. : News : . . : Message of the Week : .
You are currently viewing an archive of the Wilderness Guardians clan's IPB1 forums.

These forums were used by WG from 2008 to 2011, and now exist for historical and achival purposes only.

For the clan's current forums, CLICK HERE.
"You are a Wilderness Guardian. That northern wasteland; that land of blood, desolation and death is your dominion. Tonight we are going home."
~His Lordship
War Alert: OFF Raid Alert: OFF
PM a WG Official

Pages: (3) 1 [2] 3

 Raising the Requirements Poll #2
Posted: February 25, 2009 12:20 pmTop
   
User Avatar

IRC Nickname: Zeth
Group: Emeritus
Posts: 1839
Member No.: 17
Joined: December 29, 2007
Total Events Attended: 63
Voted!
 
--------------------
user posted image
Joined WG - 24th of June 2007 - Never left.

Posted: February 25, 2009 12:37 pmTop
   
User Avatar

IRC Nickname: rachellove
Group: Council
Posts: 6955
Member No.: 173
Joined: January 31, 2008
Total Events Attended: 305
I think JC had some very good questions. I don't just want it to be changed without some clear indication of where it is going. To often things get changed and then it is a mess after wards. Ask anyone that joined the same way I did how happy they are with some of the changes.

Bring back sectors and give the war side their high levels they think they need and let the community have their own requirements to join. Make it a war list that is flexible for those that only want to war occasionally.
 
--------------------
user posted image
Thank you Garrett and Dallar.
“The day soldiers stop bringing you their problems
is the day you have stopped leading them.
They have either lost confidence that you can help them
or concluded that you do not care.
Either case is a failure of leadership.”
~~Colin Powell ~~

user posted image

Posted: February 25, 2009 12:38 pmTop
   
User Avatar

IRC Nickname: Billy|Gilli
Group: Ex-Member
Posts: 1545
Member No.: 1451
Joined: November 9, 2008
Total Events Attended: 91
105+
 
--------------------
user posted image
user posted image

user posted image

Posted: February 25, 2009 02:25 pmTop
   
User Avatar

IRC Nickname: Dilz
Group: Banned
Posts: 1403
Member No.: 973
Joined: June 23, 2008
Total Events Attended: 151
Leave same, but enforce training.
 
--------------------
user posted image
LOLPNS
user posted image
Perm banned.

Posted: February 25, 2009 03:18 pmTop
   


IRC Nickname: ``Aaron
Group: Ex-Member
Posts: 1055
Member No.: 149
Joined: January 21, 2008
Total Events Attended: 34
QUOTE (rachellove9 @ February 25, 2009 05:37 am)
I think JC had some very good questions. I don't just want it to be changed without some clear indication of where it is going. To often things get changed and then it is a mess after wards. Ask anyone that joined the same way I did how happy they are with some of the changes.

Bring back sectors and give the war side their high levels they think they need and let the community have their own requirements to join. Make it a war list that is flexible for those that only want to war occasionally.

I don't agree, seperating the clan would just cause more harm to it. We are a CLAN, we should keep together with all the same goals.
 
--------------------
user posted image

user posted image

user posted image

Posted: February 25, 2009 03:24 pmTop
   


IRC Nickname: ``Aaron
Group: Ex-Member
Posts: 1055
Member No.: 149
Joined: January 21, 2008
Total Events Attended: 34
QUOTE (Useph1 @ February 24, 2009 10:30 pm)
QUOTE (Planolocal @ February 24, 2009 09:02 pm)
definitely 105, because:
1 - raises reqs (more prestige)

Why is higher combat more prestigious? Is there some RuneScape Clan Bible somewhere that says "A clan with higher leveled members is more respectable?"

QUOTE
2 - If your higher cb, your probably more active, so higher attenance

Is this some sort of joke? That's like me saying that all people from the South are redneck crackers who marry their cousins or all black people will come and mug you. Stop with the racism.

QUOTE
4 - most clans dont have 105+ its usualy 110+, so we still get the lower cb'ed members.

Yeah and at the same time we don't get the thousands of members between 100 and 105.

Awesome!

1 - People with higher combat are usually better in wars, higher def , attack, str, prayer ect.

2 - If you're higher combat you probably are more active. Look at some of the most active in WG. not very many below 110 f2p. he's just stating fact.

3 - no #3

4 - maybe we should lower our reqs to 85+ f2p? we're losing out on the tens of thousands of those also.
 
--------------------
user posted image

user posted image

user posted image

Posted: February 25, 2009 03:25 pmTop
   
User Avatar

IRC Nickname: Jesseh
Group: Guest
Posts: 2670
Member No.: 297
Joined: March 8, 2008
Total Events Attended: 222
Option 3. Definately.
 
--------------------
user posted image
user posted image
17/6/08--> 12/9/08--> 29/11/08--> 5/1/09--> 2/3/09(Left)--> 19/7/09(Rejoin)--> 2/8/09
QUOTE
�21:48:06� * @Abs|Busy sexes Jesseh

Posted: February 25, 2009 04:02 pmTop
   
User Avatar

IRC Nickname: [Narita]
Group: Guest
Posts: 695
Member No.: 1378
Joined: October 15, 2008
Total Events Attended: 34
85+ would be detrimental to wg. really bad idea we would be flooded by 85-100s who have little or no war experince and would be forever cut from miniwars/matched.
 
--------------------

Posted: February 25, 2009 05:39 pmTop
   
User Avatar

IRC Nickname: Gorgemaster
Group: Elite Guardian
Posts: 9840
Member No.: 3
Joined: December 26, 2007
Total Events Attended: 540
Option 3- Leave the requirements the same (100 F2P to apply) and enforce a training scheme.
However- I do not necessarily think it is right to FORCE a member to train all the time, all we want to see is an improvement and that you are WILLING to spend a little bit of your RS leisure time training up your combat.

All it takes is a little push and support.. and that is what is making me train at the moment.
The only incentive is that I will be able to do my clan proud by lasting even longer at wars... (oh plus i'll be higher than Elias if I keep going biggrin.gif)
 
--------------------
user posted image
user posted imageuser posted image

Posted: February 25, 2009 08:20 pmTop
   


IRC Nickname: Kero2|bryan
Group: Guest
Posts: 1302
Member No.: 91
Joined: January 2, 2008
Total Events Attended: 26
Not going to say mi results
Just going to say people just needa train a little bit even if its just defence...
 
--------------------
Best pure f2p Guardian
user posted image

Post here
http://www.wildernessguardians.com/forum/i...owtopic=20&st=0

user posted image
user posted image

Posted: February 25, 2009 08:20 pmTop
   
User Avatar

IRC Nickname: Chimpy
Group: Banned
Posts: 2521
Member No.: 1474
Joined: November 16, 2008
Total Events Attended: 133
Voted 105 to join. But as long as they were 105 by the end of graduation idc really.

Also 95+ FA might work good hash.png
 
--------------------
user posted image
user posted image
user posted image

Posted: February 25, 2009 08:43 pmTop
   
User Avatar

IRC Nickname: Ubg Fcbruges
Group: Emeritus
Posts: 1209
Member No.: 1373
Joined: October 12, 2008
Total Events Attended: 64
105+ smile.gif 100 might be a bit too low so I think 105 is a good balanced combat level which is not so far away from 110. Which is good...
 
--------------------
user posted imagePortfoliouser posted image


user posted image
~~ WG Emeritus - 20 November 2010 ~~
~~ WG Higher Guardian - 10 November 2009 ~~
~~ WG Emeritus - 2 July 2009 ~~
~~ WG Higher Guardian - 27 February 2009 ~~
~~ WG Guardian - 12 December 2008 ~~
~~ WG Trial Guardian - 30 October 2008 ~~

Posted: February 25, 2009 09:16 pmTop
   
User Avatar

IRC Nickname: Useph
Group: Guest
Posts: 267
Member No.: 125
Joined: January 12, 2008
Total Events Attended: 29
QUOTE (School_Boy19 @ February 25, 2009 10:24 am)
1 - People with higher combat are usually better in wars, higher def , attack, str, prayer ect.

What does that have to do with the respect of a clan? I thought WG was supposed to be about Community, Skilling, and Warring, not Warring, and oh... uh... some skilling and community.

QUOTE
2 - If you're higher combat you probably are more active. Look at some of the most active in WG. not very many below 110 f2p. he's just stating fact.

You can find inactive members at any combat level. If you look at the percentages then the amount of inactive people below 110 combat for the number of total members there are under 110 combat will probably match the ratio of higher combat levels.

QUOTE
4 - maybe we should lower our reqs to 85+ f2p? we're losing out on the tens of thousands of those also.

I don't see anything wrong with that. Personally I don't care about warring at all. I LOL when I hear people getting all into clan wars in any videogame. I join a clan for the community and just to have fun while playing RuneScape. Competing with other clans other than just occasionally for fun I don't give two shits about.
 
--------------------
Goals
78/99 user posted image | 99/99 user posted image | 92/99 user posted image | 94/99 user posted image | 82/99 user posted image | 99/99 user posted image | 77/99 user posted image
mIRC Guru
user posted image
WG's #1 Pyromaniac

Posted: February 26, 2009 02:00 amTop
   
User Avatar

IRC Nickname: Vephy
Group: Elite Guardian
Posts: 6186
Member No.: 813
Joined: June 10, 2008
Total Events Attended: 478
We need a training program that will progressively keep everyone moving forward in combat in some way. 5 levels will settle the war people for awhile. Why not think a little more creatively though? Have something where you gain a lvl within a month or a certain amount of exp. For all members. Small steps over long spaces of time will get you to your destination.

Also activity doesn't come with higher combat. That is like saying all tall people in the world are basketball players. Find ways to make events that encourage combat while keeping our skilling events. I think that could be a good compromise for everyone involved. Discuss.
 
--------------------
user posted image
user posted image

Posted: February 26, 2009 03:11 amTop
   


IRC Nickname: Starzhine
Group: Emeritus
Posts: 447
Member No.: 218
Joined: February 9, 2008
Total Events Attended: 64
Other, with slayer out 100 does not mean what it did. We need to go to 110.

WG wub.gif

No kicking of current members!!!!!!
 
--------------------
user posted image
WG love forever, Kristy
user posted image

Posted: February 26, 2009 03:13 amTop
   
User Avatar

IRC Nickname: [JC]
Group: Emeritus
Posts: 3320
Member No.: 23
Joined: December 30, 2007
Total Events Attended: 147
Starz means summ tongue.gif
 
--------------------
user posted image

Old awards wat
Most Mature & Most Honourable
Most Dedicated|IRC Freak|Best Emeritus
Placeholder lolz

Posted: February 26, 2009 01:51 pmTop
   
User Avatar

IRC Nickname: Wayne|Eregion2
Group: Emeritus
Posts: 3087
Member No.: 156
Joined: January 25, 2008
Total Events Attended: 8
QUOTE (Starzhine @ February 25, 2009 10:11 pm)
Other, with slayer out 100 does not mean what it did. We need to go to 110.

WG wub.gif

No kicking of current members!!!!!!

I think our requirements are still off f2p combat so no one has an advantage. smile.gif
 
--------------------
user posted image

Posted: February 26, 2009 02:18 pmTop
   
User Avatar

IRC Nickname: leecable
Group: Banned
Posts: 1938
Member No.: 410
Joined: April 1, 2008
Total Events Attended: 178
You guys seriously are not looking at the range tanks. There MAX Combat is like...106. Yet there fucking epically good at wars. If we rais it has to be 105+ not 110.
 
--------------------
user posted image
user posted image user posted image

Posted: February 26, 2009 02:21 pmTop
   
User Avatar

IRC Nickname: Wayne|Eregion2
Group: Emeritus
Posts: 3087
Member No.: 156
Joined: January 25, 2008
Total Events Attended: 8
Could be 105 or 100 with 90 defense/magic/ranged. Hypothetically.
 
--------------------
user posted image

Posted: February 26, 2009 05:51 pmTop
   


IRC Nickname: Mojohaza1
Group: Council
Posts: 495
Member No.: 1574
Joined: December 22, 2008
Total Events Attended: 33
QUOTE (Narita @ February 25, 2009 04:02 pm)
85+ would be detrimental to wg. really bad idea we would be flooded by 85-100s who have little or no war experince and would be forever cut from miniwars/matched.

i believe that was sarcasm.

anyway i voted keep the same
 
--------------------

Posted: February 26, 2009 06:04 pmTop
   
User Avatar

IRC Nickname: Billy|Gilli
Group: Ex-Member
Posts: 1545
Member No.: 1451
Joined: November 9, 2008
Total Events Attended: 91
QUOTE (Mojohaza1 @ February 26, 2009 05:51 pm)
QUOTE (Narita @ February 25, 2009 04:02 pm)
85+ would be detrimental to wg. really bad idea we would be flooded by 85-100s who have little or no war experince and would be forever cut from miniwars/matched.

i believe that was sarcasm.

anyway i voted keep the same

I dont think it was sarcasm lmao.
 
--------------------
user posted image
user posted image

user posted image

Posted: February 26, 2009 06:58 pmTop
   


IRC Nickname:
Group: Banned
Posts: 2447
Member No.: 114
Joined: January 8, 2008
Total Events Attended: 149
You know my opinion.
 
--------------------

Posted: February 26, 2009 08:24 pmTop
   
User Avatar

IRC Nickname: [Narita]
Group: Guest
Posts: 695
Member No.: 1378
Joined: October 15, 2008
Total Events Attended: 34
QUOTE (Mojohaza1 @ February 26, 2009 12:51 pm)
QUOTE (Narita @ February 25, 2009 04:02 pm)
85+ would be detrimental to wg. really bad idea we would be flooded by 85-100s who have little or no war experince and would be forever cut from miniwars/matched.

i believe that was sarcasm.

anyway i voted keep the same

no that was not sarcastic i dont use sarcasm on these sort of topics, what i said is a fact.
 
--------------------

Posted: February 26, 2009 11:13 pmTop
   
User Avatar

IRC Nickname: Kurt Cobain
Group: Guest
Posts: 329
Member No.: 1619
Joined: January 7, 2009
Total Events Attended: 2
I voted other, but its not exactly an other option; I'm just modifying option 3. I might not matter much since I'm still only a trial guardian (schoolwork is bringing me down since I missed a week due to me being sick), but why make a training enforcement for people that already meet the requirements or are level 120+ with 99 defense or so? Why force Range tanks like Dave to train when he's a tank and isn't exactly supposed to have a high combat level? I know I need to train (100 f2p combat still) and will probably be kicked soon due to inactivity on RS, but why force members that are here to train when their accounts are set as they are? I read about a rumor that there was some sort of program within the clan that, from what I read, had older members training with newer members. Why force training when you can encourage it and make new people feel better about training when you have other friends to do it with you and make you less bored? Of course, I only read this once, and it might have been at 2 AM while I was barely hanging onto consciousness, so I might have either imagined it or dreamt it...

Of course, I'm sure there's a flaw in this idea seeing as how this program, if it worked like that, isn't around anymore. Somewhere along the line, it hit a snag and had to be trashed, but still, it could be a temporary stimulus for clan training. I know that I'd be more encouraged to train if I had people there to talk to that were in my clan and would be nice enough to do it. However, I've found it hard to play RS since I was sick and missed a whole week of school, so I feel like I could be kicked any day now and who listens to someone that gets kicked? frown.gif
 
--------------------
user posted image
Thanks Sam for an awesome job and an awesome wait!
user posted image
QUOTE   Back to Own)

I never send PMs over RSC
But you sir, are a legend

Posted: February 26, 2009 11:27 pmTop
   
User Avatar

IRC Nickname: Vephy
Group: Elite Guardian
Posts: 6186
Member No.: 813
Joined: June 10, 2008
Total Events Attended: 478
You have a good point. A lot of our lower lvls can be range tanks. So they would be just as valuable at wars and pkri with their high def and range skills. I'm definitely in favor of having events and/or training programs instead of just a one time raise everyone up 5 lvls deal. That is an old idea.
 
--------------------
user posted image
user posted image

Pages: (3) 1 [2] 3