Your options are...

[Argh]

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

Why not maintain the status quo or move up rather than trying to conquer the smaller guilds because you think you can get more?

BDA/Taken feel slighted because they got hosed during the last period for rule changes. They wanted what they're proposing now, almost verbatim, and instead got a rule put in place that has had absolutely zero effect on what they had issue with.

Really what Taken/Div/BDA wants is to get rid of R guilds ability to ever use assistance of another guild. In doing so, either the lists get shorter, or more mobs go R-FFA where they are likely to kill them without penalty.

They think that any guild that needs help to kill a mob shouldn't be signed up for that mob. I think that is a point that everyone can agree on, however, where everyone disagrees is how to judge that. Everyone on the rotation has killed every mob solo, and even BDA has required assistance from 2 guilds to kill early AM Trak, and recently Divinity failed to kill Gore within their allotted solo time. They rely heavily on the assertion that smaller guilds rely on the help of other guilds consistently, however this
is not based in reality and is complete malarkey.

Their position isn't ridiculous or without merit, but they're absolutely awful at negotiating and managing relationships which is critical to maintaining an agreement between 10 different guilds.

[Daldaen]

Getting rid of assistance where the assister doesn't drop to the bottom of the rotation.***

Guilds should be encouraged to kill mobs on their own. If they cannot that is fine they are welcome to ally up and occupy a single rotation slot as a pair of guilds.

[loramin]

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

Getting rid of assistance where the assister doesn't drop to the bottom of the rotation.***

Guilds should be encouraged to kill mobs on their own. If they cannot that is fine they are welcome to ally up and occupy a single rotation slot as a pair of guilds.

Can someone please explain the fixation on allied guilds? As Pint so eloquently stated:

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

if two guilds field 20 people each and split loot in half then they wait another 2 months or w/e and split loot in half again then are they really getting more than the 40 members of the guild that killed it solo for all of the loot?

In other words, the two scenarios of "Guild A and B ally together" and "Guild A and B raid separately" work out exactly the same. If a dragon has 10 pieces of loot (for easy math):

Scenario 1: Allies
Month 1: Guild A gets 5 items; Guild B gets 5 items
Month 2: Guild A gets 5 items; Guild B gets 5 items
End: Both guilds have 10 items


Scenario 2: Allies
Month 1: Guild A gets 10 pieces of loot
Month 2: Guild B gets 10 pieces of loot
End: Both guilds have 10 items

Serious question (not trolling): what am I missing?

[Man0warr]

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

Can someone please explain the fixation on allied guilds? As Pint so eloquently stated:



In other words, the two scenarios of "Guild A and B ally together" and "Guild A and B raid separately" work out exactly the same. If a dragon has 10 pieces of loot (for easy math):

Scenario 1: Allies
Month 1: Guild A gets 5 items; Guild B gets 5 items
Month 2: Guild A gets 5 items; Guild B gets 5 items
End: Both guilds have 10 items


Scenario 2: Allies
Month 1: Guild A gets 10 pieces of loot
Month 2: Guild B gets 10 pieces of loot
End: Both guilds have 10 items

Serious question (not trolling): what am I missing?

It doesn't work like that.

Each guild in the alliance gets a slot in the rotation, so the alliance thus has TWO kills per rotation (they team up for each individual guilds slot). That's 20 pieces of loot per cycle.

Meanwhile, large guild not in an alliance only has 1 slot per rotation, thus they only get 10 pieces of loot that entire cycle.

In the proposal being hammered out now, your scenario would be true - the alliance would only take up 1 slot per rotation cycle, and would have to remain part of that alliance for all kills.

[loramin]

Originally Posted by Man0warr [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

It doesn't work like that.

Each guild in the alliance gets a slot in the rotation, so the alliance thus has TWO kills per rotation (they team up for each individual guilds slot). That's 20 pieces of loot per cycle.

Right, the alliance does have TWO kills per rotation (ie. 20 pieces of loot), but unlike the un-allied guilds they have to split the loot from those kills TWO ways (ie. 10 pieces of loot per guild per cycle), right?

This isn't complex math: 1 = 2 * 1/2. So again, what am I missing?

[Man0warr]

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

Right, the alliance does have TWO kills per rotation (ie. 20 pieces of loot), but unlike the un-allied guilds they have to split the loot from those kills TWO ways (ie. 10 pieces of loot per guild per cycle), right?

This isn't complex math: 1 = 2 * 1/2. So again, what am I missing?

Couple things:

• Unless perfect circumstances, they couldn't kill the mob without said alliance.
• They are making the rotation take longer. (this is the biggest one)
• They get double the chance at good loot dropping per cycle.
• They are awarding double the loot to less players. (For instance, let's say the 2 small allied guilds have 50 players combined who raid, and BDA/Taken/Div have 100. 20 pieces of loot to 50 players compared to 10 pieces of loot for 100 per rotation cycle).

All these things are unfair to any guild who doesn't ally - it's taking advantage of the way the current system works. It also leaves loopholes to take it even further. What if Taken split up into 4 25-person raid guilds - now they get 40 loot per cycle to 100 players. It makes the rotation longer, but fuck who cares?

[Errakus]

Originally Posted by Man0warr [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

• Small allied guilds have 50 players combined who raid, and BDA/Taken/Div have 100. 20 pieces of loot to 50 players compared to 10 pieces of loot for 100 per rotation cycle).

AKA Zerging, I wouldn't even call that raiding... When you can just yank it in one hand and slap 1 2 3 in the other while raiding and still down the mobs, you're either a warrior, rogue, or in BDA.

[loramin]

Originally Posted by Man0warr [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

[*]Unless perfect circumstances, they couldn't kill the mob without said alliance.

Right, and you can't kill a dragon by yourself either [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]. The entire point of raiding in EverQuest is to get a group of people to kill something they couldn't kill on their own.

Originally Posted by Man0warr [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

[*]They get double the chance at good loot dropping per cycle.

Let me just repeat: 2 * 1/2 = 1. This is something a second grader understands, it isn't rocket science. Yes the two allied guilds get two chances at the loot, but any individual guild member has only half the chance in each case, so it amounts to the same thing as an un-allied guild.

Originally Posted by Man0warr [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

[*]They are awarding double the loot to less players. (For instance, let's say the 2 small allied guilds have 50 players combined who raid, and BDA/Taken/Div have 100. 20 pieces of loot to 50 players compared to 10 pieces of loot for 100 per rotation cycle).

So you're saying it's unfair that when 50 people kill a dragon they have twice the chance at its loot as when 100 people kill the dragon? Of course defeating content with fewer players should be rewarded.

Originally Posted by Man0warr [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

[*]They are making the rotation take longer. (this is the biggest one)

Originally Posted by Man0warr [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

What if Taken split up into 4 25-person raid guilds - now they get 40 loot per cycle to 100 players. It makes the rotation longer, but fuck who cares?

Ah, now you've gotten to the crux of the matter: rotation slots/loot piles are allocated by guild (irrespective of size), but any individual player's chance of getting some loot depends on their guild's size. I think this is a legitimately unfair aspect of the current system: taken to it's logical extreme every guild would want to be as small as possible, and tons of tiny guilds isn't in anyone's best interest.

But if guild size is really the issue (as it seems to be), couldn't it be solved by adding a minimum guild size requirement to be able to join the rotation? Or at least a minimum guild size to ally (eg. if you want to raid with 18 badass people then you get your own slot, but if you want to work with another guild you both have to have at least 40 players). Or what if raid slots were just allocated by guild size, so an 100 person guild would get the same number of slots as two 50 person guilds?

A guild-size-based solution would address the issue far more directly and with a lot less controversy. After all, most reasonable people would agree that 100 people should get twice the loot of 50 people, regardless of who belongs to what guild, so why not solve the guild size problem instead of worrying about who can kill Gorenaire?

[Tann]

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

The rotation isn't dead yet. If it ever was there's a few alternatives...

1. Take it like a chump and accept less.
2. Consider red (always a good option)
3. Compete, or merge guilds til you just have 3 huge zerg guilds in a highly toxic/competitive raid scene.
4. Play something else or somewhere else.

1. doing less work for less loot doesn't a chump make.
2. the current iteration of EQLive is more classic then R99.
3. is what live was, though obviously not this many years of kunark and all the other "this aint live" balder dash.
4. WoW/GW2/etc are indeed options if you don't want to put the effort Class C puts in for the pixels.

[iruinedyourday]

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

2. Consider red (always a good option)

/transfer cus why not