Project 1999 needs to evolve with the players, just a bit

[theguyy]

Hello I've been playing here off and on for awhile now and really love this server. I do think it has some major issues that actually take away from the original EQ, namely the evolution of players.

I've found that although fun, this server doesn't have alot in common with EQ 1999 due to the extreme learned playerbase.

The newbie population is healthy but once you hit the higher levels melee vanish off the face of norrath with the exception of monks. People know now that casters completely rule this game and as a result parties get less and less balanced with each level.

The majority of every group consists of a pet tanking or a caster manipulating the game in order to bypass the use of any form of trinity. At higher levels paladins, rangers and sk's are all but extinct compared to any spell casting class. This hurts the group game alot as well because casters can also solo very well, making duo's alot more popular then full groups, xp wise.

It just doesn't pay to be melee in EQ and the EQ of today knows this. That's the biggest difference between now and then. All the good melee races have xp penalties, most the melee can't solo, giant gear requirements and worst of all pally/sk/ranger have unwarranted xp penalties.

Now I realize this is all classic stuff here but I believe even EQ99 needs to evolve with the more experienced players, if only a little. I'm proposing a small incentive to play those rarely leveled tanks/hybrids. AKA the xp penalty changed to 10% for pally/sk/ranger. Start with that for a few months then consider other small changes or none at all if it begins to alleviate the issue.

[Ephirith]

The experience penalty for class is removed completely in Velious.

Besides, I think it has more to do with class balance. In many ways monks are just flat out better than pally/sk/rangers. If you want to incentivize playing a hybrid, you need to address the massive morale hit many of them get in their 30's and 40's when they watch monks out-dps, out-tank, out-pull, and out-solo them. Then again monks being godmode is completely classic.

[theguyy]

Although I agree with you, baby steps is the only answer on this server. They will never make class changes and I wouldn't want them to; whereas, every class could argue much needed changes/bug fixes.

Toning down the penalty now will hopefully see the class more played, even if slightly. Necro outshines every caster but there is no shortage of non necro's so I don't think it's purely a balance issue except in the case of rangers.

For instance, monk will never outshine paladin/sk aggro without the randomness of procs. My point is pally/sk can still easily get the job done, rangers do have some major issues which only big changes can solve but I don't know how one would go about it without endangering the server.

[fadetree]

Well, I know there's quite a bit of negative to playing Rangers, probably the most of any hybrid. But I went into it knowing that. It'll get better in Velious. I kind of like playing a difficult class, anyways...makes success more significant I guess. The exp penalty is kind of an unfair burden, but oh well.

As far as 'fixing' the class goes, what I'd be happy with would be some form of AM3/EQ, not as AA's but some sort of other earnable ability. MAybe after velious, if i'm still alive then :)

Monk can't generally out pull me outdoors, bind sight + harmony I can single anything. Monk can't out aggro or out CC me anywhere. Probably able to outtank and outdps me, but I haven't seen it be significant yet. Monk's definitely a better soloing class though.

[Danth]

Shadow Knights are roughly on par with Warriors for popularity (albeit more often as alts relative to warriors which are more often mains), so they're mid-range and hence fine. Rangers and Paladins are less common and probably the two least-played classes on P1999. Most folks well know that Kunark was a bad period for hybrids in general and Rangers/Paladins in particular. During Velious the class penalties are removed and hybrids are also subject to class balancing improvements, so most of what you hope for will happen during that period.

At the end of the day, some classes will be more popular than others. I'm not convinced that's a bad thing.

Danth

[Lagaidh]

The reason you don't see a lot of paladins and shadowknights is because in the intervening years between original EQ and now, folks just aren't willing to grind certain combinations. With each passing year, the entire human population's attention span grows shorter. Long term goals are almost met with sneers. Hell, commercials even play background music proclaiming "I want it all, and I want it now".

You deserve it!

This is ultimately a game and it's just a tide of the times that people know where the time sinks are and they steer away from them.

I've been here since 8/2010 and am L52. Seems about right to me as a pally =)

I block out a lot of knowledge. For an old-school player, sometimes what I don't know surprises folks. The same goes for some of the things I do know. That's how it used to be. A lot of people each brought a part to solving the puzzle.

The puzzle has been solved. We can't be as naive again in a world that so nearly matches what it used to be.

[godbox]

part of it is gear. Caster game changers are all spells. (minus manatsone)
tanks needs a large plat investment to be able to make it 1-60 without crawling.

[theguyy]

This server has no shortage of extremely rich players though. Yet sk/pally/ranger are all but extinct at high level. The warrior population is a little better so I'd have to say the giant xp penalties plays the biggest role. Oddly enough it's also the easiest fix with no negative impact whatsoever server wise.

[Tecmos Deception]

The OP's post is full of misinformation.


Of course druids, clerics, shamans, and enchanters are more popular than anything else, but shadowknights, warriors, and monks are all VERY popular classes at high levels. Rogues are more common than wizards and magicians, generally. Only paladins and rangers are actually rare, but neither of those classes was exactly abundant on live either.


It pays to be a melee, it just pays in different ways. You're right that melee are basically incapable of solo xp when compared to casters, and you're "right" that xp penalties were applied in an odd way in the EQ, but that's about the extent of your rightness.

Melee are very important in a lot of duos and trios, and are crucial to anything involving 4+ people. Casters are generally buffbots in raids, while melee get to do the killing/tanking/pulling. Casters are more versatile, but outside of clerics, shamans, and enchanters, groups are always going to be looking for rogues, monks, and tanks before they look for magi, necros, or, lolol, druids/wizards.



I have a hard time agreeing that the exp penalty on sk/pal/rang is the reason these classes are so rare. Yeah, those exp penalties are brutal. But you know what else is brutal? Being a class with a small xp bonus that is earning no xp at all because he can't find a group. My 59.1 has spent countlesss hours sitting around doing NOTHING while /lfg. I've spent dozens of hours pissing time away on red while I sat LFG, I've started multiple alts and spent several days of time playing them because of how frustrated I would get being unable to find a group on my rogue.

Yeah. Needing 50-70% more xp to level a hybrid compared to a rogue would suck, but it's not like the tank hybrids aren't in pretty decent demand, and at least those classes aren't 100% reliant on groups to accomplish anything whatsoever.

Also, I can't count the number of times I've said "Ah, I would gladly pay an xp penalty to have _____" where that blank is FD or tracking or a freaking 50% clicky haste item or whatever.

[Bohab]

With the exception of my rogue I've quit each of my melee/tanks (War, SK & Paladin) once they reached 51-54... groups only need one tank. The lack of groups makes the 55+ grind unreasonable to play on a casual playtime. If I only have a couple hours I'll jump on my necro which gives me many options on how to spend my playtime.

[stormlord]

With context to how the game evolved into Velious, I agree that the experience penalties are detrimental, however, you're missing the bigger picture. The fact that these're hybrid classes is the biggest reason nobody plays them. They don't shine at dps or tanking or healing or any single thing. A group in a cut and dry zone in camping circumstances loses effectiveness with hybrids. Hybrids try to be ok or good at a lot of things and never excellent. This turns off people and makes em avoid them. Hybrids aren't specialists. Just keep in mind that EQ greatly favored groups over no groups or small groups by giving them an experience boost.

Picture the following situation:
Group A needs a DPS-class. They /who and find: ranger-37, rogue-36, monk-36. They decide to pick the rogue for maximum dps since they don't need the monk in their case. The ranger hardly even crosses their mind. The camp they're doing is cut and dry; the crowd control is simple and there's no tracking that's needed. They're like soldiers in a bunker and got it down to a science; they just need a slide rule in their shirt pocket to complete the picture.

That's pretty much how it happens for hybrids. I started with a ranger in 1999 and played another one off/on up until 2010 and got lvl 85 with 1300+ aa. So I do know what I'm talking about.

The game really needed to change the environment to make hybrids more useful. As it was, there wasn't enough chaos going on to justify bringing in a hybrid for added security. It's not so much that a ranger can root or snare or cast a patch heal or track or kill from a distance (dots + archery criticals + dd spells) or cast invis or sneak or hide or lightly tank or somewhat dps or cast small buffs or whatever else they have in their tool kit, it's instead that the environment EQ increasingly fostered was unbalanced in terms of its disregard for hybrids. Groups weren't rewarded experience for surviving adversity, they were rewarded for avoiding it altogether. Camping cut down on a lot of the chaos. Zones increasingly simplified so that the need for flexibility diminished. A long list of things happened over the years to make a game that just could not justify hybrids.

I always thought that hybrids did well in small groups of 2 to 4 people or so, but this was only because it used their tools more. In larger groups, their extra tools become redundant and even undesired and their primary dps role can't compete with dps classes. But if making hybrids useful means you have to intentionally gimp your group by not inviting more people, it won't happen. The game never tried to balance this. Instead, rangers ended up gimp for most of the time they were leveling up since groups tended to be 4+ players. This was made worse by other things like camping - where all of the adversity that makes rangers shine is eliminated.

Another thing is that the difference between a ranger and a warrior is very simple, outside of the group environment. I did an experiment and leveled a ranger and a warrior to 17. I then tried to kill the same brigand with each one. Basically, in this experiment, the ranger's ability to snare and root and heal and dot and use close combat and use archery (rangers get criticals) absolutely makes them win with their hands tied behind their back. The warrior basically was dead long before the brigand was dead. Yet the ranger was about 50% health and 50% mana when the brigand died. This really shows hte solo power of a ranger in adverse conditions. This isn't necessarily true in a practical experience situation since players try to reduce adversity.

[fadetree]

Groups weren't rewarded experience for surviving adversity, they were rewarded for avoiding it altogether.

QFT

'The Issue' in a nutshell.

[PizzaHutDelivers]

With context to how the game evolved into Velious, I agree that the experience penalties are detrimental, however, you're missing the bigger picture. The fact that these're hybrid classes is the biggest reason nobody plays them. They don't shine at dps or tanking or healing or any single thing. A group in a cut and dry zone in camping circumstances loses effectiveness with hybrids. Hybrids try to be ok or good at a lot of things and never excellent. This turns off people and makes em avoid them. Hybrids aren't specialists. Just keep in mind that EQ greatly favored groups over no groups or small groups by giving them an experience boost.

Picture the following situation:
Group A needs a DPS-class. They /who and find: ranger-37, rogue-36, monk-36. They decide to pick the rogue for maximum dps since they don't need the monk in their case. The ranger hardly even crosses their mind. The camp they're doing is cut and dry; the crowd control is simple and there's no tracking that's needed. They're like soldiers in a bunker and got it down to a science; they just need a slide rule in their shirt pocket to complete the picture.

That's pretty much how it happens for hybrids. I started with a ranger in 1999 and played another one off/on up until 2010 and got lvl 85 with 1300+ aa. So I do know what I'm talking about.

The game really needed to change the environment to make hybrids more useful. As it was, there wasn't enough chaos going on to justify bringing in a hybrid for added security. It's not so much that a ranger can root or snare or cast a patch heal or track or kill from a distance (dots + archery criticals + dd spells) or cast invis or sneak or hide or lightly tank or somewhat dps or cast small buffs or whatever else they have in their tool kit, it's instead that the environment EQ increasingly fostered was unbalanced in terms of its disregard for hybrids. Groups weren't rewarded experience for surviving adversity, they were rewarded for avoiding it altogether. Camping cut down on a lot of the chaos. Zones increasingly simplified so that the need for flexibility diminished. A long list of things happened over the years to make a game that just could not justify hybrids.

I always thought that hybrids did well in small groups of 2 to 4 people or so, but this was only because it used their tools more. In larger groups, their extra tools become redundant and even undesired and their primary dps role can't compete with dps classes. But if making hybrids useful means you have to intentionally gimp your group by not inviting more people, it won't happen. The game never tried to balance this. Instead, rangers ended up gimp for most of the time they were leveling up since groups tended to be 4+ players. This was made worse by other things like camping - where all of the adversity that makes rangers shine is eliminated.

Another thing is that the difference between a ranger and a warrior is very simple, outside of the group environment. I did an experiment and leveled a ranger and a warrior to 17. I then tried to kill the same brigand with each one. Basically, in this experiment, the ranger's ability to snare and root and heal and dot and use close combat and use archery (rangers get criticals) absolutely makes them win with their hands tied behind their back. The warrior basically was dead long before the brigand was dead. Yet the ranger was about 50% health and 50% mana when the brigand died. This really shows hte solo power of a ranger in adverse conditions. This isn't necessarily true in a practical experience situation since players try to reduce adversity.
Excellent post man. Honestly makes me want to roll a ranger.

[Roth]

Honestly I don't think the exp penalty really matters at all as far as when people decide what they want to play. Maybe I'm just being naive, but to me when I pick a character I consider two things: 1) am I going to enjoy playing this character, and 2) will I be viable at end game. The biggest problem I think with the weak classes is not the exp penalty, it's just that they're generally unappealing. I think for example, any class without bind affinity is not something I'd be interested in playing without a cleric constantly with me. It really limits what you can do in the game. There are a lot of other issues as well, but I think people generally just want to be powerful and useful. There has to be a solid reward for playing a paladin or whatever that makes someone want to make one over something else.

edit: ill further say I think the game would be overall better and more fun if ANY class could bind affinity at level 1, with no restrictions other than the obvious ones like no dungeons, but for obvious reasons that can't happen. It's really hard to say what from classic made the experience more fun/better and what made it worse.

[kylok]

I agree with the exp penalty thing, case and point Iksar monk - 44% exp penalty and they're a dime a dozen. I've always played melee toons in EQ and not being able to bind hasn't stopped me from doing much, but I guess you and I have different play styles - to each his own!=D

[Roth]

I agree with the exp penalty thing, case and point Iksar monk - 44% exp penalty and they're a dime a dozen. I've always played melee toons in EQ and not being able to bind hasn't stopped me from doing much, but I guess you and I have different play styles - to each his own!=D

That's true... I enjoy the exploring/soloing aspect of the game. I often play necros or mages.

[FansyTheBard]

Just play the game without the pressure to gain exp and play the class u WANT to play. easy as it is

[MaksimMazor]

I don't really have trouble finding groups as a rogue.

_______________
Gabobrik the Ronin

[Slave]

I don't really have trouble finding groups as a rogue.

_______________
Gabobrik the Ronin

That is because Rogues do by far the most damage in the game, and they do it for the least amount of experience. Win - Win - Win for groups. Nobody is disputing the awesomeness of Rogues.

[Twin]

You guys are playing an emulated version of a game that's practically 15 years old. I'm pretty sure if you go in with the mentality that you need to min/max everything that you couldn't before, you're going to shoot yourself in the foot (enjoyment wise).

[hatelore]

Hello I've been playing here off and on for awhile now and really love this server. I do think it has some major issues that actually take away from the original EQ, namely the evolution of players.

I've found that although fun, this server doesn't have alot in common with EQ 1999 due to the extreme learned playerbase.

The newbie population is healthy but once you hit the higher levels melee vanish off the face of norrath with the exception of monks. People know now that casters completely rule this game and as a result parties get less and less balanced with each level.

The majority of every group consists of a pet tanking or a caster manipulating the game in order to bypass the use of any form of trinity. At higher levels paladins, rangers and sk's are all but extinct compared to any spell casting class. This hurts the group game alot as well because casters can also solo very well, making duo's alot more popular then full groups, xp wise.

It just doesn't pay to be melee in EQ and the EQ of today knows this. That's the biggest difference between now and then. All the good melee races have xp penalties, most the melee can't solo, giant gear requirements and worst of all pally/sk/ranger have unwarranted xp penalties.

Now I realize this is all classic stuff here but I believe even EQ99 needs to evolve with the more experienced players, if only a little. I'm proposing a small incentive to play those rarely leveled tanks/hybrids. AKA the xp penalty changed to 10% for pally/sk/ranger. Start with that for a few months then consider other small changes or none at all if it begins to alleviate the issue.

I am actually very happy playing a sk, this is my third sk since 99 and I have never regretted my choice. And I would disagree that a monk or whatever is better, at least in my own eyes. I have a serious exp penalty, but the reward in the end outweighs the work in my opinion. I can solo, tank, pull, cc, snare, off tank, whatever is required in some form or fashion I try to fit the role, and I enjoy it every time I get the chance to be a part of a group :)

A monk can't out tank me, out taunt me, and in some environments I would say a sk is actually a better puller. In some of course, def not all.

Plus I see tons of tanks on hehe, I don't see a exodus of tanks, this server has more ogre warriors then prolly any server on live ever had lol, or it sure feels that way when i see 8 ogre warriors in the same zone hehe. Either way though, my main point is, I love my class and I don't think there will ever be a game that can create a class as unique as the everquest sk. Heck when I quit eq on live, both times, all I did was play games and try to make a char that emulated my sk on everquest, and I always came up short to what eq could offer me with the sk class. So if your an sk, rock on.

[sedrie.bellamie]

I was in KC as my mage. Shout goes out for DPS. I ask if I could bring my ranger to the group. Long silence. I get the response back that the SK in the group doesn't want to group with a ranger for max xp. So I join them for a minute in KC as the mage but leave b/c the mage is 54 and they were fighting mainly at the entrance and were mostly light blue to my mage. I ended up leaving that group as the mage b/c it was shit xp and no loot. But that would of been purfect for the ranger who just needs to level up. Not easy to get a group even in the most populous zone on the server.

[Splorf22]

In my opinion the sucky thing about Paladins and Rangers is that they are mediocre for XP groups and mediocre for raids. As a Warrior or Rogue, sure your solo ability is limited but you know that if you hit 60 you'll be far more useful on raids than any caster except perhaps a wizard. All of those pimp soloing Enchanters and Shamans get to sit and buff on most raids and do very little.

However Paladins (while vastly underrated group tanks) don't really have a good role on raids. I spent a little time with Divinity and in my opinion one of their better decisions was to have hybrids tank anything they could, which turns out to be more than you think. Obviously hybrids will do better in Fear and Hate with their snap aggro. I remember in VD we usually had Anthrax tank everything but I think other than the actual bosses you'll probably get more mileage out of a hybrid tank.

Rangers unfortunately are just underpowered. A ranger is literally a worse tank, worse dps, and worse puller than a monk. Go blame Aradune.

Shadowknights are just as good as Paladins in group tanks and also have FD (keeps you alive), Harmtouch (great for Kunark mobs with 32k hp), and FD/CoS pulling for raids. So they are a lot more useful in the endgame.

[runlvlzero]

In my opinion the sucky thing about Paladins and Rangers is that they are mediocre for XP groups and mediocre for raids. As a Warrior or Rogue, sure your solo ability is limited but you know that if you hit 60 you'll be far more useful on raids than any caster except perhaps a wizard. All of those pimp soloing Enchanters and Shamans get to sit and buff on most raids and do very little.

However Paladins (while vastly underrated group tanks) don't really have a good role on raids. I spent a little time with Divinity and in my opinion one of their better decisions was to have hybrids tank anything they could, which turns out to be more than you think. Obviously hybrids will do better in Fear and Hate with their snap aggro. I remember in VD we usually had Anthrax tank everything but I think other than the actual bosses you'll probably get more mileage out of a hybrid tank.

Rangers unfortunately are just underpowered. A ranger is literally a worse tank, worse dps, and worse puller than a monk. Go blame Aradune.

Shadowknights are just as good as Paladins in group tanks and also have FD (keeps you alive), Harmtouch (great for Kunark mobs with 32k hp), and FD/CoS pulling for raids. So they are a lot more useful in the endgame.

Problem is the pros who beat the game as SK's, pallies, and rangers all rolled, bard, necro, sham, ench, mage as their mains, twinked an SK/pal/range hybrid alt and got bored, rolled wars found out what real mitigation was and stuck with it.

Not saying SK/Pal/Ranger isnt good... (and F u splorf ranger can pull U KNOW U watched one pull). And Ironicly (yes yes) frackkin TMo's best pullers (particularly in fear) back in the day were ... rangers ;p snare kiting half the zone. (were clicky snare is really nice in kubark people scoff at it) but you can keep like 20 mobs snared as a ranger with that.

Umm just they are no longer optimal and people who were attracted to them initially found nicer slices of cake... I'm sure theres allot of them out there shelved from 34-55. I think all the hybrids get a little better and funner in velious, at least rangers geat fear for animals and theres plenty of critters 1-55 to level on. But on both servers the mentality is to roll a level 1 with full pre planar BIS and play that way reguardless of class. Back on blue I was giggled at for rolling naked toons ;p

[Larethan]

Honestly I don't think the exp penalty really matters at all as far as when people decide what they want to play. Maybe I'm just being naive, but to me when I pick a character I consider two things: 1) am I going to enjoy playing this character, and 2) will I be viable at end game. The biggest problem I think with the weak classes is not the exp penalty, it's just that they're generally unappealing. I think for example, any class without bind affinity is not something I'd be interested in playing without a cleric constantly with me. It really limits what you can do in the game. There are a lot of other issues as well, but I think people generally just want to be powerful and useful. There has to be a solid reward for playing a paladin or whatever that makes someone want to make one over something else.

edit: ill further say I think the game would be overall better and more fun if ANY class could bind affinity at level 1, with no restrictions other than the obvious ones like no dungeons, but for obvious reasons that can't happen. It's really hard to say what from classic made the experience more fun/better and what made it worse.

I disagree with this. My first toon was a bard that I leveled to 34. 40% xp penalty pissed me off and made me not as enthusiastic about him. I'm rolling a rogue now specifically because it's the lowest xp penalty melee. It's a fun class, but I'd prefer doing a Pally or even my Bard. Unfortunately xp penalty makes it tough for me to handle (knowing there's better classes that are desirable to groups and faster leveling). And this isn't just me, I know lots of people who are experiencing the same regarding their class choices. In fact, I've seen fights in groups over inviting hybrids. Some people scream and throw a shit-fit over it and don't want them in group etc.

Can't wait until Velious when penalty is gone - waiting until then to roll some fun toons and less group-drama.

[Lagaidh]

You guys are playing an emulated version of a game that's practically 15 years old. I'm pretty sure if you go in with the mentality that you need to min/max everything that you couldn't before, you're going to shoot yourself in the foot (enjoyment wise).

I agree completely and haven't be able to put it that succinctly.

I've been flabbergasted at the min maxer here on p99. I've wondered if they were tops back in the day, or weren't and are really trying to compensate here...

I just don't understand why you'd search for something like p99 only to blow through the content as quickly as possible.

[Lagaidh]

I'd also like to say, that I hear more stories of hybrid snubbing on forums and as tales from somebody's "friend" than I've ever experienced on p99.

There were times in live that I sure felt it... namely where we are now- folks used to Kunark with Velious on the way. That's about the time I was so disgusted with how paladins were treated by Sony and other players that I wanted to quit. But I realized something... the real "bad treatment" of my class, what actually affected me, was all of the bitching about paladins/rangers/rogues/wiz/insert class here on boards!

If you just log in to play, you can find something to do. You may progress, you may simply escape for a while. At least every thread I've seen near these topics on p99 has more than one person saying to play what you love.

I'll always love how a paladin interacts with Norrath.

[Camulet]

Im Zartron.

And I happily group with hybrids (including rangers).

Ooo feels better to get it out in the open :)

[Tecmos Deception]

I just don't understand why you'd search for something like p99 only to blow through the content as quickly as possible.

At least every thread I've seen near these topics on p99 has more than one person saying to play what you love.


So you're going to bring up the "this server is all about having fun, so you should play the class/the style/the times/etc. that are fun for you" point, but basically in the same breath hate on someone who doesn't enjoy playing in exactly the same way you do.

Cool.


If you can't understand why someone wants to level up as quickly as they can and therefore feels like grouping with hybrids (or wizards, or bad players, or whatever) should generally be kept to a minimum, then you're just plain dense. No min/maxers are ever making threads on these forums telling you that they think your choices in p99 are idiotic, but the forums are rife with casual-ish folk slamming everyone who doesn't like to spend their hours /played in lcy in a group of 57+ troll sk, rang, iksar monk, druid, druid, wizard.

[Xadion]

Problem is the pros who beat the game as SK's, pallies, and rangers all rolled, bard, necro, sham, ench, mage as their mains, twinked an SK/pal/range hybrid alt and got bored, rolled wars found out what real mitigation was and stuck with it.



my main is and always will be a SK :-)

Min/Maxer will never choose a pal/rng/sk or bard- they are not BEST at DPS or TANKING

SK/Pal are better tanks because of one situation or another- but never as a pure pure tank

Ranger can in situations be best DPS- well only once the bow stuff is fixed...

a hybrid's fun and enoyablity comes in that they can do alot of things that the traditional TANK or DPS role cannot so you get to experiance more things...the pentalty really sucks...

[Karafa]

Meh, end game geared Rangers are fantastic and it does make them worth it. You can solo pretty much anything out doors, track is fantastic, and tell me Zilo wont out dps the majority of this server.

[fadetree]

Meh, end game geared Rangers are fantastic and it does make them worth it. You can solo pretty much anything out doors, track is fantastic, and tell me Zilo wont out dps the majority of this server.

Truth.

[Lagaidh]

So you're going to bring up the "this server is all about having fun, so you should play the class/the style/the times/etc. that are fun for you" point, but basically in the same breath hate on someone who doesn't enjoy playing in exactly the same way you do.

Cool.


If you can't understand why someone wants to level up as quickly as they can and therefore feels like grouping with hybrids (or wizards, or bad players, or whatever) should generally be kept to a minimum, then you're just plain dense. No min/maxers are ever making threads on these forums telling you that they think your choices in p99 are idiotic, but the forums are rife with casual-ish folk slamming everyone who doesn't like to spend their hours /played in lcy in a group of 57+ troll sk, rang, iksar monk, druid, druid, wizard.

If you want to build a strawman in a vacuum, then sure, that's exactly what I meant.

Edit: I just wanted to add, I don't hate on anybody. Don't be so truculent.

What I intended to impart is that I have difficulty reconciling a player seeking such a place to experience an era of a very old online game and then trying to consume what they labored to find in a quick fashion.

I understand what makes players want to outdo one another... I just don't understand why it's so rampant here. We all have our own maudlin stories of classic EQ and many profess they are looking for the magic they once knew. I've found that magic. I'm savoring it. Hey I can work alongside power gamers no problem... that's how I can bottom feed and find great drops in EC. I can have great gear and not be guilded because of that upper echelon player.

I've been in his shoes. I've been in kick ass guilds that bent what the game offered to its will.

It's as simple as that. Maybe it can be construed as a hypocritical stance. Maybe it is a hypocritical stance. I still won't understand someone who professes a want to relive memories and then proceeds to undertake the task at all possible min/max speed.

/shrug

You will never ever hear me consciously begrudge another's playstyle so long as it doesn't cross the line of griefing.

I apologize for having to spell that out.

[fadetree]

I approve of any post that has the word 'truculent' in it and used correctly. Well-played, sir. Well-played.

[Splorf22]

I think you are missing the point Lagaidh. Why would you come back to a game you already played before? To do it better. I think almost everyone who is playing on 1999 wants to 'improve' their EQ experience in some way. I never got to raid anything on Live and I got to here. Basically casual players want to become casual raiders, casual raiders want to become hardcore raiders, and hardcore raiders don't want to repeat something they did before.

Also +1 for truculent. Next, threaten to defenestrate him!

[gloine36]

One could say that having played Live that we no longer wish to be gregarious, but rather are adapting to play egregiously.

[fadetree]

lol this thread is getting pungent!

But as for me, coming back I just wanted to do it again, hang around with folks and do the ranger thing. I've raided and done all that before, I've been casual before. I just like hanging out in EQ I guess. My time online is pretty limited though, so maybe I'd feel differently if it weren't.

[Lagaidh]

I think you are missing the point Lagaidh. Why would you come back to a game you already played before? To do it better. I think almost everyone who is playing on 1999 wants to 'improve' their EQ experience in some way. I never got to raid anything on Live and I got to here. Basically casual players want to become casual raiders, casual raiders want to become hardcore raiders, and hardcore raiders don't want to repeat something they did before.

Also +1 for truculent. Next, threaten to defenestrate him!

THANK you... this is one of the things I wondered in the post where I originally wondered out loud...

And boy does that progression you talked about perfectly describe my tenure on live =)

I'm glad folks "appreciate" the use of the word truculent. I spent 50k on an education at William & Mary, a school where I had to write a term paper in even math classes (WTF!)... and I learned the word truculent from an old sports interview between Muhammad Ali and Howard Cosell.

I'm paraphrasing:
*Ali said something funny and instigating to Howard*
Cosell: Well now you're just being truculent.
Ali: Whatever that is, if it's good, I'm that!