I honestly see no purpose behind it. I think this change would help alleviate a lot of toxicity around popular grind zones since finding an open spot would be easier. I'm sure people just get tired of swapping and waiting so they decide to just jump in someone's rotation and hope it makes them leave. 

I agree about make it easier to find an available grinding spot but they put it for a reason about players that are chased around.

They already explained that and they already reduced it so they won't simply remove it.

Maybe they could reduce it again? Make it 5 minutes instead of 10?

PA is convinced that owpvp is good for the game.

Suggesstion:

Base state:

Players are free to change channels/servers as long as they are not in an active: PvP, combat, or cooldown state.

This allowes players just looking for an open spot to hop servers freely and decreases the time required to do so.

In regards to PvP:

Rule 1:

When PvP mode is deactivated by the player a 10 minute channel/server change cooldown is activated.

This ensures the continued deterence to PK abuse and/or harrassment in it's "current" state.

Rule 1 exception:

When PvP mode is deactivated by the system, as a result of death at the hands of another player while PvP mode was active, no cooldown is activated.

This exception provides a form of protection from the cooldown for players who enjoy the DFS (Duel For Spot) stye of play. Thus the winner (who now owns the spot) would incurr the cooldown while the loser (who has to look for a new spot) is free to roam.

Thoughts?

@Aesthier:

It wouldn't work.

Some would not activate alt+C but they would switch to find the person that other members are looking for.

It would be like several spies to help one killer. As it happens already.

Also I don't see how the devs could manage that.

I guess I don't see your point as the scope of the suggestion was to decrease the channel swap cooldown timer and not to solve an already existing PVP problem that you stated: "happens already".

As I previously stated:

"This ensures the continued deterence to PK abuse and/or harrassment in it's "current" state.

My suggestion was directed at the thread's topic subject and while the current issue of unflagged hunters is problematic I believe it to be an entirely seperate issue deserving of it's own seperate thread. My suggesstion does not, and was not meant to, significantly change those exsisting elements.

But perhaps I am just not quite grasping how drastically my proposed solution might negatively effect those elements. Very possible.

In regards to the developers being able to manage the implementation of my proposed change?

I am not a programmer so while I don't see it as that difficult it very well could be. That is something I would rely upon the developers to determine as it is they that would ultimately decide. I don't think it is likely they will change anything but thats what suggestions are for.

This seems reasonable.