I implore the p99 staff to allow Target Through Nearest NPC on BLUE

[Baler]

I implore the p99 staff to allow Cycle Through Nearest NPC on BLUE

I'll begin by saying I understand it's not in the classic timeline and I will most certainly get flak by the shit's classic community here. But I beseech the staff to please allow the hotkey Cycle Through Nearest NPC on the BLUE/RED servers. On green I understand it will be and needs to be disabled.

There are other non classic elements on blue and red. The latest of these is the Pet Window which after much player backlash was decided to be allowed on blue/red. I understand that this decision was based on how era close it was implemented. But that never changed the fact that it wasn't classic.

I feel Cycle Through Nearest NPC on BLUE/RED falls in a very similar category. The Pet window functions can be done through other means. Mostly many hotkey macros for each command. Similarly the target hotkey can done through many hotkey macros however in a way that is similarly detrimental to the player.

I sincerely hope the staff can see a way to allow this hotkey on blue/red. Thank you for your time and everything you do to make project 1999 great.

This is not a rants and flames thread.

[Castamere]

Mouse click targeting is so bad in this game. Forcing someone to use a poorly designed feature for the sake of classic is silly.

[Deathrydar]

Mouse click targeting is so bad in this game. Forcing someone to use a poorly designed feature for the sake of classic is silly.

Not as silly as a bunch of players complaining about a feature that is not classic on a server that's main focus and goal has been to bring the game as close to classic as possible.

[loramin]

Previous pet window reversal was stated that it was allowed to stay on blue since it was same patch as custom UI and very close to velious, but hot bars were disabled due to being too far out of classic timeline.

Following this logic, I wouldn't hold your breath for it to stay on blue, too far out of timeline.

[Castamere]

Sure took long enough to implement. To me, that time passed was enough for me to believe staff wasn't as concerned about some of the smaller details. Time has proven me wrong.

[Sporkotron]

Mouse click targeting is so bad in this game. Forcing someone to use a poorly designed feature for the sake of classic is silly.

Daybreak TLP is that way. ======>

[Castamere]

Daybreak TLP is that way. ======>

Thanks for the suggestion. I personally don't want to see people leave the server.

[Deathrydar]

Thanks for the suggestion. I personally don't want to see people leave the server.

I don't believe anyone wants that, I know I don't. But if you're not happy with the server's intention that they made clear a decade ago, then it may be for the best.

/shrug

[Sporkotron]

Thanks for the suggestion. I personally don't want to see people leave the server.

If the only way they’ll play is if classic changes are rolled back: I do.

[Castamere]

I don't believe anyone wants that, I know I don't. But if you're not happy with the server's intention that they made clear a decade ago, then it may be for the best.

/shrug

Agreed. These changes are new. We'll see how they settle in.

[loramin]

If the only way they’ll play is if classic changes are rolled back: I do.

For the record, while I'm too lazy to find the specific quote, Nilbog has said basically this.

[Castamere]

If the only way they’ll play is if classic changes are rolled back: I do.

You want to see them leave the server, if they want to leave the server? I guess I agree

[Jimjam]

Thanks for the suggestion. I personally don't want to see people leave the server.

Me neither (okay, well maybe some of them), but if given the choice of people subverting the purpose of the project or those people leaving, then I'm afraid I am going to have to choose the integrity of the project.


If someone else makes a reputable vanilla only server, but fills it with more user friendly amenities then I'd probably give it a shot! But that is just not what p1999 is about...

[Deathrydar]

If the only way they’ll play is if classic changes are rolled back: I do.

You cannot entertain the demands of terrorists. Everything changes once you do that.

[Castamere]

I'm not sure the integrity of the server is at stake.

[Fammaden]

I implore the staff to stick to their vision and ignore those who would play moon cats if given half a chance.

I mean, don't the rest of you ever just get bored? I see changes like this and I'm excited to see how we will adjust to the new restrictions and manage to play without the old crutch. I guess if you are a hyper power gaming min/max bard/chanter type of guy this is just rage inducing or something.

[Castamere]

I implore the staff to stick to their vision and ignore those who would play moon cats if given half a chance.

I mean, don't the rest of you ever just get bored? I see changes like this and I'm excited to see how we will adjust to the new restrictions and manage to play without the old crutch. I guess if you are a hyper power gaming min/max bard/chanter type of guy this is just rage inducing or something.

You think because people don't want to have to fumble click mobs that they want instanced raids* and whatever other garbage came in the later expansions? I don't think people on the other side of your argument are asking for that. I certainly am not.

[Deathrydar]

I implore the staff to stick to their vision.

I approve this message!

[Deathrydar]

You think because people don't want to have to fumble click mobs that they want instanced raids* and whatever other garbage came in the later expansions? I don't think people on the other side of your argument are asking for that. I certainly am not.

I think he is referring to the fact that THIS is where it starts. One quality of life change is where it all starts to fall apart.

[Izmael]

The most important contributng factor to classic feeling is POPULATION. There are still thousands of people in 2019 who are willing to play this 1999 game. Some of the reasons undoubtfully are the little QoL features we have.

For instance, I don't think we'd get ~1000 peak population on Blue, if we were forced to play with the Stone UI in 800x600 at 5-10 FPS. This was classic, though. We'd probably lose even more population if mouse zoom out was deactivated (probably next on the list...). Then some more if full-screen became mandatory. And so on.

Do we want to end up on a server where only 30-50 die-hard "shit's classic" afficionados are playing? Probably not. I'm sure the devs do care about population (yes, despite what some of them said at one point).

Nothing is sadder than empty EQ zones. Try Red today to get a feel of what Blue could be if the classicness continues to be applied without discrimination.

Imagine visiting a place you've spent great holidays at, when you were a kid. You come back and take a nostalgic stroll around, maybe even spend holidays there again with the family you have now.
Suddenly you remember that you had terrible allergies back then. Will you at any point say "I wish I had the allergies again so I can truly relive that moment"? Of course not.

Please leave the NPC/PC cycling, mouse zoom, and whatever other things you guys have the itch to remove on Blue. Do it on Green, just like OP suggested. Everyone will be happy. The hardcore classic nuts will be happy on Green, filthy casuals will have the Blue haven where they can get their EQ fix.

[soronil]

Did you really need to make a second thread about this?

[Sporkotron]

You think because people don't want to have to fumble click mobs that they want instanced raids* and whatever other garbage came in the later expansions? I don't think people on the other side of your argument are asking for that. I certainly am not.

Having to click makes the game more difficult which means it’s an important change. Stop asking for the game to be easier and embrace the challenge.

[Castamere]

I think he is referring to the fact that THIS is where it starts. One quality of life change is where it all starts to fall apart.

I'm not asking for anything that hasn't been here for the life of the server. And the server is running strong. Perhaps others are, but not I.

[Castamere]

Having to click makes the game more difficult which means it’s an important change. Stop asking for the game to be easier and embrace the challenge.

I'm not asking for it to be easier. It's been that way, so if anything, i'm asking for it to be the same. But I'm not kidding myself thinking I actually get a vote. It's merely an opinion. I can choose to play with the changes or not. Pretty simple.

[Deathrydar]

I'm not asking for anything that hasn't been here for the life of the server. And the server is running strong. Perhaps others are, but not I.

And again, the blue server is beta for the green server.
The vision for this project has always been to get it as classic as possible.

I am not sure where the logic in your argument lies.

[Fammaden]

You think because people don't want to have to fumble click mobs that they want instanced servers and whatever other garbage came in the later expansions? I don't think people on the other side of your argument are asking for that. I certainly am not.

The slippery slope is very real around here yes. We see the arguments constantly like "because this other non classic thing exists then you should give me back extra hotbars what's the big deal?". The big deal is they have an idea for what they are trying to create, if they don't stand on their convictions for what's best versus what's popular then there isn't a point to what they are doing anymore.

This isn't a live retail game, we aren't customers. Is someone's pet project, someone's hobby. Our ease of gameplay doesn't trump what THEY want to do at all, and its really pretty rude the way some people act towards the devs about this stuff.

OP was pretty polite but at the end of the day there's two sides to this: "Please leave *mechanic* in because its harder and super annoying without it" VS "We did this because it better matches the era we are emulating". If you can't see why the player's side of things is irrelevant in light of what the project has set out to do with the server, I don't know what to tell you.

[DMN]

You EZmoders have ruined your own lands, you will not ruin mine!

[loramin]

If someone else makes a reputable vanilla only server, but fills it with more user friendly amenities then I'd probably give it a shot! But that is just not what p1999 is about...

This seems like the elephant in the room.

Look, everyone who wants "classic with QoL improvements" ... or even just "not classic with QoL improvements" ... I think the chorus of complaints that come up every. single patch. like. this. shows that there are many, many players who would love such a server ...

https://i.imgur.com/81ptQGL.gif

... and yet ... no one has.

There's a ton of EQ emulator servers, yet not a single one with even a decent fraction of P99's population, and no custom content (with or without QoL stuff). That's probably related to the fact that all those other servers allow two-boxing and have crap support compared to P99.

It's easy to say "hey devs (who have put a decade of work into your passion project), do something different." But, so far at least, it has proven impossible for anyone to "do something different", in spite of the clear MASSIVE demand for such a server (hell I'd certainly play a PoP server, even with post-PoP QoL, if it was like P99).

Maybe, just maybe, it's literally impossible to make an unclassic successful emulated EQ server? Maybe no one else has the stomach/passion to make such a server: only the nutjobs (;) <3) like R&N, who care way too much about re-creating a 20-year old game as exactly as possible, have what it takes?

A decade of EQEmu history certainly seems to suggest as much.

[Castamere]

And again, the blue server is beta for the green server.
The vision for this project has always been to get it as classic as possible.

I am not sure where the logic in your argument lies.

I understand the vision. I don't like this one change, so I voiced that opinion. I'm not being cryptic.

[Vexenu]

It's mostly a nerf to Enchanters and epic Shaman root rot soloing. Bards will feel it too, and any other root class trying to CC multiple mobs with root will also be affected.

The change is classic and good. It makes the game more difficult, as it was in classic. Cycle targeting made CCing multiple mobs trivially easy, which enabled a lot of sloppy gameplay and made Enchanters safer and more powerful than they were in Classic. This was not a quality of life change. Cycle targeting has major gameplay implications. Its removal will cause no shortage of caterwauling from the usual suspects, but like all classic changes it will promote more classic gameplay. Which is what this project is all about.

[Harbogast]

Feels like Daldaen had a hand in this.

[Mahdrek]

i just started an enchanter,,,, so how do i target multiple mobs now? with my mouse ?

[loramin]

with my mouse ?

https://i.imgur.com/3MAM44A.gif?1

;)

[Danth]

Target Me Target your character, just like F1 key.
Player One Target your character, just like F1 key.
Player Two Target Party Member 1, like F2 key.
Player Three Target Party Member 2, like F3 key.
Player Four Target Party Member 3, like F4 key.
Player Five Target Party Member 4, like F5 key.
Player Six Target Party Member 5, like F6 key.
Target Player Target Nearest PC, just like F7 key.
Target Mob Target Nearest NPC, just like F8 key.
Target Pet Targets your pet, otherwise, just targets you.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------


That is the copy-and-paste full listing of available bindable targeting commands from the original game manual included in the 2001 Trilogy installation dated July 20 2001. Due to the format it does not conclusively rule out the presence of additional non-bindable commands.

Danth

[DMN]

i just started an enchanter,,,, so how do i target multiple mobs now? with my mouse ?

Target the ones who are still swinging.


--from an OG enchanter.

Eventually you can become lazy AF and just drop AoE mez.

[Castamere]

It's mostly a nerf to Enchanters and epic Shaman root rot soloing. Bards will feel it too, and any other root class trying to CC multiple mobs with root will also be affected.

The change is classic and good. It makes the game more difficult, as it was in classic. Cycle targeting made CCing multiple mobs trivially easy, which enabled a lot of sloppy gameplay and made Enchanters safer and more powerful than they were in Classic. This was not a quality of life change. Cycle targeting has major gameplay implications. Its removal will cause no shortage of caterwauling from the usual suspects, but like all classic changes it will promote more classic gameplay. Which is what this project is all about.

If mouse click targeting worked better, I would be all for it. It's a mechanic that was designed a long time ago and is sloppy because of it. I'm not talking about the inherent difficulty of clicking on multiple targets. I'm talking about objects and UI elements that get in the way of the clicking, when they shouldn't. The buff bar is a good example. You can click on something that's behind you, if you're in first person.

EDIT: Find your nearest ogre. See how far away your mouse can get from the character model while still being able to click target it.

[GreldorEQ]

Upside here is if they also manage to squeeze in the mouse scroll nerf before green, we wont have to worry about an over-populated server! Lulz

[Mblake81]

i just started an enchanter,,,, so how do i target multiple mobs now? with my mouse ?

How did you do it back in classic, did you use your mouse?

[Jimjam]

I'm not asking for anything that hasn't been here for the life of the server. And the server is running strong. Perhaps others are, but not I.

I like your logic.

Bring back halfling hybrids. Until they were removed they were in for the life of the server.

[Fammaden]

It's a mechanic that was designed a long time ago and is sloppy because of it.

You could say this about literally the entire game.

[loramin]

Target Me Target your character, just like F1 key.
Player One Target your character, just like F1 key.
Player Two Target Party Member 1, like F2 key.
Player Three Target Party Member 2, like F3 key.
Player Four Target Party Member 3, like F4 key.
Player Five Target Party Member 4, like F5 key.
Player Six Target Party Member 5, like F6 key.
Target Player Target Nearest PC, just like F7 key.
Target Mob Target Nearest NPC, just like F8 key.
Target Pet Targets your pet, otherwise, just targets you.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------


That is the copy-and-paste full listing of available bindable targeting commands from the original game manual included in the 2001 Trilogy installation dated July 20 2001. Due to the format it does not conclusively rule out the presence of additional non-bindable commands.

Danth

Great list Danth. I combined it with Daldaen's on the new Targeting wiki page (http://wiki.project1999.com/Targeting).

[Castamere]

You could say this about literally the entire game.

To some extent perhaps. I feel mouse click targeting isn't showing its age nearly as well though.

[Fammaden]

The most important contributng factor to classic feeling is POPULATION. There are still thousands of people in 2019 who are willing to play this 1999 game. Some of the reasons undoubtfully are the little QoL features we have.

For instance, I don't think we'd get ~1000 peak population on Blue, if we were forced to play with the Stone UI in 800x600 at 5-10 FPS. This was classic, though. We'd probably lose even more population if mouse zoom out was deactivated (probably next on the list...). Then some more if full-screen became mandatory. And so on.

Do we want to end up on a server where only 30-50 die-hard "shit's classic" afficionados are playing? Probably not. I'm sure the devs do care about population (yes, despite what some of them said at one point).

Nothing is sadder than empty EQ zones. Try Red today to get a feel of what Blue could be if the classicness continues to be applied without discrimination.

Yeah this is another big fall back argument. You have no idea how many, if any, population we will actually lose. For all either of us know they could keep this and also pull out mouse wheel scroll and other things and green will still be wildly popular. If a major population die off happens you can point to these reasons but for the time being we are perfectly stable with WoWC having bled off some numbers (which is not altogether a bad thing).

I agree with Loramin on this though, the biggest factors in P99's population/popularity have been the support and stiff anti-boxing stance and enforcement. Its really a small miracle that this place has existed so long with such relative stability and lack of corruption (note I said relative, not absolute) that tend to bury many other private attempts to do something similar.

We have population, IMO, because people realize they can come here and find other players to chat and group with rather than being outright ignored by a bunch of people running two to six boxes while they masturbate over their insular pixel army.

[Danth]

Great list Danth. I combined it with Daldaen's on the new Targeting wiki page (http://wiki.project1999.com/Targeting).

It's useful, but I repeat my caveat from earlier: It does not conclusively rule out the existence of a non-bindable command. That section of the manual related to keybinds specifically.

Danth

[loramin]

It's useful, but I repeat my caveat from earlier: It does not conclusively rule out the existence of a non-bindable command. That section of the manual related to keybinds specifically.

Danth

Oh, I'm not even coming at it from a "classic evidence" angle. I'm just trying to educate everyone on what their targeting options (http://wiki.project1999.com/Targeting) are now that tab cycling is gone ... and that involves "dusting off" the old manual sections that describe those targeting mechanisms :)

[Dolalin]

:D


6/18/99

If there is anyone out there who is about to purchase Everquest let me warn
you of some things

...

Things are hard to target!


https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.games.everquest/NhzbKIbXGhk/A8Bn2GwSzSUJ

[Deathrydar]

:D



https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.games.everquest/NhzbKIbXGhk/A8Bn2GwSzSUJ

Wow! That guy said he had fun up until level 4 lol. EQ wasn't for him!

[Castamere]

Yeah this is another big fall back argument. You have no idea how many, if any, population we will actually lose. For all either of us know they could keep this and also pull out mouse wheel scroll and other things and green will still be wildly popular. If a major population die off happens you can point to these reasons but for the time being we are perfectly stable with WoWC having bled off some numbers (which is not altogether a bad thing).

I agree with Loramin on this though, the biggest factors in P99's population/popularity have been the support and stiff anti-boxing stance and enforcement. Its really a small miracle that this place has existed so long with such relative stability and lack of corruption (note I said relative, not absolute) that tend to bury many other private attempts to do something similar.

We have population, IMO, because people realize they can come here and find other players to chat and group with rather than being outright ignored by a bunch of people running two to six boxes while they masturbate over their insular pixel army.

I've never thought about quitting until this. If I'm alone in this, then I'm glad the majority of the population is happy with the changes and the box will thrive. I still, perhaps selfishly, want to play the game without the change.

[Deathrydar]

I've never thought about quitting until this. If I'm alone in this, then I'm glad the majority of the population is happy with the changes and the box will thrive. I still, perhaps selfishly, want to play the game without the change.

There have to be other underlying factors if you really want to quit. This is not that big of a deal man. Not to mention, I would have hoped most players would have expected quality of life changes and changes outside of the project's intended era, Classic thru Velious, would be removed/fixed at some point.

[DMN]

I've never thought about quitting until this. If I'm alone in this, then I'm glad the majority of the population is happy with the changes and the box will thrive. I still, perhaps selfishly, want to play the game without the change.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L842mz-tNBQ

[Castamere]

There have to be other underlying factors if you really want to quit. This is not that big of a deal man. Not to mention, I would have hoped most players would have expected quality of life changes and changes outside of the project's intended era, Classic thru Velious, would be removed/fixed at some point.

No underlying factors. It's normal for people to move on if they don't like the changes in a game. The change wasn't unexpected, and I wasn't surprised by it, given the vision of the server. Doesn't mean I have to like it though. We grow accustomed to things. I'll either adapt, or find a new. Either way, no worries.

[walfreyydo]

Not as silly as a bunch of players complaining about a feature that is not classic on a server that's main focus and goal has been to bring the game as close to classic as possible.

For a feature that has been in place for the last decade...

[Danth]

Oh, I'm not even coming at it from a "classic evidence" angle. I'm just trying to educate everyone on what their targeting options (http://wiki.project1999.com/Targeting) are now that tab cycling is gone ... and that involves "dusting off" the old manual sections that describe those targeting mechanisms :)

Gotcha. I'm with you. I can't even remember what keys I was using to target stuff 20 years ago so I'm trying to refrain from posting on the classic nature of this change. Just figured the manual quote was relevant to the more general subject. EQ had some weird default keybinds. The WASD movement commands most folks use was not default....remember hitting "A" when near an NPC and getting yourself killed?

Danth

[Deathrydar]

For a feature that has been in place for the last decade...

Wow.........smh

[Sporkotron]

For a feature that has been in place for the last decade...

If it’s a QOL improvement that was added after Velious: That was a bug not a feature.

The developers have been hard at work squashing those bugs for ten years.

[Deathrydar]

If it’s a QOL improvement that was added after Velious: That was a bug not a feature.

The developers have been hard at work squashing those bugs for ten years.

^^THIS

[Mblake81]

I've never thought about quitting until this. If I'm alone in this, then I'm glad the majority of the population is happy with the changes and the box will thrive. I still, perhaps selfishly, want to play the game without the change.

Look I will give you credit, at least it wasn't a direct threat to Rogean of your intention to quit. :o

[Castamere]

Look I will give you credit, at least it wasn't a direct threat to Rogean of your intention to quit. :o

No way, I've had tons of fun on this game. Perhaps the change won't effect my play as much as I think, but it's hard to imagine not* being able to play to the level I'm accustomed.

[Deathrydar]

No way, I've had tons of fun on this game. Perhaps the change won't effect my play as much as I think, but it's hard to imagine not* being able to play to the level I'm accustomed.

I think you will adapt and get used to it! ;)

[Fammaden]

No way, I've had tons of fun on this game. Perhaps the change won't effect my play as much as I think, but it's hard to imagine not* being able to play to the level I'm accustomed.

What things specifically are you worried you won't be able to do?

[Rogean]

Sure took long enough to implement. To me, that time passed was enough for me to believe staff wasn't as concerned about some of the smaller details. Time has proven me wrong.

Frankly this argument annoys me. You guys underestimate the difficulty of client side changes. We don't have access to Client source code. We have very limited dissassembly skillsets, and occasionally we rely on pseudocode. Haynar is better than I am at finding specific memory addresses and offsets, and I'm somewhat decent at finding/following code paths for functions to hook and modify their arguments and/or return values. Secrets is better than both of us at anything related to dissassembly, but often too busy to help us.

The Client psuedocode is 468,710 lines of code long, and most of it looks a lot like this:


//----- (0041ACE9) --------------------------------------------------------
signed int __thiscall sub_41ACE9(_DWORD *this, unsigned int a2)
{
_DWORD *v2; // esi
int v3; // edx
int v4; // eax
int v5; // edi
signed int v6; // ebx
int v7; // edi
int v8; // eax
int v9; // edi
int v10; // eax
int v11; // eax
int v12; // eax
int v13; // eax
int v14; // edi
char v15; // al
int v16; // eax
signed int v17; // ecx
int v18; // eax
int v19; // ebx
signed int v20; // edi
_DWORD *v21; // eax
_DWORD *v22; // eax
int v23; // eax
int v24; // eax
int v25; // edi
int v26; // eax
signed int v28; // [esp+Ch] [ebp-4h]
_DWORD *v29; // [esp+Ch] [ebp-4h]

v2 = this;
v28 = sub_40E722((_DWORD *)((char *)this + *(_DWORD *)(this[1] + 4) + 4), a2);
v4 = v2[2];
if ( v4
&& !*(_BYTE *)(v4 + 580)
&& !*(_BYTE *)(v4 + 598)
&& !sub_4167E2((_DWORD *)((char *)v2 + *(_DWORD *)(v2[1] + 4) + 4)) )
{
v29 = (_DWORD *)(*(int (**)(void))(*(_DWORD *)((char *)v2 + *(_DWORD *)(v2[1] + 4) + 4) + 64))();
v5 = *(_DWORD *)(sub_5EC220((_DWORD *)((char *)v2 + *(_DWORD *)(v2[1] + 4) + 8)) + 4516);
v6 = *(_DWORD *)(sub_5EC220((_DWORD *)((char *)v2 + *(_DWORD *)(v2[1] + 4) + 8)) + 4516);
if ( v6 < (unsigned __int8)sub_5ED510(v29) )
{
v7 = *(_DWORD *)(sub_5EC220((_DWORD *)((char *)v2 + *(_DWORD *)(v2[1] + 4) + 8)) + 4516);
if ( (unsigned __int8)sub_5ED510(v29) >= v7 + 2 )
v5 = *(_DWORD *)(sub_5EC220((_DWORD *)((char *)v2 + *(_DWORD *)(v2[1] + 4) + 8)) + 4516) + 2;
else
v5 = (unsigned __int8)sub_5ED510(v29);
}
v8 = sub_5EC220((_DWORD *)((char *)v2 + *(_DWORD *)(v2[1] + 4) + 8));
v9 = sub_44A448(v5, *(unsigned __int8 *)(v8 + 4508), a2, (int)v29);
if ( sub_40E722((_DWORD *)((char *)v2 + *(_DWORD *)(v2[1] + 4) + 4), a2) < v9 )
v9 = sub_40E722((_DWORD *)((char *)v2 + *(_DWORD *)(v2[1] + 4) + 4), a2);
v10 = sub_5EC220((_DWORD *)((char *)v2 + *(_DWORD *)(v2[1] + 4) + 8));
v11 = sub_4184F4(v2, a2, *(_DWORD *)(v10 + 4504));
v28 = v9;
if ( v9 <= v11 )
v28 = v11;
}
v12 = v2[2];
if ( v12 )
{
if ( !*(_BYTE *)(v12 + 580) )
{
v13 = sub_40E934((int)v2, v3, 122, 0);
v14 = v13;
if ( v13 )
{
sub_44D0D0(*(_DWORD *)(v13 + 4));
if ( v15 )
{
sub_40CBD6(*(_DWORD *)(v14 + 4));
if ( v16 )
{
if ( *(_DWORD *)(v16 + 48) == a2 )
{
v17 = *(_DWORD *)(v16 + 240);
if ( v17 > 0 && v17 < 101 )
v28 = v28 * (100 - v17) / 100;
}
}
}
}
}
}
v18 = v2[2];
v19 = 0;
if ( v18 && !*(_BYTE *)(v18 + 580) )
{
v20 = 0;
do
{
if ( sub_40CC50((_DWORD *)((char *)v2 + *(_DWORD *)(v2[1] + 4) + 4), v20) )
{
v21 = (_DWORD *)sub_40CC50((_DWORD *)((char *)v2 + *(_DWORD *)(v2[1] + 4) + 4), v20);
if ( !sub_5ECCC0(v21) )
{
v22 = (_DWORD *)sub_40CC50((_DWORD *)((char *)v2 + *(_DWORD *)(v2[1] + 4) + 4), v20);
v23 = sub_5E3210(v22, a2, v28, 1);
if ( v23 )
{
if ( v23 > v19 )
v19 = v23;
}
}
}
++v20;
}
while ( v20 < 22 );
if ( v19 )
v28 += v19;
if ( a2 == 35 )
{
if ( *(_DWORD *)(sub_5EC220((_DWORD *)((char *)v2 + *(_DWORD *)(v2[1] + 4) + 8)) + 136) )
{
v24 = sub_5EC220((_DWORD *)((char *)v2 + *(_DWORD *)(v2[1] + 4) + 8));
v25 = sub_5E3210(*(_DWORD **)(v24 + 136), 35, v28, 1);
v26 = sub_5EC220((_DWORD *)((char *)v2 + *(_DWORD *)(v2[1] + 4) + 8));
if ( sub_5ECC00(*(_DWORD **)(v26 + 136)) == 12 )
{
if ( v25 )
v28 += v25;
}
}
}
}
if ( v28 > 252 && sub_44A273(a2) )
v28 = 252;
return v28;
}
// 40CBD6: using guessed type double __stdcall sub_40CBD6(_DWORD);
// 44D0D0: using guessed type double __cdecl sub_44D0D0(_DWORD);

Now, the function I just listed above is a good example, because it handles the client's visual display of the values of skills in the skill window. In this function, it's handling a lot of processing on those values to check various caps based on class and skill ID, which it really should have no reason to do because we just want it to display what the server tells us it is.

So, we hook it. Hooking is essentially rewriting the running code in memory at the location of this function to do a JMP (Jump/Detour) to our own custom function. At which point we access the Skill Value directly, using a global client pointer to the character's data, and return it:

signed int CHooks::SkillCapCheck2_Detour(unsigned int a1) {
return ((CharData2 *)((*(CharData **)0x905D00)->ExtendedData->pCharData2))->Skill[a1];
}

And this is actually one of the easier examples.

[Chortles Snort|eS]

u sure know how to stir up the geriatric playerS RoG doG

[Castamere]

Frankly this argument annoys me. You guys underestimate the difficulty of client side changes. We don't have access to Client source code. We have very limited dissassembly skillsets, and occasionally we rely on pseudocode. Haynar is better than I am at finding specific memory addresses and offsets, and I'm somewhat decent at finding/following code paths for functions to hook and modify their arguments and/or return values. Secrets is better than both of us at anything related to dissassembly, but often too busy to help us.

The Client psuedocode is 468,710 lines of code long, and most of it looks a lot like this:


//----- (0041ACE9) --------------------------------------------------------
signed int __thiscall sub_41ACE9(_DWORD *this, unsigned int a2)
{
_DWORD *v2; // esi
int v3; // edx
int v4; // eax
int v5; // edi
signed int v6; // ebx
int v7; // edi
int v8; // eax
int v9; // edi
int v10; // eax
int v11; // eax
int v12; // eax
int v13; // eax
int v14; // edi
char v15; // al
int v16; // eax
signed int v17; // ecx
int v18; // eax
int v19; // ebx
signed int v20; // edi
_DWORD *v21; // eax
_DWORD *v22; // eax
int v23; // eax
int v24; // eax
int v25; // edi
int v26; // eax
signed int v28; // [esp+Ch] [ebp-4h]
_DWORD *v29; // [esp+Ch] [ebp-4h]

v2 = this;
v28 = sub_40E722((_DWORD *)((char *)this + *(_DWORD *)(this[1] + 4) + 4), a2);
v4 = v2[2];
if ( v4
&& !*(_BYTE *)(v4 + 580)
&& !*(_BYTE *)(v4 + 598)
&& !sub_4167E2((_DWORD *)((char *)v2 + *(_DWORD *)(v2[1] + 4) + 4)) )
{
v29 = (_DWORD *)(*(int (**)(void))(*(_DWORD *)((char *)v2 + *(_DWORD *)(v2[1] + 4) + 4) + 64))();
v5 = *(_DWORD *)(sub_5EC220((_DWORD *)((char *)v2 + *(_DWORD *)(v2[1] + 4) + 8)) + 4516);
v6 = *(_DWORD *)(sub_5EC220((_DWORD *)((char *)v2 + *(_DWORD *)(v2[1] + 4) + 8)) + 4516);
if ( v6 < (unsigned __int8)sub_5ED510(v29) )
{
v7 = *(_DWORD *)(sub_5EC220((_DWORD *)((char *)v2 + *(_DWORD *)(v2[1] + 4) + 8)) + 4516);
if ( (unsigned __int8)sub_5ED510(v29) >= v7 + 2 )
v5 = *(_DWORD *)(sub_5EC220((_DWORD *)((char *)v2 + *(_DWORD *)(v2[1] + 4) + 8)) + 4516) + 2;
else
v5 = (unsigned __int8)sub_5ED510(v29);
}
v8 = sub_5EC220((_DWORD *)((char *)v2 + *(_DWORD *)(v2[1] + 4) + 8));
v9 = sub_44A448(v5, *(unsigned __int8 *)(v8 + 4508), a2, (int)v29);
if ( sub_40E722((_DWORD *)((char *)v2 + *(_DWORD *)(v2[1] + 4) + 4), a2) < v9 )
v9 = sub_40E722((_DWORD *)((char *)v2 + *(_DWORD *)(v2[1] + 4) + 4), a2);
v10 = sub_5EC220((_DWORD *)((char *)v2 + *(_DWORD *)(v2[1] + 4) + 8));
v11 = sub_4184F4(v2, a2, *(_DWORD *)(v10 + 4504));
v28 = v9;
if ( v9 <= v11 )
v28 = v11;
}
v12 = v2[2];
if ( v12 )
{
if ( !*(_BYTE *)(v12 + 580) )
{
v13 = sub_40E934((int)v2, v3, 122, 0);
v14 = v13;
if ( v13 )
{
sub_44D0D0(*(_DWORD *)(v13 + 4));
if ( v15 )
{
sub_40CBD6(*(_DWORD *)(v14 + 4));
if ( v16 )
{
if ( *(_DWORD *)(v16 + 48) == a2 )
{
v17 = *(_DWORD *)(v16 + 240);
if ( v17 > 0 && v17 < 101 )
v28 = v28 * (100 - v17) / 100;
}
}
}
}
}
}
v18 = v2[2];
v19 = 0;
if ( v18 && !*(_BYTE *)(v18 + 580) )
{
v20 = 0;
do
{
if ( sub_40CC50((_DWORD *)((char *)v2 + *(_DWORD *)(v2[1] + 4) + 4), v20) )
{
v21 = (_DWORD *)sub_40CC50((_DWORD *)((char *)v2 + *(_DWORD *)(v2[1] + 4) + 4), v20);
if ( !sub_5ECCC0(v21) )
{
v22 = (_DWORD *)sub_40CC50((_DWORD *)((char *)v2 + *(_DWORD *)(v2[1] + 4) + 4), v20);
v23 = sub_5E3210(v22, a2, v28, 1);
if ( v23 )
{
if ( v23 > v19 )
v19 = v23;
}
}
}
++v20;
}
while ( v20 < 22 );
if ( v19 )
v28 += v19;
if ( a2 == 35 )
{
if ( *(_DWORD *)(sub_5EC220((_DWORD *)((char *)v2 + *(_DWORD *)(v2[1] + 4) + 8)) + 136) )
{
v24 = sub_5EC220((_DWORD *)((char *)v2 + *(_DWORD *)(v2[1] + 4) + 8));
v25 = sub_5E3210(*(_DWORD **)(v24 + 136), 35, v28, 1);
v26 = sub_5EC220((_DWORD *)((char *)v2 + *(_DWORD *)(v2[1] + 4) + 8));
if ( sub_5ECC00(*(_DWORD **)(v26 + 136)) == 12 )
{
if ( v25 )
v28 += v25;
}
}
}
}
if ( v28 > 252 && sub_44A273(a2) )
v28 = 252;
return v28;
}
// 40CBD6: using guessed type double __stdcall sub_40CBD6(_DWORD);
// 44D0D0: using guessed type double __cdecl sub_44D0D0(_DWORD);

Now, the function I just listed above is a good example, because it handles the client's visual display of the values of skills in the skill window. In this function, it's handling a lot of processing on those values to check various caps based on class and skill ID, which it really should have no reason to do because we just want it to display what the server tells us it is.

So, we hook it. Hooking is essentially rewriting the running code in memory at the location of this function to do a JMP (Jump/Detour) to our own custom function. At which point we access the Skill Value directly, using a global client pointer to the character's data, and return it:

signed int CHooks::SkillCapCheck2_Detour(unsigned int a1) {
return ((CharData2 *)((*(CharData **)0x905D00)->ExtendedData->pCharData2))->Skill[a1];
}

And this is actually one of the easier examples.

It wasn't intended to be a jab at you or your staff. I realize how it may have come across that way. I'll retract that statement, based on all the smart stuff you just posted.

[kaev]

...
Now, the function I just listed above is a good example, because it handles the client's visual display of the values of skills in the skill window. ...

Numeric skill display in the client was added some time after release, might have been post-Kunark release, all you got were the "Awful/Below Average/.../Master" strings at first. I hand-parsed logs to work out what my characters' skills were at and what the level caps were from the numeric skill-up messages. My inner Nilbog wants to see this true on green.

[Mblake81]

Frankly this argument annoys me. You guys underestimate the difficulty of client side changes. We don't have access to Client source code. We have very limited dissassembly skillsets, and occasionally we rely on pseudocode. Haynar is better than I am at finding specific memory addresses and offsets, and I'm somewhat decent at finding/following code paths for functions to hook and modify their arguments and/or return values. Secrets is better than both of us at anything related to dissassembly, but often too busy to help us.

The Client psuedocode is 468,710 lines of code long, and most of it looks a lot like this:

Now, the function I just listed above is a good example, because it handles the client's visual display of the values of skills in the skill window. In this function, it's handling a lot of processing on those values to check various caps based on class and skill ID, which it really should have no reason to do because we just want it to display what the server tells us it is.

So, we hook it. Hooking is essentially rewriting the running code in memory at the location of this function to do a JMP (Jump/Detour) to our own custom function. At which point we access the Skill Value directly, using a global client pointer to the character's data, and return it:

And this is actually one of the easier examples.

-Programmed from Rogeans SGI Crimson & Machintosh Quadra

Now we wait for the storm to steal the dino dna. :D

[Bardp1999]

Now we wait for the storm to steal the dino dna. :D

https://i.imgur.com/GIVvK6y.gif

[Gustoo]

Yeah I remember going to the guild trainer to see what my actual skills were.

[Baler]

https://i.imgur.com/nC4E4b4.gif

[Secrets]

Secrets is better than both of us at anything related to dissassembly, but often too busy to help us.


On that note...

The code for cycling through targets did not exist in any client prior to 2004. Please stop using "I read it in a Usenet group" or "it was bound to tab". It's fake news. The only thing bound to tab was cycle between self and target.

[Secrets]

Numeric skill display in the client was added some time after release, might have been post-Kunark release, all you got were the "Awful/Below Average/.../Master" strings at first. I hand-parsed logs to work out what my characters' skills were at and what the level caps were from the numeric skill-up messages. My inner Nilbog wants to see this true on green.

The strings were generated from actual numerical values. Evidence of this exists as early as the client shipped in 1999 on the disks.

[Danth]

On that note...

The code for cycling through targets did not exist in any client prior to 2004. Please stop using "I read it in a Usenet group" or "it was bound to tab". It's fake news. The only thing bound to tab was cycle between self and target.

I posted elsewhere but it got lost in the shuffle, but when did names start to "blink" once targeted? I noticed the other day they didn't do that in the old Tutorial, and most probably did not do that in the EQ beta either since the Tutorial.exe was based on that very old code. I have no personal recollection as to when that particular feature was added, but thinking about it....I remember it being really hard to tell what I had targeted if I pulled several things that had the same name. No recollection at all when it changed.

Names DO blink on the standard version of the Trilogy client so it was added early (again the tutorial is a separate .exe) I just don't remember whether it was a beta or an early-launch addition. I am NOT suggesting this for P1999--merely asking for the sake of trivia.

Danth

[Baler]

On that note...

The code for cycling through targets did not exist in any client prior to 2004. Please stop using "I read it in a Usenet group" or "it was bound to tab". It's fake news. The only thing bound to tab was cycle between self and target.

#classless

[Sonark]

I think Green will be initially popular, because hey I remember this.

Then the reality of all the things they don't remember being in the game, because they came for the nostalgia and not the actual experience, will come crashing down and they'll never come back.

[Erati]

I await the removal of Item links and the drop shadow on ALL nameplates.

[Deathrydar]

I think Green will be initially popular, because hey I remember this.

Then the reality of all the things they don't remember being in the game, because they came for the nostalgia and not the actual experience, will come crashing down and they'll never come back.

People will probably quit once they realize they can't hit the TAB key on their keyboards and cycle thru targets. I mean, that is so inconvenient...

[Daldaen]

I await the removal of Item links and the drop shadow on ALL nameplates.

Both of these sound incredible.

I look forward to people typing out the stats on their Dragoon Dirks and Glowing Black Stones in their auctions like the old times.

[Lhord99]

*Sips JumJum Juice*

Maybe this Tab Key dilemma is, like, an awakening that we ALL have too many "targets" in front of us with no simple "push-button solution" to keep them all compartmentalized and focused. Cycling tabs in EQ was giving us that semblance of organization, and, without this feature, we've all been thrust into cognitive dissonance.

Just a thought.

[Wallicker]

Haha enchanters still go it easy with aoe mez and longer duration/mez roots, ya bards however... gotta get the appropriate target in the right order multiple multiple times over the duration of a fight every 3 seconds! No one made a bard that wasn’t up to a challenge though this will just further the gap of the good and bad players on the most technical class in the game cheers!

[Baler]

An immense thank you to the p99 staff for allowing cycle through nearest targets on blue/red. I thoroughly look forward to enjoying the pure classic experience with no out of era QOL during GREEN.

And please note that this is not me stating that blue/red are not classic. Over the years they've been shaped into a as close as possible classic experience during the tip end of the Velious era.

[El-Hefe]

I think Green will be initially popular, because hey I remember this.

Then the reality of all the things they don't remember being in the game, because they came for the nostalgia and not the actual experience, will come crashing down and they'll never come back.

Nah, EQ is fun.

I'm sorry that you don't think so.

[DMN]

On that note...

The code for cycling through targets did not exist in any client prior to 2004. Please stop using "I read it in a Usenet group" or "it was bound to tab". It's fake news. The only thing bound to tab was cycle between self and target.

Really? I thought it was "target and last target". Defaulting to self only when there is no last target targettable. But that was a long ass time ago.

[Sonark]

Nah, EQ is fun.

I'm sorry that you don't think so.This stagnant little pond is fun, to a degree.

But the fun people think they had isn't equivalent to the fun they'll actually have when they come back, and things aren't as how they remember them.

Greeners gonna green, but I really don't see this becoming a larger, more popular sim after the initial launch.

Things grow and change when they stop being stagnant.

The very concept of p99 is antithetical to that, however appealing that stagnation may be to some people.

[Gumbo]

Permafrost Bear Pit days are over for Druids if we can't have tab target cycle. There is just too many things to do and have it work by trying to mouse click on everything...

[soronil]

Permafrost Bear Pit days are over for Druids if we can't have tab target cycle. There is just too many things to do and have it work by trying to mouse click on everything...

I am 100% sure that there are people capable of finding some way to target mobs in this post-apocalyptic world.

Also, they reverted the change on blue, so maybe posting the same thing in multiple threads is overkill.

[Mblake81]

This stagnant little pond is fun, to a degree.

But the fun people think they had isn't equivalent to the fun they'll actually have when they come back, and things aren't as how they remember them.

Greeners gonna green, but I really don't see this becoming a larger, more popular sim after the initial launch.

Things grow and change when they stop being stagnant.

The very concept of p99 is antithetical to that, however appealing that stagnation may be to some people.

Business plan of continuous growth. :o

Do you remember what got our attention in the early days?

Also, they reverted the change on blue

Blue is the beta server, probably just seeing if it works. Rivers of tears would indicate a yes.

[Sonark]

Business plan of continuous growth. :o More than a bit of specious reasoning, but okay.Do you remember what got our attention in the early days?I was 11 and I liked fantasy stuffs.

How about you?

[Mblake81]

More than a bit of specious reasoning, but okay.I was 11 and I liked fantasy stuffs.

How about you?

It's wrong? becoming more popular and growing a player base with whom? and what sort of changes need to be put in place to make that attractive.

I was 18, my friends in their 30's liked EQ, UO, Table Top and other things. I wasn't attracted to or repulsed by the game due to some ability to target something or a pet window. Those things were not there though. So if the people who are playing this understand what the project is then I don't understand what the argument is really about.

[AbstractVision]

Permafrost Bear Pit days are over for Druids if we can't have tab target cycle. There is just too many things to do and have it work by trying to mouse click on everything...

I never used tab targeting in bear pits. I always used target nearest NPC.

[Dolalin]

Having to "mouse click everything" was part of the difficulty of the original game. You either got good at it or you didn't.

I never knew cycle target was a thing here until I saw Daldaen mention it a few weeks ago. I managed to get several classes to 60 including a bard without the cycle target hotkey. You can too.

Although looks like they've patched easy mode back into blue so whatever.

[GreldorEQ]

I don't see why this would be bad for the server, I mean, TAKP is just SWIMMING with active players!

[Mblake81]

I don't see why this would be bad for the server, I mean, TAKP is just SWIMMING with active players!

Point taken. Blue is the beta server so they were probably just seeing if it worked or not. That said, idc if green has 200 people playing, it's 200 people that want the original version of EQ. Blue can have 1k+ that freak out whenever the developers use the beta server to test a change.

I want nothing more to do with Blue server. It would be best to start Green off fully prepared with the correct changes before people become accustomed to something that is not supposed to be there, also knowing the changes will never be on Green so there is no reason to ask about them by using troll shitposts.

[walfreyydo]

Tab targetting working fine for me as of 9/30/19

[Fammaden]

Tab targetting working fine for me as of 9/30/19

You're probably still on initial patch 50, not one of the 50b/c/d versions that have come since then. They aren't required to use right now, no word on future of blue tab targeting yet that I'm aware.

[Deathrydar]

You're probably still on initial patch 50, not one of the 50b/c/d versions that have come since then. They aren't required to use right now, no word on future of blue tab targeting yet that I'm aware.

Rogean flipped it back to quiet all of the whiners. Tab cycling will not be available in green, but it will be available on blue.

[kaev]

Rogean flipped it back to quiet all of the whiners. Tab cycling will not be available in green, but it will be available on blue.

Quieting the whiners is very much not classic. There's a reason the old SOE forums were known as "Whineplay".

Death to the cycle target hotkey and all that sort of thing!

[Jimjam]

Move to resolved.

[Fammaden]

It would be best to start Green off fully prepared with the correct changes before people become accustomed to something that is not supposed to be there, also knowing the changes will never be on Green so there is no reason to ask about them by using troll shitposts.

Pretty much yeah, starting green with everything you plan to strip away already gone nips it in the bud. If that results in some lower pop it might not be the worst thing. IDK what to expect, but if it ended up at like 500 or so at peak times I think the server would still be fun. If both servers managed to pull around 1k it would be ideal for the health of both sides. I know Rog said he's expecting 3k concurrent and shit at launch, but I've never thought that would remain consistent after the initial hype anyway.

[Daldaen]

With this and pet window I think it’s pretty clear Blue is already in custom content.

I would hope Luclin is on the horizon as well, finally get those nerds out of ToV for some snake and shade slaying.

[aaezil]

He reverted a classic change again? Man this is getting bad...

[Deathrydar]

He reverted a classic change again? Man this is getting bad...

Do not fret! Play green when it launches. :)

[aaezil]

Do not fret! Play green when it launches. :)

Zero interest in green

I am however interested in the supposedly classic velious server. . .

[Mblake81]

Pretty much yeah, starting green with everything you plan to strip away already gone nips it in the bud. If that results in some lower pop it might not be the worst thing. IDK what to expect, but if it ended up at like 500 or so at peak times I think the server would still be fun. If both servers managed to pull around 1k it would be ideal for the health of both sides. I know Rog said he's expecting 3k concurrent and shit at launch, but I've never thought that would remain consistent after the initial hype anyway.

500 steady players is just fine, considering it wipes after a point.

Zero interest in green

I am however interested in the supposedly classic velious server. . .

This server is a beta for Green. They test green changes here. But the counter troll argument (successful I might add) is that P99 blue has been the same for so many years it is not fair to change it. Pet window, UI, Tab targeting has been met with resistance from the playerbase, notice many 2019 accounts that make comments when a change happens. :o

P99 is not a EQ server but a project for a classic EQ server. It's not in its final form and probably will never be. Plenty of threads in other sections about it recently. Some people are asking for Luclin things, heh.

[Jibartik]

https://groups.google.com/forum/#!msg/alt.games.everquest/L1NSCnc9_24/U9TVBE_gqNoJ

Nearest enemy is classic works almost exactly like tab targeting I didn't even notice they took it out, try this out. You basically look at what you want to target, but you may have to move a bit. Its how I've always played, I prefer it to tab because you can go between 2 enemies in a mix of 6 or whatever.

I didnt even notice this but, I've never used tab targeting only this, as none of my hotkeys are affected by the patch haha, lucky me!