Raid Scene Rage Thread

[Splorf22]

My biggest problem with the idea is that it encourages poopsocking. So I would add 'all characters with xloc < -200 && yloc < -1400 have evacuate cast on them'. This ends up being everything past the juggs fort.

[Rogean]

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

My biggest problem with the idea is that it encourages poopsocking. So I would add 'all characters with xloc < -200 && yloc < -1400 have evacuate cast on them'. This ends up being everything past the juggs fort.

People would just find the closest safe poopsock location.

[Splorf22]

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

People would just find the closest safe poopsock location.

Well it should be possible to at least make that closest safe poopsock location up at NG, which isn't really much closer than the zone in.

[Razdeline]

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

Well it should be possible to at least make that closest safe poopsock location up at NG, which isn't really much closer than the zone in.

This ^^

[Rogean]

Need to just charge a subscription to engage raid mobs. All problems solved. lol.

[Razdeline]

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

Need to just charge a subscription to engage raid mobs. All problems solved. lol.

bitcoins?

[Garguren]

After reading it again, this seems to push the need to poopsock as logging in alts wont work as well.

[cyryllis]

First suggestion ive read that actually seems like it could work. It would slow down spawn time to engage time, and allow more guilds the chance to mobilize. Due to the number of see invis in basement and the fact that mages wouldnt be able to just coth people down within seconds it would be an interesting experiment to say the least. Why not just implement it for a month, see how it works and use that time to gather data and community input. If it does not seem to work, no harm no foul, remove the code and return to the brainstorming

[Laugher]

Haha subscription ftw

but honestly I haven't read much into this past the last 3 pages of this thread, so forgive me if a similiar concept has been discussed:

The last guild who killed a raid mob must wait 1-2 more kills of the raid mob before they can go back and kill it again. If this was the case that would enable all targets to be able to be at least minimally alternated or contested given who killed what last; less mess less code I would think.

then, for example, if FE/IB and say TMO were contesting trak one week then you would know whichever got them last would have to sit out while the ones who didn't get trak in teh previous kill would have to compete with guild c over that spawn next week.

[Rogean]

I think it's better if you guys continue to work on a player solution that benefits everyone.