Raid Rules Alternative

[Dumesh Uhl'Belk]

This is effectively just a repost of my proposal in Nizzar's thread. I'm reposting in hopes of generating more on topic discussion. Maybe the ideas can stay in this thread and the drama can stay in the other one /pipedream

Anyway...

There are some people who can be logged in nearly 24 horus a day because they work from home, or don't work, or whatever, but even those people want to play the game. By that, I mean that they want to camp an item or help PL a friend, or play an alt, or maybe just log out and do something else with their time. They don't want to park themselves and alt tab out to surf the web, or play another game, or watch TV/movies, or do housework. They do it now for one simple reason: Under the current rules, it produces results.

Most people will do whatever works that is within the letter of the rules and within their personal ability (read: available time as well as skill set).

So, if we have collectively decided that camping is a "Bad Thing" tm. Then any solution has to do more than wave an index finger and say "camping is bad, don't do it". We need to change the incentives so that camping is more painful, or just doesn't produce better results than other strategies.

AFK camping only works because the current rules grant a guaranteed first shot. So, my first proposal is to totally chuck those rules and go to a FFA with one basic rule.

First to aggro + 15 minute limit to mass engage.

Whoever can get the first aggro on the mob has 15 min to maintain aggro and have his or her guild engage. As long as the battle has begun in earnest (I'll define this as being tanked instead of kited) within 15 min of the first aggro, and there was an unbroken chain of aggro by members of that first guild through the whole 15 minutes, other guilds must back off until the first guild gets the kill or wipes. If the first guild wipes completely and the mob loses aggro, then he becomes FFA again.

If someone can successfully kite a boss for 7 or 8 minutes while his guild mobilizes, then that's cool with me, because it is definitely a skill related to gameplay in EQ. Anyway, the kiting provision is more of a catch-all that is thinking forward to some of the outdoor encounters coming in Kunark and Velious. We don't want one guy from guild X kiting Talendor around for a half an hour waiting for his guild to log in and port over. There has to be a limit. However, I think 15 min is reasonable.

The traditional complaints about FFA are Training, KSing, and excessive need for GM involvement. Obviously, training and KSing are already against server rules. They should be the only reason to involve a GM, and as per the devs, this should be a rare event. They want us to solve things by ourselves. So, how do we make sure that both real KSing and false reports to the GMs of KSing when it didn't happen are rare events. Again, the answer is in the incentives. The penalties for training/ks'ing AND for falsely reporting those charges when they aren't true should both be severe, perhaps a one month IP and account ban, or de-level to 20 or something similarly harsh.

I really believe those few measures (perhaps with a slight adjustment to the time limits) would be enough to ensure equal opportunity with limited camping. The camping becomes much less attractive when the first crack is not guaranteed just for showing up first and when they campers' eyeballs have to be on the screen. I would also strongly favor reducing the variance to +0 to 12 hours. This would still help the spawns rotate around the clock. However, with a more narrow window, there will be less of a pressure to maintain a constant presence in a zone for days... maybe just a few hours. Again, I cannot stress enough how different this form of camping would be.... first to aggro and fully engage within 15 min is a very different standard. The people doing the camping actually have to be capable of completing the kill or at least holding on while the rest of their guildmates mobilize, and they will actually have to be at the keyboard with eyeballs on screen, or else someone else who is waiting on the spawn might get first aggro.

However, as much as I want that to happen, I am afraid it might not. The devs might not want to ratchet up the penalties for KSing, Training, etc. But, those penalties will be essential to setting up the proper expectations among the player base, especially in the first week or two of this system being in place. That deterrent is vital to this plan. After 3 or 4 people get deleveled or IP banned for a month, people will stop KSing and will be too afraid to level unfounded accusations at others. After that, I believe there would be very few calls to GMs. This satisfies their requirements. As for the players, we will all get a shot. If we can get a force to the mob when it's up or about to spawn and get the first aggro, we can all get a chance to kill it. Then the game is all about keeping solid intel on when targets were killed, when they are due, scouting, picking your battles, mobilizing to your chosen target, and having a good pull team that can get first aggro (or back off when they lose so they don't get banned).

I have a second proposal that is just a tweak of the rules we have, but I don't care for it anywhere near as much. If my first proposal goes up in flames or is ignored, I may post the second one.

[Dumesh Uhl'Belk]

2. First to engage rule 15min, exactly like Dumesh outlined with a small adjustment here and there for specific bosses that requires planar clears.

You don't need adjustments for that. If a guild can aggro the boss and complete the kill without all the trash being pulled, bully for them. The 15 min starts from the time the boss is aggro'd. It doesn't matter what happens to the trash before or after that time as long as no one is training each other.

3. Increase Time variance even more to + or - 7 ~ 10 days. Add in a flat 8 hours before variance starts on time of the death of the boss (Emil's idea). To further discourage camping even with these rules.

I think this would be a big mistake. The variance only needs to be enough to ensure that the bosses sometimes spawn during Euro and Aussie prime times. The larger the variance, the lower the value of the knowledge of the mobs last time of death and the higher the incentive to keep trackers and / or small crews camping. Also, please notice that in my post I am advocating only a positive element to the variance... never shorter than the base spawn time, only up to 12 hours beyond the base. This keeps the window relatively small, but still has the effect of rotating the spawn around the clock.

I'd also be in favor of random 0-12 hour or 0-24 hour patch day spawns, but only on patch days. I'm not sure how the code would be written, but basically I am saying, only restart the timers if the server is brought down intentionally for a patch that is posted on the boards. This would make sure there is no incentive by players to find a way to crash the zone or the server to get more spawns.

[mitic]

increasing spawn timer or mob engage within 15 mins, an hour, 2 hours or 6 hours wont help at all to change anything in the current situation

the ONLY solution to make EVERYONE happy would be a calendar system = guild has time to kill a boss for a whole day in a weekly rotation. if the guild in line doesnt make it for the kill then the next one (planned for the next week) gets the shot.

[Spirell]

In order for FFA to really work well, they need to get the raid tool working, and allow a whole raid's DPS to count for the kill credit. I can already see the drama on an FFA type engage where 1 group of the "other guild" goes in and KSes the mob, and we are back to square 1 with forcing the issue to "mom and dad" (aka GMs). Or even worse 1 of the guilds gets upset because you were able to get engage first and decides to engage as well, causing mass chaos.

It would eliminate the camping for sure, because just cause you stayed there all night does not mean you can ready first on pop

[Omnimorph]

Make every raid mob zonewide DT everyone every 6 seconds... problem solved.

Well i think anything is better than camping mobs, so... i'd be more for these rules than what we currently have.

[Jify]

1. 1 Hour afk = booted from server (this should fix the non raiders problem of getting booted randomly for being afk). Honestly if your going to be afk for more than an hour just log back on.

I agree!


2. First to engage rule 15min, exactly like Dumesh outlined with a small adjustment here and there for specific bosses that requires planar clears.

Agree. Keep the 2 golem rule on CT, but apply the "first to agro - 15min to mass engage" part in for killing Golems!


3. Increase Time variance even more to + or - 7 ~ 10 days. Add in a flat 8 hours before variance starts on time of the death of the boss (Emil's idea). To further discourage camping even with these rules.

IMO, current variance is enough to discourage camping, if all it takes is someone to run into zone and agro before you do.


4. Offer draconian consequences for lying / fabricating incidents to GM. If proof was ever found that X person was guilty of making shit up, go beyond the 1 month ban. PERMA BAN of IP and account, repeat offenses from full members of X guild = dissolution of sketchy guild.

That's pretty extreme. I'd promote a deleveling of 5 levels, to bring them below the planar requirement. But no perma banning. There have been times when I was 100% sure we were in the right, and GMs ruled against us. (not to say they are inhuman and always make the correct decisions, but we must abide by them)

[Erasong]

this rule and suicide kings are looking good so far. hopefully people act on it.

[JaVeDK]

How about a raid specific sub-forum for all these discussions? Most of the server don't really care about any of this, and it's annoying that all the interesting posts are lost in the raid spam. I'm sure the raiders would appreciate having all the raid related threads gathered as well.

[Ektar]

What happens when two people sit on nagafen's spawn point? We're both staring intently at the screen, and both hit taunt or attack or whatever immediately.

YES naggy did have first agro on someone, but that will NOT be determined until after the ensuing clusterfuck of both guilds thinking they were first. Furthermore how will it be determined? By a gm's logs; which is trying to be avoided.

[astarothel]

the ONLY solution to make EVERYONE happy would be a calendar system

Broad generalization. It is wrong.

[Pyrocat]

That's pretty extreme. I'd promote a deleveling of 5 levels, to bring them below the planar requirement. But no perma banning. There have been times when I was 100% sure we were in the right, and GMs ruled against us. (not to say they are inhuman and always make the correct decisions, but we must abide by them)

I don't think deleveling is a solution GMs would want. It's very non-classic and guilds can PL whoever took the fall anyway.

Temp bans of 14-30 days sounds good, and I like Xzerions (I think) idea of needing an officer to vouch for whomever got a GM involved, who would share the weight of their ban.

[mitic]

Broad generalization. It is wrong.

of course its wrong, wrong for the current campers/batphoners. for the rest (95%?) of the server it would be a perfect solution.

[astarothel]

of course its wrong, wrong for the current campers/batphoners. for the rest (95%?) of the server it would be a perfect solution.

Uh, you just said it was perfect for everyone in your previous statement.
At least attempt to have consistency when you argue something.

http://www.newsrealblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/02/Entitlement.png

[sidgb]

Whatever you do, don't forget this clause:

Should a system be agreed upon by a select group of "elite" guilds that excludes any guild, alliance or PuG raid. The excluded raid groups are not bound by the rules agreed upon without their consent and may engage the target in any manner they deem necessary to force recognition of their clam.

[Taxi]

of course its wrong, wrong for the current campers/batphoners. for the rest (95%?) of the server it would be a perfect solution.

Im gonna play ghetto mod here and ask people to stay on topic. It would be sad to see this thread devolve into another "But mobilization takes skill - Yea but camping works" thread. I can clown when its time for it but i think this is an important issue for the server. If you really like playing here, please keep the bickering to R&F.

No, i dont like the calendar idea, and i dont like being implied that if im against calendars, i must be for camping/mobilizing. Youre trolling.

[Aadill]

this rule and suicide kings are looking good so far. hopefully people act on it.

This.

[mitic]

No, i dont like the calendar idea, and i dont like being implied that if im against calendars, i must be for camping/mobilizing. Youre trolling.

then, sir, you will never see bosses for the months to come if you are not in IB or DA. changing engage timer or booting afk ppl wont change ANYTHING

[astarothel]

then, sir, you will never see bosses for the months to come if you are not in IB or DA. changing engage timer or booting afk ppl wont change ANYTHING

Broad generalization. Another one. Keep up that line of arguing, it seems to be helping your case.

[Erasong]

then, sir, you will never see bosses for the months to come if you are not in IB or DA. changing engage timer or booting afk ppl wont change ANYTHING

You should not be given a boss mob simply becuase you play here. Sorry but just no. If thats the case lets give out a starter package to everyone who rolls on the server of 1 yak 1 fbss 1 SMR and 1 GEB's simply for deciding this is the server for them. these tiems are always camped and they deserve it too right? I dont know why you feel you deserve free stuff but ya. Im sorry if this came out as a flame. it wasnt intended too. I just feel strongly about it. Camping/mobilizing/batphoning may not seem like work to you ( in fact id agree ), but the fact is that IS the work required in a GAME to achieve certain goals and not just in the raid scene. Who has gotten an FBSS without SOMEONE camping it or the cash to buy it? Ive raced for 6 man mobs before also.

[mitic]

Broad generalization. Another one. Keep up that line of arguing, it seems to be helping your case.

so what am i generalizing?

the fact that only IB and DA are scouting or camping boss mobs 24/7 rite now and will for the weeks/months to come?
the fact that changing engage timers to 2 or 6 hours wont change anything since the rest of the server has jobs and families?
the fact that a calendar WILL give EVERYONE the oportunity to kill bosses?

please, enlighten me and tell me how iam generalizing FACTS

[mitic]

You should not be given a boss mob simply becuase you play here. Sorry but just no. If thats the case lets give out a starter package to everyone who rolls on the server of 1 yak 1 fbss 1 SMR and 1 GEB's simply for deciding this is the server for them. these tiems are always camped and they deserve it too right? I dont know why you feel you deserve free stuff but ya. Im sorry if this came out as a flame. it wasnt intended too. I just feel strongly about it. Camping/mobilizing/batphoning may not seem like work to you ( in fact id agree ), but the fact is that IS the work required in a GAME to achieve certain goals and not just in the raid scene. Who has gotten an FBSS without SOMEONE camping it or the cash to buy it? Ive raced for 6 man mobs before also.

just having the opportunity to engange a mob doesnt mean that the mob will be killed. if a guild fails then it will be passed to the next one in line. sounds easy, rite?

[Lucrio40]

This is how raid targets should be decided.

http://shirtoid.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/the-most-dangerous-game.jpg

[astarothel]

so what am i generalizing?

the fact that only IB and DA are scouting or camping boss mobs 24/7 rite now and will for the weeks/months to come?
the fact that changing engage timers to 2 or 6 hours wont change anything since the rest of the server has jobs and families?
the fact that a calendar WILL give EVERYONE the oportunity to kill bosses?

please, enlighten me and tell me how iam generalizing FACTS

how are Divinity and Remedy getting some kills and loot then? Magic?

Time invested needs to have a corresponding value placed upon it.
A straight enforced rotation denies this simple and accepted truth.

Trans seems unwilling to accept anything less than a straight enforced rotation. At least Fish Bait had the balls to say "fuck you, we won't follow your rules" when they refused to negotiate.

[Taxi]

http://www.thismodernworld.com/arc/2006/TMW09-20-06colorlowrescopy.jpg

[mitic]

Time invested needs to have a corresponding value placed upon it.
A straight enforced rotation denies this simple and accepted truth.


remedy "invests" 18 hours total per week (fixed days) on raids for ~2 months now. so it have been 90 hours for 1 opportunity so far to hit a boss since inno was up that evening we raided

i think there is some misscalculation in your "corresponding value to time invested"

right now its more like: play 24/7 and ull get the lewtz

[Aadill]

right now its more like: play 24/7 and ull get the lewtz

Suffice to say, it is. The easiest solution, as we've seen it from multiple guilds, is recruitment of players in all time zones to allow for a large enough of a force to maintain the upper hand. That's not ideal, but everyone wants to win.

To be blunt: you've put about as much work in as anyone else but haven't gone the extra mile of seeing through to the end result. You invested 90 hours and received one shot at Innoruuk. I'm glad you had a chance at him as he's got a fairly large amount of items for anyone on the raid to enjoy. The problem is those hours weren't consecutive. We just spent, what? 96 consecutive hours for Innoruuk?

We aren't entitled to more, but we were willing to stick it out till the end result. We invested just as much time in less than a week than you did in 2 months. There are two ends of the spectrum here.

[Aadill]

Getting back on topic. Reposted from other thread:

Dumesh's idea still focuses on FFA and is only really applicable, as he said, to outside boss encounters. There are no outside boss encounters right now that are appropriate for this sort of thing unless you have very particular stipulations for CT. For future encounters it may be useful but you're relying on everyone to have the same timer, and to respect it. Not to mention the fact that by attempting to steal agro, you're pretty much going against server rules of attempting to KS engaged mobs. Find me a situation where you're not going to have an opposing raid force attempting to agro the mob off of the original kiter. If, on the flipside, you are saying that once agro a guild would have 15 minutes to get ready and engage while the kiter(s) kite, we might be on to something. I will say that for all of the outside dragons in Kunark and Velious, this is a pretty good idea. A guild can claim the spawn by actually having it agroed. If their guild fails to mobilize and engage the target within a set time period, they would lose their claim. No other guild will be able to interact with the dragon unless the kiters from the first guild die. I would expect some level of whining and foul play, though. Damaging a mob to make it summon would be the biggest offense, here. In the event of that, I hope the guild with claim would be ready to engage very quickly, but it defeats the level of respect that would need to be present for this rule to work. If we can calm down the current raiding environment, I would consider this one hell of a pro idea for later expansions and hope that it could discussed in the next guild meeting!

[astarothel]

i think there is some misscalculation in your "corresponding value to time invested"

right now its more like: play 24/7 and ull get the lewtz

7*24=168

168 >> 18

there is no miscalculation.

[Datante]

What happens when two people sit on nagafen's spawn point? We're both staring intently at the screen, and both hit taunt or attack or whatever immediately.

YES naggy did have first agro on someone, but that will NOT be determined until after the ensuing clusterfuck of both guilds thinking they were first. Furthermore how will it be determined? By a gm's logs; which is trying to be avoided.

Ektar, this was my major concern as well, and the primary problem with FFA regardless if all of the guilds are trying to abide by player-driven rules.

Could this be fixed by a coded script from the developers that had the boss mob shout out the very first character to gain aggro after the spawn? It would be like a CT with no DT kind of situation.

If this shout script is put in place, FFA becomes a real possibility. Example: Nagafen shouts, "TANK1, you fool! Prepare to die!" and Tank1's guild then has a time limit to fully engage the mob as described by Dumesh. The specifics of when the first guild is said to have 'failed' can be further discussed. Real-time skill can be important again.

[Aadill]

Ektar, this was my major concern as well, and the primary problem with FFA regardless if all of the guilds are trying to abide by player-driven rules.

Could this be fixed by a coded script from the developers that had the boss mob shout out the very first character to gain aggro after the spawn? It would be like a CT with no DT kind of situation.

If this shout script is put in place, FFA becomes a real possibility. Example: Nagafen shouts, "TANK1, you fool! Prepare to die!" and Tank1's guild then has a time limit to fully engage the mob as described by Dumesh. The specifics of when the first guild is said to have 'failed' can be further discussed. Real-time skill can be important again.

That is definitely a viable solution. Sometimes agro is random, though. You'd really have to hope to be in range to attack, taunt, or shoot a bow to ensure first agro otherwise you'll be super mad when some afk dude happens to grab agro first. Other than that it would at least add the argument of "we aggroed first so step down till we win or lose." I assume a zonewide shout would be the easiest way to also catch it in logs if anyone chose to take an issue to a GM.

[Stickyfingers]

Why not just make everything pop at the same time once a week? Then DA would get one and IB would too, the rest of the raid mobs would be open too, as DA and IB would be occupied with their respective raid mob, so a guild like Divinity could try some harder mobs. If Divinity is unable to, DA or IB (or anyone) could go in later and get the unkilled raid mobs. This means DA and IB could still get a raid mob a week, if not 2 or even 3.

[Akame]

Thank you Dumesh, this is by far the best suggestion I've seen on these boards yet for raid rules and I love the first aggro 15 minutes to engage with high penalties for ksing, training and falsifying reports.

What happens when two people sit on nagafen's spawn point? We're both staring intently at the screen, and both hit taunt or attack or whatever immediately.

YES naggy did have first agro on someone, but that will NOT be determined until after the ensuing clusterfuck of both guilds thinking they were first. Furthermore how will it be determined? By a gm's logs; which is trying to be avoided.

If two players, aggro at once, and 2 guilds are sitting there, alive, awake and ready to engage then /random for it and leave the gm's be.


That is definitely a viable solution. Sometimes agro is random, though. You'd really have to hope to be in range to attack, taunt, or shoot a bow to ensure first agro otherwise you'll be super mad when some afk dude happens to grab agro first. Other than that it would at least add the argument of "we aggroed first so step down till we win or lose." I assume a zonewide shout would be the easiest way to also catch it in logs if anyone chose to take an issue to a GM.

Aggro and hold the aggro in a sustainable way by not dying, ie kite. sending someone in the room to aggro first and die doesn't count. As soon as your aggro'er dies, the mobs fair game again.

Indoor mobs have to be able to be engaged and sustained without losing aggro due to a wipe or having to FD to survive.

[Aadill]

Aggro and hold the aggro in a sustainable way by not dying, ie kite. sending someone in the room to aggro first and die doesn't count. As soon as your aggro'er dies, the mobs fair game again.

Indoor mobs have to be able to be engaged and sustained without losing aggro due to a wipe or having to FD to survive.

Yeah indoor mobs definitely have a different means to maintain agro, same as any mob that DTs would also require. The idea itself is very straightforward and simple and could very easily work. Perhaps some stipulations for things like CT need to be added so that you don't have one guild clear the zone for CT only to have another gank it. The golems rule might work here.

[Akame]

Yeah indoor mobs definitely have a different means to maintain agro, same as any mob that DTs would also require. The idea itself is very straightforward and simple and could very easily work. Perhaps some stipulations for things like CT need to be added so that you don't have one guild clear the zone for CT only to have another gank it. The golems rule might work here.

By golems rule I'm assuming you mean some kind of security blanket of time to reengage to account for death touches?

Sounds good to me :)

[Dumesh Uhl'Belk]

Getting back on topic. Reposted from other thread:

Dumesh's idea still focuses on FFA and is only really applicable, as he said, to outside boss encounters....

Negative, not what I said. This applies to all bosses.

Not to mention the fact that by attempting to steal agro, you're pretty much going against server rules of attempting to KS engaged mobs. Find me a situation where you're not going to have an opposing raid force attempting to agro the mob off of the original kiter.

If another guild steals aggro from the kiters, they are KSing and violating the rule. I posted of First aggro + 15 min to engage in force.

If, on the flipside, you are saying that once agro a guild would have 15 minutes to get ready and engage while the kiter(s) kite, we might be on to something.

Yup, that's how it works.

I will say that for all of the outside dragons in Kunark and Velious, this is a pretty good idea...Damaging a mob to make it summon would be the biggest offense, here.

Another guild interfering after first aggro would be violating the rule and violating the basic server play nice policies. There is already a procedure for reporting and resolving this behavior. This is where the stiff bans come in as a disincentive.

In the event of that, I hope the guild with claim would be ready to engage very quickly,

That's the 15 min part of the rule.

I would consider this one hell of a pro idea for later expansions and hope that it could discussed in the next guild meeting!

I think it works now too, but thank you.

[Aadill]

By golems rule I'm assuming you mean some kind of security blanket of time to reengage to account for death touches?

Sounds good to me :)

Yeah as it exists in the current ruleset if you kill 2 golems you get first shot at CT, and once zone is clear you have 10 minutes to engage. The reason why CT requires so much special attention is because it requires everything in the zone to be dead. If CT is up and the golems are up you have to deal with DT agro lists that are zonewide. That's not fun at all, and as such the CT encounter should be more based on the golems. Otherwise, when your raid gets DTd or camps out, another group could claim CT. Hardly fair at all as the script is unavoidable. It would really just be a matter of fair play. It doesn't take long to log in and log out, by any means. As long as there aren't any shifty moves it's all good :)

[Dumesh Uhl'Belk]

I don't think deleveling is a solution GMs would want. It's very non-classic and guilds can PL whoever took the fall anyway.

Temp bans of 14-30 days sounds good, and I like Xzerions (I think) idea of needing an officer to vouch for whomever got a GM involved, who would share the weight of their ban.

Perhaps not, this is the one area that takes the most input from the server devs. I'm not sure what the ideal penalty is. I just know it must be harsh and the devs must be ok with handing it out however many times it takes to get the message out to the server community. I have a feeling that if it is harsh enough it shouldn't have to be done more than 6-12 times before people quit looking to break the rules to get what they want.

[Dumesh Uhl'Belk]

What happens when two people sit on nagafen's spawn point? We're both staring intently at the screen, and both hit taunt or attack or whatever immediately.

YES naggy did have first agro on someone, but that will NOT be determined until after the ensuing clusterfuck of both guilds thinking they were first. Furthermore how will it be determined? By a gm's logs; which is trying to be avoided.

What happens the first few times is that the GMs get petitioned and some people get month long bans.

What happens after that is that the people in charge of pulling pay more attention and if they detect that they did not truly have the first aggro, they back off and let the other team have it per the rules.

[Dumesh Uhl'Belk]

Why not just make everything pop at the same time once a week? Then DA would get one and IB would too, the rest of the raid mobs would be open too, as DA and IB would be occupied with their respective raid mob, so a guild like Divinity could try some harder mobs. If Divinity is unable to, DA or IB (or anyone) could go in later and get the unkilled raid mobs. This means DA and IB could still get a raid mob a week, if not 2 or even 3.

Well, the only real negatives of patch days spawns with no variance are that people have an incentive to try bringing down the zone or the server looking for repops. I addressed that point earlier though.

The other negative is that Euro players get the first shot, then US players, then Aussies get nothing. That should be the only reason for a variance imo. Making the spawn times nearly unpredictable encourages more camping, not less... unless you make the variance so huge that the mob might not spawn for 15 days or something, and that is decidedly not classic, and also a horrible idea.

[Dumesh Uhl'Belk]

Yeah indoor mobs definitely have a different means to maintain agro, same as any mob that DTs would also require. The idea itself is very straightforward and simple and could very easily work. Perhaps some stipulations for things like CT need to be added so that you don't have one guild clear the zone for CT only to have another gank it. The golems rule might work here.

They don't require different rules so much as different tactics. If the mob DTs, you better send two pullers so that one can complete the pull after the DT. Also, you better be prepared to put more bodies on it within 30 sec or so. Nothing about the rule needs to change to account for that. Guilds just have to employ different methods.

As for CT and planar clears... I am not totally opposed to making certain concessions to those that would add complexity to the rules for CT or zones with trash to be cleared, but I don't think it is needed. In my mind, the most likely outcome is that among the guilds that will be competing for CT, his last time of death will be at least roughly known by all parties, and so, with a variance timer that is under control, those guilds will have the plane cleared or nearly so by the time CT is spawning. However, that won't always be the case, so we should consider what the likely player behavior is under my rule if there is a full pop in PoFear.

As the zone is nearly clear, guilds will (or should) reposition themselves near CTs walking path. They will have long pulls back to their raid force. They should have their trackers monitoring how many mobs remain. When they are comfortable that they can handle CT (all trash cleared or not) then they can go for the pull. If another group is also their and they make the decision to go for the pull first, then either they get the kill or they wipe. Worst case is that they go for it too early and the summoned mobs kill part or all of another guilds' raid. Well, to me, that falls under training someone, and is ban worthy. Factor that into your decisions about when to attempt a pull. Don't pull what you can't handle. That works just like any xp zone. You are free to pull 10 mobs next to someone else and kill them... as long as you can kill the mobs. If you do that and die and end up wiping someone else... you are training them.

Killing through trash doesn't earn a guild anything but the xp and loot from from those corpses. I don't like leapfrogging, most people don't like it. I think if guild/raid leaders will spend more time sending each other tells, less of it will happen. If Guild X chooses to continue trying to leapfrog and can do it without training and violating the server rules, then they are welcome to do it. In my mind, the best consequence of that behavior is that no other guild will respect the Guild X's presence in a zone and will sometimes band together to leapfrog Guild X. If Guilds Y and Z see Guild X starting to clear FGs, they might rationally decide to punish Guild X by rolling right through them with sufficient numbers to bum rush Naggy and the last 3 FGs at the same time. If they can do that without training or violating first aggro + 15 min, then good for them. In the end though, and equilibrium should settle out where guilds stop trying to leapfrog because of the dangers or violating the training rules or the first aggro + 15 min rule.

No matter what we do, the raiding game is going to feel very tight until Kunark. It will still be tight in Kunark, but the raid targets will more than double. That will relive the pressure a measurable amount. There are just not that many targets relative to the number of people that want to raid them. That's fine though, the scarcity is part of what make the loot and the experience of the kill a valuable thing.

We collectively came up with a set of rules that kinda worked for awhile. Then people's behavior settled into it's most logical conclusion, camping. Now we're trying to come up with a different set of rules to keep people's behavior to certain standards while they compete. The more rules you lay down, the more opportunity there is for loopholes and unforeseen consequences. Keep it simple. Punish the douches who can't follow the rules. Make the punishment severe enough that people will want to follow the rules even when it means they will lose a chance at loot. The internal monologue of Guild X's raid leader or puller should look like this:

I could KS Maestro even though Guild Y got first aggro and I want his loot, but then again, I don't want half my guild banned for a month... I guess I'll let Guild Y continue with their attempt and hope they wipe

not this:

Damn, those newbs from Guild Y may have gotten the first aggro, but I have more DPS here, I'll throw the kitchen sink at Maestro fast and he will come to our raid. I'll tell Guild Y's puller he is a dumbfuck douche and my guild had the aggro all the time... worst case is they'll petition, but the guides won't do anything.

[Dumesh Uhl'Belk]

Thank you Dumesh, this is by far the best suggestion I've seen on these boards yet for raid rules and I love the first aggro 15 minutes to engage with high penalties for ksing, training and falsifying reports.

Thanks

If two players, aggro at once, and 2 guilds are sitting there, alive, awake and ready to engage then /random for it and leave the gm's be.

Nothing in my rule prevents this. If two (or more) parties waiting for a spawn want to come up with another arrangement for a particular spawn, they are free to do so. If some member of that agreement breaks his or her word, then that will become known. That is it's own consequence.

[matahari]

I am not a part of the raid scene. Disregard anything I say. My opinion is there are three choices.

1. The rules that the guilds have right now.
2. FFA first to engage with ks'ing leapfrogging still camping.
3. A calendar system of reserving days in certain zones/mobs. I found a link to the calendar system from back in the day from luclin server. This is also a lot like rotation that people had and didn't like.

http://web.archive.org/web/20010124144700/everquest.estoncom.com/luclin/

I don't think there is any real answer to the raiding problems. Most raiding guilds would like all the raid mobs for their guild. DA and Ib will go to extremes to get the raid mobs under whatever rule system is in place. Soon other guilds will join them.

[Qaedain]

I like how you said there were three choices in a thread that spells out a fourth and viable alternative.

[Aadill]

Killing through trash doesn't earn a guild anything but the xp and loot from from those corpses

I was only referencing the fact that because it is beneficial to clear the zone, having someone do all the work for you as you leapfrog them is asinine. It's legal, but this will pretty much happen every time. It's not really competition as it is basically akin to camping. Nothing is to stop a guild from doing that indefinitely except the idea of an alliance of members to fight it. 100+ people in pofear? No reason not to if it gives you the upper hand.

What about if there was a first attempt deal to be made with CT? I don't see it necessary in any other zone where leapfrogging really only consists of like 20-30 mobs. The golem rule in effect right now gives you a timer to complete killing two of three golems. Once that is complete, you have first shot at CT. Instead of having a timer to kill the golems, it could be FFA. If, for example, CT is up at this time and multiple raids are racing for golems, then it will trigger DTs on both raids, meaning the raid who can recover quicker will do so and move to the last golem to reach a majority. If the majority of golems requirement is met then the race could be over and CT awarded to one raid force. If the golems are not up then it could be as you said. This way the encounter is either decided much more reasonably than a fight in a zone where trains will easily be caused, or right upon the engage of CT, depending on the state of the zone.

If faction wars still work I'd simply wipe the zone and sit in the zone on CT's path and get the first engage. Not fair to any other raiders who would consider going to fear just to take out the normal mobs.

[matahari]

No that is not a fourth alternative.

That is FFA with a first to engage rule. That is the same ruleset verant had. Whoever aggros the mob gets it. If your guild didnt' get first aggro. Than you wait until the other guild wipes or kills the mob.

Not saying it's not a good choice. It is just 1 of the 3 rulesets.

The end result of the FFA rules is the same. DA and IB camp the raid mobs with bodies or trackers. Both guilds still fight when the mob spawns and they both have people in the zone all racing to engage first. That just opens up problems like ks'ing training leapfrogging. Both guilds think they got aggro first with 70+ people running into the dragon lair.

It may stop these guilds from sitting their characters in zones for days on end. But it is kinda nice. Frees up a lot of the xp camps in the 30-49 range ; )

The other choice is spawning all raid mobs at the exact same time with a variance of what time/day it happens. With either the 15 in zone ruleset or FFA ruleset "with play nice policies"

But how many times should the devs have to change this ? Plus the work they put in for variance already.

[Dumesh Uhl'Belk]

I was only referencing the fact that because it is beneficial to clear the zone, having someone do all the work for you as you leapfrog them is asinine. It's legal, but this will pretty much happen every time. It's not really competition as it is basically akin to camping. Nothing is to stop a guild from doing that indefinitely except the idea of an alliance of members to fight it. 100+ people in pofear? No reason not to if it gives you the upper hand.

What about if there was a first attempt deal to be made with CT? I don't see it necessary in any other zone where leapfrogging really only consists of like 20-30 mobs. The golem rule in effect right now gives you a timer to complete killing two of three golems. Once that is complete, you have first shot at CT. Instead of having a timer to kill the golems, it could be FFA. If, for example, CT is up at this time and multiple raids are racing for golems, then it will trigger DTs on both raids, meaning the raid who can recover quicker will do so and move to the last golem to reach a majority. If the majority of golems requirement is met then the race could be over and CT awarded to one raid force. If the golems are not up then it could be as you said. This way the encounter is either decided much more reasonably than a fight in a zone where trains will easily be caused, or right upon the engage of CT, depending on the state of the zone.

If faction wars still work I'd simply wipe the zone and sit in the zone on CT's path and get the first engage. Not fair to any other raiders who would consider going to fear just to take out the normal mobs.

If no one could ever zone into fear except when it was at full pop, including CT, then I would be cool with what you suggest. CT spawning doesn't insta repop the whole zone does it? If it did, then your suggestion would be cool with me, but not as the published server rule... just as an agreement between the guilds that raid CT.

You plan just plain doesn't address what happens if the zone is 2/3 clear with 2 golems up when CT spawns, or 3/4 clear with no golems up.

You mention 100 members in Fear, "no reason not to" you say. Well, feel free to try it. You may get the first few CTs, but guilds that size collapse because they can't get loot fast enough to keep that many people happy and engaged. Guilds that raid with 25-40 people (less during some periods of EQ, more during POP) always advanced faster and were more cohesive because each member had a greater chance at getting loot, and the guild as a whole would get equipped and ready to move on to newer content faster.

All I am really saying is that there are downward pressures on guild and alliance size too. We'll see where the equilibrium is reached.

Sure when 2 or 3 guilds are in PoFear for the first time after this rule goes into effect there will be some kind of mexican stand-off as the guilds try to decide the best way to handle it. Should they just setup near CT and wait for the other guilds to kill all the mobs? If they do that, will the other guilds continue to kill mobs? Will the guild/raid leaders try to talk to each other and agree to a joint raid? Will they random for a shot? I'm not sure exactly what strategies will be employed, BUT as long as no one is training each other, KSing each other, or calling a GM over an issue not related to training or KSing, I'm totally cool with whatever they decide.

[Dumesh Uhl'Belk]

Not saying it's not a good choice. It is just 1 of the 3 rulesets.


In fairness... this is what you said:

2. FFA first to engage with ks'ing leapfrogging still camping.

I have addressed the issues of training in my proposal. I have talked about how it would change the nature, type, and duration of camping. I have also admitted that some leapfrogging is a likely consequence.

It seems like you (intentionally or not) glossed over the ways in which my proposal addresses those things and simply declared that all the problems would still exist without debating the points.... or you were just referring to some other unmitigated FFA. In which case, there is a 4th alternative (and many others that other people might submit)

[matahari]

That's just it. Both guilds will believe they had aggro first. So an entire guild is going to get banned for Ks'ing even though they believe they aggro'd first. Or the other guild has someone un-guilded train the other guild.

I agree first to engage with no training ksing would be awesome. Both guilds are sitting with 5 giants in the way of the dragon. Both guilds know that if they pull the giants the other guild will take the dragon.

If adding rules to the first to engage works out. That would be great for the server. But you know there is going to be a ton more fighting than there is under this camp fest ruleset of who gets the mob.

I like rotation/ calendar system : ) but i'm a carebear. Every other system will have a ton of fighting.

Like a dev said. 80people will sit on the dragon spawn in 3 or 4 diff guilds. Ban 3 of the 4 guilds for a month for trying to ks the impossible to know first to engage? Than after that dragon dies repeat in the next zone.

[Akame]

That's just it. Both guilds will believe they had aggro first. So an entire guild is going to get banned for Ks'ing even though they believe they aggro'd first. Or the other guild has someone un-guilded train the other guild.


That is very easily combated by taking regular screen shots of opposing guilds /who all commands

We did that in velious all of the time. (took screenshots of other guilds rosters to prove to gm's that the trainers were only temporarily removed).

[Aadill]

If no one could ever zone into fear except when it was at full pop, including CT, then I would be cool with what you suggest. CT spawning doesn't insta repop the whole zone does it? If it did, then your suggestion would be cool with me, but not as the published server rule... just as an agreement between the guilds that raid CT.

You plan just plain doesn't address what happens if the zone is 2/3 clear with 2 golems up when CT spawns, or 3/4 clear with no golems up.

You mention 100 members in Fear, "no reason not to" you say. Well, feel free to try it. You may get the first few CTs, but guilds that size collapse because they can't get loot fast enough to keep that many people happy and engaged. Guilds that raid with 25-40 people (less during some periods of EQ, more during POP) always advanced faster and were more cohesive because each member had a greater chance at getting loot, and the guild as a whole would get equipped and ready to move on to newer content faster.

All I am really saying is that there are downward pressures on guild and alliance size too. We'll see where the equilibrium is reached.

Sure when 2 or 3 guilds are in PoFear for the first time after this rule goes into effect there will be some kind of mexican stand-off as the guilds try to decide the best way to handle it. Should they just setup near CT and wait for the other guilds to kill all the mobs? If they do that, will the other guilds continue to kill mobs? Will the guild/raid leaders try to talk to each other and agree to a joint raid? Will they random for a shot? I'm not sure exactly what strategies will be employed, BUT as long as no one is training each other, KSing each other, or calling a GM over an issue not related to training or KSing, I'm totally cool with whatever they decide.

I'm just trying to work through possibilties. The two planes are for the most part cleared upon repop by any group looking for planar drops and/or people waiting for raid mobs to spawn. There are occurrences of fear being fully populated, with golems, and no one is clearing. If CT popped, this is where the rules could have this clause just to help decide whether or not a guild is just going to sit there and AFK camp for 3-5 hours while the other guild clears and then hop on it, or if they go ahead and get to killing off the rest of fear quicker because they have first shot. There's still a huge race involved but it's not as long of an event.

[Bumamgar]

That's just it. Both guilds will believe they had aggro first. So an entire guild is going to get banned for Ks'ing even though they believe they aggro'd first.
What's wrong with this?

You throws your dice and you takes your chances...

If you don't like the odds, don't camp the spawn.

Problem solved.

[Dumesh Uhl'Belk]

That's just it. Both guilds will believe they had aggro first. So an entire guild is going to get banned for Ks'ing even though they believe they aggro'd first. how much do you trust your puller? are you willing to risk a month long ban if he is wrong?

Or the other guild has someone un-guilded train the other guild. That's why I suggested and account and IP ban. If you train with an unguilded alt on an different account that you are playing with an IP exemption (skirting the rules already) then you will effectively get both accounts banned.

Both guilds are sitting with 5 giants in the way of the dragon. Both guilds know that if they pull the giants the other guild will take the dragon. So, they have some decisions to make. Maybe they will race, maybe they will work together, maybe they will duel for the right to the kill, maybe they will roll dice. As long as they don't break the rules, I'm cool.

If adding rules to the first to engage works out. That would be great for the server.
I agree!

But you know there is going to be a ton more fighting than there is under this camp fest ruleset of who gets the mob. Only until the first half dozen or so bans get handed out. Then people will realize that the costs of fighting are way higher than the potential benefits. If by fighting you mean training and KSing, that is.

I like rotation/ calendar system : ) but i'm a carebear. GM enforced rotations have already been shot down. Barring that, you could maybe have a player run rotation, but good luck convincing all the guilds involved. I know it will be a hard sell with me and many others.

Every other system will have a ton of fighting. If, by "fighting", you mean KSing and training, then that is just a matter of the penalties being too light. If, by "fighting", you mean racing, then I would say there is a sizable number of players on this server that WANT "fighting".

Like a dev said. 80people will sit on the dragon spawn in 3 or 4 diff guilds. Ban 3 of the 4 guilds for a month for trying to ks the impossible to know first to engage? Than after that dragon dies repeat in the next zone.

Couple things... first to aggro is not impossible to determine. The players involved in the pull should be able to tell, and if they aren't sure, perhaps they will want to err on the side of caution, given the penalties of being wrong. As for after the fact, then GMs will know. It is recorded in the logs. If 3 other guilds, knowing the consequences, all go for a KS, then yes, ban them. If that happens, there most certainly will NOT be a repeat in the next zone, because there will only be one guild left to go after dragon #2. Furthermore, one month later when the other 3 guilds come back from their ban, they probably be less likely to try KSing again.

[Aadill]

I don't think I'd like to play a game in where the consequences of one person's action, and their belief that they are right, will remove me from the game for a month. Perhaps the addition of code with a fake DT shout by the mob that would say who had first agro *would* be appropriate to clear up confusion, otherwise it's just going to be more GM involvement or everyone 'standing down' as one guild gets their way, leading to absolutely zero competition due to the fear of having no way to play for a month.

[Dumesh Uhl'Belk]

I'm just trying to work through possibilties. The two planes are for the most part cleared upon repop by any group looking for planar drops and/or people waiting for raid mobs to spawn. There are occurrences of fear being fully populated, with golems, and no one is clearing. If CT popped, this is where the rules could have this clause just to help decide whether or not a guild is just going to sit there and AFK camp for 3-5 hours while the other guild clears and then hop on it, or if they go ahead and get to killing off the rest of fear quicker because they have first shot. There's still a huge race involved but it's not as long of an event.

Cool, I agree that it's prudent that we try to think through the scenarios and what the player incentives are.

I don't think there is much incentive for guild Y to sit mostly afk in PoFear for 3 hours while guild Z is busy killing mobs so that Y can pounce on CT as soon as Z is done. Firstly, why would the players of guild Y want to sit still doing nothing for 3 hours when they could be playing the game? Secondly, why would Z kill off the last mobs while they themselves were out of position to make a play on pulling CT? Nah, I think both guilds would be killing off mobs. Their raid leaders should probably be talking to each other. They will have some choices to make as the zone becomes nearly cleared, but that will make the whole situation a lot more fun and interesting... as long as both sides abide by the rules, which is why the penalties are harsh.

Yes, this absolutely makes it possible that one or more guilds will end up putting in an hour or more of clearing planar mobs and not end up getting the shot on CT. That is a risk, but it is a risk that those guilds will take knowingly. They could always choose to leave the plane. They could choose to bargain for a random or duel to settle first attempt rights before or after the plane is cleared. There are many options, but one thing that absolutely will not be an option is the kind of mostly afk camping for days that happens now.

[Dumesh Uhl'Belk]

I don't think I'd like to play a game in where the consequences of one person's action, and their belief that they are right, will remove me from the game for a month. Perhaps the addition of code with a fake DT shout by the mob that would say who had first agro *would* be appropriate to clear up confusion, otherwise it's just going to be more GM involvement or everyone 'standing down' as one guild gets their way, leading to absolutely zero competition due to the fear of having no way to play for a month.

A shout or even a say message on first aggro is not a bad idea at all. I like it a lot. In fact, devs, consider this an official request for a new feature. Many mobs already had this in classic... the whole "You've ruined your own lands. You'll not ruin mine!" thing. Just make sure there is such a message for all raid targets and that it references the name of the player with first aggro.

In the absence of that, each guild better recruit or train a good pull team and have spotters that can call off the dogs if their guild didn't get the first aggro. That puts the onus on the players to pay attention and develop skill, which imo, is always a good thing. If you as a individual in guild Y don't trust that your guild really did get the first aggro, I say just don't participate in the fight, and therefore avoid the ban. I wasn't advocating banning all members of a guild based on the actions of a portion of the guild.

[Deric]

A shout or even a say message on first aggro is not a bad idea at all. I like it a lot. In fact, devs, consider this an official request for a new feature. Many mobs already had this in classic... the whole "You've ruined your own lands. You'll not ruin mine!" thing. Just make sure there is such a message for all raid targets and that it references the name of the player with first aggro.

This would indeed alleviate challenges to who had "first aggro." Definitely support implementing this.

[Akame]

/bump

I really believe this deserves a bit more limelight, there seems to be very few rage style disagreements against Dumesh's suggestion. I think it has a lot of merit and should be encouraged to be solidified and drafted up officially and put into place!

[Aadill]

As of right now, I would agree upon a motion to make the proposal, draft, and discuss this as a possibility. Enacting this ruleset without giving proper consideration to others first may be detrimental.

[guineapig]

A shout or even a say message on first aggro is not a bad idea at all. I like it a lot. In fact, devs, consider this an official request for a new feature. Many mobs already had this in classic... the whole "You've ruined your own lands. You'll not ruin mine!" thing. Just make sure there is such a message for all raid targets and that it references the name of the player with first aggro.



First to hail the raid boss. Easy enough, everyone would also be able to see it.
Once everyone sees who hailed it first, the other guilds have to back off.

Of course this will most likely require a Monk, SK, Necro (or sacrificial ranger perhaps? JK :D), otherwise you would see raid wiping from being too close to the spawn location of the mob.

(That being said, I'm so against all this camping BS.)

[Dumesh Uhl'Belk]

First to hail the raid boss. Easy enough, everyone would also be able to see it.

Hails can be faked.

put

/say Hail! Cazic Thule.

in a hotkey, spam that when you see him spawn, no need to target him or be in range.

But hey, at least we are talking about the details now. I'm glad a number of people seem to like the basic idea.

[G13]

Ektar, this was my major concern as well, and the primary problem with FFA regardless if all of the guilds are trying to abide by player-driven rules.

This is what people do not seem to understand

FFA would change nothing. Both guilds would just sit on the spawn waiting for him to pop. Camping would get worse. Not better.

Coding the mob to say "I was hit by so and so guild first" is not classic, and what does that really mean anyways? He randomly attacked someone? Nobody is going to accept mob rights under those conditions. Nobody.

People need to accept that the Everquest raid system is horribly flawed and find a compromise that is competitive, but fair.

Why not just make everything pop at the same time once a week? Then DA would get one and IB would too, the rest of the raid mobs would be open too, as DA and IB would be occupied with their respective raid mob, so a guild like Divinity could try some harder mobs. If Divinity is unable to, DA or IB (or anyone) could go in later and get the unkilled raid mobs. This means DA and IB could still get a raid mob a week, if not 2 or even 3.

Any guild with half a brain would pick Vox. So everyone would be fighting over Vox.

[rioisk]

I used to be a little butthurt about the situation but in all reality I have better things to do then to camp 24 hours a day for gear in an emulated game from 10 years ago. I'll just wait until there is more raid content and all the current shit is outdated.

[gruumsh]

I lost 2 jobs due to camping CT for his drops! Epic!!

[nicemace]

FFA just makes more work for GMs, not less.

The only way FFA would work is if there was no GM involvement, which means training, KSing and everything goes. Then it would just be anarchy and shit. Hence why FFA does not work. I wouldnt even care about playing my main, i'd just play a trainer/raid killer all day.

Everything will just be 'i agro'd him first hes ours' , 'nuh uh we did' and a GM has to come waste their time. It would happen every single kill.


I think it should be rot with 1 hour engage timer. Some kind of organisation but still plenty of oppotunity to take other guilds spawns (see: midnight spawns of mobs n shit).

[bullet]

Cut respawn timers by 50%

Needz moar guild drama asap!

[Bumamgar]

Everything will just be 'i agro'd him first hes ours' , 'nuh uh we did' and a GM has to come waste their time. It would happen every single kill.Every single kill till a guild gets disbanded :eek:

A simple three strikes rule solves this, imho. First to engage gets the spawn. If a GM gets called/involved, they check aggro logs. If they find that the guild who was first to aggro didn't get the kill, the following happens:
1st offense - Loot removed and awarded to the first to aggro guild, warning noted against the offending guild
2nd offense - Loot removed and awarded to the first to aggro guild, offending guild suspended for 10 days (so they miss the next spawn cycle)
3rd offense - Loot removed and awarded to the first to aggro guild, offending guild disbanded.

Pretty simple and cut and dry, easy to enforce. All it takes is for a guild or two to get disbanded and I suspect the rest will figure out a way to play nice :D

Just my thoughts on the subject...

[nicemace]

people cant know if they were the first tho. it looks like youre the first easy as.

too much gray area with too big punishment for said gray area.

and this is what im saying.... you wanna cut GM involvement not increase it.

[Uaellaen]

Every single kill till a guild gets disbanded :eek:

A simple three strikes rule solves this, imho. First to engage gets the spawn. If a GM gets called/involved, they check aggro logs. If they find that the guild who was first to aggro didn't get the kill, the following happens:
1st offense - Loot removed and awarded to the first to aggro guild, warning noted against the offending guild
2nd offense - Loot removed and awarded to the first to aggro guild, offending guild suspended for 10 days (so they miss the next spawn cycle)
3rd offense - Loot removed and awarded to the first to aggro guild, offending guild disbanded.

Pretty simple and cut and dry, easy to enforce. All it takes is for a guild or two to get disbanded and I suspect the rest will figure out a way to play nice :D

Just my thoughts on the subject...

sounds good to me :p

[logiktrip]

I remember very clearly having the two top guilds on Terris at the time being banished from Ssra for just the kind of infighting that happens with FFA. Neither guild could zone in for an amount of time (at the risk of disbandment) because we had a disagreement that resulted in two guilds attacking and killing the same NPC - and the GM's had to take time out of their day to deal with it. We (the two guilds) were at each others throats constantly - nitpicking rules like first year law students to find any loophole that we could.

What it ultimately came down to was wasted time for the staff. It was easier to use this as a deterrent than to try and implement rules for the server to live by...that is not their job. Had there been no petitions that day I am very positive that the result would have been much different.

The plus side of this penalty? Guilds behind us got their first shots at NPC's they had never seen before.

We need to work out a situation amongst ourselves as players as to what is acceptable behavior. The staff doesn't want to deal with it, and they shouldn't have to. Wrei posted either in this thread or a previous one on the same topic that both DA and IB have gone "full retard" and that is a very hard sentiment to argue with -- the current state of the raid game is stupid and there are very few who would argue with that.

Whatever solution that is eventually worked out needs to be player mandated and open to enough interpretation that it doesn't exclude PUG raids or up and coming raiding guilds. I think everyone agrees that the current situation simply cannot continue if we want to have a healthy atmosphere leading up to one of the best raid expansions ever created (Velious).

Also without fail, whatever ruleset is decided upon, there will be abuse of some mechanic - but public perception is a powerful thing. We have a community that is still small enough that it should be able to self regulate. It must scale, and it must be agreed upon by the population of the server as fair. I honestly feel bad for guilds that I know have the capability to down some of these bosses but will literally never have a chance due to what amounts to greed and a giant ball of hate that a few guilds have for one another.

I never played on Stormhammer, but I seem to remember a "Tier" system being used with guilds there. Can someone shed some light on how that worked, as well as both sides of the issue?

I look forward to the raiding in Velious, however with the current raiding rule set this "Golden Age" will never come to pass.

[HeallunRumblebelly]

That is definitely a viable solution. Sometimes agro is random, though. You'd really have to hope to be in range to attack, taunt, or shoot a bow to ensure first agro otherwise you'll be super mad when some afk dude happens to grab agro first. Other than that it would at least add the argument of "we aggroed first so step down till we win or lose." I assume a zonewide shout would be the easiest way to also catch it in logs if anyone chose to take an issue to a GM.

We did this on progression. First tag got kill rights. We ended up with 12 bards playing the aoe dot song on 1/3rd second intervals til Trakanon spawned.

By the way--is Sky out yet? Kunark on the horizon? I'm kind of on a break :( Doing some evil WoW arenas :P

[Akame]

Hails can be faked.

put

/say Hail! Cazic Thule.

in a hotkey, spam that when you see him spawn, no need to target him or be in range.

But hey, at least we are talking about the details now. I'm glad a number of people seem to like the basic idea.

I definitely like it, not sure how to keep it from being faked though, but keep talkin!

[Erasong]

bumping this. needs more debating. hopefully people havent given up on a solution

[Akame]

You know I think the thing is no one really disagrees which is why there is so little chatter.

[astarothel]

You know I think the thing is no one really disagrees which is why there is so little chatter.

No, you would be entirely too presumptuous with that belief.

FFA/FTA does not address other situations regarding raiding -- specifically mass raid target camping, and in many cases like camping will only exacerbate the situation further.

[Akame]

No, you would be entirely too presumptuous with that belief.

FFA/FTA does not address other situations regarding raiding -- specifically mass raid target camping, and in many cases like camping will only exacerbate the situation further.

Yes and no. With no first in force number they could potentially lower the number of people in the zone camping down to whatever can survive until the raid get's there. Remember they have 15 minutes to engage or they loose rights to it, no more half an hour setup, they have to have raid numbers online and ready to move.

Will it exacerbate the problem with camping Vox? Most likely, the dragons will probably be the hardest to kite and therefore the hardest to not camp, but lets be honest, there is jack in the game for level 50's to do right now until Kunark, I don't think you can fully stop camping right now even if you tried.

It's not a huge shift from the current raid rules, it simply removes the first in force requirement so 15 people do not HAVE TO camp in the zone, with the requirement gone the amount of camping is up to the individual guild and player's preference.

However it does create a set of raid rules that can stay standing up until and through any future content without breaking any play nice rules and forcing chunks of guilds to camp a zone.

[astarothel]

It doesn't solve camping.

Your statement there is nothing for everyone with a level 50 to do until Kunark is a fallacy of accident. If it was true, there would be much less issue over camping to begin with.

The claim FFA isn't a huge shift is incorrect when multiple groups present with minimum to engage are /randoming off right now. A dynamic rotation rather than /randoming for the target is equally as close, if not closer to that which is currently in place, and addresses the camping issue.

[Dumesh Uhl'Belk]

There are three ways in which it addresses camping.

First, since no one has a guaranteed shot at the mob, There is no more semi-afk camping. If eyeballs are not on the screen, you will lose. This means no AFK camping.

Second, since I proposed changing the variance on mobs form +/- 48 hours to +0-12 hours, each mob will only have a 12 hour window. So, if you have proper intel, you would never camp a mob for more than 12 hours. This isn't an elimination of camping, but 12 hours is better than 4 days.... an 87.5% reduction in the maximum camp length.

Third, since the punishment I proposed for KSing is so harsh, some will chose not to stay and camp once they see that 1 or 2 guilds are already there. As the number of guilds at the target increases, the decreasing chance that they will get first aggro will be outweighed by the increasing chance that they will fuck it up and get banned.

The amount, degree, and nature of camping would most certainly be altered by my proposal. Furthermore, as the number of targets increase, the system only gets better.