How was /list received on Green?

[Castle2.0]

A well-detailed, well-reasoned, and insightful rebuttal

Yes, it was. That's my point lol. I addressed all the hare-brained ideas, it's not worth re-arguing a finished argument: "Why every list change idea is terrible (as simple as possible)" https://project1999.com/forums/showthread.php?t=368086

Conclusion (aka the TL;DR):

You can't change the item stats, drop rate, spawn rate, or difficulty of camp. Removing/reducing AFK checks or physical presence requirements will increase wait times proportionately. Your list idea sucks. Making it easier doesn't make it easier. Go join the "give everyone a [insert list item here]" group - you're just as bad.

[Castle2.0]

A few gems from that thread lol

The List (as it is) is the best we have. It's as fair as it gets.

• First come, first served to get on list
• No one can cheat you out of your spot on the list
• No group or guild can hold the camp or list hostage or totally dominate it so others can't get on
• No one can go AFK for extended periods of time
• The item cannot be ninja looted
• When someone makes it to #1 and it drops, it's 100% their item
• When the list item drops, #1 is removed from the list and everyone moves up 1 spot. #1 cannot lie and say the item didn't drop, and keep camping the item.

Drake meme is resposne to people calling for some IP-lock mechanism.

[cd288]

Always funny when people suggest changing it to a system where anyone on the list has a chance to randomly obtain the item, rather than doing it in order. Then you watch those same people log in to raid and rant in Discord/guild chat about certain loot being /random instead of a DKP bid.

[loramin]

Triggered wall of text from Castle 2.0 ... someone who everyone else on the server would point to as an example of the problems with /list

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

[Chortles Snortles]

feelin pretty silly right now i bet

[Castle2.0]

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

*complains short response isn't "detailed and well-thought-out"*

*gets pointed to a detailed well-thought-out thread from a year ago where his argument was totally destroyed*

*complains about wall of text*

Ya, ok buddy [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

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

*gets pointed to a detailed well-thought-out thread from a year ago where his argument was totally destroyed*

Oh yeah, very well thought-out. I saw exactly zero coherent responses to my posts in there ... hell, you couldn't even spell the word "resposne" correctly.

[Chortles Snortles]

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

[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.