Project 1999

Go Back   Project 1999 > Blue Community > Blue Server Chat

View Poll Results: Is variance still needed?
Yes, it promotes "competition" 75 29.18%
No, its an unneccesary non-classic time sink 182 70.82%
Voters: 257. You may not vote on this poll

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 12-16-2009, 01:57 PM
nilbog nilbog is offline
Project Manager

nilbog's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 14,460
Default Spawn variance = Solution to Rotation ?

In the interests of making everyone happy.. a variance of spawn time can be added to particular NPCs. Currently, an issue with raid targets is their predictable spawn time, which is creating all sorts of drama. If the majority of the players would agree upon a set of variance or raid engagement rules, this would be much preferable to a GM mandated rotation.

Here is a suggestion by Nizzarr.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nizzarr View Post
how about setting some easy rules?

-random spawn time + or - 24 hours(48 hours fluctuation) on 7 days spawn, + or - 12 hours on 3 days spawns. + or - 3 hours on 12 hours spawns.

-first guild to have 15 players present after a spawn has 120 minutes to engage, if wipe/unreadiness after 120 minute and other guild has 15 players ready then other guild can engage.

-15 players is debatable but it should be the bottom requirement to claim a shot.

These rules are easily enforceable, has less gm interraction and all in all will make poeple happy. If you want to kill shit, then be ready when it matters.

You can change these rules as you see fit, but the bottom line should be the same.

I want some spawn competition, thats what made EQ a great game. if you take this away you're taking away a big deal of what EQ was.

and excuse my french.
Solutions are what we are looking for.. and this has been the best one I have seen proposed. Let's get rid of the rotation asap ok?

Discuss. Tweak this. Suggest things.
Last edited by nilbog; 12-16-2009 at 02:04 PM..
  #2  
Old 12-16-2009, 02:25 PM
Hasbinbad Hasbinbad is offline
Planar Protector

Hasbinbad's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Vallejo, CA
Posts: 3,059
Default

This post is just to get my feet wet in this conversation, in the name of tweaking policy before it becomes policy. I don't agree with all aspects of this proposal but I like the spirit of it a lot better than the rotation we have now. I need to point out that with policy stating that "first guild to be in zone with 15 at spawn" means that 2 or more guilds could possibly have 15 people in the spawn area at the earliest possible time, with neither guild giving up people at the spawn. This leads to the same issue we have now. I don't yet see a way around it, but I am thinking hard. Yes, I know you can smell the smoke. Ideas?
  #3  
Old 12-16-2009, 02:26 PM
Gildiss Gram Gildiss Gram is offline
Skeleton


Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 18
Default

Raid leader dice rolls?
__________________
  #4  
Old 12-16-2009, 02:28 PM
Deanob Deanob is offline
Sarnak


Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 201
Default

The above is great, we should work on that idea and go from there.

Just enforce the play nice policy ontop of a random spawn, FFA system....

If there are any grieving, harassment, training, KSing then strict punishment would be issued. Simply put, if your not there first go away.
  #5  
Old 12-16-2009, 02:43 PM
NergalTD NergalTD is offline
Decaying Skeleton

NergalTD's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 3
Default

As much as I like this idea, it doesn't address the fundamental issue that was raised in the other thread.

Prior to the enforced rotation, the rule was basically, "First in the zone with a raid force"...and the guilds in question were camping out 2, 4, 14 hours ahead on anticipated spawns.

If we switched to the method in this thread, the guilds would just go back to camping for days ahead of time, then some GM would have to come in and resolve who was here first...when both guilds had 15+ in the zone for more than 12 hours.

The root issue is not having enough raid targets and we're just going to have to deal with it until content expands to meet demand.
  #6  
Old 12-16-2009, 02:47 PM
Deanob Deanob is offline
Sarnak


Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 201
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by NergalTD [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
As much as I like this idea, it doesn't address the fundamental issue that was raised in the other thread.

Prior to the enforced rotation, the rule was basically, "First in the zone with a raid force"...and the guilds in question were camping out 2, 4, 14 hours ahead on anticipated spawns.

If we switched to the method in this thread, the guilds would just go back to camping for days ahead of time, then some GM would have to come in and resolve who was here first...when both guilds had 15+ in the zone for more than 12 hours.

The root issue is not having enough raid targets and we're just going to have to deal with it until content expands to meet demand.

FFA means FFA not "First in the zone with a raid force".

Guilds could camp a 2 day -/+ spawn timer as long as they want doesnt mean that own anything. Come time to gathering, buff and engage is what defines FFA.

Just dont be pricks about it. If we can have a mutual agreement on a play nice policy there shouldn't be a problem. Otherwise Ban Hammer will come out on entire guilds (temporary of course).
  #7  
Old 12-16-2009, 02:53 PM
Wenai Wenai is offline
VIP / Contributor

Wenai's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Halifax, NS, Canada
Posts: 1,083
Send a message via MSN to Wenai
Default

It is up to the community to discuss this and come up with ideas on how to tweak this. Please be sure to discuss details of when/how a guild can "claim" an NPC. We want specifics. Example: Guild A mobilizes in SolB and begins clearing FGs. Guild B notices Guild A and rushes to the scene. At what point does Guild A start this "120 Minute Window"? As soon as they clear all the FGs? As soon as they begin clearing the FGs? A certain spot in the clearing process? We need ideas/details for ALL encounters.

A simple "First to Engage" isn't going to work. So come up with some rulesets that will allow you guys to police yourself.
  #8  
Old 12-16-2009, 03:08 PM
Matrim Matrim is offline
Scrawny Gnoll


Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 25
Default

This is a much* better solution. Variance in spawn would keep guilds on their toes and add the challenge of rapid mobilization. The first guild to respond in force should* get the mob, not the guild that has sat AFK in the zone all day.
  #9  
Old 12-16-2009, 03:33 PM
guineapig guineapig is offline
Planar Protector

guineapig's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 4,028
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by NergalTD [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
The root issue is not having enough raid targets and we're just going to have to deal with it until content expands to meet demand.
How many people do you guys have exactly in your two guilds???

Not enough to meet demand? You have got to be kidding me.

Think back to live for a moment and how many players there were online on an average night. How many raid capable guilds did you have on your server?

This isn't about meeting demand. This is about greed. Certain people in both guilds simply want to have the very best items available currently in game in each slot and probably an alt or three with the very best tradable gear in the game.

I don't see why the GM's or the rest of the community should bend over backwards just so a few people can feel like gods among men before the next expansion comes out.

Admit it, some of you are simply rushing. It's a big race to see who's the first to have X amount of hit points or X int or whatever.

If you can already beat all the bosses with 1.5 groups of players than all this gear hoarding is not a need, it's a personal desire and nobody is having it.

Just my opinion.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by nilbog View Post
Server chat is for civil conversation. Personal attacks/generally being confrontational will not be tolerated.
  #10  
Old 12-16-2009, 03:35 PM
Onadan Onadan is offline
Aviak


Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Rochester, NY
Posts: 88
Default

I think the timer should start as soon as Guild B has the 15 man claim limit in the zone.
Closed Thread

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:21 PM.


Everquest is a registered trademark of Daybreak Game Company LLC.
Project 1999 is not associated or affiliated in any way with Daybreak Game Company LLC.
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.