[Discussion] The mechanics behind lockouts

[Zezlar]

Imagine if we removed it.

I think the only assumption we can make is that there needs to be a form of lockouts, but not in such an extreme form we have now. There's currently no drive to log in for some outside of those once a week instances. Honestly, also there isn't a need for more than 8 people in a FC.

[Starlord]

I think the only assumption we can make is that there needs to be a form of lockouts, but not in such an extreme form we have now. There's currently no drive to log in for some outside of those once a week instances. Honestly, also there isn't a need for more than 8 people in a FC.

That's if those 8 people are a static. It's hard to form a static, They all need to be on at the same time for X amount of hours they agreed on, Some of the 8 may have to do something that day leaving the other 5-6 people left with doing stuff on their own. etc etc.

A lot needs to happen for a static to work.

[Xystic]

I think the only assumption we can make is that there needs to be a form of lockouts, but not in such an extreme form we have now. There's currently no drive to log in for some outside of those once a week instances. Honestly, also there isn't a need for more than 8 people in a FC.

Reducing the the lockout time frame will increase the requirement of people having to play on days they aren't available. Because if we put lockouts in intervals under 7 days, that means the reset timer will technically be different every week, meaning some people can not make that time for you and your fc setting you back.

What you mean is that there isn't a need for more then 8 people in raid. You don't need a FC to raid. FC have more purposes then to just raid.

So far, I have enjoyed answering all your questions and concerns. Please do not feel like I am belittling you or anyone else. If your arguments are sound and logical I am more then willing to agree with you or anyone else.