Pandemic screwed essential workers trying to /list

[Castle2.0]

The issue is just how we settle the Y - X difference

There are Y people who want camp X, and Y>X.

There are Y guilds who want dragon X, and Y>X.

There are Y people who want item X, and Y>X.

Y>X is not a problem, Bernie Bro, and therefore it does not require a solution.

The biggest potential problem for legacy items was a subset of Y locking out everyone else from having any chance at the item.

/list gave everyone a fair shot in the same way every rare camp gives the camper the same drop rate. If you put in the time, you will get it.

P99 will never be, nor should be, a socialist experiment or a pure lottery.

[loramin]

Originally Posted by Castle2.0 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Y>X is not a problem, Bernie Bro, and therefore it does not require a solution.

Exactly what I said before: if Fungi Tunics dropped off Fire Beetles then it would make Y = X ... and the game would suck (plus it wouldn't be EverQuest).

Originally Posted by Castle2.0 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

/list gave everyone a fair shot in the same way every rare camp gives the camper the same drop rate. If you put in the time, you will get it.

This is factually incorrect. /list 1.0 is a threshold system: the only players who can ever get a Manastone are those who don't sleep for days, or get someone to help them click AFK checks constantly for days. Both of those are non-EverQuest mechanisms: clicking AFK checks was never part of EverQuest.

They were added for a good reason: to simulate GMs (GMs on live did enforce lists, and we have proof of as much in the GM guidelines from live). They have been massively successful, but unless you've played here for awhile and seen what Blue was like prior to Green and /list, it's easy to miss that fact.

I'm not crapping on /list, but I am saying it could be better. /list does not give everyone an equal chance ... but my "2.0 player-agreement-style /list" idea would. The current system "gate-keeps" out 99% of the server: anyone who just wants to play a computer game and not have to stay awake for days at a time (which, at the risk of repeating myself, was NEVER A PART OF CLASSIC EVERQUEST).

[Castle2.0]

We all show up every 28 minutes to roll? Sounds real bad. Enlighten me.

[loramin]

Originally Posted by Castle2.0 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

We all show up every 28 minutes to roll? Sounds real bad. Enlighten me.

You mean "we all show up every *mob X respawn time minutes* if we want a chance to kill mob X?" Yes, emphatically so: that's EQ!

In EQ you show up and kill something, unless someone else is already killing it, in which case you wait your turn. That's how it works when you want a Fungi Tunic in Seb, that's how it works when you want a Talisman of Benevolence from Scout, and that's even how some raid content works (in Plane of Sky). That's EverQuest!

It's also how /list 1.0 works! In that respect my "/list 2.0" is no worse, only ... A) instead of having to click an AFK check, you just have to not be AFK when the mob spawns, and B) at the end of the day, when you haven't gotten the mob, you can go to sleep and start over in the morning (again, like anything else in EQ).

[loramin]

Originally Posted by Mblake81 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

So remove the list, camp the mob.

Make more complaint threads about overpopulation. No wonder the original devs put instances in.

"I want to camp the mob and get the item but other people are doing it. I need a place just for me so I can get it"

Skyrim.

Again, it's like you just want to argue with me rather than think.

How is "the people who don't sleep are the only ones who can ever get the best stuff" a better system than "everyone who plays the game has an equal chance (people who play more get better chances)?"

That's all I want to know.

[BlackBellamy]

I got a highly desirable camp once due to some server shenanigans and within a minute someone from a well-known guild offered me 6k to leave. This was a bit more money than I could hope to farm there as a single player with biological needs. He knew exactly how much to offer me to gtfo and so I did. They're probably still holding it.

[Mblake81]

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

Again, it's like you just want to argue with me rather than think.

How is "the people who don't sleep are the only ones who can ever get the best stuff" a better system than "everyone who plays the game has an equal chance (people who play more get better chances)?" That's all I want to know.

WTF ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT

[loramin]

Originally Posted by Mblake81 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

WTF ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT

The same exact thing I've been talking about for the past several pages? /list 1.0 vs. a better version? I know you've been racing to yell angrily at me and not fully reading my posts, but ... c'mon.

[Mblake81]

Are you proposing a no lockdown rule on certain mobs, namely the ones that drop legacy items?

[Fammaden]

He's proposing that every time a legacy drops, the people on /list (or presently camping the item by some other metric) all get a roll or a random on winning the item. Like scout roll but more server hardware enforced presumably, and only when the legacy item drops. At least that's my impression of what he's proposing.