How Should Players Compete For Raid Mobs

[Splorf22]

So I read about 5 pages of the raid target rotation thread before my eyes bled from all the repetitive comments. I'd like to bring up something in a fresh thread though, and that is: how should players compete for raid mobs? Everyone agrees that raid mobs should be reasonably scarce. No one wants to see a level 5 twink running around in a bone clasped girdle - difficulty is what made Everquest the addicting game it is. So the question is how do we decide who gets what?

Right now the main criteria are 'willing to be available 12+ hours per day to raid at the tweet of the guild leader' and 'joining a guild with enough such people that 35+ can be assembled at any time'. I see things like Dravingar saying 'People that only work 15 hours a week shouldn't expect the same rewards as people that work 50' and Shiftin saying he makes 49% of TR raids, which means that he is 'on call' for Everquest raids 85 hours per week.

Is this what the players and the devs want, or not?

[Troy]

Everyone agrees that raid mobs should be reasonably scarce. No one wants to see a level 5 twink running around in a bone clasped girdle...

I don't agree that the spawns themselves need to be scarce, only the loot. If they spawned every day but with 1/7th the loot it would IMO be more interesting.

[Kika Maslyaka]

I don't agree that the spawns themselves need to be scarce, only the loot. If they spawned every day but with 1/7th the loot it would IMO be more interesting.

good point! there needs to be more raiding content, but it doesn't necessary needs to lead to more loot

[Flavor]

I like last option lololol.

Also, who cares?

[Heebee]

Uthgaard gives everyone a Fungi Staff <-- will be the clear winner.

[Hobby]

I voted for all of them because i can.

[Swish]

Gotta love polls with the "comedy" options in them. Does detract from the significance of results :P

Mass PVP anyone? :D

[gnomishfirework]

First to engage is the only fair way to do it without PvP enabled.

[Shiftin]

Right now the main criteria are 'willing to be available 12+ hours per day to raid at the tweet of the guild leader' and 'joining a guild with enough such people that 35+ can be assembled at any time'. I see things like Dravingar saying 'People that only work 15 hours a week shouldn't expect the same rewards as people that work 50' and Shiftin saying he makes 49% of TR raids, which means that he is 'on call' for Everquest raids 85 hours per week.


If you're going to make stuff up, please don't attribute it to me, even indirectly.

I have been able to maintain a 45% raid attendance with a very healthy real life since my time in IB because server repops frequently happen during weekends or at night (because that's when rogean isn't at work and can apply patches *shocked face*) when all it means is choosing between killing a few dragons and going to bed early. Plenty of people are in this boat. You are absolutely pulling your numbers out of your butt.

ps - 40% is what we ask of our active members and apps. Having people spread out across timezones is extremely beneficial.

[Prince]

why not just do whoever kills mob first gets the loots ????

[Doors]

Mass PVP would solve all the GM headaches and bickering among the playerbase.

[Splorf22]

If you're going to make stuff up, please don't attribute it to me, even indirectly.

I have been able to maintain a 45% raid attendance with a very healthy real life since my time in IB because server repops frequently happen during weekends or at night (because that's when rogean isn't at work and can apply patches *shocked face*) when all it means is choosing between killing a few dragons and going to bed early. Plenty of people are in this boat. You are absolutely pulling your numbers out of your butt.

ps - 40% is what we ask of our active members and apps. Having people spread out across timezones is extremely beneficial.

I just multiplied 49% of raids X 168 hours per week (it seems I didn't remember your raid percentage perfectly). Last few patches raid mobs weren't spawned AFAIK so a uniform distribution seemed like a reasonable assumption at the time. I would be very curious to see a log of your raid attendance with times, but I totally understand if that's personal.

P.S. THE MASSES HAVE SPOKEN UTHGAARD! WHERE'S MY FUNGI STAFF?

[Zuranthium]

I would freaking love it if mass PvP was the determining factor.

[Fourthmeal]

pvp

[Flavor]

pvp
I'm onto you bro. That title will never be yours.

[Ledzepp02]

I voted for all of them because i can.

[Troy]

ps - 40% is what we ask of our active members and apps. Having people spread out across timezones is extremely beneficial.

Being on call for 40% of your life as a minimum requirement seems reasonable to you people? Is this a game or a cult?

[Halfelfbard]

I got another option....Aggro zone on the guilds leaders...the one that survives gets the mob.

[bizzum]

Being on call for 40% of your life as a minimum requirement seems reasonable to you people? Is this a game or a cult?

40% raid attendance =/ 40% of total time spent on Everquest.

It doesn't take a whole guild, or even a half of a guild, to track a mob, unless you're going to pull a poopsock, which I really havn't seen in a long while.

Sometimes its a few people tracking a lot and fast mobilization, but hopefully its more like everybody puts in a little bit of time being on the lookout for mobs with the mobilization so your logic doesn't actaully come to be the truth for anybody. I dont think it was ever a requirment, though I won't doubt that its the truth for some people on the server.

[Daywolf]

PvP + Last [melee] hit not first.

cult

[Koota]

Oh look, this thread again.

[Dravingar]

So I read about 5 pages of the raid target rotation thread before my eyes bled from all the repetitive comments. I'd like to bring up something in a fresh thread though, and that is: how should players compete for raid mobs? Everyone agrees that raid mobs should be reasonably scarce. No one wants to see a level 5 twink running around in a bone clasped girdle - difficulty is what made Everquest the addicting game it is. So the question is how do we decide who gets what?

Right now the main criteria are 'willing to be available 12+ hours per day to raid at the tweet of the guild leader' and 'joining a guild with enough such people that 35+ can be assembled at any time'. I see things like Dravingar saying 'People that only work 15 hours a week shouldn't expect the same rewards as people that work 50' and Shiftin saying he makes 49% of TR raids, which means that he is 'on call' for Everquest raids 85 hours per week.

Is this what the players and the devs want, or not?

You claim you want classic raid content and guess what, that is classic. There was always a guild or two that destroyed everything and everyone else competed for scraps. Welcome to life, it's not fair.

[karsten]

dravingar i don't think you're giving enough credit to this important issue

[Dr4z3r]

I just multiplied 49% of raids X 168 hours per week (it seems I didn't remember your raid percentage perfectly). Last few patches raid mobs weren't spawned AFAIK so a uniform distribution seemed like a reasonable assumption at the time. I would be very curious to see a log of your raid attendance with times, but I totally understand if that's personal.

P.S. THE MASSES HAVE SPOKEN UTHGAARD! WHERE'S MY FUNGI STAFF?

The assumption that raids would be uniformly distributed across a given week is faulty to begin with. If there's a full repop on a Monday, for example, none of the big targets are going to even be in window again until Friday. The longer you go without a reset, the more even the distribution will get thanks to variance, but you'd never be able to get an actual even distribution with only 10 96-hour windows.

[Amelinda]

I voted for all of them because i can.

I voted for several because I can.

PVP ftw.

[Versus]

Also, FTE doesn't always work. You get bards kiting shit around until the raid prepares, and people throwing javs/shooting arrows at a mob while lacking numbers (it is sometimes hard to tell who REALLY "engaged" first with all the hullabaloo with preparing for a rush, etc.) and mobs charging a mess of people.

What if a raid of 15 is standing in the midst of a raid of 35 and half a second before a person in the raid of 35 shoots an arrow at a mob, a person in the raid of 15 shoots an arrow at the target? The raid of 35 assumes it's their mob, rushes and engages. GM is called, it is determined the person from the raid of 15 "engaged" first, and the loot is awarded to the raid of 15, who otherwise wouldn't have been able to kill the mob in the first place.

[Troy]

40% raid attendance =/ 40% of total time spent on Everquest.

Which is why I wrote on call, not online. Reading ftw.

[Shiftin]

Which is why I wrote on call, not online. Reading ftw.

I truly have no idea how to make this simpler for you, but I'm pretty sure you're just trolling anyway, so meh.

Looking at our DKP page, I don't think we've gone 3 weeks in over 4 months without a manual server reset. Most of these happen on the weekend, which both bunches up mobs for the following week (creating lots of off days), and means that raids typically happen during US players normal "leisure time". "Were you home this weekend? You killed a lot of dragons! Were you out at the lake, visiting family, etc? That's cool, next week!"

[Hex]

Being on call for 40% of your life as a minimum requirement seems reasonable to you people? Is this a game or a cult?

You do understand that you're playing an MMO right, and this is classic EQ? I have been in top raiding guilds in other games for years, and yes, being on call is part of that, and something we volunteer to do, because we love the game, and that's what makes it fun.

[Troy]

You do understand that you're playing an MMO right, and this is classic EQ?

Yes, and in classic EQ you never had to be on call for 96 hours per mob.

Do YOU realize that this is classic EQ?

[Prince]

why not just do whoever kills mob first gets the loots ????

???????

[gnomishfirework]

Also, FTE doesn't always work. You get bards kiting shit around until the raid prepares, and people throwing javs/shooting arrows at a mob while lacking numbers (it is sometimes hard to tell who REALLY "engaged" first with all the hullabaloo with preparing for a rush, etc.) and mobs charging a mess of people.

What if a raid of 15 is standing in the midst of a raid of 35 and half a second before a person in the raid of 35 shoots an arrow at a mob, a person in the raid of 15 shoots an arrow at the target? The raid of 35 assumes it's their mob, rushes and engages. GM is called, it is determined the person from the raid of 15 "engaged" first, and the loot is awarded to the raid of 15, who otherwise wouldn't have been able to kill the mob in the first place.

The raid of 35 needs to learn how to use their ogres properly.

[Ronas]

http://www.fippydarkpaw.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=1230

I especially like this part of there policy.

• If neither side will cooperate with the GM present, the raid mob will be perma-killed, in which case it will not re-spawn again until there has been a server reset.

Why would you perma-kill a raid mob, what about the other guilds that were not present, doesn’t that affect them as well?

Yes, it would affect them, so if you don’t want to be hated by every other guild on your server I would suggest not making this happen.

But then again on this server it seems to reset every week...

[Strifer]

1. Get all guild leaders in arena
2. http://img.filmlinks4u.net/2010/06/Highlander-1986-Hollywood-Movie-Watch-Online-210x300.jpg
3. There can be only one.

[Duie]

To be fair ,in classic EQ a cell phone was very expensive and Texting was something you did on a type writer .You didnt have phone list because noone wanted to pay the long distance bill . Also if you had a 56k conection you were considered ubar because youd only ld if you had more than 50 people in a raiding zone ........... We tend to foget these things from the "good ole days"

[Zuranthium]

No, really, please make PvP a part of this server for determining which Guilds get top billing (with specific item restrictions in place for what can be used in those fights or at least different brackets). Have we forgotten about the TEST OF TACTICS?!?

You want something? Then fight for it. Have a Guild Ladder that changes every week, as determined by the win/loss record in weekly Guild vs. Guild matches, and Guilds get to pick which camps are theirs for the week by going down the list in order. You want a camp, for sure, no questions asked? Then beat everyone else in PvP so you get #1 pick.

The amount of extra strategy and community interaction brought into the game from this would be just divine.

[Dravingar]

No, really, please make PvP a part of this server for determining which Guilds get top billing (with specific item restrictions in place for what can be used in those fights or at least different brackets). Have we forgotten about the TEST OF TACTICS?!?

You want something? Then fight for it. Have a Guild Ladder that changes every week, as determined by the win/loss record in weekly Guild vs. Guild matches, and Guilds get to pick which camps are theirs for the week by going down the list in order. You want a camp, for sure, no questions asked? Then beat everyone else in PvP so you get #1 pick.

The amount of extra strategy and community interaction brought into the game from this would be just divine.

Sounds super classic bro.

Edit : Forgot to add, EQ PvP is asshole in a can. Go Go bards and soulfires.

[Zuranthium]

Test of Tactics was certainly Classic, even if it was only for bragging rights rather than a true ongoing competition that effected other things in the game. Soulfire would definitely be on the banned listed of items allowed. Other skill balances could be put in place as well.

The current system is not Classic. The way people play the game is not Classic.

It's kind of a like a model wearing a swimsuit and then a fat person wearing the same swimsuit in an attempt to get the same reaction. It doesn't work.

WTB the best Everquest game possible that fits with how Classic EQ would have eventually improved had it continued to exist under good leadership.

[Dravingar]

Test of Tactics was certainly Classic, even if it was only for bragging rights rather than a true ongoing competition that effected other things in the game. Soulfire would definitely be on the banned listed of items allowed. Other skill balances could be put in place as well.

The current system is not Classic. The way people play the game is not Classic.

It's kind of a like a model wearing a swimsuit and then a fat person wearing the same swimsuit in an attempt to get the same reaction. It doesn't work.

WTB the best Everquest game possible that fits with how Classic EQ would have eventually improved had it continued to exist under good leadership.

ToT was for a title/server announcement, pvp'ing for trak BP's is completely different.

Current system isn't classic but its the only viable solution due to the massive amount of top end players this server has. Also, shit like cellphones, solid internet connections, good computers, prior knowledge of raid zones and all that shit isn't classic and that's why variance still keeps it fun at least for me.

[Splooie]

Damn casuals always getting in the way! grumblegrumblegrumble

[Daywolf]

Hey I didn't see a choice for "Settle it with a drinking game."
Clearly biased poll
:D

[Supaskillz]

I voted for no variance because I actually think it would spread out content better among guilds, be more classic and create less boring play rime forcing players to sit in traks lair and play an alt for 2 days.

The reason I believe the first is true is that all dragons will end up on the same timer bc of server resets which must happen from time to time, every guild picks targets to race toward. Guilds will split up some targets will have a legit race on some will be uncontested unless they are so slow that don't engage in time someone else kills their target and ports. Since timer is set all mobs would spawn around same time the next week and repeat.

[Shiftin]

Once again, number two is a contradiction wrapped in nonsense.

Why do you keep pretending there was no variance on live? Kunark dragons didn't spawn on server up but sometime in the day or two afterwards. Trak was a 3 day spawn so was offset with VS after an initial server up, and they both had small natural variances as well. Within a week of a server being up with no repops we had very natural variance and were out tracking targets, just like here, but with smaller windows.

This is very close to classic raiding, with slightly larger windows to ease the workload on our GMs. Get over it.

edit: There was no server on live during kunark with 200+ people wanting to raid. Different things have to be done mechanically to avoid us all being on top of each other.

[Tewaz]

So when do we get our F Staffs?

[Kelven]

I started reading this thread as it's only two pages long, but then came across Doors' avatar again, and just couldn't read any further.

Seriously man.

In any event there's no perfect solution to this mess, which is why instancing was created. I picked "spawn all targets at once, and FTE wins" at least then people wouldn't have to poopsock track mobs for 3-4 days straight :/

tracking sucks

[Skope]

Once again, number two is a contradiction wrapped in nonsense.

check the link i gave you before. We'd be 80% closer to classic with 0 variance than we would be with the current one.

Dumping variance completely resolves the issue of poopsock and clutter, and forces mobilization and guilds to get their acts together otherwise they'll lose out on targets.

As to which of these i prefer... i guess that depends on what the rules look like that are framed around them.

Change it to dump this variance, and there you go.

TBH, I'd rather get rid of variance completely. But poopsock can be avoided even with classic variance.

[Trench_Raider]

I'm a casual player who will never see end game raiding content even on this emu server. So I don't have a dog in this hunt. But enabling PvP in all the raid zones would be the best way to settle this debate. Survival of the fittest...natural selection if you will.
It would also be damned amusing to watch...

TR

[Shiftin]

check the link i gave you before. We'd be 80% closer to classic with 0 variance than we would be with the current one.

Dumping variance completely resolves the issue of poopsock and clutter, and forces mobilization and guilds to get their acts together otherwise they'll lose out on targets.

As to which of these i prefer... i guess that depends on what the rules look like that are framed around them.

1. The link you provided is not representative of classic. It's been updated for all the changes SOE made over the last 11 years to those mobs. I explained how classic spawn mechanics worked.

2. The concept of variance on all of those spawns is classic. It's a concept that has been expanded to work for our unique situation of tons of raiders with volunteer GMs. There are small tweaks that could be made that may help (slightly shortening windows, putting trak on 3 day like he's suppossed to be, opening VP) and the staff is aware of all of them at this point. The majority of the people raiding have come here and said that it is, in fact, working.

3. The bolded doesn't make sense to any of us. How? What rules? We've speculated our asses off about what you might mean an no one has come up with anything that doesn't seem insane.

Going to zero variance is both not "classic" (your claimed primary concern) and a guaranteed clusterF as attested to by members of TR, TMO, Asc, the GMS and your own guild. No one wants 3 guilds sitting on trak or VS's spawn point and you haven't provided a single realistic reason why that won't happen.

You are inventing problems and drama because you feel the need to percieve and injustice exists in whatever world you live in where time and effort bear no relation to each other. Everyone, including the CSR staff here, is trying to explain this to you, and at this point you're just plugging your fingers in your ears and shouting "I'M NOT LISTENING".

[Ihealyou]

This problem can be solved by lowering the capital gains tax.

[Haul]

PVP, anything less is not admirable.

[Supaskillz]

I never played a pvp server, but I dont understand how anything other than chaos results from pvp in trak's lair. Everyone is bound in the lair and keeps killing each other until people just give up, or if for some reason one guild decides to engage trak with other guild just sitting there then they come up and pick off all of your clerics and you wipe.

I am sure on full on pvp servers much fewer people survived to get to raid levels than there are on this server, but on here on some trak spawns there are 200 people in sebilis and 4 guilds and half of those people are bound there. Will most likely be hours and hours of pvping with no one killing trak.

[Striiker]

I started reading this thread as it's only two pages long, but then came across Doors' avatar again.. .

Ieewww that's gross! It's a nice avatar but seriously man.. show some restraint!

[nambar]

This is how raiding currently works on this server:

A mob is in its spawn window (VARIANCE). Guilds interested have a tracker posted at spawn point to check. This person is rotated often depending on who has time to sit there.

When mob spawns, that tracker notifies everyone and the mobilization race starts. People log in, meet up, go kill mob. This is where the race happens as often there are trackers from multiple guilds waiting.

There are people still assuming guilds sit at spawn points with 30+ people for days but that hasn't happened for a long, long time. At most it's an hour investment and then you log off and or go do something else.

So the question is with raiding being so casual friendly (you just need a few very hardcore players to track and organize, the rest just log on when a mob is up) why aren't there guilds capable of competing with TR? Get your act together, it isn't hard. And the times that people do out mobilize TR, they end up wiping. I was in Seb when those 3 guilds took turns at Trak over and over and couldn't kill him. Jesus Christ.

[Lagaidh]

I'm so glad the wife and I are still only L40 and that our best gear drops in EC.

[Splorf22]

I'm really surprised at how varied the responses are - there is no clear winner, except of course Uthgaard in EC handing out fungi sticks. How would people feel about a compromise solution? Specifically, all policies and code would remain the same, but server resets would be announced ahead of time?

[baalzy]

Create a poll that doesn't allow you to select every option and your results may differ...

Also, leave out the goofy option that people will take for the lulz.

[Pudge]

I never played a pvp server, but I dont understand how anything other than chaos results from pvp in trak's lair. Everyone is bound in the lair and keeps killing each other until people just give up, or if for some reason one guild decides to engage trak with other guild just sitting there then they come up and pick off all of your clerics and you wipe.

I am sure on full on pvp servers much fewer people survived to get to raid levels than there are on this server, but on here on some trak spawns there are 200 people in sebilis and 4 guilds and half of those people are bound there. Will most likely be hours and hours of pvping with no one killing trak.

on pvp servers.. you can't bind at trak's lair. you can bind in trak's lair on p99? or any dungeon for that matter? seems very wrong. i remember on live when they made it so you couldn't bind in dungeons... i think that happened relatively early.. like still in classic.

[Daywolf]

Option #8 Drunk + PvP + killing melee blow

[Pudge]

So i did some digging around just to check up on what i said above.. this link contains some info, definitely shouldnt be able to bind in sebilis. but i also remember not being able to bind in lower guk on a caster (i remember my brother was bound there, then after they ninja-nerfed bind, he never re-bound and was one of the only ppl left with a bind in guk). anyway, here is wayback link to EQ atlas bind guide: http://web.archive.org/web/20010428081253/http://eqatlas.com/bindguide.html

note that it is wrong about the velious binds though. they get better here: http://web.archive.org/web/20011217064415/http://eqatlas.com/bindguide.html. but still not complete. also a check in the future of the bind guide shows they stopped updating it as of the link i provide here

some ppl mention how bind works across different eras/continents, and also binding in skyshrine and kael, here: http://www.eqclerics.org/forums/showthread.php?t=5470.

also, some ppl claimed that on different servers there were different zones/areas that were bindable

[Knuckle]

The guild that /guildwars another guild first gets the mob, unless the other guild accepts and PVPs for it, lets do this TMO, karsten cant lead shit in pvp.