Thought Experiment: How Could Rotations Be Competitive?

[Danth]

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

...

...And here you thought you'd get a serious discussion out of this bunch. Best thing to do, in my opinion, is stop caring about raid loot or the raid game and leave them be in their little self-made jail while folks like us hang out in the rest of the vast game in peace. If you want to raid, do it someplace else that has a more sane ruleset. I'm not interested in trying to come up with anything involving competition in this game because I regard the entire notion of this game being competitive anything as absurd, if not outright stupid. But that's a matter of opinion and theirs obviously differs. Competition aside, the powers-that-be have a particular disdain for rotations so you're advised to re-brand your efforts if you continue.

Danth

[robayon]

and just like that, by spitting facts about one dead racist, a bunch of hypocrites get bent out of shape

sorry, fellas, facts don't care about your feelings.

[Mblake1981]

In other words he was one-of-the-crowd in the Hollywood, a liberal stronghold, and was a pedo and racist.

Facts don't care about your feelings either.

Edit: John Waynes greatest sin was not calling himself a liberal, a heretic against the cult.

[robayon]

Originally Posted by Mblake1981 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

In other words he was one-of-the-crowd in the Hollywood, a liberal stronghold, and was a pedo and racist.

Facts don't care about your feelings either.

Hehe this guy thinks I like Hollywood and limousine liberals just because I criticize the sleazebag John Wayne

I've been to LA once. Good mexican food, I'll give it that

[Mblake1981]

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

Hehe this guy thinks I like Hollywood and limousine liberals just because I criticize the sleazebag John Wayne

I've been to LA once. Good mexican food, I'll give it that

Wouldn't go speaking for another man like that you vapid ape.

[robayon]

Originally Posted by Mblake1981 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Wouldn't go speaking for another man like that you vapid ape.

Let me know when you find another man, then

[Jibartik]

This is a great thread I hope it never dies.

Bill cosby is the fuckin shit i love the cosby show.

[Mblake1981]

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

This is a great thread I hope it never dies.

Bill cosby is the fuckin shit i love the cosby show.

https://www.project1999.com/forums/s...1&postcount=23

[DeathsSilkyMist]

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

I'm tired of "competition vs. rotations" conversations. Fact: some classic EQ raid mobs were competed for, and some weren't. More relevant fact: our benevolent dictators for life want competition ... and it's their server.

But, what if we took a different angle, and asked: how could rotations be competitive?

As a simple example (just to get the ball rolling), what if guilds had "bag limits" on certain targets (eg. only 3 ST key mobs per week). However, to encourage competition the guild that kills their three targets the fastest gets to increase their "bag size" by two for the next week ... while any guild that gets caught violating a server rule loses their entire "bag" for the next cycle.

What other ways could you imagine "competitive rotations"? Perhaps, if we can imagine something awesome, the staff might even try it in the future.

Unfortunately it's almost impossible to pull off what you are asking. Competition has winners and losers, where-as rotations do NOT have losers. Once you try to add the concept of losers back in to rotations, you basically just end up at competition again lol.

The only thing I could think of would be to revert the game to the way it was before. Whichever guild gets the mob first gets it. There are no bag limits, rotations, etc. However, you would have a "consolation prize" for the guild that came in second. They would get to pick one piece of loot after the winning guild got their top 1 or 2 picks.

However, I think that is a bad idea, because it would be hard to determine who was in "second place", and there would have to be some criteria to prevent a lazy guild from just loot training the "consolation prize". You would need to be able to disqualify the losing guilds from the "consolation prize" if they did not try hard enough.

There is a reason why games are either competitive or rotated (instanced). You just can't really mix them due to their antithetical natures.

[loramin]

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

Unfortunately it's almost impossible to pull off what you are asking. Competition has winners and losers, where-as rotations do NOT have losers. Once you try to add the concept of losers back in to rotations, you basically just end up at competition again lol.

The only thing I could think of would be to revert the game to the way it was before. Whichever guild gets the mob first gets it. There are no bag limits, rotations, etc. However, you would have a "consolation prize" for the guild that came in second. They would get to pick one piece of loot after the winning guild got their top 1 or 2 picks.

However, I think that is a bad idea, because it would be hard to determine who was in "second place", and there would have to be some criteria to prevent a lazy guild from just loot training the "consolation prize". You would need to be able to disqualify the losing guilds from the "consolation prize" if they did not try hard enough.

There is a reason why games are either competitive or rotated (instanced). You just can't really mix them due to their antithetical natures.

While I appreciate your staying on topic, I disagree with "Competition has winners and losers, where-as rotations do NOT have losers".

I mean, c'mon: I gave a very clear example in my initial post of a rotated system with "winners and losers". And I came up with that in five minutes, just to get the ball rolling.

It's not my fault y'all have a serious lack of imagination ... but competitive rotations are absolutely possible. [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.] Try being creative instead of repeating the same tired arguments over and over (and that's addressed to everyone, not you specifically Deaths).