Does Hybrid Penalty (still) apply to group?

[Randiesel]

This is starting to bug me, I'm 99.9% sure the hybrid penalty applies to the group, as numerous posts here indicate, but lately in-game people seem to be citing some mysterious "patch notes" from "a couple weeks ago" that say it was removed. The only patch notes I've been able to find that even mention group penalties are from July, and they are explicitly removing shared HELL LEVEL penalties.

So which is it, do we hybrids still share the penalty?

[Orov]

I was told they do share it in groups.

[Virtuosos]

yes




but who cares....

[yaeger]

yes




but who cares....

Hybrids that get picked over when the race for 60 in Kunark starts?

Hybrids that get picked over now?

Rangers?

Betty White?

Knowing the Verant changed their minds, said hybrid penalties were retarded and served no purpose, and eliminated them shortly after Velious.

[Glaani]

...who the fuck cares about the xp penalty...have fun with the people you meet and stop worrying about whether or not you get level 32 faster than the next guy

This^^... from another thread and applies here, as well.

[Foxboxx]

I have to say the hybrid penalties become a bit hellish when you're grouped with multiple hybrids. I spent a while grouped with 2 paladins yesterday, and then some time grouped with a paladin and a ranger. That means each member of the group takes about a 16% exp penalty, right? Or is that not how the penalty works?

[Virtuosos]

i wont have a problem with getting to 60 or finding groups...i have made a good impression on essentially everyone i have met. But i sure as hell wont rush to it. kunark offers alot more than a new level cap, and i plan on enjoying most every aspect of it.

you go ahead and rush to 60 if you want, but kunark will be around for a long time before another large update....might as well take your time and enjoy it

[jimmygarr]

i wont have a problem with getting to 60 or finding groups...i have made a good impression on essentially everyone i have met. But i sure as hell wont rush to it. kunark offers alot more than a new level cap, and i plan on enjoying most every aspect of it.

you go ahead and rush to 60 if you want, but kunark will be around for a long time before another large update....might as well take your time and enjoy it

Amen, Brother.

[Randiesel]

i wont have a problem with getting to 60 or finding groups...i have made a good impression on essentially everyone i have met. But i sure as hell wont rush to it. kunark offers alot more than a new level cap, and i plan on enjoying most every aspect of it.

you go ahead and rush to 60 if you want, but kunark will be around for a long time before another large update....might as well take your time and enjoy it

This is true, however, thats also the predominant opinion of people who already have a character at 50. Its one thing to have your main be raid-able and be able to camp some twink gear and experience the endgame. That transforms leveling into a twink hobby... It's a whole different story when you're trying to level your main.

I don't have an opinion on whether the penalties should stay or not, and thats not really the focus of the post. My beef is with the group leader that wants to replace a wizard of like level with a paladin thats 4 levels too high, especially when we already have me (biggest xp pen in the game) a ranger and a bard. Or the guy that wants to add a 6th player to the group when the 5-man group is already clearing every spawn because "the 6th guy is free" and they promptly invite a ranger to come sit around waiting on pops, for ~7% less xp for everyone.

I feel there is way too large a rift between people who mope about the xp penalties and the "min max"ers. I'm not a SK Cleric Rogue Rogue Rogue Rogue guy, but we also don't need 4 hybrids in a group, its virtually pointless to group if everyone is taking a 35% hit.

(At the same time, if any clerics and/or rogues around 37 want to group, lemme know! :p )

[Fuzzi]

Lets settle this and show people whats up.. I need 5 other people willing to roll 5 troll SKs with me. Thats right! 6 Troll SKs in a group!

[Virtuosos]

i leveld my paladin as my first character on live, did the same here...i dont have any alts to speak of aside from a 36 mage that i will rarely play due to being in love with my paladin so much :/

and yes, there are group issues when the leader is stupid lol. if you cant find a group that knows what they are doing (I.E 3 clerics 2 wizards and a tank group) then it makes it alot more difficult...when i was leveling up, it got so bad that i just said fuck it and start soloing. although i am a huge supporter of grouping with whoever you want, class wise should still be observed...it IS nice to have a sk and a paladin though, utility wise...but no reason to add that ranger and that other paladin lol

[Randiesel]

I just think 3 or more hybrids gets silly, I'm the most negative xp hybrid there is, and I'm calling us out, I can definitely feel the penalty. One or two is fine, you get a pretty significant advantage in terms of pulling/tanking/aggro control by having an SK over a warrior (or in addition to a warrior, if i aggro pull and he taunts, its basically a warrior with disease cloud) but a hybrid when you already have the 2 base classes covered is a waste of space and xp.

Interesting discussion though.

[Darklake]

Or the guy that wants to add a 6th player to the group when the 5-man group is already clearing every spawn because "the 6th guy is free" and they promptly invite a ranger to come sit around waiting on pops, for ~7% less xp for everyone.

I used to play with a mate who would constantly invite others, just because there was room. It started with three of us on our mains (him a Paladin, me a Druid and the wife an Enchanter) and we would tear through stuff, but before we knew it we'd find another body in the group to share loot and xp with, so the wife and I would quit after a while and log on to alts. Problem was solved when someone handed him an account with a 60 Wizard on it in a raiding guild and we hardly saw him after that.

[Orov]

i wont have a problem with getting to 60 or finding groups...i have made a good impression on essentially everyone i have met. But i sure as hell wont rush to it. kunark offers alot more than a new level cap, and i plan on enjoying most every aspect of it.

you go ahead and rush to 60 if you want, but kunark will be around for a long time before another large update....might as well take your time and enjoy it

This is the best argument I have seen so far on these boards.

Game, set, match. Winner: Virtuosos.

[Randiesel]

I disagree.

While I agree that its a good point, its also tangentially aligned to the content of the thread. I haven't had a problem getting groups at all, thats actually one of my favorite things about this server... it seems like you get in a "pod" of like-leveled people and then basically group with them all the way to 50, its pretty neat.

Also, its not like this is Live and we're skipping expansions. While fun and nostalgic (and admittedly, I've learned quite a bit more than I thought I'd need to about old world content) my reason for playing is not to xp, its to raid.

[Kassel]

One of the things i really like about this server right now is that even with Kunark around the corner, the majority of players are here to enjoy the leveling experiance and are not raicing to "end game".

[Estu]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm pretty sure the 6th member of your group is not in fact free, as some seem to think. The group EXP bonus is as follows:
2 - 2%
3 - 4%
4 - 6%
5 - 8%
6 - 10%

Consider going from having 5 people to having 6. When you have 5 people you get 1/5 of the EXP from each mob, and then get an extra 8% of that 1/5; this ends up being .2 * 1.08 = .216, i.e. 21.6% of the EXP from the mob. When you have 6 people you get 1/6 of the EXP from each mob and an extra 10% of that, so this gives you .1667 * 1.1 = .1833, i.e. 18.33% of the EXP of the mob. There's a clear decrease here; you end up getting 15% less exp per mob (this is (.1833-.216)/.216).

[yaeger]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm pretty sure the 6th member of your group is not in fact free, as some seem to think. The group EXP bonus is as follows:
2 - 2%
3 - 4%
4 - 6%
5 - 8%
6 - 10%

Consider going from having 5 people to having 6. When you have 5 people you get 1/5 of the EXP from each mob, and then get an extra 8% of that 1/5; this ends up being .2 * 1.08 = .216, i.e. 21.6% of the EXP from the mob. When you have 6 people you get 1/6 of the EXP from each mob and an extra 10% of that, so this gives you .1667 * 1.1 = .1833, i.e. 18.33% of the EXP of the mob. There's a clear decrease here; you end up getting 15% less exp per mob (this is (.1833-.216)/.216).

That's why the Sony/Verant raised the group exp bonuses in Velious, then again for PoP.

Those who group shouldn't be punished.

although i am a huge supporter of grouping with whoever you want, class wise should still be observed...it IS nice to have a sk and a paladin though, utility wise...but no reason to add that ranger and that other paladin lol

What's wrong with adding a DPS? You might have the opinion that SK/Pallies are somewhat worth their 40% shared exp penalty, but not Rangers?

This is why it was abolished, you'll have a great group with a bard as puller, pally as tank, then be looking for some DPS to finish out your group. You see a Ranger and go "naw, he'd suck up too much exp, let's find someone else".

Really, hybrids aren't worth the 40% exp penalty. It just hurts everyone and shepherds more players to the 'easy' and overplayed solo classes.

[Virtuosos]

fine...it IS nice to have a sk and a RANGER...but no reason to add that PALADIN and that OTHER SHADOWKNIGHT...


you missed my meaning completely, i was saying that having 4 hybrids in a group is senseless, much rather have a tank hybrid and some other hybrid as dps/whatever they can offer as a class and then a monk...a rogue....some actual form of pure dps.

and hybrids, atleast us paladins and shadowknights, are exceptionally useful and well worth the penelty...the sheer amount of versitility they offer to a group goes without speaking: i wont mention the other hybrids as i have no experience with them playing-wise. to say that we ARENT worth it is senseless.

[Sethius]

fine...it IS nice to have a sk and a RANGER...but no reason to add that PALADIN and that OTHER SHADOWKNIGHT...


you missed my meaning completely, i was saying that having 4 hybrids in a group is senseless, much rather have a tank hybrid and some other hybrid as dps/whatever they can offer as a class and then a monk...a rogue....some actual form of pure dps.

and hybrids, atleast us paladins and shadowknights, are exceptionally useful and well worth the penelty...the sheer amount of versitility they offer to a group goes without speaking: i wont mention the other hybrids as i have no experience with them playing-wise. to say that we ARENT worth it is senseless.

Not adding the Paladin and that other Shadowknight is not about them being hybrids, it's about them being tanks. You don't need 3 tanks in the group...

As for a bard or ranger, I think they are useful and deserve to be added to the group if their type of usefulness is required/helpful (don't knock the rangers, well played they are useful). I don't play either of those classes, but I would not turn them down because of some penalty. I just want to level and have fun, and if I level slowly, that's more time for me to enjoy the fun EQ offers.

[Virtuosos]

as i have stated, i group with whoever is needing exp and fits with the group...i wont have 3 clerics in a group...2 is questionable as well.

and having 3 tanks really isnt that bad...when i was leveling in sol b, we had a bitching group of a warrior sk paladin cleric monk chanter. it went extremely smoothly, loved it..


hm, now come to think of it...i honestly do not think i have grouped with a ranger more than 5 times from 1 to 50 (Excluding raids)....there just really isnt that many of them :/

[Estu]

That's why the Sony/Verant raised the group exp bonuses in Velious, then again for PoP.

Those who group shouldn't be punished.

They're not punished; they're rewarded. Yes, you do get less EXP per mob if you have 6 people instead of 5, but that extra person should be helping you kill mobs faster. If they actually contribute proportionally, then you are earning more exp. Of course, in practice, 6-person groups are unwieldy because they often do not have enough pulls available to them to kill efficiently, but there is an argument to be made for smaller groups, like maybe a tank, a healer, and one or two DPS. Even then, though, solo classes often EXP faster, especially necros and mages, but my point is that the numbers I calculated don't actually indicate that 'those who group are punished'.

[yaeger]

In order to get equivalent equivalent experience as a solo class, a normal group would have to kill about 5 mobs every minute. The group experience bonus helps with this a little bit, but for every hybrid you add to your group, you greatly slow down the rate of exp.

Here's some quotes from Verant from the Jan 2001 Producers Letter that explain it better than I ever could.

Experience Penalties - Description

I think that it would be appropriate to say that most players are aware that there are different experience requirements for advancement based upon the race and class you choose to play. Ogres, for instance, require more experience to level than Halflings, and Shadowknights require more experience to level than Warriors. As such, an Ogre Shadowknight requires FAR more experience to level than a Halfling Warrior does. What some people have discovered is that when in a group, everyone shares in this penalty. Before getting into our plan, I think that its important to talk about what our goals were regarding experience penalties and the group sharing in that penalty.

When EverQuest player characters were being designed, it was immediately apparent that some races and classes would be more powerful than others given versatility and other factors. Later, it came to light that the concept of being "more powerful" began to break down at the upper levels, given that everyone capped at the same level. We could not let any one race or class be immensely more powerful than another at that final point, as it would essentially put parts of the game off limits to those who chose the less powerful classes. While we did a good job of making races vary in power, but not so much as to be unbalancing, the same could not be said for classes. Still, though classes would be roughly equivalent in regard to the compelling reason to play them through versatility, the experience penalties were kept.

In regards to the sharing of the experience penalty, it was apparent in beta, before the penalty was shared, that those playing characters without an experience penalty leveled faster than those that did. It was obvious that this would occur, but it was to the extreme that a group of friends, all playing together, would become separated to the point that they could no longer group efficiently in the mid to upper-mid levels. So we chose to distribute experience in the group on the basis of the total experience of each member rather than the level, in order to keep groups together.

As such, a level 20 Troll SK, having more experience total than a Human Wizard of the same level, would get more experience from each kill, while the total experience for the kill was unchanged. Essentially, the SK would take part of the Wizard's share were everything distributed equally to begin with.

And this highlights the main points:

2. Class-based penalties are not appropriate. Classes are roughly equivalent in power throughout the level ranges, and the versatility does not make up for that penalty. In fact, the majority of changes made to classes in the name of balance in the last year were based on the assumption that, at the high end, each class should still be roughly as needed and balanced as any other.

3. Penalties, in any form, should not be shared with the group. Players know that no one class is immensely more powerful/valuable than another, and as such it is not fair to ask them to share a burden. If classes with penalties were really more powerful or valuable than the other classes, then it might be right, but that isn't the case here. Furthermore, sharing of penalties causes people to reject potential group members on the basis of them "sucking" too much experience.

Essentially class experience penalties were broken from the get-go. I don't see why P1999 would want to continue Verants obvious mistake.

[YendorLootmonkey]

Yeah, we've tried that Dev letter. :P

http://www.project1999.org/forums/showthread.php?t=11384

[Sethius]

Point is, Class based penalties are probably unfair, sharing them with the group probably does more damage than good (to grouping), and the developers of P99 are trying to do the right thing by following the original timeline and probably won't remove the class based penalties until velious.

I do not blame them for this decision. It is this sort of mentality that allows P99 to be as awesome as it is (and otherwise would have likely become an abomination as far as classic EQ is concerned and be no fun at all).

I wish that the class based penalties were gone, I'd like that for sure. I also understand that if the developers remove them before the original timeline stipulates, what prevents people from demanding other changes? It could happen, it probably would happen. Would we end up with a server with a 5x exp bonus and no more corpse runs? Probably not, but you get the idea, it gives people the idea that the devs would bend given sufficient pressure.

Therefore I can understand their resistance to changing this before velious. If anything, I think it might be up to us as the players to develop a community that is not about powerleveling and banning others from our groups for their class choice.

We are here because we want to re-create that 1999 EQ feeling (right?), and there are a lot of players on this server now, enough for people to group with, why not put aside the solo classes and take a stand, and work towards developing the game we want by playing it the way that feels right, not the most efficient way.

Afterall, this isn't WoW, let's not try to make it WoW.

So many good points have been made on this argument, it's time to think of plan B. I am personally avoiding solo play as much as possible deliberatly. I do it once in awhile, but by no means do I do it all the time. It's less fun, and feels more like WoW, so I just boot up WoW and play my shammy when I want to solo. When I'm bored of that after 5 minutes I get back to EQ and go out in search of a good group, meet some new friends, and adventure old style. Just the way it should be.

[Malinrol]

... Epic ownage at the highest levels...

[Lagaidh]

It's odd that I've been touting the same "just fecking play" philosophy for years as Virtuosos trumpeted in this thread. It must be because we are the best race/class in the game: DWF PAL.

As I used to say in live after moments of particular lucidity: "Trust the dwarf. He knows things."

I was a bit put off over the weekend to begin hearing folks in my own guild of old friends from live that I've know for years begin the discussion over whether or not to include hybrids in pugs.

Very put off...

Know your class. Play the game. That's all. That really is all... Why do we keep this drama going on the boards (and in /gu chat apparently)?

It's a non issue unless you're dead set on measuring your veiny e-peen against the heap of pixels standing next to you.

Just.
Feckin'
PLAY!

[yaeger]

Because it's all fooked up and makes no sense, that's why it's always brought up over and over again by the community.

This..

Penalties, in any form, should not be shared with the group. Players know that no one class is immensely more powerful/valuable than another, and as such it is not fair to ask them to share a burden. If classes with penalties were really more powerful or valuable than the other classes, then it might be right, but that isn't the case. Furthermore, sharing of penalties causes people to reject potential group members on the basis of them "sucking" too much experience.

[Ploppy]

I don't have a level 50 and I'm fine with splitting the exp penalty with anyone that's fun to group with. No use crying about it. You said yourself they didn't change it till after Velious and this is a classic server

[Shannacore]

I don't have a level 50 and I'm fine with splitting the exp penalty with anyone that's fun to group with. No use crying about it. You said yourself they didn't change it till after Velious and this is a classic server

I AM FUN TO GROUP WITH, GROUP WITH ME.

[Seaweedpimp]

LOLS NO

; )

[Dantes]

I've never paid enough attention to the exp bar to actually notice if there's even a difference when I'm grouped with a hybrid. To be honest I can't even really tell. Admit it, it's all in your head! If you are obsessing over small percentiles of experience, you need to do yourself a favor and lighten up.

[Zyth]

Over the weekend I was in a group that refused to grab another person because it was a hybrid, I thought it was ridiculous but I was outnumbered so I couldn't really do anything but blacklist the people in my group. If I remember correctly we didn't even have a hybrid in the group yet so it wasn't like we were going to be stacking penalties. I guess some people just take this game too seriously.

[Shannacore]

LOLS NO

; )

>:[

[YendorLootmonkey]

The server is full of min-maxers, hence the group penalty sharing potentally hurts hybrids even more. :P

[Mcbard]

Excuse my newbness to the server, but what is a "min-maxer"?

[quellren]

People that are obsessed with minimizing the flavor of a character, while maximizing it's 'uberness'.

Not in a good way. they're the guys that get all butt-hurt over which race is best for a shaman, regardless of what race you may prefer for aesthetic reasons.

[Trademaster]

let me google that for you (http://lmgtfy.com/?q=what+is+a+min+maxer&l=1)

[Tol]

Nothing wrong with min-maxing. If I want to play a game based on creativity and story I'll look into D&D, whitewolf, or other tabletop games.

I play EQ to be the most efficient genocidal killer I can be, watch stat numbers go up, and get better gear. I just don't really consider EQ to give the ability to do anything but kill mindlessly for hours on end, the only real challenges being presented by the ineptitude of fellow players. I mean really, how many freaking days can you roleplay, "We're in Ass/sup yet again, smiting the evil frog ghouls". Especially if you did it on live 10 years ago. I group with like-minded players, and we have fun doing crazy stuff that most groups our level are not able to. I'm the person who likes to solo the crazy mobs that take most people a group to kill, or group up with another player and do challenging things that we probably weren't intended to do. That attracts me to game-breaking classes like bard and doing things like swarm kiting 50 mobs in the planes. I play with my own goals in mind, and those usually dont involve grouping with 4 lobotomized hybrids who all somehow fail to grasp eq's challenging mechanics of, "press autoattack" and watching my exp dwindle to nothing.

[Sethius]

Nothing wrong with min-maxing. If I want to play a game based on creativity and story I'll look into D&D, whitewolf, or other tabletop games.

I play EQ to be the most efficient genocidal killer I can be, watch stat numbers go up, and get better gear. I just don't really consider EQ to give the ability to do anything but kill mindlessly for hours on end, the only real challenges being presented by the ineptitude of fellow players. I mean really, how many freaking days can you roleplay, "We're in Ass/sup yet again, smiting the evil frog ghouls". Especially if you did it on live 10 years ago. I group with like-minded players, and we have fun doing crazy stuff that most groups our level are not able to. I'm the person who likes to solo the crazy mobs that take most people a group to kill, or group up with another player and do challenging things that we probably weren't intended to do. That attracts me to game-breaking classes like bard and doing things like swarm kiting 50 mobs in the planes. I play with my own goals in mind, and those usually dont involve grouping with 4 lobotomized hybrids who all somehow fail to grasp eq's challenging mechanics of, "press autoattack" and watching my exp dwindle to nothing.

Nothing wrong with playing how you want, but I have a hard time understanding why you are not playing WoW instead of EQ with that mindset... you certainly exhibit the characteristics of almost everyone in my old WoW guild.

No offense, just an observation and opinion. WoW is a good game too, for people that like that sort of thing.

As for you liking the challenge of doing the hard stuff, I can respect that.

[Tol]

Nothing wrong with playing how you want, but I have a hard time understanding why you are not playing WoW instead of EQ with that mindset... you certainly exhibit the characteristics of almost everyone in my old WoW guild.

No offense, just an observation and opinion. WoW is a good game too, for people that like that sort of thing.

As for you liking the challenge of doing the hard stuff, I can respect that.

Honestly not much of a reason other than EQ is less time consuming during the grind. The two games are not really different at all. They're timesinks where you watch numbers slowly go up. I actually think EQ is ALOT easier once you know the game mechanics. cheal chains and watch aggro and you can spank-n-tank any old world mob pretty easy. yawn. EQ was challenging when no one knew the game mechanics, before all the quests were posted online, before every classes ideal cookie-cutter gear became widely known, and because of bugs and other players. With all that stripped away, EQ is a really simple game honestly.

I like EQ more because the leveling processes is: "kill 2 mobs, afk 10 minutes to do laundry and study". I am more productive around the house and get more done when playing solo classes in EQ than virtually any other time. Yay downtime :)

wow is "click click click click CLICK CLICK CLICK CLICK" for 8 hours straight. I like a game I can play while I can watch TV or read a book unless I'm grouped with guildmates or friends. wow does not facilitate that.

[Mcbard]

I like EQ more because the leveling processes is: "kill 2 mobs, afk 10 minutes to do laundry and study". I am more productive around the house and get more done when playing solo classes in EQ than virtually any other time. Yay downtime :)

I've never really had any downtime soloing as a bard here, or as a necromancer on live. Maybe you're doing it wrong (right?). :P

[Extunarian]

He might be referring to a camp with only one or two mobs. I know I got a lot done from 38-40 when I just camped that Gypsy in Rathe Mtns. 7 minute timer, 3 nukes to kill her. Lots of afk time and great XP.

[Kich]

Nothing wrong with playing how you want, but I have a hard time understanding why you are not playing WoW instead of EQ with that mindset... you certainly exhibit the characteristics of almost everyone in my old WoW guild.

No offense, just an observation and opinion. WoW is a good game too, for people that like that sort of thing.

As for you liking the challenge of doing the hard stuff, I can respect that.

Typecasting the WoW playerbase as loot hungry min-maxers is a bit naive. Of the ~13 million users, 10 (or more) million of those players have little to no interest in raiding and the like. A good portion of that group is deeply in love with the story of the game, and a smaller portion of THAT portion intimately play on RP servers (I may be wrong about that demographic, I've never been on one, but I do know there are at least a few incredibly large and popular RP servers).

It sounds like you were probably in a hardcore raiding guild, or one that wanted to be, of which there are only about a dozen per server of the hundreds (perhaps thousandish) guilds per server.

(In other words, the hardcore min-maxing scene (which I'm absolutely a part of in that game) is actually very small.)

In regards to EQ, I can understand why he plays it over WoW. Especially in regards to the challenge and power an individual can attain in this game depending on the class. In WoW, there is no real challenge in the outside world, nor in dungeons. It only really hits in raids and even then a lot of it is actually pretty easy conceptually. EQ has a steep difficulty curve, not only that the mobs in the game drop interesting loot (something a game like WoW seriously lacks, their items are bound to stat budgets and level requirements and they're all basically the same thing with "change x to y" certain stat).

Understandably, at some point in the EQ timeline, gear starts becoming ridiculous and every piece of high end gear was just a massive increase to all stats and had no real flavor to it, but I don't think this server reaches that point.

However, Tol, you may have inspired me to make a Bard =P

[Sethius]

Typecasting the WoW playerbase as loot hungry min-maxers is a bit naive. Of the ~13 million users, 10 (or more) million of those players have little to no interest in raiding and the like. A good portion of that group is deeply in love with the story of the game, and a smaller portion of THAT portion intimately play on RP servers (I may be wrong about that demographic, I've never been on one, but I do know there are at least a few incredibly large and popular RP servers).

It sounds like you were probably in a hardcore raiding guild, or one that wanted to be, of which there are only about a dozen per server of the hundreds (perhaps thousandish) guilds per server.

(In other words, the hardcore min-maxing scene (which I'm absolutely a part of in that game) is actually very small.)

In regards to EQ, I can understand why he plays it over WoW. Especially in regards to the challenge and power an individual can attain in this game depending on the class. In WoW, there is no real challenge in the outside world, nor in dungeons. It only really hits in raids and even then a lot of it is actually pretty easy conceptually. EQ has a steep difficulty curve, not only that the mobs in the game drop interesting loot (something a game like WoW seriously lacks, their items are bound to stat budgets and level requirements and they're all basically the same thing with "change x to y" certain stat).

Understandably, at some point in the EQ timeline, gear starts becoming ridiculous and every piece of high end gear was just a massive increase to all stats and had no real flavor to it, but I don't think this server reaches that point.

However, Tol, you may have inspired me to make a Bard =P

I was the guild leader of a guild that raided 5 nights a week, doing all the top end raids. I stopped playing maybe a few weeks before we did lich king, and handed leadership off to one of my officers. We were not competing for the top spots on the server, but we did well, and had a lot of respect.

I'm not trying to typecast WoW players, but the game is built to cater to min-maxers. EQ is also built to cater to min-maxers, but the game is 11 years old now, and anyone who is coming back here is probably coming back for nostalgia when min-max gameplay was not even heard of and not due to a min-max idea. Playing an 11 year old game is the opposite of the min-maxer mentality, especially given the culture that once surrounded EQ so many years ago.

[guineapig]

Once you realize you will never be the first to do anything on an emulated server
and there is no way to really prove you are "the best" at anything,
the game becomes a lot more fun.

[Tol]

and anyone who is coming back here is probably coming back for nostalgia when min-max gameplay was not even heard of and not due to a min-max idea. Playing an 11 year old game is the opposite of the min-maxer mentality, especially given the culture that once surrounded EQ so many years ago.

Pretty much everything in this paragraph is wrong

Min-maxers existed on EQ from as far back as anyone can remember. Seriously dude, people parsing text logs and calculating exactly which stats stop being useful after which soft/hard cap is as min-maxy as it gets, and they were doing it in UO/muds/etc before EQ even hit the scene. I think you have rose-colored glasses on if you don't think most everquest players were as bad as their wow counterparts. As soon as kunark opened, the LOIO highway became the norm and was populted 24/7, not the exception. Getting anyone outside of guild/friends to go do something fun/challenging like dalnir, nurga, and other dungeons was an exercise in frustration. "LEAVE MY DREADLANDS? I DONT THINK SO BUDDY"

Also we have a shaman thread basically every week thats like, "hey how do I exactly allocate my statistics perfectly so I will be the best at everything I ever do". Nostalgia's there for sure, but people play for a lot of other reasons.

I've never really had any downtime soloing as a bard here, or as a necromancer on live. Maybe you're doing it wrong (right?). :P

I played a bard/necro on live, not here. I specifically avoided bard because after twisting for 5 years I really don't want to do so any more :p. I'll be making an iksar necro at kunark because all of the current races are STATISTICALLY INFERIOR and I couldn't have that!

[Thac0]

To be brutally honest this server has way too many people that made a toon because they try to min-max but suck horribly at the game any way (Shadow Knights that don't disease cloud come to mind).

If you know your class, know how to play and are fun to play with, there is no "penalty". Id rather group with someone fun and knows how to play rather than a min maxing asshole that doesn't.

I just fine it funny that the same so called min maxers are the same people who are the first to wait an hour for a port (when it could have been quicker just to run) or just as long finding a non hybrid tank when they could have got a hybrid tank and made the exp back and had fun doing so.

[Kckelley]

The only thing that people need to min/max is their own skill.

[Trademaster]

I think, min-maxing in the classic EQ arena is less game-changing than in WoW. Move 2 points of int into another stat for a caster and caster is going to have maybe one less spell than its counterpart who has what they believe as "the best" build. In that sense, a good player in EQ has learned how to utilize their skills well, whereas for a lot of WoW content, it doesn't matter if you're good or bad, but rather what your "gearscore" equates to in dungeon capability.

Of course there are exceptions in both games, I know one druid in WoW that is woefully inadequate in gearscore that I would happily take along on even the most heoric of end game content as he continually is able to accomplish things that would be impossible to the vast majority of WoW players with a similar load out. Just as I'm sure there are players here with fully decked out toons that have problems trying to defeat even a baby blue Mob.

[Sethius]

Pretty much everything in this paragraph is wrong

Min-maxers existed on EQ from as far back as anyone can remember. Seriously dude, people parsing text logs and calculating exactly which stats stop being useful after which soft/hard cap is as min-maxy as it gets, and they were doing it in UO/muds/etc before EQ even hit the scene. I think you have rose-colored glasses on if you don't think most everquest players were as bad as their wow counterparts. As soon as kunark opened, the LOIO highway became the norm and was populted 24/7, not the exception. Getting anyone outside of guild/friends to go do something fun/challenging like dalnir, nurga, and other dungeons was an exercise in frustration. "LEAVE MY DREADLANDS? I DONT THINK SO BUDDY"

Most people back then barely knew what stats were, and everyone was lost 90% of the time, in my experience anyway.

I don't know who you hung out with on Live in the old days, but it sounds like you got screwed in the nostalgia department. I, on the other hand, had fun.