Grey/red attacking will hurt grouping.

[Dazzler_Twodir]

<DIV>What high level wants to beatdown a gray mob for nothing?</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>With this added you'll no longer see groups willing to let someone a few levels lower tag along.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Traveling around with the see invis mobs is bad enough now ALL of them are gonna aggro and you get no experiance for defending yourself.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>If you're gonna change the game completely you better add chests to grey mobs that do this.</DIV>

[Eelyen]

<DIV>The actual amount of grouping this will effect is limited.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I can picture my level 32 group not as willing to take a level 25 into Runnyeye.  Or atleast attempting to get a level 25 there.  But, other then that.  There isn't a whole lot of situations this will effect.  I think it was done to help prevent the "looking for a high level to grey everything out."</DIV>

[Lancealittle]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Dazzler_Twodirks wrote:<BR> <DIV>What high level wants to beatdown a gray mob for nothing?</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>With this added you'll no longer see groups willing to let someone a few levels lower tag along.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Traveling around with the see invis mobs is bad enough now ALL of them are gonna aggro and you get no experiance for defending yourself.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>If you're gonna change the game completely you better add chests to grey mobs that do this.</DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <P>This also fixes an issue with mentoring. As it stands you could mentor someone 30 levels below you and if you wanted to go around some agro mobs you just un-mentor.</P> <P>I know that at level 32 a level 26 is grey to me. I'm not sure what level a 26 is red to character, but if it's even 3 levels then that character is getting no xps or quest rewards for grouping with me. If I'm not mentoring him, then we should have no reason to group.</P>

[Eelyen]

<DIV>Pretty much from what I know you can group with people within 7 levels of you and the lowest player can still get xp.  Meaning You could have a level 25 in group, and the max level in the group for that person to get xp would be 32.   I think quest rewards extend an extra level or two.  </DIV>

[mino]

<DIV>This is just another way for Sony to make the game more tedius for the people that pay for the game so that they make it harder to hit 50.  I am really dissapointed what seems like Sony's goal to make the game more tedius than it already is in an effort to slow down leveling.</DIV><p>Message Edited by minobu on <span class=date_text>03-03-2005</span> <span class=time_text>10:15 AM</span>

[Lancealittle]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> minobu wrote:<BR> <DIV>This is just another way for Sony to make the game more tedius for the people that pay for the game so that they make it harder to hit 50.  I am really dissapointed what seems like Sony's goal to make the game more tedius than it already is in an effort to slow down leveling.</DIV> <P>Message Edited by minobu on <SPAN class=date_text>03-03-2005</SPAN> <SPAN class=time_text>10:15 AM</SPAN><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <DIV>More tedious how?</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Do you read the patch notes? They are making the game easier. XPs are being rasied, loot is easier to get, you can group with people you've outleveled, etc. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>If you grey out something that is red to someone else then they have no reason to be in your group to get the agro in the first place.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>If you are surrounded by agro reds you're in over your head and it should be dangerous for you. I completed the Zek bootstrutter quests while most of it was red to me. I guess I could have grouped with someone in their 40s and walked around all the greys, but I did it the 'tedious' way, or as I like to call it..the 'fun' way.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV>

[Lancealittle]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Eelyen wrote:<BR> <DIV>The actual amount of grouping this will effect is limited.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I can picture my level 32 group not as willing to take a level 25 into Runnyeye.  Or atleast attempting to get a level 25 there.  But, other then that.  There isn't a whole lot of situations this will effect.  I think it was done to help prevent the "looking for a high level to grey everything out."</DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <P>Hi there Eelyen.</P> <P>I just wanted to note something. A red to that 25 would still be green to you and agro anyway. You still have to go around it or fight it. There would be no mobs that are grey to you that would be red to him.</P>

[WuphonsReach]

The rule for grouping and still getting experience or quest updates is, 6 levels or 25% of the highest member's level. So, up until level 27, it's a 6-level range (a 31 can group with a 25, a 30 can group with a 24). After 28, it start's to widen. 28 with a 2129 with a 2230 with a 2331 with a 2432 with a 24 (gap widens to 8 levels at level 32)33 with a 2534 with a 26(etc)This change fixes the exploit where a high level player sits at the zone line while lower level players waltz past content. Then, when they get to where they want to be (without any risk), they disband the higher level player and start fighting. A few minutes later, when they need to rest up or AFK, they re-invite the higher level player.The important thing to remember is that SOE does not want simple methods of turning risk vs reward into all-reward with no-risk.Now, there are a few approaches to fixing this issue (that I can think of):1) The current fix where grey-con mobs that are only grey due to the average group level will still aggro. Easiest of all to program, and doesn't affect groups that aren't using the 'high level to grey-out the zone' method. Difficult to exploit. Now, the higher level player needs to accompany the lower level group safely through the dungeon (which at least requires some effort, and risk to the lower level players if the higher level player is not careful to kill anything that looks at them funny).2) Make it so that the 'zone of grey' only matters if the group members are within range of the high level player. Tricky to program, adds some odd exploits where groups fight just out of range of the high level player. Makes more sense from a roleplay/reality standpoint, but the programming complexity (or coming up with rules that are as simple as possible, and no simpler, without allowing all sorts of corner cases) is probably why they didn't do it.

[Tradeskill_Addict]

<DIV>I might add that in dungeons it has become a widespread habit to group just for getting past aggro mobs and finish an important quest (like priest hallmark in vermins snye which has to be done alone but getting to the instance alive is impossible that lvl 19).</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I have mixed feelings both about this habit and  the change because many high lvls have no problems to *bodyguard* but fighting through grey mobs for 15 minutes is a diferent matter.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>But *outgreying* doesnt really sound ok to me so I will accept that change if going live.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV><p>Message Edited by Tradeskill_Addict on <span class=date_text>03-03-2005</span> <span class=time_text>08:46 AM</span>

[Ute]

<blockquote><hr>WuphonsReach wrote:The rule for grouping and still getting experience or quest updates is, 6 levels or 25% of the highest member's level. So, up until level 27, it's a 6-level range (a 31 can group with a 25, a 30 can group with a 24). After 28, it start's to widen. 28 with a 2129 with a 2230 with a 2331 with a 2432 with a 24 (gap widens to 8 levels at level 32)33 with a 2534 with a 26(etc)This change fixes the exploit where a high level player sits at the zone line while lower level players waltz past content. Then, when they get to where they want to be (without any risk), they disband the higher level player and start fighting. A few minutes later, when they need to rest up or AFK, they re-invite the higher level player.The important thing to remember is that SOE does not want simple methods of turning risk vs reward into all-reward with no-risk.Now, there are a few approaches to fixing this issue (that I can think of):1) The current fix where grey-con mobs that are only grey due to the average group level will still aggro. Easiest of all to program, and doesn't affect groups that aren't using the 'high level to grey-out the zone' method. Difficult to exploit. Now, the higher level player needs to accompany the lower level group safely through the dungeon (which at least requires some effort, and risk to the lower level players if the higher level player is not careful to kill anything that looks at them funny).2) Make it so that the 'zone of grey' only matters if the group members are within range of the high level player. Tricky to program, adds some odd exploits where groups fight just out of range of the high level player. Makes more sense from a roleplay/reality standpoint, but the programming complexity (or coming up with rules that are as simple as possible, and no simpler, without allowing all sorts of corner cases) is probably why they didn't do it.<hr></blockquote>Also, this very tactic is what has made Rogue group stealth abilities so unvalued at most levels of play. Why group stealth and have a risk of discovery, when you can just group with someone temporarily who is many levels higher than you and safely bypass all the content. Or, use the greying out ability to accomplish quest goals without risk?If, after this change, you still want to bypass mobs to get to a certain spot, just bring a Brigand or Swashbuckler with your group. That is what our group stealth abilities were designed for.

[KudLenka]

<DIV>the subclass quests with solo instances should not be placed in dungeons like that. Even in group of few lvl 19 i had terrible troubles to get my fury quest done. in fact i needed help of  high level. but none of the mobs there was red to me so the greying out would work with the change anyway. the important point is - the agressive mob needs to con RED to the lowest level. I dont have any issues with that.</DIV>

[Samnas]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> minobu wrote:<BR> <DIV>This is just another way for Sony to make the game more tedius for the people that pay for the game so that they make it harder to hit 50.  I am really dissapointed what seems like Sony's goal to make the game more tedius than it already is in an effort to slow down leveling.</DIV> <P>Message Edited by minobu on <SPAN class=date_text>03-03-2005</SPAN> <SPAN class=time_text>10:15 AM</SPAN><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> Increased exp again, mentoring, increased reward for quests..... this is tedium?  The whole point of SOE is to keep us happy and continuing to play the game.  Does this mean they dont want us to all get to 50 and blow through all their content in a week?  I would think so, but why have so much content at low and mid-levels if you just blow right past them?  MMORPG are not designed to be a game that the goal is just "finish" and then quit so of course they have to balance the pace of levelling with the content.  At lvl 35 there is a lot of content below and around my lvl that I have not seen yet so as long as they have pleanty of content for people to enjoy on the way to 50 I dont have any problem with the speed of levelling.

[aeio]

<blockquote><hr>Dazzler_Twodirks wrote:<DIV>What high level wants to beatdown a gray mob for nothing?</DIV><DIV> </DIV><DIV>With this added you'll no longer see groups willing to let someone a few levels lower tag along.</DIV><DIV> </DIV><DIV>Traveling around with the see invis mobs is bad enough now ALL of them are gonna aggro and you get no experiance for defending yourself.</DIV><DIV> </DIV><DIV>If you're gonna change the game completely you better add chests to grey mobs that do this.</DIV><hr></blockquote>Well the current situation allows higher level players to totally trivialize and bypass content for lower level players. I was never in favor of that mechanic, since beta. I am glad they finally decided to fix it.If you want to group with lower levels, then mentor them and you can face challenges together... otherwise group with appropriate level people.

[mino]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Samnas wrote:<BR><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> minobu wrote:<BR> <DIV>This is just another way for Sony to make the game more tedius for the people that pay for the game so that they make it harder to hit 50.  I am really dissapointed what seems like Sony's goal to make the game more tedius than it already is in an effort to slow down leveling.</DIV> <P>Message Edited by minobu on <SPAN class=date_text>03-03-2005</SPAN> <SPAN class=time_text>10:15 AM</SPAN><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> Increased exp again, mentoring, increased reward for quests..... this is tedium?  The whole point of SOE is to keep us happy and continuing to play the game.  Does this mean they dont want us to all get to 50 and blow through all their content in a week?  I would think so, but why have so much content at low and mid-levels if you just blow right past them?  MMORPG are not designed to be a game that the goal is just "finish" and then quit so of course they have to balance the pace of levelling with the content.  At lvl 35 there is a lot of content below and around my lvl that I have not seen yet so as long as they have pleanty of content for people to enjoy on the way to 50 I dont have any problem with the speed of levelling.<BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <P>yeah tedium.  I remember once before being told they were increasing solo xp gain and guess what?  I certainly don't see the difference.  And I agree mmorpg aren't made for just leveling which isn't what I do never claimed too either.  Who knows maybe they are changing it for the better now but they certainly went in the wrong direction to start with so forgive me if I take a wait and see approach.  Additionally, you never know what they are gonna sneak in there i.e. when they increased the damage for Wizards and Warlocks and lowered fizzle rate but lo and behold more than tripled the resist rate.  </P> <P>Some examples of tedium</P> <P>Shards = timesink nothing more why not just give more debt so it takes longer to work off?</P> <P>roadblocks in all heritage quests that require you to camp for 4 hours to kill a named mob and of course some non heritage quests -- I am not saying make them easier but there could be alot more creativity to this i.e. make the named mob harder to get to so you have to do something like dungeon crawling to get to the mob and maybe another couple of steps to get there rather than sitting in one spot.</P> <P>there are more but I am at work and don't have time for it</P> <P>Maybe the main problem is I should not have preordered because par for the course for Sony is to release a game too soon and have people pay to beta test for them probably would feel much better about the game if I bought it today and started playing.  Alot of my frustration probably stems from playing classes that had and still have many broken spells.  </P><p>Message Edited by minobu on <span class=date_text>03-03-2005</span> <span class=time_text>12:27 PM</span>

[Samnas]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> minobu wrote:<BR> <BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Samnas wrote:<BR><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> minobu wrote:<BR> <DIV>This is just another way for Sony to make the game more tedius for the people that pay for the game so that they make it harder to hit 50.  I am really dissapointed what seems like Sony's goal to make the game more tedius than it already is in an effort to slow down leveling.</DIV> <P>Message Edited by minobu on <SPAN class=date_text>03-03-2005</SPAN> <SPAN class=time_text>10:15 AM</SPAN><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> Increased exp again, mentoring, increased reward for quests..... this is tedium?  The whole point of SOE is to keep us happy and continuing to play the game.  Does this mean they dont want us to all get to 50 and blow through all their content in a week?  I would think so, but why have so much content at low and mid-levels if you just blow right past them?  MMORPG are not designed to be a game that the goal is just "finish" and then quit so of course they have to balance the pace of levelling with the content.  At lvl 35 there is a lot of content below and around my lvl that I have not seen yet so as long as they have pleanty of content for people to enjoy on the way to 50 I dont have any problem with the speed of levelling.<BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <P>yeah tedium.  I remember once before being told they were increasing solo xp gain and guess what?  I certainly don't see the difference.  And I agree mmorpg aren't made for just leveling which isn't what I do never claimed too either.  Who knows maybe they are changing it for the better now but they certainly went in the wrong direction to start with so forgive me if I take a wait and see approach.  Additionally, you never know what they are gonna sneak in there i.e. when they increased the damage for Wizards and Warlocks and lowered fizzle rate but lo and behold more than tripled the resist rate.  </P> <P>Some examples of tedium</P> <P>Shards = timesink nothing more why not just give more debt so it takes longer to work off?</P> <P>roadblocks in all heritage quests that require you to camp for 4 hours to kill a named mob and of course some non heritage quests -- I am not saying make them easier but there could be alot more creativity to this i.e. make the named mob harder to get to so you have to do something like dungeon crawling to get to the mob and maybe another couple of steps to get there rather than sitting in one spot.</P> <P>there are more but I am at work and don't have time for it</P> <P>Maybe the main problem is I should not have preordered because par for the course for Sony is to release a game too soon and have people pay to beta test for them probably would feel much better about the game if I bought it today and started playing.  Alot of my frustration probably stems from playing classes that had and still have many broken spells.  </P> <P>Message Edited by minobu on <SPAN class=date_text>03-03-2005</SPAN> <SPAN class=time_text>12:27 PM</SPAN><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Well just cause you dont see the difference in solo exp sorry that does not mean it was not changed.  I use an interface that gives exp to the tenth of a % so it is easy to tell exactly how much exp i get per mob and for the mobs I was hunting it seemed to be around 30% difference.</P> <P>Shards I personally think are a great idea and I am guessing if they instead did something like double or triple the debt for death but got rid of shard people would be very unhappy.  The shard is a good way to make death a minor inconvenience for 95%+ of deaths and you can normally easily retrieve it, but adds some difficulty if you are really stretching the limits of what you can accomplish or even going somewhere that is way beyond where you are capable of hunting.  Tedium to one person is good game mechanics to another.  Nothing makes either of us right since it is opinion, but to just post that the goal of SOE is to make it tedius I think is pretty unfair.</P> <P>As for release too soon I have never seen a MMO released where the boards were not full of people saying the "released too soon" and "we are paying to beta test", etc.  Some people thing we should not accept that as customers, but personally I am fine with it.  I realize these companies are out to make money and while it may be possible to eliminate nearly all bugs/balance issues/etc in a long/large beta I do not expect it to be done.  If the monetary return was there then companies would do it.  It is not unique to MMO though it is in software in general.  The other recently released major MMORPG comes from company known for great customer service and lengthly betas that remove 99% of the bugs.  Of course when they did their first MMORPG it was/is a bugfest.  If the game is released with a reasonable amount of bugs, but the game is still playable and fun for me then great it is worth my $15 a month I dont expect perfection.<BR></P>

[mino]

<DIV>sanmas - ( not gonna bother reqouting getting WAY too long <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /> )</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Yeah I understand that there are different play styles and I somewhat agree maybe I was being a bit harsh with that statement.  I don't know what class you play and thats not really the point but there are some classes that although someone could log on and play them once they got to a certain point in their career they were nigh unplayable.  Alot of those have since rerolled and started over but the point is that there were a few classes that over half their spells were broken and up until the 2/17 update one set of classes in particular that were all about damage didn't come close to the damage that the classes that were supposed to be about taking it.  Now to me that almost makes the game unplayable for those classes.  I think it mainly comes down to the 30+ game being very sloppy.  I mean yeah for the first 30 levels the game truly rocks but then hit 30+ and you start seeing all the copied spells that do less than spells you had 10-15 levels before.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I am a programmer so I know it is impossible to put out a piece of software without bugs even more so on a program the size of EQ but the overwhelming number of bugs and broken spells seems a bit extreme.</DIV><p>Message Edited by minobu on <span class=date_text>03-03-2005</span> <span class=time_text>03:03 PM</span>

[Drtydog]

<DIV>Okay maybe i'm having a blonde day but i'm a little confused at the moment with this upcoming change.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>is the change that if i'm at a level where the monsters in an area become gray and I'm grouped with a player lower than me, say 4 levels, then all teh gray mobs that use to run through will now aggro me </DIV> <DIV>or</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>are we all sayign that if the gray mobs would con red to the lower level dude, even though they con gray to me,  then they will aggro?</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV>

[FamilyManFir]

<blockquote><hr>Eelyen wrote:<DIV>Pretty much from what I know you can group with people within 7 levels of you and the lowest player can still get xp. Meaning You could have a level 25 in group, and the max level in the group for that person to get xp would be 32. I think quest rewards extend an extra level or two. </DIV><hr></blockquote>What I've been told (and my gaming seems to validate this) is that the maximum difference in levels between groupmates is either 6 levels or 25% of the highest level character in the group, whichever is greater. Therefore a level 14 char can group with a level 20 char (6 levels difference) or a level 30 char can group with a level 40 char (10 levels of difference, from 40 x 25% = 10) and everyone can still receive experience. That calculation, btw, seems to include the % that each char is in within their level for borderline cases.Edit: Sorry, didn't see Wuphon's post that said the same thing.<p>Message Edited by FamilyManFirst on <span class=date_text>03-03-2005</span> <span class=time_text>01:50 PM</span>

[thorvang]

this change adds the flavour of "real" guarding and proctection of lower players you group with. like that.exp is not all eq2 is about<p>Message Edited by thorvang on <span class=date_text>03-03-2005</span> <span class=time_text>11:01 PM</span>

[FamilyManFir]

<blockquote><hr>buoymarker28 wrote:<DIV>Okay maybe i'm having a blonde day but i'm a little confused at the moment with this upcoming change.</DIV><DIV> </DIV><DIV>is the change that if i'm at a level where the monsters in an area become gray and I'm grouped with a player lower than me, say 4 levels, then all teh gray mobs that use to run through will now aggro me </DIV><DIV>or</DIV><DIV> </DIV><DIV>are we all sayign that if the gray mobs would con red to the lower level dude, even though they con gray to me, then they will aggro?</DIV><DIV> </DIV><DIV> </DIV><hr></blockquote>According to Moorgard's Update Notes, it's the latter, i.e. if you group with someone much lower level than you and you or he try to run past mobs that would, normally, con <FONT color=#ff0000>red</FONT> to him but now con gray because you're so high level they'll still attack. If they would normally con yellow or lower they'll still cringe away.

[Kalyndr]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Dazzler_Twodirks wrote:<BR> <DIV>What high level wants to beatdown a gray mob for nothing?</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>With this added you'll no longer see groups willing to let someone a few levels lower tag along.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Traveling around with the see invis mobs is bad enough now ALL of them are gonna aggro and you get no experiance for defending yourself.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>If you're gonna change the game completely you better add chests to grey mobs that do this.</DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> This is completely wrong. Unless the mob attacking is <STRONG>RED</STRONG> to the lowest lvl member in the group then it wont agro. This does not effect ALL mobs. I would suggest rereading what was written in the patch notes, before making incorrect and inflammatory statements.

[Solkarr]

<DIV>While this will stop a mentor from un-mentoring to bypasss something and then re-mentor for the good kills, there are other methods which will not hurt the other currently accepted uses of greying things out.  People for groups and raids for harvesting, this is a really really nice service high level players provide lower and mid level players.  Also I provide escort services to guildies passing through Nek forest for betrayal quests, they are my friends and i want to make it easier for them then it was for me... owlbears are most certainly red at level 14 to 17... this would be a forgoten thing with this change.  Also grouping a high level to allow you to get your shard (or 5 shards, etc) from a really nasty place you "discovered" while exploring would be a thing of the past... a LOT more shards would be left to decay =(</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I propose instead a timer associated with mentoring... If you have mentored in the past hour you no-longer grey things out in the way mentioned in the patch... BUT if you have not been mentoring, it should go as it always has.  This will stop the mentor / un-mentor / mentor exploit, without hurting the services higher level members can currently offer lower level players.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I am all for stopping exploits of a system, but not hurting current beneficial ways that players interact.</DIV>

[Dazzler_Twodir]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Utess wrote:<BR><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> WuphonsReach wrote:<BR>The rule for grouping and still getting experience or quest updates is, 6 levels or 25% of the highest member's level. So, up until level 27, it's a 6-level range (a 31 can group with a 25, a 30 can group with a 24). After 28, it start's to widen. <BR><BR>28 with a 21<BR>29 with a 22<BR>30 with a 23<BR>31 with a 24<BR>32 with a 24 (gap widens to 8 levels at level 32)<BR>33 with a 25<BR>34 with a 26<BR>(etc)<BR><BR>This change fixes the exploit where a high level player sits at the zone line while lower level players waltz past content. Then, when they get to where they want to be (without any risk), they disband the higher level player and start fighting. A few minutes later, when they need to rest up or AFK, they re-invite the higher level player.<BR><BR>The important thing to remember is that SOE does not want simple methods of turning risk vs reward into all-reward with no-risk.<BR><BR>Now, there are a few approaches to fixing this issue (that I can think of):<BR><BR>1) The current fix where grey-con mobs that are only grey due to the average group level will still aggro. Easiest of all to program, and doesn't affect groups that aren't using the 'high level to grey-out the zone' method. Difficult to exploit. Now, the higher level player needs to accompany the lower level group safely through the dungeon (which at least requires some effort, and risk to the lower level players if the higher level player is not careful to kill anything that looks at them funny).<BR><BR>2) Make it so that the 'zone of grey' only matters if the group members are within range of the high level player. Tricky to program, adds some odd exploits where groups fight just out of range of the high level player. Makes more sense from a roleplay/reality standpoint, but the programming complexity (or coming up with rules that are as simple as possible, and no simpler, without allowing all sorts of corner cases) is probably why they didn't do it.<BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR><BR><BR>Also, this very tactic is what has made Rogue group stealth abilities so unvalued at most levels of play. Why group stealth and have a risk of discovery, when you can just group with someone temporarily who is many levels higher than you and safely bypass all the content. Or, use the greying out ability to accomplish quest goals without risk?<BR><BR>If, after this change, you still want to bypass mobs to get to a certain spot, just bring a Brigand or Swashbuckler with your group. That is what our group stealth abilities were designed for.<BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Rogue "Stealth" in EQ2 is such a sick joke anyway.</P> <P>It doesn't exist.</P> <P>Most of the time people i'm covering with Freeboot get jumped.<BR></P>

[Crono1321]

<blockquote><hr>Dazzler_Twodirks wrote:<BR><BLOCKQUOTE><HR>Utess wrote:<BR><BR><BLOCKQUOTE><HR>WuphonsReach wrote:<BR>The rule for grouping and still getting experience or quest updates is, 6 levels or 25% of the highest member's level. So, up until level 27, it's a 6-level range (a 31 can group with a 25, a 30 can group with a 24). After 28, it start's to widen. <BR><BR>28 with a 21<BR>29 with a 22<BR>30 with a 23<BR>31 with a 24<BR>32 with a 24 (gap widens to 8 levels at level 32)<BR>33 with a 25<BR>34 with a 26<BR>(etc)<BR><BR>This change fixes the exploit where a high level player sits at the zone line while lower level players waltz past content. Then, when they get to where they want to be (without any risk), they disband the higher level player and start fighting. A few minutes later, when they need to rest up or AFK, they re-invite the higher level player.<BR><BR>The important thing to remember is that SOE does not want simple methods of turning risk vs reward into all-reward with no-risk.<BR><BR>Now, there are a few approaches to fixing this issue (that I can think of):<BR><BR>1) The current fix where grey-con mobs that are only grey due to the average group level will still aggro. Easiest of all to program, and doesn't affect groups that aren't using the 'high level to grey-out the zone' method. Difficult to exploit. Now, the higher level player needs to accompany the lower level group safely through the dungeon (which at least requires some effort, and risk to the lower level players if the higher level player is not careful to kill anything that looks at them funny).<BR><BR>2) Make it so that the 'zone of grey' only matters if the group members are within range of the high level player. Tricky to program, adds some odd exploits where groups fight just out of range of the high level player. Makes more sense from a roleplay/reality standpoint, but the programming complexity (or coming up with rules that are as simple as possible, and no simpler, without allowing all sorts of corner cases) is probably why they didn't do it.<BR><HR></BLOCKQUOTE><BR><BR><BR>Also, this very tactic is what has made Rogue group stealth abilities so unvalued at most levels of play. Why group stealth and have a risk of discovery, when you can just group with someone temporarily who is many levels higher than you and safely bypass all the content. Or, use the greying out ability to accomplish quest goals without risk?<BR><BR>If, after this change, you still want to bypass mobs to get to a certain spot, just bring a Brigand or Swashbuckler with your group. That is what our group stealth abilities were designed for.<BR><HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>Rogue "Stealth" in EQ2 is such a sick joke anyway.</P><P>It doesn't exist.</P><P>Most of the time people i'm covering with Freeboot get jumped.<BR></P><hr></blockquote>Thats because the idiots rogues group with always break group invis.Sprint34 swash

[Siriln]

<DIV>It's not unknown for a higher level in my guild to come grey out mobs if someone died in a particularly awkward situation (someohow ended up in the middle of a TON of mobs, etc.).  I've always considered this a service to other players as well, since we don't interfere with their hunting but can rescue a guildmate.  If the current changes eliminate this ability, well, so be it, I would prefer not to interfere with the enjoyment of players who are the appropriate level for a zone, but I can assure you we will slaughter Blackburrow if need be.  (My apologies to anyone who may have to wait for respawn.)</DIV>

[Dimgroth]

its now better for roleplaying protecting of a lower friend but mainly its so the mentor system can go live without abuse.

[Almeric_CoS]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Tradeskill_Addict wrote:<BR> <DIV>I might add that in dungeons it has become a widespread habit to group just for getting past aggro mobs and finish an important quest (like priest hallmark in vermins snye which has to be done alone but getting to the instance alive is impossible that lvl 19).</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Message Edited by Tradeskill_Addict on <SPAN class=date_text>03-03-2005</SPAN> <SPAN class=time_text>08:46 AM</SPAN><BR></DIV> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <DIV>At level 19, there are absolutely zero mobs in Vermin's Snye that are red to you.  Therefore, you could have a level 50 come in and grey out the zone and it wouldn't matter at all for the purposes of this change.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>If you were trying to help a level 5, fresh-off-the-isle newbie get to the back of The Caves for the Baubbleshire Mineral Expert quest, then you'd have a problem.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV>

[Tradeskill_Addict]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Almeric wrote:<BR><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Tradeskill_Addict wrote:<BR> <DIV>I might add that in dungeons it has become a widespread habit to group just for getting past aggro mobs and finish an important quest (like priest hallmark in vermins snye which has to be done alone but getting to the instance alive is impossible that lvl 19).</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Message Edited by Tradeskill_Addict on <SPAN class=date_text>03-03-2005</SPAN> <SPAN class=time_text>08:46 AM</SPAN><BR></DIV> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <DIV>At level 19, there are absolutely zero mobs in Vermin's Snye that are red to you.  Therefore, you could have a level 50 come in and grey out the zone and it wouldn't matter at all for the purposes of this change.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>If you were trying to help a level 5, fresh-off-the-isle newbie get to the back of The Caves for the Baubbleshire Mineral Expert quest, then you'd have a problem.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>you are right about vermins snye I think  - they are talking about red, not red-bordered mobs on test.</P> <P>***** for a polite correction :smileyhappy:<BR></P>

[FamilyManFir]

<blockquote><hr>Siriln wrote:<DIV>It's not unknown for a higher level in my guild to come grey out mobs if someone died in a particularly awkward situation (someohow ended up in the middle of a TON of mobs, etc.). I've always considered this a service to other players as well, since we don't interfere with their hunting but can rescue a guildmate. If the current changes eliminate this ability, well, so be it, I would prefer not to interfere with the enjoyment of players who are the appropriate level for a zone, but I can assure you we will slaughter Blackburrow if need be. (My apologies to anyone who may have to wait for respawn.)</DIV><hr></blockquote>Most of this kind of activity will still be possible. Remember, only mobs that are <FONT color=#ff0000>red</FONT> to the low-level char will still aggro. Mobs orange and down will still cringe away. It would have to be an <i>awfully</i> awkward situation (read: very foolish players!) for your guildies to die in the middle of a mass of red-conned mobs!

[Siriln]

<DIV>*sigh*  And here I was trying to be calm and reasonable...  For those who thought otherwise 1)  I am not threatening the devs, I expect they will do as they see neccessary to balance the game.  I was attempting to point out potential conflicts that this change could cause, perhaps I was unclear.  2)  I have no desire to interfere with anyone elses game, as I would prefer they didn't interfere with mine.  My concern is the potential for walking thru a crowded area and aggroing everyone elses camp.  Frankly, if something starts beating on me I don't really want to sit there and wait for the group in the area to pull it back off...  3)  Most problems with being killed by reds for us seem to involve either griffons or giants *swears at the raid mobs* in nice open areas, so hopefully the issue will never arise.  For those unfamiliar with the phrase "so be it", in this context it's related to kai sera sera (definitely not how it's spelled, basically means whatever will be, will be), as in we'll worry when it happens and adapt.</DIV>

[AlA]

Sometimes folks have bad hair days. You sounded quite reasonable. It should be obvious that even tho you said if necessary ye would kill all the greys in a dungeon to get a shard for a friend back, that it would never be necessary. Dungeons are too big, ye would have to go out of your way to aggro all the greys and I know when doing shard missions, group's top priority is getting the shards and getting outta there and would view fighting greys as something to avoid the waste of time of if possible.<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Siriln wrote:<BR> <DIV>*sigh*  And here I was trying to be calm and reasonable...  For those who thought otherwise 1)  I am not threatening the devs, I expect they will do as they see neccessary to balance the game.  I was attempting to point out potential conflicts that this change could cause, perhaps I was unclear.  2)  I have no desire to interfere with anyone elses game, as I would prefer they didn't interfere with mine.  My concern is the potential for walking thru a crowded area and aggroing everyone elses camp.  Frankly, if something starts beating on me I don't really want to sit there and wait for the group in the area to pull it back off...  3)  Most problems with being killed by reds for us seem to involve either griffons or giants *swears at the raid mobs* in nice open areas, so hopefully the issue will never arise.  For those unfamiliar with the phrase "so be it", in this context it's related to kai sera sera (definitely not how it's spelled, basically means whatever will be, will be), as in we'll worry when it happens and adapt.</DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>

[Jacky_Ch]

<DIV>So this only involves grouping? What about those that are ungrouped and wish to bypass alot of crap grey mobs to get to a certain area? Would I have to fight my way through hundreads of worthless grey mobs now?</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV>

[Tradeskill_Addict]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Jacky_Chan wrote:<BR> <DIV>So this only involves grouping? What about those that are ungrouped and wish to bypass alot of crap grey mobs to get to a certain area? Would I have to fight my way through hundreads of worthless grey mobs now?</DIV> <DIV><BR> <HR> </DIV></BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <DIV>no, because afaik only RED-CONNING (not red-bordered) aggro-mobs attack even if outgreyed due to grouping.</DIV>

[UrkBloodA]

<DIV>It should make CR (shard recovery) a major pain.  That will equate to more players taking 3 days off or quitting out of the frustration of having 2 shards more to get since grouping with a friendly level 50 wont help, unless the level 50 risks life and limb fighting said greys.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Guess it willl increase cash flow for a level 50, 'cause this change will mean working to help someone on a CR.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV>

[Almeric_CoS]

<DIV>Life and limb fighting greys?</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Are we all functioning on the same planet here?</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Where are you taking your friends that will leave them in an unrecoverable field of red mobs?  Geesh.  Leading a character through an area where everything is grey to you but red to them is already uncommon, and there's very few - if any - reasons why it should be happening in the first place.  If it means providing proper balance for other systems like Mentoring, then its worth it.</DIV>

[Tradeskill_Addict]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> UrkBloodAxe wrote:<BR> <DIV>It should make CR (shard recovery) a major pain.  That will equate to more players taking 3 days off or quitting out of the frustration of having 2 shards more to get since grouping with a friendly level 50 wont help, unless the level 50 risks life and limb fighting said greys.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Guess it willl increase cash flow for a level 50, 'cause this change will mean working to help someone on a CR.<BR> <HR> </DIV></BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <DIV>Whoever leaves a shard in an area which is full of red-conning mobs is either a complete fool who made a terrible mistake or  just a simple greedy a*shole who went there on purpose and for profit.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Both deserve a lesson and will hopefully pay the price in the future.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Lets face it - the *friendly helping high level* was usually the higher 2-boxing toon of the same player:smileywink:</DIV>

[UrkBloodA]

<DIV>Sorry - my level 50 toon regularly gets tells asking me to group with someone to do a CR.  (And these CRs are in areas where the victim will see red agro - for example level 32 in RE.)  Sure, many times it may be fools.  some times other things happen - for example you are in a raid and the zone crashes and you cannot reconnect.  That seems to be a fairly common complaint on guild chat.  (Ever get disconnected and when you reconnect not only is your group no longer there, but they filled your spot, and guess what you just died.)</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I was watching a group take on an epic 3x today.  The people in this guild have been trying to kill it for a few days now.  This raid mob cons grey to all the level 50's trying to take it down.  Sorry - to laugh - but it's funny as hell to see a raid mob spit out a group of level 50s.  And it does it so quickly...</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>As for non-raid grey mobs which can give a level 50 a thrashing - there are pleanty of them.  Dont listen to me, get to level 50 and then go try to solo every grey group you can find in tier 4 and tier 5 zones.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>My point isn't pro or con on grey/red agro attacking a group.  As with all changes, people will log on without reading notes, or without understanding them and get thrashed.  Changes do that.  Heck, I can give you about 50 names of people who quit with the last big update.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Mentoring is a great idea.  I personally have some investment in seeing it on live (see first sentance.)</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Changes to agro mechanics may be justified.  But maybe a better idea has been suggested - make mentoring something you cannot just do anywhere.  Make it so players have to be in a city zone to start it.  Then sure, cancel any time - and make cancel break the encounter too.  Then you cannot exploit mentoring to bypass zero-content agro.  As well this would prevent evil mentoring good players, and betrayers would have to sneak into city to start mentoring (not necessarily good.)  On the other hand, making the change to agro may create more regular work for my toon - so that's really cool with me. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV>

[Almeric_CoS]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> UrkBloodAxe wrote:<BR> <DIV>Sorry - my level 50 toon regularly gets tells asking me to group with someone to do a CR.  (And these CRs are in areas where the victim will see red agro - for example level 32 in RE.)  Sure, many times it may be fools.  some times other things happen<BR><BR>I was watching a group take on an epic 3x today. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>As for non-raid grey mobs which can give a level 50 a thrashing - there are pleanty of them.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> <HR> </DIV></BLOCKQUOTE> <DIV>I understand what you're saying, I really do.  I know sometimes there's just a freakish occurance that gets someone ganked by a red.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Still, on the other hand, only the most tight, skilled parties should be adventuring in areas where stuff is red, and especially with the case of raid mobs, if you're going to take one on that's RED you should be prepared for the possibility of a tough, ugly shard recovery.  After all, you're about to fight content that really wasn't intended for you.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Otherwise there's no real risk apart from a few silver to repair your armor, and a sliver of debt.  Shard recovery is there to make you be wary of death, and therefore grouping to fight reds should be uncommon.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>So what happens in those freak occurances when someone dies to a red totally without fault of their own?  Well, maybe one level 50 will have to actually help more than just standing there to grey out the zone.  Or maybe its a harder zone and the level 50 will need another friend to come help kill the grey stuff.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Whatever the outcome, all this change is going to do is provide a little extra sting to a death caused by adventuring beyond one's means.  And even in the absolute WORST case scenario, you chalk up one shard as a loss, and play it safe for a few days...or go tradeskill...or play an alt.</DIV>