Raiding in P1999 is nothing like raiding in classic.

[W8Gamer]

Originally Posted by Tiddlywinks [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I highlighted your conflicting statements.

Consider for a minute that variance is not classic, and neither is being allowed to train people intentionally to keep them away from zones/mobs.

Right. Except the argument isn't always "that's not classic". The main argument is that the current rules in place cater to TMO. It's already been stated multiple times that the rule on training is not based on classic EQ. The rule was put in place for a reason that has NOTHING to do with classic EQ. So, I don't understand why people keep bringing up the classic argument for training in VP.

As far as variance goes, from what I understand variance was put in to place to try and prevent poop-socking. You take away variance and then what happens? Lots and lots of poop-socking which just brings about the next series of threads complaining that the current raid scene is terrible and needs to be fixed.

I don't know that you are understanding my argument. My argument is that there is nothing "unfair" about the current rules because the current rules apply to everyone. Everyone on the server can train in VP, not just TMO. Everyone on the server can park toons at raid targets, not just TMO. Everyone on the server can do everything TMO does. The problem is no one wants to. And so long as that stands true, TMO, or whoever the top guild at the time is going to have the upper hand. It's all about how far and how much you're willing to dedicate to the raid scene. You can change the rules tomorrow and for a few weeks, TMO might lose targets here and there. However, if they stay as dedicated and determined as they have been, they will eventually work out a method to maintain their control and we're right back at square one.

The first problem that needs to be addressed is this: Is the competition to TMO (or whoever the top guild is at the time) willing to go the lengths the top guild will go to get that kill? If the answer is no, then no rule will solve the problem. That's why live eventually went to isntances as that's the ONLY thing that's going to give everyone a chance at all the raid targets.

[webrunner5]

Originally Posted by W8Gamer [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Right. Except the argument isn't always "that's not classic". The main argument is that the current rules in place cater to TMO. It's already been stated multiple times that the rule on training is not based on classic EQ. The rule was put in place for a reason that has NOTHING to do with classic EQ. So, I don't understand why people keep bringing up the classic argument for training in VP.

As far as variance goes, from what I understand variance was put in to place to try and prevent poop-socking. You take away variance and then what happens? Lots and lots of poop-socking which just brings about the next series of threads complaining that the current raid scene is terrible and needs to be fixed.

I don't know that you are understanding my argument. My argument is that there is nothing "unfair" about the current rules because the current rules apply to everyone. Everyone on the server can train in VP, not just TMO. Everyone on the server can park toons at raid targets, not just TMO. Everyone on the server can do everything TMO does. The problem is no one wants to. And so long as that stands true, TMO, or whoever the top guild at the time is going to have the upper hand. It's all about how far and how much you're willing to dedicate to the raid scene. You can change the rules tomorrow and for a few weeks, TMO might lose targets here and there. However, if they stay as dedicated and determined as they have been, they will eventually work out a method to maintain their control and we're right back at square one.

The first problem that needs to be addressed is this: Is the competition to TMO (or whoever the top guild is at the time) willing to go the lengths the top guild will go to get that kill? If the answer is no, then no rule will solve the problem. That's why live eventually went to isntances as that's the ONLY thing that's going to give everyone a chance at all the raid targets.

Very well stated. But a lot of people just don't seem to get it. "I want shit for free syndrome" prevails on this server.

[Tiddlywinks]

Originally Posted by W8Gamer [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Right. Except the argument isn't always "that's not classic". The main argument is that the current rules in place cater to TMO. It's already been stated multiple times that the rule on training is not based on classic EQ. The rule was put in place for a reason that has NOTHING to do with classic EQ. So, I don't understand why people keep bringing up the classic argument for training in VP.

As far as variance goes, from what I understand variance was put in to place to try and prevent poop-socking. You take away variance and then what happens? Lots and lots of poop-socking which just brings about the next series of threads complaining that the current raid scene is terrible and needs to be fixed.

I don't know that you are understanding my argument. My argument is that there is nothing "unfair" about the current rules because the current rules apply to everyone. Everyone on the server can train in VP, not just TMO. Everyone on the server can park toons at raid targets, not just TMO. Everyone on the server can do everything TMO does. The problem is no one wants to. And so long as that stands true, TMO, or whoever the top guild at the time is going to have the upper hand. It's all about how far and how much you're willing to dedicate to the raid scene. You can change the rules tomorrow and for a few weeks, TMO might lose targets here and there. However, if they stay as dedicated and determined as they have been, they will eventually work out a method to maintain their control and we're right back at square one.

The first problem that needs to be addressed is this: Is the competition to TMO (or whoever the top guild is at the time) willing to go the lengths the top guild will go to get that kill? If the answer is no, then no rule will solve the problem. That's why live eventually went to isntances as that's the ONLY thing that's going to give everyone a chance at all the raid targets.

I understand your point, but I think we're really talking about 2 seperate things.

However, in regards to the fact that you feel they don't have an advantage over an up and coming guild I'm really confused. TMO got it's foot in VP early, only IB had the same advantage that they were given, and IB quit playing on the server, so guilds such as FE have almost no way of accessing the zone given the current rules.

It's much harder to pull of a successful assault than it is to mount a defense, and all TMO needs to do, given the rules of the server, is hold on and defend VP to maintain their advantage.

Personally I think the rules at the time had a direct affect on giving TMO this advantage, because they were literally GIVEN a rotation for their first cracks at VP. Nobody in FE or any other guild wanting to attempt to challenge TMO for mobs in the zone can say they were offered the same. The fact FE ever killed anything in there is insanely impressive.

Of course TMO has to play by the same rules as everyone else, I don't think that's the issue being discussed. The issue is that given the current non-classic rules, actual competition has been all but stifled, and almost nobody else wanting to raid or see the zone is having any fun.

Now we can argue all day about whether THAT is classic or not (it was imo) but the point is here it's only due to non-classic rules, whereas on live it actually came down to player/guild skill and knowledge. Barriers that simply don't exist for the majority of players on this server.

[W8Gamer]

Originally Posted by Tiddlywinks [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I understand your point, but I think we're really talking about 2 seperate things.

However, in regards to the fact that you feel they don't have an advantage over an up and coming guild I'm really confused. TMO got it's foot in VP early, only IB had the same advantage that they were given, and IB quit playing on the server, so guilds such as FE have almost no way of accessing the zone given the current rules.

It's much harder to pull of a successful assault than it is to mount a defense, and all TMO needs to do, given the rules of the server, is hold on and defend VP to maintain their advantage.

Personally I think the rules at the time had a direct affect on giving TMO this advantage, because they were literally GIVEN a rotation for their first cracks at VP. Nobody in FE or any other guild wanting to attempt to challenge TMO for mobs in the zone can say they were offered the same. The fact FE ever killed anything in there is insanely impressive.

Of course TMO has to play by the same rules as everyone else, I don't think that's the issue being discussed. The issue is that given the current non-classic rules, actual competition has been all but stifled, and almost nobody else wanting to raid or see the zone is having any fun.

Now we can argue all day about whether THAT is classic or not (it was imo) but the point is here it's only due to non-classic rules, whereas on live it actually came down to player/guild skill and knowledge. Barriers that simply don't exist for the majority of players on this server.

I never said TMO doesn't have an advantage. Of course they have an advantage. I'm saying they don't have an unfair advantage. Just because things worked out in their favor doesn't mean it's "unfair". That's like if a guy who's been sitting at a poker table for 4 hours manages to rack up $10,000 in chips and then I come sit at the table with my measly $500. Does the other guy have an advantage? Damn right he does. Is his advantage unfair? Nope. He got here first. He's been running the table longer than I have. Therefore I have an uphill battle. It'll be hard to overcome, but it's not impossible. Now substitute the table for p99 raid scene and substitute chips for raid loot. TMO been running the table longer than anyone else. So, whoever sits at the table is going to be at a disadvantage, but that doesn't make it unfair and that doesn't mean TMO is unbeatable.

FE has already beaten TMO in VP before. As miraculous as that may seem, it doesn't take away from the fact that it happened. That is all the proof you need that TMO can be beat in VP under the current rule set. Same goes with any other target. TMO loses targets all the time. Granted for every 1 they lose, they probably win 3, but that doesn't take away from the fact that TMO can and has been beaten. It's just about how strong is your will and determination to beat them.

Now, I already know you're going to bring up the whole shady business that happened with Amelinda. IF that's how it went down, then yes, TMO got an unfair advantage in the raid scene. However, I was not on the server when it happened so I can't comment on it. At the same, Autotune says that it DIDN'T go down like that. So, we are stuck at a he said she said dilemma. Unless you can prove that the cheating went down the way you said, it's pretty much a moot point, because regardless of what went down then, has nothing to do with people claiming the current rules need to be changed now. I mean, lets says that whole scenario never happened. What then? Who fucking knows?! There is no way to speculate what would have happened. TMO might have still beat out IB. IB might have beat out TMO. The only difference is everyone would be bitching about IB hogging all the loots, but still demanding the raid scene be fixed when it isn't even broken.

[Tiddlywinks]

Originally Posted by W8Gamer [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I never said TMO doesn't have an advantage. Of course they have an advantage. I'm saying they don't have an unfair advantage. Just because things worked out in their favor doesn't mean it's "unfair". That's like if a guy who's been sitting at a poker table for 4 hours manages to rack up $10,000 in chips and then I come sit at the table with my measly $500. Does the other guy have an advantage? Damn right he does. Is his advantage unfair? Nope. He got here first. He's been running the table longer than I have. Therefore I have an uphill battle. It'll be hard to overcome, but it's not impossible. Now substitute the table for p99 raid scene and substitute chips for raid loot. TMO been running the table longer than anyone else. So, whoever sits at the table is going to be at a disadvantage, but that doesn't make it unfair and that doesn't mean TMO is unbeatable.

FE has already beaten TMO in VP before. As miraculous as that may seem, it doesn't take away from the fact that it happened. That is all the proof you need that TMO can be beat in VP under the current rule set. Same goes with any other target. TMO loses targets all the time. Granted for every 1 they lose, they probably win 3, but that doesn't take away from the fact that TMO can and has been beaten. It's just about how strong is your will and determination to beat them.

Now, I already know you're going to bring up the whole shady business that happened with Amelinda. IF that's how it went down, then yes, TMO got an unfair advantage in the raid scene. However, I was not on the server when it happened so I can't comment on it. At the same, Autotune says that it DIDN'T go down like that. So, we are stuck at a he said she said dilemma. Unless you can prove that the cheating went down the way you said, it's pretty much a moot point, because regardless of what went down then, has nothing to do with people claiming the current rules need to be changed now. I mean, lets says that whole scenario never happened. What then? Who fucking knows?! There is no way to speculate what would have happened. TMO might have still beat out IB. IB might have beat out TMO. The only difference is everyone would be bitching about IB hogging all the loots, but still demanding the raid scene be fixed when it isn't even broken.

Your poker analogy doesn't work. The rules then, were not the same as the rules now. Rules are fluid and change over time. For a better analogy, the guy who's been at the table the longest had been given a +2500 chip bonus when he sat down at the table. By the time you sat down that chip bonus no longer applied, so you have to build yours from scratch, the hard way. That's not "fair" to you.

To your second point, I agree it might be IB who won out and they might be the ones training people out of VP. At some point in the future it may very well FE who are the ones doing it. It's not wrong simply because it's TMO who's doing it and they have an advantage because they've been doing it for so long, it's wrong because TRAINING A ZONE, NERFING IVAYNDERS HOOPS, HAVING 4 DAY VARIANCES ARE NOT CLASSIC EVERQUEST.

If it's not a real attempt to create a classic EverQuest server than fine. Let's just admit it up-front at least and not try to hide behind all of the bullshit rules and changes we've created in an attempt to "create a classic atmosphere". It's a farce.

[W8Gamer]

Originally Posted by Tiddlywinks [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Your poker analogy doesn't work. The rules then, were not the same as the rules now. Rules are fluid and change over time. For a better analogy, the guy who's been at the table the longest had been given a +2500 chip bonus when he sat down at the table. By the time you sat down that chip bonus no longer applied, so you have to build yours from scratch, the hard way. That's not "fair" to you.

To your second point, I agree it might be IB who won out and they might be the ones training people out of VP. At some point in the future it may very well FE who are the ones doing it. It's not wrong simply because it's TMO who's doing it and they have an advantage because they've been doing it for so long, it's wrong because TRAINING A ZONE, NERFING IVAYNDERS HOOPS, HAVING 4 DAY VARIANCES ARE NOT CLASSIC EVERQUEST.

If it's not a real attempt to create a classic EverQuest server than fine. Let's just admit it up-front at least and not try to hide behind all of the bullshit rules and changes we've created in an attempt to "create a classic atmosphere". It's a farce.

As I've said, the training rules in VP have nothing to do with what was classic in VP. The GMs have already stated that was the case. So, they have been up front about that. They haven't been hiding behind anything. They've already stated that rules were put in place for reasons that have nothing to do with classic. They've also said they won't comment on it anymore because they've already stated this multiple times.

Now, as far as the rules, I think this is where there is the gap in our understanding. I've been assuming the rules were the same then as they are now. As I've already stated, I wasn't playing during that time. So, please clarify what were the different rules back then that would be equivalent to the +$2500 for sitting at the table as your analogy stated? If I missed it in your previous posts, I apologize.

[Tiddlywinks]

Originally Posted by W8Gamer [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

As I've said, the training rules in VP have nothing to do with what was classic in VP. The GMs have already stated that was the case. So, they have been up front about that. They haven't been hiding behind anything. They've already stated that rules were put in place for reasons that have nothing to do with classic. They've also said they won't comment on it anymore because they've already stated this multiple times.

Now, as far as the rules, I think this is where there is the gap in our understanding. I've been assuming the rules were the same then as they are now. As I've already stated, I wasn't playing during that time. So, please clarify what were the different rules back then that would be equivalent to the +$2500 for sitting at the table as your analogy stated? If I missed it in your previous posts, I apologize.

VP was a forced rotation. That's where the +$2500 for sitting at the table came from. Guilds like FE can't even log in and look around and mess around inside of VP, whereas TMO had the entire zone to mess around with and learn. The rotation was supposed to last only the first night, yet it lasted for at least a month I think (my memory is foggy). It was later resumed and there was even more time to learn the zone.

FTE and raiding petitions were also WAY different back then. Let's ignore for now that the lead-gm at the time was corrupt, shady, and dating a member of TMO and just look at the tools at GM disposal. There were no FTE shouts. The 15-man on spawnpoint poopsock rule ended up costing TMO at least one mob. VS could be pulled to KC entrance.

I could go on and on and on. Things change, there is a lot that is different rule wise, and content wise between now and 2 years ago. The reason I highlight that is because, with the training in VP rule being what it is, up and coming guilds like FE that want to raid VP aren't given the same +$2500 for sitting at the table that TMO and IB had. They don't get to play around in the zone for a month and get loot before deciding to train each other. Most guilds know that if they step foot in there they are going to be immediately trained, so they don't bother.

Ignoring what's "fair" for a second, let's not forget the main point and premise I have for being in this thread, and it's in the thread title: Raiding in P1999 is nothing like raiding in classic. Now while only a fool would think the experience would be identical due to the game having been out for 14 years and various fixes and unintentional non-classic features existing, the fact that people have intentionally changed the raiding scene by deviating from what is classic everquest is bs imo, no matter what reasons they were for.

Sadly most people don't seem to agree with that, and if variance and nerfing ivandyrs hoops make it so that the raid scene is more competitive than the alternative of having a bunch of people sit on a spawn point spamming target so that they can hoop it down and the first group to get exp wins the encounter then they are all for creating variance and nerfing ivandyrs hoops. Similarly if they think that allowing training to occur in end-zones is a good idea because then they don't have to deal with the same number of petitions, or because it artificially leaves only the most dedicated guild to monopolize the content as happened on live when so many others could be in there doing it (not typically the case on live) then whatever.

But let's get one thing straight, that's not classic EverQuest.

When it's done INTENTIONALLY then I think it's very sad for those who want nothing more than to play on a server that is a recreation of this game during it's early years.

Shit has got nothing to do with TMO, or anyone else.

[W8Gamer]

Originally Posted by Tiddlywinks [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

VP was a forced rotation. That's where the +$2500 for sitting at the table came from. Guilds like FE can't even log in and look around and mess around inside of VP, whereas TMO had the entire zone to mess around with and learn. The rotation was supposed to last only the first night, yet it lasted for at least a month I think (my memory is foggy). It was later resumed and there was even more time to learn the zone.

FTE and raiding petitions were also WAY different back then. Let's ignore for now that the lead-gm at the time was corrupt, shady, and dating a member of TMO and just look at the tools at GM disposal. There were no FTE shouts. The 15-man on spawnpoint poopsock rule ended up costing TMO at least one mob. VS could be pulled to KC entrance.

I could go on and on and on. Things change, there is a lot that is different rule wise, and content wise between now and 2 years ago. The reason I highlight that is because, with the training in VP rule being what it is, up and coming guilds like FE that want to raid VP aren't given the same +$2500 for sitting at the table that TMO and IB had. They don't get to play around in the zone for a month and get loot before deciding to train each other. Most guilds know that if they step foot in there they are going to be immediately trained, so they don't bother.

Ignoring what's "fair" for a second, let's not forget the main point and premise I have for being in this thread, and it's in the thread title: Raiding in P1999 is nothing like raiding in classic. Now while only a fool would think the experience would be identical due to the game having been out for 14 years and various fixes and unintentional non-classic features existing, the fact that people have intentionally changed the raiding scene by deviating from what is classic everquest is bs imo, no matter what reasons they were for.

Sadly most people don't seem to agree with that, and if variance and nerfing ivandyrs hoops make it so that the raid scene is more competitive than the alternative of having a bunch of people sit on a spawn point spamming target so that they can hoop it down and the first group to get exp wins the encounter then they are all for creating variance and nerfing ivandyrs hoops. Similarly if they think that allowing training to occur in end-zones is a good idea because then they don't have to deal with the same number of petitions, or because it artificially leaves only the most dedicated guild to monopolize the content as happened on live when so many others could be in there doing it (not typically the case on live) then whatever.

But let's get one thing straight, that's not classic EverQuest.

When it's done INTENTIONALLY then I think it's very sad for those who want nothing more than to play on a server that is a recreation of this game during it's early years.

Shit has got nothing to do with TMO, or anyone else.

I see. Ok, now I can understand the sense of "unfairness" and can see where you are coming from, but I also can't fully agree with that it's necessarily "unfair". Just because someone got something you didn't doesn't always make it "unfair" and suggesting otherwise just sounds like you're expecting a hand out. Some kid that inherited his father's fortune without doing anything to earn it doesn't make it unfair to me. It sucks and I wish I could be as fortunate as him, but things didn't work out for me. So, to stick to the poker analogy, I think it'd be appropriate to explain it like this: When the guy sat down at the table 4 hours ago, someone came to me and said, "hey, if you sit down at the table now they are giving a +2500 chip bonus" and I replied, "Oh sweet! Well let me try and put together $500 bucks so I can go get it a seat". Well, by the time it takes me to acquire that much money, the bonus is gone. They're no longer giving it out for whatever the reason. Who's fault is that? The guys running the rules of table? The guy who sat down and took advantage of the bonus? Or me? It's my own fault, whether or not I could help the circumstances, it's my own fault that I didn't get to the table in time to cash in on the bonus.

So, TMO and IB played the game right. Whether they planned ahead to get that seat at the table as soon as they did, or whether or not luck just favored them, they got to the table at just right the time. If your guild didn't, well that's your own fault. After a while the GM's decided that the chip bonus was no longer feasible and did away with it. It's not fair or unfair. It's just the way the way game panned out. Truthfully we can go back and forth on this, with analogy after analogy. I think it's best we just agree to disagree.

As far as the current raid scene not being classic EQ, I don't disagree there. Of course it's not classic, but for me I will say it's pretty close. That's my personal experience though and everyone's will be different. For me, training and variance aren't classic, no. I don't remember any of that, but you know what else I don't remember? I don't remember seeing EVEN CLOSE to the amount of epics on my server during the kunark era as I do on p99. Nor I do remember seeing more than 1 guild sporting epics. First epic I ever saw was the necro epic and it was under a Recon guild tag. I didn't see my next epic for WEEKS and when I did, it was another recon guild tag.

I keep hearing everyone talk about how they remember these rotations on their server. Well, we had rotations on E`ci as well. I remember a guy named Fhaldark used to lead public Hate raids every Thursday night. And there was a website with a calender you could go to see what raids were when and who had what slots. I also remember, that this was late in the Velious era. There was no rotation in the Kunark era. Recon dominated the raid scene (for the US time zone at least). And all these rotations and hearing other guilds tackle these raid targets in the planes and kunark didn't start happening until post Velious, post Luclin, post PoP. That's how I remember it, but even so, someone else who was on the same server might not remember the same way I do, because it all boils down to personal experience. I think people forget that we are STILL in the Kunark era and when you compare to classic, you need to stay within that era, not the timeline. If you're comparing P99 to the live timeline, you are WAY off. As long as p99 has been running, I'm pretty sure we would be in PoP right now. So, we can at least agree on the fact that no, p99 raiding is not exactly the same as live raiding, but if that's what you were expecting when you joined this server (for it to be EXACTLY like live) you set yourself up to be let down a long time. As far as comparing what the raid scene was like during the Kunark era on live and on p99, for me it doesn't seem to far in the regards that one guild did dominate the content.

In closing, I just want to refer back to my original argument and why I even brought it up. The premise of this thread is that "p99 raiding is not classic". However, it got derailed when people started screaming the rules needed to be changed. That the current rules weren't fair and catered to 1 guild. My argument is that, that is just not true. There is nothing wrong with current rules regardless of what the rules were a year ago, and whether or not they are classic. Yes the rules are different. No, the rules are not classic (some for reasons that have NOTHING to do with classic), but to state the rules are unfair, and cater to 1 group is just simply not true at all. Anyone is capable of tackling whoever the top guild is within the current rule set. It won't be easy and expect an uphill battle, but As I've said over and over again, how dedicated and determined you are is the deciding factor in whether or not you come out on top. Not a change in the rules.

[finalgrunt]

Variance has removed poopsocking, a bad aspect of classic EQ raiding. Period.

In your opinion, and because that benefits you.

Since we now have FTE rules & FTE shouts, poopsocking doesn't lead to the same issues as in the past. Poopsocking would become rampant, until all partie agree to play another way.

About time they remove variance.

[Tiddlywinks]

Originally Posted by finalgrunt [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

In your opinion, and because that benefits you.

Since we now have FTE rules & FTE shouts, poopsocking doesn't lead to the same issues as in the past. Poopsocking would become rampant, until all partie agree to play another way.

About time they remove variance.