How was /list received on Green?

[magnetaress]

Best option is leave items in game (no legacy) . Make them all droppable and lootable in pvp. Make everyone pvp.

[tadkins]

Leave list in, up the drop rates, address certain issues like with the bead drops spanning the whole zone. It's a good system that just needs some fixes, not be scrapped entirely.

If you show up at the right era in history, invest some time, you deserve a shot at the item imo.

[Zuranthium]

Classic play nice policy (which did not exist until a year into the game's lifespan) dictated that everyone had to take turns, aka everyone "listed" gets to fight the NPC once when its their turn on the list. After killing the NPC or dying you drop to the bottom of the list, and leaving the zone for more than a few minutes (for a reason aside from dying) removes you from the list entirely.

That is preferable to what p99 implemented, but still dumb. Anything aside from a free-for-all goes against the nature of Everquest and how it's supposed to be an immersive fantasy world. You're not playing an MMORPG anymore if you have forced lists. Anything of that nature should be community-created. Players who don't want certain parts of the community angry at them can choose not to compete, while those who do wish to compete are allowed, at the risk of being blacklisted by certain other players.

Camps should not be so static to begin with. The designers said they never intended and did not like people sitting in front of a single NPC all day long. If they had the time to re-code the game to be more dynamic, they would have. NPC's should spawn in different places and in different amounts. Loot tables should fluctuate.

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

the only alternatives to it were letting the players handle extremely popular camps like Guise or Manastone on their own (imagine the clusterfuck that would be)

It's not a clusterfuck at all, people fight for the kill and whoever gets it is the winner. Very simple.

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

keeping guilds like Seal Team from perma-monopolizing the camp

Zerg guilds can't monopolizing anything, when the game is coded to allow any focused 6-person group to be able to get the kill.

Traditionally it's just DPS deciding loot rights, but that can be modified to also include aggro generated into the equation. Let the Clerics cast stuns during high priority fights to contribute, Taunt adds something, debuffs add something, melee can pop a discipline, etc.

[loramin]

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

It's not a clusterfuck at all, people fight for the kill and whoever gets it is the winner. Very simple.

Gee, I wonder if anyone has tried that system already? Oh wait, they did, on Red. How's that server doing? [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

But if anyone is curious about the earlier part of Zura's post, you can find it on the wiki: https://wiki.project1999.com/Kunark_...awn_Complaints (there's also a separate "Velious Era" version).

The compromise will require all parties to take turns killing the spawn(s). All parties involved in the contested spawn should be instructed to use /random 0 100 to choose a number. The CS Representative then uses /random 0 100. The individual with the closest number to the CS Representative’s number will be next in the rotation. The CS Representative then bases the rest of the rotation order on how close the other parties’ numbers were to theirs. The compromise established by a CS Representative must be objective and not require the CS Representative to choose one customer over another based on subjective criteria. The CS Representative is the arbiter in any disputes in establishing the compromise.

[Swish]

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

Gee, I wonder if anyone has tried that system already? Oh wait, they did, on Red. How's that server doing? [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

But if anyone is curious about the earlier part of Zura's post, you can find it on the wiki: https://wiki.project1999.com/Kunark_...awn_Complaints (there's also a separate "Velious Era" version).

The only difference is because you can't pvp in the game on blue/green you all take to petitionquest and writing dissertations on 80% accurate recollections of what happened with some emotional/artistic license.

[Zuranthium]

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

Gee, I wonder if anyone has tried that system already? Oh wait, they did, on Red. How's that server doing? [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

No that system was not on Red. There are various other reasons why the server declined (Velious sucks, further dev updates were needed). As usual you are useless.

p99 would be far more enjoyable and not lose any popularity if the game was ran with the 1999 mindset.

[loramin]

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

p99 would be far more enjoyable and not lose any popularity if the game was ran with the 1999 mindset.

The only problem is, we can't, because we don't have paid GMs like they did in '99.

Our 100% volunteer staff is the reason our PnP our different from the classic ones, and why we have things like /list instead of a human being sitting down with the two players contesting the spawn and making them work out a compromise.

[Zuranthium]

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

The only problem is, we can't, because we don't have paid GMs like they did in '99.

Our 100% volunteer staff is the reason our PnP our different from the classic ones, and why we have things like /list instead of a human being sitting down with the two players contesting the spawn and making them work out a compromise.

That is not true whatsoever.

The 1999 era of the game doesn't need any GM intervention at all, aside from stepping in if someone is actively griefing (following a player around wherever they go and killing anything they try to fight). We can also include training into that for p99, even though training was allowed in 1999. If this server was actually classic-minded there would be far LESS work for the GM's.

GM's could instead focus on what they're supposed to be doing - creating dynamic events in the game world. This can include going around the game world daily and spawning extra NPCs to surprise groups and keep them on their toes. (IMO dynamic NPC spawning should ideally be built into Green anyway - give this server updates to improve game quality, while keeping Blue server as the "museum" coding).

If that much better and classic ruleset is not what's going to be used, then at the very least p99 should be using the classic play nice policy. The "list" system already could have incorporated taking turns, exactly as described, and for camps that aren't specifically "listed" the players should be aware to work out rotations on their own. If players do not create a rotation on their own for other camps, and know it's punishable, then it's no different than the workload GM's have to do right now anyway to investigate and punish "kill stealing".

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

“Legacy “ items should not exist.

Either not in at all or implemented permanently in a way that makes sense. It literally ruins the entire server progression and is 1000000% unclassic.

Yeah, another thing in the long list of changes Green should make to improve gameplay. Manastone on server launch is very dumb indeed. Guise doesn't change gameplay to the same degree but is still dumb.

Rubicite BP should perma drop though, no harm in giving melee a more obtainable small regen boost. HP regen rate in the game is abysmal.

[Ooloo]

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

The only problem is, we can't, because we don't have paid GMs like they did in '99.

Our 100% volunteer staff is the reason our PnP our different from the classic ones, and why we have things like /list instead of a human being sitting down with the two players contesting the spawn and making them work out a compromise.

GMs "Making them work out a compromise" just resulted in instancing, which is just another form of automated GMing. The version of automated GMing we got is at least still pretty in-spirit with the intent of the whole project. It really is quite a brilliant balance of time investment\sense of reward.

Lists are not "guaranteed loot" at all; for example I was willing to do the guise and rubi BP lists. I wasn't willing to do the manastone list because I knew what it would take, so I didn't get a manastone. And that's fine.

[Chortles Snortles]

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