Legit Way to FIX Hunts for Good

[A_Magical_Unicorn_Rider]

Read the full story. Again, your intentions are nice, but I'm looking at this from the worst perspective possible. Things aren't that bad here on Mateus, but thinking about it from others server perspectives your idea would only cause more hostility toward players.

As you're posted, the zerg isn't going to die off. But why add to the problem? The system isn't the problem; it's the people.

[Parz3val]

Read the full story. Again, your intentions are nice, but I'm looking at this from the worst perspective possible. Things aren't that bad here on Mateus, but thinking about it from others server perspectives your idea would only cause more hostility toward players.

As you're posted, the zerg isn't going to die off. But why add to the problem? The system isn't the problem; it's the people.

Again, you give zero reason/proof that this would 'only cause more hostility' or 'add to the problem'.

You're just making poor blanket statements at this point, where is your argument?

Either read the "full story" again or reread my prior reply.

You're flat out missing it.

[A_Magical_Unicorn_Rider]

Say a troll enters a full party, said troll finds and tags a mark, aggros, troll decides to pull mark till he exits a zone. Now that the troll is not in the zone and say only 2 members managed to land a hit on the mark before the troll did what he did, does the party still get full credit even though the troll left the zone? Since no one else can tag; tagged marks can't be tagged for another 4-5 minutes, what becomes of the party's credit then if the mark happens to die before the tag marker expires and the rest of the party can't get to it before said kill? You know when you exit a zone, you lose all credit for doing something in that zone (and that you also have to be in the zone where said Hunt is happening to even get credit).

Would 1 party get less than full credit all because 1 troll decided to troll? I'm citing a very specific example. There is my argument. I'm looking through your idea from the mindset of a troll to see how it could be taken advantage of/broken. Granted, you've come up with an idea that's given more specific details than anyone else's and I applaud you for that. But you know people are going to find a way to break systems.

[Parz3val]

.

1) you're neglecting the invulnerability period (sufficient time for others to arrive)

2) you're neglecting the portion about negating resets (making your example literally impossible under any condition)

3) you're neglecting how the mob is vulnerable to anyone during Tag-Immunity

4) assuming the troll is alone & tags/exits, the mob would hard-reset ("Tagger Buff" lost, Tag-Immunity undone) as it's enmity table would be nil

5) assuming the troll is in a mixed group & tags/exits, the mob would soft-reset ("Tagger Buff" kept, Tag-Immunity retained) & move to the next person on the enmity table (your party keeps their individual "Tagger Buff" despite the troll's actions, effectively meaning only the troll is getting screwed in this scenario of yours & nobody else)

5) you're neglecting the bit about how party members who contributed at all will earn fine (if not easy full) credit with it due to the contribution multiplier

6) you're neglecting the fact party members would be able to arrive in time practically anywhere in the world with absolute ease due to the invulnerability period/alternative party-teleport feature

7) a party wouldn't get less-than-full credit due to the troll's actions (which, as cited above, wouldn't take effect under this system), they just wouldn't be entitled to a nigh-guaranteed full credit in lieu of not being the Tagging Party... they'd have the same odds as anyone currently does nowadays (contribute as much as you can before the mob is dead)


Essentially, under this system, there is zero consequence to troll-behavior for anyone but to the troll themselves

The troll will only be trolling them self alone under this system

.

[BloodPact]

The legit way to fix hunts is to turn back time and realize it shouldn't have been implemented.

Now, for realistic fixes:
1) Cap on Allied Seals per week
2) Player restriction to only hunt marks listed in the Grand Company bills. More Grand Company bills per week to include higher ranks (2 S, 4 A, 6 B, for example.)

Hunts are such garbage right now... It's basically Atma grinding all over again (content wise)

[Parz3val]

I personally wouldn't be opposed to a cap on Allied Seals per week, however, this being our only viable Open-World content... I'm hesistant to ask for it.

Additionally, I don't think the mass majority of players would want to be further restricted in this way, plus I think it too late given they released it uncapped (the rage that would ensue). If it were to be implemented, I would settle for no less than 1,250.

Player restriction on Hunt options... blech.

Bonus Discussion Topic: Specific Atma's should be purchasable with Allied Seals costing between 300-500 Allied Seals. Yay or Nay?

[dejavutwo]

The issue with marks isn't so much that people can be jerks, its the zerging. There are too many people trying to kill too few mobs. SE should focus on this, not the symptom, and there are plenty of ways to do so without having to introduce a whole new overly-complicated tagging system. The easiest way to fix it would be to just reduce the number of people zerging around by making marks available elsewhere.

[Parz3val]

.

More Marks = More Potential Allied Seals = Too Much Bloat

They would have to cap Allied Seals then OR reduce the Allied Seal gain from A/S Ranks OR increase the cost of the Rewards themselves. This suggestion also further benefits radar-hunters even worse.

There are other issues that come along with that too & it does nothing to solve the credit/trolling issues which are the worst offenders imo.

I also do not understand would think this suggestion "overly-complicated"

Click once, mob goes invincible for 1 minute, now kill it.

Think from a play-perspective, seriously play it out in your mind's eye, it's ridiculously simple.

.

[Xmbei]

How about this as a solution, make the NM's Hunt mobs only targetable, poppable and get credit if you or some one in your party has the Mark sheet handed by Hunt Board. So that only those that have the weekly mark get credit and hunt it. I honestly thought this was how it was going to operate to begin with... but no its free rewards at all times, (not making it a weekly hunt but a farm hunt) people are just farming the hell out of it because they can. If they make it so that its an actual weekly hunt then the horde would disperse because reward has been achieved.

Plus the "fix" of rng weekly hunt mobs is horrid... I was expecting it to give each person a different weekly hunt, but everyone still gets the same weekly hunt mob, which causes the horde to just go after that mob and make it hard for anyone to get credit. The Marks should be RNG per player not per serverwide.

[Parz3val]

Interesting premise to the whole Weekly concept.

I think rather than giving individualized Weekly Marks, they should change it to where Weekly Marks are different for each GC.

Maelstrom has a unique one shared by all its members & etc.