Quote:
Originally Posted by Pint
[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
perhaps mages have curbed the socking, but i know for guilds the size of asgard it puts us out of the race every time. we have 1 mage with the level and play time to actually track these FFA attempts for us atm and we simply cant ask him to sacrifice every weekend of his life on p99 trying for a slim chance at fte. i understand that not everyone is a 60 bard with a fast computer in a foot race, but at least we'd still have a chance to be in the foot race. as it stands now, only the largest guilds with the mage reserves can compete reliably.
|
Well maybe if you ditched those little side projects like trying to epic lv 5 warriors in favor of PL'ing up a guild mage, you wouldn't have that problem
[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]. All kidding aside though, i don't argue that is a valid point against it. It's just a shame people do not focus more on addressing possible solutions to that, instead of skipping right to these dressed up "we want to compete with you guys and would, but..." proclamations that just center around the desire to see more content go uncontested by Class C. Which essentially is what this latest FFA on repops push amounts to imo.
I mean i get it. Chest is Chest, and is never going find a common ground with Class C that does not involve our head on a spike. Catherine isn't going to be the first to make the jump to Class C at the expense of giving up their free/guaranteed piece of the Class R pie either, instead choosing to maximize the shitshow potential in small doses on the FFA spawns they do decide to go after. Apparently content with however "dirty" the tactics may be if/when she feels it gives them an edge and they work, and outraged at stuff like us counter coth-ducking or putting non-kos mages there (we prefer that over taking the "oops my bad. again" infraction route) if/when they don't. As i was attempting to point out above before Chest seized on the chance to play his "Class C is the devil!" card, that's ultimately hurting you guys more there then us atm.
But with all due respect, those are more or less lost causes to having a productive discussion here though imo, and the flaw adding an FFA middle ground was bound to create in the first place. At least if a legitimate attempt at implanting a system aimed at encouraging the progression towards Class C was the real goal there. What i'm personally interested in hearing/seeing is what type of changes
would need to be made for some of you other guilds to give FFA more of a try then showing once or twice over a 6 month period, choosing to poopsock your entire raid at a zoneline with a "might as well min/max our chances, no matter how small!" mindset when you do (should really stop doing that btw), and then completely giving up if/when you don't walk away with any loot.
Here, and speaking purely from an individual pov, i'll even throw you a sample presentation idea i'd be expecting off the top of my head:
- Reduce the variance time from 16 hours to 4
- Explore any option with the staff that would allow mob timers to be more spaced out over the week again, to avoid the current scenario that sees almost every window in a constant overlapping state. Which has just served to create the 48 hour straight tracking marathon that goes on every weekend for any guild with an active/multiple target agenda.
- Ask for some type of time of death stamp to be added to the raid policy page. Which would allow smaller guilds with lesser resources a somewhat better chance to plan ahead on targets if/when needed.
- Implant a "One-and-Done" agreement, which would probably end up making a lot of potentially rushed 3+ guild scrambles a lot easier to self manage at times. If a guild wipes their FTE, don't worry about going into "salvage mode" and gtfo of the way because you just automatically forfeited your chance to re-attempt that mob until the other guild/s present get an attempt in.