Asking a favor from the two top guilds on the server

[maverixdamighty]

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

GM's enforced a variance. The precedence for a rule set revamp is there.

gm's don't enforce a variance they coded it. it requires no additional work for them. enforcing a rotation is additional work they have to do. an enforced rotation will not happen.

[Stormhowl]

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

gm's don't enforce a variance they coded it. it requires no additional work for them. enforcing a rotation is additional work they have to do. an enforced rotation will not happen.

The same can be said about many things in real life.

Why is it so hard to believe that some people would police it themselves without GM involvement, especially if its a rival guild, providing them with a chance to "stick it to them"? There are always ways for the playerbase to met out justice without Mommy and Daddy stepping in to take everyone's toys away.

[kenzar]

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

gm's don't enforce a variance they coded it. it requires no additional work for them. enforcing a rotation is additional work they have to do. an enforced rotation will not happen.

You must be kidding. Yes the variance is a function that operates on its own. But think of the work the variance has generated through fte disputes/train accusations/DT cycle accusations/accusations of cheating/exploiting. Making a calendar with a list of possible raid targets -> applying a list of guilds willing to participate and moving them around seems like very little work compared to the current rule set. (and guess what? any kid with a minor knowledge of c++ could do it.) The rotation would enforce itself after a point, any guilds breaking the rotation would be reported by other guilds. The enforced rotation would generate no more work than the current rule set, in fact the amount of work required by staff would go down.

[maverixdamighty]

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

You must be kidding. Yes the variance is a function that operates on its own. But think of the work the variance has generated through fte disputes/train accusations/DT cycle accusations/accusations of cheating/exploiting. Making a calendar with a list of possible raid targets -> applying a list of guilds willing to participate and moving them around seems like very little work compared to the current rule set. The rotation would enforce itself after a point, any guilds breaking the rotation would be reported by other guilds. The enforced rotation would generate no more work than the current rule set, in fact the amount of work required by staff would go down.

there isn't going to be an enforced rotation on this server it's that simple. it's not classic and while I don't speak for FE by any means i'm 100% against this. I have no issue whatsoever not going after every mob every spawn to give others a chance to get raid targets, but expecting an enforced rotation is taking it too far.

[kenzar]

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

there isn't going to be an enforced rotation on this server it's that simple. it's not classic and while I don't speak for FE by any means i'm 100% against this. I have no issue whatsoever not going after every mob every spawn to give others a chance to get raid targets, but expecting an enforced rotation is taking it too far.

Maybe you weren't around before the variance, but the same was said then when the suggestion for a variance came up. "There isnt going to be a variance on this server, its that simple. its not classic." Guess what? We are working with a variance now. That's called a precedence.

You're talking with someone who raided with IB for years, 0 variance w/o a rotation didn't work, the variance w/o rotation isnt working, the next logical permutation would a 0 variance with a rotation.

[maverixdamighty]

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

Maybe you weren't around before the variance, but the same was said then when the suggestion for a variance came up. "There isnt going to be a variance on this server, its that simple. its not classic." Guess what? We are working with a variance now. That's called a precedence.

You're talking with someone who raided with IB for years, 0 variance w/o a rotation didn't work, the variance w/o rotation isnt working, the next logical permutation would a 0 variance with a rotation.

ya and guess what variance isn't controlled by the players. rotations are. sirken is the lead gm and he already said they aren't going to enforce rotations did he not? can stop beating a dead horse now and think of some other ideas.

[kenzar]

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

ya and guess what variance isn't controlled by the players. rotations are. sirken is the lead gm and he already said they aren't going to enforce rotations did he not? can stop beating a dead horse now and think of some other ideas.

He also said the decision is not up to just him but the server staff. Which means his statement is his opinion, his opinion holds weight, but not all of it.

[maverixdamighty]

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

He also said the decision is not up to just him but the server staff. Which means his statement is his opinion, his opinion holds weight, but not all of it.

thought this thread was about ways to work this out between the guilds on the server not how to have GMs control who gets what mobs? Started off with people talking about a potential list of mobs that could be left up every time period to allow some guilds that currently aren't going after raid targets to experience some end game content again, but now we are discussing a full out "enforced rotation." Why not just give people gm abilities and you can summon whatever gear you want?

[Stormhowl]

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

ya and guess what variance isn't controlled by the players. rotations are. sirken is the lead gm and he already said they aren't going to enforce rotations did he not? can stop beating a dead horse now and think of some other ideas.

*coughcough*

now all that being said, i'm simply the CSR GM and these are simply my thoughts/opinions. i do not dictate policy, or anything else, and i especially do not dictate things to Rogean or Nilbog. this is not my server, i do not make the rules. i do however enforce the rules that are put forth, and i also will try to explain the staff's position or reasoning on certain subjects. sometimes i offer my advice or thoughts on a subject in a thread, but thats all they are.

It doesn't qualify as a beaten horse until someone who runs the server explicitly states it's a done issue and cannot be spoken about.

[Stormhowl]

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

there isn't going to be an enforced rotation on this server it's that simple. it's not classic.

Judging by responses in this thread, it's clear that this statement is false.