Thread: Leviathan Progression Thread (updated 2.38 and beyond)

Originally Posted by Public

So... You downed T10 and then formed a linkshell?

With 20 members in that LS, a bulk of them being offline, I doubt the 'shell was formed in haste after their T10 clear. But the backlash to this DOES beg the question of, "what ARE the requirements for raiding as an LS and having your progression count"? If its simply, "have 8 dudes in the same LS" then this group fits. If the thread creator is looking for more permanency with groups then some kind of restriction on LS groups would have to be in place, otherwise you ARE going to get "oh shit our PF group unexpectedly downed prog content better make a Linkshell real quick or use a existing one so we get credit!" groups (2.3 had a few of 'em... 1 group that I knew of, at least).

Maybe require a Linkshell to register before being able to post for progression? You'd at least ensure they're an actual static group for 2.4, and not just a PF group or a 6-7/8 FC group who pugged two randoms for whatever reason. Require the registry at least 24 hours before any clears are claimed, so that people don't just 'shell up and register immediately beforehand just "in case" they beat it? Could also restrict the amount of members allowed to be in the LS, though I wouldn't want it restricted to only 8 (if FC groups are allowed to have subs then LS groups should be allowed to have them too).

Just some thoughts. As always, interested to hear what groups at endgame think of this situation and any possible solutions.

Looks like that LS has 20 players, not 128. Regardless, I do agree that LS groups should be allowed subs. But whatever works d00dz!

Gratz to all who have cleared t10 and AU on t11 as well. Wow! That is some quick progression.

Originally Posted by Public

Milulu as it is his thread and the trend of threads of this nature have been: "Well, if you want to record it, you can record it however you'd like."

her*

That being said, this whole thing does raise an interesting point. On the one hand, there's no point tracking progression for a pug group, as we're only interested in statics. On the other hand, a large linkshell that pulls members who are available to kill it feels more like a pug group with a more limited pool of players (which then isn't much difference from an FC, but there's no good way to tell if an FC static is indeed a static, since those will tend to have more members). At the least, I'm interested in giving credit to those who successfully kill content, a kill is a kill, but I wish to respect the community's desire to only track the progression of static groups and not pugs. Thus, I'll be amending the rules for linkshells a little bit, and I'll try to be as fair as possible (your kill before this rule will count, don't worry).

-All linkshells must have no more than 16 members, 8 main and 8 backup raiders. Alts should not be included in a raiding linkshell.

-All linkshells should include the linkshell window in their screenshot WHILE in the completed duty screenshot, you may take multiple screenshots of the kill, loot, time, linkshell, whatever, so long as the linkshell window is visible while in the instance. (all party members must also be showing).

If you raid as a static linkshell and have more than that number of members, you may make a linkshell purely for your static team (and those backups), and just not use it, so long as the linkshell is made and named before the content is cleared. As long as that's there, then I'm certain nobody will have any problems with any further kills. And please keep all arguing out of this thread, this is not a discussion thread but a progression one, comments about progression are allowed but bickering is not.

edit: if you guys could post said screeny next week or with 11 if you get it this week, then I'd really appreciate that