not a single player has told me to plan on raiding

[quido]

Benefit: Smaller guilds have a means to claim some stuff they need.

Trade-off: High priority targets will always be killed by multiple guilds and no one will ever get a clean solo attempt.


I'm sorry, this isn't live. There's too many hardcore motherfuckers here - you will never be able to emulate the classic cooperation you guys remember and desire under these circumstances. Tell Nilbog to open another box or two. You're wallowing in hopeful ignorance if you really think removing variance altogether is a good trade-off.

[quido]

Originally Posted by Splorf22 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

We have a shitshow now.

Anyway as I said I think server resets are a better solution.

Why not both? I figured you guys would be in favor of further punishing the guilds that want to try and get everything. Their will will falter.

By both I mean adjusting the variance per my proposal AND instituting a system of at least somewhat consistent repops.

[quido]

Furthermore, I think my proposal evens the playing field more when it comes to tracking. It makes it virtually impossible to keep everything tracked all the time, but at the same time if these same guilds resort to just having a person or two cycling trackers and spot-checking zones like I think they will, this is something that the smaller guilds could do with the same amount of ease.

As one of the larger trackers in TMO, I can tell you that if I tracked Talendor consistently for a few weeks and he never spawned in that time, I would be fucking pissed and probably wouldn't do it again.

[quido]

Originally Posted by Enslaved [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

FTE Shout.

Do you have problems with your short-term memory?

This is not a perfect solution to a spawn sock - it merely helps alleviate some GM-intervention problems.

If 200 people (heaven forbid) are camped on Sev's spawn, and he pops and chain-fears a good chunk of them and these feared people are taking AEs and getting low HP and sending him running after people who aren't even part of the engage determined by the FTE shout, we have another boatload of problems.

Zephany you're fucking dumb AND an asshole.

[quido]

Originally Posted by Enslaved [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

No. Your idea is all kinds of fucking stupid. It only exacerbates the tracking issue. ONLY those with trackers would ever get mobs which means zerg guilds. The only way to fix raiding on P99 is to

1) Remove Variance
2) Add FTE Shout
3) Remove VP DB exemption

So only zerg guilds ever managed to check and see if a mob was popped on live eh? You idiot

[maverixdamighty]

Originally Posted by Splorf22 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

To straight up remove variance, the 15-on-the-spawn poopsocking rule would have to be removed and just go with straight FTE. And lets be straightforward about this: the new ruleset would suck. 300 people show up 10 minutes before, buff, and annihilate said target. The hope is that it would suck so bad people would rotate [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Like I've been saying for over a year now:

1. Simultaneous repops 1x per week
2. Ban trains in VP (so that TMO/FE have to go to VP rather than Trak/VS)
3. 1 hour notice before repops

Monitor for a few months and see. If necessary

4. Prevent people from logging on to more than one 'raid' account during the repop
5. Anti-camp-out code which makes people relog at the zone in

and if really necessary

6. Tokens.

why would tmo/fe have to go to vp rather than trak/vs? both guilds could still get both of those mobs first as the other guilds on the server aren't going to kill anything in vp.

3 is going to still have people bitching who can't make the times that the resets happen and 4/5 are just bad ideas. it was classic to leave coth bots at certain strategic spots for mobs, but you want to get rid of even that?

again agreed more repops benefits everyone though.

[quido]

Believe it or not, I am against the full removal of variance not because it affects my guild - TMO will succeed under any ruleset/conditions - but because what it would bring would be fucking stupid. I experienced it here, Zephany; you did not. FTE shouts will not offset the idiocy of a dozen weekly spawnsocks. Nonetheless, I am in complete support of implementing FTE shouts as a means of reducing confusion and GM headaches.

[maverixdamighty]

Originally Posted by Enslaved [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

FTE Shout.

Do you have problems with your short-term memory?

if you've been involved in a fte fight you would not be so quick to have this argument be your saving grace. do you really find it enjoyable to have 30 ppl sitting directly on top of the mob when it spawns fighting for the first agro? I thought the reason behind this thread was so that casual guilds could have fun attempting these mobs legitimately not cheesing them through fte snipes?

[Splorf22]

Originally Posted by maverixdamighty [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

why would tmo/fe have to go to vp rather than trak/vs? both guilds could still get both of those mobs first as the other guilds on the server aren't going to kill anything in vp.

3 is going to still have people bitching who can't make the times that the resets happen and 4/5 are just bad ideas. it was classic to leave coth bots at certain strategic spots for mobs, but you want to get rid of even that?

again agreed more repops benefits everyone though.

Well are you and TMO really going to ally and agree to leave VP for last?

And yes, the whole point of 4/5 is to slow people down, so that you actually have to, you know, fight trash mobs and port around rather than just hide pull shit to the zone and be done in 5 minutes.

[Vexenu]

A well-designed token-spawning system is a non-classic proposal that would ultimately result in a more classic gameplay experience than any other proposal on the table. Importantly, it would also require almost zero GM intervention once implemented. The current variance system is totally un-classic. A simple FTE shout with no variance would result in 4-5 guilds at each spawn trying to win a FTE lotto, which is also totally un-classic.

A token system could allow for hardcore guilds to earn more tokens to spawn more raid mobs, while still allowing casual guilds a shot at the mobs on a less frequent basis. It is essentially a de facto rotation that doesn't require guilds to cooperate with each other, and allows for competition and guilds to set themselves apart, with more dedicated guilds getting more loot.

You can pick holes in a token system and think of ways it could be abused, but most of these could be addressed with good design. And even with flaws, the end result would be preferable to the status quo.

Ultimately the question is whether it is better to adhere to the spirit or the letter of the law. A token spawning system would better approach the spirit of classic EQ while obviously violating the letter, since no such system existed in classic. However, neither did variance, neither did a 2.5 year duration Kunark, neither did 24/7 tracking and 3AM batphoning, and neither did a single server overflowing with 60s. Given the fact that the server is already entirely un-classic in these important regards, a token system which is also un-classic but which would deliver classic gameplay results would seem to be preferable.