Sirken's proposal

[falkun]

Sure, I can start at the far casual side too: FFA the first mob of the month and rotate thereafter. But I don't think you are an idiot, so I cut the bullshit and started in the middle. I apologize for speeding this process along so you can get back to your dragons.

[Razdeline]

Serious Question: Wasn't it already an "advancement in tier" when a portion of BDA left for a more competitive raid scene? (And became Forceful Entry)

Wasn't it already an "advancement in tier" when TMO merged with DA for a more competitive raid scene? (And became TMO)

Wasn't it already an "advancement in tier" when a portion of Darkwind left for a more competitive raid scene? (And joined Inglourious Basterds)

If this is already happening, has happened, and will continue to happen; Why can't the casuals come to an agreement that guarantees them more than they have ever received before, in a rotational manner desired?

Sirken has already stated training will give entire guilds month long suspensions. Variance is going to be reduced, and all plans are on board to stop alt camping.

[Butthead]

lol, iv been tryin to reach gm's since christmas. i got banned for sayin somethin i guess. i couldnt evn get an answer back.


i msg'd sirken and drebael, petitioned on the forum thing... and have been 'bumping' it as i was told.

any suggestions? wtfs going on hurr man

[falkun]

Sven, you are reading tier1 incorrectly. According to Sirken's proposal, tier1 means you kill Trak, CT, Inny, and/or VS against *only* other tier1 guilds for the first 8 days of the month, then the rest of the time all targets are FFA. Tier1 can still decide amongst themselves to rotate or FFA their T1 mobs, but they do not have to worry about tier2 killing them for the first 8 days.

See this graphic explanation:
[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

[Tycko]

Classic EQ spawn timers known.

INC POOPSOCK from casual and hardcore players

Dumb, must fix

Custom p99 EQ spawn varience.

INC POOPSOCK from hardcore players

Is this dumb? does it need to be fixed? Good question , and since the majority of the server is casuals, it would seem the majority of the player base say yes, must be fixed.


How you might ask? Well they have not found a solution for 2+ years so maybe variance needs to go.... and a NEW system be put in it's place to fix casuals and hardcores from poopsocking.

Tracking is a derivative of varience, and EVERYONE dispises tracking it seems like this is the right direction.

I think any proposal needs to be in conjunction with removing variance.

All the fighting and the real enemy is variance!!!!!!

TO ARMS!

[Clark]

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

"No silly rotations, no silly councils, no BS. just racing for mobs the way it should be. for the people that are hell bent on a rotation, I say this; there are tons of MMOs with instanced raids and triggered bosses, EQ is not one of those games. Not having instances or triggered bosses was one of the things that set Classic EQ apart from all the crap games that exist today. I know that the staff doesn't want a rotation, and would prefer to see racing/competing for the targets."

Couldn't have said it better myself.

Only thing that needs altered is not being able to park. That isn't fair, and can't be enforced.

[Razdeline]

They will enforce it. Having a defined set of raid rules that everyone agrees on also assures that all parties involved know the risks before entering this type of agreement.

[Uteunayr]

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

T1 guilds working probably 100X as hard for 6-7x more and that's if the tiers stay this way into the future. seems fair.

If you're being sarcastic (difficult to tell over text): Hardcore guilds get their fun out of doing that. If you don't, enjoy it the casual way. For many other people, this is work and not a game. Instead, they'd rather have fun building alliances, maintaining rotations and peace between a coalition of guilds, introducing new raid guilds to the content, and things of that nature.

There are two indivisible types of raider on this server. Casuals don't work less hard, they work harder in different ways, because they want a different experience. Maintaining a rotation is not simple. Maintaining an alliance or an agreement is not simple. It's herding cats. But that is fun to a different type of person from those who find it fun to do all the work hardcore raiders do. So, no, that is not fair.

You want fairness? Read John Rawl's A Theory Of Justice. Not only is he one of the most renowned political philosophers of the 20th century, but he has a definition of fairness that persists to this day, even making it into a recent episode of Doctor Who as a means of conflict resolution. What is fairness? Fairness is if you make people bargain in which they do not know what their bargaining positions are. Meaning, if you can abstract yourself for a moment, and think what agreement would people come to if they didn't know if they were hardcore or casual, or if they were in a hardcore or casual guild? What policies would be implemented? That's the crux of fairness, as it isn't skewed by individual bias, not by superior bargaining position. And in such a case, the staff plan which provides for the 6-7x more mobs would probably be seen as unfair in the eyes of people in an original position, as it gives too much. No rational person betting on whether they would be hardcore or casual, and in one of 3, or one of 7, would create rules so skewed. But the casuals here have accepted that.

That's 30-35 a month for T1, and 5 for T2. So, 1 a day vs 1.25 a week, per guild. Or, for the competitive side, 3 pops a day approximately to fight over. That's not a bad compromise. Let T1 shape the way they want to use their share of the mobs, and T2 shape the way they want to use their share of the mobs. If the casuals want to rotate, let them rotate. If the hardcores want to FFA, let the hardcores FFA. That's more than enough to rotate, and more than enough to FFA.

We want a chance to earn our epics, and we want a fair share of those mobs. VP was surrendered as your playground, but things like CT/Inny/Trak... People like me do a lot of work in this game, but don't want your atmosphere. To say we have to delve into your atmosphere for the sake of achieving our goals is counter productive to the goals of lessening the conflicts between guilds. The hardcore atmosphere is toxic to me. The casual atmosphere would probably be toxic to you. The best way to reduce conflicts between guilds are to keep ideologically opposite groups separated in such a way that they can each enjoy the atmosphere they love most, without either side's atmosphere hurting the other. Let each enjoy their half. That's what Rogean's plan provides for. It lets each side enjoy their half, and leaves VP alone for now, and for when we get keys, unless we want to delve into your territory, and compete on your terms. Hardcores get to have the environment they want, and casuals get the environment they want.

This is not only just, it is fair, and it has the best chance at creating a longer lasting reduction of conflict between guilds, by letting each side experience the raiding atmosphere they want, without being detrimental to the other in any way other than sharing the pops. It even bumps back to Tier 1 if a Tier 2 raid takes too long to get it, depending on how Tier 2 decides to allocate pops for themselves. Seeking more than this seems less about wanting competition (which the plan provides for), and more about wanting schadenfreude. And that really isn't helpful to us all enjoying the game in our own ways.

So far, the best argument I have heard is that if FE + IB unite, then by Rogean's written plan (as it stands), it'd be a rotation in Tier 1, since if you previously got the kill, you can't get it again when it comes back to your tier. But I am certain no Tier 2 guild is going to care how Tier 1 handles their pops. If it bounces back to Tier 1, I am sure no one will mind letting it be FFA for the Tier 1 guilds, whether it be a 3 way fight, or a 2 way fight with the IB + FE coalition. So, that's an easy fix to let hardcores get their environment, and let casuals build theirs.

Now, if you were not being sarcastic, I agree, because that's what they find to be fun. And this is a game about fun. So to each their own. Different styles for different people.

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

I actually had very similar thoughts running through my head randomly yesterday, though mostly in the context of class interactions not levels and such. A game like WoW might "gain" something with more mechanics used in every fight, but it loses even more by removing some of the roles EQ had (debuffer, buffer, CCer, puller)... and that makes the game more boring when there are only 3 roles and their interactions with each other are very limited in scale compared to when you have 7+.

WoW really did lose a lot. I notice that a lot of the difference in WoW and EQ has to do with CC and the necessity for it. One thing you could never do in WoW is Fear Kite, because CC breaks on damage. In EQ, it has a chance to break on damage (unless a mez, etc), so you can create some useful, interesting strategies for engaging mobs that are actually equally as strong as you are. A level 50 character versus a level 50 mob... That's a dangerous fight, lol. Not so in modern MMOs. It is quite sad.

[Eloian]

Ute da man, Original Dr.Who avatar, Political junkie, dern nice guy. Rock on brother.

Eloian Bushlover (Any Necros about? I'm a ranger...well you know the rest)
57 Halfelf Ranger
<BDA>

[Galelor]

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

"there are tons of MMOs with instanced raids and triggered bosses, EQ is not one of those games. not having instances or triggered bosses was one of the things that set Classic EQ apart from all the crap games that exist today. i know that the staff doesn't want a rotation, and would prefer to see racing/competing for the targets."

Sirken the Great

I played live up until 07ish. EQ IS one of those games in the literal sense from LDoN forward (they even went back and instances PoTime when OoW was released...) and in the metaphorical sense since go live. Once competition became intense enough, (not even close to as bad as what happens on p99,) Sony understood that they needed to instance raid zones so everyone capable of killing x raid content could get a shot at it.

During the classic days there were metaphorical versions of instancing because there were many servers and each server only had 1-3 guilds capable of killing raid mobs. When comparing classic competitive raiding to p99s competitive raiding, multiple servers was a version of instancing! In classic, most servers didn't have all raid mobs dead the second they spawned. The high level goal of getting to mobs quickly was to get to mobs before they ended up on euro time (there were obviously races to spawns, but nothing like we see here.)

Guilds had a 'raid start time' not a bat phone... (Do you remember being docked DKP because you were late for raid start times? Do you remember PUGing dragons? I do. They weren't even called PUGs then, they were 'open raids' and sometimes they were scheduled days ahead of time on the forums...) If there was too much competition on 1 server, guilds literally switched servers. There isn't really that option here...

The point is, there was less competition on live because of the vastly smaller amounts of max level characters, no bat phone/vent (for the most part), the number of raid guilds per server was a fraction of what it is here, and the fact that there were tons of servers to choose from.

p99 is horribly overburdened at level 60. It is like 5 or 7 classic servers worth of raid guilds all jammed into one server. No one is going to be happy with the results of a raid agreement, if there is one, because no guild is going to get enough raid mobs. When looking at what we have here currently, or what could possibly be agreed to in some kind of sever wide guild agreement, trying to compare this raid community to the classic raid experience is laughable at best.

The only way to keep only 1 server running, and allow even a remotely classic experience in the raid scene, is to set up some sort of instancing (or partial instancing) to alleviate some of the congestion of having so many high level guilds on 1 server.

I'd also like to add that I personally don't believe Velious is going to solve this particular problem. High value targets with top end gear are still going to be kept perma down (NToV/AoW/ST/ETC.)