A reply to a thread in the Raid Discussion section.

[Nune]

Yendor just owned this thread hard

[Uteunayr]

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

Yendor just owned this thread hard

^

[knix]

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

Further, the 1/1/1 split doesn't necessarily mean that the Class R guilds have to rotate. Rogean's plan only says that Class R guilds cannot monopolize a single mob, by needing to wait 2 respawns until their next claim. Any agreement between the Class R guilds, and the challenges (such as getting your assigned Class R mob before a FFA spawned mob) fall entirely on Class R and the way they decide to manage their system. That isn't the responsibility of Rogean's Plan to institute such a rotation, only to make it so each side can create their own environment that is beneficial to themselves, without degrading the other.

So on repop day when Gore is an R mob, theoretically all the R class could play hot potato, and say, We are doing Inny, we don't want to do gore right now. So there should be a rule in place that all of the R mobs need to be taken down before any R guilds compete for FFA spawns.

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

So, as for who is going to police this, it will be rather simple to police in truth. You look at the schedule, it was a Class C mob, a Class R guild did it, swap the loot, done. There's no question as to who is in the wrong in this case, because we know the Class R guild was the aggressor. No need to delve through endless crap to discover the truth. Class R guild takes out a Class C mob, they are in trouble, end.

Oh do tell who would determine which Class C guild (cause there is at least 2) would get the loots, (ie who is going to police this). Would the R guild get suspended from raiding for taking a mob that wasn't on their list?,. I mean, if its just a matter of handing over the loot, that might be good cause I know we have killed many dragons and they had crappy loot, Might as well kill all the dragons as competitive, and just hand over loot, I think I could get behind that plan. Cause its the rush, its the balls to the wall, can you get there and have your force in place with a pull first and winning that is the fun of competition, so many times its a no weight bag and a pally item that the dragons drop. I think that many people who have not killed a plethora of dragons think that they drop good loot every time, but just like crypt, How many times do you kill Hiero room and get a Hiero cloak?
You Claim this plan wouldn't take away from the competitive environment, but, being handed loot from dragons, you don't kill isn't competitive, the only way to fix a R killing a C dragon is to respawn dragon, and suspend the R guild for 4 weeks. (same punishment for training) because the guild would be responsible for raid interference.

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

As for enforcing whatever Class R sets up among themselves, that's on themselves to create a system to manage it. Rogean's Plan doesn't force a rotation on either side, so if Class R creates a rotation, it's on them to live up to it, and to find a way to enforce it, because that was created by them. Without a rotation, the 2 kill lockout for Class R is more than enough to help diffuse a single guild from being insanely too powerful and monopolizing.

If the R's aren't going to have to go after their R mobs before going after FFA on repop day , it it will block and affect the C's. That is why Sirkens plan B- easy to police, easy to track easy for the Volunteer CSR staff. Do the people that were crying over this plan realize what they are doing to the CSR staff. Rogean isnt always around to monitor his grand plan, Sirken, Derubael, Eunomia, Zade, and Ambrotos are the one that are going to have to deal with the day to day aspects of monitoring (policing) this plan. the 1 1 1 plan has many aspects that are not classic, all to give the "casual" guilds a unique , instance like attempt at a dragon.


edit AND If a R dragon is left up when a repop happens, causing a FFA or a C dragon to not spawn, does the R dragon BECOME the C or the FFA dragon?

[Rararboker]

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

Yendor just owned this thread hard

[YendorLootmonkey]

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

Yendor just owned this thread hard

Feel free to link to the post in the official 1/1/1 Proposal Discussion, along with this:

That's even without Ute pointing out to me via PMs a little bit ago the special case of VP mobs, which, if included on the re-pop plan (Rogean/nilbog never specified they wouldn't), Class C guilds not only go from 4.3 to 4.86 spawns of a particular 7-day +/- 48hr non-VP mob, as an added benefit they go from 4.3 to 7.3 spawns of each VP mob in a 30-day cycle because they have the opportunity to compete for those every time they spawn. That's 18 extra VP dragons they are getting every 30 days from the 1/1/1 plan, plus more non-VP opportunities. Yet they are focused on limiting the Class R guilds on what is essentially an entirely new set of mobs being added to the mix. Class C wants in on those too? Unbelieveable.

Based on the above numbers, any hardcore that rejects this 1/1/1 plan as a concept is just trying to deny pixels to Class R with no detriment to the amount of opportunities that Class C is being provided.

[radditsu]

Boom mathshot.

[YendorLootmonkey]

Here's the Excel spreadsheet I was using to simulate 25000 spawns if anyone wants to pick it apart or mess with it. You can change that "Max hours Class R has to kill a mob" value from 8 to whatever. Class C and FFA mobs are assumed to die within an hour, based on P99 raiding history. [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.] This does not include the extra 3 re-pops per month on average, I just wanted to get a feel for how a delay in killing every third spawn might impact the spawns per month on the non-"forced full re-pop" spawns. The answer was: Not much.

http://www.filedropper.com/spawns

[Uteunayr]

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

So on repop day when Gore is an R mob, theoretically all the R class could play hot potato, and say, We are doing Inny, we don't want to do gore right now. So there should be a rule in place that all of the R mobs need to be taken down before any R guilds compete for FFA spawns.

Tier C can do the same thing with their assigned mobs, aiming for the FFA between tiers before their tier assigned ones.

So there should be a rule in place that all of the C mobs need to be taken down before any C guilds compete for FFA spawns, in conjunction with the same restrictions placed on Tier R. That is fair, but it is also fair to say that you can just let all FFA mobs be FFA, and let each tier ignore theirs until the FFA are off the table.

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

Oh do tell who would determine which Class C guild (cause there is at least 2) would get the loots, (ie who is going to police this).

This is up to GM prerogative. This system makes it immediately clear that the transgressor is, and that is the important thing. This means it is easy to assign blame for the disruption to the system, and dish out disciplinary action. It is up to the GMs how they want to handle this, but if I was in control, I'd levy significant damages against the guild that violated the arrangement to act as a significant deterrent. If there is no way to know who gets what loot, then the loot gets poofed, and the system was violated and one of the classes lost loot that they should have received. But in return, that guild is raid banned, dismantled, raid suspended, however they want to interpret heavy deterrence. Sure, the one class lost a mob to the other, but the transgressor is going to pay dearly for it. And again, this cuts down on the work load because the only thing that is important is identifying the violator of the rules.

It seems to me Class C guilds are going to have a far easier time with this system, as it is far more likely a Class C guild could grief the other side, than Class R could to Class C, just given raid capabilities.

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

Would the R guild get suspended from raiding for taking a mob that wasn't on their list?

I certainly would if I was a GM. You have a clear transgressor, you have a clear violation of the system. Suspend them for a month or two. There's no grey area in "Oh, was it training? Was it not?". Suspend them, and make it harsh enough that guilds will not seek to violate the system. Very low workload to maintain this.

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

You Claim this plan wouldn't take away from the competitive environment, but, being handed loot from dragons, you don't kill isn't competitive, the only way to fix a R killing a C dragon is to respawn dragon, and suspend the R guild for 4 weeks. (same punishment for training) because the guild would be responsible for raid interference.

How is it handled now if a guild kills a mob that was engaged by, and then kited by, another guild? So, Guild A pulls Mob A. Mob A is brought down to 70%, and then Guild A is dying. Before Mob A is back up to 100%, while Guild A still has some people up, Guild B comes in and kills Mob A.

As far as I am aware, Guild B killing Mob A still results in Mob A's loot going to Guild A. It may not be nice, and that's why the punishments for violating this system need to be significant. It encourages guilds not to violate the rules of the server, and so it doesn't need to be policed often, lowering the GM workload. Further, it is clear who violated, so dishing out discipline is far simpler than dredging through logs.

Lastly here, I'll point out that if a Class R guild runs to and gets a Class C mob before Class C does, didn't they beat you in competition? Sure, they will lose the loot and get punished, but you talk about the fun of competition, but if they beat you to it, that's still competition, just one that you lost. And then they get punished.

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

If the R's aren't going to have to go after their R mobs before going after FFA on repop day , it it will block and affect the C's.

Just restating what I said above, the same thing is true if Class C goes after the FFA mobs before going after their mobs, which they engage in through a FFA style.

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

That is why Sirkens plan B- easy to police, easy to track easy for the Volunteer CSR staff.

This plan is equally elegant, if not more so, in that it also keeps ideologically polarized individuals from interaction as much as possible, and lets each side experience their side of classic if they stay within their own bubble. I've brought this guy up in other places, but one of my favorite political scientists, a personal hero of mine named Mark Haas wrote a rather fascinating book called Ideological Origins of Great Power Politics, which shows that pretty much every war that has broken out between states since the french revolution has come about due to vastly ideological differences.

It is not difficult to apply similar logic or findings to EverQuest, in which states act as guilds, and wars are conflicts that the GMs need to resolve. Let the ideologically competitive stay with the ideologically competitive, and compete with one another to enjoy their system, and let the casuals do the same among themselves. This is what Sirken's plan did not provide for, and it is why Sirken's plan would not resolve any long term conflicts, the casual guilds still were forced to play the hardcore game for the vast majority of the month. With the 1/1/1 plan, the casuals can be casuals all month long, and the hardcores can be hardcore all month long. Making either side play the other's game for the vast majority of the month is unacceptable, and simply will not work for long term stabilization of the conflicts and the shitshow that is endgame raiding on this server.

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

Do the people that were crying over this plan realize what they are doing to the CSR staff. Rogean isnt always around to monitor his grand plan, Sirken, Derubael, Eunomia, Zade, and Ambrotos are the one that are going to have to deal with the day to day aspects of monitoring (policing) this plan.

And I will state once more. "This was a Class R mob. Class C killed it. One month suspension." Done. Be brutal, be harsh. The rules are clear, the process is clear, the punishment is clear. Make the punishment harsh enough that the benefit of violating the rules (and with the loot being removed from their possession, there is very little) is significantly less than the cost. Make the punishment severe, and it wont be a day to day occurrence, and when it does spring up, it is easy to dish out punishment and move on, relieving the GM staff of the hard and great work they do on our behalf.

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

the 1 1 1 plan has many aspects that are not classic, all to give the "casual" guilds a unique , instance like attempt at a dragon.

Much of this server is not all that classic. This type of competition on the server is not that classic. It is the type of thing you get when you sit on content for years longer than happened in classic, have a heavy population of 60s that is not classic. So, this server is far from classic, and it makes the competition on this server not classic. However, it is pseudo-classic. It is more classic than anything else you're going to find, and that is awesome.

But hardcore competition is not the sole classic. There are many people who remember their servers having agreements between the high end guilds, having cooperation, having friendly competition, rather than the cutthroat behavior on this server. These people have an equal right to relive their classic as you do to relive your hardcore classic. That's fine. Both sides deserve that. Sirken's plan does not permit it, the 1/1/1 does. It allows each side to play their way with their share of the toys, all month long. Compete against each other if you like, be friendly with each other if you like, rotate if you like.

The hardcores are getting more than enough to compete over. They are getting more mobs out of this than they had before. The only cost is that they are being asked to do it with themselves, rather than shoving their epeen all across the server and ruining other player's attempts to build their classic experience.

TL;DR:
1) 1/1/1 lets each side play with their split of the mobs. (Yendor 2014)
2) Class C has significantly more, to motivate Class R to become Class C. (Yendor 2014)
3) Ideologically opposite people are kept at an arms length so they don't fight. (Haas 2007)
4) Harsh punishments to deter violations of the system.
5) Policing the system itself would not take long, to relieve the work of the GM staff.

[Kadron]

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

So there you have it. The hardcore's reluctance to accept the 1/1/1 plan in which they get the opportunity to compete for more mobs than they already do is all about denying pixels to others. We have mathematical proof that under Rogean's plan they would get the opportunity to compete against 4.86 spawns a month compared to the 4.3 they have had the opportunity to compete for in the past.

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

[JayN]

This is retarded; staff want a solution with rules that only they can only enforce, but they dont want to have to enforce it?

Shut this server down imo...


How goes Velious?