Bring target rings back.

[nilbog]

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

You (p99 staff) guys sit here and say you want to recreate the everquest experience for people to relive and enjoy - well my experience was 2 (actually 3) boxing with my brother boxing as well. But no, if I want to play on project1999, I'm forced into to your subjective opinion of what "classic" was. I limit myself to one account simply because I love the game and 1 boxing is better than no boxing, but it's far from the fun I had on live classic.

Statistically, we are recreating classic. If you were boxing pre-Luclin, you were an extreme minority for several reasons. It's an accurate representation of active server life, not just subjective opinion.

To recreate a classic experience, the average player you encounter should be an individual, not a player with a robot in tow.

[Daldaen]

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

Statistically, we are recreating classic. If you were boxing pre-Luclin, you were an extreme minority for several reasons. It's an accurate representation of active server life, not just subjective opinion.

To recreate a classic experience, the average player you encounter should be an individual, not a player with a robot in tow.

And the player you encounter is 1 person. Not having exchanged hands between many people through the sale of said account. Which is one difference with P99 and Live.

Accounts change hands often here (some of them seem to have been passed around like a town bicycle).

That being said I don't really have a problem with the target ring change, nor the right click to load spell change (several months back which prompted the same posts of Q_Qing).

What I would like to see is that things that were classic but deemed OP by the staff implemented even if somewhat OP. Stuff like Divine Aura keeping aggro is extremely or was extremely OP (This was in game but I am unsure if this was changed according to the live patch history)... yet something like a Weighted Axe on a pet isn't allowed?

I just dislike the picking and choosing of which old things should be left out because they were OP or which should be modified from classic -> non classic because of how players were using them in P99 (see Hoops). That being said, I am not a developer working on P99, just my opinion as a player which doesn't carry much weight but its my 2 c's.

[jdx]

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

Statistically, we are recreating classic. If you were boxing pre-Luclin, you were an extreme minority for several reasons. It's an accurate representation of active server life, not just subjective opinion.

To recreate a classic experience, the average player you encounter should be an individual, not a player with a robot in tow.

Which as I said, respectfully sir, is your subjective opinion.

[wrxBRAH]

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

Statistically, we are recreating classic. If you were boxing pre-Luclin, you were an extreme minority for several reasons. It's an accurate representation of active server life, not just subjective opinion.

To recreate a classic experience, the average player you encounter should be an individual, not a player with a robot in tow.

The minority of people on live sold/bought accounts and platinum pre-luclin yet its common practice here. You cant always use the "we're recreating classic" line with a custom server. In the end its your server and your rules so it doesnt matter anyway until they get done on eqclassic and release the code.

[Malrubius]

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

You (p99 staff) guys sit here and say you want to recreate the everquest experience for people to relive and enjoy - well my experience was 2 (actually 3) boxing with my brother boxing as well. But no, if I want to play on project1999, I'm forced into to your subjective opinion of what "classic" was. I limit myself to one account simply because I love the game and 1 boxing is better than no boxing, but it's far from the fun I had on live classic.

Translation: P99 staff has created classic EQ for the majority of players. But I am not in that majority, so I will complain about how it should be changed to MY classic implementation, so that the majority should be forced into MY subjective opinion of what classic was.

[Spoodowg2000bc]

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

Translation: P99 staff has created classic EQ for the majority of players. But I am not in that majority, so I will complain about how it should be changed to MY classic implementation, so that the majority should be forced into MY subjective opinion of what classic was.

You're bringing this back to the picking-and-choosing classic thing. Rings could have been removed sooner if they wanted it that way. They chose to leave them in until they chose to remove it. This server is the DEVS subjective opinion of classic was.

My argument is don't leave something that isn't classic in and then take it away at a whim, when people have come to expect it and others could have used it as a crutch for much longer. We can argue about how much it really helps anyone all we want, but that is just as subjective as the discussion of how much the MQ and MySEQ users benefited from that shit.

I'll probably be fine without target rings. I dunno though because I can't get a group as an untwinked melee during raid hours (responsible adult playing time).

[Ennoia]

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

Speaking of which, I'm curious to know why you'd remove target rings but you left item linking in.

I keep hearing this 'not classic' argument but it seems like you pick and choose what you want to be classic.

Item links isn't combat-changing, target rings is.

[Doors]

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

Item links isn't combat-changing, target rings is.

Completely besides the point.

[RiffDaemon]

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

Speaking of which, I'm curious to know why you'd remove target rings but you left item linking in.

I keep hearing this 'not classic' argument but it seems like you pick and choose what you want to be classic.

Rogean, Uthgaard and Co. have said long ago that code constraints and other obstacles prevent them from removing Titanium-era features, and if they ever find a way to get around said obstacles, they will remove those features with prejudice.

So when they finally find a way to remove Item Linking, they're gonna do it.

[Fril]

The no target rings change is brutally stupid....