Anti-Draft Week

[WarpathEQ]

As we're in the thick of "Draft Week" it brings up a lot of thoughts about the state of P99. I considered sharing them in the UN discord but suspect it would be a giant flameroast (as this post will likely turn into as well). I figured this forum would atleast better reflect the overall population of players on the server and not just the chosen few voices of "raiding guild" members and leaders that have become the defacto controllers of the UN and therefore the gameplay experience of P99.

Like many of you I returned to the game a few months ago after a 20 year hiatus when I learned about P99 and loved the idea of reliving true classic EQ gameplay as it existed when I first left the game. In these last few months I've had the chance to participate as both an insider in the UN and an outsider. I don't really have an agenda here and quite frankly don't care if anything changes about the current state of the game. I mostly just find humor in the irony of how decisions are made and felt like sharing. Maybe there will even be some productive conversation here that promotes positive decision making for all players on P99 in the future.

Let me start by saying I completely understand why the UN exists and its necessary (evil?).

First and foremost its a survival tool that helps the Guides and GMs, many of which (if not all?) volunteer their time to ensure a fair and enjoyable P99 experience, thank you for all that you do! After all there are only so many hours in the day. The more these folks can get players to cooperate, the less problems flow up to them to address with the limited time/resources available and the more time they have to focus on positive experiences which can benefit us all.

Side Note - I would be really curious to see published stats on what % of petitions and/or GM/Guide time is spent addressing issues from players that are a part of "raiding guilds" versus those that aren't. In my experience all gameplay issues or disputes I've encountered have involved someone that is part of a "raiding guild" aka part of the UN. I suspect the raw data would support this anecdotal evidence.

Secondarily its an avenue for players to come together, collaborate, and provide new and innovative ideas. We've seen a lot of thoughts and ideas come from this and it permeates into a unique P99 experience. While there can certainly be an entirely separate debate of whether those outcomes have improved gameplay for ALL players of P99 that's not the intent of this discussion (please start your own thread if you want to discuss that further).

With all that said I've been thinking about the Irony of the UN and more specifically tasked myself with coming up with thoughts and ideas will NEVER exist in P99 under the current state of the UN.

Enter Anti-Draft Week.
I think it would be quite fair and equitable that if there is going to be a full week where anyone not part of a "raiding guild" is locked out of virtually all of the best content in EQ that it would also be equally fair that every member of a "raiding guild" is locked out of that same content for a different week at the same interval as Draft Week. I'm using the working title of Anti-Draft Week but I'm sure there is better packaging out there, maybe freedom week, FFA week, anti-establishment week, or inclusivity week who knows (again not what we're here to discuss).

Side Note - At any given time the green server has around 700-1300 active players online. By my estimation approximately 25-30% of those players are associated with "raiding guilds" that get to participate in draft week based on the amount of guilds and size of raid forces I've experienced. That means a minority of people are the driving force behind gameplay decisions and that 70-75% of active characters have no voice currently (generally not a good strategy to only cater to a fraction of your clientele).

I can't help but laugh out loud thinking how great it would be to see this happen in P99 (evil maniacle laugh) and how much crying would occur. While I myself find this concept a bit far-fetched I also will get much joy in seeing all of the explanations to follow about why this is a dumb idea only to realize that the same reasons anti-draft week is dumb actually apply to draft week in its current form from the viewpoint of the majority of players.

Enter a middle ground and the starting point for a productive and valuable thread about how the UN and gameplay in P99 could evolve to benefit ALL players.

A few actual productive thoughts I have (stepping away from the somewhat satirical post above):
1. Lock out draft week guilds from a portion of content during draft week. I.E. the Original bosses - Naggy/Vox/Phinny. Or plenty of other options such as Vindi, 6 neck dragons, spawns that require a /list ect.
2. Provide incentives to other players such as EXP, faction, or loot bonuses (on non-draft targets) during draft week.
3. Create custom FFA content that all the other players can engage in while the handful of guilds tally up all their fat draft week loots.
4. Restructure draft week so that targets aren’t locked for specific guilds to kill but instead create an FFA raid schedule where all targets will be killed during that week, with attendance and loot 100% open to all players.

Hopefully if nothing else this post leaves you with one clear takeaway. These types of ideas, and many even better ones that you will all hopefully add to this thread will never exist if we don't give a voice to more than just a handful of leaders associated with raiding guilds in the UN to decide the future state of P99.

I will now despawn my soapbox and banish myself Nagafen's Lair for its notoriously high fire resist in an attempt to survive the flaming that is about to ensue.

[Toxigen]

woke99 is gonna send you off to commie reeducation camp

[fortior]

Agreed OP. The UN and its drafts has shifted from a way to let smaller guilds enjoy content formerly reserved for the top guild(s) to a way to lock more and more content behind guild tags.

[cd288]

This ignores the fact that a guild is called a "raiding guild" because they are able to kill the targets that you can choose in the draft. There are not guilds outside of those participating in the draft that could reliably kill those targets. So an anti-draft week is pointless since it would basically be "leave all these raid mobs up for a week while no one kills them...just because"

[WarpathEQ]

This ignores the fact that a guild is called a "raiding guild" because they are able to kill the targets that you can choose in the draft. There are not guilds outside of those participating in the draft that could reliably kill those targets. So an anti-draft week is pointless since it would basically be "leave all these raid mobs up for a week while no one kills them...just because"

This is a somewhat valid point in that there are some pretty challenging targets out there, however the fact was not ignored. Admittedly the initial description of anti-draft week was intended to have a satirical undertone, however, examples of how this could be tackled were supplied in the OP and I hope to see even more better ideas to come. To speak in terms of these targets would never die if guild X or Y disappeared from the server is flat out categorically false.

Case and point:
1. Seal team, who would have said the same thing, no longer exists yet high end content remains extremely competitive
2. AoW was killed in an FFA in the last few weeks

In the 24 year history of EQ, in my opinion, there is only one clear thing that I know of that has prevented content from being completed - Being locked out by others.

[fortior]

This ignores the fact that a guild is called a "raiding guild" because they are able to kill the targets that you can choose in the draft. There are not guilds outside of those participating in the draft that could reliably kill those targets. So an anti-draft week is pointless since it would basically be "leave all these raid mobs up for a week while no one kills them...just because"

This is true for the raid mobs, but Ragefire is absolutely groupable content, and shouldn't be part of the Nagafen pick. Additionally, people have been clamoring to add stuff like Guardian Kozz to the draft, which is a soloable mob. The draft should be limited to mobs, encounters, or zones which are either already classified as raid targets or which require an organized raid to reliably kill.

[cd288]

This is true for the raid mobs, but Ragefire is absolutely groupable content, and shouldn't be part of the Nagafen pick. Additionally, people have been clamoring to add stuff like Guardian Kozz to the draft, which is a soloable mob. The draft should be limited to mobs, encounters, or zones which are either already classified as raid targets or which require an organized raid to reliably kill.

Been awhile since I last heard the Ragefire draft discussion, but IIRC they locked it out to ensure that it didn't interfere with someone's Nagafen pick. Logistically it makes sense.

At any rate, that's one mob and it's one single week where it's locked out. The rest of the time Ragefire is fully open and hardly monopolized at all times.

All other mobs on the draft list require and organized raid to kill. Some of the simpler mobs packaged with a pick are done so for similar logistics to prevent issues with people trying to kill their draft pick and also serve the purpose of requiring a guild to give up a pick if they want to select the package, thus leaving open more content to be drafted.

It's a great system and every guild that is reliably capable of killing raid mobs gets its shot. There are zero non-raid guilds that could reliably kill 95% of the content included in the draft so there would be no guilds that benefit from an anti-draft week.

[fortior]

Been awhile since I last heard the Ragefire draft discussion, but IIRC they locked it out to ensure that it didn't interfere with someone's Nagafen pick. Logistically it makes sense.

At any rate, that's one mob and it's one single week where it's locked out. The rest of the time Ragefire is fully open and hardly monopolized at all times.

All other mobs on the draft list require and organized raid to kill. Some of the simpler mobs packaged with a pick are done so for similar logistics to prevent issues with people trying to kill their draft pick and also serve the purpose of requiring a guild to give up a pick if they want to select the package, thus leaving open more content to be drafted.

It's a great system and every guild that is reliably capable of killing raid mobs gets its shot. There are zero non-raid guilds that could reliably kill 95% of the content included in the draft so there would be no guilds that benefit from an anti-draft week.

Oh, absolutely, the anti-draft week idea is stupid. But there's a kernel of truth inside, or at least a valid criticism of the draft. It shouldn't just be free pixels, it should be aimed at opening up the raid game, letting smaller guilds get their bearings and learn stuff at their own pace, etc.

In the UNs, people are unabashedly suggesting drafted Kozz, drafted Drusella, drafted scout, etc

[cd288]

Oh, absolutely, the anti-draft week idea is stupid. But there's a kernel of truth inside, or at least a valid criticism of the draft. It shouldn't just be free pixels, it should be aimed at opening up the raid game, letting smaller guilds get their bearings and learn stuff at their own pace, etc.

In the UNs, people are unabashedly suggesting drafted Kozz, drafted Drusella, drafted scout, etc

Ok but that's basically what the draft does right now.

People suggest things in the UN all the time. Who cares. The staff isn't going to listen to that dumb stuff. Although IMO I can see a slight argument for drafted Scout but either way undrafted is fine too.

[Drevux]

How about open sky to be FFA during draft week?

[Ooloo]

The hardcore players would just start an alt guild(s) to monopolize the anti-draft week

[fortior]

It would be cool to have planar events to give unguilded/small guild players a taste of raid content during draft, though. But that's up to the participating guilds, not the GMs. The draft isn't a GM event giving out free pixels, it's a truce between player guilds with GM enforcement

[Menden]

Interesting idea, but really hard to organize and enforce. I really don't want to perform background checks on every player that attacked and killed X mob to see if they have "raiding guild" ties. Not a great use of my time.

But, I think I understand where you are coming from. I've always loved the draft, working with players to create it was awesome. It enforces my desire to open content up for more players to experience that was historically locked down to just the top guilds. When the draft was first created we had a "staff pick", where staff acted as a raid entity during the drafting process. These would be open raids for all to join. But due to game limitations, having 400+ players in Kael or ToV just didn't work out, lots of lag and desyncing. Till we figure out those limitations, staff picks are on pause.

If someone wants to form a new guild and start raiding with it, nothing is stopping them. They can start competing for targets and ask for UN speaker rights. Or join an alliance like Sanctum(blue).

[fortior]

Thanks for commenting menden, I think your stated goal for the draft is great and also makes sure it’ll never be able to ‘take content’ from unguilded/non un guilded players

[WarpathEQ]

Been awhile since I last heard the Ragefire draft discussion, but IIRC they locked it out to ensure that it didn't interfere with someone's Nagafen pick. Logistically it makes sense.

At any rate, that's one mob and it's one single week where it's locked out. The rest of the time Ragefire is fully open and hardly monopolized at all times.

This is the type of decision making that this post was created to expose, I believe most people would say the reasonable solution if you can't lock down Naggy without locking down ragefire is to not lock down Naggy, but something like that will never be offered as a suggestion in the current UN structure as it doesn't benefit the insiders.

We saw the same thing with Wraith in fear during this draft. Not a draft target, as soon as a drafting guild who thought they had free reign on it realized someone else killed it they immediately started lobbying for it to be locked down and the other guilds immediately start agreeing because it has the opportunity to benefit them in future drafts.

The Reality is Ragefire is a big gate keeper for players to form up for taking on tough content. The cleric epic is widely regarded as the most useful epic in P99 and a necessary item for advancing gameplay. Any cleric I've interacted with that socked Ragefire would challenge the thought that is is hardly monopolized.

The draft isn't a GM event giving out free pixels, it's a truce between player guilds with GM enforcement

I may be in the wrong here but my understanding based on comments in the UN discord is that draft week is enforced server wide and not just amongst drafting guilds. I.E. a group of players that are not part of the UN/Draft would receive punishment from GMs for killing draft targets during draft week. If this is correct then you cannot categorize it as a player agreement when the overwhelming majority of players have no say in any agreements that are made.

If this is not correct I would love to see this clarified. To the point of some of the comments earlier if 95% of the draft targets are unkillable by non-draft guilds then there should be no reason to enforce draft week outside of the drafting entities. Let's put our money where our mouth is and find out. I know plenty of outsiders that would love to snipe a large portion of the lockout targets and see if they have what it takes to take down some of these targets before the drafting guild does. If we're so confident these mobs are only killable by the draft entities then the "raiding guilds" should have no problem with this concept. Effectively the only people locked out of targets on Draft week would the members of guilds that participated in the draft. Maybe @Menden or another GM can opine and clarify here.

I've always loved the draft, working with players to create it was awesome. It enforces my desire to open content up for more players to experience that was historically locked down to just the top guilds. When the draft was first created we had a "staff pick", where staff acted as a raid entity during the drafting process. These would be open raids for all to join. But due to game limitations, having 400+ players in Kael or ToV just didn't work out, lots of lag and desyncing. Till we figure out those limitations, staff picks are on pause.

I do want to make it clear that while I've intentionally taken a counter viewpoint in this thread that I too am actually a big fan of the draft. I can only imagine that the gameplay experience for the members of Lineage is at an all time high right now as they go through their first draft as a qualified entity. This is a massive win for a guild when they first get in and I can think of several other similar groups that are not far behind them that will benefit greatly when their time comes.

One thing I've found that we have in common as humans is that we will always do what we're incentivized to do. There is no incentive for drafting entities to think about all the other players that are on the outside and it shows in the UN dialogue especially surrounding the draft which is why I targeted the draft in this post. My biggest hope is that this thread simply gets the gears turning on how we can shift incentives to better represent a larger segment of the population of Norrath. The challenge I see building every day is this line in the sand of raid target versus not raid target and as people continue to lobby to include more targets in these lock outs we put a greater and greater emphasis on the draft/UN and being an insider or outsider. Maybe we need to define intermdiate content (things like naggy/vox/phinny and the planes come to mind, but would love to hear others thoughts) that require some level of organization to kill but are certainly attainable outside of folks in the existing UN/Draft. This would help create more of a build up to going from a solo player, to starting to organize, to establishing a guild, to being ready to take on the true high end targets that are already in scope of the existing draft and eliminate some of the 0 or 100 dynamic the current state of the UN is creating.

I think there is something to this staff pick concept. While FFA opportunities can be really cool they do require someone to step up and help plan/facilitate them and for anyone that went to Kael for AoW we all understand limitations on the infrastructure that can negate the wins from these opportunities. What about a concept of staff picks giving the staff the ability to pick one drafted target from each drafting entity that the entity is required to host as an FFA event? To address the zone attendance limitations the entities could either work together to go after the FFA targets on the same day so attendees are split up between targets in different zones or a mass sign up with a target preference where we can cap how many FFA players can join each entity and assign them based on their target preferences. This would give the drafting guilds the opportunity to still stack the box on attendence and have a good shot at winning loot through random rolls but also open up content for more folks. Even as an insider I preferred to take down some of the less challenging targets in a more FFA setting where I can win loot via rolls vs. hard earned DKP from time to time.

[Guesty07]

Seal Team effectively continues via Good Guys. And the open AoW was killed by...... all of the draft guilds.

[loramin]

But due to game limitations, having 400+ players in Kael or ToV just didn't work out, lots of lag and desyncing. Till we figure out those limitations, staff picks are on pause.

If this is truly the blocker, why not just limit the number of players somehow? For instance, what if you had a "GM pick" where only characters whose names start with A-G could participate (and then later on, have one for names H-P, and then Q-Z)?

Or, alternatively, you could just decrease the demand overall. For instance, I imagine a lot of "non-raiders" would love a chance to participate in certain raids ... even without any chance at loot (or a much-reduced chance).

Why? Simply to have the classic experience of fighting a famous dragon (or giant, or whatever). If you got rid of (or lowered) the loot from a GM pick, "raiders" wouldn't come to these raids ... leaving room for non-raiders in the zone.

[fortior]

I don’t think unguilded or non raiding guild members constitute the majority of the server’s raiding population. Not even in the slightest.

[loramin]

I don’t think unguilded or non raiding guild members constitute the majority of the server’s raiding population. Not even in the slightest.

Everyone is unguilded or a non-raiding guild member before they ever raid for the first time.

At first you just play EQ alone or with a friend, but then some guy is spamming invites in the EC tunnel, and you figure "what the heck, let's see what guilds are about?" Then one day your guild chat buzzes about a member's epic fight, and it's only a zone away, so you decide to go. You kill your first Xenovorash, or General in Kithicor, or whatever, and ... you're hooked.

The occasional GM raid could similarly allow non-raiders to experience raiding and become part of the raiding population. Or even if they don't, letting them participate in (say) a single Vox fight fits the server's overall goal (of letting everyone experience classic EQ).

[fortior]

Everyone is unguilded or a non-raiding guild member before they ever raid for the first time.

At first you just play EQ alone or with a friend, but then some guy is spamming invites in the EC tunnel, and you figure "what the heck, let's see what guilds are about?" Then one day your guild chat buzzes about a member's epic fight, and it's only a zone away, so you decide to go. You kill your first Xenovorash, or General in Kithicor, or whatever, and ... you're hooked.

The occasional GM raid could similarly allow non-raiders to experience raiding and become part of the raiding population. Or even if they don't, letting them participate in (say) a single Vox fight fits the server's overall goal (of letting everyone experience classic EQ).

Not true on green at least. Castle is the most populous leveling guild and they’re a raiding guild. FoH is too as is ancient blood through the castle alliance. There’s no more hard split between leveling and raiding guilds on p99 green

[Guesty07]

Anybody that thinks the combined total of Good Guys, Kingdom, Nova, Safe Space, Castle Alliance, Drift, Fires of Heaven and Lineage is the minority of the server is crazy

[fortior]

It’s true that everyone starts unguilded, but at level 20-30ish a LOT of people are tagged. Not all in raiding guilds, but by the time you get to raid relevant levels, 46+, people start wanting their epics and get guilded with a raiding capable guild. However it’s good to make sure there is room to be unaffiliated with a guild or to have cross guild grouping action going on. Ragefire should NOT be draftable content since it’s groupable.

[Pootle]

To the point of some of the comments earlier if 95% of the draft targets are unkillable by non-draft guilds then there should be no reason to enforce draft week outside of the drafting entities. Let's put our money where our mouth is and find out. I know plenty of outsiders that would love to snipe a large portion of the lockout targets and see if they have what it takes to take down some of these targets before the drafting guild does.



SO what's stopping you gathering these players together and camping the target outside of the draft. All the raiding guilds will be normally running around doing quake day stuff, so wait on your selected target whlie they are busy with higher end stuff.

Instead of moaning about the draft, Put YOUR money where YOUR mouth is, and proove that you can take part.

[WarpathEQ]

Anybody that thinks the combined total of Good Guys, Kingdom, Nova, Safe Space, Castle Alliance, Drift, Fires of Heaven and Lineage is the minority of the server is crazy

The methodology I used to approximate the statistic was the typical raiding forces I've seen from the UN draft guilds multiplied by the number of guilds divided by the active population on the server from the login screens. Another way to approximate is using examples like the AoW FFA where approximately 400 people come to participate at a time when there are 1200ish people on the server.

To your point these guilds have massive volumes of people tagged but not all are active, online, or raid level. If you wanted to look at the sum total of everyone tagged in these guilds you would have to compare it to the sum total of all characters ever created on the server. That would be much harder to guesstimate but I would imagine the character count would have to be in the 5 figures and these groups would still represent a similarly sized minority. This approach is less valid because one actual human can account for a large amount of toons. Using active counts helps to better gage the actual amount of distinct humans that are actively engaging in real time.

SO what's stopping you gathering these players together and camping the target outside of the draft. All the raiding guilds will be normally running around doing quake day stuff, so wait on your selected target whlie they are busy with higher end stuff.

Instead of moaning about the draft, Put YOUR money where YOUR mouth is, and proove that you can take part.

Nothing is stopping me...I have, am, and will continue to do so. This thread isn't about moaning about the draft, I offer my praises for the draft in addition to my sharp criticisms. The draft/UN is a relevant topic here because it is an overlay on top of classic and the main avenue the GMs have chosen to give a voice to players about the future state of gameplay on P99. This thread is intended to expand that voice and to propose creative ideas on how we advance the game from here while also highlighting the potential (and in my opinion current reality) that the will of the UN is not the will of the overall population.

I mean if nothing else you at least have to stop and chuckle about the irony of a draft concept that is intended to open up content by locking it down. I don't know about you but I've never opened a door for someone by locking it :D

[cd288]

It’s true that everyone starts unguilded, but at level 20-30ish a LOT of people are tagged. Not all in raiding guilds, but by the time you get to raid relevant levels, 46+, people start wanting their epics and get guilded with a raiding capable guild. However it’s good to make sure there is room to be unaffiliated with a guild or to have cross guild grouping action going on. Ragefire should NOT be draftable content since it’s groupable.

It's drafted because the logistics of it make it such that it could interfere with drafted Naggy and vice versa. It would cause more headaches for the staff if it wasn't included with Naggy.

It's like 5 days out of a month. Chill out.

[Pootle]

I mean if nothing else you at least have to stop and chuckle about the irony of a draft concept that is intended to open up content by locking it down. I don't know about you but I've never opened a door for someone by locking it :D

As a member of a casual raiding guild/coalition on Blue, we had set raid evenings/times, so we could not sock or batphone targets much at all. We could not practace on many targets without the the massive zerg guilds racing to them before us, or presuring us to fail so they could leapfrog.

I found the Draft allowed us to raid waaaay more content than we were able to on normal quakes etc.

We even managed to score Trak Teeth on a few Drafts, then partner up with another guild to do Veeshans Peak on a later Draft week.

So personally (in my experience) i really have to disagree with your above statement.

[cd288]

To the point of some of the comments earlier if 95% of the draft targets are unkillable by non-draft guilds then there should be no reason to enforce draft week outside of the drafting entities. Let's put our money where our mouth is and find out. I know plenty of outsiders that would love to snipe a large portion of the lockout targets and see if they have what it takes to take down some of these targets before the drafting guild does. If we're so confident these mobs are only killable by the draft entities then the "raiding guilds" should have no problem with this concept. Effectively the only people locked out of targets on Draft week would the members of guilds that participated in the draft.

This is just a really dumb idea that defeats the whole point of the draft (which is to give smaller guilds a shot at content that is normally monopolized by one or two larger guilds).

The only reason to be against a draft is if you are IN the one or two larger guilds that normally monopolize the content. As a result, you are clearly someone who is too immersed in one of those guilds and trying to make up some reason why the draft harms smaller guilds/ordinary players, which it doesn't in any way shape or form.

If these groups were capable of sniping content as you seem to be claiming, they would be sniping content. They don't have to wait to draft week to do it. There's 3 weeks of of the month where the content is an FTE free for all. So either get one of these "disenfranchised by the draft" groups of people together and go snipe some raid targets this week or STFU.

[CrazyPro]

The solution to all our problems is literally just a forced rotation of all raid mobs and instead of the draft, there will be free for all weeks where any guild can kill any mob.
Then we can live happily ever after.

[cd288]

The solution to all our problems is literally just a forced rotation of all raid mobs and instead of the draft, there will be free for all weeks where any guild can kill any mob.
Then we can live happily ever after.

Which would be the antithesis of classic EQ because at that point you might as well have instancing.

I don't mind a once a month draft. I think it's a cool mechanic and the draft itself is actually kinda fun to attend and watch haha

But full on enforced rotations would kind of be too much IMO. I do like a little competition the other weeks! Even if I'm not in the guild that's winning all the targets lol

[enjchanter]

Instances would save so many paragraphs of typing
And solve every problem this server ever had

[Stepper]

Why? Simply to have the classic experience of fighting a famous dragon (or giant, or whatever). If you got rid of (or lowered) the loot from a GM pick, "raiders" wouldn't come to these raids ... leaving room for non-raiders in the zone.

I don't post here much at all. I've been playing P99 on and off for over a decade now, and the highest level I reached is about 46 or 49 I believe on Blue.

I most certainly would be into killing a raid boss just for the experience. EverQuest to me is a nostalgia game. I can pick it up when I feel like playing something. I am unguilded because of my infrequency of playing.

I do believe it would be fun to dabble in raids, but only to experience them. No chance at loot? That's fine, I have no DKP anyway!

Now granted, I don't know if this should be the norm. Raids are kind of aspirational as a player. But maybe an off week every 6 months that real raiders can take vacations and "guided tours" of bosses becomes a thing for us casuals just for the experience. It'd be neat, albeit "not classic." But it wouldn't provide any benefit to those participating other than being part of a fight.

IDK, just wanted to weigh in as a casual on this.

[Toxigen]

im not sayin its pixels...but...pixels

[cd288]

I don't post here much at all. I've been playing P99 on and off for over a decade now, and the highest level I reached is about 46 or 49 I believe on Blue.

I most certainly would be into killing a raid boss just for the experience. EverQuest to me is a nostalgia game. I can pick it up when I feel like playing something. I am unguilded because of my infrequency of playing.

I do believe it would be fun to dabble in raids, but only to experience them. No chance at loot? That's fine, I have no DKP anyway!

Now granted, I don't know if this should be the norm. Raids are kind of aspirational as a player. But maybe an off week every 6 months that real raiders can take vacations and "guided tours" of bosses becomes a thing for us casuals just for the experience. It'd be neat, albeit "not classic." But it wouldn't provide any benefit to those participating other than being part of a fight.

IDK, just wanted to weigh in as a casual on this.

You're sufficient level to do a few raids. Riot might take you for their Vox/Naggy squad maybe, since those raids are level capped. There are some other guilds that do planar stuff occasionally.

[7thGate]

If you wanted to look at the sum total of everyone tagged in these guilds you would have to compare it to the sum total of all characters ever created on the server. That would be much harder to guesstimate but I would imagine the character count would have to be in the 5 figures and these groups would still represent a similarly sized minority.

As an aside, I think its probably higher than 5 figures. I would guess somewhere in the low 6 for green, blue might get to 7 given how long its been around.

I had a program I wrote that parsed my log file and uploaded it to a google sheet with the last seen history of each guild character, and Auld Lang Syne had 1590 characters seen by me in a /who over the course of 2017 to 2019 with 203 level 46+. This was much higher than I was expecting given that even at our peak we could never field a raid force over 40 people.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

Instances would save so many paragraphs of typing
And solve every problem this server ever had

Instances would probably also cause a lot of players to leave, tanking the server populations. The same thing happens on TLP.

People get their loot quickly due to every guild being able to kill the same mobs at the same time. Then they get bored and leave. It would basically be the death of P99.

TLP already exists if you want instancing.

[enjchanter]

Instances would probably also cause a lot of players to leave, tanking the server populations. The same thing happens on TLP.

People get their loot quickly due to every guild being able to kill the same mobs at the same time. Then they get bored and leave. It would basically be the death of P99.

TLP already exists if you want instancing.

I think ppl don't quit because they get their gear quickly , I think ppl quit because boomers can't handle learning a new system every once in a while

[DeathsSilkyMist]

I think ppl don't quit because they get their gear quickly , I think ppl quit because boomers can't handle learning a new system every once in a while

It's the same thing that happens in just about any game with faster loot progression. The faster the loot progression, the faster the turn-around. Once your goals have been fulfilled, there isn't a good reason to stick around.

P99 not having instancing makes it difficult for a player to achieve even one BiS character. This means you will have a goal that takes years to complete, instead of weeks/months.

[cd288]

P99 not having instancing makes it difficult for a player to achieve even one BiS character. This means you will have a goal that takes years to complete, instead of weeks/months.

For a lot of people sure, unless you join the top guild in which case you are constantly getting the vast majority of the targets, DKP prices scale down, and it's just easier in general. You do have a bit more competition in terms of amount of players in the guild, but again DKP prices will go down a bit overall due to the frequency of getting the targets so it sort of offsets.

If you're in any other guild (unless said guild is able to regularly compete and actually win a majority of targets at times) then yeah it's going to take a very long time.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

For a lot of people sure, unless you join the top guild in which case you are constantly getting the vast majority of the targets, DKP prices scale down, and it's just easier in general. You do have a bit more competition in terms of amount of players in the guild, but again DKP prices will go down a bit overall due to the frequency of getting the targets so it sort of offsets.

If you're in any other guild (unless said guild is able to regularly compete and actually win a majority of targets at times) then yeah it's going to take a very long time.

When I was in AM at the height of it's power (with unrooted dragons), it could still take years to get a fully built character. When most individual Vulak items only drop 10 times or less in a year, there is a good chance you just miss the item. It could drop when you aren't there, another guild gets it, etc. You can also be outbid when your guild does get the drop.

Not saying it is impossible, but you would need to play a ton, get lucky on item drops, and get lucky on bids to try and get a single character full BiS in a year or less.

[cadoipi]

When I was in AM at the height of it's power (with unrooted dragons), it could still take years to get a fully built character. When most individual Vulak items only drop 10 times or less in a year, there is a good chance you just miss the item. It could drop when you aren't there, another guild gets it, etc. You can also be outbid when your guild does get the drop.

Not saying it is impossible, but you would need to play a ton, get lucky on item drops, and get lucky on bids to try and get a single character full BiS in a year or less.

You have said two things
1) With no instancing, in a guild monopolizing content it takes years to get full bis.
2) With instancing people would get bis too fast.

Why not allow instancing for a guild at current respawn frequency (or a bit slower)? Could lock out guild characters who joined the guild less than X days ago if the instance has a frequency of X days. This would prevent shenanigans of a guild splitting into a bunch of copies and characters tag switching to get more instances. If time limits for instances were made, there would still be stakes. Eg if you wipe them there will not be enough time to recover and complete the instance.

Of course implementing the code for this might be a headache and/or large amount of work (depending on the current codebase).

[YendorLootmonkey]

When the next iteration of green opens up, make Green 1.0 instanced or rotation. People who want competition can go enjoy that on Green 2.0. People who want rotations can finally enjoy that on Green 1.0 with whoever is remaining.

Win-win for everyone, because they can play on the server that best represents their playstyle, and stop crapping on the other playstyle because it is on a completely different server and does not impact them in any way whatsoever.

[Ooloo]

When the next iteration of green opens up, make Green 1.0 instanced or rotation. People who want competition can go enjoy that on Green 2.0. People who want rotations can finally enjoy that on Green 1.0 with whoever is remaining.

Win-win for everyone, because they can play on the server that best represents their playstyle, and stop crapping on the other playstyle because it is on a completely different server and does not impact them in any way whatsoever.

You can do this on eqlive. This entire project is a repudiation of the direction eqlive ended up going.

Veto.

[loramin]

You can do this on eqlive. This entire project is a repudiation of the direction eqlive ended up going.

Veto.

That's a moronic response that pretends live is equally as good as P99 ... when we both know it isn't.

This place is special because of classic EQ. And if we're being honest, the raid scene here isn't classic: races literally never existed on live.

If P99 switched to instances or rotations, people would raid the way they did back in 2001 ... ie. the classic way.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

You have said two things
1) With no instancing, in a guild monopolizing content it takes years to get full bis.
2) With instancing people would get bis too fast.

Why not allow instancing for a guild at current respawn frequency (or a bit slower)? Could lock out guild characters who joined the guild less than X days ago if the instance has a frequency of X days. This would prevent shenanigans of a guild splitting into a bunch of copies and characters tag switching to get more instances. If time limits for instances were made, there would still be stakes. Eg if you wipe them there will not be enough time to recover and complete the instance.

Of course implementing the code for this might be a headache and/or large amount of work (depending on the current codebase).

This would speed up the loot acquisition process on the server by at least 5-10x, depending on how many guilds end up splitting. While your suggestion does theoretically prevent people from constantly making new guilds to get around restrictions, people will still end up making as many guilds as possible to maximize how many raid bosses are killable per week.

Unfortunately no MMO has really solved the issue of instancing causing too much loot to enter the market. Players simply care less about the problem these days, since they don't have as much time to play games. It's a really tough problem, because the feeling of accomplishment comes from the loot's rarity. Someone would need to find a way to make loot feel accomplishing outside of rarity, which hasn't been done yet to my knowledge.

On P99 players obviously still enjoy loot rarity, which is why they play here instead of TLP. We don't really have the problem of modern gamers rejecting the time sink, because most people playing here are players who already like the game as it is. It is a niche market for people who enjoy the older style of MMO's.

That's a moronic response that pretends live is equally as good as P99 ... when we both know it isn't.

This place is special because of classic EQ. And if we're being honest, the raid scene here isn't classic: races literally never existed on live.

If P99 switched to instances or rotations, people would raid the way they did back in 2001 ... ie. the classic way.

One of the biggest differences between TLP and P99 is instancing vs. non-instancing. You cannot simply ignore that fact and assume that P99 would be better with instancing. Ooloo is correct that instancing was a core direction change on live. Based on how the TLP servers have operated, it's not a stretch to assume the P99 player base would start leaving P99 once they got their loot quickly via instancing.

I am not sure why you think people would change their raiding strategies if instancing was added to P99. They would still use the same strategies, which are not classic because people didn't have 20 years of game knowledge in 2001. There really isn't a way to put the genie back in the bottle in terms of player knowledge. People are going to play differently on P99. There wasn't instancing in 2001, so that wouldn't be raiding "the classic way" either.

[Ooloo]

That's a moronic response that pretends live is equally as good as P99 ... when we both know it isn't.

This place is special because of classic EQ. And if we're being honest, the raid scene here isn't classic: races literally never existed on live.

If P99 switched to instances or rotations, people would raid the way they did back in 2001 ... ie. the classic way.

Sorry but I fundamentally can't see how adding instancing of all things to p99 would make it more classic. Instancing is totally antithetical to the point of the project.

"Classic" is a super elastic term anyway. Everquest only has classic mechanics. You can emulate those mechanics perfectly and there will still be new emergent playstyles. Some servers had rotations, others didn't, yet they all existed during vanilla\kunark\velious. So which playstyle is the genuinely "classic" one? I think the raid system here works about as well as it possibly can; it's mostly meritocratic but smaller guilds can still work their way up and get stuff. Please god no instancing though.

[enjchanter]

Instancing would literally save the server

[DeathsSilkyMist]

Instancing would literally save the server

Save it from what? The population has remained steady for years. There's around 1.5-2k players at peak times when looking at both servers. The population was also around 1.5-2k players on Blue before Green launched at peak times.

There are some people who play on both servers at the same time, and some boxers, but I doubt that is making up a significant portion of the numbers. Unless someone can show otherwise.

[erasser]

The notion that P99 devs can simply implement instances into this locked patch version of Everquest is laughable. This is not going to happen.

[WarpathEQ]

You have said two things
1) With no instancing, in a guild monopolizing content it takes years to get full bis.
2) With instancing people would get bis too fast.

Why not allow instancing for a guild at current respawn frequency (or a bit slower)? Could lock out guild characters who joined the guild less than X days ago if the instance has a frequency of X days. This would prevent shenanigans of a guild splitting into a bunch of copies and characters tag switching to get more instances. If time limits for instances were made, there would still be stakes. Eg if you wipe them there will not be enough time to recover and complete the instance.

Of course implementing the code for this might be a headache and/or large amount of work (depending on the current codebase).

Interesting concept. While I think adding instancing will never happen and would likely require too much of an overhaul of the backbone of P99 if you think about it the current quake environment is a form of instancing. Maybe there is a way to improve how quakes are done to create a more desired outcome.

It seems like recently the GMs have been testing quake ideas with rolling quakes that only impact one zone at a time to spawning multiple of the same mob at once and having guilds team up to take them down.

Maybe there is an opportunity to create more of a dual platform of naturally spawning content that the poop sockers can stare at for hours on end while they sit cross legged alongside some planned spawn events that can open up raid experiences to more players, especially those currently outside of the UN. There could be a happy middle ground here that preserves the rarity of loot that promotes longivity in gameplay while giving some opportunities to folks that are locked out of content by the lack of progression for the UN folks to engage in.

[loramin]

I am not sure why you think people would change their raiding strategies if instancing was added to P99. They would still use the same strategies, which are not classic because people didn't have 20 years of game knowledge in 2001. There really isn't a way to put the genie back in the bottle in terms of player knowledge. People are going to play differently on P99. There wasn't instancing in 2001, so that wouldn't be raiding "the classic way" either.

I was referring to the unclassic "PvP" aspect of the current raid scene (eg. racing for mobs, starting at a race line ... a race line that never existed on Live, and so by definition is unclassic). Obviously the PvE aspects would remain (largely) the same.

"Classic" is a super elastic term anyway.

This is the crux of it. Our current raid scene is unclassic in key ways. For instance, back in 2001 guilds didn't compete directly (eg. by racing for a mob), because there wasn't the kind of competition for those mobs that there is here, there weren't the same FTE rules as we have here, etc.

Instances would solve that unclassic aspect of P99 ... but in return they would require a sacrifice of making something else unclassic (instances obviously didn't exist in 2001). It's impossible to make P99 100% classic in every way, so no one is (really) talking about classic or unclassic: they're talking about making their preferred aspect of the game classic.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

I was referring to the unclassic "PvP" aspect of the current raid scene (eg. racing for mobs, starting at a race line ... a race line that never existed on Live, and so by definition is unclassic). Obviously the PvE aspects would remain (largely) the same.


Ah I see. Thank you for clarifying.

I would be all for removing race lines and just have it a free for all, as it was in classic. But you don't need instancing to do that.

There was competition on live, so you can't really say that "classic" is no competition. Not all servers had rotations, and none had instancing.

[cd288]

I was referring to the unclassic "PvP" aspect of the current raid scene (eg. racing for mobs, starting at a race line ... a race line that never existed on Live, and so by definition is unclassic). Obviously the PvE aspects would remain (largely) the same.



This is the crux of it. Our current raid scene is unclassic in key ways. For instance, back in 2001 guilds didn't compete directly (eg. by racing for a mob), because there wasn't the kind of competition for those mobs that there is here, there weren't the same FTE rules as we have here, etc.

Instances would solve that unclassic aspect of P99 ... but in return they would require a sacrifice of making something else unclassic (instances obviously didn't exist in 2001). It's impossible to make P99 100% classic in every way, so no one is (really) talking about classic or unclassic: they're talking about making their preferred aspect of the game classic.

I would rather have unclassic race lines that allow for a bit more competition rather than a guild like Riot getting every single spawn 100% of the time than have instances.

Half the fun of the raid scene is the competition aspect and never knowing if you're going to get that target this cycle or not. Or on quakes having to strategize which targets to hit out in the world (or do you just roll on NToV and try to clear a bunch of it while the other guild(s) are hitting Dane, Gore, etc.).

I do think instancing could also cause P99 pop to go down in the semi-long term. If you make it easy to gear all the alts because the only competition is with people in your guild, how long do some of these people keep playing? There's a good chunk addicted to the pixel chase on their alts...resolve that for them quickly and where does the pop go.

[Toxigen]

Rotation 2024