Server talk:Nathrezim US

Separating Classic and BC Progression?

I had an idea that it may be a good idea to separate the classical progression from the BC progression, simply for a historical look as well as not destroying information (ignoring the fact that this is, indeed, a versioned wiki). Thoughts?

Sounds good to me. Having information such as naxx/aq40 still listed on the top 20 seems kinda useless as it doesn't really help identify which guilds are further progressed. btw, you can sign comment with four tildes. Squar 02:22, 7 March 2007 (EST)

I just feel like adding my 2cents, as far as anyone knows nobody is ever going to be seriously raiding the 'classic' instances and should be separated with the ones concerning bc.--Cr4zyd 18:21, 7 March 2007 (EST)

As I posted on the Nathrezim forums, my current opinion is that since people seem to be clearing through KZ very quickly and we don't have other endgame dungeons progressed into yet (aside from GL), the older instances help in ranking. For example, a guild with Naxx progress would be above a guild without, if they both have the same BC progression. As BC instances are entered, I intend to clear the Classic ones one-at-a-time to make room. -Tokro

top 20 endgame

I'm a little curious as to the logic that places 12/12 KZ and 0/2 GL ahead of 11/12 KZ and 1/2 GL. Ranking completely based on once instance seems a bit irrational. Edit: forgot to sign, sorry Squar 01:42, 11 March 2007 (EST)

Several guilds have 1/2 GL, and none have 2/2 GL. Point-wise, I've regarded KZ accomplishments as 1 point, and the first boss of GL as something like 1.1 points (not literally, but that's generally how I run it). But since 12/12 KZ and 2/2 GL seem rare, I consider the final kills worth slightly more. It's also slightly beneficial to be the first one to reach a level of progression. So that's why I put 12/12 KZ 0/2 GL over 11/12 KZ 1/2 GL in this case. -Tokro

The reason I ask is because SoAT got put above SnD by killing the same boss after us. The only reason we don't have 12/12 is because we've been unlucky with the opera event and haven't had a chance to fight the wizard of oz encounter. Not trying to get in an e-peen fight or anything, just doesn't make sense to me. Squar 03:41, 11 March 2007 (EDT)

I can't observe progress based on each guild's luck and other similar situations. Once Stack and Die has 12/12 it will be back on top, both because of the GL progress and the classic progression that's still up. -Tokro

I'm moving SnD back to #1 for now for the following reasons:

1. A 12/12 "bonus" is irrational in a comparison of progress among various instances.

2. SoAT has not killed any bosses in gruul's lair. With every boss given equal weight, as it should be, this places them equal with guilds that have 11/12 kara.

3. According to what you have posted previously regarding using classic content to break ties SnD is higher than SoAT.

4. SoAT killed the boss that made them first after SnD and in fact did not posess the first cleared karazhan. Giving them a "bonus" for killing a boss after another guild has done it is irational.

if you disagree revert and post some reasons why. Squar 04:59, 11 March 2007 (EDT)

I don't count classic progression unless two guilds have the same BC progression. I don't understand your claims behind irrational bonuses and equal weight. And it's not so much the boss, it's the percentage of the instance complete, and it still means that SoAT has completed an encounter that SnD so far has been incapable of completing. In fact, no one else on the server has been able to clear all 12 encounters in Karazhan yet, where SoAT has. It seems reasonable to assume that, if their progress maintains pace, that they will have the same 1/2 encounters complete in GL that several guilds hold, because, again, if several guilds have gotten that far, it's probably not as difficult, and therefore not as valuable in my opinion for determining rank. -Tokro