Some core issues with antonica in classic eq(why everyone goes to guk)

[Skosh]

I could understand why the staff sharply reduced the ZEM to both Lake of Ill Omen and the Overthere due to bards swarming and doing PL for cash (digital coin. right. that's what I meant). It just came as a surprise when I was leveling in Lake of Ill Omen and noticed right off that the exp was way lower than the 1999-2000 era. The real shock though was when Kedge had its exp modifier nerfed on Blue. That dungeon always sucked balls to deal with and seemed worth checking out when it had its full ZEM applied.

[Gustoo]

Yeah kedge always zero pop or 1 druid or enchy and 1 cleric roughing it hard in the danger zone.

[cd288]

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

I suspect you're being confused by the wiki, which shows the classic/non-P99 ZEMs. For instance, if you are referring to the http://wiki.project1999.com/Per-Level_Hunting_Guide, you may want to read the bottom:



Or maybe you're thinking of the page that note references, the Recommended Levels and ZEM List? Again, if you look you'll see that there's a ZEM section ...

Yes definitely have read those disclaimers. But, at least on Blue, if you go to the high ZEM zones and solo a mob and then go to a lower ZEM zone and solo a mob of the same level, you will see a higher EXP gain from the mob in the high ZEM zone. So these must be accurate to a certain extent (at least insofar as the zones in the list that have high ZEMs...maybe there are other high ZEM zones that we aren't aware of for instance).

For example as well, if you're leveling in Kurn's the EXP is absolutely way faster than a zone with like a 75 ZEM on the list. So there must be some accuracy as to those being the high ZEM zones, but maybe the numbers themselves are off somewhat.

[loramin]

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

The real shock though was when Kedge had its exp modifier nerfed on Blue. That dungeon always sucked balls to deal with and seemed worth checking out when it had its full ZEM applied.

Again, I've never once heard any one express anything positive/enthusiastic about P99's ZEMs, and I think Kedge is the perfect example of why. It's unclassically low, an incredibly hard dungeon just based on the mobs, the loot is crap, and then there's that whole giant PITA "it's underwater" aspect. Nobody wins!

Classicists lose because it's not classic. Everyone else loses because no one goes there. And I say this as someone who has 8x Driftwood Treasure Chests (each of which takes about 100 sharks, 22 min apart): I've spent many days in that zone, and I've pretty much only ever seen people there to get an epic piece and get out.

Now, that particular zone is a little anomalous: I think it used to have a better (and more classic) ZEM, then someone abused something, and the staff's reaction was to nuke the zone. But it's also a perfect representation of how the current ZEM scheme isn't good for anyone.

[loramin]

Originally Posted by cd288 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Yes definitely have read those disclaimers. But, at least on Blue, if you go to the high ZEM zones and solo a mob and then go to a lower ZEM zone and solo a mob of the same level, you will see a higher EXP gain from the mob in the high ZEM zone. So these must be accurate to a certain extent (at least insofar as the zones in the list that have high ZEMs...maybe there are other high ZEM zones that we aren't aware of for instance).

For example as well, if you're leveling in Kurn's the EXP is absolutely way faster than a zone with like a 75 ZEM on the list. So there must be some accuracy as to those being the high ZEM zones, but maybe the numbers themselves are off somewhat.

Well so, the P99 numbers did start with the classic number, and that's precisely why the wiki still uses them: many of them are correct.

But some of them aren't, and no one really knows which (aside from extreme examples like Kurn's, and even that no one knows the exact ZEM of: we just know it's "good"). Without ShowEQ (which the staff blocks much more effectively than Verant ever did), it's virtually impossible to determine what they actually are, and in that sense the staff has achieved a victory: there is (some) "mystery".

I just don't see anything else good coming out of the current ZEMs other than that "mystery" though. And I think the vast, vast majority of players would happily trade that mystery for either "more classic-nes" or a better game.