May 13th 2009 8:41AM Ah, yes, questionable GMing at it's best! That's one of the reasons my last raiding guild fell apart. The GM, who was a nice guy most of the time, was self-centered and just couldn't see how others couldn't see how he wasn't entitled to get the things or do the things he wanted.
- During one guild meeting, he tried to convince us that we should all contribute towards getting him a traveler's mammoth. When asked why we should do so in vent, he tried to use the justification that it was to make repairs easier for the guild after wipes. Nevermind that as an Alliance guild, repairs were open to most of us about ten seconds flight time from the graveyard...so, when he pressed the issue, the guild said, "Okay, we'll do it...but we get to vote on who gets the mammoth." When it was revealed that another officer was chosen instead of the GM as the mammoth recipient, suddenly the idea of getting a mammoth was dropped...lol
That being said, the GM in question was a decent guy for the most part, which is why I'm not naming the player or now-defunct guild in question. I'm just convinced that a lot of people are incapable of seeing how selfish they are, perhaps even to the point of GMs who ninja their guild bank being incapable of not seeing that despite organizing the guild, the contents of the guild bank aren't their property.
May 12th 2009 10:11AM Nah, it's not sad. Anything that disadvantages gnomes and has the potential to make them cry is a good thing in my book!
May 12th 2009 10:08AM If this change to WG goes live, I think the unintended consequences will come back to bite Blizzard. Part of the draw for us PvE'ers in WG isn't so much the honor as it's the opportunity to run VoA. They've already damaged the PuG-ability of VoA by not putting Emalon and Archavon in different instances, but not giving PvPers a reason to go there on a daily basis will likely mean the fortress won't change hands nearly as often...and since the changes with the workshops, defense has already been a lot more successful lately as it is.
The consequence of that is that there will likely be fewer opportunities for some people to run VoA. No, it's not game-breaking, but reduction of options for gear is not a good thing, as far as I'm concerned.
On a COMPLETELY different yet tangentially-related note note, how about adding a Looking For Guild tool to the interface? It might be my server, but both the realm forums and the various chat channels seem to be a poor place to find good, compatible guilds. If they don't want to clutter up the interface further, how about a kind of matchmaking service on the WoW website that connects players with compatible guilds?
All I know is that it seems like guilds on Fenris are at two extremes - so hardcore they want more of a time commitment than I want to invest in raiding or so casual that the players - while ostensibly well-meaning, intelligent people - don't really apply themselves as well as they should. The few guilds that occupy the middle ground on my server all seem to be, unfortunately, late night guilds, and as a working adult, I can't raid from 12 a.m. to 4 a.m. server/local time.
How is this tangentially-related to the issue with WG? Having witnessed the disintegration of my last raiding guild yet still wanting to progress my character, I would care a lot less about running VoA if I could find a compatible guild, and I'm sure I'm not alone in feeling that way.
May 5th 2009 12:11PM A lil' free loot would help relive the pain of having completed School of Hard Knocks as an avowed non-PvPer over the weekend...help a lock out, would ya?
Apr 30th 2009 8:00AM Yeah, I was more or less brainstorming and didn't really think it through. This would also be exploitable as hell...
Let's say your rather large guild is in Ulduar, and your guild's A-Team just downed Yogg Saron. You have enough people in your guild to try to down him a couple more times (I know, highly unlikely that you'd have 75 people in one guild geared and skilled enough to take down Yoggy, but bear with me.) Most of the people leave the instance, but in a safe spot near Yogg, a lock and a couple other people stay behind. An "unsaved" lock joins the raid and is summoned in with a couple other saved people, then the "saved" people leave and drop from the raid while the rest of the "unsaved" raid is added and summoned in.
Yeah, so scratch my idea, unless a mechanic could be put in to prevent abuse or, as is pointed out above, keeps the disorganized from being pwned. lol
Apr 29th 2009 3:27PM Or, with phasing being a reality now, use it to save us on a per-boss basis rather than on an instance wide basis. If you are saved to that boss, you don't see him. If not, you do. Simple concept, probably a royal pain to code...
Apr 28th 2009 8:45AM Lots of non-raiders still play with a Beastmaster spec. My 80 hunter alt's primary spec is BM because I only raid seriously on my main - well, used to raid seriously on my main until recently - and despite my love of complexity (I'm one of those aff locks that actually misses the former complexity of our rotation), it's nice to just kick back and relax on my BM hunter occasionally.
So, nah, you survivalists and marksmen aren't going to make the one sole perk of being a BM hunter a mainline ability.
Apr 28th 2009 8:20AM Simple game mechanics improvements and not wish lists, right?
Okay, I'd like autopilot on my drake, perhaps making it to where you have the option of right clicking on the world map, selecting "Begin Flight to Here," and shortly thereafter arriving at your destination at a default distance above the terrain. If you have to maintain the gold sink portion of things, have the drake not necessarily take the straightest route but instead make use of the pre-established FP, still charging for "use of the FP by a non-taxi entity."
Apr 27th 2009 1:42PM Honestly, what seemed to disturb those of us who camped most wasn't by someone who just happened to zip by, snag an egg, and go on their way, it was when they resorted to basically try to horn in on a camp and see who could click the fastest. I can't see that as defensible behavior, and if every last spawn point is camped (and I don't doubt that's the case in a place such as Goldshire), you just go back later.
That being said, I would much rather have had the event structured so that camping wasn't possible or efficient (it was very efficient for my lock), but that's really the point I'm driving at: the event is setup to cause people to irritate each other, and that didn't have to be the case. Hopefully, the event will be improved next year by implementing some of the improvements suggested by myself and others in this thread.