I don't mind the concept, but I think there are a lot of different ways to go about it. For example, if the spawn is at the end of a crawl then the placeholder should be a guy when it is not the guy. If you spend all that time fighting down to an area, then you should be rewarded with something worth killing even if it is not what you were looking for. That being said if the camp is in the relative open and has ease of access then there is no need to have the placeholder be something interesring IMO.
Aich said:Yeah Raster was just terrible camp. I think I spent months on that guy. The day I finally got him went like this...
I made my way back down to the camp spot in LGuk after FD flopping thru the zone like I normally do when I come back to camp him.
Another monk was there, so I just stayed and helped him clear mobs.
Then...Raster spawns...I'm like crap, I finally see this guy but he is for another guy. Instead of trying to steal the kill I let the other guy go ahead. He left giving me the camp lol.
So there I was waiting on the next PH to spawn after seeing this other lucky guy just drop Raster.
The NEXT spawn Raster spawns again, back to back. I literally was stunned. I droped him post haste got my drop then sent a tell to the previous monk saying you will never believe what just happened....
Had this a couple of times on various mobs
variable timers like this are infuriratingly sweetness
I'm both in favor or it and not in favor of it lol.
I want rare mobs to be rare. I don't want them spawning every 10 minutes but I also don't like the idea of static spawns. Meaning having the same rares spawning in the same spots. I would rather have rares spawning out of a type of mob in one area. For instance, we are clearing mobs in sol b killing kobolds, now let's say there is a kobold high shaman that is a rare spawn. That high shaman should be able to spawn from ANY shaman spawn in that zone. This would make dungeon crawls more of a thing since there would be no real point to 'camp' any certain areas. It gives more of a surprise and adventure feel to things rather than just sitting in one spot for hours and hours controlling a mob. Would also make tracking a lot more relevant in dungeons and not just open world.
Enitzu said:I'm both in favor or it and not in favor of it lol.
I want rare mobs to be rare. I don't want them spawning every 10 minutes but I also don't like the idea of static spawns. Meaning having the same rares spawning in the same spots. I would rather have rares spawning out of a type of mob in one area. For instance, we are clearing mobs in sol b killing kobolds, now let's say there is a kobold high shaman that is a rare spawn. That high shaman should be able to spawn from ANY shaman spawn in that zone. This would make dungeon crawls more of a thing since there would be no real point to 'camp' any certain areas. It gives more of a surprise and adventure feel to things rather than just sitting in one spot for hours and hours controlling a mob. Would also make tracking a lot more relevant in dungeons and not just open world.
Playing devils' advocate on this for a minute. In theory, I like this idea, but I believe it would decrease the accessibility in dungeons, and create more friction between players. Think of this scenario.
Xxgandalfxx zones into Crushbone and shouts "Camp Check!"
Mylilpwnies Shouts "Wall!"
Kabener Shouts "Slaver Pits!"
Aradune Shouts "Ambassador lolnewbs"
Xxgandalfxx proceeds to Trainer hill with his group. You now have 4 happy groups in 4 completely different parts of a zone that has other options for the next group that decides to hunt here. You might have that one jerk that tries stealing your camp, but for the most part, people are secure in their intended camps.
If you take that away and have these rare mobs that drop desirable gear spawning in random locations with randomly located placeholders, all you have is chaos. You have one group mowing down the entire zone from beginning to end, hoping they stumble across a Named mob. You have another group attempt to pick up stragglers. You have another group completely out of luck, because the two aforementioned groups pretty much have it covered. Maybe the 2nd group gets lucky and stumbles onto a named Mob. The 1st group sees it and throws a fit because they've been clearing the whole dang zone. Arguments ensue. 3rd group still sits there with a frowny face, trying to decide if they need to just move on to another hunting ground.
We talk about how we want this social dynamic in the game. Static mobs create part of that dynamic. They cause downtime between camps. They cause lists for groups (Highpass goblins, anyone?). As much as we hate to admit it, they also created order in dungeons. Take those away, and you might as well have these dungeons instanced, because there will always be that one group that just dominates the entire dungeon in the hopes of finding that ONE mob.
But, also, I didn't read all replies, because I'm lazy, so maybe I'm missing something.
-Tralyan
From the twitch stream, I liked how they moved further in, and didn't just stay in the same spot the entire time. There should be incentives to work your way deeper into a zone or dungeon. A lot of this comes down to zone layout.
I don't mind camping some PH but I'd rather it be the exception rather than the rule.
Tralyan said:Enitzu said:I'm both in favor or it and not in favor of it lol.
I want rare mobs to be rare. I don't want them spawning every 10 minutes but I also don't like the idea of static spawns. Meaning having the same rares spawning in the same spots. I would rather have rares spawning out of a type of mob in one area. For instance, we are clearing mobs in sol b killing kobolds, now let's say there is a kobold high shaman that is a rare spawn. That high shaman should be able to spawn from ANY shaman spawn in that zone. This would make dungeon crawls more of a thing since there would be no real point to 'camp' any certain areas. It gives more of a surprise and adventure feel to things rather than just sitting in one spot for hours and hours controlling a mob. Would also make tracking a lot more relevant in dungeons and not just open world.
Playing devils' advocate on this for a minute. In theory, I like this idea, but I believe it would decrease the accessibility in dungeons, and create more friction between players. Think of this scenario.
Xxgandalfxx zones into Crushbone and shouts "Camp Check!"
Mylilpwnies Shouts "Wall!"
Kabener Shouts "Slaver Pits!"
Aradune Shouts "Ambassador lolnewbs"
Xxgandalfxx proceeds to Trainer hill with his group. You now have 4 happy groups in 4 completely different parts of a zone that has other options for the next group that decides to hunt here. You might have that one jerk that tries stealing your camp, but for the most part, people are secure in their intended camps.
If you take that away and have these rare mobs that drop desirable gear spawning in random locations with randomly located placeholders, all you have is chaos. You have one group mowing down the entire zone from beginning to end, hoping they stumble across a Named mob. You have another group attempt to pick up stragglers. You have another group completely out of luck, because the two aforementioned groups pretty much have it covered. Maybe the 2nd group gets lucky and stumbles onto a named Mob. The 1st group sees it and throws a fit because they've been clearing the whole dang zone. Arguments ensue. 3rd group still sits there with a frowny face, trying to decide if they need to just move on to another hunting ground.
We talk about how we want this social dynamic in the game. Static mobs create part of that dynamic. They cause downtime between camps. They cause lists for groups (Highpass goblins, anyone?). As much as we hate to admit it, they also created order in dungeons. Take those away, and you might as well have these dungeons instanced, because there will always be that one group that just dominates the entire dungeon in the hopes of finding that ONE mob.
But, also, I didn't read all replies, because I'm lazy, so maybe I'm missing something.
-Tralyan
This is a concern of mine as well with my theory. However that can be countered with good game design as well. If we don't have many options to level, then it will be a problem. But if we have plenty of places to go then it really wouldn't be.
Groups will still have that same downtime because you can only press forward for as long as your healer and casters can back you on it. With a good group, well geared/experienced, that maybe longer than others but it would essentially be the exact same as sitting in a camp with the exception of that camp moving.
I wasn't really pushing for any linear dungeons by any means and even using my suggestions, camps would still be effective and probable. The only difference is you wouldn't be camping a static rare. You would be camping every rare in the zone of your mob types. This kills those groups that perma camp the best loot just to sell on the market. Without something like this you will have that group that has rotating schedules to perma camp things, especially early on to make a fortune or RMT.
Tralyan said:If you take that away and have these rare mobs that drop desirable gear spawning in random locations with randomly located placeholders, all you have is chaos. You have one group mowing down the entire zone from beginning to end, hoping they stumble across a Named mob. You have another group attempt to pick up stragglers. You have another group completely out of luck, because the two aforementioned groups pretty much have it covered. Maybe the 2nd group gets lucky and stumbles onto a named Mob. The 1st group sees it and throws a fit because they've been clearing the whole dang zone. Arguments ensue. 3rd group still sits there with a frowny face, trying to decide if they need to just move on to another hunting ground.
We talk about how we want this social dynamic in the game. Static mobs create part of that dynamic. They cause downtime between camps. They cause lists for groups (Highpass goblins, anyone?). As much as we hate to admit it, they also created order in dungeons. Take those away, and you might as well have these dungeons instanced, because there will always be that one group that just dominates the entire dungeon in the hopes of finding that ONE mob.
I don't see the issue you have with group 1 being more a risk with random spawns than you would see with multiple static spawns. If group 1 is able to clean the zone and doesn't want to play nice, they could be trying to hold claim to more than one camp even with multiple named. If all involved group agree to camps, even with randoms, then group 1 can be sad all they want, the named mob was group 2's.
Random named spawns also don't affect your example of HP goblins. If progessing deeper in the dungeon gives out more exp and cash loot, ppl will line up anyway. Having random named spawns actually give hope to those waiting that there could be something worth it in the lesser camp.
Mekada said:Tralyan said:If you take that away and have these rare mobs that drop desirable gear spawning in random locations with randomly located placeholders, all you have is chaos. You have one group mowing down the entire zone from beginning to end, hoping they stumble across a Named mob. You have another group attempt to pick up stragglers. You have another group completely out of luck, because the two aforementioned groups pretty much have it covered. Maybe the 2nd group gets lucky and stumbles onto a named Mob. The 1st group sees it and throws a fit because they've been clearing the whole dang zone. Arguments ensue. 3rd group still sits there with a frowny face, trying to decide if they need to just move on to another hunting ground.
We talk about how we want this social dynamic in the game. Static mobs create part of that dynamic. They cause downtime between camps. They cause lists for groups (Highpass goblins, anyone?). As much as we hate to admit it, they also created order in dungeons. Take those away, and you might as well have these dungeons instanced, because there will always be that one group that just dominates the entire dungeon in the hopes of finding that ONE mob.
I don't see the issue you have with group 1 being more a risk with random spawns than you would see with multiple static spawns. If group 1 is able to clean the zone and doesn't want to play nice, they could be trying to hold claim to more than one camp even with multiple named. If all involved group agree to camps, even with randoms, then group 1 can be sad all they want, the named mob was group 2's.
Random named spawns also don't affect your example of HP goblins. If progessing deeper in the dungeon gives out more exp and cash loot, ppl will line up anyway. Having random named spawns actually give hope to those waiting that there could be something worth it in the lesser camp.
I feel like it goes against inernet protocol to say things like "Huh, I never saw it from that point of view. I concede your point." But I do.
If the community still sticks to the "camp" protocol, then I agree 100%. Admittedly, the idea that this might be the case didn't register. I imagined 1 group attempting to camp the entire zone in the hopes of finding a particular mob.
This comes down to how important I feel reputation will hopefully be in Pantheon. Will you be the group leader that attempts to claim multiple camps as his own? Or will you actually play nice and allow other groups the chance, even if that means those other groups might get the mob you've been hoping for?
Also, are we talking ALL named? Or a chosen few? Surely not some quest mobs ..? How upset would you be after waiting for days for that griffin in ...WK, was it? ...at his spawn point only to have it turn out that he popped randomly on the other side of the zone?
Or are we only referring to dungeons, and not overland?
-Tralyan
I think EQ struck a balance when it came to named mobs though. Take for instance the ancient cyclopse example that I gave in the OP. In the Ocena of Tears near the sister island he was a static mob with placeholders. This is where I got my ring of the ancients. However, he could randomly spawn roaming in the open in either South Ro or East Karana. Although South Ro and East Karana were a bit rarer to find him in, there was still a chance. So to me, that is a good balance there between those who would like to have static PH/Name camps and random camp areas. We can have our cake and eat it too :)
I've had enough of games where all you do is run through the zone. Making rare spawns "dynamic" is going to make getting an item you're after potentially even harder and has the potential side effect of lowering the bond players create with areas of the game. It also has balance issues that the devs would need to spend resources addressing. Do you want the frenzied ghoul spawning in the bedroom? For multiple reasons, I would not. Fighting your way all the way down to the Frenzied or King or Lord had meaning. If those mobs could just spawn anywhere, why even bother making your way all the way down to the bottom, risking life and limb? Risk vs reward is a core tenet of ROTF. Additionally, do you want a level 50 mob spawning at a level 35 camp? It's going to create chaos. The group there would wipe, and then other groups would hear about it and there'd be a PC train to the camp and then we get into the killstealing and griefing that people lament so heavily.
starchildren3317 said:I think EQ struck a balance when it came to named mobs though. Take for instance the ancient cyclopse example that I gave in the OP. In the Ocena of Tears near the sister island he was a static mob with placeholders. This is where I got my ring of the ancients. However, he could randomly spawn roaming in the open in either South Ro or East Karana. Although South Ro and East Karana were a bit rarer to find him in, there was still a chance. So to me, that is a good balance there between those who would like to have static PH/Name camps and random camp areas. We can have our cake and eat it too :)
Items should remain rare, but in certain situations, perhaps like epic quests? having multiple avenues to complete a goal could be a good thing. At almost all costs it is important(to me) to not water down items so that they maintain their power and status, but there are ways that certain bottlenecks/blockers could be alleviated without undermining the integrity of the economy or of certain items.
Tralyan said:Also, are we talking ALL named? Or a chosen few? Surely not some quest mobs ..? How upset would you be after waiting for days for that griffin in ...WK, was it? ...at his spawn point only to have it turn out that he popped randomly on the other side of the zone?
Or are we only referring to dungeons, and not overland?
-Tralyan
The griffon you are reffering to has actually 3 spawn points so your example happened a lot actually. His PH's also all roamed. He is the perfect example of what I was describing. Was never a static spawn and he had 3 different PH's on 3 different paths in an open zone. Even when someone was 'camping' him you still had a chance to get him which made it a lot easier to deal with. Static spawns such as the Djinn in Sol B where a literal nightmare. Ever caster wanted GEBs early on and it was camped 100% of the time. If your guild didn't control it you could forget about getting them for at least a month.
I was really suggesting it more for dungeons since those are usually the more heavily camped areas, however it could work in the open world as well.
Krixus said:I've had enough of games where all you do is run through the zone. Making rare spawns "dynamic" is going to make getting an item you're after potentially even harder and has the potential side effect of lowering the bond players create with areas of the game. It also has balance issues that the devs would need to spend resources addressing. Do you want the frenzied ghoul spawning in the bedroom? For multiple reasons, I would not. Fighting your way all the way down to the Frenzied or King or Lord had meaning. If those mobs could just spawn anywhere, why even bother making your way all the way down to the bottom, risking life and limb? Risk vs reward is a core tenet of ROTF. Additionally, do you want a level 50 mob spawning at a level 35 camp? It's going to create chaos. The group there would wipe, and then other groups would hear about it and there'd be a PC train to the camp and then we get into the killstealing and griefing that people lament so heavily.
I wasn't suggesting making dungeons linear where you just run through them and you're done. My suggestion is more like if you are camping in an area and looking for a certain type of mob then you kill all mobs of that type when you can.
The only thing my suggestion would change is the static spawns. It would open all camps up to all spawns. It would allow camps like the Djinn for GEBs to become a good camp for even melee to have (yes I know he has the ring but in this example I'm pretending he only has the boots since thats why most want him). Because it wouldn't be only him with the possibility of spawning. It would give reasons to camp every area of a place rather than just the named. It would allow there to be more camps in a place.
As for level wise, well that's game design. They would have to regulate the spawn areas. If a place like guk exists where you can go from 35-50 then they need to keep things like the lord/frenzy in the 42ish+ areas and vice versa. It wouldn't be hard to do since lower and higher level mobs generally have different names. Rare mobs could be tied to the PH names which would keep it in the correct level range.
I was a supporter of multiple spawn locations but let me explain in more detail what I mean or support.
in dungeons, rare or named mobs need to be narrowed down to a tight area. I just don't want to see one exact location trigger the named. I would much rather have the three spots close to each other have the chance. There is something about the consistent kill, wait exactly 18 minutes 30 seconds and the "SPAWN" again, to see if the named spawns I cannot stand. I would "feel" better about breaking that time up into multiple close spawns and the chances would probably be in line with what is right. I am not a fan of camping something, is the SAME exact spot for a full day to - 2 weeks straight.
Let me make it clear, I do NOT like any named to spawn every 5 minutes either. I still want to work at it, problem is, most of us do not have that kind of time to waste anymore, that is a fact.
Open world content- I would rather see multiple spawn possibilities open up if the rare or named mob can wander quite a distance. If the named mob is tied to a camp spot, it should have that tight, 3 to 4 spawn area again I mentioned above. However, it is important that only ONE named possibility can be up at any given time.
Raid mobs should have a static location for obvious reasons. World mobs that wander, I do not care where they spawn, you still need a sustantial group to take them out.
Crazzie said:I agree, i want this too. It brings back so many old school memories. I wish i could be in my 20's again. But if we can rekindle the old feeling in a new world, i am on board.
Jboots was the most important part of EQ. I wondered who made this quest up?
Brad do you remember?
Sneaks
I camped Jboots in Najena, BEFORE there was such a thing as a quest for them. :) Made a lot of friends in that camp. Working together for a common goal. Yes we had ninja looters and so on, but most of us behaved ourselves, waited our turn and helped with the camp. :) The good old days. :)
Pyye said:I was a supporter of multiple spawn locations but let me explain in more detail what I mean or support.
in dungeons, rare or named mobs need to be narrowed down to a tight area. I just don't want to see one exact location trigger the named. I would much rather have the three spots close to each other have the chance. There is something about the consistent kill, wait exactly 18 minutes 30 seconds and the "SPAWN" again, to see if the named spawns I cannot stand. I would "feel" better about breaking that time up into multiple close spawns and the chances would probably be in line with what is right. I am not a fan of camping something, is the SAME exact spot for a full day to - 2 weeks straight.
Let me make it clear, I do NOT like any named to spawn every 5 minutes either. I still want to work at it, problem is, most of us do not have that kind of time to waste anymore, that is a fact.
Open world content- I would rather see multiple spawn possibilities open up if the rare or named mob can wander quite a distance. If the named mob is tied to a camp spot, it should have that tight, 3 to 4 spawn area again I mentioned above. However, it is important that only ONE named possibility can be up at any given time.
Raid mobs should have a static location for obvious reasons. World mobs that wander, I do not care where they spawn, you still need a sustantial group to take them out.
Does this accomplish anything? If they are close to each other, you're still in the same basic camp, and to avoid item inflation if there are 3 possible spawn point, they will just cut the spawn rate by 3. And if you can't cover all 3 spawn points, or even more than 1, all youve done now is cut your chances at getting that item by 2/3. I'm not seeing what this fixes or improves. It's a bunch of six of one half dozen of another with additional drawbacks.
Krixus it is a preference... It was not meant to be formulated in any other way. I would rather have 3 (multiple) versus one possible spawn location in a tight area, obvious reason, to increase chances of popping. But it is also because in my mind, it is more satisfying or more rewarding to see 3 spots "pop" with a chance than one. One is rough and tedious. Adjust rate however you want... I am speaking for anyone that does not have a week to waste covering a single rough spawn point. Keep in mind that rare mobs also drop rare items, which makes matters worse.
Pyye said:I am speaking for anyone that does not have a week to waste covering a single rough spawn point. Keep in mind that rare mobs also drop rare items, which makes matters worse.
I don't have tons of time anymore but I still don't mind it taking a long time to cover a rough spawn point. And yes, I agree with the rare mobs drop rare items at a rare rate. To me, it isn't about "I dont have a ton of time to play so give me what I want sooner". I want it to take a long time to get something, I don't want to be able to get everything in the game. I want to WANT to get everything in the game, but know that it might not be possible. It's the dream that makes the game so desireable.
Now I totally know that you not proposing that we be handed everything easy on a golden spoon, you wouldnt be here if that was the case. However, I do caution comments such as, "I am speaking for anyone that does not have a week to waste....." For one, you dont speak for me, and I dont have a week to waste for anything. But to me, it is not wasted. I am playing the game and having fun and all the while I have that HOPE that I will get that item. If I don't, oh well as long as I had fun trying. If I do get that item...Well ever more the sweeter, cause of what I had to go through to get it. And everyone else on the server will admire that because they know what I went through to get that item.
Why do you think people play the lottery? It's the hope that they will get rich, not that they ever will ;)
As I read over your post Starchildren, you made sense. And I guess when I am actually in the game, I would rather have something tougher than easier, I could always move on to other things. It would add "value" to accomplishing something that hard. A good mix of easy to super hard is good by me... As long as I can immerse myself. Due to life responsabilities though, I really don't have the time to camp that long like the old days.
Looking forward to viewing some of your other comments in the future for those not wording things perfectly.
I can agree with most here. I don't want things handed to me at all. I've had enough of that over the past 10 years. But I wouldn't mind having a chance to get things without having to be lucky enough to get that 1 certain camp to do so. Quest mobs/raid bosses, yes they need to be static. But most rares are not involved in those.
I also wouldn't mind having what I will refer to as 'zone drops'. Having a couple of good pieces that have small chances to drop from any mob in the zone. It gives at least some chances for things without having to kill only rares for loot. Adds a bit of chance and randomness to things. I mean if you are in a zone with 1000 goblins, why is it that only maybe 10 of them actually have useful things? I am sure that spells and the more exotic versions of them will be zone drops except for the few highly sought ones off raid mobs I'm sure but it would be nice to see some good stuff coming from normal mobs rather than camping just rares.
The main reason I purposed this method was because of launch honestly. When everyone and their mother will be around the same levels and in the same areas grinding for that gear. I've seen it recently and the only way the TLP servers even kept me interested for even a little while was due to their channel swapping. If you only have 1 'instance' of the zone it will be so very crowded and the camp you want will not be likely gotten unless it's your guild holding it.
I really think a better solution for some named situations is the way Old Sebilis and Howling Stones were done. Named in Howling Stones could spawn in multiple locations in the same wing of a dungeon, while campable by 1 group.. it wasn't easy unless you were max level. Old Sebilis had kor shamans dropping SBC and many other very powerful items that were very rare drops off random trash, Chardok had this dynamic as well. I never saw any issues in arguments over camps and stuff in these zones nearly as much as classic. When the FBSS drops off 3 mobs and they are all in the same location, that's just not a good idea.
I think Brad and Verant realized this and changed some things with Kunark and it really worked, we'll just hope they remember to do it in Pantheon. I will say however I don't think everything should be like this, sometimes it just makes sense for the Ghoul Lord to be in 1 place, just don't put any bottleneck items like the only pre-raid haste belt in the game that was accessible on him. If I was to change classic FBSS camp I would leave the spawn rate the same, 3 PH's, but I would move 1 down towards Exe area, and 1 down by Ghoul Lord off on a new branch to the side of him.. making it very difficult to camp all 3 without some serious hijinx.
Dreake said:I'd like there to be named that can spawn in several areas of a zone - as long as there can only be 1 of that named up. If I see 2 of the same named up, that would be lame.
I think you need all kinds of nameds in Pantheon - ones that can spawn in several areas, random spawns with no placeholders, random spawns with placeholders, campable placeholders...everything. All ov the above strategy. I hope it has everything.
And to add, let's not have just 1 PH for a certain mob. It would be nice to have camps, but make them random within a certain close area. Keep us guessing.
With so many environments in Pantheon, I wouldn't be surprised if different zones had different spawn patterns. Brad and the VR team are trying to push the genre forward after all; when you finally figure out one zone, you may very well be starting from mental scratch in the next.
That said, I'll always remember that feeling of excitement when your puller's Incoming macro named a rare mob instead of the usual fodder.
Talv
I think you need a balance. Kunark did it with a few dungeons I think, Karnors and city of mist both had named spawn locations with PH's; but then there were also mob-type-PH's that anywhere in the zone could spawn. Correct me if I am wrong, but skeleton warlord i think? Tranquill staff, he potentially spawned in multiple locations, for example.
Now if all the named mobs in a zone have multiple spawn locations, and people can't define it as one location, when that named spawns and it is anywhere disputable... you will have people scrambling for it. The puller in me wants to shout GAME ON! but at the same time you will make anyone with tracking required for groups in these areas.
If you're camping frenzied ghoul in lguk and your group happens to be in the outer room and not in frenzied or the hallway off of it, then you open yourself to someone running in and pulling it out when it spawns. BUT if this occurs, or if you completely miss the fact it spawned and noticed a group towards magus killing a frenzied... you have a right to be upset about the situation. It's justifiable. And the other group killstealing will earn that rep fairly. In the other situation you will have varied opinions. How do you know the other group stole a named from your camp if the spawn loc isnt identifiable after the mob moves?
And while I can see some appeal to not having a defined spawn loc, the cost of this is not worth it. In a game that promises reputation will matter again, we want clear lines, we want to feel justified, we don't want the lines blurred and GM's being called for questionable conflicts. Because I think we all know no one comes away satisfied in those situations.
IMO give people a named to camp for, and then sprinkle some very rare mob-type-ph's to sweeten it for those who want a chance at something elsewhere.
Amsai said:It needs to be done right (not too easy/predictable but not too crazy/random either). I know not everyone will get the reference but in FFXI, King Arthro (24 hrs after ToD and all place holders killed) was too predictable but Charybdis (8 hours to 20rs, i have heard even longer? after ToD) was a bit too random. But essentially my anser is YES!
Speed belt haunts my dreams years later. I really like this and I hope they implement it. Our group used to pay others for ToD and many people could get rich off of one kill of King Athro with luck. The difference that FFXI needed way sooner was non tradable from the get go to keep away RMT and bot claimers. VR please put this in the game. It just has to be.