Raid Changes

[Supreme]

just do what WOW did with plat.

Give players a 30 min respawn on all bosses and dilute the encounters/loot to the point that no one cares who or when a boss is killed.

[NergalTD]

How many people do you guys have exactly in your two guilds???

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

Dunno how many people we're talking about...I'm not in either guild. It's simple common sense though. If there were enough high-end targets to go around, there wouldn't be conflict over them.

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

Partial agreement...it's not entirely about demand.

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

Complete agreement. However, whether we agree with them or not, the Devs feel this issue is bad enough that they have to address it. There's going to be peace in the sandbox even if they have to wield a hammer to do it. I don't necessarily think the current solution is good, or ulimately viable long term...but I certianly understand why they've gone down this road.

I think spawn timer variance can be an answer, but the variance has to be sufficiently large that it effectively discourages spawn camping. The definition of 'sufficiently large' is open to community debate...

[karsten]

I too am happy to see that Nilbog A: ultimately don't think much of a rotation system and B: is genuinely searching for solutions to remedy the issue in a manner that involves the last amount of their involvement. I'm also happy that he's willing to discuss it with both sides of the issue instead of just talking with one side and then handing rules down from on high and threatening people with bans if they don't stick to it.

A spawn time variance is a WAY better system than what we have now, and I'm all for it. Wenai's suggestion of allowing for a 48 hour variance is a solid amount of time assuming that we'll still get the same number of pops say, in a four week period, which I think he has indicated will still be the case.

The danger of a guild just camping something for 48 hours or even 96 is a real one -- given that I've seen trancscendence already camp something for 14+ hours. This could be remedied with a decision regarding engagement, and a variance on the spawn timer should still allow for the more organized guild to be "ready" sooner than the unorganized one, regardless of who had, say, 12 people there first.

If the rule was who is first to engage, given a variable spawn timer, the feedback i've gotten from GMs that i've talked to is that it'd be a pain in the ass to figure out, and even more of a pain in the ass to enforce -- I can follow that. Thus, my proposal is to have a variable spawn timer, and have whoever gets the xp gets the kill, as long as that force had at least 12 people inzone for dragons and 18 inzone for gods.

Or, and I'm a big fan of this: let's fucking guildwar. IB has better gear, Transc has more players -- let's do it up

[Hasbinbad]

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

A spawn time variance is a WAY better system than what we have now, and I'm all for it.

Gotta disagree with you here good buddy, I think you're looking at this situation through rose-tinted glasses.

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

The danger of a guild just camping something for 48 hours or even 96 is a real one.

This is exactly the problem. They *will* do this, and we all know it.

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

Thus, my proposal is to have a variable spawn timer, and have whoever gets the xp gets the kill, as long as that force had at least 12 people inzone for dragons and 18 inzone for gods.

This sounds better than a straight rotation, but I still think it is unfair because obviously if both guilds had 12 or 18 in the zone, the truth is that IB is better geared out and would probably be able to more effectively assemble a KS group than Trans. This specifically is the type of unfairness I think the GM's are trying to avoid, whether we agree with it or not.

[Greldor]

I do not understand how a 120 timer could be enforced or tracked outside of a GM babysitter. Which is, again, not what anyone wants.

I think that variable spawn times can help.

I definatly think that there is absolutely nothing that can be done to prevent determined individuals from exploiting or bending the rules of whatever system you all decide to implement.

Let's be realistic here, if you do not want to babysit, then implement whatever variable spawn rates you would like and punish anyone who killsteals a mob under a FFA/first hit policy.

The above solution leaves any GM interaction to a minimum and allows them to police most situations by reviewing logs.

edit: Furthermore, for all those claiming this or that is unfair, I think it is more unfair to the project for us to be involving GMs in our guild politics when it is already clear that only one raid can loot the mob.

[Wonton]

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

I do not understand how a 120 timer could be enforced or tracked outside of a GM babysitter. Which is, again, not what anyone wants.

This is true. but do GMs really wanna volunteer for that?

[Pikle]

I'm pretty new on this server but have tons of EQ and MMO experience. So far I've noticed a lot of people complaining about high end loot often. I understand this, EQ is a gear based game and rightly so. Our guild isn't even close to being able to raid anything other than upper guk and Najena, but I will put in my 2 cents.

So far I feel that the variance is the by far the best option. As I remember on our live server (The Rathe) later on we ended up having a rotation and forums specifically for raid mobs. Early on it was all about who got there first and who engaged first. If a guild rushed it and started the fight early then wiped, the other guild would come in behind them and mop up. Sometimes they would be nice and allow or help the other guild to CR and try again. But of course that comes down to guild management.

The issue of camping a spawn is the same everywhere you go. I have seen people fight over the mobs at the entrance of guk, so I can't imagine why this wouldn't happen everywhere you go. Now here's logically how it will go down. Most of the upper guilds (right now there may only be 2 capable of raiding but this will change in the following month or so) will have a man or two in the zone waiting to see if something will spawn, If a raid guild really wants to keep 15 people there to make sure they get CT or whoever when they spawn, that's great for them. That allows the rest of us to get other camps that would normally not be open. How often do lvl 50's come into any zone, whether it be Najena, CT or Sola and just own whatever they want when they want. SO having 15 of them waiting deep in solb or in fear helps out some of the little guys who are still working their way up. If a guild could honestly put 15 people at each raid mob and wait for them to spawn, then by all means go ahead. But don't just have 15 people in Solb farming whatever, you need to have them ready to engage Naggy or clearing the FG's for it to be considered your camp. If you have 1 rogue or monk sitting deep inside and the rest of your crew camping king or stone spider, that doesn't count. If you have a raid force ready to take down a mob when it spawns, it's yours. If another guild is doing the same thing, then it's a battle. This is a lot of what old EQ was all about, that innate competition between guilds to get there first and to kill the Dragon/God. I knew guilds that would recruit a few extra wizards just so they could mobilize and KS anyone. This method does have it's drawbacks but a guild should be able to mobilize quickly to make sure they can get mobs too. Once Hate, Sky and Kunark open up this won't be as big of an issues, although I assume there will be more guilds capable of taking those zones.

Our new guild Gothic Circle is going to be nice and polite about mobs and camps. So I suggest we all work together to help each other out or it's going to get real dirty and the top guilds will end up getting banned from fighting over loot.

ALSO guild wars aren't a bad option, was in many of them in live and it's amazing. I suggest if you have never been in one, start one [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.] I do say if 2 guilds are giving the GM's trouble they should put them at guild war, this clears up all the problems of camping. Only 1 guild can hold a zone at any given time. If you are at war with each other you aren't hanging out in Lguk or Fear together you are killing each other (unless you are a pansy).

Camps and mobs should be simple, I think the variance of the spawn time should solve a lot of the issues. I think someone did bring up a valid point about server down time, it was awesome when you could get on right when the servers came back up in live and head straight for whatever mob you wanted. It really was a great way to level the playing field.

[Hasbinbad]

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

1. If you see a guild with 15+ people camped in a zone waiting on a spawn, LET THEM EFFING HAVE IT OR WIPE! They can't camp everything at once (see point 2).

I like your spirit, and I think we can all agree. The problem is that trans showed up for a dragon 14 hours early.

They are a zerg guild. If they want to have a rotation of 15 people in a zone at any given time, they have the numbers to do so. What is to stop them from killing nagafen and then leaving 15 people in the zone for a week until he spawns again?

The fact that this is not probable has nothing to do with the fact that it is possible. If it is possible and the system allows it, there is nothing to stop them from doing so. If there is nothing to stop them, there is no reason they shouldn't, and then this becomes a goal. If it happens, no other guild on the server would get a shot at any mob they decide to lock down, ever.

I cannot see how anyone feels this is the best solution.

[Dartagnan]

Spawn variance is not the solution. If you intend for this server to be classic then you need to stick with a classic structure.

Spawn variance is not classic. Dump it.

[Fanwen]

Spawn Variation is not going to work. There is going to be camping for long periods of time until the mob spawns. As stated by other Trans will do it. If you want it that way then i think you only hurting yourselves.

You claim they are a zerg guild. maybe they are maybe they arent. The fact is they have numbers and can perma camp anything so you will never get a spawn. So would you rather do variable spawns or a rotation so you can get a spawn.

Or is there another idea out there to solve this issue? I personally think the rotation is by far the easiest and most fair for both parties. It worked on Emarr for years. As we open up new content it will only get better as there will be many more targets to focus on.

This is a short term problem as we attempt to release new content and not have to continue to deal with conflicts between these two guilds because they cant get along.