Manastone /List yet another idea

[Tilien]

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

#1 on List is a Random but Nice person unable to solo the mob
#2-4 is all from the same guild and have orders to not help non guildies at list camps so more people join their guild

If you implement a system that allows a guild to monopolize list by ordering “no help” to anyone not tagged which in turn resets the list, you just made it easier to monopolize list camps w a zerg guild.

I would agree this is possible but it would require a constant stream of non ask guildies to actually monopolize, and person 1 and 5 could still work together to kill it.

Assuming the guild will try to blockade the camp anyway would you rather have a system where the guild requires larger coordination (because if more nonguildies show up there could become a block of unguilded at the front) and forces the guild to actually clear the camp?

Or have one where the guild can blockade indefinitely or never clear camp?

Imagine a guild has positions 1-4 and refuse to assist the kill because 5 is unguilded. Once the unguilded is gone killing resumes.

Lots of ways to abuse both systems, I think one is marginally better than the other.

[Erati]

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

I would agree this is possible but it would require a constant stream of non ask guildies to actually monopolize, and person 1 and 5 could still work together to kill it.

Assuming the guild will try to blockade the camp anyway would you rather have a system where the guild requires larger coordination (because if more nonguildies show up there could become a block of unguilded at the front) and forces the guild to actually clear the camp?

Or have one where the guild can blockade indefinitely or never clear camp?

Imagine a guild has positions 1-4 and refuse to assist the kill because 5 is unguilded. Once the unguilded is gone killing resumes.

Lots of ways to abuse both systems, I think one is marginally better than the other.

I am merely giving examples of where a system that removes people from the list due to not engaging PH can be abused and exploited for gain.

Right now does it suck when people dont help clear the mobs and the #One cant solo it - yes - but that usually comes down to whether people are assholes or not and eventually itll get worked out with petition or simple conversation.

If you tempt people by hardcoding a way that boots people off lists outside of AFK checks, people WILL abuse it to get people they dont like booted.

[Cen]

Your idea is too exploitable. Mine is better still [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

My idea - List works as normal, except the top 6 people in the list can be rewarded the item randomly.

Everyone else is waiting in line to be the top 6 to have a chance at it.

Incentive to keep the kills moving, but can't be exploited to throw people off the list.

[Darkslide632]

My idea is better.

People just need to stop being assholes.

[aismartin]

Do level 35's slow down rate of drop? Saw two 50's get stone back to back. Every time I /list with a 35 at spot one drops seem none existent.

[Bristlebaner]

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

#1 on List is a Random but Nice person unable to solo the mob
#2-4 is all from the same guild and have orders to not help non guildies at list camps so more people join their guild

If you implement a system that allows a guild to monopolize list by ordering “no help” to anyone not tagged which in turn resets the list, you just made it easier to monopolize list camps w a zerg guild.

This sounds perfect for the neckbeards we have in these parts...let's do it!

[Erati]

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

Do level 35's slow down rate of drop? Saw two 50's get stone back to back. Every time I /list with a 35 at spot one drops seem none existent.

same as anti-camp radius in classic

filed under its classic

[Polixa]

Not sure who would exploit the idea I posted originally. If a guild held positions 2 through 7 would they seriously have 2 through 6 agree to be booted off the list to bump #7 to the top? Thus foregoing the chances of several manastones?

Nevertheless, I like Cen's suggestion

List works as normal, except the top 6 people in the list can be rewarded the item randomly.

Everyone else is waiting in line to be the top 6 to have a chance at it.

[Phaezed-Reality]

how can i instead of leveling up and just making this easy for everyone, put the onus on everyone else to get me my manastone.

can anyone help?

[Tilien]

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

Not sure who would exploit the idea I posted originally. If a guild held positions 2 through 7 would they seriously have 2 through 6 agree to be booted off the list to bump #7 to the top? Thus foregoing the chances of several manastones?

Nevertheless, I like Cen's suggestion

List works as normal, except the top 6 people in the list can be rewarded the item randomly.

Everyone else is waiting in line to be the top 6 to have a chance at it.

The abuse is that if there are 5 people on list, 2-5 are guilded. All guilded members refuse to help. All 5 listers are booted and /list again. unguilded now ended up randomly deep in the list with guilded having the 1 spot.