Lock Server Until an Agreement is Met

[Nuggie]

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

Thank you unbiased 3rd party.

Can't tell if you're being sarcastic. It's lost in the text. If you're not, dont think for a minute i'm not biased against TMO. But I think it was a reasonable approach to the problem.

[Autotune]

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

I like the idea of giving up a few of the lower priority targets to give "Tier B" people raid experience and fun. But the number and relative need of the gifted mobs shouldn't be excessive. I would be alright with a 1 to 1 Tier A - Tier B rule rotation on certain mobs. Guilds should also be encouraged to form alliances and actually compete with the Tier A guilds, they might surprise themself and get targets. However, some of these demands that I'm seeing with everyone's new-found bargaining power are really unreasonable and could have unforeseen consequences to the server. I like brainstorming these unforeseen consequences because some of these wacky ideas are going to happen eventually.

Okay, so I'm going to quote someone who asked a question about this earlier.

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

Ok, then what happens when multiple people from one guild place alts in an existing Tier C guild. Is this guild going to be a default "alt guild" of the Tier A guild? How many members of a Tier A guild can have alts in the same secondary guild? What if multiple Tier A guilds band together and place just enough Alts in a pre-existing secondary guild to stay under said limits (raid cooperation!)? Who is going to track this?

The GMs already said that keeping track of everyone's alt is not practical from their end and it is not going to happen.

So, um?

[sanforce]

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

Okay, so I'm going to quote someone who asked a question about this earlier.



So, um?

That's why any changes shouldn't be too excessive. If it comes down to a rule rotation on every other lower priority target, I won't feel the need to have alts in other guilds. I'd rather have all of my alts under 1 tag, but I'd also like to have useful alts (whetever they are tagged).

Ok, out of here for some New Years fun. I'm not necessarily against everything you say on here Autotune, but the results of these changes should be thought through and shouldn't unnecessarily damage the server.

[Turp_SmokinPurp]

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

I'll make this clear too.

Im more than willing to be raid suspended for a week, or a month, or longer, if that's what its going to take for a proper agreement for everyone. This doesn't hurt me. This doesn't hurt the smaller guilds. Taken looses the respectable number of targets we get but it also gives us a break from this toxicity in the promise of something better in the future for all of us.

Not sure if I can say that about everyone in the top Guilds though so you had better think about that.

TL DR

Rotation or no one raids.

[DrKvothe]

The Div plan is far too lenient on TMO. They easily get, what, 7-10 times the raid kills as BDA or Taken? With a similar number of players behind those alt armies? After 2 years of dominance allowing the vast majority of their ~100 people to get epics for at least one if not more of their characters. Yeah, you get new recruits. The difference is they're not 10th in line within the guild for their epic.

If a bag system with a low cap were established, you might only get the same number of targets as BDA or taken, but they'd be whichever ones you chose, you'd still have to track and race, and you have fewer players who need drops for their main and thus can still epic your recruits faster.

Edit: obviously bda supports the div plan and I support bda, but tmo's acting butthurt need to wake up.

[MaksimMazor]

I need 2 more epics I dunno about yall

[fastboy21]

I support a /movelog of all raiding guilds to red until they are ready play nice with each other.

[Arteker]

Originally Posted by fastboy21 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I support a /movelog of all raiding guilds to red until they are ready play nice with each other.

yessssssss would be interesting,,,,,,,[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

[Frieza_Prexus]

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

The Div plan is far too lenient on TMO.

Any solution must be fair on its own merits. TMO's punishment was in its suspensions and bannings. Exacting a pound of flesh now does nothing to advance the dialogue.

[DrKvothe]

No pound of flesh. But 90% dominance to 50-70% dominance that still includes all of VP is more than fair.