OFFICIAL PROPOSAL from FE/TMO

[Hitpoint]

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

Oh trains happen, trust me I have wasted hours recovering from those accidents. No way to point the finger anywhere though, people have gotten good at disguising who did it. Nevertheless, I brought this even more off topic.

When plane of hate is your choice of target you're definitely going to get trained, no matter who you are. Even if you're the only guild there it can happen. Doesn't mean it's on purpose. There's a reason the big guilds NEVER go to hate on a full repop, even though Inny can be so fast and easy to get to. The chances of wiping to a train shitshow between multiple guilds and losing every other target is too likely.

[Durka]

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

This was the proposal brought up last summit to the other guilds. It was flatly rejected afaik. This is the SAME proposal that was offered by the OP, but 10 days instead of 7 days.

I think pictures and numbers help people understand better than just reading it.

I did read your previous post and looked at the numbers, but arent is that a true spreadsheet to variance? Or is that the perfect spawn rate.

http://wiki.project1999.com/Cazic_Thule_(God)

Respawn Time: 7 Days (+/- 48 hours)

I believe it was said in many ways that the code is not going to be changed to accommodate whatever is decided upon. With that said, I am sure you can mod your spreadsheet to show actual worst case scenario for spawns. Then crunch the numbers =D

[Mezzmur]

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

I did read your previous post and looked at the numbers, but arent is that a true spreadsheet to variance? Or is that the perfect spawn rate.

http://wiki.project1999.com/Cazic_Thule_(God)

Respawn Time: 7 Days (+/- 48 hours)

I believe it was said in many ways that the code is not going to be changed to accommodate whatever is decided upon. With that said, I am sure you can mod your spreadsheet to show actual worst case scenario for spawns. Then crunch the numbers =D

I was of the impression that they would consider disabling (extended?) variance in some period of time if the community is playing nice.

This is the law-of-averages spawn time but you can't write down the worst case scenario because of extended variance. VS could theoretically take 30 days to spawn.

It's entirely possible that some months you will get more on one side of the fence than the other, it'll go both ways.

[Hitpoint]

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

I did read your previous post and looked at the numbers, but arent is that a true spreadsheet to variance? Or is that the perfect spawn rate.

http://wiki.project1999.com/Cazic_Thule_(God)

Respawn Time: 7 Days (+/- 48 hours)

I believe it was said in many ways that the code is not going to be changed to accommodate whatever is decided upon. With that said, I am sure you can mod your spreadsheet to show actual worst case scenario for spawns. Then crunch the numbers =D

It's an average. He could crunch the numbers for best case scenario too.

[Durka]

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

I was of the impression that they would disable variance in some period of time if the community is playing nice.

This is the law-of-averages spawn time but you can't write down the worst case scenario because of extended variance. VS could theoretically take 30 days to spawn.

Yeah I think we are screwed with variance - wish we had that option to have it removed ;-)

Kinda hard to bite on this plan with the variance in play. Less opportunity for cat b. It could be more opportunity too, but I like to play devils advocate and go worst case scenario when making my decisions / deriving opinions. Maybe thats the wrong approach but it seems to serve me well!

Thank you for posting that information though, it does give a good understanding of actual vs perceived.

[Mezzmur]

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

Yeah I think we are screwed with variance - wish we had that option to have it removed ;-)

Kinda hard to bite on this plan with the variance in play. Less opportunity for cat b. It could be more opportunity too, but I like to play devils advocate and go worst case scenario when making my decisions / deriving opinions. Maybe thats the wrong approach but it seems to serve me well!

Thank you for posting that information though, it does give a good understanding of actual vs perceived.

If you actually took the real average of 14 day snake and went with the guilds *today* its 30/9 vs 35/7.

I actually included day 15 in Divinity's numbers to make them look better than they actually are.

[Moodie]

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

Taken didn't beat BDA on FTE. We had a peeps there if Taken wiped but we gave them their shot firstly and they pulled it off. Grats Taken folks. They had people xp'ing waiting for spawn, when window got short lots more came. All perfectly good.

Eloian Bushlover (not Political Bushes)
57 Ranger <BDA>

Check your logs... FTE was Taken.

[Durka]

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

Check your logs... FTE was Taken.

Nevertheless, I think keeping this on topic is key. I do like averages when I am accounting for things that arent so critical. I use worst case scenario when I want to make hard decisions. Worst case scenario seems to highly favor cat a. But that is 1 person in 1 guilds opinion - I refuse to speak for others!

I do appreciate all of the supportive facts though. It does show a great option if variance wasnt an issue!

[Mezzmur]

The only number you can rely on is average because it's constant to both plans. If a spawn takes longer in either plan, it pushes it out of the 14 day window and it'll go FFA either way. TMO/FE/IB would participate in the rotation plan as well as on the FFA side, which is why the mobs-per-guild is always higher in the hands-off-no-rotation plans.

[Seltius]

I want to say this and it isn't targeting anyone or any idea.

The GMs have already made the first change towards improving the raid scene when they removed the No GM intervention in VP and banned future intentional training in VP. With this and the fact that intentional training is banned everywhere else how about working around that for a basis of competition.

BDA, A-Team, Europa, Taken, IB/FE(even separate if they want), TMO, and any other guild that wants a shot can attempt it all they have to do is clear around the dragon or pull the dragon to their raid. If they engage first the new PnP by its very nature should prevent any interference. You get your shot you fail and the next guild there ready gets a shot. Now you need to iron out how long you have to prep prior to engaging. This is an example for VP but every zone should work that way. If you are worried about alt armies then go and level your own alts and park them there or have your members camp there. You can find out when its in window and every guild can have trackers there.


Just a suggestion you talk about how toxic things are then make an effort to better yourself and improve them in the process. That way any guild that wants to raid can compete without underhanded interference but the alts thing isn't going away.

If you really want a chance to compete in VP maybe work it out to where you can get trak tooth from another guild or work out trades or something for epic loots/ etc. Or make alliances that raid and work out how the teeth are handled. Get enough people to try the dragons whether it is 10 or 25+ and then go in and fight for it.

Your complaining about attrition through numbers that's not TMO or IB/FE fault that they have the characters/alts to compete.