Actually Realistic Proposal for the Server

[Nefarum]

In all the arguing and proposals put forth, people are forgetting the facts of the matter.

1. The devs have stated that they will not change how the server is functioning. This means no things like repops or reduction of variance will be implemented.

2. Players want to have some competition on the server, it's part of what makes EQ what it is.

3. Everyone is sick of the current monopoly and the majority of players being blocked from experiencing end game content.

4. The system should treat all guilds equally. No one on the server is more entitled than anyone else. TMO/FE players have put in more effort playing the game, but that doesn't give them more of a right to game content than a more casual player. The fact that the more hardcore guilds are "ahead" and that there will still be an element of competition means that you guys will still "do better" anyways. The new implemented system doesn't need to add to this advantage by treating certain guilds in a special way.

5. The GMs have stated that they will not enforce a rotation, meaning it is up to the player base to handle whatever agreement we come up with. This means that only a simple, easily-understood and easily-implemented system will work long-term. Dividing the guilds into tiers, with councils, arbitrary rules of where you can have characters or not, and all the other nonsense proposed by FE/TMO will not be understood by players and will be fraught with endless arguing and confusion. Deciding which guilds are which tier etc etc will only add to the fighting.

So to repeat, no changes to server code, must be simple and easily implemented, must still encourage competition, and has to eliminate monopoly and blocking the majority of the server from content, must treat all players/guilds in the exact same way.

I think everyone should agree/remember these premises when tackling this issue.

So what do I propose? Well I don't have a perfect solution designed, but i can offer a starting point. Your input is encouraged. I say the agreement should be something close to the following:

1. If a guild kills a raid target, they are not allowed to kill it again the next 2 times it pops.
2. If a target is up for 12 hours, it's open for anyone to take, even if a guild normally couldn't take it because of rule 1.
3. Any training/interference tactics should be heavily punished.

- Simple.
- Easy to remember/understand.
- Doesn't require code changes.
- All players/guilds are treated equally.
- There will still be competition for mobs, it's just that the competition each time will only involve the guilds that are able to kill the mob that spawn cycle.
- Eliminates monopoly as more guilds get a chance at mobs
- The table of what mobs popped when and who killed them could be easily tracked on a simple webpage

This isn't the lesser guilds asking for handouts, as the top guilds will most likely get the kills on cycles where they are allowed to, but it will get rid of the current monopoly/bottleneck. Sure, this will "cost" the top guilds some loot, but the currently monopoly is the reason we are in this mess. No viable agreement won't end up costing the top guilds something.

I think this is a more reasonable starting point than anything else I have seen.

[HujuVanikil]

It's a decent start. The problem with any ruleset is that there will always be loopholes. The biggest one I see with this is big guilds starting alt guild s so they get more shots.

Realistically the best solution is probably to just remove raid content. As I doubt anyone will agree to anything.

[Sinestria]

In all the arguing and proposals put forth, people are forgetting the facts of the matter.

1. The devs have stated that they will not change how the server is functioning. This means no things like repops or reduction of variance will be implemented.

2. Players want to have some competition on the server, it's part of what makes EQ what it is.

3. Everyone is sick of the current monopoly and the majority of players being blocked from experiencing end game content.

4. The system should treat all guilds equally. No one on the server is more entitled than anyone else. TMO/FE players have put in more effort playing the game, but that doesn't give them more of a right to game content than a more casual player. The fact that the more hardcore guilds are "ahead" and that there will still be an element of competition means that you guys will still "do better" anyways. The new implemented system doesn't need to add to this advantage by treating certain guilds in a special way.

5. The GMs have stated that they will not enforce a rotation, meaning it is up to the player base to handle whatever agreement we come up with. This means that only a simple, easily-understood and easily-implemented system will work long-term. Dividing the guilds into tiers, with councils, arbitrary rules of where you can have characters or not, and all the other nonsense proposed by FE/TMO will not be understood by players and will be fraught with endless arguing and confusion. Deciding which guilds are which tier etc etc will only add to the fighting.

So to repeat, no changes to server code, must be simple and easily implemented, must still encourage competition, and has to eliminate monopoly and blocking the majority of the server from content, must treat all players/guilds in the exact same way.

I think everyone should agree/remember these premises when tackling this issue.

So what do I propose? Well I don't have a perfect solution designed, but i can offer a starting point. Your input is encouraged. I say the agreement should be something close to the following:

1. If a guild kills a raid target, they are not allowed to kill it again the next 2 times it pops.
2. If a target is up for 12 hours, it's open for anyone to take, even if a guild normally couldn't take it because of rule 1.
3. Any training/interference tactics should be heavily punished.

- Simple.
- Easy to remember/understand.
- Doesn't require code changes.
- All players/guilds are treated equally.
- There will still be competition for mobs, it's just that the competition each time will only involve the guilds that are able to kill the mob that spawn cycle.
- Eliminates monopoly as more guilds get a chance at mobs
- The table of what mobs popped when and who killed them could be easily tracked on a simple webpage

This isn't the lesser guilds asking for handouts, as the top guilds will most likely get the kills on cycles where they are allowed to, but it will get rid of the current monopoly/bottleneck. Sure, this will "cost" the top guilds some loot, but the currently monopoly is the reason we are in this mess. No viable agreement won't end up costing the top guilds something.

I think this is a more reasonable starting point than anything else I have seen.

Sounds like a three guild rotation.

[Alarti0001]

In all the arguing and proposals put forth, people are forgetting the facts of the matter.

1. The devs have stated that they will not change how the server is functioning. This means no things like repops or reduction of variance will be implemented.

2. Players want to have some competition on the server, it's part of what makes EQ what it is.

3. Everyone is sick of the current monopoly and the majority of players being blocked from experiencing end game content.

4. The system should treat all guilds equally. No one on the server is more entitled than anyone else. TMO/FE players have put in more effort playing the game, but that doesn't give them more of a right to game content than a more casual player. The fact that the more hardcore guilds are "ahead" and that there will still be an element of competition means that you guys will still "do better" anyways. The new implemented system doesn't need to add to this advantage by treating certain guilds in a special way.

5. The GMs have stated that they will not enforce a rotation, meaning it is up to the player base to handle whatever agreement we come up with. This means that only a simple, easily-understood and easily-implemented system will work long-term. Dividing the guilds into tiers, with councils, arbitrary rules of where you can have characters or not, and all the other nonsense proposed by FE/TMO will not be understood by players and will be fraught with endless arguing and confusion. Deciding which guilds are which tier etc etc will only add to the fighting.

So to repeat, no changes to server code, must be simple and easily implemented, must still encourage competition, and has to eliminate monopoly and blocking the majority of the server from content, must treat all players/guilds in the exact same way.

I think everyone should agree/remember these premises when tackling this issue.

So what do I propose? Well I don't have a perfect solution designed, but i can offer a starting point. Your input is encouraged. I say the agreement should be something close to the following:

1. If a guild kills a raid target, they are not allowed to kill it again the next 2 times it pops.
2. If a target is up for 12 hours, it's open for anyone to take, even if a guild normally couldn't take it because of rule 1.
3. Any training/interference tactics should be heavily punished.

- Simple.
- Easy to remember/understand.
- Doesn't require code changes.
- All players/guilds are treated equally.
- There will still be competition for mobs, it's just that the competition each time will only involve the guilds that are able to kill the mob that spawn cycle.
- Eliminates monopoly as more guilds get a chance at mobs
- The table of what mobs popped when and who killed them could be easily tracked on a simple webpage

This isn't the lesser guilds asking for handouts, as the top guilds will most likely get the kills on cycles where they are allowed to, but it will get rid of the current monopoly/bottleneck. Sure, this will "cost" the top guilds some loot, but the currently monopoly is the reason we are in this mess. No viable agreement won't end up costing the top guilds something.

I think this is a more reasonable starting point than anything else I have seen.

This is a 3 guild rotation and absolutely in no way viable.

[Mezzmur]

This is a 3 guild rotation and absolutely in no way viable.

Sounds good, lets do it.

TMO, IB/FE, Afkite Masters.

[Nefarum]

The more important part of my post is the points I make early on: the premises that people are forgetting and need to remember when tackling this issue. A lot of the arguing going on is useless because people are forgetting these points.

Sounds like a three guild rotation.

As for my proposed system I knew it wouldn't be perfect, but let's try to build on it. A "three guild rotation" isn't the best but would still give lesser guilds more of a chance to try and compete than they have now (2 of the top 3 guilds out of competition each pop). Any ideas how to make this better though?

[Cyrano]

This is a 3 guild rotation and absolutely in no way viable.

Why is it not viable?

[Autotune]

Why is it not viable?

Because it only adds another guild to the problem that rogean posted.

1 or 2 guilds monopolizing the raid content.

3 guilds monopolizing the raid content.


We have to have, at least, 5 guilds monopolizing the raid content.

[Mezzmur]

Why is it not viable?

I think what he meant to say is that none of the smaller guilds would likely agree to this.

It's like Divinity's hybrid rotation without the 14 day rotation and just the FFA portion. The top 3 guilds would likely just rotate through.

[Mezzmur]

Because it only adds another guild to the problem that rogean posted.

1 or 2 guilds monopolizing the raid content.

3 guilds monopolizing the raid content.


We have to have, at least, 5 guilds monopolizing the raid content.

I lol'd.

[Ecguy]

I did have quite the chuckle.

[Yinikren]

Three guild rotation doesn't solve the issues where CSR wants multiple guilds (as in 6) killing multiple mobs and everyone having fun.

[doraf]

In all the arguing and proposals put forth, people are forgetting the facts of the matter.

1. The devs have stated that they will not change how the server is functioning. This means no things like repops or reduction of variance will be implemented.

2. Players want to have some competition on the server, it's part of what makes EQ what it is.

3. Everyone is sick of the current monopoly and the majority of players being blocked from experiencing end game content.

4. The system should treat all guilds equally. No one on the server is more entitled than anyone else. TMO/FE players have put in more effort playing the game, but that doesn't give them more of a right to game content than a more casual player. The fact that the more hardcore guilds are "ahead" and that there will still be an element of competition means that you guys will still "do better" anyways. The new implemented system doesn't need to add to this advantage by treating certain guilds in a special way.

5. The GMs have stated that they will not enforce a rotation, meaning it is up to the player base to handle whatever agreement we come up with. This means that only a simple, easily-understood and easily-implemented system will work long-term. Dividing the guilds into tiers, with councils, arbitrary rules of where you can have characters or not, and all the other nonsense proposed by FE/TMO will not be understood by players and will be fraught with endless arguing and confusion. Deciding which guilds are which tier etc etc will only add to the fighting.

So to repeat, no changes to server code, must be simple and easily implemented, must still encourage competition, and has to eliminate monopoly and blocking the majority of the server from content, must treat all players/guilds in the exact same way.

I think everyone should agree/remember these premises when tackling this issue.

So what do I propose? Well I don't have a perfect solution designed, but i can offer a starting point. Your input is encouraged. I say the agreement should be something close to the following:

1. If a guild kills a raid target, they are not allowed to kill it again the next 2 times it pops.
2. If a target is up for 12 hours, it's open for anyone to take, even if a guild normally couldn't take it because of rule 1.
3. Any training/interference tactics should be heavily punished.

- Simple.
- Easy to remember/understand.
- Doesn't require code changes.
- All players/guilds are treated equally.
- There will still be competition for mobs, it's just that the competition each time will only involve the guilds that are able to kill the mob that spawn cycle.
- Eliminates monopoly as more guilds get a chance at mobs
- The table of what mobs popped when and who killed them could be easily tracked on a simple webpage

This isn't the lesser guilds asking for handouts, as the top guilds will most likely get the kills on cycles where they are allowed to, but it will get rid of the current monopoly/bottleneck. Sure, this will "cost" the top guilds some loot, but the currently monopoly is the reason we are in this mess. No viable agreement won't end up costing the top guilds something.

I think this is a more reasonable starting point than anything else I have seen.

We brought this up in the meeting last night and it was shot down as well. We offered 10 days and it was shot down. It seems the casual guilds want a 14 day rotation or nothing.

Personally, I'd rather we never come to an agreement and raid mobs never spawn again, then watch "EQ Classic" turn into a sandbox for crybabies who don't want to work for their gear.

There are plenty of instanced servers (paid and emu) if you guys want hand outs.

[Erati]

since when does a hand out require tracking, bat phoning, fielding numbers, mobilizing and killing

to me that sounds like effort

[Alarti0001]

Why is it not viable?

you wont get a majority of the server agreeing on a 3 guild rotation?

[Nefarum]

It's not necessarily a 3-guild rotation. It still encourages competition, but makes the competition more viable for lesser-than-TMO guilds. A guild like BDA/Divinity/etc. will have more of a chance getting a mob if 2/3 of the top guilds have to sit out that pop. Lesser guilds will only have 1 of the top 3 to contend with (along with the other lesser guilds).

I honestly think just a small change like this, plus the addition of Velious content is all we really need. Keep in mind I'm not even a member of a top 5 guild and I'm saying this.

This just prevents such a ridiculous bottleneck on key items, like Trak teeth.

---> One more thought:

I honestly don't believe there will ever be a proposal that will have unanimous agreement. The GMs' mandate for us to reach a consensus is pretty much impossible. We could have a near-perfect plan, and there will still be people who don't like it. No matter what, the top guilds have to give up power, and/or the lower guilds will still feel oppressed. I think no matter what happens, the GMs might have to just choose a proposal that isn't universally reviled and just declare it the new law. That's the only way I see anything actually moving forward.

[kphooper33]

I love all these people with 10 plat-bought uber-alts talking about how nobody else wants to "work" for their gear. Most of them 'work' for their gear with their plat-bought alt armies.

[Alarti0001]

It's not necessarily a 3-guild rotation. It still encourages competition, but makes the competition more viable for lesser-than-TMO guilds. A guild like BDA/Divinity/etc. will have more of a chance getting a mob if 2/3 of the top guilds have to sit out that pop. Lesser guilds will only have 1 of the top 3 to contend with (along with the other lesser guilds).

I honestly think just a small change like this, plus the addition of Velious content is all we really need. Keep in mind I'm not even a member of a top 5 guild and I'm saying this.

This just prevents such a ridiculous bottleneck on key items, like Trak teeth.

---> One more thought:

I honestly don't believe there will ever be a proposal that will have unanimous agreement. The GMs' mandate for us to reach a consensus is pretty much impossible. We could have a near-perfect plan, and there will still be people who don't like it. No matter what, the top guilds have to give up power, and/or the lower guilds will still feel oppressed. I think no matter what happens, the GMs might have to just choose a proposal that isn't universally reviled and just declare it the new law. That's the only way I see anything actually moving forward.



A 3 guild rotation would cause FE/IB to split. What would happen is TMO>FE>IB>TMO repeat

[Yinikren]

Its unfair regardless to lump every other guild into that third slot, even if IBFE doesn't split because of it.

5 guilds competing for the last slot on what is basically a rotation probably isn't what rogean had in mind when he asked the server to come together and form an agreement.

[Durka]

Veto.

[Nefarum]

the only guild it will "cost" loot is TMO.

FE hasn't been getting "the loots" on this server. your analysis is shallow and betrays lack of nuance.

Do you really think that people aren't aware that TMO causes the majority of the issues in the raid scene and has the most to lose? I've been trying to word things lightly so as to prevent it from degrading into an anti-TMO flame war.

Why do you think I, as someone who isn't even a member of one of the top guilds, is proposing a system that MOST benefits the top-tier guilds just underneath TMO? Maybe if you sat back and thought about it for a second you'd see there's more "nuance" than you realize.

The point is that change is needed, and a simple system like this is the most realistic step towards actual viable change.

[Arteker]

Brenloo and Pugigi would be laughing their ases so abdly if they read those forums.

The rule number 1 of a GM:
1: ignore players.