First Aggro + 15

[G13]

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

I grow tired of people saying that this system would not change anything. If you take away the 'first 15 in a zone' rule, it won't matter how long a raid has been camping, 3-4 days it doesn't matter, some other raid can show up an hour before a boss' window opens and agro it first.

How is that not a world of difference?

I mean shit guys, the whole reason camping sucks is cause people want to play the damned game, not tab out and do other stuff. Couple hours-half a day(or whatever a lessened variance would be) is fine, 3 days is not. If you cannot see the difference, then you shouldn't even be in the discussion.

The people camping it would sit on the spawn spamming bard AOE damage songs

Also if you already have 15 in the zone in anticipation for the spawn, you are in a much better position strategically to get first aggro. You don't need to wait for 15 to zone in, or port, or to log in ect. You are there, in force, ready.

This rule wouldn't change anything. FFA would just make camping worse. Not better.

[Dumesh Uhl'Belk]

Originally Posted by G13 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

The people camping it would sit on the spawn spamming bard AOE damage songs

Also if you already have 15 in the zone in anticipation for the spawn, you are in a much better position strategically to get first aggro. You don't need to wait for 15 to zone in, or port, or to log in ect. You are there, in force, ready.

This rule wouldn't change anything. FFA would just make camping worse. Not better.

How different the world must be from your perspective where 6-12 horus of camping is worse than 96 hours of camping!

[astarothel]

Originally Posted by Dumesh Uhl'Belk [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

How different the world must be from your perspective where 6-12 horus of camping is worse than 96 hours of camping!

6 to 12 hours of active camping with 50+ per group isn't a massive improvement over 15 per group semi-afk camping for a longer period of time. It is the act of camping itself which is the issue.

[Wrei]

This is why I stated previously that in order to cease campers the mobs needs to be put on an even longer variance. Make the bosses pop + or - a month and if that fails (by people going ultra retard), then increase it to + or - 2 months [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.] , if they are willing to wait 2months 24/7 then they DESERVE the loot. On a serious note, I'm not sure why we can't try full FFA. Trying it for a couple of weeks won't kill the server...

[girth]

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

6 to 12 hours of active camping with 50+ per group isn't a massive improvement over 15 per group semi-afk camping for a longer period of time. It is the act of camping itself which is the issue.

No. No its not. The issue is not being able to play 85% of the time because you have to be the first 15 in a zone to claim a boss.

[Dumesh Uhl'Belk]

You know, I've seen a number of responses to this thread talking about camping.

A few are reasonable and mention that camping will still take place (something I never denied).

Some are claiming that there will still be camping (ignoring the better/worse amount of camping dimension) and simply declare it to be fail because there will be some amount of camping.

And... a few responses display either a staggering lack of understand of absolute value, greater than/less than, basic arithmatic... an amazing capacity for cognitive dissonance... or a relentless willingness to troll my thread.

That said, after further consideration, I have decided that the only useful purpose of spawn variance was the push the spawns around the clock and balance time zones. So, I have changed the proposal to eliminate it. The proposal now suggests adding exactly 6 hours to the base spawn time of raid mobs so that they will naturally progress around the clock.

[Skope]

Something like an FFA with first 15 to aggro could work in theory, but you'd have to keep the spawn variance as is to deter the camping. If you decreased spawn variance it would benefit those that have been there for days due to less need for mobilization. It essentially boils down to a race between getting back to your PC or another guild mobilizing a 15+ raid force and getting to the target. My bet is that the campers will probably win out.

Divinity has called timers on guilds and it has been successful. Right now, though, guilds engage targets with 40+, 50+, even bordering on 60 players. The chance to fail on something like naggy, inny, or CT with that many people is damn near null. Depending on the target, it's practically not worth calling timers at all. The only two exceptions I can think of maestro, vox, and perhaps draco. Essentially a single dragon, and even then if the guild has resist gear and the proper tactics it'll be a very slim chance of a wipe.

If the spawn variance were any smaller (say it were 12 hours) it would be advantageous to any guild that sits there for 12 hours. Thus the only deterrent against camping would be leaving the same variance, but even then you're not guaranteed that guilds won't camp, because it does still give them a slight advantage. Also consider that in a rush to engage the target there inevitably be training, jumping, and other foul-smelling business. Thus my issue with FFA is the same as the GMs; it WILL ultimately make their job a living hell.

[Akame]

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

Something like an FFA with first 15 to aggro could work in theory, but you'd have to keep the spawn variance as is to deter the camping. If you decreased spawn variance it would benefit those that have been there for days due to less need for mobilization. It essentially boils down to a race between getting back to your PC or another guild mobilizing a 15+ raid force and getting to the target. My bet is that the campers will probably win out.

Divinity has called timers on guilds and it has been successful. Right now, though, guilds engage targets with 40+, 50+, even bordering on 60 players. The chance to fail on something like naggy, inny, or CT with that many people is damn near null. Depending on the target, it's practically not worth calling timers at all. The only two exceptions I can think of maestro, vox, and perhaps draco. Essentially a single dragon, and even then if the guild has resist gear and the proper tactics it'll be a very slim chance of a wipe.

Morbid curiosity but why would a bigger spawn variance deter camping, instead of a smaller spawn variance that would shorten the length of potential camping? I don't understand your logic.

[Skope]

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

Morbid curiosity but why would a bigger spawn variance deter camping, instead of a smaller spawn variance that would shorten the length of potential camping? I don't understand your logic.

Because camping for 12+1 hours is a lot less than 4 days, and in turn a lot easier to camp thus would make people far more willing to do so. There are already 15+ people in zones now, with a smaller variance that 15+ number will exponentially increase because 12 hours doesn't look so bad anymore. The 48+/- hours that we have now is at least keeping the numbers to a minimum. Having it 12 hours (or whatever # you want less than 48) will introduce 2-3 more guilds camping in the same zones as IB/DA.

[Akame]

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

Because camping for 12+1 hours is a lot less than 4 days, and in turn a lot easier to camp thus would make people far more willing to do so. There are already 15+ people in zones now, with a smaller variance that 15+ number will exponentially increase because 12 hours doesn't look so bad anymore. The 48+/- number now is at least keeping the numbers to a minimum.

Ahh ok now I think I got you. So you're saying 15 people camping over several days is better than an entire raid force of 40+ camping for 6-12 hours?

The collective sum of hours camped is what you mean [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]