Play Nice Policy/LNS/RvR needs overhaul before Velious

[Rednaros]

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

Conjecturing with Sirken over it is the best source I have. He's seen 300 in a zone operate fine while other people with weaker comps/internet have dropped like flies. That's why I would want to see a large scale fight without zoning before ruling that out.



That's an interesting idea...though logistically a little tricky. Under LNS right now, the reward for the winner is to continue on in the zone without harassment (a la the lockout). Rez timers are something that should be noted in the corpse lockout proposal. Though if your goal is to prevent guilds from sniping other targets after a fight, why wouldn't they just avoid the fight and go snipe?

I think that the LNS rules at the raid level should just ensure that your raid is uncontested in that area after. If you want to contest other mobs with a fight, then you need to be there to fight when a rival goes for it. Although the idea may seem silly that the fallen force can just loot and go on their merry way, I don't see how the current system is hurting anyone but the monopoly.

the desync had little to do computer size it wasn't FPS lag it was MS/ping lag which falls on the server

[Guide.Chroma]

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

This wasn't a small selection of people desyncing, our entire raid desynced upon zoning in and running to the corner by the right moat. I can guarantee you that some of these nerds live on the east coast with good internet (sub 20 ping) and have monster computers to boot.

We weren't zone hopping, so the issue isn't going to be fixed by making the argument that we all need to be in the same zone and stay in the same zone. They prepared several hours in advance with a very large force with their casters and rezzers being g-fluxxed onto the super block (so taking the zone prior with our 20-30 people also wasn't feasible).

There isn't a way for the 2 groups to co-exist in that zone prior to the mob being about to spawn. And there's no way for me to build a computer that will drop my ping below the 115-130 ms that I'm always in in the Pacific Northwest. So this in essence is a server hardware issue, especially since I've been in several 70v70s in the past with absolutely no lag or desyncing whatsoever.

I've heard that people spoke with rogean and karnors and a few other zones had been placed on bad server clusters to make room for the velious beta zones being properly tested. I also never desynced in Fear during trains prior to the shitfest Sunday, and now I do with regularity...so something has happened recently to the red99 server files.

I don't have any information other than what I've presented, and I don't have anything to do with the server hardware. I can tell you what I see from my pov, but I can do as much about it as you.

Now to the LNS removal, what I was able to learn was that it has been done before. It led to corpse camping, bind rushing, and general wars of attrition. A 20 v 40 in a battle for Vox ended with the 20 winning. The 40 batphoned and continued to rush for 4+ hours, ending with the 20 that actually won to leave in frustration. Victory through skill is preferred to victory through attrition, and the removal of LNS favours the latter.

If your issue with LNS is "I don't like it" instead of "these are the detriments it's causing to the server", then there isn't a lot more for me to look at. Anyone that claims that the detriment is "becoming blue" will be shot. It's Everquest with PvP, not PvP with Everquest.

[Veltira]

Too damn long, didn't read

[Colgate]

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

I don't have any information other than what I've presented, and I don't have anything to do with the server hardware. I can tell you what I see from my pov, but I can do as much about it as you.

Now to the LNS removal, what I was able to learn was that it has been done before. It led to corpse camping, bind rushing, and general wars of attrition. A 20 v 40 in a battle for Vox ended with the 20 winning. The 40 batphoned and continued to rush for 4+ hours, ending with the 20 that actually won to leave in frustration. Victory through skill is preferred to victory through attrition, and the removal of LNS favours the latter.

If your issue with LNS is "I don't like it" instead of "these are the detriments it's causing to the server", then there isn't a lot more for me to look at. Anyone that claims that the detriment is "becoming blue" will be shot. It's Everquest with PvP, not PvP with Everquest.

the current iteration of the play nice policy in no way stops a guild/force from bind rushing and/or winning a battle through attrition

all it does it take the risk factor out of being the aggressor in PvP

[daasgoot]

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

remove pnp

[Colgate]

this is a rough draft of an amendment that i would make regarding the current force LNS policy; this would not apply to small scale LNS in non-raid zones so that random newbie dying in crushbone won't be affected by this

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In large scale PvP or any PvP in a contested raid zone, a force may call Force LNS at their bind(s) after they have died. They are then locked out of the contested zone(s) and any adjacent zone(s) for 1-2 hours. After that initial lock out, they may then zone in, gather their corpse(s), and then leave. They are then locked out from the contested zone(s) and any adjacent zones for 1-2 hours. Their lock out timer begins when all members of the force have left those zones. The lock out timer may also end if/when the opposing force also leaves those zones. The opposing(winning) force may dictate up to one zone adjacent to the lock out zones that you may not move into. If you are in the same guild as someone who is on Force LNS, you are also considered to share the same lock outs as them.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

this addresses the current issues of there being basically no risk/punishment for losing raid PvP and also the issue of forward LNSing

examples:

if you call force LNS in sebilis, you are then locked out of sebilis and trakanon's teeth

if you call force LNS in skyfire, you are then locked out of skyfire, veeshan's peak, overthere, and burning woods

if you call force LNS in kael, you are then locked out of kael, eastern wastes, and wakening land. the winning force can then dictate that you are not allowed to move into skyshrine

pls give feedback

[Guide.Chroma]

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

the current iteration of the play nice policy in no way stops a guild/force from bind rushing and/or winning a battle through attrition

all it does it take the risk factor out of being the aggressor in PvP

The 20 in the example above would have been able to LNS and go on their merry way, instead of sit being camped. Bind rushing, etc is indeed not prevented. That could be something worth looking at, though my wager would be that it would have to start from the players.

The risk of the aggressor is losing and having to take their toys and play somewhere else for the lockout. I don't see how this is a detrimental issue to the server when compared to being corpse camped.

[jibekn]

my wizard is currently suspended for winning pvp following to the rules.

[daasgoot]

plz no additional rules or amendments.

remove it all together.

if someone is corpse camping you then go play a different toon until they get bored of sitting on ur face.

next time, don't die

[dis_mornin]

Lot of PvP for longest tldr post in this thread.