Petition To Add Behest Rank Restrictions

[TheVedis]

After thinking twice, I think Level Sync won't solve this problem. If Level Sync were to be implemented, and as an example, an R7 went in to R20/30 Behest, The others Synced with the R7 and everyone became R7, but mind that the monsters will still be around level 20/30 and an R7 won't be able to beat it. Therefore, the behest will fail. Level Sync, however, would be good for Grinding and it doesn't hurt to implement it here. Please share your thoughts about this, I'd welcome pros and cons.

syncing with grinding isnt needed
the fact you can so easily change jobs and have many negate the need for it

behests are the issue in this thread, so dont really wanna go off on a tangent talking about grind parties

[AlexiaKidd]

After thinking twice, I think Level Sync won't solve this problem. If Level Sync were to be implemented, and as an example, an R7 went in to R20/30 Behest, The others Synced with the R7 and everyone became R7, but mind that the monsters will still be around level 20/30 and an R7 won't be able to beat it. Therefore, the behest will fail. Level Sync, however, would be good for Grinding and it doesn't hurt to implement it here. Please share your thoughts about this, I'd welcome pros and cons.

Yeah I do agree in regards to Behest it should still be capped as I said earlier.

[Abriael]

there's no real need for syncing in behest. There are behests at every level, so why would anyone want to take up a spot at lower levels when he has his own?

[Anima]

syncing with grinding isnt needed
the fact you can so easily change jobs and have many negate the need for it

behests are the issue in this thread, so dont really wanna go off on a tangent talking about grind parties

I'm just saying that It doesn't hurt to implement what they already have. Rank Restrictions would put people at it's place, low with low, med with med, high with high. btw I edited my last post to show you what I'm trying to say about behests, well, it's Rank Restriction anyway XD

Notes: My problem is exactly the opposite, it's the lowbies who's taking up the spots of people who's in the rank corresponding to the Camp Behest.

[Loke]

Exactly. And as I have said on pg. 3 and a couple others in the previous pages: If they were to implement level like they did with FFXI then with (as someone else stated) a rank 7 comes into a rank 20 Behest, they would be level synced to the rank 7 or someone else still much higher than him. The rank 7 stays in Behest and leeches. Oust would solve that part as they wouldnt be able to do it. But with the talk of level sync it would add the issue with the +10 rank higher being in the group as well. So both should be implemented. That would solve any negative issue with Behest. ^^

[TheVedis]

Exactly. And as I have said on pg. 3 and a couple others in the previous pages: If they were to implement level like they did with FFXI then with (as someone else stated) a rank 7 comes into a rank 20 Behest, they would be level synced to the rank 7 or someone else still much higher than him. The rank 7 stays in Behest and leeches. Oust would solve that part as they wouldnt be able to do it. But with the talk of level sync it would add the issue with the +10 rank higher being in the group as well. So both should be implemented. That would solve any negative issue with Behest. ^^

Ousting people who are grosly underleveled is something many are afraid to do
When i was at cedarwood(rank 30 behest) anyone below 20 i would oust the moment i noticed, but most people dont do this, and in fact, alot of people who are grosly underleved as this are the ones who try to form the parties so that no one can oust them at all.

And to top it off, the people doing it also have 50s, so they tend to get mad if you oust them, hop on their 50 and try to clear the area before you(granted, this is easily griefing and a GM will do something about it, ask the many people ive seen just up and disappear in the middle of doing it after ive called a gm for it)


But seriously, upper and lower limits are needed, the question is to how much of a limit
id personaly be all for a +-9, so for 20s, you see 11-29 and so on. This may seem like a wide range, but it fits well enough to work well
and at the very least a +-7 since -7 is whenm you can get leves at a camp

[Loke]

I'd take the +- 7 or better a +- 5. -+11 is the issue I usually see as they are usually killed in one shot, especially if already slightly damaged and something like a Bomb uses the AoE explosion, they are pretty much done for. Granted they will lose a little bit of SP/EXP from having to return and run back to the party, but after they get back all they do is hide in the back for the most part and leech. When a rank 15 or so could have joined and gotten a few more hits and some more damage dealt.

Edit to add: But I also understand with +- 7 as that is the rank you are actually able to start getting levequest for that camp.

[TheVedis]

I'd take the +- 7 or better a +- 5. -+11 is the issue I usually see as they are usually killed in one shot, especially if already slightly damaged and something like a Bomb uses the AoE explosion, they are pretty much done for. Granted they will lose a little bit of SP/EXP from having to return and run back to the party, but after they get back all they do is hide in the back for the most part and leech. When a rank 15 or so could have joined and gotten a few more hits and some more damage dealt.

Edit to add: But I also understand with +- 7 as that is the rank you are actually able to start getting levequest for that camp.

the problem with +-5 is that its too strict, you are forced to go at that level to the next camp
the reason alot of people go at +- 9 right now is that its a choice they have for optimal SP

my example stands still that i get around 2-3k SP per behest at 31 at cedarwood(tested with over 50 bvehests) and closer to 5-6k at Broken Water.....
so given this, why would i want to stay at a 30 camp at 31 when i can go to a 40 camp and get more.

The way SP works too is im not really denying any of the higher people a great ammount of SP, they just dont get the party bonus from me, just as i dont get it from them. I am still able to contribute(im able to hit the mobs, do ok damage even though its not spectacular) so at least im not leeching.

The difference i do see is when people are moving up, and getting less SP while doing it, that rank 15 at cedarwood is actualy getting less sp then he would at bloodshore. and at the same time taking away a party bonus from everyone else at cedarwood. Add the fact they probly cant even hit the mobs....at that point it just gets dumb and is leeching.

[AlexiaKidd]

The ranks should be whatever rank you unlock the leves for that camp to when you unlock the next camp for Behest.

So Bloodshore/Horizon would be 13-23 because you get the R20 leves at R13 and at 23 you unlock the R30 leves so can move on to the next camp.

[darkstarpoet1]

The ranks should be whatever rank you unlock the leves for that camp to when you unlock the next camp for Behest.

So Bloodshore/Horizon would be 13-23 because you get the R20 leves at R13 and at 23 you unlock the R30 leves so can move on to the next camp.

i actually disagree, but just for one reason. a max sp party is within 5 ranks. i would hate to break up parties to have to go do different behest areas. example is a party 20-25 and a behest starts in cassiophia. half of the group has to leave and cannot get into the behest there and is forced to go to another camp then meet back up later. i used the +-5 because that is an optimal party level range and would allow if one person is 5 ahead or behind the biggest gap the whole party could still do behest together. i just don't like the idea of breaking up parties that are grouping together because that is the level range se wants together.