![]() |
So, what you're saying is..... the early turd gets the sock?
|
Quote:
That is a variance of a week. No one wants that. People hated 96 hour variance, 168 hours would be even more retarded. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
The point I'm trying to make is that going back to the old variance only punishes the casual raiding guilds. |
Quote:
I'm sure there are new wrinkles. But they seem keen on stopping poopsocking sooner rather than later. And they don't appear to want to remove raid windows entirely and replace them with weekly simulated respawns... So limiting to 2 in zone as opposed to 2 at target and allowing for some banhammering if people attempt to skirt the rules by chilling at zone lines, would make for a better environment. One that may be agreeable by all parties. Where as your complete rotation idea is obviously utopian and Class C will never concede to it. |
Quote:
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
What is the staffs' definition of socking?
Having one person track? Having two people track? Having a pre-buffed/camped raid force outside the zone? Having a pre-buffed/camped raid force inside the zone? Mage tracking ducking CotH? Having the raid or initial engage group logged in? Socking is a symptom of people not having anything constructive to do with their main characters. People could level a 5th or 6th alternate at this point, but what do they end up doing with that character? Buffing it and parking it in a zone while a boss is in window. Creating yet more socking and instant engages. Quote:
Not to mention that 96 hour variance (with extended windows) did not dissuade all people from socking spawns. |
Quote:
|
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:19 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.