As a remark: those who resort to ad hominem attacks or suspicions undermine their own credibility. I was pointing to a problem which obviously has not been recognized by me alone. My point never was to blame anybody in person, and I consequently avoided to name any particular player. I was and am criticizing a distribution method which I consider a failure in social behaviour. I do not blame anybody to have acted on purpose who did not expressively confirm that.
In general, I tend to agree to Juko that limiting these titles is probably not such a good idea. There has always been abuse and misuse of the guardian titles and exterminator tokens, back before the swarming I saw them traded by some. Giving the title to all participants would at least limit the titles to those who actually took part in the event.
Yet, that was not so much my point, and I disagree somewhat also with Juko, that during an event, the looter may act upon the loot as he chooses. In my eyes, that is similar as if during the NPC boss hunts the looter would keep the prize and leave the others without their share. That would be the certain end of such multi team activity.
We should not forget that this game has many facets. Powerplay of mighty individuals, guilds, and alliances has its place and its merits, when it comes to PvP fights, outpost battles, struggling around season change, and other competitive aspects of the game, it may then be a source of fun, thrill, and satisfaction.
Already during team hunts, a social aspect supersedes such style of playing. Personally, I even felt ashamed in the beginning receiving an equal share of the loot as a small backhealer, in fact even more as the loot was and is usually divided not by headcount but by guild where a guildless individual counted like a guild.
During our events, the whole community of participants has most times been treated like a big team, meaning that every guild or guildless individual got an equal share of the loot if available. That was the way The Free Soul distributed the prize of the Pyr attack: giving every guild one piece, first the tokens, then the supreme materials, as long as available. With over hundred participants in average that should have sufficed during most of the attacks - I doubt that more than 72 guilds + guildless players were present at any of them.
I agree to some of the contributors that such method is "unfair" towards guilds with more players. I think that this is more acceptable than leaving the distribution to the deliberation of the looter, and is more likely to encourage participation. If anybody has better ideas I would welcome to listen.
Though I find the proposals of Juko and Talkirc interesting and tend to agree, I think that it is social behavior during events which was lacking, or at least a method to express it in a way satisfying a greater number of participants. A technical solution does not resolve social or behavioral failure.
In general, I tend to agree to Juko that limiting these titles is probably not such a good idea. There has always been abuse and misuse of the guardian titles and exterminator tokens, back before the swarming I saw them traded by some. Giving the title to all participants would at least limit the titles to those who actually took part in the event.
Yet, that was not so much my point, and I disagree somewhat also with Juko, that during an event, the looter may act upon the loot as he chooses. In my eyes, that is similar as if during the NPC boss hunts the looter would keep the prize and leave the others without their share. That would be the certain end of such multi team activity.
We should not forget that this game has many facets. Powerplay of mighty individuals, guilds, and alliances has its place and its merits, when it comes to PvP fights, outpost battles, struggling around season change, and other competitive aspects of the game, it may then be a source of fun, thrill, and satisfaction.
Already during team hunts, a social aspect supersedes such style of playing. Personally, I even felt ashamed in the beginning receiving an equal share of the loot as a small backhealer, in fact even more as the loot was and is usually divided not by headcount but by guild where a guildless individual counted like a guild.
During our events, the whole community of participants has most times been treated like a big team, meaning that every guild or guildless individual got an equal share of the loot if available. That was the way The Free Soul distributed the prize of the Pyr attack: giving every guild one piece, first the tokens, then the supreme materials, as long as available. With over hundred participants in average that should have sufficed during most of the attacks - I doubt that more than 72 guilds + guildless players were present at any of them.
I agree to some of the contributors that such method is "unfair" towards guilds with more players. I think that this is more acceptable than leaving the distribution to the deliberation of the looter, and is more likely to encourage participation. If anybody has better ideas I would welcome to listen.
Though I find the proposals of Juko and Talkirc interesting and tend to agree, I think that it is social behavior during events which was lacking, or at least a method to express it in a way satisfying a greater number of participants. A technical solution does not resolve social or behavioral failure.
---
Daomei die Streunerin - religionsneutral, zivilisationsneutral, gildenneutral