Was Having Two Servers More Fun Than One?

[Aeaolena]

Thank you Loramin. I think sometimes people forget not every forum is RnF.

[RipVanFish]

The “silent majority” you are referring to are teal casuals who briefly got a reprieve from classic Everquest.

[cd288]

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

Thank you Loramin. I think sometimes people forget not every forum is RnF.

I'm not attacking you. I'm asking why you think the merge was a bad thing. I asked about high ZEMs etc. because the complaints about the merge have been coming from people who want to do the ZEM highway and are finding it too crowded to log in and immediately get a group in those zones to min/max their exp. Curious what the other issues with the server post-merge could be besides that.

[El-Hefe]

I voted Pre-Merge but I'm still having a great time. But Pre-Merge was more fun for people who have a group of friends and want to find an un-used camp.

Now we gotta filter people into a camp one at a time, sometimes over the course of a few hours. Which is not as fun as before.

[TripSin]

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

The poll was definitely not "which is/was more classic?" (this forum could argue that until the cows come home [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]).

But whichever one was more fun, before or after (or neither), vote that!

There's nothing to argue about that though if you're not delusional and pissy because it's a little harder to get a manastone now. 700 peak concurrent players was not AT ALL classic. Current server population is much more classic. I get that there's a lot of stupidity that gets argued over here but trying to argue that low server population is classic is beyond even these boards I would imagine.

[loramin]

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

There's nothing to argue about that though if you're not delusional and pissy because it's a little harder to get a manastone now. 700 peak concurrent players was not AT ALL classic. Current server population is much more classic. I get that there's a lot of stupidity that gets argued over here but trying to argue that low server population is classic is beyond even these boards I would imagine.

IF you get to define "which is/was more classic?" only as "which resulted in closer to classic population numbers?", then that is an objective fact, and we can both agree that the post-merge numbers are "more classic" in that sense.

But I would also suggest that the question "which is/was more classic?" could be interpreted many other ways than just considering population numbers. I have absolutely zero desire to in engage in any kind of argument one way or the other, I'm just saying what I said was far broader in scope than what you said ... and what I said is not incontrovertibly clear one way or the other: both sides have arguments to make.

[cd288]

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

IF you get to define "which is/was more classic?" only as "which resulted in closer to classic population numbers?", then that is an objective fact, and we can both agree that the post-merge numbers are "more classic" in that sense.

But I would also suggest that the question "which is/was more classic?" could be interpreted many other ways than just considering population numbers. I have absolutely zero desire to in engage in any kind of argument one way or the other, I'm just saying what I said was far broader in scope than what you said ... and what I said is not incontrovertibly clear one way or the other: both sides have arguments to make.

Uh oh Trip you've got Loramin bolding words now. You opened Pandora's Box

[Jean-Baptiste Cutting]

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

IF you get to define "which is/was more classic?" only as "which resulted in closer to classic population numbers?", then that is an objective fact, and we can both agree that the post-merge numbers are "more classic" in that sense.

But I would also suggest that the question "which is/was more classic?" could be interpreted many other ways than just considering population numbers. I have absolutely zero desire to in engage in any kind of argument one way or the other, I'm just saying what I said was far broader in scope than what you said ... and what I said is not incontrovertibly clear one way or the other: both sides have arguments to make.

You creating this thread is just stringing the drama our further. Stop shit disturbing.

[loramin]

Originally Posted by Jean-Baptiste Cutting [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

You creating this thread is just stringing the drama our further. Stop shit disturbing.

So you're another one of those people that gets offended by others expressing their personal feelings (about an elf sim, in an elf sim forum)?

[Jungleberry]

I'm having fun either way. It's just really slowed my progress down.