Ignoring the Average Joe: Why most raid plans do nothing for those who need it most

[Autotune]

Originally Posted by Frieza_Prexus [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I don't understand what you're trying to say. Are you saying that my post is some sort of sour grapes? Please elaborate.

No sir, this isn't against you, sorry.

Seeing all these people have nearly the same agreement, but because it's not their exact proposal they don't want to agree to it is annoying.

I guess I'm just getting irritated like some of the staff.

[Rhambuk]

Originally Posted by Frieza_Prexus [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I don't understand what you're trying to say. Are you saying that my post is some sort of sour grapes? Please elaborate.

I don't believe it was directed towards you at all. More towards the guys that are literally crying as they scream about competition and handouts.

[Daldaen]

Originally Posted by Pint [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

im not entitled to shit, im just tired of reading post after post of people bitching that the free handouts they are getting are not enough.

Oh so the dragons are just falling over dead?

They aren't using a MT warrior? Or cleric CH/spam heals? Or Rogue/Wiz DPS? Or shaman/enchanter buffs?

I'm pretty sure the bosses still have their AEs, the ability to attack and 32k HP. So they aren't asking for handouts. Just asking to play PvE.

[Autotune]

Originally Posted by Rhambuk [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I don't believe it was directed towards you at all. More towards the guys that are literally crying as they scream about competition and handouts.

There have been people on both sides doing this as well, but the more vocal and obnoxious ones seem to be from FE and TMO (a few, not the majority).

[Frieza_Prexus]

Originally Posted by Autotune [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

No sir, this isn't against you, sorry.

Seeing all these people have nearly the same agreement, but because it's not their exact proposal they don't want to agree to it is annoying.

I guess I'm just getting irritated like some of the staff.

Ah, ok, that makes sense.

[citizen1080]

Originally Posted by Frieza_Prexus [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I am hesitant to make a new post given how frequently people have been vomiting on their keyboards and pressing Enter, but I see a large problem looming, and I don't think it has been satisfactorily addressed.

The Issue

Many of the non "Tier 1" guilds do not kill raid mobs, not because they can't compete, but because they do not have the desire or ability to compete at certain times. For example, smaller guilds are certainly capable of killing Trakanon, but they are not capable or desirous of killing him at 9 AM on a Tuesday morning. These people have demanding jobs, families, and other responsibilities that hinder their ability to respond to batphones on short notice. Many of the current ideas floating around do nothing to address the issue of spawn times, and they often set a time limit on how long the mob can be spawned before it defaults to FFA. These solutions do little to address this issue.

One of the largest outcries from the community is that the current setup prevents the casual from ever seeing, much less participating in, the end game. No one can reasonably suggest that casuals should have just as much content as the hardcore, but neither can anyone suggest that the casual should never be allowed to even glimpse the endgame. The goal should be to enable both groups in a fair manner that does not unduly impact the other.

Solving the problem: Hardcores gonna hardcore; casuals gonna casual

I see a fundamental error in most plans because they attempt to create a single sandbox where both populations are to play. This is, in my view, an incorrect approach. The rift is so drastic that it cannot be satisfactorily bridged. There must be two separate schemes. This is why I personally favor hands off periods with baglimits, and similar plans that completely segregate the different populations.

The ideal situation would be a pre-announced repop every ~2 weeks wherein no guild make take more than 2 targets, and no guild may attack the repop if it claimed more than X# of targets since the last repop. The repop time can vary to accommodate time zones, but the general thrust is that it is reasonably predictable so that players may plan around them. Players do not respond to 4 AM batphones for a variety of reasons, but a 7:00 PM Tuesday Night or an 11:00 AM Saturday morning repop would certainly make the average player's personal calendar. If casuals are to have meaningful participation, they must 1) be able to plan their schedule in advance of the raid, and 2) be protected from predatory hardcores.

NOTE: I understand that the staff has said that repops are not on the table, but we've also been told that they'd never force negotiations on the players. These are interesting times, and nothing is impossible. If we appeal logically and diplomatically it may enable otherwise impossible solutions.

Recap: Why is this a problem and what does this solve? Explain Like I'm 5

Many smaller guilds do not compete because time and commitment restrictions keep them from logging in when the mobs spawn. Many of the current proposals do nothing to solve or address this issue. By segregating raid targets into completely separate groups between the casual and the hardcore you allow the casual to make time to raid with a promise of absolutely zero interference from the hardcore crowd, and you allow the hardcore to continue their activities without harming the casual.

Well written and thought-out post. I agree completely. There is no satisfactory solution for all parties without repops on the table or as a second best solution something akin to Divinity's proposal.

Bravo sir

[citizen1080]

Originally Posted by Millburn [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I understand where you're coming from Xasten and I think it's a discussion we need to continue having down the line. The agreement that needs to be made for tonight's deadline though has to be made with the system we have now. That's what the GM's are looking for and so far a lot of the discussions have slanted towards wanting to change the system itself instead of working with what we have.

The last thing we should do is hurry up and accept a sub par proposal just because a deadline is coming up. There is ZERO guarantee that the GMs will force the server to the negotiating table again so this is most likely the first and only chance to do the server some good and make it a better place for ALL the players.

[Millburn]

Originally Posted by citizen1080 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

The last thing we should do is hurry up and accept a sub par proposal just because a deadline is coming up. There is ZERO guarantee that the GMs will force the server to the negotiating table again so this is most likely the first and only chance to do the server some good and make it a better place for ALL the players.

Totally agree with you on this Bob. I just think it's important that the discussions we do have to this end be based on the system that we have now, not a system that we want in the future. (By system I mean the mechanics and coding, not a raiding agreement) It's been a couple times now where the GM's have said something to this effect.

[Autotune]

Originally Posted by citizen1080 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

The last thing we should do is hurry up and accept a sub par proposal just because a deadline is coming up. There is ZERO guarantee that the GMs will force the server to the negotiating table again so this is most likely the first and only chance to do the server some good and make it a better place for ALL the players.

This is only great for a short while, you can't expect that the server staff will allow this to carry on much longer.

If you want it more open, needs to be more open and if you want something more concrete, a proposal with less wiggle room.

I'd highly suggest a system that allows for both sides to make changes as they need to their own part of the raiding system.

[citizen1080]

Originally Posted by Millburn [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Totally agree with you on this Bob. I just think it's important that the discussions we do have to this end be based on the system that we have now, not a system that we want in the future. (By system I mean the mechanics and coding, not a raiding agreement) It's been a couple times now where the GM's have said something to this effect.

I see your point but at the same time, and I have said this to some high level negotiators from the T1 raid guilds, they need to have 2 proposals for the GMs.

One in which there are no mechanics changes to the server where the ball is entirely in our court (which will be the worst of the two proposals in my opinion) and a SECOND proposal that includes mechanics changes via the staff. Be this variance changes, re-pops, dildos made of cheese raining from the sky, whatever.

This puts the ball in their court and hopefully they will decide to anty into the pot and help the players make this a better server.