Sirken's proposal

[Maximius]

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

Maybe the punishments are harsh enough to deter PNP infraction occurances?

The death penalty works. Oh wait...

[Mezzmur]

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

Its one week (8 days) of non-interference on Tier2, the rest is FFA, as it has been for the last couple years. There are stipulations that hopefully decrease PNP infractions, but those will still require fraps and petitionquest. Tier2 wants to cut PNP infractions with a rotation, Sirken wants to cut PNP infractions with a heavy hand of justice. Personally, I'd rather have the justice, but justice is grey and history shows its difficult to actually enforce. Maybe the punishments are harsh enough to deter PNP infraction occurances?

I suggest 10 days. Best breakdown, that's why I make pretty pictures.

[Razdeline]

Also on my server, if guild 'a' failed on a raid target (this is velious era mind you), they knew they were giving the next kill attempt to the second person in line. And this would go vise versa until a mob finally died.

[Brut]

Still think one priority in this whole discussion should be to do something to fix the said DA stall tanking, FTE sniping, leapfrogging, training with plausible deniability, and creating mounds of petitions. Not just cut the whole server in half.

That's what the very first proposition was mostly about anyway, for example DA stalling shouldn't be hard to fix at all. The big idea originally was that you DA to engage Trak so you can position the guy properly and take the first banish before the main tank goes in. It won't be hard to monitor if some guild chains clerics and necros into lair to keep the thing going, and if there's a 4week ban looming over the guild's head, that sure as hell isn't going to be a thing they'll take a risk for.

4week guild bans alone are going to be a huge incentive to start playing nicely, and Rogeman has already thrown ideas about banishing precamped players. Throw in possible cut down variances and week and a half of hands off mobs and I rly fail to see what all the hubbub's about. Just saying "no! the competition is toxic! we don't want any of it!" is silly, just suck the poison out and let's see how it works. If it doesn't get fixed on the first try, work on it some more.

[Mezzmur]

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

mezzmur makes a lot of sense, should support this idea.

[-Catherin-]

you could say 10 days and it is practically the same thing as 7 though, because of variance. I hate variance in its current form [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I think it is necessary to have it, but as large as it currently is, with extended variance on top of it is what has caused these discussions in the first place imo.

Variance as it currently is has to drive the "T2" guilds to such extremes that it is just not realistic for us to do it. I've done my share of tracking. it's turned killing a target into simply a relief for me. there is no fun involved.

I know we have been told over and over again this isn't changing. I just think an unrealistically large variance is why T2 guilds cant compete.

[Droog007]

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

you have to have something, before u can actually give it up.

The only way to interpret this, in our unique context here, is: You haven't sunk low enough to win these mobs in the ridiculous meta-game that has evolved on this server, so you have no claim over them.

Some of us beg to differ.

[Maximius]

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

If another guild gets FTE on a mob, only the guild that has FTE should attack it.

That's how it was on live, and it worked.

Way back when my guild had a FIF agreement with several other guilds. If 2 guilds were contesting Vindi whoever got kill force to the arena first got the right to engage, but only had 5 min to do so. If they wiped the other guild could snap it up.

This allowed for racing and heavy competition but kept some semblance of order.

If A-Team was raiding Juggs and Trak popped they wouldnt have to pull out a slide rule to know if they could make an attempt, they have FIF. Guilds would be free to login on poopsock mountain but would have to wait for their attempt or 5 mins before engaging. They could also pass on the chance.

It bears similarities to FTE but doesn't allow a single toon to heroquest and tag a mob for their guild to log in and kill.

All that said I don't think FIF would work here but it might be better than what we have. Racing here = alt armies and multiple accounts which is much different that live.

[Mezzmur]

Personally, for me, tracking and tagging FTE on say VS is the biggest rush in game for me and makes it worth tracking. I'm going to miss that, all of these PNP, no sock in room rules will do away with that. I'm ok with that, but let's have a reasonable system.

I'm all for whatever meta rules you want but this mob share day baseline is by far the most equitable solution for everyone. It will always yield more mobs per guild than divinity's plan in any month.

[Mezzmur]

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

you could say 10 days and it is practically the same thing as 7 though, because of variance. I hate variance in its current form [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I think it is necessary to have it, but as large as it currently is, with extended variance on top of it is what has caused these discussions in the first place imo.

Variance as it currently is has to drive the "T2" guilds to such extremes that it is just not realistic for us to do it. I've done my share of tracking. it's turned killing a target into simply a relief for me. there is no fun involved.

I know we have been told over and over again this isn't changing. I just think an unrealistically large variance is why T2 guilds cant compete.

Give it a chance, if it goes well they'll consider Adjusting variance to a more reasonable phase.

Shit, it would be reasonably easy (speaking as a programmer) to have a check if mob killed in first 10 days, 0 variance. Again, not something happening immediately bit if we came to an agreement and lives with it it would be a reasonable request. People are thinking instant gratification not, put in some time and happily ever after.