Hello, I just wanted some clarification regarding the rules about the nagafen/vox rotation. If a guild isn't able to kill it during their week what happens in the future? I bring this up because the population of the server has gone way down in the last few weeks. I know that in Austerity we struggled to field a force capable of killing the dragons. I am not sure what is happening with Starvald but I think every guild has taken a hit in population. Thanks!
the Population has gone down and then back up. We had a good numbers of players coming on last week during the double xp week and even after that there's a good numbers than what we had a few weeks ago. If the guild isn't capable of downing the raid mob for whatever reason at least twice or three times in a row. I would think we would drop that guild out of its rotation.
we haven't really discussed the possibilities yet. This is just probability since we haven't came across this situation yet. I can discussed this with Speedz about it.
For Destiny, being an international guild who is 12-13 years old we have no problems with numbers. Between Murica, our Eurotrash, the crAZN/Aus crews, and our Texican BumBots we have been able to do unplanned full raid forces any time of day/nights. We are open to Aus/SD people joining us too. Just ask if you see us in fear/hate. It's a small server and we like to play with others.
yeah pretty much unless its something we are doing first time as guild we welcome others. dragons though i think will be guild only and especially for loot on the dragons. if you wanna come for the kill then i dont see a problem with that though
I hope the server has at least a few different guilds for diversity, and challenge. Steamrolling content with a Destiny superguild sounds boring. I am not saying anything bad about Destiny, a lot of the members are great players and chill people. I hope Starvald can come back after the summer lull and with new content.
i agree, guild diversity is important. i dont want a destiny super guild by any means. we have so many different play styles in eq that 1 guild is really just impractical.
hehe... super guild... my no means is destiny a super guild. true.. we have alot of members.. but alot of members who go "RL afk" alot. like me for example. i havent played since last Wednesday maybe. RL & wife agro. not to mention the random honey do lists items. keep people away. not trying to hijack this thread to a destiny praise thread. good group of people. very nice people. besides bum.. im almost certain he is a bot controlled by skynet.
There needs to be more transparency here. I have next to no issues with this server community as a whole. In fact, I'd say it's pretty damned amazing how cooperative most players are here, regardless of what guildtag someone is wearing. The cooperation between Austerity and Destiny has been exemplary. The OP speaks to a loss in population, and again I'm sure most can agree that the timing of our "superbug" colliding with the launch of Daybreak's new progression server was ill-timed. I have seen people trickling back (the honeymoon is fading), and our superbug has been gloriously resolved. Still, there needs to be a constant influx of new people to make up for losses, which will happen to a variety of benign reasons as well as ill-fated situations as outlined above. Population hits at all levels, right up to leadership. I understand a board was created for Guild Leaders only, for communication on subjects just like this one. When there are "private" boards discussing items of interest to all players, not just guild leaders, threads like this will pop up. Please consider removing this invisible forum, and creating a "Raid Discussion" forum instead. I'm pretty sure the mature, intimate community we have here is capable of behaving. Thanks for your consideration
The leader only forum was created due to the drama it caused talking about every detail openly. For raid coordination and rotations, it is best to have 1 voice (guild leaders) convey the wishes of each guild in a safe relatively drama free situation. Nothing in there is top secret except for pasting other people's comments openly. Guild Leaders are free and encouraged to inform their respective guilds of any discussion material to bring the guild's wishes to the table.
The guild leader of Austerity is currently taking a break from the server. Austerity does not have anyone representing us on the guild leader forum. The reason I brought up this topic is that there has been some speculation that Starvald cannot currently field the numbers to take down nagy/vox. If this is true and they have not taken it down in the last two rotations perhaps we should consider changing the rotation so that guilds that can take down naggy/vox get more shots at it. Thanks!
Starvald have taken down Naggy / Vox in the last 2 rotation schedule. They don't show their tags when they log on since they go anonymous when they are in game. I do speak to one of their members from time to time. That one week that they couldn't take down was due to the server "superbug" that we were having that made it unplayable, but they did managed to take down the dragons just right after the "superbug" was resolved which was on the last day of their schedule.
It is up to your guild leader and all guild leaders to get in touch with us via PM about who to appoint in their place for guild lead discussions. If they don't we can't entertain speculations and things that spark up drama. We can't be guild managers as well.
So what sort of rules are in place when a guild leader just goes missing? I believe people have been trying to meet up with Aus guild leader but he is insanely busy and we have not had contact. We need Austerity people in that forum. I think I GL and 2 main officers may provide a good balance of people. Its not about sercrets getting out, it is about having the right people, the right number of people to have good discussions. I think I know where your coming from Speedz, you dont want a bunch of power struggles and bullshit in your inbox about guilds. But there is always exceptions, GL's just dissapear as we all know
Rob and I both agree, a couple of officers in there shouldn't be an issue. But the tolerance for drama is very low in there. It is a diplomatic section. Let me get the dev situation resolved and setup and I'll work on that access. Each guild should figure out who would be the choices and have the GL PM me or in absence of GL, one rep officer from the guild.
This sounds like a good start. Nobody, be it players or staff, can predict what life throws at people. Providing senior ranking officers should help offset the communication barrier. This, however, does not address the "transparency" issue. I hate to refer to the way other servers do things, but I have to admit I do like the way Project 1999 deployed their "Raid" forum. Only senior-ranking officials (leaders and select officers) are allowed to "post" in that forum, but the entire server community is allowed to read it. Keep in mind that what happens within that forum affects every player on the server (whether they are in a participating raid guild or not). If the majority (99%) of the playerbase is clueless about how "raid rules" are being created and enforced, it will spawn distrust among the community as a whole, particularly when "rules" are created or destroyed that are "unpopular". Please consider opening up viewing to the rest of the playerbase. If people have issue with any of the proposed material, they can approach their own guild leadership to address it on their behalf. Thanks
"This, however, does not address the "transparency" issue." I understand what Pinoit is saying concerning having the ability for the entire server to see what is being discussed in "real time" on the particular forum, but I don't agree. The transparency is there because every guild leadership is represented and discussions seem to purposely involve all the affected guild and their leadership. The GMs seem to be very particular in ensuring all guilds are represented, and if they aren't I'm 100% sure that particular guild would raise a fuss about it. Additionally, as someone who has been in leadership in real life (just saying I've not been in my guild's leadership, but have other leadership experience.. not disparaging gaming leadership), I totally understand wanting the ability to discuss with other leadership in private with the GMs to resolve issues and discuss ideas. This promotes honest feedback among the leaders, without worrying about potential backlash on the back end after someone in their guild has read what they said, or what they "should" have said, etc. This empowers the leaders to be candid with each other, and then they turn around and can share what is resolved with their other leaders within the guild, as well as their guild populace. I am in Destiny, and I fully trust Trisi to represent the best interests of our guild while also adhering to the growth and support of the server in general. I don't need to know how the hot dog (server politics) is made, I just know it's going to taste good (server rotations best for all, server protocol, etc). Just my 2cp worth.
Sturmm, What about players that are not yet in one of these guilds? Who speaks for them? What about potential for cooperative efforts? I'm only one voice, but I recognize that change is the one guarantee that we can count on. Even in the 6 months I've been playing here, an entire raid guild has vanished, new ones have cropped up, and "unofficial" player alignments are working together on goals outside of these "rotation boundaries". If there are private backroom discussions going on that the majority of the playerbase (99%) are unaware of, how can they contribute towards or benefit from this knowledge? Why are they disqualified simply because they don't fall within a specific "mold" of qualification? Not trying to stir things up here, but as Sketchy and Rak have pointed out, we have recently experienced this "blackout" effect, and we're in a "qualifying" guild. It certainly made me think of how other "up-and-coming" guilds or other types of raid alliances are impacted from this "blackout" effect. If people want to discuss things privately, there is a private message feature and even the ability to create "group private messages" (very cool by the way... love it!). Major issues that affect more than 3-6 people should be transparent. Our recent situation is just one of many examples of why the "backroom" situation is less than ideal for the majority of the playerbase over the long-term.
Trouble is there is no way to keep everyone happy at once. The player majority will likely be guilded and this is not to discount or minimize those that choose not to be in a guild. That section was made out of how easy drama is stirred up when leaders and GMs are tossing out merely ideas. By the point you made about private conversations and the ability of group conversations being private makes that no different than having a particular section as we do. That section is far easier to moderate and add/remove members in general than a group PM. I do appreciate the constructive methods used in this conversation and it ultimately helps the server grow into a place we all want.
No one speaks for their cooperative efforts, because they're not in a guild. But that's the whole point, this is concerning dragon rotations that are being conducted by qualified guilds. If you're not in a guild, then the dragon rotations wouldn't matter to you, would it? (Not being a smart aleck, an honest question) The forum for the guilds leadership concerns guild issues that affect one another and the server; not every single toon needs a representative in this discussion, ergo the discussion being able to be seen by every person. Again, this is just my viewpoint and if the GMs and guild leaderships decide to make it viewable by all that is their prerogative, but I understand and agree with the ability to discuss guild issues quietly.
"That section was made out of how easy drama is stirred up when leaders and GMs are tossing out merely ideas." Bingo.
