Getting the general playerbase to agree was how the rules have been changed before. The problem is getting input from the GMs/Devs as to what would or wouldn't work. It's fruitless for me to be shooting in the dark if I don't know where the boundaries are.
Randomized spawn is even further from what we have now and doesn't cure the issue but rather exacerbate it.
I noted that the smaller variance, though great in theory, would increase GM involvement, but then so did FTE when it first came out. Over the course of 2-3 weeks things eventually died down. I think the argument that decreasing windows to reasonable levels somehow doesn't address that issue isn't being realistic, as FTE didn't address that issue either, in fact it just made it worse.
How much leeway is there? What is the leeway? My point is there are questions that'd need to be answered before you can even come up with a plausible idea that would suit the GM/Devs before selling it to the playerbase.
As for nothing wrong with what we have... hobby, please. There's plenty wrong with what we have, and no matter what we pick someone's gonna find some faults. My point, and the wall-o-text explanation, was showing exactly what's wrong with what we have. The first decision isn't "let's make something perfect", but rather "let's try to get less wrong this time."
Making the mobs spawn just as they did on live should be the default option, not variance. It's far easier to build around and justify the rules in a classic EQ raiding frame then it is one as heavily controlled as we have now.
|