Question on the ragefire rotation

There is lots to fix, no doubt. I am not doing these encounters, do not care to because of all the drama that comes with it. No thanks.

However I am into things being fair and this proposal is not fair to the up and coming guilds. You are effectively limiting the small guilds window of opportunity to join via one mob.

And if you guys are making it the one day FFA where guilds can apply to try Naggy, its not a FFA day. It should be a gatekeeper trial day or some such. If three guilds apply, they get attempts in the order they applied.

Meaning, if guild a applies, attempts and fails in the alotted time, then guild b should be ready to try. If they fail in the alotted time, then guild c should be ready to go. If they succeed, they are in. If they fail, Naggy becomes FFA.

This should be for any contested raid mob, that way the window of opportunity to prove yourself and enter the rotation is not so limited.

And by days I mean npc rotation.

On top of all this, as guilds actually do beat Naggy and join the rotation, 1/5 of 1/4 of the time, the rotation grows longer and is that much longer for other guilds to have to wait to attempt to get in on the rotation.

We all know there are alot of variables that go into whether or not your guild may or may not be able to do a raid target. The rotation might fall on a night that you typically do not have a strong turn out but say if your GAD (gatekeeper attempt day) say came one a Sat and you had unobstructed attempt at say Cazic, you might have np at all.

Lots of things you folks are not considering.

Such an obvious troll. Why didn't Toxist post on his main account at the beginning if this wasn't some sad attempt? Not to mention not having Toxn in the raid to further hide the fact that it was a member of TL. I hope they suspend your whole guild for this ploy.

Yea it's by no means perfect. But it's a great attempt to be fair. Squeesh you at work ? The Last Guardian the next big thing on Ragefire?

Yeah, at work.

I would just like to mention that, I am in no way even hinting that this proposal is decent. The entire thing is terrible, starting from the fact a guild that can't even beat these mobs, and a guild that has wiped more than they have killed, are the two main "Decision makers" when it comes to this rotation.

I commend all of you working on it, I hope it works out.

If you extend those FFA days into GAD days across your board, you address some of these issues. granted you will have some smaller guilds sign up for Inny and really not be ready for Inny but really, whats the big deal?

Maybe you can also stipulate % as to whether or not small guilds get additional chances in their alotted times. That way small guilds d and e do not sign up for Inny gad days and waste everyone`s time getting curb stomped.

Lots of things you all can do to make it fair and challenging.

Hell, make the GAD days FFA days between the guilds that sign up...

It is not ironic then that the proposal does not make sense for the guilds that are in similar situations as them. Sort of we are in, now lets seal up the holes and keep additional guilds out?

Really makes me wonder. Honestly, I am sure it is more just not thinking it through actual implementation. This sounds good, lets see how it goes.

Reminds me of how dgb has been handling issues.

There is no fair and challenging here. Either you can kill the gatekeeper or you can't. If you can't kill Inny and CT, but you can kill Naggy, tough luck, you don't deserve to be in the rotation.

TL as a whole, while disagreeing with rotation in general, have been pretty strong in voicing that if we're doing one, it needs to be open and fair to all guilds. If you havn't killed the current Gatekeeper mob, you shouldn't be in the rotation, period. If you want to join the rotation, you can request that you have an attempt in a 3 hour window to down the Gatekeeper. Whoever requests first, gets dibs. These mobs are spawning every 18-44 hours. Every guild should have to not only A. Prove they can kill these raids bosses, but B. Have access to the rotation if they can.

TL's initial proposal had every other spawn FFA, with guilds being allowed to request an attempt on FFA days to get into the rotation. Not whatever the hell APok is suggesting is fair.

Once again DBG has absolutely no foresight on how their well-meaning(debatable) changes will be interpreted and skated around, its laughable.

Again you are not considering circumstance. What if your guild is capable of killing Cazic on a Saturday, when you have full turn out but Tuesday when naggy is spawning and the GAD is open for contention, you couldnt get 50% turn out even offering kronos to those who show.

Most people rl>eq, there are many weekend warriors and I am sure many guilds reflect that. These guilds will find it difficult or damn near impossible to join the rotation in any reasonable time frame because the 1/20 of a rotation slot might very well fall on bad turn out days for them, consistently.

So while this guild may be full of filthy casuals, they would be more then capable of joining the rotation if they had more opportunities that fit their play style, not yours. Once in, they can then trade their slots for more favorable times or bypass their rotation all together. Or attempt and fail.

See what I am saying?

I dont see what you're saying at all. I understand you're trying to give everyone a peice of cake, even if they want to show up to the party 6 hours later. If there is no cake left, sorry, thats your fault, we're not saving it for you.

If you cannot compete for mobs in rotation in a certain window, then you do no deserve to be in the rotation, as simple as that. With exception to PoSky, all of these mobs are doable by 50-60ish characters. If you can't muster that many, your mob goes ffa, if it happens twice, you're out of the rotation. We're already holding enough hands as it is with this BS, every guild doesn't deserve raid loot. The fact that we're at a situation where there may be up to 10 different guilds getting loot, is bullish. Fair is fully competitive FFA, we're past that point though.

Kudos to TL, I am laughing my off that these other guilds shot themselves and those who come after them in the foot. Not know what TL proposed, this is exactly what makes sense to me. Take the LJ rotation and make the FFA days or some of the FFA days GAD (gatekeeper attempt day) days.

I posted above how this could be done, I am sure it is similar to what you in TL porposed so I will not bother you any more with it.

The challenge I am suggesting is to perhaps allow multiple guilds to sign up for those gad rotations, which can be either done one a timed basis or leave it open ffa for those who signed up. Which imo is the way to go, actually earning the kill vs another similar progressed guild. Not to mention fun.

Who's sealing up the holes? Right now a single guild is trying to get it and it probably needs to be investigated by Holly and the team...

But the window presented is 1/20 of the rotation. Naggy is the gatekeeper out of the four rotated npcs. If there is four guilds in the rotation to start (of which apparently some have not killed the new gk) plus a fifth ffa slot which is used to determine if you are in or not, then once another guilds joins the rotation, every guild attempting after them only gets 1/25 of the rotation to try and get in.

Then it goes to 1/30 of a shot to get in. All this providing the naggy spawn rotation falls into whether or not you have enough online. Think about it and how it would work long term.

The TL every other spawn FFA is great if there are GADs mixed in there too giving more opportunities for guilds to join the rotation. If no one signs up, ffa all the way. If they do sign up, like I said, limited time or even % mixed with time to determine if the attempting guild should be given another shot in their alotted time or bypassed because they are in over their heads and wasting everyones time.

Hence the reason we're trying to figure out how this proposal, which does not have the support of anyone but Apok, has become "The Agreement", when there are two other proposals that are incredibly more fair.

Of the litany of bad ideas that DBG could come up with, this "rotation" has to be one of the worst by far. In a vacuum this would be a bad idea, but in practice, on Ragefire, this can be catastrophic to the server and its guilds. You have isolated an entire guild. That guild has proven its want and will to play the game at its highest level, and is filled with many players that have multiple accounts that they choose to pay for on a monthly basis. Sure, the Krono that exists now is paid for and DBG has already cashed those checks, but the long run equilibrium will trend sharply downward starting in just a few months as people who prefer the raid grind return to the games they were populating prior to the TLP's release. Many guilds think that somehow this rotation will equalize the server, but as has been proven already on Ragefire, the items that other guilds have looted on the server have hit auction sites for real money, and therefore are likely to continue being sold as they are looted. The idea of a top guild sharing a raid mob with a loot table that is fully droppable, and watching as those items are sold rather than worn is a tragedy in itself.

Time lapsed progression should mean that as time passes, which it is known to do, players will continue to progress in both content and gear. The assumption is that an evolved skill set will help the best players find themselves n the elite guilds, and will afford them the right to raid the hardest content in the game. Those people who do not rise to the top of the skills charts are usually left behind and will borrow strategies created by the previous. Eventually every player will have the opportunity to prove themselves worthy of a stop in a top guild if that happens to be their ambition, but trying to force equality only creates derision amongst the populous. The fact is that even the most fervent economists discounted the idea of Equality Theory in the late 70's and there is a belief that even in the most communal society such a theory would fail to achieve its goals. Without incentives, or at least the perception of incentives, all complex societies will fail.

The statement being made by rotating guilds into raid windows is that you would prefer if guilds did less work (i.e. recruiting, strategy, gear grinding) to earned more (raid drops are coveted items or this thread would not exist), and that you would rather reward the underachievers in principle than perpetuate a battle tested guild.

I am just stating that it does not make sense to limit yourself or anyone else a 1/20th of a shot to join the rotation. What if your spawn is 530-830 am est on a tues morning and you are a est guild of working adults? Obviously your guild could kill Naggy at 7pm or even 8am on a Sat but the rotation timing is off.

This does not prove a guild is or is not capable of downing raid targets, it only proves it was not their time due to whatever circumstance.

So I made the comment of sealing up holes because it does not make sense to me, if I was in one of the guilds that is being said to have not killed any or is wiping more often than not but you are magically in the rotation because you sat down at the table, then perhaps the reason the rotation does not make sense because there was an alternative motive when it was written.

This was just conjecture and meant nothing more to point out it made little sense to me with what you all seem to be trying to accomplish. No harm I hope.

I wanted to quote this as it's an amazing example how many are thinking the same things, just from different perspectives. The crux depends on what a person thinks an elite guild actually is. Is it purely about raiding performance? Or was there something else uber guilds did (or did not do) that inspired people to look up to them, and in some cases admire them?

Frankly, operating under a reputation system is a lot harder to be successful in. It's a lot of work, and I get why glory raiders wouldn't care. But, there are many who do.