Proposition For Raid Rules - Input Requested

[baramur]

There is simple things you will not change. Alarti i have heard you time and time again agree that poopsocking is evil, yet you fail to mention that was TMO that caused poopsocking to be used. You can say you did not start it, but if that what guilds had to do to win a mob against tmo monopoly, because tmo refused to let others enjoy killing targets, then you TMO is responsible. All this could have been avoided by TMO simply sharing a few mobs here and there, or saying hey server we are gonna take 1 week a month break, enjoy, but you did not, you said "Hey server, fuck all you guys, if you want epics, reach into your banks. Pay us, because you all suck, and we are gods of eq." Personally i would love to see it where TMO was raid banned until velious, considering you have monopolized your share of loot for the last 3 years, and then turned and talked shit about everyone while doing it. But, in the spirit of christmas, i will actually give you all the benefit of the doubt. Now then why are we making things so tough. Why not take the 2 best ideas we have and implement them together with a few minor tweeks.

First off 2 hour no touch limit is way to long, i believe in sharing, but i also believe people should have to work for loot, not just be handed opportunities. After all only guild to be handed mobs was TMO's vp rotation. That said. 1Hour is sufficient. This MAKES guilds track for the mobs they want. This gives guilds time to log on and prepare and have a real engage. If you cant mobilize for vs or trak in 30min, then you shouldnt be allowed to a chance to kill them without competition. Now this said, wouldn't this mean it would simply go TMO, IB, TMO, IB,,,,,Yep prolly. And i think IB, FE, other guild is to easy, i was thinking this.

HERE IS MY SUGGESTION.

If IB/FE and TMO combine to kill 4 targets in a row, both guilds will agree not to engage the 5th spawn for a time of no less then 6 hours.

IB/FE and TMO agree that the first week of each month they will not engage TAL/GORE/FAY/SEV/NAGGY/VOX/DRACO/INNY/Maestro

ALL GUILDS AGREE to Not engaging a mob within 1 Hour of its spawn, if they killed its last spawn. If said guild has killed last 2 spawns they Agree not to engage 3rd spawn for 6 hours.

Trak/VS/CT Will be open competition, except, these mobs will have a 15 minute engage timer if prior kill, and if FE/IB and TMO combine to kill mob 4 times in a row, they will Agree to neither engage mob for 6 hours. 15 min still forces competition.

VP will remain FTE and open for further discussion later on down the road.

[Layne]

Raiding guilds should just turn in books of discord and Duke it out for mobs blue would make a hell of a lot better red than red.

[Autotune]

GMs should just spawn targets for the non-raid guilds and ban any raid guild that tries to kill them. However, no one should know what is a GM spawn and is a normal server spawn.

Problem solved.

[Troubled]

Originally Posted by Alarti0001 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I have a simple solution. Lets have FE/IB/TMO agree to no poopsocking, no delayed engages, and to leave up 4 dracos, and 2 naggy/vox/tal/sev/gore/fay/inny in an 8/4 cycle. (50%)

CT/Trak/VP always complete, and the draco that pops with CT always compete.

So for one, define no poopsocking. Does that mean no camping chars, no stall team sitting around, or no force sitting around(just a tracker?) I think, personally, no stall team or force sitting around is good and camping chars for Trak/CT/VS is acceptable, but a force inside VP should be racing from the zone in and not camping out inside lairs.

For this proposed pseudo-rotation:

Besides CT(& Draco CT), Trak, VS, & VP, blanket agreement for no guild to take more than 1 out of 4 spawns? For most mobs, FE/IB & TMO would easily reach their 50%, but that opens it up for another guild to take the other 50%, such as Taken/Taken on 2 inny spawns or BDA/BDA on 2 Vox spawns. Let's just make it 1 out of 4 for any guild?

Speaking for myself, and not my zerg, I would like to see VS added to the lesser mob list, but other than that I think we have something to work with here. Nice thought, Alarti.

[baramur]

HERE IS MY SUGGESTION.

If IB/FE and TMO combine to kill a mob 4 times in a row, both guilds will agree not to engage the 5th spawn for a time of no less then 6 hours.

IB/FE and TMO agree that the first week of each month they will not engage TAL/GORE/FAY/SEV/NAGGY/VOX/DRACO/INNY/Maestro

ALL GUILDS AGREE to Not engaging a mob within 1 Hour of its spawn, if they killed its last spawn. If said guild has killed last 2 spawns they Agree not to engage 3rd spawn for 6 hours.

Trak/VS/CT Will be open competition, except, these mobs will have a 15 minute engage timer if prior kill, and if FE/IB and TMO combine to kill mob 4 times in a row, they will Agree to neither engage mob for 6 hours. 15 min still forces competition.

VP will remain FTE and open for further discussion later on down the road.

[Autotune]

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

How about first in force, no leapfrogging?

define first.
define force.
define leapfrogging.

[quido]

I am holding back from sharing my vision of p99 raiding until everyone has had a little more time to mull over all the suggestions and ideas. There has been some great input from people, but more time is needed for people to confer with their respective parties (especially during these holidays) and hopefully each respective faction can come up with a list of possibilities that they are able to live with.

Here are some of the important points for me:
- Competition on the high-demand targets remains at least most of the time
- The rules don't essentially implement a rotation on any target
- Tier 3 guilds receive the benefits of these concessions as much as or more than Tier 2 guilds
- The system is one that can be managed with civility and won't necessitate constant disputes, requirements of proof, and other annoying crap

[Alarti0001]

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

There is simple things you will not change. Alarti i have heard you time and time again agree that poopsocking is evil, yet you fail to mention that was TMO that caused poopsocking to be used. You can say you did not start it, but if that what guilds had to do to win a mob against tmo monopoly, because tmo refused to let others enjoy killing targets, then you TMO is responsible. All this could have been avoided by TMO simply sharing a few mobs here and there, or saying hey server we are gonna take 1 week a month break, enjoy, but you did not, you said "Hey server, fuck all you guys, if you want epics, reach into your banks. Pay us, because you all suck, and we are gods of eq." Personally i would love to see it where TMO was raid banned until velious, considering you have monopolized your share of loot for the last 3 years, and then turned and talked shit about everyone while doing it. But, in the spirit of christmas, i will actually give you all the benefit of the doubt. Now then why are we making things so tough.

Nope TMO didn't start poopsocking. Poopsocking was prevalent here long before TMO was even a guild on p99.
Also, who defines who gets what share of loot>? Terrible troll.

[Alarti0001]

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

First = the first guild
Force = the quantity necessary as deemed by the server/guild summit/ whatever
Leapfrogging = if there is a guild first in force ready to engage at the spawn point, another guild will not attempt FTE snipe or any of that BS

Good definitions. Good defined as terrible

[Ungriim]

How would you modify what I have so far to help the tier 3 guilds out more? I feel like at some point a BDA or Taken or Europa guild may step up and get enough dragons to bump them off the list to allow for even more people to get a shot at dragons that first week off that we would have...maybe not?

I feel like I've covered 1 and 2 fairly well. If guilds agree on anything #4 will come with it - I would add to point 4 that we probably want to be self-governing so that we stop bothering the GMs as well