Jboots Quest

[LazyFuj]

Hi,

Can anyone confirm or deny that you can MQ Jboots?

Thanks,

[Virtuosos]

deny



because MQ is not allowed here


GG

[Humerox]

You can't MQ on P99.

[LazyFuj]

yeah I was just told this, disregard or delete!

Thanks!

[Zithax]

deny



because MQ is not allowed here


GG

you know he's talking about multiquesting right?

[TheDudeAbides]

FAIL

MULTI QUESTING

[guineapig]

Not so much not allowed but doesn't work. The database they use doesn't support it.

[Aeolwind]

The database isn't the issue, it is the operation of the perl that handles quests. Time for a little perl 101 I think!

if (plugin::check_handin(\%itemcount, 10032 => 2, 10000 => 1)) {
quest::say("Here is your prize - a lambent star ruby.");
quest::summonitem(10117);
quest::faction(320,5);
quest::faction(291,-15);
}

this is a standard turn in, lambent star ruby. It checks for all the items to be turned in at once. Now, it might be possible to enable chaining of quests, but it would require a rewrite of -every- quest in the game, which is several thousand. It would involve adding a global variable for each item turned in for the NPC and then cycling that variable out when the last item is turned in... This could also change writing a quest from probably 30 minutes to several hours.

None of us on the project were familiar enough with perl when we started, or the emulator in general to be able to see this possible caveat. But as a rule, the system just doesn't allow for quest chains out of the box. I've never tested this hypothesis either and I might not even work how I have it laid out in my mind and not work at all. Using the plugin is what allows for item returns on a bad turn in as well and would go away.

In essence it is a double edged sword and a Pandoras Box that I'm not sure we are capable of opening based on staffing levels & time requirements.

[Virtuosos]

hire sony to do it




:o

[Ferok]

It would involve adding a global variable for each item turned in for the NPC and then cycling that variable out when the last item is turned in... This could also change writing a quest from probably 30 minutes to several hours.

Just throwing out some ideas here, I totally understand what you're saying. Perhaps I'm being naive here - I'm not real familiar with perl. I'm just looking at this from possibly a different angle. Obviously, no offense is meant.

For an NPC in the database, store 4 "inventory" fields which each would contain an item number, an iterator (that counts to 4) and (if necessary) the id of the last character to do a handin.

When an item is handed in, add that item to the inventory# of the iterator, and iterate. If the iterator = 4, set it to 0. On each handin, check quest completion. If the quest is completed, summon the item, and delete the appropriate inventory items.

Additionally, I would think that you could do this in such a way as to keep the majority of your quest code. Possibly writing a simple perl script or find/replace, in conjunction with some external methods, would allow you to affect the majority of the quests to be MQable.

In your example:

if (plugin::check_handin(\%itemcount, 10032 => 2, 10000 => 1)) {
quest::say("Here is your prize - a lambent star ruby.");
quest::summonitem(10117);
quest::faction(320,5);
quest::faction(291,-15);
}


Creating a method here called check_inventory which takes the same parameters as "check_handin" would allow for easy replace all. Then, all you need is a method called "add_to_inventory" which gets triggered every time something is handed in (subsequently, the check function should be called... as I assume it already is.) Within the check function, delete the appropriate items from the inventory when the check succeeds (and obviously return true).

Sorry, I'd write up a bunch of pseudo code but I don't even know where to begin with parameters like the above.

I don't consider MQing really very important, so I wouldn't expect you to spend alot of time on such a fix. But if you were so inclined, an approach like the above might be worth looking into. Anyway, thanks for the early morning brain teaser.

Cheers.

[Omnimorph]

Only time i've seen multiquesting as a viable, legit method would be if someone went LD and was unable to loot a piece for the quest that would otherwise rot unless a group / guild member looted it for them with the intention to multiquest later on.

I think it's better having it the way we have it now, rather than having people camping Jboots and what not with the intention of selling the multiquest for a profit. If the above scenario happens i'm sure if someone else looted it and told a gm about what happened it could be sorted out.

My only woe is that the kedge robe will be looted by casters, who then won't be able to MQ it for rogue epic when kunark comes out :p what a waste.

[Murphy]

hire sony to do it




:o

__/
http://imgurl.filetac.com/image/01318140.jpg

[Striiker]

..

I think it's better having it the way we have it now, rather than having people camping Jboots and what not with the intention of selling the multiquest for a profit. If the above scenario happens i'm sure if someone else looted it and told a gm about what happened it could be sorted out.

..

I also am in favor of no multi-questing. It opens up a lot of content which in the past was perma-camped by people seeking to make a lot of profit. Yes, this is not a classic configuration but it also addresses an issue which significantly interfered with the game for many people. I would chalk this one up to being on par with multi-boxing in that it should not be permitted (even if a solution was easily attainable). I am sure Verant would have preferred this to what was in the game as it better fit their vision. SOE on the other hand would have probably preferred to sell multi-quest items through some online store.. :rolleyes:

[Ferok]

I also am in favor of no multi-questing. It opens up a lot of content which in the past was perma-camped by people seeking to make a lot of profit. Yes, this is not a classic configuration but it also addresses an issue which significantly interfered with the game for many people. I would chalk this one up to being on par with multi-boxing in that it should not be permitted (even if a solution was easily attainable). I am sure Verant would have preferred this to what was in the game as it better fit their vision. SOE on the other hand would have probably preferred to sell multi-quest items through some online store.. :rolleyes:

MQing was pretty essential if you farmed Dozekar now that I think about it. I can't think of anything else in Velious/Kunark/Classic that was so multi-rare-drop dependent though. Anyway, you'd be wasting an awful lot of components if you werent able to MQ some stuff in HoT.

[Omnimorph]

MQing was pretty essential if you farmed Dozekar now that I think about it. I can't think of anything else in Velious/Kunark/Classic that was so multi-rare-drop dependent though. Anyway, you'd be wasting an awful lot of components if you werent able to MQ some stuff in HoT.

Quite true, i remember having a shit load of those tears and what not in my bank. But i think that's more of a case of being the exception to the rule, rather than abolishing the rule for an exception.

Given that velious will, in theory be the last expansion, those farming doze will be there for a while, so if everyone in a guild has a said item they're after (some will be more popular than others obviously) but they can acquire the tears eventually. So even then i don't think it'll be that big of a hassle.

[Ferok]

Quite true, i remember having a shit load of those tears and what not in my bank. But i think that's more of a case of being the exception to the rule, rather than abolishing the rule for an exception.

Given that velious will, in theory be the last expansion, those farming doze will be there for a while, so if everyone in a guild has a said item they're after (some will be more popular than others obviously) but they can acquire the tears eventually. So even then i don't think it'll be that big of a hassle.

I think HoT is usually a short-lived fascination for most guilds. You're pretty limited to Zlandicar, Vindicator, Statue, and Dozekar if you're in this niche, as you need to maintain ally dragons in order to turn in HoT quests.

By the time you can down Dozer, it quickly becomes apparent that you could be shortly farming ST talisman dragons.... and that's awfully tempting.

Thats how I ended up farming faction for the guild ML after I had reached an agreement to purchase the final piece of my silver bracelet. We had been farming ST dragons and were no longer concerned with HoT quests, and were moving into NToV as well. Ugh, what a nightmare. I about flipped one night after he took an Aaryonar hit.

Anyway, you're right.. it is very much the exception to the rule. Can't think of anything else quite like that.

[Tudana]

Pardon me for my ignorance to game development things - but I assumed emulator was a copy/paste of the live version, raw version, but a copy none the less. When I first read the replys it made me understand the classic EQ wasn`t coded for MQing, But I was thinking by the time we got to kunark that kind of coding would be within the build of that expansion on the copy/paste version.

Please dont take offense to my discription of a copy/pasteing, I am in awe and and appriciation of all the work the devs here are doing and have done for us hardcore EQers, I don't know what else to properly call it /hugs! /thanks guy!

I`m always just curious and facinated by how things work on the "backside" of EQ, I wasnt aware that some of the code like that wouldn't be avail here if its avail on live.

[Ferok]

I`m always just curious and facinated by how things work on the "backside" of EQ, I wasnt aware that some of the code like that wouldn't be avail here if its avail on live.

It's not. All of the back end code is written from scratch by the EQ EMU/p99 devs. Thus the discrepancies.

[Tudana]

It's not. All of the back end code is written from scratch by the EQ EMU/p99 devs. Thus the discrepancies.

:eek:

/bow

[nilbog]

Pardon me for my ignorance to game development things - but I assumed emulator was a copy/paste of the live version, raw version, but a copy none the less.

http://code.google.com/p/projecteqemu/

There's the public eqemu-written code prior to any changes we made/make to it.

All we use from sony is the Titanium cd/client. That's what contains your models, textures, music, etc.

[nilbog]

All the people that try to cheat in free games. lol.

[Tallenn]

Essentially, quest turn-ins are handled differently in live than in EMU.

People play an EMU server and forget that it is basically just a reverse engineered facsimile of EQ live, not a copy- the guys who wrote the EMU have never had access to the actual EQ code or databases. They reserve-engineered it pretty much based solely on the content of the packets going back forth between the server and the client.

It behaves like EQ, but isn't necessarily built like EQ. So, the way that quest turn-ins work is different. Hence, the reason multi-questing doesn't work here. On live, it was just a consequence of the way it was built. Since it is built differently here, it's not an option.

At least I think that's basically the gist of it...

bottom line: there's not going to be multi-questing

[shinobi wan kenobi]

I don't really know where to put this question but this seems like the right place:

Do Brother Z and Hasten still share the same PH? If so, does Brother Z ever despawn? The last patch notes say he's been buffed, so the jboots quest may not be doable until kunark if that is so.