Jump to content

Raid Rotation Discussion Time For A Change?

Recommended Posts

"When the new 'content' for DT was added to the game, that is where the 'public council' was put together. It was there, that agreements and gentlemens rules were stated regarding how things had been working prior to the public players rotating in. The representatives public or non public, had no issues with the way things worked and agreed they were happy with everything that was going on."


I would equate this to USA, Canda, Mexico, and France signing a treaty, then USA says to Europe, since France signed the treaty, we expect all European countries to follow the treaty.  My point is, the public is not a guild, even if you choose a few representatives, it's up to each individual/guild to choose whether they want to be represented.


I'm in one of the big 3 guilds, by joining I chose to abide by the rules that my guild leadership set, therefore I follow the raid rotation.  I would have an issue if for example VGE  took BI's raid because they also signed up for the agreement.  I would have absolutely no issue if Space Vixens and Dirty Old Creepers (random funny guild names I saw in the guild list :D ) got together and took down my guild's raid...as far as I'm concerned my guild and that group has no rotation agreement and the trigger is first come first serve, if they get to it before we do, gratz on being more organized on that day.  **note: this is my personal opinion as a player, it is not meant as a statement representing my guild**

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In regards to your questions Holyman we did the best we could come up with at the time given the fact there seemed to be no inclination for a public representative for a while.

Thus with 3 raids we devised the 4 slot rotation meaning even one of the original 3 guilds  would be without a raid for a week as to accommodate most everyone.

When DT came along it was a happy day cause that meant we all had something to do all the time.

Chat channels were buzzing with chatter about all these but few ever showed an interest to come to the forums and participate.

I feel thats normal for every game community, some get more involved than others who don't want to be bothered.

In the end i think we did a good job for the vast majority of the players given the fact that many expressed their opinion of leaving it as it is right from the start.

You can't please everyone all the time, right? Thats just human nature.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You can't please everyone all the time, right? Thats just human nature.



I’ve always viewed that more as a challenge, than a block!


You certainly can’t give everyone what they want, if they all want the same thing and that same thing is in limited supply... But I do think it is possible to reach consensus agreements that all parties are generally satisfied with, even though all requirements are not completely fulfilled.


The point I was aiming to make in my New Year’s Day post (#164), which probably got lost in my philosophical diversions, was that nobody should or could really have expected players in an On-line Game to come up with a perfect, cast-iron and enduring contractual agreement, at least at the first attempt.


That doesn’t mean that the attempt at ordering access to the Raid Content in the Emulator was a total failure and should be discarded: it wasn’t a total failure (it has actually been quite successful in maintaining good order and a positive spirit in the Community) and it shouldn’t be discarded.


But nor does it mean that it should remain in its exact and current state in perpetuity.


An analogous situation would be (probably is..!) having a bug in the Game’s code, that whilst being inconvenient and a bit annoying, everyone has learned to live with. The feeling being that it is better to live with the slight bug in the functionality, than get rid of the functionality altogether.


But a better situation than either living with the bug or getting rid of the function that is bugged, would be to try and fix the bug.


And to widen this response to refer to Alurra’s (#180) post:


I think that is what we are engaged in doing here: addressing the “bugs” in the current Raid Rotation Agreement.


Not having any form of ordered arrangement regarding the time-spawned Raids in the Game would be… Undesirable.


Having some form of ordered arrangement, albeit an arrangement with some flaws in it, is a much better state of affairs: like being able to play a much-loved and fondly-remembered MMORPG all over again, even if it does have the odd bug in it..!


The ideal situation that we should be aiming for is a “bug-free” Raid Rotation Agreement… And that just requires an on-going, patient approach to developing the Agreement until it reaches a stable, mostly “bug-free” state.


And fortunately, that should be a lot easier with respect to the Raid Rotation Agreement, than with the Game itself!


So what are the current “bugs” in the Raid Rotation Agreement?


Well, it is worth first reiterating what the stated purpose of the Raid Rotation Agreement is:


The *PRIMARY* purpose of the/any Raid Rotation Agreement is not to ensure fair distribution of Raid Loot; and it is not to ensure that as many players as possible get to experience Raid Content: these are Secondary Purposes for a Raid Agreement.


The Primary Purpose of the/any Raid Agreement is to maintain good order, civility and a generally positive and friendly culture within the Player Base.


This is the Primary Purpose because it is more important and more essential to the survival of the Game than either of the Secondary Purposes.


I do not think that any player within the Emulator Community wants to see the culture break down into acrimony and unpleasantness. Even those players who have explicitly suggested a complete abolition of any Raid Agreements, have supported their suggestion by pointing at the more mature and reasonable player demographics within the Community.


To infer something from what the “Free For All” advocates are saying, their position could be stated as:


The current Raid Rotation Agreement (between “The Big Three”) is creating increasing levels of resentment among players who have joined the Game subsequent to that Agreement having been made. If the parties who drafted and maintain that Agreement are inflexible about making changes, there is a good chance that some players will soon start ignoring the Agreement, and in doing so, may disrupt the generally positive status quo. An orderly dismantling and abolition of the current Raid Rotation Agreement must be preferable to a disorderly breakdown of the same thing.


To draw a similar inference from the points you have made Alurra, your position could be stated as:


A disorderly, “Anything Goes”, “Free For All” approach to the Raid contents will not be positive for anyone in the Community. Some form of ordered control of allocation and access to the Raids is vital in order to avoid social anarchy within the Game. The Raid Rotation Agreement currently in effect was assented to by representatives of players not in either B.I., Static or V.G.E., at the time it was instituted in its current form. Therefore, to prevent a disorderly breakdown of the Player Community, it has to remain in effect.


The point of these inferences being: everybody wants the same thing – to prevent disorder.


Nobody is advocating disorder. A few are advocating getting rid of the Raid Rotation Agreement altogether, because that will prevent disorder. And a few others are advocating leaving the Raid Rotation Agreement in place, in its current form, because that will prevent disorder.


And a few others, myself included, are advocating that we all develop the Raid Rotation Agreement and renew its legitimacy, also because that will prevent disorder.


I think that is where we are at. All of us united in our desire to maintain good order and a peaceful, positive Community Culture: there are just different views on how best to go about doing that.


So looking specifically at what the “bugs” in the current Raid Rotation Agreement are…


The first and perhaps most obvious is the one concerning the legitimacy of the Agreement.


Between who was the Agreement reached? Is it fair or realistic to expect all current and all future players in the Emulator to abide by an Agreement that was reached without their involvement?


It might be possible to use the argument that “Public” players at the time the Agreement was set, were given the opportunity to have an input into the Agreement… But that is obviously not an argument that can be used in the case of players who started playing *AFTER* the Agreement was reached.


Flip makes a *REALLY* good point in post #189:


“I’m in one of the big 3 guilds, by joining I chose to abide by the rules that my guild leadership set, therefore I follow the raid rotation.”


It’s a key point because it is about a choice Flip personally made within the dynamics of the Game, to abide by a set of rules that exist and are enforced by the game dynamics:


Want to join Builders, Inc? Then you must abide by Builders, Inc.’s rules of Guild membership.


Don’t want to abide by Builders, Inc.’s rules of Guild membership? Don’t join Builders, Inc.


Have joined Builders, Inc., but no longer want to abide by Builders, Inc.’s rules? Leave Builders, Inc., or get booted out.


No similar provision relating to the Raid Rotation Agreement exists for people choosing to start playing the EnB Emulator.


Prospective players are not told that they can only play the Game if they are willing to abide by the Raid Rotation Agreement; and that if they don’t want to abide by the Raid Rotation Agreement, then they shouldn’t join, or they will get booted out. Because of course, this is not the case and never will be the case.


Can you see why new players might feel the injunction to abide by the Raid Rotation Agreement is unfair?


I would suggest therefore, that one possible approach to addressing this “bug” would be to make reviews of any Raiding Agreement a regular affair, and have any resulting changes legitimised by a Community-Wide poll.


A reasonable interval between reviews and poll would probably be around 12 months, since new players aren’t going to be in the “Raid Zone” straightaway. By the time that an average player is ready to start raiding, there’s a good chance that a review and poll will have rolled around.


And if a non-average player is mad-keen to get raiding, as soon as possible, well, they can always join one of the Guilds with a permanent seat in any Rotation Agreement, and get a leg-up that way.


Another bug that has been highlighted by a few posters in this thread, including myself and Kyp, is with the requirements that need to be satisfied by any Guild (or confederation of small Guilds) looking to occupy a permanent seat in any rotation.


I can certainly understand why the requirement was set that any candidate Guild should be capable of successfully completing a Raid to a standard set by existing Rotation-Seat holders, because of the desire to not see Raid-Looting opportunities go to waste…


But as I suggested in a previous post, I think this is more borne from the idea that Raids are in fact opportunities to visit a “High-End Vendor”, than to enjoy the experience of Raid Content with friends, and collectively working to overcome the challenges presented by the Raid.


If Raiding is about having fun with your friends, and learning how to complete the Raid, then there can’t really be any such thing as a “wasted Raid”.


So that probably needs looking at… For as long as having Guilds with permanent seats in a Rotation remains the core principle of any Agreement.


Finally (and not to labour the point about Agreement “bugs”!), there is the issue of players from different Global Time Zones getting a fair opportunity to attempt raids…


…That also probably needs looking at!


So there you go… I promised you a fuller response.


To summarise:


No need to go for the “Anarchy” option. Nobody wants that, even the people suggesting a “Free For All” approach.


Sticking with the current Raid Rotation Agreement without making any changes, ever, is likely to create (is perhaps already creating) the kind of situation the Agreement exists to avoid.


The current Raid Rotation Agreement has been really successful in keeping the Peace and maintaining order within the Community, and nobody who helped formulate, implement and maintain it should feel any shame about any “bugs” that may have been subsequently observed.


It is probably a good a time as any to consider reviewing the Agreement to see if any of the “bugs” can be eliminated.


And at the end of such a review, why not get as many players who are inclined to do so to look at the output, and indicate whether they agree or disagree with any revised arrangements?


We may not be able to give everyone everything that they want, but so long as everyone who wants more than they have, gets a little more than they’ve got: this usually keeps everyone satisfied, at least for a while!



  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for the input Keith.


What are your thoughts on the three "bugs" in the current Agreement, that I listed above?


(Repeated here for your convenience):


1) The existing Raid Rotation Agreement does not have any legitimacy with currently active and future players that are not members of B.I., Static or V.G.E.


2) The requirements for an additional guild (or group of small guilds) to occupy an additional week in the Rotation Agreement are unfair; and there is a Conflict of Interest if it is up to the leaderships of the three Guilds currently in the Rotation to approve additional Guilds joining the Rotation.


3) The existing Rotation Agreement limits the opportunities of players in different Time Zones to get a chance to raid.


Also... Would I be correct in assuming that as "Exec Chief in Command", that makes you the Guild Leader of Builders, Inc?


If so: would you mind me asking your views on the nature of the existing agreement?


Do you feel that it is just an agreement between your Guild, Static and V.G.E?


Or do you believe that it is an agreement between these three Guilds and ALL "Public" players, which is/should be binding on all those "Public" players?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not sure what the chirping crickets and tumbleweed tumbling is an indicator of..?


Uncertainty..? An impasse..? Catharsis..?


I would suggest that it is unlikely to be… Closure!


How are things In-Game..? I’m back to The Grind now, so only logon during the (European) evenings, and Sunday mornings if I can surreptitiously sedate the kids and my partner… But I haven’t seen or heard of any disputes concerning Raids…


Is the (existing) Raid Rotation still holding up between Static, V.G.E. and B.I?


For my own part, the key understanding I have taken from this thread (so far), is that the “Raid Rotation Agreement” is a legitimate and active agreement between the Leaderships and memberships of those three Guilds.


This Agreement was reached between “The Big Three”, because at the time it was reached, they really were… The three biggest guilds. And the contentiousness and arguments around Raids took place… Between members of “The Big Three”.


Since there was contention between members of these Guilds regarding access to the time-spawned Raids, their coming together to reach an agreement was a really positive step, because members of those three Guilds constituted a sizable majority of active players.


It was an Agreement reached when the (then?) leaderships of each of these three guilds got together to address problematic behaviour between members of these three guilds. When the fourth week was allocated to “The Public” by “The Big Three”, it was done so as a concession. That was probably (and quite rightly) seen as a “good P.R. move”, to offset or respond to grumbles from non-Big-Three players about the perception of the “lock” on Raids that the Raid Rotation Agreement conferred on “The Big Three”.


The Raid Rotation Agreement was (and is…) still very much between “The Big Three”; with “The Public” expected to comport with it, because of some uncertain involvement that a handful of non-Big-Three players may (or may not…) have had in accepting the fourth week concession from “The Big Three”.


When Gunney “opened the Door” to this latest thread, he did ask some relevant questions; perhaps the most pertinent being about whether or not “The Big Three” still constituted the same kind of majority of active players.


That particular question seems to have been somewhat skipped around, despite it being probably one of the most relevant… Perhaps because it is too difficult to provide an accurate or valid answer to.


But here’s the thing:


If this current Raid Rotation Agreement between “The Big Three” exists to prevent arguments and contentiousness between the members of “The Big Three”... Then it is entirely up to the Leaderships and members of those three Guilds whether or not they choose to maintain and respect this Agreement.


It is irrelevant to any players who are not members of one of these three Guilds.


If members of these three Guilds still constitute an active majority of players in the Game, and the Agreement remains in force, then it will continue to serve the purpose it was intended to serve. But if the majority of active players are no longer members of one of these three Guilds…


…Well, to what extent should non-“Big Three”-Guild members continue to respect that particular Agreement?


I think that the argument put forward by those who want to see the current Raid Rotation Agreement continue to be in effect, is that some order is better than no order.


That is a plausible assertion... But as Gunney suggested in his original post, the assumption that disorder would ensue if there was no form of ordered agreement, is not necessarily a given.


One key point Gunney made is that “…the spawns are nothing new.” By which I take him to mean that the novelty of the Raids covered by the agreement has worn off; and let’s be honest, anyone who was desperately hungry for the loot that results from these raids should probably have satisfied their appetites by now!


Who knows..?


What can be said for certain is that there is a growing sense that the Raid Rotation Agreement instituted by and between “The Big Three” may not have the legitimacy it once did.


Nobody has been able to present a good argument to support the requirement that players that are not members of one of “The Big Three” Guilds should adhere to the Raid Rotation Agreement made between those three Guilds... Only the assertion that order would breakdown (again), if the Agreement is not in place.


But again, from an objective perspective:


The majority of the disorder and discord that existed prior to “The Big Three” instituting their Agreement, existed between members of those three Guilds. If players who are not currently members of one of those three guilds chose to no longer abide by that Agreement, that would not mean that those three guilds shouldn’t maintain the agreement between themselves.


In fact, if they are that certain that disorder will ensue between their own members if their Raid Agreement is scrapped, they should definitely keep it in place!


As for any agreement that non-“Big Three” players (a.k.a. “The Public”) might decide should be in place… Well, that really is a separate discussion I think.


I definitely think that some form of schedule or order should be in place, for a variety of reasons… But that’s just me… Just one player, who happens to be a professional negotiator… So *OF COURSE* I think there should be some kind of Agreement in place..! But I know others feel differently about that…


In conclusion then, I think there are two distinct questions that remain to be answered:


1)      Should players who are not members of one of “The Big Three” Guilds be expected to abide by the Raid Rotation Agreement that was created by and between those three Guilds?

2)      Should the Player Community as a whole devise, institute and maintain an agreement that controls and schedules access to the time-spawned Raids in the Game?


Are these not actually the questions we should be trying to answer..?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

I have a Question for all that fits into this discussion (it may be over but not sure)


Pub has RD Base this week, last night the trigger was up and I received no interest from Pub members on doing the raid (5PM PST)

Tonight the trigger is still up and once again no interest when asked about in chat (6PM PST)


To me this falls into the "Wasted Trigger" category (If there is such a thing), I thought about just making a general announcement for anyone to join


Would this be "Out of Line"?  Would it be the same as if say one of the 'other three' guilds left a trigger up for the same period of time

 and a general population group took it down?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The big 3 are just as guilty of letting triggers sit around for days during the week on the less popular raids too (RD & Genril in particular), I speak from experience on this, so what you're seeing is not unique to the public Gunney.  Yah, i'd call those wasted triggers.


I'd love to see a "use it or lose it" clause in the agreement, if your guild/group isn't able to take the trigger down within 24 hours, give the rest of the server a shot to take it down for you (or better yet work with the rest of the server to get it done).  If something like that were in place, today at 6PM, you could have opened up the raid to all players (public, BI, Static, VGE), everyone that participated would be free to roll on the loot and I bet the raid would have gotten done.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here, let me give you a view from "the public".

Where I come from:

I don't belong to a guild, in the past when I did belong to a guild it was in a small guild. I have been in and not in the officers of those guilds, I didn't mind pitching in and helping run the guild, usually I was an officer because of my knowledge, recipes or skill and willingness to help when called upon. I don't hate large guilds, medium guilds, or completely solo acts. I take every player on their face and will help if asked with the exception of those in the past who have been especially nasty to me, not rumored to be nasty.


I'm not adverse to any "gentleman/woman's agreement" per se between any entity that wants said agreement, as long as they understand that me not being a party to it does not bind me to it in anyway whatsoever. If there was a raid trigger sitting there, and I wanted it bad enough to do it, and if I wanted to go to the pain in the butt to get a group together to do so bad enough, I would with absolutely no qualms no matter who's or what's guild turn it was, you snooze you lose.


With that being said, the likely hood of me wanting to do a raid bad enough that I would go to the effort to organize it myself and deal with the headaches and gripping are so slim it is nearly nil. I would like to experience and share in the loot of some of the raids, but not bad enough to weedle or beg for a slot, not enough to bribe or twist an arm. If asked to help, when they came up short in a group to help, I would gladly, with the understanding that I either shared in the rolls for the loot, like everyone else, or that I was doing them a favor,  not me. On the few occasions that i have seen open raid calls, I have seriously considered, but then usually they call that x, y or z is reserved on loot and I reconsider......reconsidered...no..in fact hell no. (usually the thing they want reserved is the very thing I want to roll on :))


So summerized:

1. It's not likely I'll start my own raid, but if I did, or was asked to be in one with full loot rolls, or as a favor to a friend, I would feel no compunction to refrain from doing so, I wasn't a party to any agreement.

2.I'm not going to kill myself, to start, or to be in a raid group, on a "public" day just because it's a "public" day. Like someone else said, I'm not France, i didn't sign the deal, I'm Antartica, chill out bruh' :)

3.When there is a call for open raids and I was so motivated to join, the fastest way to demotivate me is to say, 'well except for this item or that item", if you don't want to share in equal odds of me getting it rather than you, then don't ask me to do the work, do it yourself. (By the sweat of their very brow shall they eat). The only exception to this would be if they were my personal friend and I was doing them a favor.


I bet most other "the public" take some sort of this tack that I do. They don't want to be told what is or is not their's to do, that someone else "owns" it, especially since they weren't there to ask for their share of the pie. You guy's enjoy your pie slice, me I'll bake my own and have the whole thing thanks. I'm willing to bet the same hold true about the "open" raids or the unused "guild" raid triggers, that they are willing to go, or help out, but if the "owning" guild is going to dictate the loot and it's distribution...forget it, no thanks.


*shrug* thats my 3 cents worth and I bet "the public" is at or near that stance as well.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey Mattsacre, I get what you're saying here, it's just not worth the hassle for you.  I just want to clear up a couple things from your post.  You may be mixing up the time spawned triggers (which are in the rotation) with the non time spawned triggers (i.e. Gate Raid/Fish Bowl) where someone has to build a device to trigger the raid.  As far as I know, in the time spawned raids (RD Base/Troller/GoBB/DT) items don't get reserved, if you show up for the public raid, you are welcome to roll on anything that drops.  From what I've seen, the public organizers are generally very welcoming and will be happy to have you participate.  As for the big 3, I can only speak for my guild, but if we make a call in general chat for more participants to join us, the folks that show up are welcome to roll on anything that drops.


In the raids that require a built trigger (and can be done at anytime) it is customary for the person that went through the effort of building that trigger to reserve an item.  One of those triggers represents many many hours of work, the parts for them are very hard to find, you either get lucky, or you put in serious grinding time.  Personally I don't hold a reasonable "reserve" against the raid organizers, if someone puts in let's say 6 to 10 hours to gather all the parts for a trigger, I think it's reasonable that they get to put 1 item on reserve.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Create New...