Test Update 03/03/2020 - Patch Notes and Discussions

Discussion in 'Test Update Notes and Bug Roundup' started by EQ Dev, Mar 3, 2020.

  1. Baldur Augur

    That does seem like a bug if it gave someone a lockout that was no longer in the DZ.

    I take it they were logged in the game at the time the event was beaten, if they camp out do they still get the lockout?
    Yinla likes this.
  2. Natal Augur



    But they did exactly that with the plane of hate raids when there was a bug that allowed them to do so. It is not academic, we know for a fact that raiding guilds will do this because they have done it in the past. If there is a mechanism to game the system to maximize loot then people will do it. After all, the locked out people would still be raiding and getting dkp, they just would not be getting loot on that particular raid.

    If the suggestion was implemented you would see people running the Griklor raid multiple times a day on a daily basis. Ultimately they would not need to do any other raid in the game since they would be able to fully equip everyone from that raid alone.

    Having raids set up as they are now limits the maximum rate at which gear can enter the game, the extent of which depends on how far you progress into the raiding structure.
    Nennius likes this.
  3. Moege Augur

    Intentional imo, else you can time have almost all people quit/leave DZ and not get a lockout.
  4. Funky Augur


    put it this way... your raid of 54 people beat ToFS 1. real life happens and 6 people need to leave, now your raid is down to 48 people.those 6 people drop the raid and DZ and you add in 6 new people to fill the raid. as the raid goes on to complete events 2 and 3, those 6 that left still get a lockout for event 2 and 3 tho they were not around.. so now 60 people managed to get a lockout to a DZ that limits 54 people. those 6 that left also are not eligible for loot or coin from the event either. that is a problem.

    those 6 that left should be able to go back at a later date (even if with another guild/raid) to attempt/complete the events. (except for event 1 which they rightfully received a lockout)
    Yinla likes this.
  5. Waring_McMarrin Augur


    If I remember right that was added in due to guilds dropping the dz right before a win to avoid the lockouts and being able to raid again for more loot.
  6. strongbus Augur

    havn't had the time to do test. and have been looking round.

    I have heard you can use the overseer to collect ts stuff.

    can it be use to go do old world hunter or slayer?
  7. Piznut Augur

    So, I noticed the increased AA experience for groups > 4 and raids > 13 people that was mentioned in the 2/26 patch notes was left out of this one. Was that intentional? If so, why?
  8. Skuz Augur

    Was re-added on today's notes on test.

    For groups I would think it makes sense, since encouraging players to group up is a core tenet of the game & with mercs being available this will provide added incentive to swap mercs out for players
    (much easier to do for those who 3merc-3box as a tank or healer than it will be for those who do so as a DPS class from my experience).

    Not sure on the reasoning for raids though it will certainly benefit those less-hardcore players who manage to have time to raid but struggle to find time to get AA outside of raiding, or for players in guilds that raid really frequently - i.e. on any TLP with shorter DZ locks.
  9. Moege Augur

    And what you are asking is to allow the following.

    Guild1 cannot beat tier 2 event 1
    Stick an alt into another raid get lockout for tier 2 event 1
    Drop alt out of dz/raid

    Now Guild1 can go do event 2 and 3 without touching event 1 as the alt can just request the dz.

    There is very good reasons why it is function as it is currently.

    I would be fine with people not getting lockouts for later events not completed if when they request a dz all events leading up has to then be won with no loot/coin. And that would cause too much crying. Sounds like there is already an exploit around it too.
  10. Yinla Augur

    The event lockout for event 2 should start from when event 2 is engaged, not when the DZ was created. So it works the same was as getting a fresh DZ.
    Funky likes this.
  11. Funky Augur


    i recall that being a thing yes. this is not what i am referring to tho. i'm just saying that if a toon does not participate in an event (say they leave right after t2.1), they should not get a lockout for t2.2 and t2.3.

    there should be some form of check at that engage/start of the event, not the start of a DZ that would determine who gets a lockout.



    that's not exactly what i am asking but i also do not see that as such a problem.

    all i was stating is that, just because you were in the DZ/raid at the start of event 1, beat event 1 and then left before event 2 was engaged. you should not get a lockout for event 2, or event 3 if the raid goes on to beat it after you are gone.
    Yinla likes this.
  12. Baldur Augur

    I see what you're saying. It would be hard to drop most your raid though and still finish most fights.

    But if you could time it right then you could drop all but whatever you needed to keep it open, 1 maybe, then see what dropped, only add people that needed to loot, and then immediately do the raid again.
  13. Waring_McMarrin Augur

    Raids where dropping everyone but a select few which is why changes where made.
    Moege likes this.
  14. Piznut Augur


    Eh i welcome both lol. On Coirnav, my guild will raid for approximately 3 hours of killing trash almost the whole time and i *MIGHT* get one AA during a raid night.
  15. Moege Augur

    Hard? No its not. Drop an instance and you can keep on participating until you get booted out. Drop the DZ at 1% is very easy.
  16. That0neguy Augur

    Sounds like something not working properly. Did you submit a bug report about this and get confirmation if this is working as intended? Stop trying to make up stuff about why the new DZ rules(that your guild forced them to implement) are bad.

Share This Page