Haven't the big guilds just built their strategy and guild structure around the current ruleset and that's why they have dominated? What's so bad about altering that again for a new ruleset that benefits not only the other guilds but them as well?
If we come to a decision where the smaller guilds have a shot at the big raid bosses that they need to progress, and content is viable for everyone to attempt when they feel they are ready, how is that a bad thing when the number of mobs is increased (simulated patch respawn days) as well as the time needed for tracking goes down from weeks to maybe a couple hours because of variance changes?
I understand TMO and FE/IB being concerned about losing out on mobs by "giving" it to others, but rules can change for the betterment of everyone by including more.
It doesn't even necessarily have to be a 100% rotation. Divinity has released a suggestion that would not only include a rotation for everyone to have a shot at what they need as a guild to progress but also a time period where mobs are FFA and the "competition" you desire isn't extinguished.
I'm not asking for everyone to give up what they want, but a compromise could literally benefit everyone on the server including GMs. The # of mobs doesn't have to be a static thing, if we work together we can all benefit.
|