![]() |
|
|||||||
| View Poll Results: Is a Rolling +ZEM value for low pop Zones something that would interest you? | |||
| Yes? |
|
56 | 83.58% |
| No? |
|
3 | 4.48% |
| I don't care. |
|
6 | 8.96% |
| What's a ZEM? |
|
2 | 2.99% |
| Voters: 67. You may not vote on this poll | |||
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
|
|
#1
|
|||
|
Not all post velious ideas were a bad thing, some of them even solved problems for a group centric game without incentive to group
| ||
|
#2
|
|||
|
The answer you seek is simple:
Rotating ZEMs. | ||
|
#4
|
|||
|
Do people not group in seniors on green? There are groups in sebilis all the time on blue
| ||
|
#5
|
|||
|
I Don't agree with them lowering ZEMs to increase ZEMs in other zones...Just...Increase ZEMs...in less popular areas.
__________________
| ||
|
#6
|
|||
|
The biggest factors are:
ZEM (which is why Mistmoore, Highpass Hold, and most outdoor zones aren't popular grouping spots) Ease of hunting: Which is why Runnyeye, Kaesoris, Najena aren't popular Ease of access: which is why Permafrost and Kerra Isle aren't popular
__________________
Jersiey De'Vil <Venerate>
Green Server | ||
![]() |
|
|