Raid Changes

[Handull]

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

I've done some quick back-of-a-napkin probability calculations, and this scheme, in the long run if my math is correct, will not appreciably affect the number of pops per month of any given mob. Even if it did, I suggest that the one less Trak spawn a year might be worth it for fewer FTE bonanzas.

doesn't take any calculation to see that any chance to make the mob spawn later, with no chance to spawn sooner, will cause less spawns per unit time.

one solution is rogean should just change the variance code without telling anyone. (maybe tell nilbog, but dont tell the gms). change it so the windows are just a bit smaller than they are now, maybe even make the different targets have slightly different windows. it would take a while for people to catch on to the change, and in that time socking will be way down because it will just seem like random luck that mobs haven't been going super late in window lately. when people start to figure it out, change it again.

or we could, ya know, start to all get along. make an agreement not to sock b4 so many hours are left in the window, agree to just roll for a super late window mob rather than fight for fte, or think of some other solution that doesn't involve crying for rogean to fix the problem.

[Frieza_Prexus]

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

doesn't take any calculation to see that any chance to make the mob spawn later, with no chance to spawn sooner, will cause less spawns per unit time.

Obviously, this decreases the number of spawns in any given time period. My point is that the impact is negligible. Even if the impact were noteworthy, I submit that it would be worth it to lessen the amount of socking.

Originally Posted by SupaflyIRL

You're not understanding what I'm saying, every single extension's endpoint would be a known time which makes your solution "more of the same".

I understand you. My counter point is that each instance of socking becomes a gamble. Yes, it is true that strategic or staggered socking can and will occur. The point I am making is that this system lessens such occurrences. It is not "more of the same" it actually leads to "less of the same." The probability increasingly diminishes the efficacy of late window socks.

[Splorf22]

Xasten's scheme according to my back of the envelope calculation would be about a 3% reduction in spawns.

Why not do something simpler: 5 days after it is killed, every raid boss has a ~1%/hour chance to spawn. I'd have to do the math on what percentage would give us the same number of mobs, but it would totally eliminate poopsocking (there would be no rise in probability towards the end of the window) while being mathematically more elegant.

Of course none of this changes the problem that VARIANCE SUCKS DONKEY BALLS. I kind of agree with Alarti that Velious will help a lot, but it won't be the The Solution. Again, I think my solution of spawning all raid mobs every day at fixed times would a) be way more fun b) get way more people involved in the raid scene. But we've had this discussion, Rogean was going to implement some changes, and evidentially he lost interest. So the whole point is moot.

[SupaflyIRL]

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

I understand you. My counter point is that each instance of socking becomes a gamble. Yes, it is true that strategic or staggered socking can and will occur. The point I am making is that this system lessens such occurrences. It is not "more of the same" it actually leads to "less of the same." The probability increasingly diminishes the efficacy of late window socks.

day 0: mob dies

day 8: 10% left in window start socking

day 8: new window expires

day 9: 10% left in new window start socking

day 9: new window expires

Repeat until infinity or mob dies in same exact manner as they do now. This will only increase the importance of zerg recruiting to meet the new socking requirements as opposed to causing any kind of significant blow to the practice. Explain to me how multiple potential socking points is less of the same and not more of the same, since you yourself said this can continue indefinitely.

I understand you've invested yourself in this idea, but you're wrong and your numbers and theory are garbage.

[Frieza_Prexus]

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

I understand you've invested yourself in this idea, but you're wrong and your numbers and theory are garbage.

Oh, you wound me so deeply.

Under the current scheme, you can guarantee that if Trak has 5 hours left, you WILL see him within 5 hours. This motivates the sock. The ONLY question is if will you win the FTE lottery. Trak is NOT socked until the window nears completion because it is not worth it to the guilds involved to invest so many resources.

Under the proposed scheme, if the current window has 5 hours left, you are NOT guaranteed to see him within 5 hours. This forces a calculated gamble as to whether or not a guild should commit resources to socking

I submit, that such uncertainty will lead to fewer spawn camps. Even if it only reduces spawn camping by a small amount, it is still a reduction and thus my statements hold true. The question then becomes is the reduction in camping enough so as to make ~3% less Trak spawns a year worth it?

Do you alternatively submit that this scheme increases socking? Also, as time continues, the "end of the window" becomes increasingly smaller in regards to the overall window size.

If a mob had a 6 hour variance, it would always be an "end of window" scenario. If it had a 500 hour variance the "end of the window" scenario would be an extremely small proportion of the total window. Therefore, window extensions contribute to making the "end of the window" a smaller proportion of the total window. Ergo, a decrease in the impetus to sock.

[Sizzle]

Looking for Skope's input on this situation. >.>

[Wiwi]

How long has variance been instituted?

Let's say Rogean became a vegan one day and suddenly decided to remove the variance for just one month. How bad would things be in comparison to how things run now?

If this is answered by another thread, please link for me.

[Splorf22]

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

How long has variance been instituted?

Let's say Rogean became a vegan one day and suddenly decided to remove the variance for just one month. How bad would things be in comparison to how things run now?

If this is answered by another thread, please link for me.

What would happen is everyone and their brother would sit on the spawn point spamming tab/autoattack. When the boss spawned, no one would know who had FTE, and every boss kill would require a petition for the GM to check.

HOPEFULLY after about a month of this idiocy everyone would work out a rotation, but I doubt it.

TBH this doesn't sound worse than now when 50% of the time the GMs have to check anyway.

BTW Xasten, I don't think poopsocking is the primary problem with the raid scene currently. The primary problem is that 80% of the population has no interest in it owning to the batphone/tracking required even when things are working 'well' as you would say. Any solution to the raid scene needs to address the primary problem first; if it makes sense it will fix poopsocking as well.

[Hugmukk]

Sounds like your just delaying the spawn in which case more poop socking will entail, spawn variance was a good idea but has caused other issues. It should be elliminated. Create a "simulated crash" I think that's the best option.

[Elements]

How's about a rotation only for very late window spawns. If mob has < 6 hrs in window next guild in rotation gets first shot but if you wipe its FTE. TMO is still going to get the vast majority of spawns but the entire server can be spared FTE socking.

Also who evers turn it is in the rotation would have say 10 minutes to engage or it becomes FFA.