Linked group limit of 6?

M

mwh

Dalayan Beginner
Recently we have noticed that there seems to be a limit of 6 linked groups, and after that links dont stick. Ive heard wizzy talk about some limit of 36 on a raid, is this what was being talked about? I asked what he meant by this before, but didnt get a response.

Anyway, last night even before we had more than 36, while in the middle of the LD bug and groups reforming, we ended up with 7 groups and about 34 people and had a horrible time getting buffs to work. Didnt know what was going on, people kept missing buffs. At first we thought it was a bug, had people camp out and come back, then took a stab at maybe the problem was teh 7th group. We ended up dealing with it by having people sit out not linked and we raided, but if this is a limit, I respectly request that you consider making it unlimited. Then when we got a few people right at the last minute, I had to tell them just to remain solo rather than risk messing up the links, which wasnt exactly what I could call popular with those that got told that. Already things have been put into play like the 20 second CH, the limit on enchanter curses, etc. This limit with the LD bug and how often this makes reforming groups, adds another gigantic headache to raid guilds here.


On the LD bug, Ive heard this is almost impossible to track down. Well, this bug is easily the biggest cause of stress and lack of fun for me running a raid. Id be willing to do anything to debug this, if it requires me organizing a raid of 40 people doing nothing in a zone for 2 hours so GMs can log packets or something and figure out whats going on, ill try and set it up. Last night we had 4 "waves" of the LD bug hit our raid, and it prolly delayed our raid an hour or so just with that, at one point we waited 30 minutes until our 6 clerics in the CH chain managed to stay on together at the same time. We camped them all at one point, and then got hit by another wave, made me want to kill josie.
 
Yes, that's the limit Wiz spoke of, you can only have 6 groups linked at a time. It's like a soft cap; You can have more, and he's not going to prevent more than 36 to raid if you have more, but full easy benefits apply to only the first 36.
 
Limiting linked groups to 6, does NOTHING but waste time for people involved with a raid, really. It just makes a raid more cumbersome and less fluid.

Full easy benefits? what are these full easy benefits? being able to talk in group chat? hearing group chat? catching group buffs? I'd much rather see a spell cost more mana if it's cast across links, than the headaches this 6group link limit causes.

I could almost see these limits if mobs were designed around a raid force of 36, but they're very much not.

Thossur
 
Actually, they kind of are. 36 or lower.

Raids are gonna have a limited size, but I might put it at 42 or something.
 
Tarhyl, sivyana, shiritri, librarian, trial 3+...36 ppl? ::flies his spaceship back down to earth:: linked groups of 36 ppl clearly cause only more harm to the high end game than they do to "balance" teh server. I can see where your coming from slightly in looking for ways to keep encounters from becoming zerged events, but unless encounters are equally changed for this magic number of 36 than you are only targeting ppl to nerf for no reason. I forsee these encounters requirements remaining above 36. Explain to us clearly why anyone past 36 can still raid but do not get to share chat, buffs? Shall guilds begin to enforce non guildies from sharing in a raid due to slots available for links? Shall we revert to live and completely unlink, but where is mass group buff? This is another example of a nerf being instituted without a patch messege that affects the server in a negative way, I believe we can re look at this and come to comparatove terms that are positive and beneficial for us all.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom