#41
|
||||||
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
| |||||
|
#42
|
|||
|
I'd support the idea of a loot limit per account similar to what was done with summon corpse. If you have the item or have looted the item in the past, you can't list for it again. Sure, quite a few people have multiple high levels spread across multiple accounts, so they could still no-life it, but I'm sure it would cut the list down a bit after the people farming list items for money get 1 or 2.
__________________
| ||
|
#43
|
||||
|
Quote:
Either way, list isn't perfect and it definitely favors/requires account sharing crews but it works and is way better than the alternative. I still won't see any of you at a /list camp, have fun. | |||
|
#44
|
|||
|
The problems with the list system are obvious, the RNG is streaky, it promotes account sharing but...
The primary concern is player health and well-being. Players have been pushing themselves to camp items for multiple days on end. Some have even been resorting to using drugs to stay awake. The P99 playerbase isn't young, it's only a matter of time before someone dies due to a /list camp, if it hasn't happened already. I propose a /list system that provides players with tickets per unit of hour of spent at that camp with the tickets giving you a chance to win at a roll each time the item drops. In addition, that the tickets are permanent until you've won an item. This way you could quit, eat, sleep and get back to it when you're better. Maybe more people would be doing the /list camps since then people who had jobs could also /list up, I don't see how this is an issue however and players who are hardcore /list campers are gonna get their items regardless. A bonus with a ticket system is that every player at the camp will be active, no more FD'ed players simply checking the AFK-window. In fact, you might even be able to do away with the AFK-window this way. Yes, someone might just walk into camp and /list and after one spawn run away with an item, however has EQ ever been fair? I know of several /list players who got shafted after having spent countless hours without drops and eventually having to throw in the towel after 40+ hours. | ||
|
#45
|
|||||||
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
| ||||||
|
#46
|
||||
|
Quote:
| |||
|
#47
|
||||
|
Quote:
__________________
| |||
|
#48
|
|||
|
Randomly award to top 6 people on the list.
> Encourages people to work together as a group, instead of hoping someone in front of them dies. > Removes at ton of need for CSR (waaa waaah #1 doesn't want to kill a_goblin_0039, please ban him for life wahh) > Keeps 6 people on their toes instead of just #1 > Keeps it just as random | ||
|
#49
|
|||||
|
Quote:
Your assumption seems to be: "when 6 people can get the drop instead of 1, people will participate more." Maybe you haven't heard the saying, "When it's everyone's responsibility it's no one's responsibility." When there is a list, it's ultimately the responsibility of #1 because if the item drops it is 100% their item. When it's 6 random individuals who don't know each other... well... the other guy will do it. If you think list participation is bad now (and it really wasn't except for a few times @ Rubi BP), it will be worse with the "top 6" idea. Let's use Manastone as an example. It takes 1 person to kill the EE. With 5 other people responsible why bother? Check in every 10 minutes to hit afk-check and have my GINA timer set to trigger when I get the Quote:
Here's the kicker: You're going to have people justifying their lack of participation because "I've been helping for X hours and have lost every roll. You just got here, you do some work to earn yours!" That's points 1-3. Point 4: "Keeps it just as random" is wrong. The RNG for the drop is the same, yes, but now you add an additional roll against 5 other people. The "random to top X number of players" is just plain bad.
__________________
| ||||
|
#50
|
||||
|
Quote:
It would take a group to get down there and kill the king, for instance. So which player of that group should be #1? | |||
|
|
|