Discussion in 'Time Locked Progression Servers' started by Cicelee, May 15, 2023.
Again, what happens when the Wizard loses and the Paladin has no intent to kill the mob?
The mob continues to beat on said paladin , until that player dies, zones or /yells breaking the encounter at that point the wizard can engage.
I'll be playing classic eq on the traditional tlp server model with added bonuses and fte just as many others who prefer a traditional tlp server will as well
You're assuming the Paladin wants to play nice. Which, leads right back to DPS races depending on people playing nice. Wizard writes a ticket about the Paladin. Different paths, same outcome just wasting time.
EQ is not the first game to explore FTE.
Explain what that even means ... remove all the bs and it's just the wizard vs the paladin .. no exploits , no cheats FTE each of them has 50% chance of locking the encounter compared to the current system of tough luck paladin.
The point is you can't , the paladin will lose every single time in the current system.
That at essence is why , I am pro FTE . Also I have played other FTE systems , this is not a new concept , I prefer it and it evens the playing field regardless of class.
As for the ticket , the paladin still won the FTE and will have loot compared to him well never having it. The ticket , if done will still resolve into the abyss.
You are being oblivious to griefing this will cause.
Explain to me why I should wait 45 minutes for a cleric to solo an NPC?
Enchanters can mez lock content ALL DAY in its current state, GMs will not be able to enforce it.
Then go play that game, not EQ.
'Life is not fair" get over it.
I don't mind the ruleset as much as wanting a new server to play on and worried about what they are implementing will break the game in various ways, as the test server is currently demonstrating.
As it is currently implemented its possible that someone can train you, and the train itself is invulnerable to damage. The issue is not in the concept of what they are trying to do, but that the implementations they are attempting have further reaching consequences that they wont have time to test before the servers launch date. It does not appear to accomplish anything the players are wanting. Trains can still happen, as well as power leveling, and with rune and heals working the way they do on current iteration it doesnt even effectively lock the encounter from kill stealing.
It would be better if they just made 1st point of attributable damage gets the kill, awarded to player/group/raid they belong to if they insist on implementing this in some form. It doesnt break existing mechanics.
Otherwise, propose me a method for FTE implementation and I can give examples of how one could seek to exploit it, and im unlikely to get all of the possible ways. Therein lies the problem with changing a core mechanic.
Fundamentally I agree with you and I'm not going to play on Oakwynd. That said, DPG releases one server a year, rarely two. Folks WANT to play EQ so they are trying to get DPG to be more responsive to player feedback instead of just not playing for another year or attempting to play on some poorly conceived idea simply because it's the only option.
Folks can be vocal AND not play on Oakwynd because they want DPG to make better decisions in the future.
Why , do you keep trying to validate a broken system? Griefing in a working FTE system , can't be done period , either the encounter is locked or not.
Explain to you why , you should wait 45 mins for a cleric to solo a npc ... the cleric engaged first , simple as that.
Gm's don't enforce it now , at least that cleric got a chance to solo the mob.
What needs explained? Players are going to use this to troll individual players and guilds. Players can just root a mob, and then keep it locked down now. Have you thought about that? What do you think these Krono farmers are going to do? Kill the mob and potentially lose an FTE race on the next spawn?
This system is all dependent on players being nice. The whole driving point for them introducing FTE was to reduce the number of tickets. Does this system sound like one that will reduce tickets?
I can say the same thing about going to a different server , this is supposed to be a FTE server get over it!
45 minutes for 1 NPC, now 26 minutes for a respawn, plus PH's, yeah enjoy all those new bottlenecks you just created bud....
If the system is fixed, I see it reducing tickets at the end of the day.
We can keep playing the what if game all day , at the end of the day though it's just different view points.
Probably would have been simpler for them to create a queue system for camps. If you are next for the camp, you get a notice that it is locked to your force and you have x minutes to engage. When time expires, it locks to the next in queue. No one at camp/no queue, no locks.
That kind of sounds like EQ.
Good luck getting anything done of importance with that kind of logic.
Bottlenecks have been addressed to help the increased speed on the TLP, this just creates more bottlenecks.
Not if you are that paladin , the wizard tried to ks or the cleric because they had the opportunity to do the encounter .
The current system both lose and will continue to lose always , so it's a positive for both of those examples.
If the system is fixed as intended, good luck getting mobs from an enchanter that's just keeping it mezzed, until their "friend" arrives for the kill.
Or the Cleric/Tank box just holding onto an Epic mob, until their "friend" shows up.
Bard Afk melody singing with mez running into a corner...
Separate names with a comma.