FTE Shouts: Rethinking Their Mechanics and Issue

[Splorf22]

An idea I had previously, which no one really liked but I could never figure out why, is that whichever guild can get a player summoned first has the engage. Certainly for Trakanon it would work well I would think. And there can be no doubts in the logs.

[YendorLootmonkey]

Originally Posted by Splorf22 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

An idea I had previously, which no one really liked but I could never figure out why, is that whichever guild can get a player summoned first has the engage. Certainly for Trakanon it would work well I would think. And there can be no doubts in the logs.

1) Have someone nearby just above low HP aggro range.
2) Wait for other guild to get mob to 96%
3) Summonee nukes himself into low HP aggro to get summoned.

[Splorf22]

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

1) Have someone nearby just above low HP aggro range.
2) Wait for other guild to get mob to 96%
3) Summonee nukes himself into low HP aggro to get summoned.

It's a reasonable counterargument, Yendor, although I think it's not as easy as it sounds. I suppose with mallets and such you could consider it 'FTE at 97%' but the big point is all this DA tanking/stalling BS goes away.

[YendorLootmonkey]

Originally Posted by Splorf22 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

but the big point is all this DA tanking/stalling BS goes away.

What are the holes in Xasten's "first to commit" idea we're not seeing?

[Splorf22]

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

What are the holes in Xasten's "first to commit" idea we're not seeing?

Well the obvious one is that summoning and the appropriate messages are already coded in, while multiple FTE shouts are not, and may require more coding server side than the simple scripts Nilbog is talking about.

But of course I think Xasten has a reasonable idea as well.