First in Force.

[Morlaeth]

Not true, FIF was definitely a (edit: player rule) rule in 2010. You'd need 15 players in the vicinity of the spawn.

I remember being in DA in Fear hanging out near CT's spawn with 15 members which guaranteed we had first crack at CT.

[maestrom]

Originally Posted by am0n [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I like your idea.

Unfortunately, as you said, the server staff, who don't play on the server, like things how they are. And the people who are friendly with the server staff also likes things how they are, because they get most of the kills and aren't particularly interested in seeing smaller guilds get in on the fun.

In the end, it probably will be harder to police, since a guild can have multiple forces, claiming multiple spawns, and just argue that at the time they were asked in Zone A which spawn they were claiming, they claimed the spawn in Zone A. But five minutes later, when asked in Zone B, they changed their plans and claimed the target in Zone B.

What it comes down to is shitheads will be shitheads when it comes to pixels.

The rule says a guild or alliance can claim ONE target. The idea is to force guilds to only claim one target at a time. If a guild is claiming tormax, they cannot also claim Trak.

The whole point of this is to attach a cost to raiding for top guilds. A guild could not disengage from kael when Sev pops, go kill sev, and then come back and expect to have a shot at Tormax. They would have to decide that they want to give up their shot at Tormax in order to kill Sev.

[Samoht]

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

Under this rule, if you leapfrog, you get spanked.

But how do you prove a leapfrog? More frapsquest and petitionquest? It's not a change for the better.

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

I guess "give them everything because they'll break the rules if they don't get what they want" isn't a satisfying solution for me, which lead me to write this up.

The only thing you're proposing here is to change the rule that they're breaking. You haven't proposed anything to keep them from breaking it. It certainly won't make things any easier on the staff.

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

FIF was never the rule here. It has always been FTE (aside from rotations). The reason FTE has evolved into the silliness it is now is 5-6 raid forces would camp on top of spawns and kill him within seconds. This wouldn't happen with FIF because only the guild with the claim would have a right to kill the target.

The only thing that has ever helped to alleviate the "silliness" (your words) on this server was the class system with the class R lockouts. Still, class C was allowed to shit all over each other at will on their own days. But they at least chose to raid that way.

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

FIF moves the fixation of a right to kill a mob from the moment is engaged to the moment a raid force arrives in the zone.

You still haven't defined what a capable force is in any satisfactory manner. I asked if you were going to assign values to each target, and you actually dodged the question. Your original suggestion would only allow the number to go up and would never address over-gearing the encounters.

Also, what do you do about zones where multiple forces can raid concurrently (NTOV). Is only one guild allowed in the whole zone? Alternatively, what do you do now about guilds who just fill zones with AFK bodies so that they have the right to mobs when they spawn and nobody else does?

You really need to take this one back to the drawing board. And then throw that drawing board into a chipper. And then burn the remnants. And then douse the ashes with acid. It's that bad of an idea.

Like I said before, the best solution they could come up with on live was instancing raid content. The only actual other good solution that has ever been proposed was raid tokens, but that still leaves you a lot of room for sniping and interference from trains and general douchebaggery.

[slappytwotoes]

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

This is so 2010.

This used to be server ruleset way back when. It was a nightmare of poopsocking and Rogean hates few things more than poopsocking. This won't happen.

Besides its harder for staff than a yellow FTE message.

[maestrom]

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

Not true, FIF was definitely a (edit: player rule) rule in 2010. You'd need 15 players in the vicinity of the spawn.

I remember being in DA in Fear hanging out near CT's spawn with 15 members which guaranteed we had first crack at CT.

Ahh. I had only just started playing in 2010.

But I'm not looking for a player-base solution. I'm looking for a staff-enforced solution.

[Nibblewitz]

This is thread #5990376306836 proposing a "better system."

Save your breath.

[maestrom]

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

But how do you prove a leapfrog? More frapsquest and petitionquest? It's not a change for the better.



The only thing you're proposing here is to change the rule that they're breaking. You haven't proposed anything to keep them from breaking it. It certainly won't make things any easier on the staff.



The only thing that has ever helped to alleviate the "silliness" (your words) on this server was the class system with the class R lockouts. Still, class C was allowed to shit all over each other at will on their own days. But they at least chose to raid that way.



You still haven't defined what a capable force is in any satisfactory manner. I asked if you were going to assign values to each target, and you actually dodged the question. Your original suggestion would only allow the number to go up and would never address over-gearing the encounters.

Also, what do you do about zones where multiple forces can raid concurrently (NTOV). Is only one guild allowed in the whole zone? Alternatively, what do you do now about guilds who just fill zones with AFK bodies so that they have the right to mobs when they spawn and nobody else does?

You really need to take this one back to the drawing board. And then throw that drawing board into a chipper. And then burn the remnants. And then douse the ashes with acid. It's that bad of an idea.

Like I said before, the best solution they could come up with on live was instancing raid content. The only actual other good solution that has ever been proposed was raid tokens, but that still leaves you a lot of room for sniping and interference from trains and general douchebaggery.

I actually really like a rotation. And I was a HUGE advocate for instancing on the TLP. Not sure I think instancing is right for this server (classic and all), but I would absolutely play on a server of P99 quality with instancing.

Proving someone has broken the rule would be pretty easy. Guild A claims Target A. Guild B kills Target A. Guild B has broken the rule. The proof would come when Guild A is in the zone, does a /who, sees that they're the only ones there, and claims the target. When guild B rolls in, guild A will tell guild B that they have claimed the target and they take screen shots.

The only thing going to keep a guild from breaking a rule is staff enforcement. Not sure what else there is to be said here. Of course staff would have to adopt and agree to enforce this rule.

This is where your post starts to get good. My suggestion was for a simple average of the last 5 or so successful kills in order to claim a target. You point out, correctly, that if you roll this over every time, this will lead to an increasing number of people required to claim a target. Awesome! This is what I'm looking for. 14 seems a bit low. 50 seems a bit high. 24? I don't really know what this number should be. Should it be different for each target? I don't really know. What do you guys think?

As far as where other guilds are allowed to be. I don't think there's any reason to say that claiming a target means no other guild can be in the zone. If guilds want to sock a zone and claim a specific target, that's fine. Let them. But If rampage is socking NToV and BDA rolls in, BDA would be able to force Rampage to pick which target they're claiming, and BDA could then pick its own from the remaining targets in window. And then Taken could come in and claim another. And forsaken could claim another. And there'd be no reason for any of these guilds to train each other, because they would be under no pressure to kill the second their target spawns. They would kill the couple of trash between them and the target and then pull the target at their leisure.

[maestrom]

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

This is thread #5990376306836 proposing a "better system."

Save your breath.

I know but I was bored.

[Pokesan]

pardon me for not reading these long posts - did you propose a limit as to how far in advance FiF could be asserted?

[maestrom]

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

pardon me for not reading these long posts - did you propose a limit as to how far in advance FiF could be asserted?

I don't, for a few reasons.

First: With variance the way it is, its impossible to know exactly when a target will pop, so saying "No claims can be made more than 6 hours before a target spawns" is ripe for lawyering. Can a guild re-claim every 30 minutes?

Second: Having a "No socking more than 2 hours before a target goes in window" will mean that people will just show up 2.01 hours before a target goes in window and lawyer at each other over who has the real claim. This is better than training, but it doesn't really help answer the question of who owns the claim.

Third: There are so many targets available, if guild A wants to sock Statue (and AoW) for 24 hours to make sure they get it, they will miss out on every other spawn in the game that spawns that day. All of Velious, all of Kunark. I don't think they'll do that.