Dear, anti-afk-check people, how's that AC list?

[turbosilk]

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

Honestly, having been here awhile and having done /list, done player agreement rolls, done "waiting for my turn for a camp", etc. ... AFK checks are almost my least favorite thing in any system. They are not classic EverQuest ... and this is supposed to be a place that celebrates classic EverQuest!

The only good thing about the AFK checks are that they're part of a larger system that discourages monopolization. AFK checks may suck, but they beat the heck out of a few insane nerds hogging certain items to themselves (which did happen on Blue in the past, and undoubtedly would have occurred to legacy item camps without the /list system).

But, as I've said in many other threads, we don't have to just accept a terribly unclassic and not-EverQuest thing (clicking a box every fifteen minutes) to avoid the worse thing (five guys monopolizing a camp). There are third (and fourth, and fifth, and ...) options.

Each one requires custom programming work by the staff, so I understand them not wanting to try a million systems ... but ultimately I do hope they can find a way to make a "/list 2.0" someday.

I agree let's celebrate the classic Everquest experience!

What are your recommendations for addressing the non classic experience of solo level 50s monopolizing classic experience group camps?

[loramin]

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

What are your recommendations for addressing the non classic experience of solo level 50s monopolizing classic experience group camps?

My recommendation would be to understand that re-creating classic EQ is a sisyphean task: the staff will never 100% succeed at rolling that boulder to the top of that hill.

The aim here is not to re-create 1999-2001 exactly, it's to re-create 1999-2001 as closely as possible in 2020.

As such, some things (like player distributions among popular camps ... and indeed the very proportions of levels: live was never as top-heavy as this place) are always going to be unclassic. I'd suggest we accept that, live with it, and advocate for changes that can realistically make things more classic [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Something something, strength to accept the things we can't change, something something.

[magnetaress]

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

[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

It's not a gif but it's hurtful wards, u were warned.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

now do a bald ebony transgender hooker with a $5000 dolla weave, fungi, and 2 yaks, & fbss in the cage

Thankfully DBG provides a button that has a slow burn once it's activated. So we can avoid that instant shock.

[magnetaress]

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

My recommendation would be to understand that re-creating classic EQ is a sisyphean task: the staff will never 100% succeed at rolling that boulder to the top of that hill.

The aim here is not to re-create 1999-2001 exactly, it's to re-create 1999-2001 as closely as possible in 2020.

As such, some things (like player distributions among popular camps ... and indeed the very proportions of levels: live was never as top-heavy as this place) are always going to be unclassic. I'd suggest we accept that, live with it, and advocate for changes that can realistically make things more classic [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Something something, strength to accept the things we can't change, something something.

all that said i would donate $10 to this project occasinally even tho i really dont play a lot here and mostly post

pixels are unimportant its nice to know p99 exists and when p99 dies a big part of me will die to - this is probably closer to how the devs feel but one day they will need to hit the beach or pass p99 on to their kids, that'll be interesting, i bet it will happen

or some new birth of some new game will come from all this

[turbosilk]

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

My recommendation would be to understand that re-creating classic EQ is a sisyphean task: the staff will never 100% succeed at rolling that boulder to the top of that hill.

The aim here is not to re-create 1999-2001 exactly, it's to re-create 1999-2001 as closely as possible in 2020.

As such, some things (like player distributions among popular camps ... and indeed the very proportions of levels: live was never as top-heavy as this place) are always going to be unclassic. I'd suggest we accept that, live with it, and advocate for changes that can realistically make things more classic [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Something something, strength to accept the things we can't change, something something.

Good response. Do you have any recommendations for what we should be advocating for that can realistically make things more of the classic experience?

[aspomwell]

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

[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Well with that checked off my list, can we talk about your contributing to the wiki now?

For the love of God, NO!

I can ignore it on the forums, there's no ignore function in the wiki...

[loramin]

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

Good response. Do you have any recommendations for what we should be advocating for that can realistically make things more of the classic experience?

I'm a big believer in the future of "automated GMing" on P99. /list could be only the first step, and I'd love to see further iterations of it. But at the same time, the staff only implemented /list for three mobs, and only on Green. My theory is that they only "dipped their toes in the water" because they're concerned that "the cure could be worse than the disease" (ie. they don't want to inadvertently make things less classic). Their problem isn't "what are some ideas to make things more classic?", it's "how do we not screw things up by trying to improve them?" Classic mechanics vs. classic environment is a difficult balancing act.

When we in the forum discuss ideas, I see it as a sort of "proving ground": a chance for flaws in ideas to be discovered (we all love to find flaws in each other's arguments [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]). So personally I see threads like this, where people suggest ideas, and other people tear them down, as part of a healthy cycle for the server. I imagine Rogean and Nilbog quietly watching, and seeing which ideas can't be torn apart. In other words, I imagine these discussions give them another way to weigh whether a potential change will make the server more or less classic.

But automated GMing is just one thing. Another example would be the recent clicky nerf. Now look: people have been begging for Soulfire to be Paladin-only for years, and R&N waited until recently to make it so, so one could argue all that forum pleading was for nothing. But I don't see it that way: I instead imagine they waited so long because they were hesitant to make "unclassic" (mechanically) changes ... but then finally made the change because the consistent forum feedback finally gave them the confidence to decide that "non-Paladins clicking Soulfires for CHes is not classic EQ".

So really I'd just recommend everyone suggest any ideas they can for trying to make the server the way we all remember it being back in 1999-2001, and when you hear an idea someone else has that you think would make things better, speak up. Haters will tear holes in your idea, but that's good (in a "survival of the fittest idea" way). If you can make the idea work even with criticism (and get others to buy into it) ... well I won't lie: it's extremely unlikely that Rogean or Nilbog will respond to your post and say "you're right, you've convinced me, I'll make _____ change!"

But even if they never say a word, I truly think simply having such conversations does help give the staff useful information that can help them decide what will truly make this place more classic.

[magnetaress]

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

For the love of God, NO!

I can ignore it on the forums, there's no ignore function in the wiki...

[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

[turbosilk]

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

I'm a big believer in the future of "automated GMing" on P99. /list could be only the first step, and I'd love to see further iterations of it. But at the same time, the staff only implemented /list for three mobs, and only on Green. My theory is that they only "dipped their toes in the water" because they're concerned that "the cure could be worse than the disease" (ie. they don't want to inadvertently make things less classic). Their problem isn't "what are some ideas to make things more classic?", it's "how do we not screw things up by trying to improve them?" Classic mechanics vs. classic environment is a difficult balancing act.

When we in the forum discuss ideas, I see it as a sort of "proving ground": a chance for flaws in ideas to be discovered (we all love to find flaws in each other's arguments [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]). So personally I see threads like this, where people suggest ideas, and other people tear them down, as part of a healthy cycle for the server. I imagine Rogean and Nilbog quietly watching, and seeing which ideas can't be torn apart. In other words, I imagine these discussions give them another way to weigh whether a potential change will make the server more or less classic.

But automated GMing is just one thing. Another example would be the recent clicky nerf. Now look: people have been begging for Soulfire to be Paladin-only for years, and R&N waited until recently to make it so, so one could argue all that forum pleading was for nothing. But I don't see it that way: I instead imagine they waited so long because they were hesitant to make "unclassic" (mechanically) changes ... but then finally made the change because the consistent forum feedback finally gave them the confidence to decide that "non-Paladins clicking Soulfires for CHes is not classic EQ".

So really I'd just recommend everyone suggest any ideas they can for trying to make the server the way we all remember it being back in 1999-2001, and when you hear an idea someone else has that you think would make things better, speak up. Haters will tear holes in your idea, but that's good (in a "survival of the fittest idea" way). If you can make the idea work even with criticism (and get others to buy into it) ... well I won't lie: it's extremely unlikely that Rogean or Nilbog will respond to your post and say "you're right, you've convinced me, I'll make _____ change!"

But even if they never say a word, I truly think simply having such conversations does help give the staff useful information that can help them decide what will truly make this place more classic.

I think you just dodged offering up specific recommendations [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

[loramin]

Well, more automated GMing was specific [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

But yeah, overall I think the staff has done, and continues to do, excellent things making this place better/more classic/more fun. When I see things I think can be improved I am not shy about saying them, but ATM I think the staff is kicking ass, and automated GMing is the only area I see obvious improvement potential in.

P.S. It's not so much an idea I want to advocate for, as it is a dream, but I would love to somehow see a split between "competitors" and "casuals". I truly think that if people could choose which style they preferred they'd have more fun with "their kind" (eg. "rotation raiders" hate having to compete with "competitors", and "competition raiders" hate having mobs "given" to others). Teal sort of accidentally created that separation ... but how to separate the two groups and keep both happy (on purpose) is a hard problem I don't have a clear answer to [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

In classic this naturally happened on each server: you had a guild or three of "competitors", and they only sort of played on the same server as everyone else (they spent a ton of time in places like VP and Sleeper's that the rest of the server never saw). But here the ratios of competitors and casuals are much different, and that's why I think it would feel more classic if the two each got their own server with rules geared towards them ... but again, I have no practical suggestion for doing that well, so it's just a dream.