GUARD SPAWN TIMERS: AN INTRICATE LOOK INTO COGENCY

[Uberom]

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

CODE

• DOACleric: Guard spawn times normalized to their dungeon npc equivalents

"Normalized" is an improperly used verb here.
–verb
def: resume a normal state

By altering the gaurds spawn timer to those of "dungeon equivalents", you have not "normalized them". Instead, you have changed them.
–verb
to make the form, nature, content, future course etc., of (something) different from what it is or from what it would be if left alone

Now that we have established that the guard spawn timers were NOT 'normalized', but rather 'changed', we must call into question the integrity of this change.

If the idea is to keep the programming standards to that of classic Everquest, as Project 1999 claims, then the changes made are invalid. Spawn timers between guards and 'their dungeon equivalents' (whatever that means) were never related in classic Everquest. If there did exist any similarity between the two, it was purely unintentional.

That being said, since the changes made are invalid and not within standards of the classic programming, we must now conclude that P1999's claims about preserving the integrity of the classic experience are uncogent.

Granted, there are issues with guards. The spawn timers are too short, but dungeon timers are not the proper timing either. The factions are messed up in some areas. Aggro and socializing don't work in places where 'normally' it is supposed to.

These are all valid issues that should, in keeping with the standards of classic EQ, be fixed. However, this is the mentality that I see coming from the devs.
"Guards are messed up and are being exploited. We don't know how to fix these issues. Therefore, we must decrease the overall existence of guards as a deterrent to those who take advantage of their juicy loot."

If we are to keep this way of thinking, we may one day see patch notes that say the following.

DAOCleric: All warriors have been normalized to contain the same hit points as their dungeon equivalents.
DAOCleric: All mobs in zones that contain dungeons, are now the same difficulty as their dungeon equivalents. They also give the same loot and experience.
DAOCleric: Nagafen's spawn timer has been normalized to that of his dungeon equivalents. (Although Nagafen doesn't have any normal, NPC dungeon equivalents now, in Kunark he will [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.] and those are rather short)

[Toony]

Keep in mind I don't have edit powers at Urban Dictionary...

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=intrical

[Uberom]

Lol, yea I caught that right as I sent it out. However, I did edit it before your post. GG [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

[astarothel]

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

[mmiles8]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikilawyering

The parallels are astounding.

I like this one in particular:

In other words a "wikilawyer" is an image drawn from a poor lawyer, and the term may also be used in other cases, e.g., when a person superficially judges other editors and their actions by jumping at conclusions and slapping labels while brandishing Wikipedia policies as a tool for defeating other Wikipedians rather than resolving a conflict or finding a mutually agreeable solution.

[maya]

normalize can also mean "to bring into equilibrium with", which changing guard timers to 28 mins or whatever brings guards into equilibrium with lguk as an example.

your later argument is actually a slippery slope fallacy. just because one change is made, does not mean those other changes will be made.

now your middle argument might have some merit. the nerf isn't classic. i'd stick with that one.

[Lazortag]

If the idea is to keep the programming standards to that of classic Everquest, as Project 1999 claims, then the changes made are invalid. Spawn timers between guards and 'their dungeon equivalents' (whatever that means) were never related in classic Everquest. If there did exist any similarity between the two, it was purely unintentional.

?

This:

MAY 12, 2000

As we are sure many people are aware, there are guards that exist specifically for the purpose of giving new characters a place to run in order to be saved from a certain death. However, as many people have mentioned, these guards are frequently either dead, or engaged by players choosing to hunt them. This makes things very frustrating for newer players, and with the large influx of new players due to the release of EverQuest: The Ruins of Kunark, we decided that a change was warranted.

Though we do not have a problem with players choosing to hunt guards, the newbie guards themselves, specifically the ones at the gates of cities and in the vicinity of newbie zones, need to remain alive under most circumstances. To that end, we have buffed up these newbie-protecting guards, made them immune to magic, and given them some pretty good healing properties, in order to make them less attractive to people hunting them.

In addition, though we have left the guards inside cities as-is from the perspective of power, we've also found a problem with the respawn rate. Previously they were typically on a six-minute timer, making them spawn much faster than an equivalent NPC would in a dungeon. We have normalized the respawn time of guards inside cities to bring them in line with dungeon NPCs.

Why are you so disingenuous, "Uberom"?

[Extunarian]

I scratched my head at this line:

Now that we have established that the guard spawn timers were NOT 'normalized', but rather 'changed', we must call into question the integrity of this change.

I'm not sure why you're so hung up on semantics - it's like you went out of your way to make a weird argument. Of course there was a change...otherwise the notes would have said:
" "

Secondly, it would behoove you to do a little research on the subject before trying to write a very formal and 'logical' argument. Even a cursory read over the other threads on this topic would have led you to the text that Lazortag posted, and might have saved you a little credibility.

Overall, this reads like a letter to the editor from one of Glenn Beck's writers: rife with suspect logic and an overall lack of facts.

[Uaellaen]

wrong forum, idiot

i may have a link for you thou ... http://www.project1999.org/forums/sh...ad.php?t=11956

[Aarone]

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

Now that we have established that the guard spawn timers were NOT 'normalized', but rather 'changed', we must call into question the integrity of this change.

If the idea is to keep the programming standards to that of classic Everquest, as Project 1999 claims, then the changes made are invalid...
That being said, since the changes made are invalid and not within standards of the classic programming, we must now conclude that P1999's claims about preserving the integrity of the classic experience are uncogent.

You should catch up on your reading and reasoning, my friend.

However, in the chance that reading comprehension and objective reasoning prove a bit too much to tackle right now, I think that this You Tube video sums up the errors in your arguement fairly nicely.