Soldier + MC

[Keltor]

Some warriors in RG2 (won't mention names) are getting quite annoyed regarding the fact that Soldier member(s) (warrior too) are recieving loot from 40 man instances. Although they earn their DKP, they are still temporary and it will not always benefit the raid not to mention it gimps the raid with too many of the same class and slows down loot spread out within that class. The question is that will they still be able to earn loot or even attend the raid at all if there are enough of that class already?

P.S. I pos cuz my eenglish rox

[Gorion]

if they earned the dkp, then why shouldnt they get items..?

[Keltor]

They are not even suppose to raid in the 1st place let alone get items. Its not fair to have 8-9 warrior going on every raid and only 1-4 locks for example.

[Asheera]

locks r rare u have to lrn more about 40 men instances

[Gorion]

Originally posted by Keltor@May 8 2006, 06:50 PM
They are not even suppose to raid in the 1st place let alone get items.

and? would you prefer a raid to be cancelled or to do the raid with some soldier members?

soldiers will rarely get an item..  because 99.999999999% of the time a defender will always have more dkp. so weres the problem in that? are you afraid to loose an item? then raid more and dont miss a raid..

or would you prefer an item to be disenchanted or it goes to a soldier.. if you prefer it to be de'ed... then you shoulndt try to attend to any rg1 raid.. welle de the items just for fun..

dont think ime offensive or somehting, this is just my uncensored 2c

[Keltor]

lol nah this is not about me. im only typing this out for the warriors who are afraid of losing loot and yes, there is a soldier member raiding on a regular basis even when not needed.

[Keltor]

and the loot wouldnt get DE at this point anyway, it would go to a defender

[Snowstormer]

Originally posted by Keltor@May 8 2006, 08:50 PM
They are not even suppose to raid in the 1st place let alone get items. Its not fair to have 8-9 warrior going on every raid and only 1-4 locks for example.

[post=125606]Quoted post[/post]

[/b]

Actually, From what i understood, Rg2 members repace missing rg1 people in BWL, and Soldier replace missing rg2 people in MC: so they're backups, kinda. if you have 25 people in MC; Why would any soldier want to come and "help" you get the raid going if they'd have no chance for loot? Thats right, you wouldnt always have a thursday raid or Monday raid at all without some of the soldiers. I just totally agree with Gorion.

And about soldiers raiding regularily when not needed, when there's a rg2 raid with less than 40 people when invites start, its only beneficial to the raid that a soldier joins, rather than wait 30min for it to be filled with defenders who were late, isnt it?And if rg2 member comes online later, its his fault he missed the invites and let a soldier get the spot.

Sorry, but you're just concerned cause soldiers take some loot you may need. One of my friends is a sildier and i'm very straightforward in this subject.

[Keltor]

seriously, i dont mind them at all getting loot. again im speaking for other warriors..bah knew i shouldnt of made ths topic and make myself seem like a selfish d***head lol

[Snowstormer]

My last reply seemed a bit rude against you, now that i read it again. Sorry about that, but my points still remain over there

[Keltor]

hehe apology accepted..if i was so obsessed with loot, i would of snatched that epic cape away from umbra instead of passing it. Wanted it so badly as well.

[sitha]

Atm some people in RG2 will probably be on negative DKP, so a soldier that joins with 0 dkp will get loot before a defender with say -10 dkp. In my opinion this is not fair to the defender that commits to show up at two raids a week, while the soldier joins if he can/wants etc. No commitement made and no expectations for him to show up.

Maybe defenders could get a bonus 200 dkp (for instance, just a random number) when desciding who gets the loot? This would keep it balanced between defenders, but they will get a bonus for actually commiting to a raid schedule.

PS! I hope I didn't totally miss the point here as I'm slightly drunk at the time I'm posting this  :dummy:

[TeaLeaf]

Originally posted by sitha@May 8 2006, 10:34 PM
the defender that commits to show up at two raids a week, while the soldier joins if he can/wants etc. No commitement made and no expectations for him to show up.

What commitment to raid twice per week?  Defenders have no commitment to raid.  

RG1 has a commitment to raid twice per week minimum, but not RG2.  Defender membership levels are set by the Officers and monitored to provide we *hope* sufficient people turning up to the RG2 raid each night.  We expect that when we finally get the Defender membership level right (we are currently monitoring) then on a normal RG2 night we will have some unfortunate people unable to join the RG2 raid from the Defender ranks as RG2 will be FULL.  This will mean ZERO Soldiers raid in RG2, so the problem discussed is very temporary.

You are sort of right in that it may seem unfair when a Soldier gets Epic loot if a Defender has negative loot, but consider this:

- the Defender got negative DKP by getting more Epics than his attendance DKP would otherwise buy.
- the Defender will earn DKP pretty much the equivalent of one Epic per week by doing Molten Core, so the math says that it is damn hard to turn up regularly as a Defender and *fail* to be ahead of a Soldier who turns up to help the raid when requested.
- Soldiers will only raid when the Officers decide it is in the raid group interest.
- There are only two Warriors currently in negative DKP - Siffredi and Myanmar the former have spent over 450DKP already in the short time that RG2 has been going, so I am guessing that Siffredi (and others) would not argue about this system as it has seemed to allow him to acquire items pretty quickly.

Finally, it is never sensible to post the concerns of an anonymous third party - get that person to post the question themselves and then they will be able to phrase their concerns properly and answer queries as they comeup.

TL.

[Paximperiali]

Myanmar <-- Soldier

05/04/06     Flameguard Gauntlets     
05/04/06    Helm of Wrath

............

[TeaLeaf]

I'm sorry, but I am not at all sure what that post was meant to say.  You were stating the obvious, but not making a point.  Do I need to post Do you agree with me, disagree with me or do you not have a view on this in which case why post?  I knew who had what level of DKP and which membership level when i posted, but I do not believe that your post changes anything.

When Defender membership is set correctly to meet Defender attendance performance then this will not happen.  So the problem is not how to stop someone else getting an Epic, but how to make sure we get sufficient Defenders turning up for RG2.  

I stand by the points I made above.  Does anyone disagree?  If so why?

Btw, for comparison purposes on the very same night as Pax quoted above, the other Warrior mentioned got:

05/04/06    Eskhandar's Collar    
05/04/06    Flamewaker Legplates

So I guess it didn't stop that warrior getting loot.  

Turn up, earn DKP, help the raid group progress and loot will arrive.  Focus on the achievement not the loot please - if loot is the priority then you're in it for the wrong reasons and will probably be one of the ones who does not show up or moans when you spend a month wiping on a brand new boss that is really difficult to take down - and yes, BWL can do that to you, as can Ragnaros.

TL.