Project 1999

Go Back   Project 1999 > General Community > Rants and Flames

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #171  
Old 03-01-2012, 07:47 PM
Gringo Gringo is offline
Skeleton


Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 16
Default

18 pages of TMO saying they just want to crap up the server, thanks guys.
  #172  
Old 03-01-2012, 07:51 PM
quido quido is offline
Planar Protector

quido's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 5,519
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Teddie1056 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
Point is, we could if we tried. We just really don't want to. This is why you guys are being unreasonable. We are asking for a share, not all of it, a share, without this annoying socking. You guys are demanding all of it unless we can prove that we are capable of taking half of it. We have taken half of it (or 2/5 of it according to Jeremy). This is at least enough to prove that we are fully capable of taking Trak. Fact is, this rotation would be the only way that Taken/Div/BDA could get a shot at Trak without direct VD/TMO assistance. That, and all of a sudden poopsocking is out the window. And that is something that the whole server can agree sucks. Now if we can just get over our petty differences and stop raging at each other maybe we can get something like Cold suggested done.
We all know that 5 pops is not a large enough sample size to make a claim one way or another! How about 45?

And also, we are not demanding everything [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.] If you came at us saying we could have two or three kills to your one in a system that is 50% rotation, or something, we'd probably actually consider it. This is a far cry from the currently proposed nonsense. Trying to bargain with Coldblooded is futile. You people act like a bunch of entitled wussies.

When it just comes down to a difference of opinion (I dispute that you deserve as equal a slice as we do right now), it becomes time to hash it out on the battlefield. I invite you to engage in open, fair, and sportsmanlike competition over an extended period of time.

Yes, whoever said it, part of my aversion to a full rotation is the lack of exciting competition. But I personally am open to a reasonable partial rotation.
__________________
Jack <Yael Graduates> - Server First Erudite
Bush <Toxic>
Jeremy <TMO> - Patron Saint of Blue
  #173  
Old 03-01-2012, 07:51 PM
Silentone Silentone is offline
Fire Giant

Silentone's Avatar

Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 526
Default

to gringo

I dont see it that way, we just asked to be treated fairly. Im betting you didnt even read anything and just decided to troll the post, that in my opinion has been relative. I have read everything that has been posted and considered both sides of the issue. Sure my view is bias to my position, but i promiss you so is VD's, and we are trying to communicate if you dont like it, Doors that way >>>>
__________________
___________________________________
<The Mystical Order> 60 Monk Silentone
  #174  
Old 03-01-2012, 07:54 PM
Daldolma Daldolma is offline
Fire Giant


Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 645
Default

ITT: TMO explains that they will treat other guilds the way IB treated them, after spending 8 months complaining about the way they were treated by IB.
  #175  
Old 03-01-2012, 07:59 PM
Gumm Gumm is offline
Scrawny Gnoll


Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 21
Default

it's brutally clear that members of VD have posted this in an attempt to win public support by placing all blame on the lack of a rotation on TMO.

instead of trying to sway public opinion and outrage onto your side, why not outright win trakanon's? if you care so much about the good of the server, invite those other guilds that don't currently engage trakanon such as taken, divinity, BDA etc and have them raid with you.

you can't play only one side in this discussion.
  #176  
Old 03-01-2012, 08:00 PM
quido quido is offline
Planar Protector

quido's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 5,519
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Daldolma [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
ITT: TMO explains that they will treat other guilds the way IB treated them, after spending 8 months complaining about the way they were treated by IB.
Nobody in a long time has complained about getting legitimately beaten. We complained mostly because you're a bunch of cheating sketchballs who have no scruples, as a guild anyways.
__________________
Jack <Yael Graduates> - Server First Erudite
Bush <Toxic>
Jeremy <TMO> - Patron Saint of Blue
  #177  
Old 03-01-2012, 08:04 PM
AenarieFenninRo AenarieFenninRo is offline
Aviak

AenarieFenninRo's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 64
Default

-DISCLAIMER- I am not an officer of TMO and cannot make any sort of agreements to rotations. I am going to be as impartial as I can, but I am a member of TMO and will be called out as having a bias and lying etc etc. I'm going to post it anyway though, and if I make a mistake, it is not for the intent of showing one guild above another, and please let me know so I can adjust the numbers accordingly.

I love the math here, VD has 5 Trak, IB 3, TMO 3... I believe that was the statement above, i'm not going back to search for it to quote.

2 of those VD killed Traks were killed during the TMO / IB raid suspension... so your competition was BDA and TAKEN I believe. I hold no animosity toward anyone when i say this, but I think most people would agree that the competition level between VD and TMO versus the competition level between VD / TAKEN / BDA are NOT the same.

This leaves 3 "uncontested by TMO / IB" for which VD can lay claim to in their recorded numbers from above

The rotation:
3 IB traks - uncompeted for by VD
3 TMO traks - VD tries to compete for and lost (this is a simple assumption made from the fact that it was stated that TMO got 3 and VD was there every single time but maybe they were just there to watch how we killed it)

3 TMO vs 3 VD = an even split since at this point IB is gone, and will no longer factor into the numbers.

One of VD's kills counted above in which TMO was off killing Talendor, Trak was killed 15 mins after it spawned, i'm not taking the number away, just making a statement here for time of life, and assume that VD would have gotten it regardless of TMO not being present.

last night - TMO took out trak... from spawn to death in 3min 45 seconds.

Now i'm no rocket scientist, but I put that count now at 4 TMO vs 3 VD... still a very respectable split, I think it works out like 57% / 43% in TMO's favor. Nothing to scoff at from either guild, and not a statistically wide enough margin to validate an even split since the sample size is so small.

so, if we go with a relatively even split, lets concentrate on the only other outstanding factor, kill time.

~15 mins vs ~4min

Conclusions:
1) If VD can consistently kill Trak in ~4 mins EVERY TIME it pops and the %'s stay in the 50/50 range of VD vs TMO kills, I am guessing some form of rotation will be adopted.

2) IF it continues to take VD ~15 minutes from spawn to kill of Trak, then there will never be a rotation, because TMO will be getting every kill.
  #178  
Old 03-01-2012, 08:05 PM
Newguy Newguy is offline
Large Rat


Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 5
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Doors [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
First it was IB, now its VD's fault. Starting to think the real shit bags here are TMO.
  #179  
Old 03-01-2012, 08:11 PM
Teddie1056 Teddie1056 is offline
Sarnak

Teddie1056's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Rivervale
Posts: 475
Default

To echo Aenarie, I am not an officer of Vesica Dei, so I can't agree to anything either.

But what about a rotation of

1. TMO
2. Open
3. VD
4. Open (Minus TMO/VD).

This makes it so that TMO and VD do still compete, everyone else gets a shot, and we get some stability.
  #180  
Old 03-01-2012, 08:12 PM
Rais Rais is offline
Fire Giant

Rais's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 743
Default

I take my offer back. This will be too much fun. Sooner or later it'll sink in this is stupid all around and everyone works something out.

Till then, I'm with stupid.
Closed Thread


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:52 AM.


Everquest is a registered trademark of Daybreak Game Company LLC.
Project 1999 is not associated or affiliated in any way with Daybreak Game Company LLC.
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.