one already made we can burgle.. Someone here know of a way we can determine a winner fairly between 3 or 4 or 5 guilds? An expandable tournament structure?

More ideas!

[Rigget]

Not gonna lie, at first I thought the idea sounded retarded, but the more I've read.... I love this plan.

6v6 or 1v1, I wanna get the crap beat outta me and I wanna have all this bickering resolved. We need to choose a location where NPC's and other garbage won't interfere. If the arena works, that'll be perfect, if not, I'm sure we can find some remote zone like west karana where there won't be any interference.

Please work out more details, and let the games begin!

[Ektar]

Only issue with the champion from last week fighting a new challenger is that pvp in eq is veeery unbalanced, and a class could be chosen just to take advantage of the bullshitery of eq pvp. Or perhaps that's a way to give the loser the advantage the next time? Could start the duels with leader vs leader, then go from there. That is if we go the 1v1 route.



And, from another post, Wenai said he looked at this proposal and said it has no place on this server. Honestly, you said we need to work it out ourselves, and when we do... you say no? Even without "[reading] it in full detail?" Especially based on this response, if it's a system we want to do, then let us do it... I know it's hard for parents to let their children make their own choices when those choices don't meet with their own... but, you have to do it (that is, if you don't want to babysit us).

[Ektar]

Also, something mentioned about waiting until midnight of the last day to kill Cazic so you get him at the start of your next rotation... Honestly, that can be solved by the following being in the agreement:


No Bullshit


You may want everything mapped perfectly, every detail specified... but I think on something so simple we can be civilized people and agree to just kill cazic or inny or whatever once per week. during your week, you get to kill him once. You fail to do it in your week, you miss your chance. You get him on the ropes as your time's up, then ask the other guild if you can stay an extra hour... then they get to kill your CT the next time (perhaps a week + 1day to regularize it back in the middle). Let's sneak around and manipulated any other points, but shit so simple as that? "No Bullshit" should suffice.

[Taluvill]

Also, something mentioned about waiting until midnight of the last day to kill Cazic so you get him at the start of your next rotation... Honestly, that can be solved by the following being in the agreement:


No Bullshit


You may want everything mapped perfectly, every detail specified... but I think on something so simple we can be civilized people and agree to just kill cazic or inny or whatever once per week. during your week, you get to kill him once. You fail to do it in your week, you miss your chance. You get him on the ropes as your time's up, then ask the other guild if you can stay an extra hour... then they get to kill your CT the next time (perhaps a week + 1day to regularize it back in the middle). Let's sneak around and manipulated any other points, but shit so simple as that? "No Bullshit" should suffice.


Exactly. If we can all agree to a winner vrs loser and actually stick to it without someone from either guild trying to rile up the other guild... And we can act like respectable human beings and respect spawns and stuff... this would work wonderfully.

I honestly think Hasbin + Allizia needs to look and take the important bits from people's ideas here and organize a formal write up for wenai and the team to take a peak at.

Hasbin's foundation along with allizia's adds, and my tidbits+everyone else's tidbits (like ektars for example) should be included. I want my name stamped on there somewhere too ;) :D

Edit: I just thought of this, but this isn't just the leadership's decision. The regular members (like myself) need to have a vote in the process as well, i know a lot of people who are extremely uncomfortable with this idea.

[karsten]

trading off mobs is retarded, there should be a ffa on all raid mobs, either with variance or without, and gms shouldn't be involved. it's not rocket science.

All this talk about finding ways to share mobs is making people thing mobs ought to be shared, which they aren't. The whole paradigm is misguided, as are discussions about it

[Gildiss Gram]

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v518/EarthbounderNess/QuitGettingMad.gif

[Allizia]

Some people really love this, and some people really hate it for the pvp aspects.

We could do a simple /random draft with the same effect that would actually be way easier to manage, and still get some pvp on the side

[Reiker]

trading off mobs is retarded, there should be a ffa on all raid mobs, either with variance or without, and gms shouldn't be involved. it's not rocket science.

All this talk about finding ways to share mobs is making people thing mobs ought to be shared, which they aren't. The whole paradigm is misguided, as are discussions about it

The GMs have made it quite apparent that they don't want to run this server like actual classic EQ (FFA), so we're trying to find "the next best thing."

The whole point of the PVP aspect is that each guild gets to "decide their fate" in a way... /randoming defeats the whole idea.

[Hasbinbad]

It needs some form of opt out /roll though. While I like the idea and I will fight, I am sure some guilds will come along and pull the PvE argument that they should not be forced to pvp to engage PvE targets.

Something along the lines of a /random with a small penalty for being a pussy. ( /random 100: 80+ = first choice, 60+ = second choice, 0-60 = last in a 3 guild situation)

Meh, they will still get 3rd pick even if they don't fight. If we force rotation of mobs after a certain point (maybe you can't chose CT more than twice consecutively), they will still get a shot at all the mobs. This is just imo, but I think it's already in the description?

[Hasbinbad]

What about:

CT (Plane of fear is owned by this guild for 24 hours from the minute CT spawns or until CT is dead. Any guild currently in PoF must vacate immediately when CT spawns)
Naggy
Vox
Plane of Fear Sunday - Wednesday (excluding CT, Including Dracho/Golems)
Plane of Fear Thursday - Saturday (excluding CT, Including Dracho/Golems)

Not sure if phinny is worth it, but could add it in as well:

Phinny Sunday - Wednesday
Phinny Thursday - Saturday

Days end CST at Midnight, Guild Leaders/Officers can (and should) give permission for another guild to enter for trash if it is not going to be done etc.

I'm not sure if it is your intention, but I really like the idea of putting blocks of time in a plane as a pick.

[Hasbinbad]

trading off mobs is retarded, there should be a ffa on all raid mobs, either with variance or without, and gms shouldn't be involved. it's not rocket science.

All this talk about finding ways to share mobs is making people thing mobs ought to be shared, which they aren't. The whole paradigm is misguided, as are discussions about it

I agree 100%, but in a theoretical way that applies to my pipe dream.

Wenai has specifically stated specifically over and over and over and over and over again that specifically FFA is what is specifically not going to happen.

Some people keep harping on this like they have cottonballs dipped in wax lodged in their ears. Keep plugging your ears and saying "LALALALALALA." Ostrich head in the sand much Karsten? It's not groundhogs day bro, go back in your hole.

As long as people keep harping on a theoretical "way it should be" and don't look at the reality of the situation at hand, other people who do look at and work with reality will make all the decisions. If IB doesn't come to the bargaining table with something realistic that is within the boundries of the stated realm of possibility, someone else will, and they will get their way in the face of a lack of constructive ideas from us.

Like I said, I totally agree with you - theoretically.
Just like I agree with an anarchistic system of government - theoretically.
I just wish you would deal with reality.

[Hasbinbad]

The GMs have made it quite apparent that they don't want to run this server like actual classic EQ (FFA), so we're trying to find "the next best thing."

The whole point of the PVP aspect is that each guild gets to "decide their fate" in a way... /randoming defeats the whole idea.

I agree, while it would be fair the /randoming idea defeats the point of the competitive aspect of this system. IMO all a guild needs to do is state their intention to attempt a raid mob to get on this rotation.

Since this is an issue, maybe some more words on how it would work for a new person..

We're going to have to say that certain milestones have to be met first. Have you cleanly taken down the seahorses and Phinny? Have you attempted and downed a dragon? No CT picks until you take down a dragon. If a guild wants in on the pick, they state their intention to try Nagafen or Vox, and we're going to have to let them. To be fair, so that the "on deck" guild isn't stepped on, they should get the NEXT dragon, not the expected one. They follow the same rules of engagement as other guilds, but if they don't get the kill, they don't get a spot in the next duel.

I apologize, but since it is pertinent, and because Allizia wanted to add the 24 hour clause to this idea, I am now going to temporarily hijack my own thread.
The rules of engagement need to be reworked. 24 hours to "engage and kill" is ludicrous. 24 hours to engage seems like a long time but fair, but to get as many attempts as you want during that time rewards failure. Something like "24 hours to engage and make 2 (solid) attempts (wipes - not including resets due to aggro during setup etc.)." If you can't get your target down, you need to step aside and let someone else try. This is just my opinion, but we do need to work it out.

[Hasbinbad]

Keep the discussion going.
I'll take some time this weekend at some point to review this thread and write up a solid draft of the system as I see it working best. I'll post it for review.

We need to get both raid-ready guilds to have an internal vote on this issue. With the support of their organizations, they can sit down and hammer out any disagreements with the drafted system. Work out any last details so to speak.

It needs to be stated that if either party doesn't like this system anymore, they can always opt back to rotation or another agreement. So, if you have other good ideas (I'm sure you do.. This is just the best *I* could come up with), start a thread and get support for it.. This is the agreement between guilds that staff has stated rotation will be lifted for, but it is just that, an agreement. If it is no longer agreed upon, rotation becomes enforced de facto (which none of us want, really).

[Wonton]

/random 6 to determine the size if the battle is awesome!
/random for first pick draft is not awesome!

1 = 1v1 = class selection and who duels from that class needs to be decided and agreed by the guilds / guild leaders. Also, needs to be something from restricting shaman vs. shaman or warrior vs. warrior week after week if we roll 1's a lot.

2-6 = multiple class selection and who duels from that class needs to be decided and agreed by the guilds / guild leaders. If a 2 is rolled eight weeks in a row, the two champions selected shouldn't have any kind of rotation check. Assuming you would want to put the same two classes up over and over. I know certain classes counter others, that being said.. maybe if a 2-6 is rolled then the classes/players need to be decided on before-hand then called forth at the same time by each guild.

I would love to see this implemented. the only thing i have against it is the 24 hours to engage and kill. it should be 24 hours to Engage, then rotated down in order of how the duels went. Like.. say IB wins the first duel and chooses CT. if we wipe once Trans should have the chance to come in and attempt, ONCE. if they wipe, Divinity should have the chance to come in and attempt, ONCE. so on and so on. this example would be if ib won first duel, trans was second, then divinity third.

[Wonton]

And, from another post, Wenai said he looked at this proposal and said it has no place on this server. Honestly, you said we need to work it out ourselves, and when we do... you say no? Even without "[reading] it in full detail?" Especially based on this response, if it's a system we want to do, then let us do it... I know it's hard for parents to let their children make their own choices when those choices don't meet with their own... but, you have to do it (that is, if you don't want to babysit us).

this is lol.

[quido]

https://www.msu.edu/~oconne53/pictures/hair.jpg

May I interest you in a book? Here's one called "How To Cut Hair." I only read half of it...

[Wonton]

how'd you find my picture??? wtf

[Matrim]

I'd hit it.

[Nizzarr]

This idea is retarded and I will never support such shitty ideas.

[Hasbinbad]

This idea is retarded and I will never support such shitty ideas.
You're not alone. While many people agree with you, many more people seem to agree with this idea. Nobody seems to be giving specific reasons why this idea won't work. Why don't you discuss what you don't like about it?

[Deanob]

EDIT: I really dont care actually... just wanna play

[Bigcountry23]

You're not alone. While many people agree with you, many more people seem to agree with this idea. Nobody seems to be giving specific reasons why this idea won't work. Why don't you discuss what you don't like about it?

Some people are good at PVP
Some people are good at PVE
Some people might be able to do both (good for them).
Some people mght suck at both (and roll up rangers)

Why should you have to win a PVP fight in order to be able to fight a PVE mob.

That is my reason for not being in favor of this.

[Hasbinbad]

Some people are good at PVP
Some people are good at PVE
Some people might be able to do both (good for them).
Some people mght suck at both (and roll up rangers)

Why should you have to win a PVP fight in order to be able to fight a PVE mob.

That is my reason for not being in favor of this.

Yeah, that's valid.. But it does foster cooperative competition and like allizia said, it's not the end of the world if you lose. You still get to raid. Your last analogy about not getting to fight a PVE mob if you lose a PVP fight is therefore false.

Also, rangers are kind of awesome in PVP once they get geared.

[Ektar]

I really don't understand why PVP can't be a decidor (yea that's how I wanna spell it) for PVE mobs. To me that argument makes no sense. Why do we /ran 100 to determine who gets an fbss? It's simply a way of determining one over another. But better than /ran 100, this, as has been said, gives us some power over it and some competition. Yes, we could also set up a giant chess game out of guild members and the guild leaders tell pieces to move and the victor gets first pick. This has the same elements of the PVP as it gives control over the process and is competitive. But PVP sounds more interesting, yeh? And if you don't understand that analogy's point, don't respond to it. It's an exaggerated example alternative.



And as for some people sucking at pvp? Don't choose them as your champions :p

[Hasbinbad]

Don't choose them as your champions :p

^

[Widan]

Pvp is in no way balanced in EQ. Good enough?

[Soulfighter]

It's a freaking pve server , deal with it .

ps: VZ/VT has been fully wiped and is now a classic pvp server please go there.

[Andman]

Hey there,

Thought i'd drop in my 2 cents. The idea of competition for guild picks is good. However, I think duels could be problematic, it would just lead to more arguing. Why not (If a GM was interested) have a monthly event, where CLASSIC EQ Trivia was the competitive game. The GM's would have a set of questions (thought up before hand), whoever correctly answered the question first would get first pick of target for that week or month. It could also be expanded to attract other people & make it a server event. Round one for guild picks, round 2 would have prizes for lowbies! The GM could use ooc or a private channel. I think that would be fun, especially the lowbie idea! As i'm level 8 and have no interest in raids atm :)

Example question could be something like... Name two zones connected to "Gorge of King Xorb" (or whatever that zone is). Speed & General knowledge would reward the true old school players.

[Ektar]

It's a PvE server. Zoman, what're those commands...? /duel and /guildwar? PvP existed in PvE servers too! gosh darn, sucks for your argument don'tit!

Just because it's a PvE server doesn't mean we can't duel, I really don't see how this is an argument at all! And ps, on a pvp server, we wouldn't have organized duels. We'd fight at nagafen's lair; in plane of fear; in north freeport. That's PvP. This is dueling on a PvE.


And yes, pvp is unbalanced in eq. I'm very vocal about this. But it's unbalanced for both sides equally, don't you see? Each side will have the benefits and hindrances of the unbalance.



ANYWAY the reason I got out of bed to post... too excited over the idea things just flyin through my head. In order to make the battle itself less "okay, when it starts, jump soandso" (when it's more than 1v1 this applies) we can have each guild (or a greater than the number of fighters amount) stand on opposite sides of the arena (or designated arena), and upon the start of the battle, people in the battle rush forward and everyone else scatter back. The battle will therefore depend more on leadership and quick thinking, rather than foreplanning of "kill soandso first, soandso second, and soandso third."

[Ektar]

And as for your post andman, the major problem is that the GMs do not want to be involved. And actually in response to this I just thought of a problem with my previous post's idea... get to that ina second... But yeah, GMs do not want to be involved, and even more turning this into an event for everyone on the server is just adding things unnecessarily to what this is trying to accomplish. It's like throw pillows on a bed. (and honestly, I just find that to be incredibly boring, and I'd feel like a kindergartener. Not to deter bringing ideas, I just feel like this particular one's not gonna fly.)


So yeah my previous post's idea... will allow for buff cheating, cuz there won't be thorough dispel cleansing before the allowance of self buffs. I can't think of a solution to that off the top of my head, other than allowing any buffs, but that's not a good idea at all heh. Perhaps it needs to be thrown out. If you like the idea please try to save it!

[Hasbinbad]

Pvp is in no way balanced in EQ. Good enough?

1v1 same class it is, and there is room in the language already to allow guilds to put forth some kind of guidelines specific to a situation. Basically it comes down to what can be agreed upon. Two clerics vs. 2 monks might not be very balanced, but if that's what the guilds in question agree to, who are you to say it's unfair?

[Hasbinbad]

Hey there, Thought i'd drop in my 2 cents.. [bunch of stuff unrelated to the topic] ..reward the true old school players.
This looks like a great post for a different topic. I'm not trying to be a jerk, it actually sounds like a fun idea, and I think you should make another topic about it. I would definitely post ideas.

[Andman]

Already theres lots of arguing about dueling, trivia just seems simpler and less problematic.. with same potential results

[Ektar]

Yes, but so is /random 100. See above for argument against this

[Hasbinbad]

Already theres lots of arguing about dueling, trivia just seems simpler and less problematic.. with same potential results

Here, have this instead. (http://project1999.org/forums/showthread.php?p=10496#post10496)

[Andman]

and upon the start of the battle, people in the battle rush forward and everyone else scatter back. The battle will therefore depend more on leadership and quick thinking, rather than foreplanning of "kill soandso first, soandso second, and soandso third."

this is riddled with problems.. wouldnt work

[Hasbinbad]

and upon the start of the battle, people in the battle rush forward and everyone else scatter back. The battle will therefore depend more on leadership and quick thinking, rather than foreplanning of "kill soandso first, soandso second, and soandso third."

this is riddled with problems.. wouldnt work

Goobles?

[Ektar]

AND as for a solution to my own problem! Cut down the numbers on each side so it's like 1 to 1 real contender to decoy... like 3v3 fight will start with 6 people on each side, 3 in battle, 3 that'll run back. Each side sends other people over to mass dispel, and then watches as they buff up to make sure they only get self buffs. But once again I run into the same problem of the decoys buffing the real contenders.. sigh! I need to go to sleep =p. Perhaps the decoys can only be non buffers or weaker buffers. Like warriors can be there, paladins if a cleric is there, rangers if a druid is there (or cleric if a cleric is there, paladin if a paladin is there, etc). So the decoys can't actually aid in buffing. And during the fight, everyone not involved can be like "okay if they were actually in the fight and these were the decoys, is it possible for those mofos the CHEAT?! DID THEY!?" and if it's shown that cheating did happen (or was possible due to an error) that side loses. I'll even go so far as to look into everyone's spells, but I feel like there are enough non-casting classes to make this simple enough (and I know for a fact that so far in the timeline paladins are weak clerics, and can add no advantage... I assume same for rangers n sks.)

[Ektar]

I like how we're all here just chattin =p. I JUST said there are problems with it, andman - look a few posts up


GOIN TO BED CHECK BACK LATERZ

[Hasbinbad]

Ektar made me think of something Allizia said..

If it's a 2v2, guild A comes to the fight with 3 players, guild b eliminates one.
If it's a 3v3, guild A comes to the fight with 5 players, guild b eliminates two.
etc.

?

[Ektar]

damn it, fine I'm NOT goin to bed.

I don't like this idea, because it hits upon the unbalance of eq pvp. I don't wanna think of a specific example right now, cuz I wanna gooooo to bed, but if eac hside comes out with 3 people, and it works out that guild A chose a certain classes that would ultimately slaughter guild B if one of B's was removed... bam. fucked. Elimination of competitors digs into the unbalance of eq pvp and makes it unequal to either side. Like I said earlier, the unbalance of pvp is a non-issue because it hurts and benefits both sides equally.



Honestly, now goin to bed. we'll have a good chat tomorrow hasbin, I'm sure =p

[Hasbinbad]

damn it, fine I'm NOT goin to bed.

I don't like this idea, because it hits upon the unbalance of eq pvp. I don't wanna think of a specific example right now, cuz I wanna gooooo to bed, but if eac hside comes out with 3 people, and it works out that guild A chose a certain classes that would ultimately slaughter guild B if one of B's was removed... bam. fucked. Elimination of competitors digs into the unbalance of eq pvp and makes it unequal to either side. Like I said earlier, the unbalance of pvp is a non-issue because it hurts and benefits both sides equally.



Honestly, now goin to bed. we'll have a good chat tomorrow hasbin, I'm sure =p

It does make it interesting.. It kind of makes you think of 3 different possible teams of 2.. Makes planning for a 2v2 a lot harder.

[Hasbinbad]

It would allow the guilds with the better plan - pvp oriented tho it may be (other ideas for competition besides duels?) - to have some direction over the content while still allowing other organization(s) to have a hand in determining their content as well.
Yes, I did just quote myself.

I kind of feel like this sentence had some good that was overlooked by a lot of people who take issue with the pvp nature of the OP.

Specifically, the idea that PVP is not necessarily the only sort of competition we could have. If you really wanted to, you could come up with some sort of PVE competition that would isolate and test skill (for clerics.. how long can you keep Hasbinbad alive vs a fire giant warrior - i dunno how you could get the times, but you see the kind of thing I mean). This could even be proposed an implemented after the fact. We can do PvP sometimes and goofy shit like that other times, or have some sort of weekly race through FG's with a single group (this actually sounds fun).. I dunno.. think about it!

Ideas?

[Taluvill]

On our server on live, our guild (Truthseekers) did a level 1, drunken naked gnome race from Queynos to the back of Kelethin (yes, you had to navigate the treetops haha) for prizes.

I think that hasbin made an excellent point. doesnt have to be Just pvp. We could do trivia one week, events like the one i described above as others, and pvp some weeks. I mean we could really do a lot of fun things with the basic structure of this thing.

Hell, we could all random 32k if were hardpressed for time or something. idk. Should be fun, and will help keep a lot of interest i think as kunark is a very, very long ways off.

I like the basic structure -- Winner gets first pick, 2nd place gets second pick and so on. Same with how i like the idea of 24 hrs to kill, 2 attempts max.

Lets just satisfy everyone's needs and do more than one type of challenge.

[Hasbinbad]

Lets just satisfy everyone's needs and do more than one type of challenge.

My only gripe with something new and different every week would be:
1.) a lot of work hammering out rules every week.
2.) a lot of work policing it to make it fair.
3.) you wouldn't be able to practice and get better at the competition over time.
4.) it doesn't reward the more motivated and skilled players, it rewards the best game-players (races, trivia, etc).

Well I guess I had more than one gripe. I actually have a few more now that I think about it. It seems like it would be a lot of fun if we had like camp-counselors who already knew what games we would be playing and how to determine if it was fair coz they were counselors for the last 5 summers too, but having to start from scratch is probably a lot more work than you think. For every idea you come up with, someone else has five more (look at this thread), and we're trying to come to a solid agreement and keep it simple.

As far as keeping it simple goes, here is another idea I had (http://www.project1999.org/forums/showthread.php?t=1562). I am shifting my main support over to this new idea (http://www.project1999.org/forums/showthread.php?t=1562), although I will continue to help with this idea if that's the will of the server.