Thread: 3.0+ Midgardsormr Progression Thread

Originally Posted by Curia_Regis

I hope I am explaining myself adequately.

There's no reason to police it, groups like Arrak's (who might have a majority of member's in MVP) can still post as a separate LS for their clear, as they've done. Since you're not refuting the scenario that I referred to in my prior post, I'm very reticent to agree that allowing multiple within-fc groups to count as "server clears" is going to foster any kind of competition at all. It's not your job to police everyone's clears, but there's some common sense in only allowing one clear per FC to count towards the server kills. Anyways, that's my $.02, if we move forward with things as they've been set up, I think it will be very clear if there are groups abusing the system.

Originally Posted by bwa

There's no reason to police it, groups like Arrak's (who might have a majority of member's in MVP) can still post as a separate LS for their clear, as they've done. Since you're not refuting the scenario that I referred to in my prior post, I'm very reticent to agree that allowing multiple within-fc groups to count as "server clears" is going to foster any kind of competition at all. It's not your job to police everyone's clears, but there's some common sense in only allowing one clear per FC to count towards the server kills. Anyways, that's my $.02, if we move forward with things as they've been set up, I think it will be very clear if there are groups abusing the system.

Perhaps I misunderstood the idea Techno was trying to convey in the thread earlier. Are you guys saying you want a raid group based system that doesn't track only a certain number of spots? With individual raid groups being tracked there are more moving parts, so I assumed the idea behind it was to track more but to also make the list harder to get on to, if that makes sense. I'm still open to changing the system, I'm just trying to find something that works for everyone and still keeps things interesting.

IMO the ideal would be to keep it like the previous thread, but allow multiple groups from an FC to post to the thread and track those kills. I don't think we should be counting multiple groups from the same FC as "server 2nd", "server 3rd", etc. for the reasons that I've listed above.

Originally Posted by bwa

IMO the ideal would be to keep it like the previous thread, but allow multiple groups from an FC to post to the thread and track those kills. I don't think we should be counting multiple groups from the same FC as "server 2nd", "server 3rd", etc. for the reasons that I've listed above.

Alright, I'll work on the formatting and see what looks good.

Originally Posted by Curia_Regis

I've removed the requirement for only tracking so many kills, but I've broken each turn up into its own section, as well as a section for overall Alexander completion. I know sometimes groups start off slower and end up finishing before others or vice versa, so the list should reflect that. Each group will be listed in descending order based on kill date, and if there is an FC association it will be added.

I hope this both keeps things interesting and is something that people can agree upon.

This is more or less what I wanted. One extra element that could be added: I don't think it would be difficult to implement something where you can bold first kills within-FC or italicize tertiary kills within-FC.