ATTN: Devs/GMs

[Faerie]

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

i personally prefer racewar to deity war.

just somthing more appealing about a group of halflings, gnomes, and dwarves spotting a stray ogre and swarming him, vs omg a tunare worshipper whos name is a different color. doesnt seem as satisfying.

racewar also promotes regionalism, whereas deitywar is less cohesive. instead of the qeynos/halas region being the defacto stronghold of the men, through which others must penetrate to get a hero bracer, do a hole raid for epics, or access vox, its just whatever.. theres some bertox ranger slapfighting a karana one, and the good team is hiding in halas and even that isnt secure, like on sz.

which has drawbacks as well. promote regionalism later atthe cost of sweet blackburrow level 6 pvp, which is some of the most fun ive ever had in a mmo.

4 team racewar is more fun from like 1-30, I agree. Starting in Gfay was awesome, fighting off the hordes of dwarves and gnomes for our right to xp in CB and UR. But the game as a whole needs to be considered, and deity teams do make more sense from a roleplaying perspective. The teams will set up in certain areas still, though. I'm pretty positive that Faydwer on SZ was like a good vs. neut battlefield, kinda like how it was short vs. elf on VZ. Not sure why anyone would even want to start in the Qeynos area when you could be an elf or gnome.

I guess if the devs felt really strongly about fostering team safety from the start, they could just have deity play a larger role in determining start location. Good/neut team humans start in Qeynos, evil team Freeport or even Neriak... but the idea of Bertox/Cazic human/erudites being a minority in Qeynos area sounds so cool. idk

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

You can't just go adding diety choices to classes/races. There are potentially game imbalancing issues that could come up that we aren't thinking about, maybe making a diety specific item usable by a class that makes it OP'd, faction on a class that isn't supposed to have it or making certain class quests not completable for faction reasons, etc.

We learned from SZ that an evil based team will be the best option if nothing else is done. If you search through the plethora of threads on this topic you can find the reasons which include better starting areas, better stats, better team only class choices, etc.

Honestly, the only way to make this fair is you spawn teamless with a red book, blue book and green book in your inventory and you choose your team by which book you turn into POD...exp locked until you do it. Or just make 2 books red/blue and a third faction you start on that is FFA to everyone (so you could stay on the FFA team if you wish).

The Mithaniel barbarians and Veeshan monks were from SZ ruleset, to give good team shaman and neutral team monks. Probably wouldn't be an issue since there wasn't on live. I'd rather not see evil paladins and good necros, that was just a suggestion in case the devs were somehow thinking every team needed every class.

People get too caught up in things being fair, imo. Nothing is ever fair in EQ, and while there are steps that can be taken to reduce the unfairness at some point you gotta just go with it. Each team getting every race/class combination makes no sense, and cheapens the unique feel of the teams. If everyone is so afraid of evil team being overpowered, then a simpler solution is taking away their bards imo.

[Something'Witty]

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

Unfortunately the one thing the staff can't fix, no matter how many changes they make to code or policy, is reputation. And Red has a stinker of a reputation. The state of the server today is probably better than it's ever been, but it's completely overshadowed by the negative image that's been created over it's history. This is where the interest in Teams is important. Likely a lot of the same people on Red now are going to end up there in some capacity, and in the end it may not feel much different. But to those players who simply won't even give Red a second thought, that clean slate looks mighty appealing.

Hmm, that is one of the first good posts about teams99 in a long time. I think everyone can agree that red's rep is, well, not good to put it mildly. A new PvP server has the potential to attract new players, but to summarize a key point same players = same atmosphere, which I think will lead to the same reputation and a similar population.

When, if ever, teams99 is launched, the GMs will have to be on patrol 24/7 to enforce the PnP rules. Otherwise the same toxic players that helped sully red99, will be back to do the same on teams99. After all, some people just like to throw rocks at trains.

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

[Gaffin 7.0]

didnt read

[Squire]

the roleplaying population is so low on red, or blue for that matter that rp implications should absolutely, positively, take a back seat to all other considerations. sorry faerie.

[Kergan]

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

false, this only aids existing guild structures and negates the support network for new players which teams is intended to foster. denied.

How exactly does it do that? Major guilds will not stay on the FFA faction...just being able to do AE groups alone is worth picking one. You're picking a team at character select or right after, what difference does it make?

[Squire]

you can aoe with your racial or religious group unless in guildwar id imagine. likewise random, selectable teams just hardcode ourcurrent guild landscape. hardcoded az, hardcoded nilly, hardcoded rd. i, personally, support a team composition in which choices and sacrifices play a part. one team might have to be bardless, another shamanless, another may have subpar racial selection for tanks, etc.

being bardless, for instance, changes the game for evils, but wouldnt really impact the evils traditionally disproportionate population. people will still roll iksar monks, troll sks, ogre warriors, and darkelf casters. but this provides incentive for other to play on teams traditionally underrepresented alignments, like good or elves. the elf shortie alliance lacks sks and monks, but people still want to be woodelf bards, assling druids, etc.

ideally id like to see three race based teams consisting of...

*********************
evil: ogre, troll, iksar, de (no bards, pal, rng, dru, but best stated and most popular races)

good: barb, human, eru (fewest races, least played races, but all classes)

neut: dwarf, gnome, halfling, woodelf, highelf, halfelf (most races, popular races, no monk, no sk, no shm)

**********************

[Kergan]

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

4 team racewar is more fun from like 1-30, I agree. Starting in Gfay was awesome, fighting off the hordes of dwarves and gnomes for our right to xp in CB and UR. But the game as a whole needs to be considered, and deity teams do make more sense from a roleplaying perspective. The teams will set up in certain areas still, though. I'm pretty positive that Faydwer on SZ was like a good vs. neut battlefield, kinda like how it was short vs. elf on VZ. Not sure why anyone would even want to start in the Qeynos area when you could be an elf or gnome.

I guess if the devs felt really strongly about fostering team safety from the start, they could just have deity play a larger role in determining start location. Good/neut team humans start in Qeynos, evil team Freeport or even Neriak... but the idea of Bertox/Cazic human/erudites being a minority in Qeynos area sounds so cool. idk



The Mithaniel barbarians and Veeshan monks were from SZ ruleset, to give good team shaman and neutral team monks. Probably wouldn't be an issue since there wasn't on live. I'd rather not see evil paladins and good necros, that was just a suggestion in case the devs were somehow thinking every team needed every class.

People get too caught up in things being fair, imo. Nothing is ever fair in EQ, and while there are steps that can be taken to reduce the unfairness at some point you gotta just go with it. Each team getting every race/class combination makes no sense, and cheapens the unique feel of the teams. If everyone is so afraid of evil team being overpowered, then a simpler solution is taking away their bards imo.

Using SZ as your reasoning for anything is a bad idea. That server was fun, but ultimately a horrible failure. The team populations were horribly unbalanced, and the no GM intervention crap never really let us see how things would work out if basic PNPs were enforced. It also started in Velious with Luclin soon after, and I am assuming this new server will be progression based.

I do agree in a sense with each team being unique adding some "flair". But if you're going to code in imbalance from the start you're setting yourself up to fail. As you mentioned, plenty of that is done by design (i.e. ogre warriors having way better stats than a wood elf), no reason to add more with team layouts.

[Squire]

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

Those teams aren't terrible honestly. I'd play there. Not sure how people would respond to the teams, could be the Nihilum types all roll human team even though humans are lame.

They probably would. At the end of the day its still a team of erudites and humans, with tons of Iksars, Ogres, High Elves, and Dwarves etc to contest them.

[rollin5k]

i like that squire . No b.s. Geography based too

[Squire]

Originally Posted by rollin5k [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

i like that squire . No b.s. Geography based too

yup.

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