Project 1999

Go Back   Project 1999 > Blue Community > Blue Server Chat

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 07-30-2010, 05:19 PM
fwaits fwaits is offline
Aviak


Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Folsom, CA
Posts: 85
Send a message via MSN to fwaits
Default

On Drinal, if there was not an agreement between competing guilds for a zone/target, the generally accepted/enforced policy was first in zone with sufficient minimum raid force had rights. This was generally honored and worked fairly well. There are obviously details/specifics of this such as how many people is sufficient for the zone/mob in question, how long does that claim last (1 try, given time interval, etc), and such, but that's the general policy that was in place for the time I was around. (Up through GoD/OoW timeframe)
  #2  
Old 07-30-2010, 05:27 PM
Chicka Chicka is offline
Kobold


Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 156
Default

First to engage means just that. Some encounters are regarded as multi-mob (e.g. NTOV) so FTE for the entire encounter is based on FTE the first mob. Clearing trash is not engaging the mob. There is no such thing as "leapfrog" unless the encounter has been engaged by guild A and guild B engages the next mob in the encounter.

Two rules (GM enforced): No training, no ksing. As has been previously mentioned the ks rule often wasn't enforced due to practicality, unless it was a common occurrence and could be predicted. The reality is most guilds realize that acting like asshats will get the same asshattery back at them (probably from multiple guilds on this server) - the net result for those guilds is a much harder time, more wipes, and less loot. It doesn't make sense in the end.

Whatever the rules turn into, please, please, do not have anything that gives precedence to who was in zone first - that would be poopsock all over again.
__________________
--

Quote:
Originally Posted by Aeolwind View Post
I <3 detriment.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tronjer View Post
10 years ago I split up as well with my ex gf over EQ. Didn't even realize her move out, as I was raiding at this time.
  #3  
Old 07-30-2010, 07:27 PM
Noleafclover Noleafclover is offline
Sarnak


Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 295
Default

Off-topic, sounds like you've got some sort of FFA anti-camping rules for before the mob spawns. AND I LOVE IT! Tracking/killing'd be awesome.

A solution to leapfrogging/ksing would be to use timers still, but only after the boss spawns. 15 claims, second has to have 15 to call time. Change the timer length for CT or any planar boss while trash is up to 1:30 or 2 hours to allow for clearing.
__________________
Accersitus Mage
Ennui Monk
Vita mid 40s Cleric
  #4  
Old 07-30-2010, 08:07 PM
Yukkers Yukkers is offline
Kobold


Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 121
Default

They made instances...
  #5  
Old 07-30-2010, 08:15 PM
Allizia Allizia is offline
Sarnak


Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Texas
Posts: 234
Default

In my experience rulings were made mostly on a "how do I get out of this with the least amount of drama" perspective from the GM's. As the top guild we were pretty much always ruled against regardless of the situation simple because another farm kill for us was less of a loss then an important or step up kill for an up and coming guild

It eventually got bad enough that a forced rotation was created
  #6  
Old 07-30-2010, 08:30 PM
Troy Troy is offline
Sarnak


Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 418
Default

Like has been posted, officially the GM policy only considered single mobs at a time so you could leapfrog to your heart's content and GM's couldn't/shouldn't have done anything about it.
  #7  
Old 07-30-2010, 08:34 PM
rioisk rioisk is offline
Sarnak


Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: RI
Posts: 271
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogean [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
So I'm curious.

People who played live back in the day, on servers that did NOT have forced raid mob rotations, how did the GM's there handle a situation where Guild A is clearing trash towards a raid boss and is completely leapfrogged by Guild B which rushes to engage the mob when Guild A sits down to med. Obviously this is one large reason we are hesitant to go with a first to engage policy, but I'm curious to hear the answers and suggestions.

Also keep in mind there may frequently be situations where two guilds start clearing at the same time, leapfrogging eachother.
I like that you're expressing public interest in this. Would you care to share whether new raid rules are being developed?
  #8  
Old 07-30-2010, 10:51 PM
Bardzilla Bardzilla is offline
Large Rat


Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 9
Default

GM's rule pretty much was whoever got the loot from dps, got the loot. Unless the GM witnessed something himself. The "player rules" (first come first serve) > all, and while there was some guilds that exceeded the player made expectations, those guilds were well known, and got the same respect they showed.
It worked well the race was fun, when you won, and sucked when you lost, just like any competition. And sometimes you would loose the race, but the guild would wipe from racing and you'd win the war.
  #9  
Old 07-31-2010, 08:00 AM
eqdruid76 eqdruid76 is offline
Banned


Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 342
Default

There is only one solution that will even come close to working. And it's one you definitely don't want to do.

Spawn the raid mob manually, flag it as unkillable. Stand there until a raid force is assembled. At 15 players, it's their mob. When the poopsockers log on top of the mob, warp them out. When the next guild zones in to try to leapfrog, send them packing. When the first raid force nears the boss, flag it as killable.

This is the only way to ensure fairness among a playerbase of exploiters, kill-stealers, and douchebags. It's not the least bit classic, but neither is the attitude of the playerbase. It's akin to standing over a group of kids to make sure they don't hurt each other on the playground. But that's what they are; a bunch of kids. This crew can't handle fair-play or even friendly competition. They WANT to piss off their rivals. And they'll do it any way they can. And they get a huge thrill out of getting away with it.

Aye, you have much better things to do than babysit every raid kill on your server. Although, would it be any less time-consuming than dealing with the shit that's happening now on raid kills? You've already got one full-time babysitter in EC, and that's been effective. Might be something to think about. People still get their phat lewtz, and it could still be random...as random as you want it to be.
  #10  
Old 07-31-2010, 08:17 AM
Allizia Allizia is offline
Sarnak


Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Texas
Posts: 234
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by eqdruid76 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
This is the only way to ensure fairness among a playerbase of exploiters, kill-stealers, and douchebags. It's not the least bit classic, but neither is the attitude of the playerbase. It's akin to standing over a group of kids to make sure they don't hurt each other on the playground. But that's what they are; a bunch of kids. This crew can't handle fair-play or even friendly competition. They WANT to piss off their rivals. And they'll do it any way they can. And they get a huge thrill out of getting away with it.
Pretty much dead on, people on P99 don't want to compete against anything but each other. I started on a PvP server and there was actually more respect for each other there. It's amazing that the raiding community has actually devolved and the younger crowd was actually more mature and respectful then the same crowd 10 years later.
Closed Thread

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:57 PM.


Everquest is a registered trademark of Daybreak Game Company LLC.
Project 1999 is not associated or affiliated in any way with Daybreak Game Company LLC.
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.