Project 1999

Go Back   Project 1999 > Blue Community > Blue Server Chat

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #121  
Old 01-23-2014, 12:14 PM
drktmplr12 drktmplr12 is offline
Sarnak

drktmplr12's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 483
Default

On any full server respawn, all guilds are limited to two raid mob kills for 12 hours. This limitation does not apply to mobs that are exclusive to a Class.

Anyone who is wrongfully accusing (my opinion) that FE/IB is taking advantage of a loophole needs to get their brain checked or repeat elementary school. It is very clear. Let's read it again.

On any full server respawn, all guilds are limited to two raid mob kills for 12 hours. This limitation does not apply to mobs that are exclusive to a Class.

Still clear.

It tells us exactly who, what, when, how many and for how long. If you don't like the rule, why not bring it to your guild leadership to discuss in the raid discussion forum? It would be far more productive than trying to form a PAC among the community (who largely doesn't care) to garner support for your cause.

This thread started as please clarify why something is allowed. It's perfectly clear based on the rules. It took too many posts for this to be said.
__________________
[52 Disciple] Downgrade (Human) <Azure Guard>
[31 Druid] Edarg (Halfling)
Last edited by drktmplr12; 01-23-2014 at 12:15 PM.. Reason: wording
  #122  
Old 01-23-2014, 12:17 PM
Erati Erati is offline
Planar Protector

Erati's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 4,561
Default

The bag limit is the issue here however I feel that with there being only what 3 (?) sim repops so far, it is too small of sample size to determine if anything needs to be overhauled.

Maybe after another week or two of the current ruleset, the bag limit can be looked at if it still feels 'unfair'
  #123  
Old 01-23-2014, 12:18 PM
Pheer Pheer is offline
Fire Giant

Pheer's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 858
Default

I don't get why you guys keep approaching this with the attitude that its a problem that needs solving or some kind of issue for the server to discuss. Nothing IB and FE are doing is outside the rules. The only "problem" here is that you guys are upset about the end result of a situation you had a very large part of creating in the first place.

Quote:
Originally Posted by quido [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
The rules as they stand are bullshit. That's what we're trying to change here in the name of fairness. Stop saying "we're following the rules." We know. They're bullshit.
So essentially you want leftover C class spawns during a full repop to automatically go FFA to the class R guilds because "Hey at least IB or FE wont get it then"

This has nothing to do with fairness and a lot to do with you guys still wanting to control the pixel flow on the server in any way you can.

Also if you're so concerned about the rules why is this in server chat instead of the forum they set up specifically for guilds to discuss things like this? You guys could easily have gone in there and tried to get a calm and respectful dialogue going between guilds and the staff, but instead you decided to post it here hoping there would be some kind of community outcry of support and the raising of pitchforks to demand change.
__________________
  #124  
Old 01-23-2014, 12:23 PM
Lammy Lammy is offline
Fire Giant

Lammy's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 548
Default

I see it being unfair when it plays out like this.

Server repop happens

1. IB/FE team up to go after the two highest priority targets (they fail because TMO is faster)
2. Now they get to split up and take 4 open world targets.

1. Say IB/FE teams up on the two highest priority targets and beats TMO
2. TMO is still limited to only 2 open world targets

Just remove the bag limit. Several other guild have proven to be capable of getting targets when they try.
__________________
  #125  
Old 01-23-2014, 12:27 PM
Erati Erati is offline
Planar Protector

Erati's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 4,561
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lammy [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
I see it being unfair when it plays out like this.

Server repop happens

1. IB/FE team up to go after the two highest priority targets (they fail because TMO is faster)
2. Now they get to split up and take 4 open world targets.

1. Say IB/FE teams up on the two highest priority targets and beats TMO
2. TMO is still limited to only 2 open world targets

Just remove the bag limit. Several other guild have proven to be capable of getting targets when they try.

They (IB/FE) get 4 targets. 4/2= 2 per guild

yet when you talk about your guild you used words "still limited to only" but it is still the same number that each IB and FE get.

They are not getting more targets than you guys because they are separate guilds.

They want to stack the deck to beat you guys on the normal/VP spawns because that works in both guilds best interest.

I agree though, the bag limit if any is the problem. Figure out how to fix this via the bag limit rules, not break up guild alliances.
  #126  
Old 01-23-2014, 12:29 PM
Pheer Pheer is offline
Fire Giant

Pheer's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 858
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lammy [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
I see it being unfair when it plays out like this.

Server repop happens

1. IB/FE team up to go after the two highest priority targets (they fail because TMO is faster)
2. Now they get to split up and take 4 open world targets.

1. Say IB/FE teams up on the two highest priority targets and beats TMO
2. TMO is still limited to only 2 open world targets

Just remove the bag limit. Several other guild have proven to be capable of getting targets when they try.
So you're mad that two individual guilds would each be able to take two targets, and your guild would only be allowed to take two targets?

wat

Also in your example IB/FE teaming up to try to ensure they get the two high priority targets would mean they share the bag limit on those mobs. Theyd end up trading an additional target each to be part of the kills on the priority mobs. What exactly about that situation is unfair?
__________________
  #127  
Old 01-23-2014, 12:31 PM
Lammy Lammy is offline
Fire Giant

Lammy's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 548
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pheer [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
So you're mad that two individual guilds would each be able to take two targets, and your guild would only be allowed to take two targets?

wat

Also in your example IB/FE teaming up to try to ensure they get the two high priority targets would mean they share the bag limit on those mobs. Theyd end up trading an additional target each to be part of the kills on the priority mobs. What exactly about that situation is unfair?
I'm not mad about anything. I'm just discussing viewpoints. And I'm certainly not mad that FE/IB raid together, If anything it's just advocating for the bag limit to be removed.
__________________
Last edited by Lammy; 01-23-2014 at 12:34 PM..
  #128  
Old 01-23-2014, 12:32 PM
drktmplr12 drktmplr12 is offline
Sarnak

drktmplr12's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 483
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pheer [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
Also if you're so concerned about the rules why is this in server chat instead of the forum they set up specifically for guilds to discuss things like this? You guys could easily have gone in there and tried to get a calm and respectful dialogue going between guilds and the staff, but instead you decided to post it here hoping there would be some kind of community outcry of support and the raising of pitchforks to demand change.
qft

Quote:
Originally Posted by quido [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
Stop saying "we're following the rules."
They probably feel the need to remind everyone because everyone is intent on pointing out that this is somehow against the rules.

You clearly hate the rule. We get it.
__________________
[52 Disciple] Downgrade (Human) <Azure Guard>
[31 Druid] Edarg (Halfling)
  #129  
Old 01-23-2014, 12:34 PM
drktmplr12 drktmplr12 is offline
Sarnak

drktmplr12's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 483
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pheer [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
Also in your example IB/FE teaming up to try to ensure they get the two high priority targets would mean they share the bag limit on those mobs. Theyd end up trading an additional target each to be part of the kills on the priority mobs. What exactly about that situation is unfair?
Nothing.
__________________
[52 Disciple] Downgrade (Human) <Azure Guard>
[31 Druid] Edarg (Halfling)
  #130  
Old 01-23-2014, 12:37 PM
Tanthallas Tanthallas is offline
Fire Giant

Tanthallas's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 577
Default

Im going to drive to EL and cockpunch you Jeremy. Per Paladins request.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Daliant17447 View Post
more ducktape than exploit
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 09:07 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.