Quote:
Originally Posted by Loke
[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
I'm on my phone, so I'm not going to quote you, but this is a response to man0warr.
You are wrong - both sides negotiated (how much good faith is up for dispute I guess though) and rogean/Sirken acted as an arbiter. Both sides submitted suggestions on what they felt was fair, which were obviously skewed in opposite directions, and the staff created a system that fell some where in the middle. That is how a mediated negotiation works between two hostile parties. That doesn't change the fact that is it bad form to come back with your hands out asking for more and expecting to give nothing in return. If class R really wants to compete in VP they should propose an alteration of the agreement to class C and the GMs, not make weekly posts saying how unfair an agreement is that gave them a far greater number of mobs than they recieved previously.
Class R seems to want to have it both ways - play their way, and also play class C's way, while at the same time demanding class C be excluded from the class R samd box. Why not offer class C a spot in the rotation in exchange for FFA in VP? Because then you wouldnt be getting something for nothing. I have no idea if class C or GMs would go for somethig like that, but atleast that would be an attempt to negotiate instead of begging for more hand outs. Who knows, maybe class C guilds would like some nice relaxed engages every now and again. Ofcourse that would also reduce class R pixels, but only class C cares about pixels, right?
|
Despite this thread title, no class R leaders are asking Class C to give up VP exclusivity. They just want the FFA cycle removed to decrease intra-class interaction and drama/petitions/poopsocking.