VP closed to Class R guilds?

[Fanguru]

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

Wipe it and split it. A rotation server for those that come from servers with a history of rotation, and a FFA server for those that come from servers with a history of FFA.

I would love that. I'm pretty sure the FFA server would have 200 players at peak time though [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
It would also probably lose its population fast when players lose interest because there is no casual scum to envy their shinies.

[Loke]

The reason for the layer of protection in VP is to counter the layer of protection afforded to class R guilds when the class system was created. To make implementation of he class system equitable for all parties, there was give and take on both sides. Class C gave up mobs outside VP (because prior to the system all mobs were essentially class C) and in return they got the caveat that top tier content remained class C. I personally haven't heard class C people trying to alter the deal that was made, yet it seems every week there is a new post by someone in class R trying to have their cake and eat it too.

If you want to raid end game content, you have to leave the loving protection class R affords you, it is really as simple as that. It isn't about whether class C could handle the competition, more that they negotiated this agreement in good faith, and expect it to be honored, just as you expect them to honor your classes rotation. If you want to remove protections afforded to guilds, I'm sure class C would be happy to go back to the way it was, with no class system or bag limits, but to continually try to alter the agreement in your favor when class C has continued to honor their's indicates to me that class C isn't the real problem.

Oh how quickly class R forgets what raiding was like before the class system.

***disclaimer: I haven't raided in over 6 months, so my knowledge of recent events is not perfect or complete. This is just my observation as someone who has been around for awhile and still lurks on the forums****

[wwoneo]

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

The reason for the layer of protection in VP is to counter the layer of protection afforded to class R guilds when the class system was created. To make implementation of he class system equitable for all parties, there was give and take on both sides. Class C gave up mobs outside VP (because prior to the system all mobs were essentially class C) and in return they got the caveat that top tier content remained class C. I personally haven't heard class C people trying to alter the deal that was made, yet it seems every week there is a new post by someone in class R trying to have their cake and eat it too.

This is why I suggested making raid boss spawns a Scheduled Earthquake (in other words all bosses will ONLY spawn on an earthquake <all at the same time> and everyone knows when the earthquake will occur allowing proper preparation.

This will also provide the opportunity to advance and still keep the spirit of competition because you can contest whatever spawns you want and there will still be a race.

Note: some additional small rules can be added to make things run more smoothly such as no guilds can be INSIDE (or camped inside) the zone with the raid boss when the earthquake occurs, and you can only attempt 1 boss at a time as a guild, etc...

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

If you want to raid end game content, you have to leave the loving protection class R affords you, it is really as simple as that. It isn't about whether class C could handle the competition, more that they negotiated this agreement in good faith, and expect it to be honored, just as you expect them to honor your classes rotation. If you want to remove protections afforded to guilds, I'm sure class C would be happy to go back to the way it was, with no class system or bag limits, but to continually try to alter the agreement in your favor when class C has continued to honor their's indicates to me that class C isn't the real problem.

My suggestion (noted above) will also remove the necessity of having a rotation and any "protection" that is currently provided to C and R class guilds. Having scheduled simulated repops would also prevent any one guild from receiving more than their fair share of mobs as one guild cannot be everywhere at the same time.

[Man0warr]

It has nothing to do with the mobs.

[Ella`Ella]

Originally Posted by Man0warr [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

It has everything to do with the pixels.

[wwoneo]

I would also like to note that the suggestion in my comment above would eliminate starring at a wall for 16 hours.

Edit:
Also if a GM reads this, my suggestion of placing all raid boss repops on a scheduled earthquake addresses many of your concerns of a competitive raid scene with no rotations.

[Loke]

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?

[Man0warr]

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.

[Daldaen]

Week 1 - Full FFA, no classes, Poopsock to your hearts content, zero variance, mobs spawn exactly 7 or 3 days after death. No bag limits. Just follow FTE and no Training.
Week 2 - Class C, compete to your hearts content, however the hell you wish. Poopsock, foot race, circle jerk, Neckbeard... Whatever it is that gets your jimmies excited. Zero variance. If you kill mobs this week, you are precluded from partaking in next weeks festivities
Week 3 - Class R, rotate all mobs. Zero variance.
Week 4 - Random /roll of above 3 weeks of rules with equal weight. 2/3 times it will be a system that favors Class C.

Respawns are full FFA with 2 bag limit.

Discuss.

[quido]

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

Week 1 - Full FFA, no classes, Poopsock to your hearts content, zero variance, mobs spawn exactly 7 or 3 days after death. No bag limits. Just follow FTE and no Training.
Week 2 - Class C, compete to your hearts content, however the hell you wish. Poopsock, foot race, circle jerk, Neckbeard... Whatever it is that gets your jimmies excited. Zero variance. If you kill mobs this week, you are precluded from partaking in next weeks festivities
Week 3 - Class R, rotate all mobs. Zero variance.
Week 4 - Random /roll of above 3 weeks of rules with equal weight. 2/3 times it will be a system that favors Class C.

Respawns are full FFA with 2 bag limit.

Discuss.

Isn't it complicated enough already?