Is it that hard to have a raid solution? Here - E . Z .

[Widan]

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

The EZ solution would be FFA with no camping. Stay out of a zone before a mob spawns, once it spawns the first to engage with force gets it. However this is too easy a solution / too favorable to IB.

I've already explained why this will not work in another thread. Randomization of spawn times, as well as guaranteeing a raid mob for a certain amount of time to the first guild to claim it are both imperative to make sure that all guilds, especially ones not familiar with the encounter and ones that raid at times that do not coincide with spawn times, have an equal opportunity to compete in the high end raid game, provided they put in the time.

[Onadan]

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

and what if both guilds had 15 people in the zone at the earliest possible spawn point?

..and taking that to the ultimate end, what happens if both guilds leave 15 people in the zone to camp for a week after the target dies? so that they both have an "equal" claim on the mob?

The end result is back to square one. We have a situation like the one that precipitated all this. This is why some form of rotation, some form of agreed-upon competition, or FFA/KS are the only possible solutions.

Really you can get 30 people to login at the EXACT same time? If a / shows your guild w/ 15 in zone and the other guild has a couple slow zoners and only gets 13 people in, I guess you win w/ 15, a screenshot and log from everyone.

[Dartagnan]

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

I've already explained why this will not work in another thread. Randomization of spawn times, as well as guaranteeing a raid mob for a certain amount of time to the first guild to claim it are both imperative to make sure that all guilds, especially ones not familiar with the encounter and ones that raid at times that do not coincide with spawn times, have an equal opportunity to compete in the high end raid game, provided they put in the time.

It's not imperative. Somehow servers on classic survived. Maybe it will be imperative in 2012, but not now.

[Widan]

It's imperative if you want the server to keep increasing in population. This isn't live, its an emu. People are already getting turned off because of the high end circle jerk they see all over the forums and in game.

[Pyrocat]

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

All I know is that somehow our server polices itself when it comes to camps. Raid encounters are no different imo.

Not really, I've seen people train my friends camping EE multiple times.

[Dartagnan]

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

It's imperative if you want the server to keep increasing in population. This isn't live, its an emu. People are already getting turned off because of the high end circle jerk they see all over the forums and in game.

And thus you hit my conspiracy theory...at least for Wenai [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Fairness is being exchanged for more people to play on. Screw over a minority to appease the majority.

That's it, I'm calling Al Sharpton.

[Dartagnan]

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

Not really, I've seen people train my friends camping EE multiple times.

Of course there are issues but overall there are cultural ways we handle camps. It's a built in way of handling EQ that we all learned back in 1999. You enter a zone and you shout camp check. You wait your turn for the camp, etc, etc.

[Widan]

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

Fairness is being exchanged for more people to play on. Screw over a minority to appease the majority.

Fairness is subjective. Personally, I'd much rather have the server adopt a rule set that encourages more people to play even if that causes some of the high end people to quit.

[Dartagnan]

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

Fairness is subjective. Personally, I'd much rather have the server adopt a rule set that encourages more people to play even if that causes some of the high end people to quit.

I understand.

But I'm still calling Al.

[Haynar]

I say the guilds work something out they can agree on.

Everytime there is a dispute, and GM must intervene, then mob is GM Killed, and they can try to work something out next spawn.

Eventually they will work it out.