What is BDA doing to work towards a raid agreement?

[Clark]

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

Kicking and screaming just doesn't cut it, you need to post logical arguments, alternate plans, and in general be willing to compromise.

Also BDA is the largest guild on the server and has the most people online any given point of day 24/7. Tier 2? I think not.

[kotton05]

I like mr cumbers and skarry a lot, but my god why must chest just say opposed to everything. You're the largest guild on the server yet you have had littlest impact. I cringe at the posts I read :-/

[Ravager]

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

Also BDA is the largest guild on the server and has the most people online any given point of day 24/7. Tier 2? I think not.

If you're saying tiers should be based on guild size, that's fine. We'll take VP, you can be tier 2.

[Aeaolena]

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

Also BDA is the largest guild on the server and has the most people online any given point of day 24/7. Tier 2? I think not.

[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

[Uteunayr]

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

[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

^

You know, on the other thread, I wrote out about 1000 word response to the comment that BDA is tier 1 because of capability, rather than because of our intent. This gif does that job far better than my brief essay to elucidate the counter-point. So, if anyone wants to see it articulated, switch over to Page 13 of "With all due respect, Sirken, you're no Solomon.", but really, this gif does the work.

[Beguiled]

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

As a red player can someone explain the differentiation between a tier 1 and tier 2 guild? VS is two groupable as is faydedar. Almost all mobs in the game excluding hoshkar / nexona are doable with sub 20 players. What am I missing here?

Just my two cents.

I am not a big name nor am I able to heavily influence guilds.

From paying some attention to the forums this appears to be the source of confusion that should be clarified. Whether on the server forums or in the raid discussion forums.

People are bandying T1 and T2 about with regards to two different things and it should be clarified better imo.

Some people are referring to what appears to be a ranking of guilds or guild abilities and the other are ranking the Raid Target in a degree of usefulness or value of loot table. If that makes sense.

I think it is quite possible that because of the terminology without clarification it is just creating further confusion.

[khanable]

Originally Posted by kotton05 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I like mr cumbers and skarry a lot

I like you too, friend.

<3

[Uteunayr]

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

People are bandying T1 and T2 about with regards to two different things and it should be clarified better imo.

This is exactly the issue. The people I see writing from FE seem to be splitting it based on capability, as they want everyone to still be playing the same cutthroat competitive game. The people I see from BDA and others are splitting it on intent, as each side wants to play their own type of classic experience. By FE's split, BDA would be tier 1, but from what I gather from many of my guildmates, that is not the game we're looking to play, which is why the staff proposal is so adored, as it lets each side play the game their own way, all the time. Even the other propositions offered, such as 10 days of mob rotation between the tiers, etc., and the rest of the month is FFA, that's still making the casual/tier 2 players play the game the hardcore/tier 1 players want to play. And that's atrocious. That is morally and philosophically a horrible thing to do. Let the two sides play their own game all month long, in the style that they like the most. Done.

What's the fear here? What's the problem? Are hardcore/tier 1 raiders afraid that their environment isn't welcoming enough or appealing enough to players that they will be able to sustain their own playstyle independent of doing it on the backs of putting down casual guilds? Are they fearful that people will see casual competition, or casual rotation, and see that as a far better alternative to cutthroat competition, and refuse to be a part of their hardcore cutthroat style? Or do they feel that the game would become meaningless without casuals to stomp over, and drag into their shitshow? It clearly isn't just competition, because the staff plan lets each side have the type of competition they want. There is some secondary motive at work here. If tier 1 wants to offer a type of competition that can appeal to the people of the server, then people will join Tier 1 in greater numbers of compete. If they don't, it's because they don't like the style, and the environment those guilds create for themselves.

If it really is just mobs, then the amended Rogean/Staff plan that gives the epic mobs a Tier 1->Tier 2->FFA rotation should be passed immediately, as it fulfills all requirements. The only thing it doesn't fulfill is forcing casuals to play the way they don't want.

[Vandy]

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

Also BDA is the largest guild on the server and has the most people online any given point of day 24/7. Tier 2? I think not.

Just because a guild has a lot of players online doesn't mean that everyone has multiple lvl 60 characters that can be camped out at targets that are in window. They may have 150 people online in various spots all over Norrath but they still have no chnace when Trak spawns against a group with a full force buffed and ready to go at Sebilis.

[Rupertox]

supremacy, tier 1?