| . : 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 |
||
Posted: February 25, 2009 01:43 am  | |||||||
     IRC Nickname: [Randy] Group: Raid Leader Posts: 5065 Member No.: 16 Joined: December 29, 2007 Total Events Attended: 499    | The majority of people wanted one of the three options. Those who wanted over 105, I don't see it happening. Vote. Discuss. --------------------   | ||||||
Posted: February 25, 2009 01:44 am | |||||||
| IRC Nickname: Group: Elite Guardian Posts: 7306 Member No.: 47 Joined: December 30, 2007 Total Events Attended: 343 | leave the same. -------------------- July 5, 2007 - June 27, 2011 | ||||||
Posted: February 25, 2009 01:45 am | |||||||
 IRC Nickname: DyIan Group: Emeritus Posts: 1205 Member No.: 1638 Joined: January 15, 2009 Total Events Attended: 107 | I think it's fine leaving the reqs the way they are. Training would help out a great deal. --------------------   | ||||||
Posted: February 25, 2009 01:45 am | |||||||
| IRC Nickname: ``Aaron Group: Ex-Member Posts: 1055 Member No.: 149 Joined: January 21, 2008 Total Events Attended: 34 | Voted. Payce. --------------------    | ||||||
Posted: February 25, 2009 01:45 am | |||||||
| IRC Nickname: spanthrax Group: Ex-Member Posts: 813 Member No.: 29 Joined: December 30, 2007 Total Events Attended: 37 | i voted for 105 largely because a small increase every now and again prevents the clan from becoming stagnant and encourages growth. which is what i believe is our main goal as a clan is to grow. --------------------   | ||||||
Posted: February 25, 2009 01:47 am | |||||||
 IRC Nickname: Ramirezr Group: Ex-Member Posts: 94 Member No.: 432 Joined: April 6, 2008 Total Events Attended: 35 | I think the Req Should be 100 to apply but 105 to graduate. Edit:I voted for other --------------------  | ||||||
Posted: February 25, 2009 01:48 am | |||||||
| IRC Nickname: [Randy] Group: Raid Leader Posts: 5065 Member No.: 16 Joined: December 29, 2007 Total Events Attended: 499 |
Think about that though. 5 combat levels in one month? Plus the activity requirements! A little much to ask don't ya think  -------------------- | ||||||
Posted: February 25, 2009 01:57 am | |||||||
| IRC Nickname: Ramirezr Group: Ex-Member Posts: 94 Member No.: 432 Joined: April 6, 2008 Total Events Attended: 35 | Right lol, then 102-103(either is fine) to apply and 105 to graduate 2-3 combat levels in a month seems Fair -------------------- | ||||||
Posted: February 25, 2009 02:02 am | |||||||
 IRC Nickname: Colin Group: Ex-Member Posts: 2039 Member No.: 68 Joined: December 31, 2007 Total Events Attended: 69 | Keep them the same. --------------------  Proud WG member from January 2006 - Fall 2009 | ||||||
Posted: February 25, 2009 02:02 am | |||||||
 IRC Nickname: Plano|Adam Group: Emeritus Posts: 1449 Member No.: 228 Joined: February 13, 2008 Total Events Attended: 107 | definitely 105, because: 1 - raises reqs (more prestige) 2 - If your higher cb, your probably more active, so higher attenance 3 - More KO's 4 - most clans dont have 105+ its usualy 110+, so we still get the lower cb'ed members. --------------------  "If at first you don’t succeed, call it version 1.0" | ||||||
Posted: February 25, 2009 02:26 am | |||||||
 IRC Nickname: Mr Glennfase Group: Emeritus Posts: 3064 Member No.: 39 Joined: December 30, 2007 Total Events Attended: 220 | Leave the requirements but have a highly encouraged training plan. We can't force people to max out within a month, but we can enforce some type of progress somehow. I'm not talking 100-124 F2P within two months, but possibly one combat level a month or something. To be honest, at under 115 F2P Combat, it would take no more than 4-5 hours to get a combat level every month. Maybe 5-7 hours if you just AFK bandits, which is great experience, and little maintenance. I disagree with a combat requirement change just because of the amount of applicants that we lose. We really can't afford to drop to 50 people and still allow ourselves to be successful. We aren't active enough for that, and I would like to keep our general requirements in this clan as one of the lowest. [Trust me, this clan is NOT strict in any way, shape, or form lol.] -------------------- That's Mr. Glennfase to you. Ex-Warlord/Council  | ||||||
Posted: February 25, 2009 02:33 am | |||||||
 IRC Nickname: Wayne|Eregion2 Group: Emeritus Posts: 3087 Member No.: 156 Joined: January 25, 2008 Total Events Attended: 8 | I kind of like the training requirement idea as long as it's super lenient, or maybe not even required just encouraged (get attendance points or whatever). I could go with that. PS: Give us sectors back and do whatever you want with your half!  --------------------  | ||||||
Posted: February 25, 2009 03:22 am | |||||||
| IRC Nickname: Joe mamma27 Group: Ex-Member Posts: 106 Member No.: 1589 Joined: December 26, 2008 Total Events Attended: 12 | I personally liked the 102+ to apply and 105+ to graduate. That sounded good. If not, then 100+ to apply and 105+ to graduate sounds good. Forcing people to stay in the clan with training requirements is what I think most people's concearn was with raising the level requirements in the first place. So that's a definate no imo. -------------------- | ||||||
Posted: February 25, 2009 03:26 am | |||||||
| IRC Nickname: Wayne|Eregion2 Group: Emeritus Posts: 3087 Member No.: 156 Joined: January 25, 2008 Total Events Attended: 8 | I don't think 105 would be enough to make any difference; maybe 110 or 115 but that's out of bounds unless we do something like sectors (I swear I will beat this horse to death TWICE before this whole situation is done with). As it is though, I don't think it'd be a good idea to have a combat level for applying and a combat level for graduating, better just to have one single level. If not we'll get stuck kicking people who haven't trained by the graduation deadline but have been around for several weeks and are integrated; basically messy (or we'll end up with people who never, ever graduate but are otherwise active participaters). -------------------- | ||||||
Posted: February 25, 2009 05:08 am | |||||||
| IRC Nickname: ^Dave^ Group: Ex-Member Posts: 735 Member No.: 1616 Joined: January 4, 2009 Total Events Attended: 23 | Stay 102 to graduate .. we are not ready for a req raise .. we need to work on our warring "skills" before when even think about raiseing the reqs tbh --------------------   | ||||||
Posted: February 25, 2009 05:30 am | |||||||
 IRC Nickname: Useph Group: Guest Posts: 267 Member No.: 125 Joined: January 12, 2008 Total Events Attended: 29 |
Why is higher combat more prestigious? Is there some RuneScape Clan Bible somewhere that says "A clan with higher leveled members is more respectable?"
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.
Yeah and at the same time we don't get the thousands of members between 100 and 105. Awesome! -------------------- Goals 78/99  | 99/99  | 92/99  | 94/99  | 82/99  | 99/99  | 77/99  mIRC Guru  WG's #1 Pyromaniac | ||||||
Posted: February 25, 2009 05:57 am | |||||||
 IRC Nickname: Sithofwookie Group: Ex-Member Posts: 2842 Member No.: 815 Joined: June 11, 2008 Total Events Attended: 48 | I voted for 105+. but let the current people that are below that atm not have to meet it. -------------------- | ||||||
Posted: February 25, 2009 05:59 am | |||||||
 IRC Nickname: His Lordship Group: Founder Posts: 6029 Member No.: 1 Joined: December 26, 2007 Total Events Attended: 129 | At this stage I would be warming up to a training req rather than a level req. --------------------  | ||||||
Posted: February 25, 2009 06:48 am | |||||||
 IRC Nickname: Maths Group: Ex-Member Posts: 1855 Member No.: 54 Joined: December 31, 2007 Total Events Attended: 286 | 105+ --------------------  "Journeys are what brings us happiness, Not the destination." ~ Two time ex-raid leader of wg ~  | ||||||
Posted: February 25, 2009 06:52 am | |||||||
 IRC Nickname: Trolls trolling trolls trolling trolls Group: Banned Posts: 2956 Member No.: 422 Joined: April 4, 2008 Total Events Attended: 130 | Leave the same IMO  -------------------- Mugger84 Member Of WG Since 4th April 2008. WG Raid Leader Since 20th June 2008. WG Council Since 20th November 2008. Banned from WG Since 6th March 2009. DF IG Since 6th March 2009. DF FA Since 15th March 2009. Ex-Member Of WG Since 26th March 2009. Member of DF Since 6th April 2009. Clan Friend of WG Since 4th June 2009. --- ||Ex-WG Warlord || Current Member of DF || Ex-Rampage Leader ||  | ||||||
Posted: February 25, 2009 08:58 am | |||||||
 IRC Nickname: [JC] Group: Emeritus Posts: 3320 Member No.: 23 Joined: December 30, 2007 Total Events Attended: 147 | I'm just trying to figure out where exactly the correlation between activity and higher activity actually come from exactly? To me, just because one member has a higher combat level than another doesn't nessacarily reflect at all upon their activity, and even if they are 120 cmb rather than 100 does not nessacarily mean that those 20 levels will make them a better part of WG. Many measures of RS activity aren't shown in a combat level, take this example: Member 1: 120 cmb, 1500 total level, 100m Xp Versus Member 2: 100cmb, 2100 total level, 250m Xp Now who of those 2 is likely to have played more RS and is likely to be more active? who would also not be allowed into WG under a 105+ cmb req? As above, I do not think that cmb exclusively displays activity or not. Higher level members CAN be more active than someone with a lower combat, however it can also be just as much of an indicator of somone who is self focused and will not do much to help their fellow clan members, and only goes to events they 'have to'. I can't see many benefits to increasing the req's other than perhaps a slightly higher cmb average at the loss of a few applicants. I think a training programme would be great, if it is practical, however I do wonder: How would it be enforced? Do staff have enough time to monitor whether it is being followed or not? Will it apply to all WG members, current and future, or just new members? What is going to be the end point? 110, 115, 120+? --------------------  Old awards wat Most Mature & Most Honourable Most Dedicated|IRC Freak|Best Emeritus Placeholder lolz | ||||||
Posted: February 25, 2009 09:19 am | |||||||
 IRC Nickname: Dnovelta Group: Emeritus Posts: 2750 Member No.: 130 Joined: January 20, 2008 Total Events Attended: 137 | I voted other, and here is my suggestion: A training quota, but a very lenient one that basically follows the "slow but steady" mantra. People apply at 100 combat, can graduate at 100 combat, but are required to gain two melee levels (individual levels, not combat levels) a month. Very reasonable if you ask me. Could be easily done in a matter of days, and doesn't take that much determination or concentration. The quota could be lifted at a specific combat level, 110 or 105 or whatever is desired. So until those levels, members would be required to gain two levels a month. It sets in place a sort of training system. Members that find it as a burden might just want to reach the required combat level to have the quota lifted. Some might just train the bare minimum, but then it would still be training. Skillers would still have their time to skill as two levels is easy to get at level 100 and 105. I was thinking about making it 1 combat level per month, but that might be a bit much. --------------------   | ||||||
Posted: February 25, 2009 09:28 am | |||||||
 IRC Nickname: Mickey Group: Emeritus Posts: 5305 Member No.: 48 Joined: December 30, 2007 Total Events Attended: 282 | 105+. --------------------   | ||||||
Posted: February 25, 2009 10:13 am | |||||||
 IRC Nickname: leecable Group: Banned Posts: 1938 Member No.: 410 Joined: April 1, 2008 Total Events Attended: 178 | Olly, Mikes and my idea. Look in suggestions, im hungover. --------------------    | ||||||
Posted: February 25, 2009 10:48 am | |||||||
 IRC Nickname: [Narita] Group: Guest Posts: 695 Member No.: 1378 Joined: October 15, 2008 Total Events Attended: 34 | as i have always said, 100+ to apply 105+ to graduate or 102+ with 90+range and def. -------------------- | ||||||
Raising the Requirements Poll #2