A question of Time Saving or Wanting to Frontline

[Zephyr L 0]

I personally think that players should be warned going inactive during a boss fight will result in a char death and if they are skipped twice the boss should focus all dmg on that character until they're dead or they come back from inactivity

[Mari 1]

Death will not be an option as it is too extreme; at this stage it is 5 damage per turn skipped and as we go up floors that damage will go up. 
For instance, floor 11 will most likely be left at 5 or move to 6 damage per turn skipped. If they die from that, so be it. But its not fair for a player to die completely due to just being inactive for 2 turns.

[Reusririasuir 0]

You're all making a mountain out of a molehill. You don't need to limit the number of players per boss battle, you just need to not waste time starting the next boss battle. A week after clearing a floor, open up the boss thread, and let people go after it solo or in groups immediately, one attempt at a time. I'd actually say two weeks for more realism but you're wanting to start moving floors quickly and most people only have 8 weeks of summer so one week is a better gestation period before opening the boss thread. If you want to organize higher numbers of players attacking the boss in one attempt, then coordinate among yourselves, but realistically, you could almost solo/double-team the bosses right now. I don't see you all breaking through floor 21 though without 4-5 more level 35+ players though, so don't be surprised if you don't make it as high as you think you will in this push.

[Kurou 0]

I like the idea of allowing multiple boss threads, that way people can determine there own group size. First group to complete the thread gets credit for the kill, while the other threads will just be deleted. Should help people stay active in their topics as well if its a race.

[Azrael 0]

Azazel: That is something I would like to implement in the next boss battle. 

Zephyr L: That is exactly why they aren't removed, and instead incur a 5 damage penalty; if you went inactive in a boss battle in SAO you'd probably die, same goes for this one. If i had it my way, and you were inactive for the whole fight, The person would be killed off, but that is too mean/extreme.

 

I don't think that's mean at all; its rather fair and it'd make people think twice about the commitment of a boss battle. . 

[Azrael 0]

I like the idea of allowing multiple boss threads, that way people can determine there own group size. First group to complete the thread gets credit for the kill, while the other threads will just be deleted. Should help people stay active in their topics as well if its a race.

 

That'd be a nightmare for staff. One thread, one quest. Period.

[Zelrius 0]

I oppose the Multiple boss thread idea. It works in theory sure, and I have personally thought of it before. But as Mari has stated, there are only 3 GMs, two of which are currently handling other things. That means Mari would have to be extremely active to post for multiple bosses at a time, and that would leave her with little to no time for her own things. And that's not right or fair to her or anyother GM that has to do that.

[Zephyr L 0]

I just think the penalty for being inactive in a boss thread should be higher

[Reusririasuir 0]

 open up the boss thread, and let people go after it solo or in groups immediately, one attempt at a time.

 

Since everyone seems to have missed this part, I made it bold for you.

[Zelrius 0]

That'd take too long. It'd be basically the same thing if not longer. Not to mention, Say a group goes in, and all go inactive. If there are 10 people in that group, You'd have to wait 240 Hours before being able to officially say they're inactive. That idea still doesn't work

[Zephyr L 0]

they could set it up so that after so many posts inactive you get so stressed from Fear that you have a heart attack and die

[Ariel - The Crowned Lion 0]

I like limits and I like first come first serve.

 

^extremely unfair due to timezone differences.

As for the specific limit above 10...my suggestion would be:

 

Specific limit: (X * nr. of participating guilds) + Y^ >10

 

X - number of players each guild can send to the boss fight.

Y^ - number of slots reserved for solo players, maybe 1/3 or 1/2 of  (X * nr. of participating guilds)

 

(idea open for improvements)

[Zelrius 0]

That's a good point, I have a new idea in mind, stay tuned

[Reusririasuir 0]

That'd take too long. It'd be basically the same thing if not longer. Not to mention, Say a group goes in, and all go inactive. If there are 10 people in that group, You'd have to wait 240 Hours before being able to officially say they're inactive. That idea still doesn't work

 

No, it would be faster. More players might die because of increased risk but creating competition to clear the bosses is a good thing; it would promote guilds more and really give front-line players a sense of urgency to 'get their first'. We'd see more of these bosses being cleared sooner by smaller, more competitive groups versus larger month-long sign-up group efforts. Your issue is with it taking 240 hours to rotate through ten inactive players and that is simply an issue from it requiring 24 hours to post per inactive person which is an extremely reasonable time-limit given this a global play by post game.

 

That 24-hour rule is extremely unlikely to change which means the only ways to reduce inactivity is to reduce the number of inactive people signing up. We already have rules in play which state that a failure to post initially removes you from the thread, the only other thing you can do at this point is reduce the number of people who sign up per boss thread and reduce the chances they are inactive. That's best done on a first-come, first-served basis, created by natural scarcity. Their will be one boss battle which will likely be cleared on the first attempt; if you and all of your intended allies don't sign-up before another set of players do, you're going to be stuck sitting outside the boss room while they get their attempt.

 

The more people you have to organize for a boss battle, the less likely it will be your group gets all their members posted and signed-up before a smaller group does, but at the same time, that smaller group has the higher chance of dying. It's a risk/reward scenario which gives smaller groups more of an opportunity rather than 'the first ten players to randomly sign-up'. It also gives true solo's an opportunity. Once all of those allied members have signed-up in the thread, the GM can start running the boss thread like usual by removing any inactive players, but you'll likely have less inactive players simply because those who have rushed to complete the sign-up process, are going to be more active then someone who comes on and signs up with little to no affiliation to anyone else in the thread.

[Zephyr L 0]

You only really have a handful of chars atm that have a high chance of not dying during boss raids

[Rebekah 0]

As one of the few members who is participating in that super long floor 10 raid, and this tiny floor 11 raid, I do not think limit on people is a problem. But rather, the problem is if the next person (or whoever) would automatically skip after the 24 hour period is over. A simple fix might be that we could state our timezone for the duration of this bossfight in a PM, and sync it so that we can post one after another (4-8 hours) of activity, so we can roll through the boss quickly. Thinking that each person will take up the full 24 hours may be a problem in big teamfights, but that is to be expected. This will just edit the starting order of the boss fights, since when I post at night, I wake up and see Mari, Cro and Shark often post by noon the following day, so I can respond when I get off work. When all 4 of us are posting, it is not a problem.

Floor 10 was a mess since the automatic skip did not happen after a while, and the most important thing in my opinion is an active GM or whoever is controlling the boss, to help facilitate the skipping or continuation after every 4 players, with the 5 damage penalty.

As for leaving an amount for solo player, and guilds, I do not think there should be limits on whoever can join, but rather whoever signs up, up to a current limit, pending guild leaders permission. Ariel, the problem with limits per guild or solo player is that is dependant on the current players. For example, in the Azure Brigade era, you cannot limit them to 2 spots out of 10, but you cannot limit solo players today to 3 slots. None of them are good long term solutions since there is a lot of movement between guilds.

[Mari 1]

Yamata no Orochi had a limit of 16 and the next boss eill provsbly have a limit of 20 max. I would not want any more than 20 in any boss battle

[Kurou 0]

If the limit was 16 and we only managed 4 players I don't think placing a cap will have any effect. That being said I like Rebekah's timezone idea about setting up the posting order so it flows better.

[Zelrius 0]

To everyone speaking here: Please do your homework before Posting. There have been some highly uneducated posts written here, and while that's fine, I'd much rather we had informed debates.

[Mari 1]

I've had people message me on Skype so I am going to say a few things here as it seems people are getting heated and out of hand on a poll that isn't even staff run. I am going to recap a few things here, but if the thread is going to go around in circles I am going to lock it because I don't want people getting heated or out of hand or salty or what have you.



-There will never be multiple boss threads at once. There will always be the single raid group. IF everyone in that raid group dies or is skipped 3 times in a row, a new raid group will take its place.

-Players will not be booted or 'die' after being skipped once THIS is grossly unfair and unreasonable, staff understand that people don't like waiting. That boss raids tend to take time, however we have the 3 skip rule for a reason. 3 is a reasonable number, its not too high nor is it too low. IF a majority of people feel that penalties for being skipped in a boss thread are not enough, I can look at increasing the amount of health someone looses when they get skipped. I do not want to reduce the amount of times from 3.

 

-Imposing a limit is not unfair, nor is the first come first serve basis; As long as the limit of players is reasonable. This is why right now, unless there is a large outcry the next boss will have a high limit for participants. 

 

-I personally will attempt to implement, (Pending staff approval) Players who are skipped three times or more in a previous boss thread will not be allowed to participate in the very next boss thread. Example: skipped in Yamata 3 times or more - cannot participate in floor 11 boss, but can participate in floor 12 boss.

-This poll is in no way affiliated with staff nor how future bosses may be run

 

 

 

 

 

-Admin Mari.