Project 1999

Go Back   Project 1999 > Blue Community > Blue Server Chat

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 12-30-2013, 08:49 PM
Derubael Derubael is offline
Retired GM


Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Cabilis East, in the northwest corner of the zone-in from Field of Bone
Posts: 5,009
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bossman [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
No offense Deru, but that's BS. How is this "official" proposal given more levity than any of the proposals that were discussed (namely point system)?

Let everybody get together as hash this out, not discuss with TMO behind closed doors.
It wasn't. If you guys want to try and work something else out, go ahead. Hence my post. Nothing is 'official' until all of you guys agree on it.

Personally I feel this is a fair agreement. The only concession I would try to make if I wasn't a 'category A' guild would be to drop inny and fay to de-prioritized targets.
  #2  
Old 12-30-2013, 09:02 PM
Turp_SmokinPurp Turp_SmokinPurp is offline
Kobold

Turp_SmokinPurp's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 161
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Derubael [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
The only concession I would try to make if I wasn't a 'category A' guild would be to drop inny and fay to de-prioritized targets.
This should already be in the writing. Or people sending tells to these leaders to get it wrote up.
I agree. Even if its just Inny one month an fay the next (back an forth). They are getting tons of raid mobs left up with this proposal. Way more than before , and it gives every lower guild a big chance at mobs. + they have the chance to steal our mobs still too.
But for some reason it just seems like nothing but a full blown rotation (forced by GM's) will make these people happy.
__________________

Turp --- Purp
60 Shm 60 Wiz
Last edited by Turp_SmokinPurp; 12-30-2013 at 09:24 PM..
  #3  
Old 12-30-2013, 09:04 PM
Bossman Bossman is offline
Kobold


Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 125
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Turp_SmokinPurp [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
This should already be in the writing. Or people sending tells to these leaders to get it wrote up.
I agree. Even if its just Inny one month an fay the next (back an forth). They are getting tons of raid mobs left up with this proposal. Way more than before , and it gives every lower guild a big chance at mobs.
But for some reason it just seems like nothing but a full blown rotation (forced by GM's) will make these people happy.
Hard to complete other epic without VS. Maybe "these people" are tired of a small percentage of server population telling is what we can and cannot do.
  #4  
Old 12-30-2013, 09:12 PM
Scoresby Scoresby is offline
Aviak


Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 85
Default

I think a revision to this proposal which seems more fair to the server is.

GroupA - TMO and FE/IB
GroubB - Everyone Else

Priority Targets (can be focused on by GroupA) - All of VP
Non-Priority Target (cannot be focused on by GroupA) - The rest of the raid mobs

If you manage to achieve 25% or more of the kills in VP in a month, you are considered GroupA.

The first week of the month, GroupA can compete with GroupB for all targets. The remainder of the month, non-priority targets are not killed by GroupA.

Poopsocking in all its forms are from here forward a bannable offense. The definition of poopsocking is having a raid character in the zone at the spawn point of a boss (either actively playing or logged out). I would suspect a few fraps of this would fix people from using this tactic?

In all seriousness...

Some of this is a hyperbolic attempt at pointing out how ridiculous the initial proposal seems. The poopsocking idea I do think should go forward. I can't imagine how the top tier raiders feel there is realistic competition in having alts camped out at the boss. There is no rush to engage, it's just phone a friend and kill a dragon. You will not ever have serious "competition" if those are the lengths you must go to.

At the end of the day, bigger compromise is needed between the top tier and less hardcore raid guilds. This server is VERY mature in terms of where we are expansion wise vs age of the server. There are significantly more guilds capable of downing a raid target than any server ever experienced on live. Because of that there need to be serious concessions to keep a healthy server.

I think the biggest thing lurking in the back of my mind is honestly how many more Trak/VS kills do TMO/FE/IB (especially TMO) honestly need to be competitive. I would venture it's a very small number.
Last edited by Scoresby; 12-30-2013 at 09:15 PM..
  #5  
Old 12-30-2013, 09:15 PM
Ecguy Ecguy is offline
Sarnak


Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 218
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Scoresby [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
I think a revision to this proposal which seems more fair to the server is.

GroupA - TMO and FE/IB
GroubB - Everyone Else

Priority Targets (can be focused on by GroupA) - All of VP
Non-Priority Target (cannot be focused on by GroupA) - The rest of the raid mobs

If you manage to achieve 25% or more of the kills in VP in a month, you are considered GroupA.

The first week of the month, GroupA can compete with GroupB for all targets. The remainder of the month, non-priority targets are not killed by GroupA.

Poopsocking in all its forms are from here forward a bannable offense. The definition of poopsocking is having a raid character in the zone at the spawn point of a boss (either actively playing or logged out). I would suspect a few fraps of this would fix people from using this tactic?

In all seriousness...

Some of this is a hyperbolic attempt at pointing out how ridiculous the initial proposal seems. The poopsocking idea I do think should go forward. I can't imagine how the top tier raiders feel there is realistic competition in having alts camped out at the boss. There is no rush to engage, it's just phone a friend and kill a dragon. You will not ever have serious "competition" if those are the lengths you must go to.

In all seriousness, some bigger compromise is needed. I think the biggest thing lurking in the back of my mind is honestly how many more Trak/VS kills do TMO/FE/IB (especially TMO) honestly need to be competitive. I would venture it's a very small number.
CAT A guilds have lots of newer players that still want to raid lower targets. What this actually might do is cause people to join CAT B guilds to farm their gear then join the CAT A guild for when they are ready to move on to VP.
  #6  
Old 12-30-2013, 09:21 PM
Scoresby Scoresby is offline
Aviak


Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 85
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ecguy [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
CAT A guilds have lots of newer players that still want to raid lower targets. What this actually might do is cause people to join CAT B guilds to farm their gear then join the CAT A guild for when they are ready to move on to VP.
You say this like it would be a bad thing....it happens already. At least other guilds would be getting low priority targets.
Closed Thread


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:04 PM.


Everquest is a registered trademark of Daybreak Game Company LLC.
Project 1999 is not associated or affiliated in any way with Daybreak Game Company LLC.
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2026, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.