With all due respect, Sirken, you're no Solomon.

[whitebandit]

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

Why can't casuals be happy with 25% of raid targets? You will get to kill more raid mobs in one or two months than you've been able to get in three years.


Dolic

its been said 100 times before...

5-10% players, 75% loot
90-95% players, 25% loot


the numbers are seriously skewed...

I also believe this is beyond being about Playtime, I think there are a TON of people outside "hardcore guilds" that have higher playtime than that of some of the members of said guild..

[Seltius]

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

Why can't hardcores be happy with 50% of raid targets? You will get to kill just as many raid mobs as you've been able to kill in the past three years.


Chest

Its not classic!

[Babayaaga]

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

...We do not intentionally train, except what we used to do in VP. Which, again was also within the rules.

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

...accounts being banned, and though we groused about the accounts we shared being suspended we took it and dealt with the GM's on a per-account basis because TMO, by and large, plays within the rules...

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

...We happen to be the best at pushing those rules to their absolute limit...

The areas I have underlined expose the reasoning why some people are being extremely cautious in these negotiations. What may appear to be a "chip" is nothing more than this... caution. Chest is one of many players who have experienced first hand what can happen when rules have been exposed to the ingenuity of the human brain when driven by a common goal in an environment where resources are too few to meet demand.

While we may be negotiating a more fair way to "share" these resources, the reality is that the common problem will still remain... there just isn't enough content to meet demand. If historical evidence tells us anything, and as you have clarified in your post, it can be expected that people will look for ways to bend these new rulesets to their favour using exposed grey areas all over again.

By your own post, you have exposed how this happens, the "why" is where guild philosophies disagree. What some consider acceptable behaviour, others do not.

Through these negotiations, it is the responsibility of everyone to ensure that grey areas are identified and clarified before anything is set in stone.

[Uteunayr]

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

Its not classic!

Sure it is. Classic means different things to different people from different servers. Classic means PvP to some, classic means hardcore cutthroat raiding, classic means cooperation and friendliness the kind of which has never been replicated in other games, classic can mean simply leveling up to 60 on your own. Of course, I get the impression you were being sarcastic, so do not take this as me attempting to say you're wrong by any means, simply to elaborate for the person that comes through here and believes that line wholeheartedly.

[Clark]

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

Chest, you're being a baby. If I were in your guild I'd be railing at you to get out of the negotations or shut your mouth, because frankly you're embarrassing BDA. And you can cry and call me a cheater or a bully all you want, but the fact is you're holding up the negotiations by being a greedy little whiner with an enormous chip on his shoulder, and everybody sees it.

You wanna call me greedy? Fine. I'm greedy. But I've got news for you: we're all greedy. You wanna call me a competitive jerk? Fine. I freely admit that I enjoy being in the top guild and pushing as hard as possible to down the most raid mobs.

But entitled? Get fucking real.

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

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Also BDA has the most people online for any guild across the entire server 24/7. That isn't Tier 2 I'm sorry.

[BillyCranston]

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

"it's as if Obama told Israel and Palestine that they have 3 days to become best friends, otherwise we'll nuke em both."

Exactly what the staff bullshit "proposal" was/is.

[Uteunayr]

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

Also BDA has the most people online for any guild across the entire server 24/7. That isn't Tier 2 I'm sorry.

It has a lot of people online, because the vast majority of players are seeking a more casual experience from the game, but a lot of us want to be able to see some of the stuff that the upper tier guilds have been locking down.

Tier 1 in capacity? Probably. We've downed CT before, we've done some bigger bosses, as have a number of other "tier 2" guilds. But the vast majority of us don't like to play the game you all do. Tier 1 in terms of the attitude and the style of game we seek to play? Not even close. This isn't about anything other than that fact. Certainly, Tier 2 should have defenses so that no one guild can monopolize or even be complete douchebags in Tier 2. Numerous times I have seen the BDA representatives arguing for these things, things that are less beneficial to BDA in a purely competitive way, but far more beneficial to us in the style of play we seek. Yes, in a pure tiered raiding system, there is the threat that a guild with the capacity of BDA could dominate their tier, but that's thinking like a tier 1 guild. That's why Bregan reps have been perfectly fine with the idea of a percentage of casual kills, or wanting to go into VP as making you tier 1, so that way a guild (BDA or another in the future) can't do to tier 2 what we are arguing against.

You're looking for people to want to play in the shitshow of hardcore competitive raiding, but the vast majority don't like that. You can't pull people into it who don't want to be into that. If you can't make hardcore competition appealing enough to those involved to sustain hardcore competition, maybe the issue isn't in people are just too casual, maybe you're just too hardcore to compete for people playing a 14 year old elf simulator, many of whom are just sort of done with the stage in their lives in which they measure their epeen based on hardcore attitudes. You all can play tier 1 the way you all always have, and while I don't speak for BDA (as I am just a member), I can say that from my experiences with these people, that most people here do not want to play the game you all do. I certainly don't.

People really need to realize that not everyone thinks in terms of maximum material utility. Utilitarianism has been a corpse in political thought for at least half a century, if not more. Not everyone thinks of what they can do to take the most toys in the box. It isn't wrong to think that, nor is it wrong to not think that. But you can't expect the other to play by those rules, and for everything to work out right. Political science is against you if you think that that can work.

"I just don't see how any guild, GM or guide can dictate any guild to adapt to a play style they don't want to. Focus on that, figure how the two different sides can adapt it to this problem. Limiting NPCs to one tier or another and forced into the other side's play style is the second biggest issue." -Ambrotos

[Seltius]

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

Sure it is. Classic means different things to different people from different servers. Classic means PvP to some, classic means hardcore cutthroat raiding, classic means cooperation and friendliness the kind of which has never been replicated in other games, classic can mean simply leveling up to 60 on your own. Of course, I get the impression you were being sarcastic, so do not take this as me attempting to say you're wrong by any means, simply to elaborate for the person that comes through here and believes that line wholeheartedly.

Sorry that was humor.

In the end the server powers that be really need to step up and lay out how they want the server they are working so hard on to be.

Its like giving the inmates the keys and telling them to run the asylum. But first they have to come up with a non-crazy rule set.

[Uteunayr]

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

Sorry that was humor.

In the end the server powers that be really need to step up and lay out how they want the server they are working so hard on to be.

Its like giving the inmates the keys and telling them to run the asylum. But first they have to come up with a non-crazy rule set.

I thought you were. It's a sad state of affairs when it is difficult to know easily whether it was humor or actual belief, given that there are numerous people who would say that without any sense of humor to it whatsoever. Hence, I put in that last sentence.

It's an idea, but the reason, I think, that Rogean, Nil, and everyone else in the server staff, want the players to come to an agreement, is that then it is something they agreed to and made, so it has a greater chance of having a longer lasting influence. Rules forced down on people are less happily accepted than those made by people. That's just a truth, whether it be regrettable or beneficial. As for me, I've already made clear that Rogean's plan is not only the most fair by current political philosophy, but also provides the most justice under the same category, and when paralleled to actual political science that was researched, replicated, and taught today, has the best chance of creating a lasting reduction in conflict.