Oakwynd Feedback

So long as those chanters are all in the same group as the puller. They will be taking up most of that groups slots though which doesn't leave a lot of room for other folks.

ask the one guy rolling macros to 9 enchanters in The Deep if this change affected him in any significant way
another symptom of impulsive changes with no concept of consequence in its designs

You seem to be missing the references to the new server. FTE will basically kill this playstyle. You would have to be in a raid which murder's exp gain.

1 monk engaging the AOW and training him / using FD and standing to not lose aggro will make the aow despawn .. man.. super guild would be livid i bet

i honestly think its just going to end up changing one set of problems for another. I cant remember the last time i was in a "dps race" in group content where it mattered. and for raids, its the return of poop socks if more than 1 guild wants to do open world content.

If anything I think it increases the amount of tickets they see.

I am willing to see how it plays out myself, but It seems like an odd thing to change at this point. it makes eq feel less like eq and more like WoW.

and btw i see this making old world content relavant again so here comes raid roations again. its that OR your alt toons u made and lvled up for that xp bonus wont be able to raid o well

Inevitably, people fall behind. I'd rather see 100% bonus to your highest level character (no bonus for a tie!) Then 80%, 70% 60% etc until you get to 0% on your 10th alt.

oh, that's actually a good point
we'll have to see how aggro/effect tables work with people going in and out of groups

The AoCs will look cool.

There's myriad discussion on the negatives of FTE, but "if" this is going to be implemented on the new TLP this is how "I" think it should be done.

I would welcome other thoughts as I consider this a brainstorming session but one I hope the devs see and consider as to the specifics of "how" this will be implemented.

A) I believe if this is to be done that it should be done via locks occurring on first point of "assigned" damage. Assigned meaning damage done by a player that is credited to that player. Not damage shields which currently don't count as anyone's specific damage, and ideally not a pet/charm. The goal here would be to not have someone unintentionally lock a target through no intended action of their own.

B) I think they should walk back the concept of spells not being able to land by players not on the lock. This would still allow for players to help engage a mob down while outside the group or to cast helpful debuffs on the mob. I do think the locks should prevent outside charms and memblurs, but people contributing damage and debuffs should still be allowed. Just lock the loot rights to the person/group/raid that did the initial point of assigned damage.

Implementations done in other ways run various risks

Such as
1. A general inability to help someone while trying to be friendly.

2. An outside healer gains aggro with impunity and mob ignores any action they take.

3. Or if 2 doesnt prevent their aggro, now they may have a mob on them that cannot be rooted or damaged by them in any way and they are powerless to do anything to it without zoning. This would also be problematic with people intentionally or unintentionally training a locked mob onto people.

4. Unintentional locks such as a ranger passing by and a mob striking his damage shield resulting in a lock is avoided.

It seems to me that all implementations that can be done come with pros and cons, but by far the best in my eyes is going to be locking this down to loot rights to the first to deal damage and letting people deal damage and debuffs as normal. That eliminates a lot of the negative situations with things like unkillable mobs hitting you and keeps the core abilities for players to use their toolsets to still help remain intact. It also prevents someone from parking a mob or pulling the whole zone and running them around as mobs could still be pulled off and killed even if you couldnt collect the loot for doing so. It seems to be the lesser of the evils while still having the intended effect of removing the DPS race.

With this being relaxed truebox those alts are going to be on another account so won't get the exp bonus.

WTS PL! Room for 68 more!

Oakwynd is like a pokemon. It's rubbish to begin with, but by the time it his live, it might have evolved into something interesting. If it lives that long of course.

Also, encounter locking will be pointless unless people actually play the server. Which they won't in any significant numbers to need the feature in the first place.

Does Oakwynd's legacy character XP bonus apply to AA's? If the bonus xp applies to AA's, I would level up a few alts to max just for that bonus.

my opinion - if the change causes more tickets - we wont see it on any other tlp outside this new one, much less live.

so we more or less agree - i do think fte will have it's own problems no doubt - but the cookie cutter classic sure fire win scenarios for dps racing wont work.

Yelinak's AOC is number one!

There's a separate aa xp bonus unlocked by one of the xpacs, so I guess not?

Can you tag a mob before it has rendered on your screen?

WTS encounter rights to ______________ 2 Krono PST

If they are going to do this I would rather see them do it so that you can still cast and do damage as per normal but have the loot rights lock to the first person/group/raid to do attributable damage (ignoring damage shields as I dont think causing a lock should be an unintentional action.)

Seems like that still lets the friendlies debuff mobs or help dps stuff down without worrying about stealing it, and eliminates a lot of the trolliness some of the other methods bring.

Such as having a mob aggro to you that you cant DPS or cast on so its virtually unkillable to you, or having 7 mobs ignoring you entirely while you spam heals on the person that locked them all from outside the group, or someone training a mob thats locked onto someone else, etc.

It seems like you could still have the intended killing of the DPS race with this without removing some of the other core mechanics of this game that players are worried about losing here. (and some just hate FTE, but certainly some implementations are worse than others)