Item linking is not classic

[silo32]

why dis still in game?

[Bazia]

client issue i believe, similar to the fatigue problem

[AgentEpilot]

I think linking wont ruin the classic feel its nicer to click an item than have tunnel chat stuff spam filled with stats.

[Baler]

Because only an idiot would not want item linking

0/10 thread

[gildor]

Only an idiot wouldn't want buff timers, or cycle targeting, or pet windows too right baler?

[Gustoo]

It's a client issue would 100 percent be removed if they could.

All these classic changes make game worse / harder. No classic changes that make game easier are in game (perma whirl)

Our devs are just like OG devs in what kinda game crushing power they want you to have

[Baler]

HERE IS JUST TWO LINES OF ITEM LINKS FROM EC TUNNEL ON BLUE (only 9 items)
Only idiots and trolls want item links removed.

WTS

Loam Encrusted Lined Shoes
Item 633.png

MAGIC ITEM LORE ITEM
Slot: FEET
AC: 4
DEX: +8 CHA: +8 AGI: +8 MANA: +15
SV POISON: +10
WT: 0.7 Size: SMALL
Class: NEC WIZ MAG ENC
Race: HUM ERU HIE DEF GNM IKS

Spider Fur-Lined Boots
Item 525.png

MAGIC ITEM LORE ITEM
Slot: FEET
AC: 6
CHA: +5 HP: +45
WT: 0.0 Size: TINY
Class: NEC WIZ MAG ENC
Race: ALL

Crystal Chitin Gauntlets
Item 529.png

MAGIC ITEM LORE ITEM
Slot: HANDS
AC: 20
STR: +10 MANA: +35
WT: 2.0 Size: TINY
Class: ALL except MNK NEC WIZ MAG ENC
Race: ALL

Crystalline Spider Fang
Item 763.png

MAGIC ITEM LORE ITEM
Slot: RANGE PRIMARY SECONDARY
Skill: Piercing Atk Delay: 22
DMG: 10
STR: +3
SV POISON: +10
Effect: Velium Shards (Combat, Casting Time: Instant)
WT: 5.0 Size: TINY
Class: WAR RNG SHD BRD ROG
Race: ALL

Embroidered Black Cape
Item 656.png

MAGIC ITEM
Slot: SHOULDERS
AC: 4
HP: +15 MANA: +20
WT: 0.3 Size: SMALL
Class: CLR DRU BRD SHM NEC WIZ MAG ENC
Race: ALL

Withered Leather Leggings
Item 635.png

MAGIC ITEM LORE ITEM
Slot: LEGS
AC: 6
WIS: +4 AGI: +8 MANA: +5
SV DISEASE: +10
WT: 4.0 Size: MEDIUM
Class: CLR DRU SHM
Race: ALL

Withered Leather Sleeves
Item 634.png

MAGIC ITEM LORE ITEM
Slot: ARMS
AC: 5
WIS: +4 MANA: +10
SV FIRE: +10
WT: 1.5 Size: SMALL
Class: CLR DRU SHM
Race: ALL

Gatorscale Leggings
Item 635.png

MAGIC ITEM
Slot: LEGS
AC: 7
WIS: +4 HP: +15
WT: 0.4 Size: MEDIUM
Class: ALL
Race: ALL

Elder Spiritist's Vambraces
Item 622.png

MAGIC ITEM LORE ITEM
Slot: ARMS
AC: 8
Effect: Drones of Doom (Must Equip, Casting Time: 8.0) at Level 45
WT: 6.5 Size: SMALL
Class: DRU
Race: HUM ELF HEF HFL

[ChairmanMauzer]

Only an idiot wouldn't want buff timers, or cycle targeting, or pet windows too right baler?

Agreed 100%. Yes. Only an idiot wouldn't want these things too...

Anyways, if you don't like item linking then don't link items.

[Danth]

It's a client issue would 100 percent be removed if they could.

Not in this case. Links could be taken out via a couple different methods. We experimentally played with disabling them during the course of UI work. The P1999 admins want links left in because they feel it reduces scamming and hence their own CS workload.

Danth

[Obrae]

look at the hypocrites apostles of selectively classic :)

[silo32]

Not in this case. Links could be taken out via a couple different methods. We experimentally played with disabling them during the course of UI work. The P1999 admins want links left in because they feel it reduces scamming and hence their own CS workload.

Danth

so its not classic but makes life easier on devs

but the other changes pet windows, cycle targeting, etc that don't benefit players are certainly removed because "classic"

lmao

cherry picking at its core

[Razdeline]

Actually was thinking about this the other day. If links were removed, would prices on items generally go down as a result of the hassle with posting items? Would more conversations between players emerge as a result of no item definitions in the links?

[Baler]

look at the hypocrites apostles of selectively classic :)

Look at the people who want chaos for the staff, spam in EC and to troll anyone who says otherwise. Get down off your high horse.

To any of the classic purists.... Titanium Client.. now back off

Actually was thinking about this the other day. If links were removed, would prices on items generally go down as a result of the hassle with posting items?
No, people would just spam the shit out of EC more.
Then people would cry more about text parsers.

---
Cazic H Thule people, open your eyes and quit rolling troll on the forums.

[Obrae]

Look at the people who want chaos for the staff, spam in EC and to troll anyone who says otherwise. Get down off your high horse.

To any of the classic purists.... Titanium Client.. now back off


No, people would just spam the shit out of EC more.
Then people would cry more about text parsers.

---
Cazic H Thule people, open your eyes and quit rolling troll on the forums.

i like links, just pointing out you are all hypocrites for attacking selectively classic shit that dont hit you guys.

[FungusTrooper]

half the time i can't tell if baler is a real person

[Razdeline]

Look at the people who want chaos for the staff, spam in EC and to troll anyone who says otherwise. Get down off your high horse.


No, people would just spam the shit out of EC more.
Then people would cry more about text parsers.

---
Cazic H Thule people, open your eyes and quit rolling troll on the forums.

Or more use of acronyms. fbss, ssoy, pgt, etc. etc. Which would mean less spam. I'm sure the community would look down on the spam you suggest.

[Baler]

half the time i can't tell if baler is a real person

At least I'm not an uggo daniel!
:p

just a joke

[Bazia]

its not classic if you arent looking into someones bags to see their wares

[oldhead]

I think linking wont ruin the classic feel its nicer to click an item than have tunnel chat stuff spam filled with stats.
Mages having pets on vendors would not hurt it either. Classic is classic tho

[oldhead]

so its not classic but makes life easier on devs

but the other changes pet windows, cycle targeting, etc that don't benefit players are certainly removed because "classic"

lmao

cherry picking at its core


Selectively classic.

[Hibbs]

Just start linking all your items like that anyway haha

[Ligma]

SeLeCtIvElY ClAsSiC

[Baler]

✔User wants 100% classic
✔Plays P99 with the titanium client
✔complains about classic
□Staff give in and make it 100% classic
✔user doesn't login with trilogy client
✔complains about project 1999 population

[Gustoo]

Staff confirmed 100% selective with classic implementation. Easier for them, A-OK. Easier for you to play game, NOT-OK

Its a custom classic oriented emulated server, thats how it is.

There is no extra EC spam without item linking. Only psychos posted stats for their items. You would make a macro with item names typed out. You would then put bags into trade window for people to inspect.

People would walk to vendors and see their bags to get inspired by cool items, and then buy them.

Prices would be the same. Item linking 100% not needed for normal EC tunnel rat activity to be prosperous.

Lazy folks just say "TONS OF EXCITING ITEMS COME TO T1 TO SEE" and active and clever buyers would show up check out that shit and buy the stuff for good prices. The guys with elaborate detailed built into their auctions had way too much time on their hands and were selling for loser status reseller prices to make 100pp on the transaction.

So yeah if anything it rewards the fully active tunnel rat for his vigilance. I had a great time during the pre link era.

[El-Hefe]

CSR nightmare. Not classic but a good adaptation for running the server with limited volunteer staff.

[Ahris]

I think people arguing about this, pro or con, are idiots. Item links are completely irrelevant to the classic experience.

[fadetree]

I don't care about item links. I do care about the hypocrisy I'm seeing in this thread. So all the times people made the 'shit's classic' argument, I was like, well yep, that's the deal. I knew about item links and always thought it was a hard client limitation. That's cool. However, if it's NOT really that, and there are other ways that wouldn't cause worse problems....it's gonna make me look at shitsclassic warriors a bit differently.

*Edit*
I mean 'worse problems' in a technical sense, as in break something. It being an annoyance to us or staff is not what I meant. Staff certainly has the right to do it anyway, but it seriously weakens the 'shit's classic' argument.

[fadetree]

✔User wants 100% classic
✔Plays P99 with the titanium client
✔complains about classic
□Staff give in and make it 100% classic
✔user doesn't login with trilogy client
✔complains about project 1999 population

Trilogy client? Am I missing something...I thought we HAD to use titanium.

[Baler]

Trilogy client? Am I missing something...I thought we HAD to use titanium.

For a truer classic experience it would require the use of the trilogy client.

The titanium client is Not Classic.
https://i.imgur.com/dNsTjKn.gif
gif by Sidell

[Lulz Sect]

why dis still in game?

[Jimjam]

Personally I would be rid of them (as not classic), but I can sympathise staff including nonclassic touches that lowers their workload. Lucky for everyone here this idiot Jimjam doesn't get to call the shots!

[Rooj]

Don't understand how this could be a CSR nightmare. Remove linking but keep the log message that states which item was added to the trade window.

Besides that, scamming IS against the rules. Very few people want to risk losing their accounts over easily detectable and logable scamming. If scamming was truly an issue on P99 (it's not), there would be a post outlining each possible scam, what to watch out for, and what to do about it.

For the record I'm not for or against item links, I prefer the QoL stuff but I'd still play if they were removed. But yeah the pick-and-choose mentality 'round here is reminding me of every argument I've ever had with a Christian about the Bible. Always entertaining to see people's true selves!

[Jibartik]

Was hoping auctions would be all green text on green99 but oh well.

I prefer

Wolf-hide sleves +2 str, get that dps up! Gossamer robe (white robe!), Golden Earstud +3 int!!

To

Wolf-Hide Sleeves - Gossamer Robe - Golden Ears-tud

1. its community first
2. immerses players with creative auctions
3. MACROS AGAIN god I miss macro auctions.

:o

[Jibartik]

You know what? From now on I will make sure I only sell with macros.

[cd288]

I think people arguing about this, pro or con, are idiots. Item links are completely irrelevant to the classic experience.

Couldn't agree more. I honestly can't tell if this is a troll thread or not lol

[Jibartik]

Im going to go out on a limb and guess cd288 and Ahris have literally cried irl over pet windows.

[cd288]

Im going to go out on a limb and guess cd288 and Ahris have literally cried irl over pet windows.

Nah I don't really care about the pet window. It's really not hard just to create macro buttons that do the same exact thing so I don't see what the issue is. I do think it's somewhat silly not to have a pet health window, but oh well I guess.

[Wwen42]

I don't care about item links. I do care about the hypocrisy I'm seeing in this thread. So all the times people made the 'shit's classic' argument, I was like, well yep, that's the deal. I knew about item links and always thought it was a hard client limitation. That's cool. However, if it's NOT really that, and there are other ways that wouldn't cause worse problems....it's gonna make me look at shitsclassic warriors a bit differently.

*Edit*
I mean 'worse problems' in a technical sense, as in break something. It being an annoyance to us or staff is not what I meant. Staff certainly has the right to do it anyway, but it seriously weakens the 'shit's classic' argument.

The "classic" "not classic" argument is just bad and should be abandoned. It's not a great defense for anything they are doing/not doing. Just say what your vision is and why you're doing it and be done. I don't have to agree, but at least I won't feel like I'm getting bullshat. It's clear that things are dependent on the whims of the devs, for good reasons sometimes, but don't blow smoke about the classicness.

The core of what everyone likes about "classic" EQ is going to vary and you can't please everyone.
My core is
1. Death means something
2. Travel is not instant and/or has a cost.
3. Not an endless skinner-box Sure, we're all working on levels and items, but it's generally slow rather than constant timed rewards every 10 minutes. You're putting work in.
4. Plenty of interaction with others good or bad. WoW feels like a single-player game.

Any change that doesn't affect this is ok in my book. Making the UI less intuitive and useful seems really grognard to me. Just because we didn't know what good UI or player controls were in 1999 doesn't mean we should go back to it. Removing linking is just silly and doesn't affect aspects 1-4, but makes the game just a tiny % more tedious for no reason. There's overall a just a bunch of tiny QoL control and usability improvements I'd like to see. Like "Can I ctrl+m to meditate please?"

Looking at the book doesn't bother me and kinda makes sense, you're suppose to be "meditating."

[Gustoo]

Yeah thats why the hypocrisy is a bummer.

P99 staff changes a lot of things and says "eat dirt, its for classic"

But then leaves things like linking in its current state and says "Well whatevs we like it"

It would be nice if there was an actual vision. At the same time I have seen how forum posters here complain about everything and make demands about everything like they are owed something and it is pretty ridiculous.

It would just be nice to know that 100% of all classic changes are trying to get into the game and eventually they all will.

On red they disabled duck to instant stop casting, but left blue in titanium mode where ducks instantly interrupted. This was not a timeline issue, but they decided to leave it unclassic for unclassic reasons.

Those kind of inconsistencies hurts the reputation of staff whether or not it matters

Like others I have no idea how linking not existing would hurt CSR.

[cd288]

Like others I have no idea how linking not existing would hurt CSR.

I think the theory is that it opens the door for scams? I guess under the idea that if you don't link the item and instead just list the stats in your /auc and someone just trusts you and doesn't bother to inspect the item in the trade window, then you scammed them? But if you're not double checking the item in the trade window has the stats the seller claimed it did, you're kind of a moron.

[Llandris]

Not in this case. Links could be taken out via a couple different methods. We experimentally played with disabling them during the course of UI work. The P1999 admins want links left in because they feel it reduces scamming and hence their own CS workload.

Danth

Who said this?

[Danth]

Who said this?

Rogean I think, might've been Nilbog. Both of them were in the UI discord channel. The UI guys (especially Deezy) were eager to remove links but were overruled. One very easy method would've been to remove the icons in the item stat window and elsewhere (which aren't classic)....that wouldn't remove item ID-based item links but would get rid of the casual rightclick link that most people mainly use.

Danth

[Wwen42]

I think the theory is that it opens the door for scams? I guess under the idea that if you don't link the item and instead just list the stats in your /auc and someone just trusts you and doesn't bother to inspect the item in the trade window, then you scammed them? But if you're not double checking the item in the trade window has the stats the seller claimed it did, you're kind of a moron.

That solution is easy, don't get scammed next time. "we don't take CSRs if you're not paying attention." Even with linking, I sold a mino battle the other day and had an orc axe in my inv and made sure that I was trading the right one. Were I more sketchy(I'm only Lesser Sketchy, not a Greater Sketchy), I still could have tried to give them the wrong item like a douche-nozzel, resulting in a CSR.

[Baler]

Item linking? No. CS total nightmare with trade scammers.

Also saw some interesting posts by nilbog who seems to be in support of it's removal.
rogean and sirken seemed to think it was tied to the titanium client.
(based on searches of the forums)

[FatherSioux]

Get some betters Ears, Tud.

[Llandris]

Rogean I think, might've been Nilbog. Both of them were in the UI discord channel. The UI guys (especially Deezy) were eager to remove links but were overruled. One very easy method would've been to remove the icons in the item stat window and elsewhere (which aren't classic)....that wouldn't remove item ID-based item links but would get rid of the casual rightclick link that most people mainly use.

Danth

Interesting. I'm no dev, but I've been under the impression that it would be quite difficult to remove item linking with the titanium client without screwing up itemid #s. Or at least it would take loads and loads of time and/or rewriting a ton of script to make it happen (like dropping coin).

[Baler]

(like dropping coin).

So you're saying there is a hope for dropping coin!? ;)
Pras the classic immersion! :p

[fadetree]

The "classic" "not classic" argument is just bad and should be abandoned. It's not a great defense for anything they are doing/not doing. Just say what your vision is and why you're doing it and be done. I don't have to agree, but at least I won't feel like I'm getting bullshat. It's clear that things are dependent on the whims of the devs, for good reasons sometimes, but don't blow smoke about the classicness.

The core of what everyone likes about "classic" EQ is going to vary and you can't please everyone.
My core is
1. Death means something
2. Travel is not instant and/or has a cost.
3. Not an endless skinner-box Sure, we're all working on levels and items, but it's generally slow rather than constant timed rewards every 10 minutes. You're putting work in.
4. Plenty of interaction with others good or bad. WoW feels like a single-player game.

Any change that doesn't affect this is ok in my book. Making the UI less intuitive and useful seems really grognard to me. Just because we didn't know what good UI or player controls were in 1999 doesn't mean we should go back to it. Removing linking is just silly and doesn't affect aspects 1-4, but makes the game just a tiny % more tedious for no reason. There's overall a just a bunch of tiny QoL control and usability improvements I'd like to see. Like "Can I ctrl+m to meditate please?"

Looking at the book doesn't bother me and kinda makes sense, you're suppose to be "meditating."

Yep, I agree. 'Shit's classic' ought to be modified to 'shits classic or it's impossible or the devs have decided to not implement it'. The spirit of this server being classic is strong, as this poster points out. The letter of the law is not as important, except when it's being used as a forumquest hammer. We cannot go back fully, even if they were at 100% the same as 1999 we would not be the same excited bunch of idiots who know nothing as we were back then. Yknow what's NOT classic? Us.

[cd288]

Interesting. I'm no dev, but I've been under the impression that it would be quite difficult to remove item linking with the titanium client without screwing up itemid #s. Or at least it would take loads and loads of time and/or rewriting a ton of script to make it happen (like dropping coin).

And screwing up item ids would, I'm assuming, create more problems on the CSR side when trying to confirm scams and/or RMT?

[BlackBellamy]

so its not classic but makes life easier on devs

but the other changes pet windows, cycle targeting, etc that don't benefit players are certainly removed because "classic"

lmao

cherry picking at its core

how much are you paying for this server?

[silo32]

[x] pet windows
[x] dot damage
[x] meditate button clicking till lvl 35 (wasn't in game on blue at launch)
[x] tab cycle targeting
[x] all kinda of other various QOL life shit removed because "muh classic"
[ ] Item Linking

[silo32]

double post but I would sacrifice a limb for those pretty target circles we use to have and tab targeting back. Really enjoyed being a chanter.

[x] Buff Timers

[silo32]

how much are you paying for this server?

more than you can afford, pal