Re: Raid Situation

[Brut]

So forget all the pie slicing and fairness and whatnot, what really matters here is that some bloated egos were hurt?

[arsenalpow]

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

How many mobs do tier 2 guilds rotate between under the repop agreement ?

How many would they get under div Rogean plan?

Anyone do the per month math yet ?

Dolic

so let's do some back of the envelope math

before the banhammer came down on TMO the usual mob distribution was something like 80-90% for the hardcore guilds, Taken was socking to snag Innys, BDA was DOMINATING Vox (lol) and we'd maybe snag a target here or there. No other tier2 guilds were getting anything. Let's call that pool of mobs X

The Rogean plan was to split X mobs 50/50 between the tiers and any mobs that spawned from the additional repops would retain their tier assignments, so each tier gets 50% of X and most likely 50% of Y based on when the spawns fall

The plan that was enacted was pure FFA for the pool of X so that meant 80-90% for the hardcore crowd, and the tiers were basically splitting the pool of Y mobs (repops) down the middle. So 80-90% of pool X, and half of pool Y for the hardcores, and half of pool Y for the casuals.

I think that's a pretty close representation of how the math plays out

[Pheer]

if the math is the only thing holding us back on this whole situation then I think we all know who needs to be brought in


[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

[YendorLootmonkey]

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

You're confusing two different things, ya moran. BDA stands accused of being unnecessarily obstinate in the discussions, not of causing whatever problems before these negotiations.

Lets be fair here while you're busy spinning this against BDA...

Here is the proposal that seven (including BDA) out of the nine guilds threw their support behind:

http://www.project1999.com/forums/sh...d.php?t=133458

Who was being unnecessarily obstinate in that thread? To the point of trolling Rogean into locking the thread for his own proposal?

[Hitpoint]

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

It became abundantly clear two days ago after the Sirken-announced ruleset that BDA was more concerned with taking from Tier1 than they were with providing for Tier2.

"We just got a sick deal, but why didn't you punish them more?!"

This.

I mean. There were multiple BDA posting exactly this after the new deal was announced. Didn't even try to hide it.

[Fael]

Rogeans plan was 50/50 for all but vp right?
So, t2 gets, per month, roughly 2 x ct, vs, inny, dolj, sev, tal, gore, fay, vox, nag, and 4x trak. So total of 24 mobs.

Under the plan we though we had, tier 2 gets basically the exact same amount. And they still get the opp to compete on FFA repop (guaranteed another 4 or 5), and also the ability to compete during second half of month.

Accordingly, why the heck are we upset about this ?
It's a win win.

I suspect it has most to do with the fact that they want tier 1 to get less more than they want to get more.

Dolic

[arsenalpow]

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

Rogeans plan was 50/50 for all but vp right?
So, t2 gets, per month, roughly 2 x ct, vs, inny, dolj, sev, tal, gore, fay, vox, nag, and 4x trak. So total of 24 mobs.

Under the plan we though we had, tier 2 gets basically the exact same amount. And they still get the opp to compete on FFA repop (guaranteed another 4 or 5), and also the ability to compete during second half of month.

Accordingly, why the heck are we upset about this ?
It's a win win.

I suspect it has most to do with the fact that they want tier 1 to get less more than they want to get more.

Dolic

because additional repops and reduced variance were always on the table, they weren't something special added by sirken to sweeten his plan. Any plan agreed upon would have had some semblance of repops/lesser variance so no matter what the pool of mobs would be increased

[Byrjun]

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

Accordingly, why the heck are we upset about this ?
It's a win win.

Question of the night. The plan we ended up getting was better than the one that BDA wanted, because it featured repops in addition to normal spawn, which was a mechanic we thought wouldn't be considered. Tier 2 didn't end up with less mobs, they potentially got more. 12 pages and I still haven't heard a reason why the repop plan was bad.

[Vandy]

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

There are 11 mobs outside of VP. 2 of them are level 52-restricted.

They pop on average 4 times a month.

That's 44 raid mobs per month. There are at least 6 tier 2 guilds, and 3 tier 1 guilds - that's being pretty stingy

That's 9 guilds that want to compete for 44 mobs a month. That's approximately 5 mobs per guild.

Do you think it's fair to you that you only get 5 mobs a month for your guild?

Oh, you don't? Well that's fine, but keep in mind that if you take another mob, then someone else only gets 4 mobs a month. How many mobs do you think you deserve? Is it 10 mobs a month? Well then another guild gets 0 mobs a month. Do 4 guilds want 10 mobs a month? Gratz 4 mobs total for the rest of the 5 guilds.

This is an unsolvable problem on an EMU server that's been stale for too long. My numbers may not be accurate (i don't raid here) but that's the actual reality of the situation. A LOT of people can kill the mobs. A LOT of people want mobs. There are a static number of mobs per month.

No one guild can be dominant without severely cutting off access to those mobs to the rest.
No coalition of guilds can exist without everyone getting a very very thin slice of pie.

The solution is more mobs, or people being content with less.

Staff / Development are going to have to solve this problem with a coded solution. We are all arguing with each other to no great effect because the numbers behind all these solutions just don't add up.

You can put tiers on stuff, you can put restrictions on who and what can engage and in what time period, but the end result is straight up numbers.

44 Mobs a month

[Hitpoint]

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

because additional repops and reduced variance were always on the table, they weren't something special added by sirken to sweeten his plan. Any plan agreed upon would have had some semblance of repops/lesser variance so no matter what the pool of mobs would be increased

You were not offered repops that T1 wasn't allowed to touch at all. If you think t2 would have gotten a guaranteed 8 T1 spawns a month on FFA repops you're crazy. Not to mention 3-4 repops were not on the table either, 2 were.