FE Raid Scene Proposal

[falkun]

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

The bottom line here is the tier 2 guilds really aren't willing to negotiate with tier 1 guilds. Tier 2 have only offered the divinity plan and have insisted the tier 1 guilds adhere to it absolutely with no modification whereas the numerous proposals by the tier 1 guilds continue to be chastised regardless of how many modifications and concessions have been made in favor of the tier 2's. This isn't a negotiation, it's holding the tier 1's hostage for a pound of flesh for past transgressions.

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

Let Tier 2 worry about Tier 2, Tier 1 worry about Tier 1.

You guys can play however you want and we will not worry about it, we won't stop you. Please, enjoy the game the way you want. The only thing we're asking for is the exact same thing, the ability to play our way and figure out solutions to our own problems, that's it.

Unbrella, listen to Kope here. If tier2 wanted a pound of flesh, we'd ask for mobs so that every guild gets equal # of mobs. Look at Loraen's numbers, tier2 is asking to split 50% of the kills outside VP amongst 70+% of the population while the other 30% gets 50% of the non-VP kills and ALL of VP. Tier2 has their little playground, and tier1 has theirs over in another part of the yard. As Chest said, keep the peanut butter away from the chocolate.

[oddibemcd]

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

I keep seeing insinuations that these talks are forced because of how the hardcores are "wrong." Misinformation does the conversation no services.

These talks are not a result of philosophical differences between the staff and the hardcores. They are a result of situation that led to too much work on the part of the staff. That they want the hardcore to accommodate the casual is a secondary consideration.



It is certainly true that it is fair for the hardcores to compete while allowing meaningful participation from the casual, but this concept is not the origin of these talks. Do not claim moral authority for your stance because you inappropriately think that's where the staff philosophically sits.

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

The bottom line here is the tier 2 guilds really aren't willing to negotiate with tier 1 guilds. Tier 2 have only offered the divinity plan and have insisted the tier 1 guilds adhere to it absolutely with no modification whereas the numerous proposals by the tier 1 guilds continue to be chastised regardless of how many modifications and concessions have been made in favor of the tier 2's. This isn't a negotiation, it's holding the tier 1's hostage for a pound of flesh for past transgressions.

Then just go with the staff plan if it's not trying to punish for past transgressions and if the tier 2 guilds haven't bent enough on the Divinity plan.

[Kope]

This will most likely be my last response because I feel like I'm getting trolled at this point. I'm only trying to figure out a way everyone can get the most out of their game.

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

The bottom line here is the tier 2 guilds really aren't willing to negotiate with tier 1 guilds. Tier 2 have only offered the divinity plan and have insisted the tier 1 guilds adhere to it absolutely with no modification whereas the numerous proposals by the tier 1 guilds continue to be chastised regardless of how many modifications and concessions have been made in favor of the tier 2's. This isn't a negotiation, it's holding the tier 1's hostage for a pound of flesh for past transgressions.

Our proposal gave us less than half of a month of a rotation of mobs outside of VP which you were included in. You could most likely get 70% of the mobs in any given month and you guys shot that down, without question every single time, because of competition sake. After this happened Rogean comes up with a plan that would allow you guys to have all the competition you wanted between every guild that wants it, period. ANYONE who wants to do it can, no exceptions, but anyone who wants no part of it isn't forced into it.

You came up with plans that gave FFA mobs to the non Tier 1 guilds (sans Trak, VS and sometimes CT, or sometimes Inny) for 1 week, the rest of the time you wanted to force us to compete with you for it (which most everyone isn't even trying to do). We weren't holding anything hostage, we came up with a plan where we thought we were losing out and you STILL said no, so yeah we're not going to negotiate down from a deal that automatically favors you to be forced into the same type of raidscene > 50% of the time we play the game.

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

I mean...that is exactly what I proposed here. It is THE SAME as the staff proposal with the details filled in about how the tiered system would progress.

Let the people who are actually trying to build something here build something, and the people who are not not.

No, it's not. In the staff system you don't have to be Tier 1 unless you want to (or any set of prerequisites are fulfilled). In your plan you're forcing guilds that DO NOT WANT anything to do with that, to deal with that.

How would you feel about a rotation 100% of the time? No? We know that, that's why we didn't offer it, it wouldn't be fair. Why not play the way you want, and let us play without having to deal with your playstyle?

[Kennie]

Nice kid's table solution.

[Ciroco]

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

You really need to reread the staff plan. I took the tiered system DIRECTLY from the staff plan. The only difference is Rogean said that the details of how the tiers were to be structured and how to move between tiers had yet to be worked out. I provided a very simple way for these details to be worked out.

Now, please stop throwing around rainbows with helmets on them and discuss what is actually being said here. HOW does the staff system let you 'play how you want to' and this system does not - do you even know WHAT the staff systems tiered progression is based on? HOW does this system limit you in a way that is unacceptable, both in relation to other plans and in relation to how things were? The sooner you let us know these RELEVANT issues, the sooner we can begin to have a more fruitful discussion.

I'm not supportive of the staff suggestion, but let's not pretend that's the only major difference. The removal of T1/T2 lockouts and tier requirements are big changes.

[-Catherin-]

they don't want the staff plan because it gives them less opportunity to demonstrate their superior prowess over us lesser guilds. what fun is their competition when there is so many less guilds that they can "compete" with and defeat. withdrawing now. I'm sure I won't be missed. GL [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

[Tanthallas]

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

Unbrella, listen to Kope here. If tier2 wanted a pound of flesh, we'd ask for mobs so that every guild gets equal # of mobs. Look at Loraen's numbers, tier2 is asking to split 50% of the kills outside VP amongst 70+% of the population while the other 30% gets 50% of the non-VP kills and ALL of VP. Tier2 has their little playground, and tier1 has theirs over in another part of the yard. As Chest said, keep the peanut butter away from the chocolate.

Listen to Kobe? The guy who denied tooth and nail a plan that would give tier2 the majority of the mobs every week and a very easy way to progress to tier1 if they so desired? Giving tier2 their 'little playground' and the ability to be mobile to tier1 without having to deal with tier1 cockblocking them? Literally the straight middle ground between the GM plan and the Divinity plan.

Deajay, you have become just as delusional as the rest now. Either you guys want to compromise or you dont, and as far as I see it you are not here to compromise, you are here to make demands.

[arsenalpow]

I would like to strike the peanut butter chocolate analogy from the record, I've been told that peanut butter and chocolate are delicious together thus making for a very poor example. I apologize.

[Lazie]

You really do not understand the situation as well as you believe you do. Does the staff want a healthier environment where guilds can experience content and progress ? Yes. Do they want it simply because the lower guilds want it ? Nope. They want it because a player made agreement in the long run is less work on the staff. Now Sloans is the best compromise I have seen of all the systems so far. Both sides have to come off what they are asking for and it seems to meet exactly in the middle. I don't know what to say past that... I mean they met you guys in the middle and you guys keep asking for more.

[Tanthallas]

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

I'm not supportive of the staff suggestion, but let's not pretend that's the only major difference. The removal of T1/T2 lockouts and tier requirements are big changes.

The staff plan is nothing without a definition of tier mobility and requirements, which they do not have.

The second you add the details to the tiers, it seems everyone has a problem with what they had no problem with before.