|
|
|
|
#1
06-25-2010, 11:32 AM
|
|||
|
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.
__________________
More famous than Jesus and better dressed than Santa Claus; wouldn't be seen dead on a cross and have never been caught up a chimney. So I deserve your money more | ||
|
|
|||
|
#2
06-25-2010, 12:07 PM
|
|||
|
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. | ||
|
|
|||
 |
|
|
Hybrid Mode
