View Full Version : Any "clarity" on some of the major potential class changes on green?
Enchanter should not have clarity for a couple months.
Necros get charm and beguile. 90% of their pets are research only after 16-20?
Shaman get charm.
Magicians have to research all pets after 20, and they can't equip weapons.
I haven't been able to keep up with everything here with some RL health issues, so if any has the 411 on "if they stay or if they go"? Or are we still in the dark on this?
Madbad
10-21-2019, 09:23 PM
seems like none of this is in
Baler
10-21-2019, 09:27 PM
im sorry my friends but I must douche bag response...
https://www.project1999.com/forums/search.php
Icannotpost
10-21-2019, 09:28 PM
Damn - none are in?
soronil
10-21-2019, 09:58 PM
Nilbog is asking for help in an effort that could solve some of this.
https://www.project1999.com/forums/showthread.php?t=337025
By providing dates and evidence when spells on this list became available on vendors, they will be properly tagged with the correct timeline.
Won't fix everything you mentioned. (if a spell existed for another class, or a spell was removed from a class) but for Spell:Clarity, having the merchant not sell it until May99 would make it unavailable.
There's a spreadsheet a few posts into it if anyone wants to add effort to it.
TheDudeAbides
10-21-2019, 10:10 PM
Enchanter should not have clarity for a couple months.
Necros get charm and beguile. 90% of their pets are research only after 16-20?
Shaman get charm.
Magicians have to research all pets after 20, and they can't equip weapons.
I haven't been able to keep up with everything here with some RL health issues, so if any has the 411 on "if they stay or if they go"? Or are we still in the dark on this?
I don't think it's unreasonable to realize that Everquest was released as an unfinished game back in 1999. At launch it was plagued with many problems. Underdeveloped classes, balance issues, almost zero end game content and many other features were missing that were the original part of Brad's "Vision" at launch. Especially those that pertained to classes and abilities.
All of SOE's games were basically released as barely a Beta product back then (See SWG (<- Totally unfinished Disaster at launch) / EQ2 / Planetside, ect) WOW (cough) learned a lot from those initial mistakes and released a game that was relatively polished for it's time.
The reason why EQ2 launch was a mess was because they rushed the game to get it released before WOW which ended up hurting the game in the long run.
In all of this discussion to "recreate Classic" exactly as it was, many important specifics are never discussed. For one, the game was originally released in March to gain steam for the Summer Market and give development time to polish it up. Fiscal considerations were put ahead of development/balancing issues and like many games at that time, the assumptions were made details would be ironed out as Summer hit with patches. You paid to play Betas that were comically characterized as a finished product to sell units. They needed the money to continue development. It's not cheap.
It was all about money. The finished product took a distant second place.
They didn't know what they were making at the time. They didn't know how popular the game would become. It was a massive gamble that paid off. We wouldn't be playing the game 20 years later otherwise. It was a perfect accident.
I don't think I've ever played an MMO since the original EQ (and there have been many) that can hold a candle to it. The immersion, sense of danger, character and fantastical realized world we now call home.
There were many absurdly broken mechanics during original launch that were removed for a reason. Many initial mistakes that were quickly fixed. I don't see any threads demanding they be implemented because that was "Classic" (None that should be taken seriously anyways)
IMO there needs to be a balance between creating that Classic feel and launching a new server with completely gimped, needless, and broken class mechanics. I see all these Wayback Detectives trying to piece together their "vision" in how the classes should be on Green at launch now 20 years later. Parsing patch notes from some 20 year old forgotten news group like it's forensic evidence at a murder trial.
It's Aspergers. This isn't 1999/2000. It's almost 2020.
We've had 20 years of data and testing to iron out the kinks. Putting that into perspective, it's basically been at the minimum a 10 year Beta test to get to this point on P99.
I think this is actually a golden opportunity for Rogean and his team to give Classic Everquest the launch it truly deserved back in 1999. Releasing it all the way back in that obvious original broken state, (that had nothing to do with the game itself) would be big mistake. Especially with vast improvements and changes literally right around the corner that were intended at launch.
As an example I point to how Bard kiting/swarming has been changed specifically for Green. An improvement over the original design because frankly the mechanic was beyond broken and abused for so long on Blue the Bard class is literally despised by the stigma it has created.
I implore the Devs to learn from past mistakes. Just because they were past mistakes that were "Classic" doesn't mean we have to all be masochists and repeat them. Many of the changes were done for a reason. To improve gameplay, balance, and the overall gaming experience for the players that are still playing.
What's the definition of Insanity again?
Madbad
10-21-2019, 10:15 PM
What's the definition of Insanity again?
Rolling my 20th alt
I prefer to play green 1.0 instead of blue 2.0.
If they are too arbitrary with picking winners and losers of previous patches, then green is no more than a custom content server. You don't recreate the civil war by giving the north panzer tanks and the south squirt guns.
Chryorn
10-21-2019, 10:51 PM
Yes, the intention to recreate Classic as close to the original as possible seems to have been abandoned towards a more stream lined version. Sometimes I am just a bit puzzled by the things they chose to change versus those they stick to.
Bazia
10-21-2019, 11:01 PM
Yes, the intention to recreate Classic as close to the original as possible seems to have been abandoned towards a more stream lined version. Sometimes I am just a bit puzzled by the things they chose to change versus those they stick to.
yes it's very puzzling that they would save a ton of work by not bothering to implement high-effort features that would have a 30-90 day lifespan at most
really cant wrap my head around that one
yes it's very puzzling that they would save a ton of work by not bothering to implement high-effort features that would have a 30-90 day lifespan at most
really cant wrap my head around that one
What ton of work? Removing/adding a handful of items on vendors?
TheDudeAbides
10-22-2019, 12:22 AM
I prefer to play green 1.0 instead of blue 2.0.
If they are too arbitrary with picking winners and losers of previous patches, then green is no more than a custom content server. You don't recreate the civil war by giving the north panzer tanks and the south squirt guns.
This is a video game
Not War
Your analogy would make more sense if you complained that civil war recreation exercises are "custom content" because they don't use real guns and canons
I don't look at it as "picking winners and losers"
Neutering a class at launch to make it "classic" while at the same time deliberately changing other class mechanics (Bard) seems unfair to me. The point is a lot of these classes were released in an unfinished state because of many other factors beyond the game back then.
TBH there have been ludicrously broken mechanics on P99 since the beginning (Charm). It was never supposed to be this reliable. It was supposed to be a dangerous spell that is unpredictable. Risk being the balance for how powerful it is.
10 years ago I said it was broken and it's never been fixed. Enchanters are basically a God Mode class with unlimited lawnmower pets that destroy everything in their path. The class has every tool imaginable to manage what is supposed to be a dangerous spell to the point it has become trivial.
I remember charming Noxious Spider on my chanter way back in the very early days when there were only a few 50s. It was obliterating everything in it's path and charm held full duration with Pre Planer Classic scrub gear. I was laughing at how absurdly overpowered it was. A lot of the early God kills were easy because of charmed pets and broken CH Swords that could be recharged infinitely.
Instead of trying to get Clarity removed maybe charm should be looked at. Chanters don't really group anyways (The good ones at least that know where the XP is which is solo or duo).
Instead of demanding Clarity be taken away maybe the charm mechanics should be re examined before launch. Maybe some of the things that trivialized early P99 Blue raiding should be looked at and fixed. I would rather the small window of development time we have left before launch be dedicated to fixing those types of issues instead of breaking classes that will be fixed literally weeks later.
Chryorn
10-22-2019, 01:57 AM
yes it's very puzzling that they would save a ton of work by not bothering to implement high-effort features that would have a 30-90 day lifespan at most
really cant wrap my head around that one
You don't need to wrap your head around it. You falsely read something into my post that isn't in there at all.
Dolalin
10-22-2019, 03:01 AM
Any spells that weren't in the game until a certain era, I'm noting in the spreadsheet and linking to hard evidence.
It won't fix the mechanics stuff but it will fix many spell related things.
This is a video game
Not War
Your analogy would make more sense if you complained that civil war recreation exercises are "custom content" because they don't use real guns and canons
It's just an analogy. man. And it wouldn't be custom content if they were using weapons that approximated the contemporary weapons of the north/south as best they could.
Instead of demanding Clarity be taken away maybe the charm mechanics should be re examined before launch. Maybe some of the things that trivialized early P99 Blue raiding should be looked at and fixed. I would rather the small window of development time we have left before launch be dedicated to fixing those types of issues instead of breaking classes that will be fixed literally weeks later.
No clarity means they will lack significant amounts of mana to throw around when they get a bad set of resists. Tash being resisted as often as snare will be another curve ball and drain on mana. Their DD line pretty much resisted 70-90% of the time on high blues and up, another massive mana drain and curve ball. No billion hot keys. No target cycling. No easy mode pet bar.
If you want charm looked at, then post evidence it worked differently, instead of idle speculation and anecdotes. I'm talking about stuff that was objectively true/accurate without any debate. You are talking about creating your own version of the game, frankly.
zodium
10-22-2019, 05:31 AM
many people also seem confused by the idea that there will be subsequent Greens that will be more era-accurate than the first Green
Jimjam
10-22-2019, 05:32 AM
One of the games workshop sculptors blew his hand off with a cannon during a reenactment. He had to relearn how to sculpt one handed with his non dominant hand.
... I can't work out a way to tie that back into the analogy or to p1999 but hope it's an interesting enough tangent to warrant posting.
zodium
10-22-2019, 05:32 AM
and speaking of ren faire analogies, we haven't even really started on things like accurately and efficiently doing the classic GM events, which of course would also be part of a genuine classic server replication. i think some weren't ever done on blue even. lots to do in the coming years~
Diogene
10-22-2019, 05:54 AM
Charm during live wasnt considered as a viable game mechanic, «*dangerous*» at best, and nobody had a real play at it... except a very few perhaps, that also why we dont have much written evidence. I dont think charm is broken here or has ever be. It has always been random duration and the toolset provided to survive charm breaks (outside clickies which are classic anyway) is part of the initial design. I dont think solo artists were «*exploiting*» a weak point back in 2013 were just on top of their game due to years of experience.
Deathrydar
10-22-2019, 06:41 AM
yes it's very puzzling that they would save a ton of work by not bothering to implement high-effort features that would have a 30-90 day lifespan at most
really cant wrap my head around that one
Jimjam
10-22-2019, 06:44 AM
All this talk of changes we can't lock the details down on in time for green is getting me excited for 2.0. 1.0 ain't even out yet!
Tecmos Deception
10-22-2019, 07:00 AM
Yes, the intention to recreate Classic as close to the original as possible seems to have been abandoned towards a more stream lined version. Sometimes I am just a bit puzzled by the things they chose to change versus those they stick to.
It's always been this way.
Consider that ivandyr hoop soulfire thread. They unclassicly changed the hoop AGES ago because it was ridiculous. But soulfires? Perhaps recharging overall? They affect things as much or more but go untouched.
It's always been a custom server, though it's still very classic compared to the alternatives. The servers are fantastic, but the staff definitely are doing this as a hobby and so I imagine personal preferences and time and effort constraints affect development and balancing and etc.
cd288
10-22-2019, 01:05 PM
Damn - none are in?
Well, for one there's no hard proof that Clarity wasn't in the game at launch. There's conflicting evidence. Pretty much all we have are forum posts by people from 20 years ago. Some of which show Clarity existed at launch; on the other side of the coin, there are other old forum posts which, if you try and extrapolate the implications of their vague wording seem to others to provide an argument that it was not. It seems like the devs of P99 have required more solid proof than that.
For the Necro and Shaman charm, I think it's a mix of (i) it's a good amount of work to build this into the game for such a short period of time before it was patched out, and (ii) it was patched out because it made the classes more OP and the P99 devs seem to lean toward not building things in that would make things much easier for people (and were eventually patched out by Verant for that reason) just because it would be classic.
For the Mage pet stuff, it's pretty obvious that the change was made back in the day because Mages were way less of a playable class without it. Most people in 1999 abandoned their Mages in the 20s. I would assume that there's no reason to implement the original state of Mages on day 1 just to reflect a terrible class design that Verant realized within about 8 weeks or so was bad and needed to be changed in order to have there be any reason for someone to play a Mage.
Deathrydar
10-22-2019, 01:12 PM
For the Mage pet stuff, it's pretty obvious that the change was made back in the day because Mages were way less of a playable class without it. Most people in 1999 abandoned their Mages in the 20s. I would assume that there's no reason to implement the original state of Mages on day 1 just to reflect a terrible class design that Verant realized within about 8 weeks or so was bad and needed to be changed in order to have there be any reason for someone to play a Mage.
Agree!
Indicas
10-22-2019, 01:13 PM
I prefer to play green 1.0 instead of blue 2.0.
If they are too arbitrary with picking winners and losers of previous patches, then green is no more than a custom content server. You don't recreate the civil war by giving the north panzer tanks and the south squirt guns.
why would the untied states have german tanks during a civil war?
Bardp1999
10-22-2019, 01:21 PM
why would the untied states have german tanks during a civil war?
Why would the south have squirt guns is an equally viable question.
The devs should be concentrating on making a classic experience that is fun, not intentionally implementing bugs and bad ideas that were quickly discarded.
Gustoo
10-22-2019, 01:28 PM
Project 1999 BLUE, RED, and GREEN are custom content servers
For example, red had duck interrupt disabled since it started. WELL before the era where blue should have gained the ability to duck cancel their spells.
But staff decided not to make this classic change to blue.
Why?
Who knows. It totally baffles me. Its a custom server and they decided not to fix blue to make it more classic when they had all of the tools to do so.
So the level of focus and implementation on classic stuff seems to go with the staffs willingness or commitment to fix stuff.
Overall we have been on a steady train of "pretty freaking classic" with some really unclassic stuff like crazy sneak pulling that took forever to get nerfed.
You can expect to NOT understand all of the reasons for staff decisions and you can expect to have NO ability to change these decisions.
You might remember back when BOB was B/S/T accounts all the time on forums and in EC tunnel. 3 letter names are not allowed in EQ servers ever except in weird bug cases, but this guy BOB had one, and he was like "the guy" for account trading.
Then they decided that was no longer allowed, and BOB despawned. I have no idea what happened to BOB but I really miss account trading, it allowed me to trade my valuable time for someone elses valuable time and enjoy a lot more classes a lot more readily than otherwise was possible.
At the same time i KNOW that I would be beating my head against a wall if I decided I was going to try to get the staff to change this decision.
The point is, they make decisions and you won't always know why. Just like your parents used to.
It may seem arbitrary. Maybe it is, maybe it isn't. Your opinion on that though, is irrelevant.
Enjoy the server.
Speaking of beating heads against the wall I am really looking forward to some new PVP 99 stuff
soronil
10-22-2019, 01:29 PM
Why would the south have squirt guns is an equally viable question.
The devs should be concentrating on making a classic experience that is fun, not intentionally implementing bugs and bad ideas that were quickly discarded.
By your logic should we just go ahead and remove legacy items and exp penalties? Does the length of time it took verant to realize/correct a mistake matter?
cd288
10-22-2019, 01:35 PM
By your logic should we just go ahead and remove legacy items and exp penalties? Does the length of time it took verant to realize/correct a mistake matter?
Depending on the mistake, definitely yes. Should we have every single bug that was ever in EQ replicated on launch just because it took Verant some time to fix it? Should we have every possible exploit available just because it took Verant some time to patch it? Should we have things reflected on launch that Verant changed within a couple of months because they realized it completely didn't work (i.e. Mages as a viable class pre-pet patch) and didn't realize before then because this was one of the first MMOs ever and nobody knew what they were doing?
Don't be ridiculous.
Could we at least get some kind of indication there will be no more significant class changes that what exists on green currently? Some of these issues will have huge class-choice implications for people.
metatron
10-23-2019, 11:20 AM
mages being useless for 8 weeks? sorry but that was months and really until kunark until mage pets got op
mages being useless for 8 weeks? sorry but that was months and really until kunark until mage pets got op
They weren't useless. You just needed to research the damn pets. And research materials are still dropping at ridiculous rates on green. Not even close to classic.
Fake news.
randal.flagg
10-23-2019, 11:43 AM
Can't wait to research my lvl 49 pet that is OP as fuck. I'll gladly take missing my pets while leveling to fuck shit up endgame.
douglas1999
10-23-2019, 11:49 AM
I know warriors didn't have low-hp berserker frenzy at launch. I started playing on the second day of release in 1999 as a warrior, and I distinctly remember a patch coming out some weeks\months? later that mentioned the addition of berserker frenzy and explained what it was in the patch notes. I'm googling like crazy trying to find specific evidence for it but nothing yet...
cd288
10-23-2019, 11:56 AM
They weren't useless. You just needed to research the damn pets. And research materials are still dropping at ridiculous rates on green. Not even close to classic.
Fake news.
Proof of this not being the rate on classic?
douglas1999
10-23-2019, 12:05 PM
The original login music was also not what it is currently (though many people might not remember this). To my memory the song at 58:20 in this video was the original logging in music: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XA3curH5KHw
Again trying to find evidence but it's probably impossible for this particular item.
Proof of this not being the rate on classic?
The staff already knows if they turned down their rates. They clearly have not, and it's obvious to anyone. Maybe it would require a lot of work to change all the drop tables, or maybe it hasn't been a priority for them. Who knows? Maybe it will be an eleventh hour patch. Currently this is the old drop rate on blue.
Dolalin
10-23-2019, 12:21 PM
Proof of this not being the rate on classic?
https://www.project1999.com/forums/showthread.php?t=336029
They are supposed to be 1/3rd of the current drop rate until June 1999.
cd288
10-23-2019, 12:32 PM
https://www.project1999.com/forums/showthread.php?t=336029
They are supposed to be 1/3rd of the current drop rate until June 1999.
So what do we know about what the drop rate was before that? It says they boosted it 300%, but 300% from what exactly? I.e. how do we know what the specific drop rate should be on launch and whether it's not currently accurate?
I'm not saying you're definitely wrong. Just that saying something was increased later doesn't mean that the rate at which something is dropping now is incorrect.
Dolalin
10-23-2019, 12:55 PM
Did you flunk math? If it's 300% higher now it was 1/3rd the current rate before.
Tyronius of Midnight
10-23-2019, 01:08 PM
What ton of work? Removing/adding a handful of items on vendors?
You seem ignorant to matters such as these.
Izune
10-23-2019, 01:11 PM
Could we at least get some kind of indication there will be no more significant class changes that what exists on green currently? Some of these issues will have huge class-choice implications for people.
Nilbog starting working on era gating items on merchants yesterday, completed so far are in green, you can track the changes here: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets...it?usp=sharing
No indication if anything will or will not change however. Hope that helps!
cd288
10-23-2019, 03:30 PM
Did you flunk math? If it's 300% higher now it was 1/3rd the current rate before.
My point is, the notes you posted say that it was increased by 300%. They don't say by 300% from what. So technically, unless this was part of the patch timeline on Blue, we don't know whether or not the current rate on Green is inaccurate from what it's supposed to be at launch or, alternatively, if it's reflective of that 300% increase.
skorge
10-23-2019, 04:38 PM
My point is, the notes you posted say that it was increased by 300%. They don't say by 300% from what. So technically, unless this was part of the patch timeline on Blue, we don't know whether or not the current rate on Green is inaccurate from what it's supposed to be at launch or, alternatively, if it's reflective of that 300% increase.
Your logic fails bro...you tell me how did they get the % that is on blue now? Lol...you are fighting fire with fire.
Any person with brains would have told you to take the % now and multiple it by 3 to get 300%. Read my first sentence. Come at me.
I get it - people obviously want EZ mode EQ. That is the only reason people are so bitter on these forums. They want their EZ mode classic EQ.
Nilbog starting working on era gating items on merchants yesterday, completed so far are in green, you can track the changes here: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets...it?usp=sharing
No indication if anything will or will not change however. Hope that helps!
I get a 404.
Kornaki
10-23-2019, 08:33 PM
Did you flunk math? If it's 300% higher now it was 1/3rd the current rate before.
Actually if it's increased by 300% then it was 1/4 the current rate!
cd288
10-23-2019, 09:55 PM
Your logic fails bro...you tell me how did they get the % that is on blue now? Lol...you are fighting fire with fire.
Any person with brains would have told you to take the % now and multiple it by 3 to get 300%. Read my first sentence. Come at me.
I get it - people obviously want EZ mode EQ. That is the only reason people are so bitter on these forums. They want their EZ mode classic EQ.
Erm, I think you’re sort of misunderstanding what I’m saying. I’m asking how we know that what the rate is on Green right now isn’t accurate for what it was back in the day at launch? If the rate mirrors Blue, was Blue patched at some point to reflect the 300% increase? If not, then we should go with what the rate is on Blue since presumably they have the correct percentage.
Erm, I think you’re sort of misunderstanding what I’m saying. I’m asking how we know that what the rate is on Green right now isn’t accurate for what it was back in the day at launch? If the rate mirrors Blue, was Blue patched at some point to reflect the 300% increase? If not, then we should go with what the rate is on Blue since presumably they have the correct percentage.
Where is your proof that the drop rate on blue is not accurate.
soronil
10-23-2019, 10:26 PM
I get a 404.
https://www.project1999.com/forums/showthread.php?t=337025
cd288
10-23-2019, 10:54 PM
Where is your proof that the drop rate on blue is not accurate.
I’m not saying it isn’t. I’m asking if it isn’t and, if it’s not, how do we know it isn’t?
Basically, question is is the current Blue drop rate as a result of a patch during Blues lifetime to increase the drop rate 300%? If not, then does that mean the current drop rate is supposed to be accurate for what EQ was at launch?
I’m not saying it isn’t. I’m asking if it isn’t and, if it’s not, how do we know it isn’t?
Basically, question is is the current Blue drop rate as a result of a patch during Blues lifetime to increase the drop rate 300%? If not, then does that mean the current drop rate is supposed to be accurate for what EQ was at launch?
Where is your proof that the drop rate on blue is not accurate.
cd288
10-23-2019, 11:01 PM
Where is your proof that the drop rate on blue is not accurate.
What’s wrong with you man? You gotta relax.
What’s wrong with you man? You gotta relax.
I expect answers from idiots, number one. I entertain them, number two.
cd288
10-23-2019, 11:13 PM
I expect answers from idiots, number one. I entertain them, number two.
I’m not sure what your issue is. You keep asking me for proof that the rate on Blue is inaccurate. I respond that I’m not claiming it’s inaccurate, I’m asking if it is or isn’t.
You’re asking me to prove something that I’m not asserting lol
axisofebola
10-24-2019, 08:18 PM
Any information on any of these changes yet? getting awfully close to launch...
vBulletin® v3.8.11, Copyright ©2000-2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.