New Angry Goblin Agreement

[loramin]

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

everyone who is voting is actually going to end up being in the "old guard" when the agreement has been in place a while. It's the people who can't yet vote because they aren't yet rolling who end up penalized.

The root of this scheme: a current roller wants to screw the chances of future rollers to increase their own [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

... except, as I keep repeating, it won't work. Player agreements require consensus, and the staff only enforces them as long as there is consensus.

As soon as people realize they're getting screwed, they're just going to go back to the click fest. If it's just one guy, the GMs might step in, but when it's 5? 10? 20?

If I actually thought this idea had any chance whatsoever, I'd be worried that it would lead to disrupting the existing agreement (which was painful to get established) ... but again it has zero chance.

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

I don't think it's necessarily true that half the people will be losers in the new system. Who do you think would end up being losers?

This is not complicated math: every goblin I get is a goblin you don't get, and again there are no (more) new goblins entering the system. No matter how you shift the system, there will by definition be losers: everyone who doesn't get the goblin.

The beauty of the current system is that everyone who participates is equally a loser [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.] Until they win that is.

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

except I don't see how it could be implemented and operated.

A turd cherry on this turd Sunday of an idea.

[Castle2.0]

/list fixes this.

Go back to work.

[shovelquest]

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

By definition, any system you propose will have winners and losers.

Yeah no doi. That's why they want to get points so the more losses they have wont continue to accrue while some rich kid gets it first time.

It's called sociaism.

Why do you right wingers hate socialism!!

[cd288]

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

Here's the thing: no agreement is going to make more goblins spawn. That's what you all really want, but since you can't make it happen you're trying to trick others into giving their chance at a goblin to you.

By definition, any system you propose will have winners and losers. By definition, half the people at the current roll will be losers if the system changes (... and in all honestly, I think some of the people who think they would be "winners" will actually be losers in the new system).

So you're welcome to try and get half the people at the agreements to vote against their own interests (and against classic EQ) ... but again, I don't think it's going to happen.

It's not really purely against their own interests though. It's reducing their chance now in order to guarantee a much higher chance later. I'm not doing Angry Goblin, but personally if I were I would view that as a much better trade off than just perpetually rolling.

People do this with the URN system for example. It's not like it's totally unheard of for there to be a player agreement that essentially awards you DKP for being at the camp.

Seems like a pretty fair system to me. And it's technically not unclassic if it's a player agreement since there were player agreements in classic (it would be unclassic if the staff just decided to create this system).

[Swish]

I think we need more rules.

[Salaryman]

pvp for it, RED 99

[BigChief]

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

pvp for it, RED 99

Both people on it?

[Toxigen]

the difference w/ drusella is that you need people to hold the camp for a long ass time

angry is a roll, sorry you dont got SWC

[PatChapp]

I bought every piece of this quest

Skargus head mq,urn mq
Friend of mine mq a sinew for me

Imagine not just buying it all,what a nightmare.

[Knuckle]

At this point im more amused at the thought of people being ANGRY their odds of winning the roll increase after each loss...Yeah no ones going to feel that way.