Simulated Patch Day Repop's

[President]

Please.

[Rhalous]

I think that having boss repops on server restarts could be a bad idea if people were able to make the server crash, but what if a script was written to simulate a patch? Is this feasible? I don't know much about programming, but it seems like a script could be written to take the server down and reboot it with a full pop. Is this something we want to consider?

[Ihealyou]

Why write a script to simulate patches? I'm pretty sure we have real patches.

[soup]

Have a patch that adds a script to simulate patches that don't happen, brilliant!

[Uaellaen]

You are not getting his point, in classic on a server reboot all nameds were back up (Vox / Naggy / Inno / CT / Maestro / Draco) and guilds could just log in, mobilize and kill them.

With the current situation and some weird no life guild (no, not IB) camping those mobs 24 / 7 it might actualy not be a bad idea, but i did not make up my mind yet if i would support this idea or not. I am still hoping for another solution to pop up in my head.

[gedeost]

You are not getting his point, in classic on a server reboot all nameds were back up (Vox / Naggy / Inno / CT / Maestro / Draco) and guilds could just log in, mobilize and kill them.

With the current situation and some weird no life guild (no, not IB) camping those mobs 24 / 7 it might actualy not be a bad idea, but i did not make up my mind yet if i would support this idea or not. I am still hoping for another solution to pop up in my head.

It was classic so it has to be like that.

Doesn't matter if it's good or bad.

[girth]

It was classic so it has to be like that.

Doesn't matter if it's good or bad.

Actually that doesn't matter either. It's whatever nilbog and friends want it to be. When will you learn buddy?

[gedeost]

Actually that doesn't matter either. It's whatever nilbog and friends want it to be. When will you learn buddy?

"Relive the classic Everquest MMORPG Gaming Experience as it was in 1999 and onward. Project 1999 is a free to play Emulated Everquest Server giving Players the opportunity to experience Classic EQ Once again, starting with the original 3 continents and a max level of 50, with the look and feel of the old interface and several modifications making game mechanics similar to how the game used to be."

Nice gm butt sucking tho.

[eqdruid76]

"Relive the classic Everquest MMORPG Gaming Experience as it was in 1999 and onward. Project 1999 is a free to play Emulated Everquest Server giving Players the opportunity to experience Classic EQ Once again, starting with the original 3 continents and a max level of 50, with the look and feel of the old interface and several modifications making game mechanics similar to how the game used to be."

Nice gm butt sucking tho.

Oh, the hypocrisy.

[girth]

"Relive the classic Everquest MMORPG Gaming Experience as it was in 1999 and onward. Project 1999 is a free to play Emulated Everquest Server giving Players the opportunity to experience Classic EQ Once again, starting with the original 3 continents and a max level of 50, with the look and feel of the old interface and several modifications making game mechanics similar to how the game used to be."

Nice gm butt sucking tho.

I'm not sucking up by any means. I have posts that aren't very nice/friendly towards GMs or GMs decisions. The difference is I learn. You don't seem to.

Just cause you have an opinion does not make it the majority nor does it make it right nor does it mean we have to listen to your retarded dribble, so who the fuck cares about what you think? Nobody here...unless you somehow helped this server come into existence...then maybe I might think about possibly caring.

Why are you awake anyways? Mommy might get mad if she catches you up.

[gedeost]

Making game mechanics similar to how the game used to be

Making game mechanics similar to how the game used to be

Making game mechanics similar to how the game used to be

Making game mechanics similar to how the game used to be

Making game mechanics similar to how the game used to be

Making game mechanics similar to how the game used to be

Making game mechanics similar to how the game used to be

Oh, the hypocrisy.

[girth]

sim·i·lar
 
 /ˈsɪmələr/ Show Spelled[sim-uh-ler] Show IPA
–adjective
1.
having a likeness or resemblance, esp. in a general way: two similar houses.

[gedeost]

sim·i·lar
 
 /ˈsɪmələr/ Show Spelled[sim-uh-ler] Show IPA
–adjective
1.
having a likeness or resemblance, esp. in a general way: two similar houses.


Relive the classic Everquest MMORPG Gaming Experience as it was in 1999

opportunity to experience Classic EQ Once again

two similar houses.

two similar games.

[girth]

What kind of crack are you smoking if you don't consider this similar to EQ live? And don't start listing things that are different, we all can. If there weren't differences, then it wouldn't be similar, it would be exactly the same. The fact is its the most similar experience in existence today, and you are just mad that your opinions aren't the ones being favored here...some of mine aren't either...booo hooo

If you are not freely enjoying the free server, which is free, then feel free to leave and don't let the free door hit you on your free way out.

[astarothel]

Let me help you with this, since you seem to be having an issue:

Similar is not identical


Similar is not identical


Similar is not identical


Similar is not identical


Similar is not identical

[Akame]

I haven't had coffee and it's too early in the morning for this. I hope this thread gets deathtouched.

[Phallax]

You are not getting his point, in classic on a server reboot all nameds were back up (Vox / Naggy / Inno / CT / Maestro / Draco) and guilds could just log in, mobilize and kill them.

With the current situation and some weird no life guild (no, not IB) camping those mobs 24 / 7 it might actualy not be a bad idea, but i did not make up my mind yet if i would support this idea or not. I am still hoping for another solution to pop up in my head.

Dont even try that shit, theyre camping targets just as much as DA is. And dont even start the "well they started it" shit either because just cuz someone started it doesnt mean you need to follow suite THEN talk shit about it, thats being a hypocrite.

As for the OP...no. Rogean and Nilbog have already stated why server up spawns are bad for Emu servers.

[Kinamur1999]

Dont even try that shit, theyre camping targets just as much as DA is. And dont even start the "well they started it" shit either because just cuz someone started it doesnt mean you need to follow suite THEN talk shit about it, thats being a hypocrite.

Doesn't matter who started it, the whole camping raid bosses is BULLLLLLLSHIT.

[Pyrocat]

Man, these forums are like a training ground for message board newbies.

[Omnimorph]

People should really stop feeding the trolls...

I'd be for the server patch day repops, but then you might have people bringing the server down etc. It would however give more guilds an opportunity at raid targets without guilds camping mobs for 24hrs or w/e.

[BlackBellamy]

What, raiding? Bosses? Outside your little dedicated group, no one cares. This server is 95% casual players so stop trying to take up the GMs valuable time with your stupid requests.

[km2783]

Man, these forums are like a training ground for message board newbies.

It's like people's mentality's and maturity levels have regressed a decade, too.

[Toony]

It's like people's mentality's and maturity levels have regressed a decade, too.

I'm not convinced all these cats were even old enough to man the controls of mmo in 99...

[Akame]

I'm not convinced all these cats were even old enough to man the controls of mmo in 99...

You noticed that too? I usually gauge it by the ability to type correctly and formulate coherent sentences.

[km2783]

I'm not convinced all these cats were even old enough to man the controls of mmo in 99...

There is that, too, and I'm curious what even drew them to find Project 1999 in the first place.

[Toony]

There is that, too, and I'm curious what even drew them to find Project 1999 in the first place.

Free mmo with a population count over 30 and seemingly relaxed rule enforcement for starters. (the appearance of, not necessarily in practice)

[Rhalous]

Lets stay on topic, please. RnF is there for a reason. Go troll each other over there.

This is an possible solution to something that a lot of people miss about the classic experience.

[Nizzarr]

There is issues with the current raid rules, but this clearly isnt a solution to those problems.

[Branaddar]

Yes, let's encourage people to force the servers to crash because there aren't enough patches. Good stuff.

[pickled_heretic]

Yes, let's encourage people to force the servers to crash because there aren't enough patches. Good stuff.

if the patch was "simulated" and a respawn would be caused because of that then it seems to me that crashing the server would have no bearing on whether or not raid mobs would respawn.

[Rhalous]

if the patch was "simulated" and a respawn would be caused because of that then it seems to me that crashing the server would have no bearing on whether or not raid mobs would respawn.

Thanks, pickled.

By the way, I do not propose this is a solution to the current rules for raiding. I propose this will help better simulate a classic experience. Patch day repops were a large part of classic EQ for many people.

[Xumosa]

Thanks, pickled.

By the way, I do not propose this is a solution to the current rules for raiding. I propose this will help better simulate a classic experience. Patch day repops were a large part of classic EQ for many people.

yep i remember numerous occasions on live where my guilds motd would be camp out at [set location] in [set zone] and be ready to log in once servers are up after patch

[Branaddar]

Yeah I'd be all for simulated patch repops. But not coding the server to repop after it comes back from down time.

It'd mix the spawn times up a bit. Do it at odd times every week or however long for the mix-up factor and preventing guilds from monopolizing a spawn for weeks on end.

[Nizzarr]

I believe simulated patch day repop would be detrimental to the server's health. Raid variance has a side effect of having to play a lot to get raid mobs. If it had simulated patch day.. i'd say server would lose a good chunk of poeple that compete for these mobs.

I remember when there was a rotation, hardly anyone would log on when there wasnt anything to kill. It made the server quite a dull place. Simulated patch day would bring the same issue. Everything would die in 3 hours, then there wont be anything else to do for raiders.

This raid variance makes it that people are tied to this server. They gotta be on there to help their guild and what not. It actually motivate poeple to play here.

[Akame]

Not completely classic but Nizzarr has a strong point.

[Branaddar]

A good point, but it's still concerning me somewhat that one or two guilds could monopolize certain spawns for prolonged periods.

I dunno what the situation is like here, but I remember on my old Live server, there was one power guild that tended to cockblock other guilds by farming raid mobs whose drops went to alts or rotted, just so the other guilds couldn't get them. They kept the kills (and thus, spawn times) secret so that nobody knew when to even expect them to repop.

Hell, in PoP they would pop and fail encounters all the time just to prevent others' progression.

I guess if it's not an issue yet, then there may not be a need to "fix" it. I'm just the type that's in favour of giving everyone a chance, even if they're not the #1 or #2 guild.

[astarothel]

Everything would die in 3 hours, then there wont be anything else to do for raiders.

At least guilds wouldn't have to stick 15 people in a zone 24/7.

I'm not saying this is a great plan, but I am in favour of some move that would cut back on the camping. I think many people are in agreement its getting absurd.

[Nizzarr]

It might sound absurd, but its the less absurd choice besides all the other choice the server staff has.

Current system has a lot less GM interraction( something the staff wished). If everything spawned at once, the GMs would have to monitor everything or shit would hit the fan.

I believe one sane solution to this is to add a monthly or bi-weekly "server raid" day.

Something that is based on a rotation, that every guild gets a dragon or god or mini boss. Spawned by GMs, without interfering with the current set spawn time of said dragon or god.

This is clearly NOT classic, but it would give a chance to smaller guild/less motivated guild to get a shot at stuff.

I agree that the current rules for camping mobs are a little off. I have no solutions to those either. but its the lesser of all evils.

[Akame]

Something that is based on a rotation, that every guild gets a dragon or god or mini boss. Spawned by GMs, without interfering with the current set spawn time of said dragon or god.


I would rather not see this happen, that's a bit too... socialist for my tastes. I'm ok with races and competition and the best man wins, as long as it's done tastefully and respectably.

The patch day does the same thing by allowing them all to basically be up at once, which leaves the top guilds having to pick their first priority and leaving other smaller guilds to go after secondary targets. Though a weekly "patch day" is not the answer either, because no one will be on in between them and it is still a way of spoon feeding raid mobs to those who wish it.

Edit: I guess the end result is First in force wins, if there is a disagreement to who was there first in force, call in a gm and do a coin toss */random* loser leaves the zone (this is in place already right?). Beyond that, patch when needed, and reset the boss's when you patch, whenever that is, to reset any monopoly that a guild might have at the time.

[Vyal]

If your life didn't consist of nothing but spending every moment of the day your eyes are open making sure 15 people stay in a zone for 6 days outa the week to make sure some other guild doesn't come and kill a stupid dragon or god then why do you even care?

Honestly if its that important to you why don't you go play live where the game actually matters and the gods are badass and not the same freaking gods you killed a thousand times since 99........

This server is supposed to be about going back to a time in EQ lots forgot and having fun but once you been there and done that there isn't any fun because of guilds like the guilds that sit there and fist bump each other in a zone sitting in one spot for days on end and talk about how cool they are.

[Akame]

This server is supposed to be about going back to a time in EQ lots forgot and having fun but once you been there and done that there isn't any fun because of guilds like the guilds that sit there and fist bump each other in a zone sitting in one spot for days on end and talk about how cool they are.

These same issues existed back then, there is nothing unusual about raid target competition and disagreement. It's when the guilds get ugly with eachother that it becomes "unfun." The difference is in 1999 most of the players were adults, often in the IT fields, the players now are for the most part teenagers, and some young adults who are quite used to getting their way and weren't taught common courtesy growing up.

Same game, same problems, new generation.

[Aeolwind]

The problem with this, all along, has been a set of douche bags that choose to try to cheat....on a "free" server...of 11 year old content.

Patch day pops were classic. But due to limitations (Mainly the staff being human) we can't do this, even simulated. It's been explained in other threads re: the same topic. While we sit on the "OMG IT MUST BE CLASSIC" fence, it -cannot- be "at all costs". And opening an exploitable hole like patch day pops has the potential to ruin the server.

Being the guy that does most of the work on raid content re-creation (Poorly in many cases I might add) I want it to be close as possible. I recently upped the AC on the raid mobs considerably to help push this end. And I'll continue to make changes like this, but I can't in good conscience open this particular hole.

[Gwence]

I believe simulated patch day repop would be detrimental to the server's health. Raid variance has a side effect of having to play a lot to get raid mobs. If it had simulated patch day.. i'd say server would lose a good chunk of poeple that compete for these mobs.

I remember when there was a rotation, hardly anyone would log on when there wasnt anything to kill. It made the server quite a dull place. Simulated patch day would bring the same issue. Everything would die in 3 hours, then there wont be anything else to do for raiders.

This raid variance makes it that people are tied to this server. They gotta be on there to help their guild and what not. It actually motivate poeple to play here.

aka DA would get no mobs if they actually had to mobilize instead of camp

No one plays right now either, they afk for 3 days with their characters online then wake up when they get a call or txt or alert of some kind.

Patch day spawns were always a BONUS on live they did not remove the normal variance of the spawns on regular cycles, it was a once in a while thing, also spawns on live did not respawn on server crashes or general server maintainence downtime, just on actual patches where .exe was changed. There was also a variance on the actual patch day iirc of approx 12 hours or so, but that might have been implemented during luclin era.

[Vyal]

But this isn't back then--- That was YEARS AGO for dee luv of god I have solo'd half these gods and dragons, I remember making a video years ago about how to glitch into vox and solo it as a mage.....

All I am saying is that if your whole intention is to come to this server and play to return to a cool period in EQ but you end up getting to end game joining a raid guild and doing nothing with your time but waiting on these things to spawn --------- YOUR MISSING THE POINT ------------ & you need to go play Live where this type of thing has been perfected in there are hundreds of badass mobs you can go kill.

Just doesn't make sense thats why I quit this server people are fucking retarded.

[Akame]

The problem with this, all along, has been a set of douche bags that choose to try to cheat....on a "free" server...of 11 year old content.

If it can't work or opens potential exploits, we'll just have to find another way for the raiders to all play together. Maybe send them out drinking and go get manicures together and party all night at the Korean bathhouse like I do with my friends. That will make friends out of anyone I guarantee.

[Akame]

I remember making a video years ago about how to glitch into naggy and solo it as a mage.....

....Just doesn't make sense thats why I quit this server.....

Then can you quit posting too, exploiters don't exactly have much to say in my book.

[Vyal]

You kidding me right?

I was with DA camping Naggy for like 3 days straight, if we wanted to be in that guild and over 46 we had to either be in fear or solb camping one of the two, when naggy finally spawns we rush to the thing stick pets up there top of the steps HIDE behind a wall and let one tank pull it and pets agro it.

Was like winning a fight with a dragon by having it trip over a rock and crack its head on the ground.

I have saw Vox glitched to the point it got stuck in a wall and everyones corpses fell under the world.

[Akame]

You kidding me right?

Nope, just means one more guild off my list when I go guild shopping.

[Tseng]

Why the hell would you still post here if you make a point of pointing out that you've quit the server?

[Gwence]

I was with DA camping Naggy for like 3 days straight, if we wanted to be in that guild and over 46 we had to either be in fear or solb camping one of the two, when naggy finally spawns we rush to the thing stick pets up there top of the steps HIDE behind a wall and let one tank pull it and pets agro it.


lolololololololol

60+ zergathon and this is how they kill nagafen

Thank you Vyal, awesome post!

[jilena]

I like this idea but I think maybe specific patches would have to be chosen to be the recipient of this. This server gets patched pretty frequently (like once a week or more). If this happened maybe 1 out of 4 patches or roughly once a month I think it would be pretty cool. Especially if it was random. I loved when this happened in classic and you would scramble to get to some decent spawn just before the server went down and be the first back on so you can kill it. Not just raid mobs but anything. *shrug*

[ooantipostoo]

Guys here is a conversation regarding the post at hand... It was not in the FAQ so I replied to ask the Dev's the same thing you are..

Here you go : http://project1999.org/forums/showthread.php?t=8150

[girth]

Vyal you need to work on your grammar if you want to call people retarded.

On topic:

Simulated actually would be a great idea if they made it to where crashes don't repop. Even 1-2 a month like jilena said.

aeol - how would it be so bad if crashes didn't repop it? I don't understand how it could be so exploitable...that takes out like 98% of the issues I can foresee - but I am no prophet...

[Vyal]

As long as you got the point lil homie.

The whole system is totally fucked this is the point...... :(

I came here to remember back in the day before it was that way just simple lets go kill this and a I need a group for that (THAT is the only reason I came here) meeting new people, fuck the best time I had here was killing orcs on orc highway...

I played EQ since the day it was open so when I started no one could do planes or camp plane mobs and when they could it was nothing like this. People use every cheap lil thing they can on top of that who hasn't killed everything on the server tons and tons of times?

Greater server = better shit, matter a fact nah I ain't even gonna say it but this server is totally awesome to play for 50 levels then you gotta deal with this thread and dumb ass mother fuckers and stupid guilds and ignorant ass people that could all go fuck themselfs in the ass.

You ever heard of Sony? They invented this game and charge people a small fee for badass servers, once you hit 50 go find out the truth bitches.

/emote Drinks more fucking beeer

[girth]

I'm just hoping they change the 'raid rules' before kunark.

[Phallax]

lolololololololol

60+ zergathon and this is how they kill nagafen

Thank you Vyal, awesome post!

Id wouldnt pay much attention to Vyal, hes just sore he got the boot from DA for being a total asshat.

[Vyal]

I quit DA FYI they are a total asshat and everything they do is pretty fucked up it seems.

I quit DA because of Modus, who is about the worst Enchanter on the entire server. No really the guy is worst then any enchanter ive ever come across in the many years ive played the game. I would take RAREN over modus any day of the week, Raren is a a badass enchanter.... Then you look at Modus who completly sucks.

Why would I be sore even if I did get kicked and not quit? The only reason I was in your idiot ass guild is cause I got asked by a pretty awesome person and I would have left ages ago if it wasnt for that person. Sorry man like I said alot of cool people in DA some are actually pretty good, Jaytee, Khadafi, Spoolie, Durison, Aadill, and I can't forget Bronson, any there are many more but you arn't cool......
The whole lets merge with other guilds and recruit everyone and their mother so we can zerg every spawn on the game is a pretty lame tactic.

[Cyrano]

likes this.

[spoolie]

thanks for the shout out vyal *fist bump* =D

[Neno]

lolololololololol

60+ zergathon and this is how they kill nagafen

Thank you Vyal, awesome post!

A bunch of people want to kill shit so they kill shit.
/shrug

p.s. You twist like a quadriplegic. reroll.

[kariden]

For a server that claims to be true to classic eq in every way it sure isnt.
Fun server that I enjoy but every time someone says "this is classic" I want to slap them in the face or punch a baby.

[ooantipostoo]

For a server that claims to be true to classic eq in every way it sure isnt.
Fun server that I enjoy but every time someone says "this is classic" I want to slap them in the face or punch a baby.


I somewhat agree with this.. What makes them different from sony's operations? Still don't give what the people want!

Keep in mind though that the Dev's work endless hours for us and can't do everything. They try there best and do a very very good job!

Thanks Team : )

[eqholmes]

Vyal clearly you are mad that your not wanted anymore, which is to be understandable. You saying that modus is a shitty enchanter is a lie, you may hate him or whatever so you say he sucks in reality he is a pretty dam good enchanter, I've known and played with him and the guild much longer than yourself. This is like hating the hot chick because she doesn’t find you attractive, which Ill assume is the case for you in your real life. As for Gwence he/she, IDK name could go either way, seem to be angry that they have to camp mobs now instead of just having 1 druid sit in pof/poh/soul/perma. Maybe spend less time hating/trolling and more time having fun???

[girth]

For a server that claims to be true to classic eq in every way it sure isnt.
Fun server that I enjoy but every time someone says "this is classic" I want to slap them in the face or punch a baby.

Show me where it says this server claims to be true to classic eq in every way. It says its similar and the closest experience available, which is 101% correct.

[Taxi]

For a server that claims to be true to classic eq in every way it sure isnt.
Fun server that I enjoy but every time someone says "this is classic" I want to slap them in the face or punch a baby.

Step 1 : log out

Step 2 : Check the server name

Step 3 : Notice the name of the server is "Classic PROGRESSION"

Step 4 : Profit

It does say here and there it tries to recreate classic as close as they can but it doesnt "Claim to be true to classic in every way"

[lauremore]

Why not just make a formal rotation? Guild A has this mob this week, Guild B has another mob this week etc...

[nilbog]

Why not just make a formal rotation? Guild A has this mob this week, Guild B has another mob this week etc...

Your answer is somewhere in here. (http://www.google.com/#hl=en&source=hp&q=%2B%22rotation%22+site%3Awww.project1999.org&btnG=Google+Search&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=%2B%22rotation%22+site%3Awww.project1999.org&gs_rfai=&fp=dfdf66882bd03aae)

[girth]

Why not just make a formal rotation? Guild A has this mob this week, Guild B has another mob this week etc...

No competition is not fun for ANYBODY involved.

[anthony210]

No competition is not fun for ANYBODY involved.

In your oppinion. The fun for me is killing the mob not the camping 24/7 to get the chance to kill it.

[girth]

No Jinsho, that isn't fun, but that also isn't normal EQ raiding. The system here for raiding at the moment sounds so fucking stupid its unbelieveable. That said, I still cannot wait to get tossed into the mix.

The 24/7 camping shit to get a mob needs to go, I don't know who's idea it was but its a retarded one. The most fun I ever had in EQ was racing to zones for a boss kill, even if you lose its a thrill like no other MMO has that I have tried.

/gu DROP EVERYTHING GET TO KAEL NOW! TORMAX UP!

ahh memories - and tbh - the way it still should be on here.

[Bumamgar]

It will be that way once there's more shit for people to do.

The reason it's campland right now is because there are only a few raid targets, and no non-raid content for level 50s to work on.

One thing Kunark and Velious really brought to the table were quests that required a massive amount of effort to complete with rewards that made them worth doing. Epics, 10th ring, Blessed Coldain Shawl, factioning with dragons/giants, etc... All of that content combines to help keep max-level characters busy and less likely to just sit on their asses for days at a time camping raid targets. Sure, some of that might still happen, but it's a lot less likely, especially when you end up giving up a lot of content to do it (keep a 40 man raid in KT for days to camp AoW? Your guild is going to miss out on NToV that week).

Sadly, we don't have that much content live right now, so the raiding guilds have nothing better to do with their time than camp the few targets that do exist.

[Zordana]

The 24/7 camping shit to get a mob needs to go, I don't know who's idea it was but its a retarded one. The most fun I ever had in EQ was racing to zones for a boss kill, even if you lose its a thrill like no other MMO has that I have tried.


this was basically the idea... if you are the first raidforce, you may have the first shot on boss mobs.. people couldnt imagine that certain people are willing to permacamp bossmobs for DAYS even... pretty rediciolous imho.. i hope the guild councils will find a solution for this..

[guineapig]

Figured this would be a better place to post this.

I was thinking of a simple script like this:

You have 6 mobs on a random spawn currently.
(Inny, CT, Vox, Naggy, Dracho, Maestro)

1.) When either of those boss mobs repop the script checks to see if any other bosses are up.

2.) If no other boss mobs are up then the script does a random roll(maybe a 1 in 6 to a 1 in 10 chance).
If the roll succeeds then all the other boss mobs pop as well and at the same time.

3.) Once the script is triggered (AKA all bosses up at once) there is a 3-5 day cooldown before the script can be triggered again.

/end script

And now you have 6 raid bosses spawning at once instead of just one!!!

There would be no need to manually do anything. You would just be adding the same script to the six mobs that are already scripted to pop at random times.

End result is, once in a while all bosses spawn at once. No way to exploit it, no server crash. And no telling when it will happen. Seems like a fairly simple script to implement.

[mastagee]

I fail to see how simulated patches would cause exploitation. At least not anything that isn't done already. Simulated patches don't require any coding to be changed.

[Excision Rottun]

I fail to see how simulated patches would cause exploitation. At least not anything that isn't done already. Simulated patches don't require any coding to be changed.

Crash raid zone of your choice....patch simulated....boss pops.

Work into hair vigorously.

Repeat as necessary.

[girth]

I don't either since the way it was explained was that it would not pop on a zone crash. What else could be exploited? Sounds lazy to me, but they have the right to be so w/e.

[Uaellaen]

The Dev's sayd no chance they would do it, so why dont you give it up already? They have theyr reasons and dont need to explain every step they make to you ...

[Icecometus]

OK, hear me out.

What we could do is have the Devs randomize a day and time for 3 simulated server restarts per month. When the time comes for the "patch" they take down the server for 30 min or so and then restart it and repop the raid targets by hand instead of hard coding the repop.

The day and time would be posted like it was on live.

[mastagee]

Yea but they also say they want this server to be like classic. Only reason we've seen is that they said they don't want people to exploit, but there's no way for anyone to exploit patchday respawns(unless you know/are a gm) so i don't see what there is to worry about.

[mastagee]

bump

[bullet]

How about we do it like this.

The patch respawns ONLY occurs during european primetime.

Now thats a much better idea, because it suits me better and you don't get any nameds on any patch respawns ever.

MUHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

p.s.

your solutions is stupid.

[President]

It's about time this was brought up again.

Remove the variance, simulate patch days. Make this classic, please.

[Teensy Weensy]

I agree we only have half the boss mobs that we should. Maybe someone could figure out the percentage increase patches on live increased boss mobs and just increase the timers by that percentage?

[Nedala]

This thread is pretty old just fyi.

[guineapig]

This thread is pretty old just fyi.

We know, still relevant though.

[Lazortag]

I agree we only have half the boss mobs that we should. Maybe someone could figure out the percentage increase patches on live increased boss mobs and just increase the timers by that percentage?

You have the right idea, but I don't think that would be a great way to execute it. I agree that we should figure out how many average patches per month Live had compared to p99's average patches per month, but I think if we find, say, that they have half as many patches per month, that shouldn't mean that we decrease spawn timers - it should mean that every two patches, raid mobs respawn and their timers reset. I think the best and most classic solution should at least *feel* classic, and rushing to a raid mob after the server's just started up feels more classic than simply having Naggy respawn every 6.7 days instead of every 7.

[Nealio]

Having 15 guild members camping raid boss spawn points 24/7 is definitely not classic. The only time someone popped into Fear was to check on CT, not to slip in with 14 others and sit for hours. We knew spawn timers on the dragons and other non planar bosses and checked in on them as the timers wound down. We then raced in as fast as we could against other guilds. Sometimes smaller casual guilds beat us to the target. We stood in the next room waiting/hoping for that guild to fail so we could have our shot if we didn't organize fast enough. That was classic.

Using 10-15 Observer Staves to crash Permafrost was classic but the x hours + y to z random number of hours respawn timer made that a ridiculous option.

P99 is not classic or even "similar" to classic in these aspects. There are so many situations where raid targets are handled in a manner on this server that are nothing near to classic. What I think is interesting is the majority of those who argue to keep the status quo are members of specific guilds that are benefiting from said status quo.

Those that argue against it seem to not understand that things are the way they are because it is as it was designed by those that coded it that way. It is what it is. It is their server, and since its inception have you ever observed an instance where ridiculing their decision or insulting them personally has ever successfully encouraged a change?

Make your suggestion, hope the "dev's" listen to your suggestion, and move on. Arguing the merits of your suggestion with those who have the most to lose from your suggestion is ridiculous at best and most often will only lead to flaming and immature name calling.

Unfortunately that is more often than not the fruit of endeavors such as P99; people taking advantage of it, others assuming/expecting, people feeling entitled, and ultimately lots of bickering and fighting. I've never understood how people can allow an mmo to bring out the worst in them.

My two cents for what it's worth, same as yours and everyone elses, two cents...

[Rogean]

I didn't read pretty much any of this thread, but I will say:

To simulate a patch day respawn, you actually need to have.. a patch day.

We don't have patch days.

[Nealio]

I didn't read pretty much any of this thread, but I will say:

To simulate a patch day respawn, you actually need to have.. a patch day.

We don't have patch days.

Which was someone's point earlier, as that does not simulate classic EQ. But seeing how this post isn't going to be read by you by your own admission... why did I even post it? :D

[Mcbard]

For what it's worth in this very old thread: I loved racing to mobs after patch day! Racing to mobs was so fun back in the day, and sure beats the current "poopsocking" situation where sitting or logging out at mob spawns for half a day at a time is expected.

[guineapig]

The point was to guarantee that no guild could monopolize all raid content.

The method would be that each raid boss, when spawned would have a chance to spawn all other raid bosses. The % chance of this happening can be open to debate.

This would ensure that raid guilds still had to use trackers (instead of simply camping a target 1-2 days before you know it's due with 15+ people).

It would also ensure that on these "special days" a raid guild would have to decide which 1 or 2 targets they are going to go for, leaving the other targets up for grabs for the other guilds on the server.

End result: More fun for everybody.

No actual patch of any kind is necessary to relive the classic experience and the simultaneous pop of all raid bosses once every 12 days or so (arbitrary number) would not be tied in any way to the server being brought down. ( On a side note, back in classic, patch days happened at least once a week.)

[President]

Ginea had a good idea that each boss spawn could have a chance to spawn others, but I still think simulated (thats the key word there... Rogean) patch days, while removing variance would be necessary.

Back on live, a patch happened, everyone got on and raced to the other bosses. If no patches happened during the next week, then all the week long spawns happened within the same time period, making it near impossible for a 15 man poopsock to take out all bosses.

-->simulated<-- key word there. It's been brought up before a script could do it.

[Lazortag]

I didn't read pretty much any of this thread, but I will say:

To simulate a patch day respawn, you actually need to have.. a patch day.

We don't have patch days.

I'm not sure if this is supposed to be facetious or something, because I know you said earlier in another thread that it was possible to respawn raid bosses and reset their spawn timers upon putting the server up. The real concern, I believe, was that we patch more often than live (in addition to the fact that there would be ways to abuse the new system, but they seem easy to solve for).

I'm pretty sure that the whole point of this thread is to deal with the disparity between the number of patches we have on p99 compared to Live. We don't necessarily have to have it so every patch causes raid bosses to repop, but we could "simulate" the way it was done on Live in various ways. One that I suggested is to have a proportional number of patches cause raid mobs to respawn, ie, supposing Live had 1/4 as many patches as we did during the Classic-velious era, then we could have patch day repops every four patches. This would be the most classic solution by far, and would still require guilds to keep up to date on p99's recent patch history to deduce when the next patch is going to be a "repop patch".

The only concern then would be, what happens to the variance? Well as president has implied already, this is actually a perfect substitution for the variance. It's also meritocratic in the way that the variance is supposed to be (except it doesn't benefit cheaters/exploiters in any way), because patch days are unpredictable, and so it becomes a race to whatever raid mobs have repopped, and no guild can possibly poopsock all of them at once. It's ridiculously rare on p99 to have all raid mobs be up at the same time with the variance, but with simulated patch day repops, it would be guaranteed to happen fairly often. As for the rest of the mobs on a static timer, well, guilds can sort that shit out themselves, they can negotiate a rotation, they can roll over it, or they can even poopsock it if they're that desperate. But at least poopsocking ceases to be a guaranteed method of getting every raid mob under the new system being proposed, and that's a good enough reason to support it.

TLDR: Basically, both systems allow for some kind of meritocracy, but one benefits cheaters and isn't classic, while the other is classic and does not benefit cheaters.

[Daldolma]

IMO, any solution that eliminates the practicality of a raid-force waiting on a mob to pop works for me. Don't care if it means a gigantic variance for every raid mob, a simulated patch day, PvP raid zones, or whatever other idea anyone comes up with.

What kills the end-game is the fact that certain guilds amass to park 100 people on top of a raid mob's spawn point before it even pops. Any solution that would make it impossible to predict the pop time is what I'd want. Variance can work, if it's big enough. If you've got Vox, Naggy, CT, and Dojo all with open windows, the practicality of poop-socking is eliminated. Guilds can either compromise or race. That's the way it should be.

[Akame]

Variance can work, if it's big enough. If you've got Vox, Naggy, CT, and Dojo all with open windows, the practicality of poop-socking is eliminated. Guilds can either compromise or race. That's the way it should be.

The practicality of it may be eliminated, but with nothing better to do at level 50 they will still do it. I would actually be in favor of smaller variance and shorter spawn times to make up for the lack of patch day re-spawns. If it's 1 spawn on patch day and then 1 five day reset, with another patch day two days later to restart the cycle... That's 2 boss spawns in a 7 day period.

On P99 that could look like bosses on timers of 3.5 days with a 6 hour +/- variance to give some benefit chances to the euros, that fixes the number of bosses in a 7 day cycle though it still wouldn't give you the server wide bum rush to the bosses, but nothing comes to mind to make such a feat easy on this server.

[guineapig]

IMO, any solution that eliminates the practicality of a raid-force waiting on a mob to pop works for me. Don't care if it means a gigantic variance for every raid mob, a simulated patch day, PvP raid zones, or whatever other idea anyone comes up with.

What kills the end-game is the fact that certain guilds amass to park 100 people on top of a raid mob's spawn point before it even pops. Any solution that would make it impossible to predict the pop time is what I'd want. Variance can work, if it's big enough. If you've got Vox, Naggy, CT, and Dojo all with open windows, the practicality of poop-socking is eliminated. Guilds can either compromise or race. That's the way it should be.


We already have variance, it's just hasn't been much of a deterrent. Unless you have code implemented to cause multiple raid targets to spawn at the same time the odds of it happening by chance (from variance code) is practically nill.

In other words, giant guilds and/or zerg forces that tend have 50+ people online at all hours of the day will always have a chance to lock everyone else out of certain content permanently.

And I will say it one last time: This is what all guilds had to deal with on live. Nobody was able to have a monopoly because they had to pick and choose targets on patch days.

[President]

If the GM's would write a script, or allow someone else to write a script to simulate patch days the rest could almost all be handled by leaders/officers of raiding guilds.

As it stands now the raiding scene isn't even remotely close to classic. And this is going to get even more apparent when people are attempting to get VP keys off a 7-9 day trak spawn since I rarely notice variance occurring early.

[Mardur]

Put the variance on the simulated patch. Every 20-30 days or so a patch simulation happens, and a serverwide message goes out (since back in classic you'd obviously know when there was a patch). The simulated patch days could be long like that, since stuff would generally be all spawning again at the same time anyways if variance was removed.

This discourages poopsocking, encourages quick mobilization, and encourages raid mobs being split across multiple raid guilds.

Sounds like the best solution to me.

[Hasbinbad]

I didn't read pretty much any of this thread, but I will say:

To simulate a patch day respawn, you actually need to have.. a patch day.

We don't have patch days.
No silly, you don't. What you are suggesting would be "patch day respawns." What has been suggested is "simulated patch day respawns."

The difference between the two concepts is simulation, which is why they used that word.

[Icecometus]

I didn't read pretty much any of this thread, but I will say:

To simulate a patch day respawn, you actually need to have.. a patch day.

We don't have patch days.

That is why they must be simulated. How long was the average time the servers would be down for a patch? 3 or 4 hours?

[President]

That is why they must be simulated. How long was the average time the servers would be down for a patch? 3 or 4 hours?

If I remember right, patches would start at something like 8am EST, and we would get an estimate of how long it would take. Again, if I remember right, that estimate was hardly ever accurate and and could end an hour or two early or late.

I doubt any guild would be opposed to simulated patch day repops, or be opposed to them happening at different times(randomly) so that the EU players we have don't get totally screwed.

[fastboy21]

patch day kills were usually the only way under-dog guilds could get some kills...especially on bottle-neck/key mobs.

since everything is up on patchday, the top guild can't watch everything...giving the under-dogs an opening.

imo, this system was a tremendous part of what classic EQ was...given the mission of the server to recreate classic experience as much as possible I think this is a good idea.

it's also an idea that has been brought up before, and I believe GMs have said that they can't do it without manually popping the mobs as they are afraid that folks would intentionally crash zones forcing a reset to spawn mobs.

[Bushwick]

Simulated patch days would give smaller guilds a shot at raid content on a regular basis, and force even the larger guilds to race in a more traditional manner for content. This sounds great.

The developers clearly work hard on this server and do a fantastic job. If they ever get around to implementing something like this, I'm sure it would be a tremendous boon.

[Dumesh Uhl'Belk]

Whether we ever get simulated patch day respawns or not, it would sure help things out if variance were kicked to the curb. In conjunction with that, any mob whose spawn timer is a multiple of 24 hours should have 6 hours added to its spawn time to make sure that it will gradually appear in all time zones.

That would take many hours of poopsock off the server.

Of course, removing variance AND adding simulated patch day respawns work have the most impact. Together, they would mean that all the 7 day mobs would likely be killed by different guilds (since you can't be in two places at once) and then 7 days and 6 hours later... multiple guilds would still have a shot, because all the mobs would be respawning at the same time.... rinse repeat every 7.25 days.

[Rogean]

No silly, you don't. What you are suggesting would be "patch day respawns." What has been suggested is "simulated patch day respawns."

The difference between the two concepts is simulation, which is why they used that word.

Then it's not a simulated patch day... It would become a ... well not even simulated.. it would basically be every mob in the game randomly respawning at the exact same time. In order to simulate it like a patch day, it would have to be announced ahead of time. Typically it was estimated when the servers would come up from a patch in classic (usually after a 6 to 8 hour downtime), so it would be sometime in the afternoon... We would have to set a window and let everyone know what it is.

"All mobs will be respawning between 2 and 5 PM EST"...

Seems like kind of a cheat.

Then you don't actually have the downtime.. so people are on the server already, have been killing mobs.. waiting for the random respawn.. hell I bet you raiding guilds would already select out the first target they want and be poopsocking the hell out of it. And in the case of Dark Ascension with their bajillion strong raid force, they would most likely have split their raid force and be poop socking multiple raid mobs.

It wouldn't work out as well as you guys think it would.

Oh and don't even recomend taking the server down to accomplish this.. Raiding guilds are still the minority compared to the rest of the server and we aren't going to inconvenience the masses to appease you.

And I'd also like to mention, when the server is patched.. it happens typically overnight, and is down for 10-30 minutes, and is always unannounced ahead of time.

[fastboy21]

Then it's not a simulated patch day... It would become a ... well not even simulated.. it would basically be every mob in the game randomly respawning at the exact same time. In order to simulate it like a patch day, it would have to be announced ahead of time. Typically it was estimated when the servers would come up from a patch in classic (usually after a 6 to 8 hour downtime), so it would be sometime in the afternoon... We would have to set a window and let everyone know what it is.

"All mobs will be respawning between 2 and 5 PM EST"...

Seems like kind of a cheat.

Then you don't actually have the downtime.. so people are on the server already, have been killing mobs.. waiting for the random respawn.. hell I bet you raiding guilds would already select out the first target they want and be poopsocking the hell out of it. And in the case of Dark Ascension with their bajillion strong raid force, they would most likely have split their raid force and be poop socking multiple raid mobs.

It wouldn't work out as well as you guys think it would.

Oh and don't even recomend taking the server down to accomplish this.. Raiding guilds are still the minority compared to the rest of the server and we aren't going to inconvenience the masses to appease you.

And I'd also like to mention, when the server is patched.. it happens typically overnight, and is down for 10-30 minutes, and is always unannounced ahead of time.

So....are you saying you don't like the idea? :p

/duck

[RocketMoose]

I don't like that there are windows on classic mobs anyway, there simply weren't windows in classic. Kinda sucks =(

I know I know poopsocking would be insane, but given the amount of guilds around, at least the initial respawns after a big patch or downtime, would spread out the content. It's not like IB or DA or Divinity could get Draco/CT and mobilize for Maestro/Inny or Naggy or Vox. *shrug* There's just far more people who know the content now than there ever was on live.

Gotta be a tough balance. But a year into live servers, there were way more CoFs and Crys spears out there. Prolly due to more server downtime and those repops happening. They feel very sparce on this server.

[Extunarian]

During 'simulated patch day respawn' day, pvp is enabled in all raid zones, your char is locked out for a day upon death in those zones, and /petition and /report are disabled for anyone tagged to a raid guild.

I want permanent DA, Invis and a front row seat though.

[Lazortag]

Then it's not a simulated patch day... It would become a ... well not even simulated.. it would basically be every mob in the game randomly respawning at the exact same time. In order to simulate it like a patch day, it would have to be announced ahead of time. Typically it was estimated when the servers would come up from a patch in classic (usually after a 6 to 8 hour downtime), so it would be sometime in the afternoon... We would have to set a window and let everyone know what it is.

"All mobs will be respawning between 2 and 5 PM EST"...

Seems like kind of a cheat.

Then you don't actually have the downtime.. so people are on the server already, have been killing mobs.. waiting for the random respawn.. hell I bet you raiding guilds would already select out the first target they want and be poopsocking the hell out of it. And in the case of Dark Ascension with their bajillion strong raid force, they would most likely have split their raid force and be poop socking multiple raid mobs.

It wouldn't work out as well as you guys think it would.

Oh and don't even recomend taking the server down to accomplish this.. Raiding guilds are still the minority compared to the rest of the server and we aren't going to inconvenience the masses to appease you.

And I'd also like to mention, when the server is patched.. it happens typically overnight, and is down for 10-30 minutes, and is always unannounced ahead of time.

Patches are equally as unpredictable here as on Live. As someone said before, even if they gave you an estimate that the server was going to be down for eight hours, it was rarely a reliable one. Sure, they told you longer in advance, but that doesn't change whether you have a real life commitment in the next eight hour window or not. I also don't think that patches being less predictable is that much of a bad thing.

I see the problem with simulating it while people are still able to access the server. That's fair. But if you do what I suggested (just respawning raid mobs every X number of patch days, where X is how many times more patch days we have compared to Live during the classic time period), then you don't have that problem. It wouldn't take long for someone to research what "X" is. Hell, I'll even do it if you want, it surely wouldn't take that much work.

Also, the fact that *most* patches happen at night, seems like an easy problem to solve, since that's largely a choice on your part (except in the case of emergency patches, which probably shouldn't count towards "X" mentioned earlier), and I'm pretty sure some arrangement could be made where you guys mix it up a little. Granted, it would make you the target of even more silly conspiracy theories as people try and allege that you're purposely restarting the server while some guilds have the least members on, so I can see why that wouldn't be fun. I still think we don't necessarily have to always patch during the time where the least players are on, and I don't think this is such a ludicrous idea that it shouldn't be considered further.

[Akame]

I still think we don't necessarily have to always patch during the time where the least players are on, and I don't think this is such a ludicrous idea that it shouldn't be considered further.

The idea behind bringing down the server when the least number of people are playing are to inconvenience the least amount of people. If Rogean says that the raiding guilds are a minority, then patching the server during prime to be a convenience to a minority of raiders, goes against that plan and something he appears to be loathe to do, which makes sense to me.

[guineapig]

I don't really see how repoping all the raid mobs at once without warning is a big deal.

No exp groups ever hang out in Vox or Naggy's lair and you typically have some sort of raid force when you go to Hate or Fear anyway. Basically you are only repopping 2 Dragons, 2 minibosses and 2 bosses. This can be triggered by any one of them spawning, thereby keeping this event truly random.

Technically the spawn variance means that these mobs respawn with zero notice anyway, so what's the difference? The only one I can think of is that they would pop without the poopsockers being prepared for it.

Am I missing something as to why we would have to notify everyone online?

[Shiftin]

I'm pretty sure "minority" is used loosely by rogean. Technically 49% of the server is a minority, but let's not pretend the players in these raiding guilds don't make up a material chunk of the long time and high playtime playerbase of the server.

The crazy CT race last month had over 1/3 of the server's population at the time in fear when CT was pulled, and that was after the 2 guilds who were clearing fear when CT popped had recovered their corpses and left the zone.

The underlying issue is twofold: The current system for repops is not classic, and that in turn is allowing dragon/god loot to enter the world at a much slower pace than it did classically.

[Dr4z3r]

No exp groups ever hang out in Vox or Naggy's lair and you typically have some sort of raid force when you go to Hate or Fear anyway. Basically you are only repopping 2 Dragons, 2 minibosses and 2 bosses.

Doesn't CT/Inny popping spawn the whole zone? Or am I just confused?

[Hobby]

Only CT spawns the entire zone

[guineapig]

Doesn't CT/Inny popping spawn the whole zone? Or am I just confused?

Yeah, it's only CT but the point is currently nobody is supposed to know when this is going to happen anyway. We have a "window" of time, that's it.

I think it would shake up the raid scene in a positive way. Bring a little bit of "skill" back to the "race". These are all things that people claim to want.

[Hobby]

I am a fan of completely random pops..7 day varience. Mob pops, as soon as it dies the window opens again and closes 7 days later unless it pops before then.


But, unfortunately, that might cause too many God's spawning...Potentially having a God/Dragon every single day, multiple times a day.

[Teensy Weensy]

I didn't read pretty much any of this thread, but I will say:

To simulate a patch day respawn, you actually need to have.. a patch day.

We don't have patch days.

Hence why I recomended a percentage. There have to be some original patch notes so it is possible to tell how many patches happened or at least close. I'm no programmer so I could just be talkign tard here, but couldn't we just see what percentage more pops were on live than on here and just increase the major boss timers by said percentage? Say over a year CT would spawn X amount of times on live. And at max under perfect circumstances on P99 he will spawn 52 times. So on live under perfect circumstances you would have 52 chances + X amount of patch days. Yes I realize it is all ballpark figures, but we aren't trying to reinvent the wheel. Just trying to get as many opportunities as you would have on live. Once again, I am not a programmer, but I did stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night. Well that's nto true either. But I still think my theory is sound. And for the love of Jeebus don't ever tell anyone what the timers are. Let's actually race to mobs instead of getting out the poopsock.

[Nealio]

Raiding guilds are still the minority compared to the rest of the server and we aren't going to inconvenience the masses to appease you.



All I see here is a lot of double speak from Rogean on the issue. Please do not misunderstand, I am grateful for the hard work and effort put into the project, but this is a glaring issue wiht an apparent large number of players.

Raiders who might be inconvenienced by a change in the status quo by your own admission are a minority, and you want more players. Yet you turn around and say you are not going to alter anything to inconvenience the masses? The masses are inconvenienced by this supposed minority.

Instead of just popping in at random and defeating everyones suggestions flatly, is there a current roundtable discussion amongst the "dev's" to resolve this issue?

[Trystych]

"patch day spawns" weren't always for announced patches, if your particular server took a shit and came back up, blammo loot bonanza. It doesn't have to be an announced or regular thing, nor would it require the server to be down for x hours or even minutes to accomplish. The randomness of it at times was part of the beauty, the known tuesday the whatever is a patch was also time for high alert.

To prevent abuse, it could be a completely manual script, so that intentionally crashing the server would not spawn anything. Being a script, it could also be limited to raid targets in particular, so xp groups would work as it is now (not classic, but a hell of a lot easier on the guides). Server goes down and right back up, quick break out the trackers and see if targets are up! While those at xp camps still have their broken camps but have to resummon pets and reform groups.

I'm not suggesting that it something like this would have to follow a WoWesque set schedule of every tuesday being a patch, but for an actual server update or Rogean bored / drunk and looking for lulz...do it up.

I'm not privy to the number of petitions during the database crash several weeks ago for guild vs guild drama and if it was higher than average, but both the guilds and GMs on this server do an awful lot of bitching and moaning about competition. It's said that the CS staff does not want to deal with these types of disputes, yet guilds are expected to submit petitions, screenshots, and videos for the staff to deal with. IMO they like the drama, or they just wouldn't deal with it and leave players to make their own agreements. On live GMs didn't watch guilds raid for shits and giggles, they were busy answering petitions of the non-raiding majority, if some guild got trained or KS'd there were no hard logs to prove it, it was frontier justice where the ramifications for that was the golden rule coming back to bite you in the ass.

There have been several different rulesets here to alleviate drama, and an option like patch simulation has not yet been explored. Multiple targets at a time would keep guilds out of each others paths until targets dwindled. And flash forward to a spawn variance later with every window being open, how are you effectively going to poopsock it all short of getting lucky?

Last time it happened during the database crash, only 2 guilds walked away with the kills but it could have been different if the less dominant guilds were in better practice and didn't train each other. Nobody even attempted to get a dracoliche kill until all other targets save sky were exhausted.

The potential for 5 nagafens in a week was an unlikely possibility on live. Given how long classic has been around here, clearly getting more of this loot into the system isn't necessary, but zomg everything is up move quick and kill as much as you can is fucking fun for everyone who wants it to be.

At present IB and DA are quite capable of splitting the kills every week, and will continue to do so. The best shot other guilds on the server have would be something like this, which is why you see these people posting here wanting it so bad. It certainly wouldn't benefit me, but I post about it anyway because it is part of the classic experience, and I'm all for that.

**Speaking of classic, even though the xp is terrible in skyfire and I wouldn't likely do it, shameless plug to fix chromodracs; 200 yard dispel range is not supposed to be implemented until oct 16 2002. Read and take note of about face on aforementioned date: http://www.graffe.com/forums/showthread.php?5736-Quadding-in-SF&p=120495&viewfull=1#post120495 many more links supporting this are available.

[Dumesh Uhl'Belk]

Then it's not a simulated patch day... It would become a ... well not even simulated.. it would basically be every mob in the game randomly respawning at the exact same time... and is always unannounced ahead of time.

Ok, thank you for the full response. I now see that you and I had very different concepts in mind when reading the phrase "simulated patch day respawns." So, let me discard that nomenclature and just tell you what I was thinking about.

Here is my ideal situation.

I am thinking about a script that can run in the background. It should have maybe a 3% chance of triggering each day at noon eastern, but not unless it has been at least 8 days since it last triggered. When the script triggers, it should do the following:

1. changes the server MOTD to some text similar to "Fake Patch Day Tomorrow - Not really a patch, we're just respawning the raid mobs, haha"

2. the following morning at 8am eastern, it will broadcast "Fake Patch starting, estimated raid mob repop is XXX" where XXX is a value between 2 hours and 12 hours and change the Server MOTD to "Fake Patch is underway, estimated raid mob respawn is YYY" where YYY is 8am eastern + XXX.

3. the script will decide when to do the respawn and that actual time will be XXX +/- 2 hours. 15 min before the script is going to respawn the raid mobs, it should broadcast a message in all planar zones and other zones that will have mobs respawned (sol b, permafrost, kedge, west freeport), that "Zone will be repopped by the Fake Patch in 15 minutes". Then, at the time dictated by the script, the planes will be fully respawned (including the 7 day spawn of the Noble Dojorn). Vox + ice giants, Nagafen + fire giants, Phinigel + swirlspine guardians, and Sir Lucan will respawn and thus reset their spawn timers, and a server broadcast will go out saying something like "Fake patch complete, enjoy your raid mobs."

Also, unrelated to the script, all those raid mobs whose spawn timers are a multiple of 24 hours will have variance removed and instead have a flat 6 hours added to their spawn time.

With a full repop it would be pretty dangerous in most places to keep your raid force in the plane through the respawn event, although the non-kos islands in sky would be an exception.

This proposal will result in about a 10% chance of having 2 or more patches in a month, never closer to each other than 7 days, ~ 60% chance of 1 or more patches a month, and an 84% chance to have at least 1 patch per 60 days.

Obviously, the specifics for the chance this can happen could be altered to the developers' taste or to try to match classic patches as closely as possible if someone wants to do more research on exactly how often they happened.

My SQL-fu is perhaps not up to the task, at least not without some reading and research which I admit, I do not have the time to do currently. Perhaps someone else in the community would volunteer to help the developers code this?

In closing, I believe this proposal will have no impact on the casual playerbase (besides a few lines of text in their chat window ever couple of weeks). This proposal will also mimic the classic patch day spawn races. It will allow for the simultaneous spawning of enough targets to make it much more difficult for a single guild to monopolize. It will reduce camping by making the next spawn time a known time for people and groups that do their scouting. It will also rotate the spawn times through the time zones so that they do not favor one group of players over another based on geography.

[President]

Pretty much any way you simulate patch day repops would be more classic than it is now. I would honestly prefer you remove variance, and do a simulated patch day 0-3 times per week, either in the morning, afternoon, or middle of the night, without notice(since, as you put it, having a patch without the server coming down is not quite fair). Even that, right there, is more accurate to classic than what we have now.

I can't imagine DA and IB would agree with this as well, as they are only set to gain from this, and get more sleep.

[Scratch&Sniff]

"All mobs will be respawning between 2 and 5 PM EST"...

Seems like kind of a cheat.

Then you don't actually have the downtime.. so people are on the server already, have been killing mobs.. waiting for the random respawn.. hell I bet you raiding guilds would already select out the first target they want and be poopsocking the hell out of it. And in the case of Dark Ascension with their bajillion strong raid force, they would most likely have split their raid force and be poop socking multiple raid mobs.

It wouldn't work out as well as you guys think it would.


this is why rogean = smart people

[chtulu]

Pretty much any way you simulate patch day repops would be more classic than it is now. I would honestly prefer you remove variance, and do a simulated patch day 0-3 times per week, either in the morning, afternoon, or middle of the night, without notice(since, as you put it, having a patch without the server coming down is not quite fair). Even that, right there, is more accurate to classic than what we have now.

I can't imagine DA and IB would agree with this as well, as they are only set to gain from this, and get more sleep.

What's the point? Unless we make a community-wide accepted rotation on raid encounters, there will always be DA/IB there to poop sock and zerg it, despite whether the Mobs are refreshed by a "patch day" or not. It does not give anyone else other than zerg guilds more chance at loot, so why bother?

[guineapig]

What's the point? Unless we make a community-wide accepted rotation on raid encounters, there will always be DA/IB there to poop sock and zerg it, despite whether the Mobs are refreshed by a "patch day" or not. It does not give anyone else other than zerg guilds more chance at loot, so why bother?

I think you missed tha part about no guild being able to take out 6+ targets at once. The point is letting other people on the server try and relive their past EQ experiences. The point is all the bosses are never up at the same time with the way the server is currently implemented.

You missed the point.

[President]

What's the point? Unless we make a community-wide accepted rotation on raid encounters, there will always be DA/IB there to poop sock and zerg it, despite whether the Mobs are refreshed by a "patch day" or not. It does not give anyone else other than zerg guilds more chance at loot, so why bother?

We've cleared up that you are stupid in just about every thread you have posted in. Please, move along.

[Massive Marc]

simulated patch days with variance is the way to go. trust me.

[Bushwick]

1. changes the server MOTD to some text similar to "Fake Patch Day Tomorrow - Not really a patch, we're just respawning the raid mobs, haha"


Anything more than a fifteen minute warning guarantees that IB and DA will dominate the competition. Dragons die quickly, planar raid targets are untouchable for fifteen minutes to 2 hours. Give either guild time to prep for the dragon kill and they will be through with it in time to (out-)compete with the other guilds rushing through Hate and Fear.

Random, unannounced server-wide respawns of raid content still sound really great to me.

[Dumesh Uhl'Belk]

Anything more than a fifteen minute warning guarantees that IB and DA will dominate the competition. Dragons die quickly, planar raid targets are untouchable for fifteen minutes to 2 hours. Give either guild time to prep for the dragon kill and they will be through with it in time to (out-)compete with the other guilds rushing through Hate and Fear.

Random, unannounced server-wide respawns of raid content still sound really great to me.

Practice clearing trash mobs faster. Make an alliance with another guild to steamroll through the trash faster. If IB or DA or anyone else can clear ice giants, kill vox, res up, assign the loot, teleport to hate, and still beat you to Innoruuk, then I say you don't deserve Inny's loot. Also, while IB was doing Vox... someone ELSE got Nagafen.

There are still some weeks right now when one guild gets all, or all but one of the raid bosses. That wouldn't happen with the system I proposed unless all the other guilds let it happen.

All of that said... I wouldn't mind if the script sometimes just left out the announcement part to simulate emergency patches. However, the notice helps casuals WAY more than it helps IB/DA. They have trackers. They know when mobs are due anyway. It's the guilds who haven't been gathering intelligence who don't know when to expect the pops.

[President]

I think we should stick with the argument that simulated patch days makes it more classic, promotes racing to targets like in classic, and allows people to sleep instead of poopsock (not classic). Not that it makes it easier for the guilds who don't put in the time to track.


When the database froze up a couple months ago or whatever and all the mobs repopped, DA/IB still got 90% of the targets, but it was a helluva lot more fun than the turdfest we have going on right now.

[Dumesh Uhl'Belk]

Not that it makes it easier for the guilds who don't put in the time to track.Well, that's not really the big selling point for me either, but when someone asserts that it is the other way without backing it up, I have to respond.

[Bushwick]

Practice clearing trash mobs faster. Make an alliance with another guild to steamroll through the trash faster. If IB or DA or anyone else can clear ice giants, kill vox, res up, assign the loot, teleport to hate, and still beat you to Innoruuk, then I say you don't deserve Inny's loot. Also, while IB was doing Vox... someone ELSE got Nagafen.

There are still some weeks right now when one guild gets all, or all but one of the raid bosses. That wouldn't happen with the system I proposed unless all the other guilds let it happen.


I'm a member of DA. The current system suits me fine. Give us (and IB) warning of a full respawn and we won't be racing to mobs, we'll be mobilized in advance, split between targets in order to grab as many as possible. Between the two of us, we'll probably get them all.

Well, that's not really the big selling point for me either, but when someone asserts that it is the other way without backing it up, I have to respond.

If classic racing is what you are interested in achieving, giving guilds an opportunity to mobilize far in advance of respawns is going to defeat your goal. You'll see races in fear for CT, but this is already the status quo.

[Dumesh Uhl'Belk]

I'm a member of DA. The current system suits me fine. Give us (and IB) warning of a full respawn and we won't be racing to mobs, we'll be mobilized in advance, split between targets in order to grab as many as possible. Between the two of us, we'll probably get them all.



If classic racing is what you are interested in achieving, giving guilds an opportunity to mobilize far in advance of respawns is going to defeat your goal. You'll see races in fear for CT, but this is already the status quo.

You act like you will be the only ones with that information. When everyone knows when the spawns are coming, all the interested guilds can at least pick one target and be there ready and buffed. If they all spawn at the same time, DA and IB won't get them all very often. In fact, the reason DA usually wins the CT race is because you guys bring 55-70 to do it so you can pull CT when there are still dozens of mobs up and burn CT down with huge dps before the aggro train of mobs even gets to your raid camp. I'm not saying that is an invalid tactic at all, but you'd have to do it differently if you only brought 30 members so you could send 25 to vox and 20 to naggy. If you try to split your forces to get Naggy, Vox, and CT on server up, you will lose some of those races, or your guild will grow so massive that each individual member will wait months between loot awards and the thing will collapse under its own weight.

[President]

Hey hey now, lets not get into a tussle. You may be happy with camping a mob for 48hrs+, but I've spoken with plenty of DA who would rather see simulated patch days.

[Bushido]

In fact, the reason DA usually wins the CT race is because you guys bring 55-70 to do it so you can pull CT when there are still dozens of mobs up and burn CT down with huge dps before the aggro train of mobs even gets to your raid camp.

Depends who all we have log on before CT engage. Yes, we've had 60 before that I can remember. I also remember doing the same tactic with low 30's and still winning. IMO, CT comes down to who has the balls to engage first with amount of mobs left in zone.

As far as simulated patch days or not, I'm perfectly happy with either. I just enjoy playing EQ before it became what it is on live.

[Bushwick]

Hey hey now, lets not get into a tussle. You may be happy with camping a mob for 48hrs+, but I've spoken with plenty of DA who would rather see simulated patch days.

I'm in favor of simulated patch days. I am just suggesting that giving advance warning of them (the element Rogean took issue with in his post) would work against the goals most of us have in pushing for them.

[Uthgaard]

The biggest problem that I see is with the mentality those of you who want to compete are approaching this with. The current system lends itself to the truest free-for-all competition, for anyone willing to put forth the effort. If you had everything spawning at the same time, you would instead be complaining that {insert desired target} is always chosen by {DA or IB}.

When players compete for a mob with a known window coming up, their perception is that it's not their problem that they couldn't reach a resolution on their own, it's our problem for deciding who was merited the kill.

When players want to lobby for a different system of mob spawning, their perception is that it's not their problem to solve with creativity, cooperation, and cunning problem-solving skills, but that it's our problem to re-arrange the entire system to suit the latest complaint.

Spotting a problem doesn't take any special talent. It's one of the most base aspects of human nature. So is pleading for an advantage, or expecting someone else to solve that problem for you. But what does take special talent, is solving that problem yourself.

And not just saying 'I think this should happen because I don't like what's happening now', but really thinking through the consequences of what would happen if it was changed. Live is a perfect example of listening to short-sighted self-interest.

From a developer standpoint, we can reasonably take ownership of a problem when a player has no ability to solve it themselves. This is not one of those situations. We don't really give a shit who gets the mobs. If you perceive this to be a problem: Brainstorm. Collaborate. Compete. Raid targets are a scarce resource. If you want them badly enough, you will approach it with realistic expectations, find a way to compete for them, and persevere when you fail.

If you expect a higher authority to solve your every problem, and cede all personal responsibility, and externalize all blame, take the time to read this over.

In PDF (http://socserv.mcmaster.ca/econ/ugcm/3ll3/hobbes/Leviathan.pdf)

On Kindle (http://www.amazon.com/Leviathan-ebook/dp/B000JQUA0K/ref=sr_1_4?ie=UTF8&qid=1295497222&sr=8-4)


It's public domain, and both of those links are free. Read it while you're shitting in your socks.

[Lazortag]

The biggest problem that I see is with the mentality those of you who want to compete are approaching this with. The current system lends itself to the truest free-for-all competition, for anyone willing to put forth the effort. If you had everything spawning at the same time, you would instead be complaining that {insert desired target} is always chosen by {DA or IB}.

When players compete for a mob with a known window coming up, their perception is that it's not their problem that they couldn't reach a resolution on their own, it's our problem for deciding who was merited the kill.

When players want to lobby for a different system of mob spawning, their perception is that it's not their problem to solve with creativity, cooperation, and cunning problem-solving skills, but that it's our problem to re-arrange the entire system to suit the latest complaint.

Spotting a problem doesn't take any special talent. It's one of the most base aspects of human nature. So is pleading for an advantage, or expecting someone else to solve that problem for you. But what does take special talent, is solving that problem yourself.

And not just saying 'I think this should happen because I don't like what's happening now', but really thinking through the consequences of what would happen if it was changed. Live is a perfect example of listening to short-sighted self-interest.

From a developer standpoint, we can reasonably take ownership of a problem when a player has no ability to solve it themselves. This is not one of those situations. We don't really give a shit who gets the mobs. If you perceive this to be a problem: Brainstorm. Collaborate. Compete. Raid targets are a scarce resource. If you want them badly enough, you will approach it with realistic expectations, find a way to compete for them, and persevere when you fail.

If you expect a higher authority to solve your every problem, and cede all personal responsibility, and externalize all blame, take the time to read this over.

In PDF (http://socserv.mcmaster.ca/econ/ugcm/3ll3/hobbes/Leviathan.pdf)

On Kindle (http://www.amazon.com/Leviathan-ebook/dp/B000JQUA0K/ref=sr_1_4?ie=UTF8&qid=1295497222&sr=8-4)


It's public domain, and both of those links are free. Read it while you're shitting in your socks.

So even if what you said was true, that both systems are equally shitty because guilds refuse to work with each other, shouldn't the system that's closest to being classic win out, even if only by a small margin?

[Noser]

I really like the idea of having, not so much a simulated patch day, but just 1 day a week, totally random time and day when all the boss mobs spawns. I don't like static times or telling anyone when this may occur because that encourages poopsocking.

If this can be done while keeping the prior raid timers going, not crashing the server, and not making loads of work for the GMs then i think this would be a great idea.

[Noser]

I am a fan of completely random pops..7 day varience. Mob pops, as soon as it dies the window opens again and closes 7 days later unless it pops before then.


But, unfortunately, that might cause too many God's spawning...Potentially having a God/Dragon every single day, multiple times a day.

I like this idea as well. Id rather see more god loot on the server then dealing with the current poopsock situation. If its random though you would think it would tend to average out around 3-4 days per.

[guineapig]

I agree that any form of announcement would defeat the purpose.

I disagree with Bushwick thinking that on an even playing field (advance notice of a boss spawning), that DA or IB would win every single target. When we bothered to compete with other guilds (over aout almost year long history or raiding) we won our share.

[Dumesh Uhl'Belk]

Depends who all we have log on before CT engage. Yes, we've had 60 before that I can remember. I also remember doing the same tactic with low 30's and still winning. IMO, CT comes down to who has the balls to engage first with amount of mobs left in zone. I wasn't suggesting that with low 30s DA would have to clear the entire zone, but that DA would clear MORE of it than they would if DA had 55+ available to burn CT. it's not rocket science, it's simple math. 32,000hp goes to 0 faster if a raid has 25 more people applying damage.

I'm not trying to piss in anyone's cheerios or insult DA, you guys sometimes have a very large hammer (big numbers) at your disposal. Why not use it? I only brought up the point because people talked about how IB and DA would split their forces to cover multiple mobs. Doing so has consequences on the race for each of those mobs. I was just trying to talk reasonably about what those consequences would be when 5 raid targets are spawned at the same time with notice. At this point though, it's fair to say you and I just interpret the consequences differently, and are not likely to persuade each other. So, I'll drop it.

[President]

The biggest problem that I see is with the mentality those of you who want to compete are approaching this with. The current system lends itself to the truest free-for-all competition, for anyone willing to put forth the effort. If you had everything spawning at the same time, you would instead be complaining that {insert desired target} is always chosen by {DA or IB}.

Assumption, likely wrong.

When players compete for a mob with a known window coming up, their perception is that it's not their problem that they couldn't reach a resolution on their own, it's our problem for deciding who was merited the kill.

Don't see how this is relevant with the current poopsocking situation. Whatever guild decides to sit on their ass longer likely gets the kill, unless there is a unfortunately and unlikely wipe.


When players want to lobby for a different system of mob spawning, their perception is that it's not their problem to solve with creativity, cooperation, and cunning problem-solving skills, but that it's our problem to re-arrange the entire system to suit the latest complaint.

You mean when players want the system to be more along the lines of classic on a *gasp* classically recreated server? To bring back the fun of racing to get all the mobs instead of sitting around with 15+ thumbs up our asses?

Spotting a problem doesn't take any special talent. It's one of the most base aspects of human nature. So is pleading for an advantage, or expecting someone else to solve that problem for you. But what does take special talent, is solving that problem yourself.

Nice attempt at condescending the player base.

And not just saying 'I think this should happen because I don't like what's happening now', but really thinking through the consequences of what would happen if it was changed. Live is a perfect example of listening to short-sighted self-interest.

See every response above.


Not responding to the rest because it's pretty much irrelevant to the argument of making the server more like classic.

[Bushido]

I wasn't suggesting that with low 30s DA would have to clear the entire zone, but that DA would clear MORE of it than they would if DA had 55+ available to burn CT. it's not rocket science, it's simple math. 32,000hp goes to 0 faster if a raid has 25 more people applying damage.

I'm not trying to piss in anyone's cheerios or insult DA, you guys sometimes have a very large hammer (big numbers) at your disposal. Why not use it? I only brought up the point because people talked about how IB and DA would split their forces to cover multiple mobs. Doing so has consequences on the race for each of those mobs. I was just trying to talk reasonably about what those consequences would be when 5 raid targets are spawned at the same time with notice. At this point though, it's fair to say you and I just interpret the consequences differently, and are not likely to persuade each other. So, I'll drop it.

Fair points, I didn't bother reading the entire thread either, so that was my bad. But there's some truth to splitting targets and still getting all or almost all reasonably. Split force to Vox/Naggy for first, jump to Inny right after if guild still clearing way, then off to fear as it will still being cleared. If hate was cleared before Inny spawned would most likely miss him but would have shots at vox, naggy, draco, ct still. That's just how I would see it happen, I might be wrong though.

[Starklen]

The biggest problem that I see is with the mentality those of you who want to compete are approaching this with. The current system lends itself to the truest free-for-all competition, for anyone willing to put forth the effort. If you had everything spawning at the same time, you would instead be complaining that {insert desired target} is always chosen by {DA or IB}.

When players compete for a mob with a known window coming up, their perception is that it's not their problem that they couldn't reach a resolution on their own, it's our problem for deciding who was merited the kill.

When players want to lobby for a different system of mob spawning, their perception is that it's not their problem to solve with creativity, cooperation, and cunning problem-solving skills, but that it's our problem to re-arrange the entire system to suit the latest complaint.

Spotting a problem doesn't take any special talent. It's one of the most base aspects of human nature. So is pleading for an advantage, or expecting someone else to solve that problem for you. But what does take special talent, is solving that problem yourself.

And not just saying 'I think this should happen because I don't like what's happening now', but really thinking through the consequences of what would happen if it was changed. Live is a perfect example of listening to short-sighted self-interest.

From a developer standpoint, we can reasonably take ownership of a problem when a player has no ability to solve it themselves. This is not one of those situations. We don't really give a shit who gets the mobs. If you perceive this to be a problem: Brainstorm. Collaborate. Compete. Raid targets are a scarce resource. If you want them badly enough, you will approach it with realistic expectations, find a way to compete for them, and persevere when you fail.

If you expect a higher authority to solve your every problem, and cede all personal responsibility, and externalize all blame, take the time to read this over.

In PDF (http://socserv.mcmaster.ca/econ/ugcm/3ll3/hobbes/Leviathan.pdf)

On Kindle (http://www.amazon.com/Leviathan-ebook/dp/B000JQUA0K/ref=sr_1_4?ie=UTF8&qid=1295497222&sr=8-4)


It's public domain, and both of those links are free. Read it while you're shitting in your socks.

Based on this, I would think you'd support a virtually 'anything goes' ruleset where any or all agreements, actions, expectations, and/or resulting consequences are the business of players and guilds. With respect to this matter, I think your philosophy might actually be the best.

[Nealio]

It's almost like Rogean and Uthgaard are reading just enough of the first one or two posts, then posting a response that defends their stance.

Most people in the thread seem to acknowledge pros and cons to many of the scenarios presented here today. That is a fine example of working together with creativity, cooperation, cunning problem-solving skills. I suppose when there is a flaw in the system, it is the "dev's" stance that "their perception is that it's not their problem that they couldn't reach a resolution on their own"

I'm getting rather tired of hearing the card being tossed around that if you cry about not getting to see the planes then get up and do something about it. I want someone to explain to me exactly what skill set is required to camp CT's spawn point and zerg him before the zone aggros and arrives? What amazing creative genius is required to sit in front of a flat screen and wait. That argument fallls flat on its face, lacking any merit or validity at all.

The current status quo does not support or inspire any initiative for guilds to work together to rub out the accused farming guilds because it simply cannot happen at this late stage in the issue. It's the EXACT same problem as with LIVE, just in a different dress and you are lying both to yourself and to the user base by arguing it's not. Large guilds, filled with people around the globe, who have nothing to do for large amounts of time, sitting on boss spawns. At least in LIVE smaller guilds had an opportunity, and succeeded quite often, due to idiosyncrasies in the game mechanics.

What I think is sad in this particular issue is that not once have the 'dev's" popped in and said something to the effect of "Ya know, we understand the system in place atm isn't perfect, but ...". Rather I have seen two insuffucient posts aimed at insulting a large portion of the user base, arrogant rebuffs that don't even address issues brought up in this thread, and nothing at all remotely helpful. I'm very disappointed as my first few encounters with GM's were very good.

[Chanus]

You could always stop paying your subscription fee to show them you're not going to take that kind of attitude from them!

[Akame]

What I think is sad in this particular issue is that not once have the 'dev's" popped in and said something to the effect of "Ya know, we understand the system in place atm isn't perfect, but ...". Rather I have seen two insuffucient posts aimed at insulting a large portion of the user base, arrogant rebuffs that don't even address issues brought up in this thread, and nothing at all remotely helpful. I'm very disappointed as my first few encounters with GM's were very good.

Well for one the Dev's aren't classic. They aren't being paid to make us happy, it's not all that surprising that they'll actually just up and say no, because I said so! At the end of the day, it's their sandbox to play in, and they are the big kid on the playground. At best we can bring up thoughtful well laid out suggestions to possibly make their job easier and benefit the community in some way at the same time.

[Nealio]

At best we can bring up thoughtful well laid out suggestions to possibly make their job easier and benefit the community in some way at the same time.

And that's what this thread largely has been doing, and we are getting shot down without so much as a thought. That much is evident from their two responses to the thread.

Earlier, I believe in another thread, I pointed out to someone else that this is THEIR project (sandbox as you put it) and that the person should not argue but make suggestions. I totally understand and agree. However if they are going to open a forum for suggestions from the player base, it should be utilized as that and not just blown off, even more used to insult those making the suggestions.

[Akame]

And that's what this thread largely has been doing, and we are getting shot down without so much as a thought. That much is evident from their two responses to the thread.

Earlier, I believe in another thread, I pointed out to someone else that this is THEIR project (sandbox as you put it) and that the person should not argue but make suggestions. I totally understand and agree. However if they are going to open a forum for suggestions from the player base, it should be utilized as that and not just blown off, even more used to insult those making the suggestions.

I think of it like this. Patch day re pops were there because of problems in classic, not because they were intentionally giving the player base more god loot. Likewise they have fixed things ahead of time on this server that were broken in classic, whether or not it was on a time-line to fix.

However, you could say that Dumesh's idea of no variance with a +6 hour respawn timer on even 24 hour timers (to rotate them around the clock) and either shortened respawn timers, or these ideas of random world respawns of all gods without warning, could be a way to keep the (ever growing) level 50 playerbase entertained while we wait for Kunark to come out.

Because! Yes there is a reason - Because Kunark came out much faster in classic than here, opening up more raiding content and higher levels for that growing 50 playerbase to funnel into, whereas on this server there is no place for the 50 playerbase to funnel into (higher levels, kunark, epic weapon quests, the hole etc).

I could see using that as a viable reason to push for simulated patch day repops, not because we want to emulate spotty unreliable servers and bad coding which worked in the favor of the bored high level playerbase, but to stave off the boredom of the extra 6-12 months waiting for Kunark/more stuff to do.

[Lazortag]

I'd like to make one last response in this thread with some data defending my earlier suggestion, that we have the server repop raid mobs after every N number patches, where 1/N is the proportion of patches live had compared to p99.

Firstly, the reason I suggested the "every N number of patches" part was because we patch more often than live, so this is the most fair and classic solution. From looking at old patch notes for here and for Live, I found the following:

-There were 10 patches in 1999 (from April 6th onwards, when the first patch happened)
-There were 33 patches in 2000
-There were 29 patches in 2001 (before Luclin was released)

The above was taken from the extensive pages on Alla which detail eq's patch history. I omitted patches which most likely didn't involve restarting every server (like press releases and announcements, or things that affected only one server, like server splits).

From the Announcements forum I gathered that we had roughly 49 patches in the past year on p99. This means we have roughly 4.08 patches per month, and Live had 2.18 patches per month during the entire classic period (which spanned 33 months). So we patch about 1.87 times more often than they did. If we make things simple and just round that up to 2, then we could have raid bosses respawn every two patches. I really don't think this would be hard to keep track of, nor would it be unfair, nor would it be a huge departure from what was done in classic.

One objection to this was that we typically patch really early in the morning. While this isn't always the case, this would also sometimes happen on Live, and honestly if it gives the euro guilds (or the guilds with the most insomniacs) a brief advantage every time a patch happens, that's not really a big deal and I'm sure it wouldn't be the end of the world. Either way, this issue could be worked out somehow, and apart from it I see no other issues with my suggestion.

If someone wants to correct any mistakes in the above data, please mention something.

[President]

Are you going off patch notes Giegue? I can't see how that count is even possibly correct. I remember, if nothing else, hardware maint every single week. I remember the week where Povar went down 4 days in a row.

Not that im trying to advocate we patch 4 times in one week, I always figured /rand 0 3, or even if 3 is too much, /rand 0 2 being better.

[Lazortag]

Are you going off patch notes Giegue? I can't see how that count is even possibly correct. I remember, if nothing else, hardware maint every single week. I remember the week where Povar went down 4 days in a row.

Not that im trying to advocate we patch 4 times in one week, I always figured /rand 0 3, or even if 3 is too much, /rand 0 2 being better.

This is going off patch notes I found online, which were very thorough. There were definitely some weeks with multiple patches, and sometimes you'd go for a month without a patch (just like on p99, actually). If you can find evidence suggesting that alla's patch history isn't correct though, that would be great, but I personally don't remember patches happening that often.

[Nealio]

Whether there was a patch or not, there was hardware maintenance every week on live. This brought the servers down every Tuesday and reset them every week which is why dragons were on 7 days spawn timers; to ensure they were only seen once per week. Every Tuesday afternoon the rush to take down dragons began, and by Friday the planes were all cleared.

Maybe things were different on other servers (just throwing that out there because anything is possible) but that is how it was on Rodcet Nife.

Why is it that Rodcet Nife with a population of 800-900 at peak time (circa mid to end 1999) could support 5-7+ guilds accessing the same number of raid bosses that this server cannot with its 600-700 population?

Why aren't there safeguards against afk camping like there were on live? 5 minutes of being afk and the toon sits down (that was usually our first clue no one was at the keyboard), soon afterwards the toon gets disconnected from the server. Seems a simple fix and would help promote a more healthy environment. Won't solve all the ills but is a step in the right direction. Simulate weekly server resets and add that to the respawn x + y variance and it's a big leap.

example: Every Tuesday an algorithm decides when the reset occurs to simulate the variance associated with how long the servers were down on Live. This was typically 3-5 hours starting at around 11 am EST. So on this particular Tuesday the algorithm random'ed a 4 1/2 hour server down time. BOOM! POOF! At 3:30 pm EST the spawn timers start ticking down for all raid bosses server wide. Now the dragons eventually had a 2 day variance added to their spawn timers (dont remember exactly when this changed nor do I care as it really isn't relevant. whether it was classic or not it, it was the best fix for the situation and is precisely the situation we have on P99). So now Naggy can spawn at any time between 3:30 pm EST Tuesday and 3:30 pm EST Thursday. So I wanna get 15 of my guild members and camp Naggy for 2 1/2 days (2 1/2 instead of 2 because I have to start camping him early to 1)beat everyone else to the camp and 2) I do not know exactly when the servers will "be up"; ie when the random spawn timer starts ticking). Fine, we can do that. However we had better be prepared to sit in front of our computers the entire time because if we afk for 10 mins we are disconnected, or have a large enough guild of dedicated people that we can keep him perma camped for 2 1/2 days around the clock in shifts. But wait! Damn it there are other bosses out there, not just Naggy. What oh what will we do this week?

Let the races begin...

Why is that so difficult? THAT is live emulated pretty damned perfectly.

[Rogean]

Wasn't it World of Warcraft that had the weekly tuesday downtimes?

[Zithax]

Wasn't it World of Warcraft that had the weekly tuesday downtimes?

still does. EQLive never had regularly scheduled maintainence though.

[Nealio]

Everquest started the Tuesday downtime holiday. Was there a patch every week, no. Did the servers come down? Yes.

[guineapig]

Why aren't there safeguards against afk camping like there were on live? 5 minutes of being afk and the toon sits down (that was usually our first clue no one was at the keyboard), soon afterwards the toon gets disconnected from the server. Seems a simple fix and would help promote a more healthy environment. Won't solve all the ills but is a step in the right direction. Simulate weekly server resets and add that to the respawn x + y variance and it's a big leap.


Interesting point...

[Chanus]

What about people who AFK for non-camping reasons?

Should they be disconnected as well? How do you differentiate?

[Rasah]

Wasn't it World of Warcraft that had the weekly tuesday downtimes?It may have been, but since I only played WoW casually, it never impacted me.

On live, I had friends that played in the UK, and I would take half day vacations to be able to group with them during their prime hours. I remember always being irritated if I took off a Tuesday and the patch wasn't finished by noon, or whenever they claimed it would and I lost play time.

The patches seemed to be always on a Tuesday, and often, but I don't remember if it was EVERY Tuesday. Certainly seemed like most of them.

[RocketMoose]

What about people who AFK for non-camping reasons?

Should they be disconnected as well? How do you differentiate?

Couldn't you put it in zonetags?

However, even with that leaving EC tagged to be allowed to afk in it, 5 mins is ENTIRELY too short. AFK camping is someone who's missing spawns etc, if you're camping say, AC, you are more than welcome to tab out of the game as long as you are back before the next respawn. So I don't like this idea. 30 min timer would be much better, but even at that, it's just so easy to come back every 30 mins since most people who afk camp do it anyway just to make sure their mob didn't spawn.

[RocketMoose]

I just don't get why people don't see that a patch day, or lack of windows would be a bad thing. When the small guilds know that something is going to spawn, they can be there just like the big guilds, right now big guilds have full advantage, because they can have players online 24/7.

How do you think guilds like "Legion" on Veeshan ever became elite? Because they knew when the mobs were going to spawn, and they raced Fires of Heaven, Celestial Tomb, and Cestus Dei. They all had an equal shot, even though they only raided about 18 people they were able to dominate even in Velious because of their high quality players, not because they'd zerg stuff down (CT on Veeshan/DA on here)

I'd much rather see some smaller guilds having a shot at stuff, as it is now, they have little not no chance of getting a boss mob on this server. With the windows removed/simulated patch days. DA could try to split up 3 ways, but then what, do they have enough to just zerg something? No, they don't. So it'd be a fair shot for smaller guilds with quality players in them to get their fair shake at some of these boss mobs too.

Imagine everyone on the server knows all mobs are going to spawn at x time, everyone would be sitting waiting on server up, and in fact the smaller guilds could have a chance to win out via fastest mobilization. So IB / DA may or may not get 2-3 targets, where as right now they pretty much get whatever they want by sheer numbers.

[Bigcountry23]

I'd like to make one last response in this thread with some data defending my earlier suggestion, that we have the server repop raid mobs after every N number patches, where 1/N is the proportion of patches live had compared to p99.

Firstly, the reason I suggested the "every N number of patches" part was because we patch more often than live, so this is the most fair and classic solution. From looking at old patch notes for here and for Live, I found the following:

-There were 10 patches in 1999 (from April 6th onwards, when the first patch happened)
-There were 33 patches in 2000
-There were 29 patches in 2001 (before Luclin was released)

The above was taken from the extensive pages on Alla which detail eq's patch history. I omitted patches which most likely didn't involve restarting every server (like press releases and announcements, or things that affected only one server, like server splits).

From the Announcements forum I gathered that we had roughly 49 patches in the past year on p99. This means we have roughly 4.08 patches per month, and Live had 2.18 patches per month during the entire classic period (which spanned 33 months). So we patch about 1.87 times more often than they did. If we make things simple and just round that up to 2, then we could have raid bosses respawn every two patches. I really don't think this would be hard to keep track of, nor would it be unfair, nor would it be a huge departure from what was done in classic.

One objection to this was that we typically patch really early in the morning. While this isn't always the case, this would also sometimes happen on Live, and honestly if it gives the euro guilds (or the guilds with the most insomniacs) a brief advantage every time a patch happens, that's not really a big deal and I'm sure it wouldn't be the end of the world. Either way, this issue could be worked out somehow, and apart from it I see no other issues with my suggestion.

If someone wants to correct any mistakes in the above data, please mention something.

You're ommiting random sever crashes (which happened, well randomly) and cases where the server had to be brought back down after a patch to fix something that was broken in the patch (which happened about every other patch).

[Lazortag]

For the people who think there was weekly maintenance, I don't necessarily disagree with you, but here's the evidence I was going off of:

http://everquest.allakhazam.com/history/patches-1999.html
http://everquest.allakhazam.com/history/patches-2000-1.html
http://everquest.allakhazam.com/history/patches-2000-2.html
http://everquest.allakhazam.com/history/patches-2001-1.html
http://everquest.allakhazam.com/history/patches-2001-2.html

These are pretty thorough. Could it be that hardware maintenance (which brought the servers down) isn't included in these links? Can anyone find evidence of hardware maintenance performed on all servers which isn't included? I was on Rodcet Nife too, and I don't remember patches/maintenance being weekly, however I also didn't raid so it didn't affect me as much, so it's entirely possible I'm just not remembering correctly.

I really think it's important to have an accurate count of the number of times servers were brought down on Live, for the idea of patch day repops to be fair and classic..

You're ommiting random sever crashes (which happened, well randomly) and cases where the server had to be brought back down after a patch to fix something that was broken in the patch (which happened about every other patch).

For the second part, see the links above - there are patches where they fix things from previous patches (like the second patch fixing Summon Corpse I believe). Sure I'm omitting server crashes because they aren't documented there, to my knowledge - should I really include server crashes? We would never repop mobs here if the server were crashed. edit: wait - were you talking about patches on Live or p99?

[Henini]

Uth told yall, you want it, you go get it, if someone else wants it more then you and gets it instead of you, well work harder!

stop bitching and moaning, or go play wow, everyone wins there!

besides EQ isn't kewl there are no purple items here.

[Nealio]

If you cant stay at your keyboard then you have no business owning a camp. 10 minutes if more than enough time to alt tab to read an article on the web, use the rest room, or whatever. I camped Dylan Starshine the other day for 6 1/2 hours and was never afk for more than 10 minutes.

[Kassel]

If you cant stay at your keyboard then you have no business owning a camp. 10 minutes if more than enough time to alt tab to read an article on the web, use the rest room, or whatever. I camped Dylan Starshine the other day for 6 1/2 hours and was never afk for more than 10 minutes.

Cool Story bro.

Thanks for setting playing restrictions for the rest of the server btw.

[Extunarian]

If you cant stay at your keyboard then you have no business owning a camp. 10 minutes if more than enough time to alt tab to read an article on the web, use the rest room, or whatever. I camped Dylan Starshine the other day for 6 1/2 hours and was never afk for more than 10 minutes.

I think Nealio might have been looking for the 'questions about camp rules' thread. Not sure how this post relates to the patch day repops.

[Dumesh Uhl'Belk]

Could it be that hardware maintenance (which brought the servers down) isn't included in these links?

There were definitely times when the server went down with no patch message. Sometimes it was emergency maintenance, sometimes it was a scheduled patch that was only server-side code. If there were no changes to announce (for instance, they just optimized some network code), there was usually not a patch message.

[Myrkskog]

And Inny drops 2 minutes after he spawns. Grab your socks and onto the next spawn boys!

[President]

still does. EQLive never had regularly scheduled maintainence though.

May not have been every tuesday, but it was close.

[Belli]

To Rogean and Uthgaard :

I'm pretty new here, so I don't have a well informed opinion about this topic. That being said, you asked for the players to get together and cooperate towards a solution. Having read the entire thread in one go, it seems that this is exactly what has happened.

There are many slight variations on the theme of simulated patch days represented in this thread, but there is an overwhelming positive response to the idea in general. This thread has not descended into bickering over whether this is a good idea or a bad idea because nearly everyone who cares (read: cared enough to post here) thinks this is a good idea. Instead, the conversation is centered on which iteration of simulated patch days should be put into place.

Your playerbase has cooperated and come up with a solution. That alone makes it worth more consideration than the outright dismissal shown here.

[Pycoba_rng]

You act like you will be the only ones with that information. When everyone knows when the spawns are coming, all the interested guilds can at least pick one target and be there ready and buffed. If they all spawn at the same time, DA and IB won't get them all very often. In fact, the reason DA usually wins the CT race is because you guys bring 55-70 to do it so you can pull CT when there are still dozens of mobs up and burn CT down with huge dps before the aggro train of mobs even gets to your raid camp. I'm not saying that is an invalid tactic at all, but you'd have to do it differently if you only brought 30 members so you could send 25 to vox and 20 to naggy. If you try to split your forces to get Naggy, Vox, and CT on server up, you will lose some of those races, or your guild will grow so massive that each individual member will wait months between loot awards and the thing will collapse under its own weight.

If Da last through kunark with more then 30 + members Ill be amazed. I for one can't wait to see 50 - 70 people trying to complete epics its LOL worthy.

[Pycoba_rng]

Oh and heres an idea. Rather then waste any of the Devs/gms time with this garbage. Maybe 1/10th of you cry baby wah wahs can beta test kunark. Considering at most theres 30 people on during prime. The devs and gms are already flustered enough trying to push content that not even 1/10th of the player base will even help test it. Instead we get crying about please simulate a script etc etc. Why the hell should we waste the devs time with this? You want more raid targets? More raiding for small guilds. Lets try to collaborate and push kunark out faster by testing it. It would be nice if any of you showed any amount of respect to these people and help them push kunark out instead of wasting their time with this nonsense. I for one vote no on any dev time or gm time wasted to cater to this crap. Please devote your time to kunark and nuthing more. Thanks~

[Harrison]

To Rogean and Uthgaard :

I'm pretty new here, so I don't have a well informed opinion about this topic. That being said, you asked for the players to get together and cooperate towards a solution. Having read the entire thread in one go, it seems that this is exactly what has happened.

There are many slight variations on the theme of simulated patch days represented in this thread, but there is an overwhelming positive response to the idea in general. This thread has not descended into bickering over whether this is a good idea or a bad idea because nearly everyone who cares (read: cared enough to post here) thinks this is a good idea. Instead, the conversation is centered on which iteration of simulated patch days should be put into place.

Your playerbase has cooperated and come up with a solution. That alone makes it worth more consideration than the outright dismissal shown here.

The last time we got together to hammer out rules, there was one shitbag guild that ignored it anyways. (and we even said it was going to happen)

DA/Fishbait and *gasp* they're still a hacking zergforce of utter fail. How many members now on raids? Triple digits?

[Uthgaard]

That being said, you asked for the players to get together and cooperate towards a solution.

We didn't ask anyone to come up with a solution. People were throwing around ways for us to fix their problem. We simply aren't touching it. Those that didn't get hyperdefensive and attempt to rationalize why they should be handed bonus targets in hopes that they could snag one that falls through the cracks are beginning to think outside the box.

http://www.project1999.org/forums/showthread.php?t=25980

Between all of the so called 'casual raiding' guilds, there are enough people who want raid targets (mostly the ones posting in this thread), to be a serious contender, but for various reasons will never see them until they start thinking outside the box. Some are in too small of a guild, some don't have the ideal composition, some have people who couldn't care less about raiding, and some have people who couldn't piss their name in the sand holding back the talented raiders.

I'm glad someone caught my suggestion, I was beginning to think it was lost on everyone. This fits more closely with my suggestion of cooperation, and I imagine will be a much more satisfying solution.

[Pycoba_rng]

The sad thing is there is little to no cooperation amongst people. Either they have to big of an ego and ride the high and mighty horse. Or they really don't want to work up a solution whether it means helping eachother as a community or not. Its quite sad. I for one come from E'ci which is now tunare. We had the best public raiding system ever imaginable.

[Myrkskog]

You call forming a raid alliance to compete with the poopsockers thinking outside the box. I call it turning all of the so called 'casual raiding' guilds into a super hardcore raid guild. If those people wanted to be hard core raiders, they would be in a sock guild.

I'm sure if we formed up all the smaller raid guilds into one super raid guild we'd have the greatest poopsocking association this server has ever seen, but fuck that when a simulated patch day will be more classic and keep casual casual.

[Pycoba_rng]

You call forming a raid alliance to compete with the poopsockers thinking outside the box. I call it turning all of the so called 'casual raiding' guilds into a super hardcore raid guild. If those people wanted to be hard core raiders, they would be in a sock guild.

I'm sure if we formed up all the smaller raid guilds into one super raid guild we'd have the greatest poopsocking association this server has ever seen, but fuck that when a simulated patch day will be more classic and keep casual casual.



Clearly you misunderstood all aspects of the post. A casual person can offer just as much as a hardcore person. Most the hardcore people are in those two guilds we have discussed. If you read my post clearly it says 6 guilds with 15 members = 90 people. Your telling me a casual person can't devote 4 hours of playtime every other day or so to help contribute? Or perhaps when they are on to come help keep a camp on a raid boss? No one ever , said they would have to stay an entire duration. I would hope such guild leaders and officers would logically employ their members to devote some time if any if this was ever cordinated. Again this is a casual standpoint ,the goal is 90 or so casuals which can be a raid force of 30 hardcore if properly utilized with time restraints and cooperation. Post like yours just show lack of thinking outside the box which clearly what Uuthguard was pointing out in the first place.

[Curmudgen]

4hours in a row is something I doubt will ever happen for me with greater regularity than once a month if that.

What does that make me, if the above is what a "casual" player does?

[Pycoba_rng]

4hours in a row is something I doubt will ever happen for me with greater regularity than once a month if that.

What does that make me, if the above is what a "casual" player does?

I would hope the guild leaders would cordinate an appropriate time for you to contribute. Whether or not its 4 hours , maybe even 1 hour. Like i said Cooporation and devotion is needed.

[Chanus]

You call forming a raid alliance to compete with the poopsockers thinking outside the box. I call it turning all of the so called 'casual raiding' guilds into a super hardcore raid guild. If those people wanted to be hard core raiders, they would be in a sock guild.

How is it not completely obvious to people when they write things like this, they're just saying, "Yeah, that's great that you suggest we do what it takes to get what we want, but we'd much prefer you just hand it to us!"?

[Nealio]

I think the REAL problem is some people do not want to admit they are wrong. they are arguing for arguement's sake with no intention of achieving anything other than standing their own ground. It's evident from the posts. This is a dead issue.

Want a raid boss? Form up 50-75 people whose only evidenced talent is setting an alarm and waiting, or find a classic EQ server that actually emulates classic EQ.

[President]

Want a raid boss? Form up 50-75 people whose only evidenced talent is setting an alarm and waiting, or find a classic EQ server that actually emulates classic EQ.

Seems to be pretty accurate.

[Myrkskog]

How is it not completely obvious to people when they write things like this, they're just saying, "Yeah, that's great that you suggest we do what it takes to get what we want, but we'd much prefer you just hand it to us!"?

How is it not completely obvious to you that you're a moron?

When did I say anything about handouts? Never. I said simulated patch days would allow casual guilds to make attempts on content that is currently on lock down. Like it was on classic. A simulated patch would be closer to classic, and it would give others a chance to race and compete for mobs.

Coordinating to make sure that you have enough people sitting around to compete with the sockers doesn't change the fact that Innoruuk dying within 2 minutes of spawning is stupid.

[Bubbles]

We didn't ask anyone to come up with a solution. People were throwing around ways for us to fix their problem. We simply aren't touching it. Those that didn't get hyperdefensive and attempt to rationalize why they should be handed bonus targets in hopes that they could snag one that falls through the cracks are beginning to think outside the box.

http://www.project1999.org/forums/showthread.php?t=25980

Between all of the so called 'casual raiding' guilds, there are enough people who want raid targets (mostly the ones posting in this thread), to be a serious contender, but for various reasons will never see them until they start thinking outside the box. Some are in too small of a guild, some don't have the ideal composition, some have people who couldn't care less about raiding, and some have people who couldn't piss their name in the sand holding back the talented raiders.

I'm glad someone caught my suggestion, I was beginning to think it was lost on everyone. This fits more closely with my suggestion of cooperation, and I imagine will be a much more satisfying solution.

And you're close.. But still way off.

The *real* issue on p1999 is this:

We got the top 10% from about 20 different servers to come back and relive their glory on p99. The vast majority of those who played in 1999 casually.. Who tradeskilled.. and held weddings.. role played.. fished off the docks.. wandered around aimlessly.. played gems.. and did f*ckknowswhatelse who made up a solid 70-80% of a typical 1500-2000 peak population server ....

they ain't here.

So you got about a dozen servers worth of the ubers crammed into one tiny little bastion of faded glory. And you are simply not going to make them happy.

A calander worked on, say, Tunare 10 years ago because there was maybe 3 top guilds contesting 7 raid targets, had the cushion of server patch repops, and a mutual interest to not have to deal with petty bs while still getting a healthy amount of whacks at the loot pinata.

Here we can make a quick list:

1. ) IB
2. ) DA
3. ) Div
4. ) Darkwind
5. ) Tmo
6. ) Pantheon
7. ) Vesica
8. ) Peace Pipe
9. ) Eclipse
0. ) Dozekar

That's 10.. Maybe 11 if Kimmie and Nalkin join forces with the evil Life Alert.

10+ guilds fully capable of killing all dragons/gods without breaking so much as a sweat, left unmolested to engage the raid target. There's simply not a way to carve up 2 dragons, 2 minis, 2 gods, a dude in a turban, and an underwater squid.. among 10 guilds per week. And even in the best of moods and goodwill, there's simply no reason IB and DA would even feel the slightest inkling of making any concessions to anyone (besides possibly each other). And I think we all know that's the truth.

You have to split the server. 5 guilds on each server could definitely put together a calender system that would benefit the masses and leave enough whacks at the loot pinata for each to actually get some sleep and do some grocery shopping and see what that sunlight thing is all about. And even then, everyone would still whine and moan incessantly.

But I mean, seriously.. If you're suggesting the solution is form like 2 or 3 massive raid alliances as a way to *END* poop socking..

lol no. Putting out a forest fire with flamethrowers is what that is.

[Harrison]

And you're close.. But still way off.

The *real* issue on p1999 is this:

We got the top 10% from about 20 different servers to come back and relive their glory on p99. The vast majority of those who played in 1999 casually.. Who tradeskilled.. and held weddings.. role played.. fished off the docks.. wandered around aimlessly.. played gems.. and did f*ckknowswhatelse who made up a solid 70-80% of a typical 1500-2000 peak population server ....

they ain't here.

So you got about a dozen servers worth of the ubers crammed into one tiny little bastion of faded glory. And you are simply not going to make them happy.

A calander worked on, say, Tunare 10 years ago because there was maybe 3 top guilds contesting 7 raid targets, had the cushion of server patch repops, and a mutual interest to not have to deal with petty bs while still getting a healthy amount of whacks at the loot pinata.

Here we can make a quick list:

1. ) IB
2. ) DA
3. ) Div
4. ) Darkwind
5. ) Tmo
6. ) Pantheon
7. ) Vesica
8. ) Peace Pipe
9. ) Eclipse
0. ) Dozekar

That's 10.. Maybe 11 if Kimmie and Nalkin join forces with the evil Life Alert.

10+ guilds fully capable of killing all dragons/gods without breaking so much as a sweat, left unmolested to engage the raid target. There's simply not a way to carve up 2 dragons, 2 minis, 2 gods, a dude in a turban, and an underwater squid.. among 10 guilds per week. And even in the best of moods and goodwill, there's simply no reason IB and DA would even feel the slightest inkling of making any concessions to anyone (besides possibly each other). And I think we all know that's the truth.

You have to split the server. 5 guilds on each server could definitely put together a calender system that would benefit the masses and leave enough whacks at the loot pinata for each to actually get some sleep and do some grocery shopping and see what that sunlight thing is all about. And even then, everyone would still whine and moan incessantly.

But I mean, seriously.. If you're suggesting the solution is form like 2 or 3 massive raid alliances as a way to *END* poop socking..

lol no. Putting out a forest fire with flamethrowers is what that is.

Ban people camping spawn points.

Those who mobilize more efficiently win.

THE FUCKING END

[Slathar]

Ban people camping spawn points.

Those who mobilize more efficiently win.

THE FUCKING END

define camping a spawn point? is it exping in the zone watching track? is it buffing a group in the zone? it's too hard to define. also you're an idiot for banning people for doing one of the past times that makes everquest what it is.

DURRR CAPITAL LETTERS DURRR

[Nealio]

So you got about a dozen servers worth of the ubers crammed into one tiny little bastion of faded glory. And you are simply not going to make them happy.



Ubers? How on earth do you think any of these people are ubers? Ubers knew how to break Fear with 10 people, knew how to deal with the wandering scareling on the hill, knew how to pull Amy's without pulling CT himself. Ubers knew how to break Hate, camp the wall without aggroing the upstairs floor, or letting rats chain aggro half the first floor. Ubers knew how to island hop and not get knocked into OoT by Dirkog Steelhand.

There is nothing uber at all about the way the planes have been reduced to a zerg-camp-fuck-fest here. There may be some folks here who have never experienced the REAL planes on original live, where skill and technical understanding of game mechanics were essential and numbers meant nothing. But there are some of us who were there and don't buy that shit you're selling.

Ubers here? where?

[President]

Ubers? How on earth do you think any of these people are ubers? Ubers knew how to break Fear with 10 people, knew how to deal with the wandering scaerling on the hill, knew how to pull Amy's without pulling CT himself. Ubers knew how to break Hate, camp the wall without aggroing the upstairs floor, or letting rats chain aggro half the first floor. Ubers knew how to island hop and not get knocked into OoT by Dirkog Steelhand.

There is nothing uber at all about the way the planes have been reduced to a zerg-camp-fuck-fest here. There may be some folks here who have never experienced the REAL planes on original live, where skill and technical understanding of game mechanics were essential and numbers meant nothing. But there are some of us who were there and don't buy that shit you're selling.

Ubers here? where?


I think you missed the point of her thread, and shes spot on. On P99 we have 3x the amount of raid capable guilds that there were on live, but we have reduced the amount of spawns by not having patch days or simulated patch days.

I think its funny Uthgaard keeps telling us to "think outside the box" like we have some magical thing we can pull out of our ass to prevent a guild from sitting on a spawn point for 48 hours.

[Nealio]

Sorry, I got derailed by the "ubers" remark and didn't comment on the second part which is spot on. I'm just frustrated with people talking about all the skill and talent being excercised by the guilds to monopolize the planes and how those that can't get into the planes obviously aren't working hard enough or have the skill when it's all rot. There is no skill to sitting and zerging. More than half these people would never have seen planar loot 10 years ago due to their reliance upon numbers rather than skill.

[Harrison]

define camping a spawn point? is it exping in the zone watching track? is it buffing a group in the zone? it's too hard to define. also you're an idiot for banning people for doing one of the past times that makes everquest what it is.

DURRR CAPITAL LETTERS DURRR

There is no gray area to exploit if the GMs just get hardcore with it, and guilds won't tread the gray area if they know the consequences. Permanent bans.

You try to say, "but we were just experiencing at this very ridiculous spot lawlz" and you're still banned. It doesn't matter.

The admins aren't fucking stupid. They know the difference between experiencing and being no-talent pussies sitting on top of spawn points because the difficulty in mobilizing(lol what difficulty?) is too much for them.

[Molitoth]

And in the case of Dark Ascension with their bajillion strong raid force.

Have you seen the IB/DW/Pantheon alliance?

[Harrison]

Have you seen the IB/DW/Pantheon alliance?

Three guilds, all with talent in their ranks.

DA, lacking three guilds worth of talent in their three guilds worth of members.

[Slathar]

Three guilds, all with talent in their ranks.

DA, lacking three guilds worth of talent in their three guilds worth of members.

talent = who has more free time to sit in front of a computer and eat a box of cheeze-its

mmorpgs only reward people who play the most

[Jenni D]

nealio, out of interest which guild are you in on this server?

[Nealio]

nealio, out of interest which guild are you in on this server?

Not one that has been mentioned in this thread. My guild tag has nothing to do with my views and as such I am not willing to open it up to ridiculous flaming and unwarranted flames here.

[Nealio]

Actually it was mentioned once, but my stance remains the same. My guild affiliation is not relevant to this discussion in anyway.

[guineapig]

But I mean, seriously.. If you're suggesting the solution is form like 2 or 3 massive raid alliances as a way to *END* poop socking..

lol no. Putting out a forest fire with flamethrowers is what that is.


LOL! So true though.


Can I also point out that the variance still seems whack. When was the last time a boss spawned in the first day of it's window?
1 in 7 chance of that happening, doesn't seem that far fetched. IB didn't even bother to camp out people in Inny's room till like day 3 of his window... it's almost as if it's a given that the mob will not spawn before mid window.

[Harrison]

FU RNG! lol

[Henini]

Ban people camping spawn points.

Those who mobilize more efficiently win.

THE FUCKING END

so instead of sitting at the spawn point, they sit 10 feet away. How does this solve anything?


And there you are thinking you are so smart!

[Harrison]

Like I said, the GM team is not dumb.

They know what you are doing. Camping the IZ, spawn point itself, the room adjacent to it, etc. is all the same and you know it.

[Hobby]

There has been a 5 hour vox, 3 hour draco (multiple times), a very early CT..


All within the past month or 2.


Generally, you are correct - They do spawn near the end of the window. But you can not rely upon that as an effective tracking tool.

[Henini]

Like I said, the GM team is not dumb.

They know what you are doing. Camping the IZ, spawn point itself, the room adjacent to it, etc. is all the same and you know it.

and where do you draw the line? since you are so smart that should be easy for you to define that!

The hard part is mobilizing, that's why poopsocking happens, not running for 60 seconds to get to a target. Are you going to start banning people in Lavastorm or ferroot as well? or anyone that is 50 in any zone since you can port to hate from anywhere?

[President]

There has been a 5 hour vox, 3 hour draco (multiple times), a very early CT..


All within the past month or 2.


Generally, you are correct - They do spawn near the end of the window. But you can not rely upon that as an effective tracking tool.

It's going to take a guild 6 months to get enough VP keys to enter if spawns don't get changed to being more along the lines of classic.

[nilbog]

It's going to take a guild 6 months to get enough VP keys to enter if spawns don't get changed to being more along the lines of classic.

I think you mean downtime/patch days being more along the lines of classic, not spawns.

[President]

I think you mean downtime/patch days being more along the lines of classic, not spawns.

Same thing. When there was downtime/patch days, there were spawns. Spawns were far more often than 7-9 days (more like 8 or 9 days which everyone has noticed and Hobby has said is *mostly* accurate.)

[nilbog]

Same thing. When there was downtime/patch days, there were spawns. Spawns were far more often than 7-9 days (more like 8 or 9 days which everyone has noticed and Hobby has said is *mostly* accurate.)

I remember days when the emarr server (and i assume others) would be restarted multiple times a day..especially in 1999-2000. "Oh, shit guys.. fire beetles are dropping rubicite and gigantic zweihanders, bankers are duping plat" etc, and they would restart it 5 times or so within 24 hours before they fixed their problem. Every npc would respawn, with each restart.

With that being said, I can't rationalize multi-spawns as being intended by verant/soe. If their servers at the time ran as well as ours does now (lol), they would have only brought it down for scheduled maintenance or patches.

I have discussed with Rogean.. some ideas to statistically increase the amount of raid targets, without needing downtime to achieve them.

In conclusion, it's not the same thing. When you say spawns aren't classic, you are referring to our servers not having to be constantly restarted. I'm not sure that this would prevent people would camping them, either.

[Shiftin]

I have discussed with Rogean.. some ideas to statistically increase the amount of raid targets, without needing downtime to achieve them.


Thank you. I hope these discussions lead to something productive.

[President]

I remember days when the emarr server (and i assume others) would be restarted multiple times a day..especially in 1999-2000. "Oh, shit guys.. fire beetles are dropping rubicite and gigantic zweihanders, bankers are duping plat" etc, and they would restart it 5 times or so within 24 hours before they fixed their problem. Every npc would respawn, with each restart.

With that being said, I can't rationalize multi-spawns as being intended by verant/soe. If their servers at the time ran as well as ours does now (lol), they would have only brought it down for scheduled maintenance or patches.

I have discussed with Rogean.. some ideas to statistically increase the amount of raid targets, without needing downtime to achieve them.

In conclusion, it's not the same thing. When you say spawns aren't classic, you are referring to our servers not having to be constantly restarted. I'm not sure that this would prevent people would camping them, either.

I think you assume too much. How do you know that Verant/SOE saw that potentially multiple respawns per week were saving them from a major headache and left respawns on patch in? Do you not think they could have removed that if they wanted to?

The real point is, that when all the bosses spawn at once, it takes poopsocking out of the equation, at least for the most part. And if there is no patch that week, and no variance, then all the bosses are going to spawn again at relatively the same time. This, again, would take poopsocking mostly out of the equation.

When all the bosses spawn at the same time after a patch (whether you announce a time frame, or do it randomly) it is going to encourage racing to at least a few of the targets. That is what EQ was about. Racing to a target to see which guild could gather, buff, and engage first. Not what guild wants to sit 15+ on a spawn point for days.

Just increasing how often they spawn but still keeping them separate and random won't help the current situation.

[guineapig]

When all the bosses spawn at the same time after a patch (whether you announce a time frame, or do it randomly) it is going to encourage racing to at least a few of the targets. That is what EQ was about. Racing to a target to see which guild could gather, buff, and engage first. Not what guild wants to sit 15+ on a spawn point for days.

Just increasing how often they spawn but still keeping them separate and random won't help the current situation.


Exactly!

[Felix]

I'm pretty sure President has won this thread.

[Cars]

[QUOTE=President;211347](whether you announce a time frame, or do it randomly) it is going to encourage racing to QUOTE]

If you announce the timeframe absolutely nothing will change. The only difference would be IB and DA would get almost double the loot. On simulated server downs maybe 1 seperate guild would get a boss target well IB and DA both split their raid forces to 2 seperate targets and downed both of them. The only time a seperate guild would get a single target would be if IB and DA camped a team each at the same spawn leaving one boss open. But when they repopped without any variance the guilds would be there again, this time not missing a single boss.

Although their should be more god loot in the game by this point and even though in classic they had server downs that refreshed mobs..it just wouldnt fix the issues we have here like everyone seems to think, or rather not to the extent that everyone would hope.

This server has a WAY higher population of level 50 players then live did on classic on ANY server. Its a very simple issue of extremely big fish in an extremely small pond. Which is probably why the GMs look at this entire thread and shrug it off because they know the only answer to this problem is Kunark and thats why they are working so furiously on it.

If you didn't announce the simulated server repop then you would have entire dungeons popping on "the majority" of players well they are grinding or playing casually. The flip side to that is if you make it so that the simulated server down only repops bosses then what your asking for is not at all classic and you lose the basis of your argument to make things more like classic. I am not in a guild that is getting Boss mobs, but we can and have had opportunities to compete. Variance DOES allow it to be competitive but competition is stiff when the server has 4 times as many raid capable people that there were during this era on live (ballpark figure). Personally I would rather that they focused on Kunark rather then a solution to a problem that will most likely be fixing itself in the near future. And if it doesn't fix the problem they can look into a solution when they dont have so much on their plate like they do now.

my two cents anyways. Flame on

[President]

[QUOTE=President;211347](whether you announce a time frame, or do it randomly) it is going to encourage racing to QUOTE]

If you announce the timeframe absolutely nothing will change. The only difference would be IB and DA would get almost double the loot. On simulated server downs maybe 1 seperate guild would get a boss target well IB and DA both split their raid forces to 2 seperate targets and downed both of them. The only time a seperate guild would get a single target would be if IB and DA camped a team each at the same spawn leaving one boss open. But when they repopped without any variance the guilds would be there again, this time not missing a single boss.

Although their should be more god loot in the game by this point and even though in classic they had server downs that refreshed mobs..it just wouldnt fix the issues we have here like everyone seems to think, or rather not to the extent that everyone would hope.

This server has a WAY higher population of level 50 players then live did on classic on ANY server. Its a very simple issue of extremely big fish in an extremely small pond. Which is probably why the GMs look at this entire thread and shrug it off because they know the only answer to this problem is Kunark and thats why they are working so furiously on it.

If you didn't announce the simulated server repop then you would have entire dungeons popping on "the majority" of players well they are grinding or playing casually. The flip side to that is if you make it so that the simulated server down only repops bosses then what your asking for is not at all classic and you lose the basis of your argument to make things more like classic. I am not in a guild that is getting Boss mobs, but we can and have had opportunities to compete. Variance DOES allow it to be competitive but competition is stiff when the server has 4 times as many raid capable people that there were during this era on live (ballpark figure). Personally I would rather that they focused on Kunark rather then a solution to a problem that will most likely be fixing itself in the near future. And if it doesn't fix the problem they can look into a solution when they dont have so much on their plate like they do now.

my two cents anyways. Flame on

You are wrong on many points. The only reason I included "announced simulated patch days" was because it has been brought up by other people. Your last paragraph(well really, the whole thing) is so filled with flaws I don't even know where to begin.

[Cars]

lol well feel free to educate me, I definitely had a quote fail moment so you could always start there.

[President]

If you announce the timeframe absolutely nothing will change. The only difference would be IB and DA would get almost double the loot. On simulated server downs maybe 1 seperate guild would get a boss target well IB and DA both split their raid forces to 2 seperate targets and downed both of them. The only time a seperate guild would get a single target would be if IB and DA camped a team each at the same spawn leaving one boss open. But when they repopped without any variance the guilds would be there again, this time not missing a single boss.

There are 5 major targets and 2 mini bosses that would respawn. It would be difficult for IB/DA to lock down both. Would both guilds get more loot than they are right now? Yes, but it's not far from classic. As Nilbog stated there were days where the server was taken down multiple times, I definitely remember weeks that had 2-3 patch/hardware maint days. Sure, DA/IB might be able to split up forces and cover more than 1 boss each right off the start, but its still a race to the rest. And still better than what we have now. I would rather IB/DA spend 3 hours poopsocking than 48 hours with a known respawn time that at least gives some of us a chance to race. Though, I would definitely be more for an unknown time.

Although their should be more god loot in the game by this point and even though in classic they had server downs that refreshed mobs..it just wouldnt fix the issues we have here like everyone seems to think, or rather not to the extent that everyone would hope.

Yes, actually, it would. Being able to poopsock each mob in its window would be a thing of the past if all mobs spawn at once. Sure, they may be able to sock one of the 5 that spawn, but not each of the 5 as they spawn.

This server has a WAY higher population of level 50 players then live did on classic on ANY server. Its a very simple issue of extremely big fish in an extremely small pond. Which is probably why the GMs look at this entire thread and shrug it off because they know the only answer to this problem is Kunark and thats why they are working so furiously on it.

Kunark is far from the only answer. This server has a higher population of 50's and far fewer raid spawns. As I stated earlier in the thread, its going to be quite a treat for guilds to attempt to get VP keys with Trak working as timers currently do. And, with Kunark, I assume they will institute the level 52 and less requirement for Naggy/Vox, effectively removing them from the target rotation for guilds that don't decide to have 15/20 level 52 alts sitting around. As it was back on the live, the spawn after patch happened during Kunark, which opened up racing even more. Now Trak/Inno/CT both require fighting to the boss before engaging (assuming you aren't poopsocking Trak or CT's spawn point).

If you didn't announce the simulated server repop then you would have entire dungeons popping on "the majority" of players well they are grinding or playing casually. The flip side to that is if you make it so that the simulated server down only repops bosses then what your asking for is not at all classic and you lose the basis of your argument to make things more like classic.

What I am asking for is to get as close to classic as possible. Do we wan't 6 hour down times every Tuesday? No. Do we want all the respawns to be at 4/5pm in the afternoon when Europe is going to bed? No, and there isn't a euro server. Will doing simulated patch days get us far closer to classic than what we have now and prevent poopsocking each mob as they spawn? Yes.

I am not in a guild that is getting Boss mobs, but we can and have had opportunities to compete. Variance DOES allow it to be competitive but competition is stiff when the server has 4 times as many raid capable people that there were during this era on live (ballpark figure). Personally I would rather that they focused on Kunark rather then a solution to a problem that will most likely be fixing itself in the near future. And if it doesn't fix the problem they can look into a solution when they dont have so much on their plate like they do now.

my two cents anyways. Flame on

Already commented on Kunark above. You must not have been playing here very long or you would know that the current solution does not allow it to be competitive, unless of course, being competitive is recruiting enough people to be able to sit 15+ people on top of a spawn for 48 hours.

And, to add it in again, the one time this did happen, DA & IB got all but 1 target. Assuming that something like this is a hand out to all the up and coming guilds is ridiculous. If DA & IB are as good as they say they are, they will continue to get the majority, if not all of the raid targets with simulated patch days. But at least, at least, we have a chance at them that doesn't require sitting on top of a spawn for 48 hours.

[Cars]

Ok I follow, and thanks for the clarity on your reasoning. I guess it also depends how often these simulated server repops would happen that would really determine the effectiveness. I know on live you would purposefully delay the kill on certain mobs so that you could control even more the next repop (as long as there wasnt another server down between) and I am certain that wouldn't change here.

Also the whole VP key issue I agreed with you on the entire time, but from a developer standpoint what is going to be higher on their list of things to do, make the current 6 or 7 Raid targets more available to everyone or realease an additional 9-10 immediate targets? I think Kunark will help either way and once they get it out they can stress the simulation of server repops or whatever it is they decide to do to adress the issue.

[President]

Kunark adds Trak, VS, and three world spawn dragons, while removing Naggy & Vox from 53+ players.

Not quite 9-10 immediate targets.

[Lazortag]

Kunark adds Trak, VS, and three world spawn dragons, while removing Naggy & Vox from 53+ players.

Not quite 9-10 immediate targets.

Well, to be perfectly fair, it also adds the later islands in sky.

[Felix]

Kunark adds Trak, VS, and three world spawn dragons, while removing Naggy & Vox from 53+ players.

Not quite 9-10 immediate targets.

Faydedar. Royals too.

[President]

I considered Faydedar a lesser encounter but I suppose the loot is still good. The islands in sky is true as well.

[Shiftin]

I considered Faydedar a lesser encounter but I suppose the loot is still good. The islands in sky is true as well.

+ the hole + a ton of epic fights once epics are released which also drop some of the same loot. We will be significantly busier with kunark out.

[President]

+ the hole + a ton of epic fights once epics are released which also drop some of the same loot. We will be significantly busier with kunark out.

Epics don't come out with the release of Kunark. I believe it was 6+ months after.

[fastboy21]

none of this matters, since it seems rogean has clearly weighed in every time this idea has been brought up by saying it not gonna happen...

Raiding DOES get more fleshed out in kunark by a factor of about three or four times more content, which alleviates the dense cluster that is raiding in vanilla classic, the bottle neck mobs will remain as tightly guarded as vox and naggy in classic.

patch day respawns on live made guilds choose between...do we want to block the guild behind us by going after VS? Trak? Gore? Sev? etc. We can't be in all places at once, so we have to pick one. This means the under-dog guilds get to poop sock it at whatever the top guild doesn't pick...allowing the little guy to get a shot at the big mob every once in a while (on patch day/server crash).

I agree with Rogean, and I think he knows best when he gives his explanation as to why its a bad idea to do here. My only point was that if not but for patch respawns on live I would have had a very different EQ experience...and so, I had initially thought that it should be recreated here.

There are cons to everything though, and we have to trust the devs to pick and chose the right things.

[President]

Three or four times more raiding content my ass. As I said before, the last time all the targets spawned, IB/DA got all but 1. Simulated patch days does not guarantee anyone anything, like the current system of sitting on a spawn point does. I can't be clear enough(apparently) when I say this is not about giving loot to everyone whose level 50, it's about recreating the "racing for mobs" which was what classic raiding was all about.

[Nealio]

Server split is another "step" in the right direction. I wish everyone would stop insisting that "my way and only my way is the best way". I have seen several options where "a little bit of this, a little bit of that..." would make for a great resolution.

Comb this entire thread, look and see. There are some great steps that combined would go far.

[Cars]

Three or four times more raiding content my ass. As I said before, the last time all the targets spawned, IB/DA got all but 1. Simulated patch days does not guarantee anyone anything, like the current system of sitting on a spawn point does. I can't be clear enough(apparently) when I say this is not about giving loot to everyone whose level 50, it's about recreating the "racing for mobs" which was what classic raiding was all about.

Yeah not even close to 4 times as much, even with everyone Keyed from trak. I was more referring to what would open "legitimately" in sky plus the overking in chardok. I wasn't even thinking about faydedar. In my head I was thinking The Hole too but I dont think the Hole comes out until closer to the epics.

[guineapig]

Hole is 2 months after Kunark
Same time as old world dragond become 52 and under.

[Pycoba_rng]

It seems quite apparent none of you would be happy regardless on what changes are made. If we increase spawn time and random encounter time, there will be the guilds that can capitilize on this the most. Which then would lead to another guild whining and crying. Oh wait I know.... Forming an alliance is a horrible idea. God forbid we get any shot at God and boss loot. OMG We might have to split loot amongst guilds~~~!!!!.. Wait a sec... your telling me you small guilds are getting god loot anyway? Lets see you have a better one??? I know lets whine and cry in the forums for the Gm's and Dev's to change it and make everything better. We whine about how this server isn't classic enough , yet we want to bend the rules to our liking... It seriusly amazes me how many of you contradict eachother with a level of hypocrisy that would make a dirty horr look like the virgin mary. When you all can function as a community and not some neo everquest nazi's. Then the server just might be fun for you. The constant bashing of new players , ideas , and in community relations is enough to make anyone sick.


Want to raid Gods? Bosses? Join IB and DA. Those that want to raid the bosses and gods that is should probably join them. Whats that you say DA and IB suck??? You don't see them whining as much in here. They suck so bad, yet they kick your asses. You will never suceed at bosses/gods in this game without poopsocking zerging, if your don't form some sort of community even outside your guild. Maybe come Kunark , which leads me to my next point.

Out of the box thinking???? BETA TEST KUNARK<<<< Get more content out quicker.... Quite trying to accomplish dev time on this crap. It needs to be focused on Kunark. I wish the Gm's/Devs would come up with a contribute hourly beta testing meter. When the meter hits a high of say 1,0000 hours serverwide. Maybe then they can give you some of their valuable time , but that might be to easy. Who would of thought beta testing Kunark would get it out quicker. Which would then lead to more content for the guilds to focus on. Which then would lead to more chances are gods/bosses. :confused: Is this out of the box thinking enough for you???

[Pycoba_rng]

Another - Comment on the bottom of my last post. If I were a dev on this server I would punish everyone who brings these thread up, or anything related to the matter. What would this punishment be? Well I would punish you to community service. You now must have to beta test kunark for a given # of hours. During your beta test you must write at least a one page thesis on your expierence and include things you tested to make sure they function correctly. Oh how rad that would be, and funny too... We could thank all the constant whiners and cryers for all the hardwork they put into Kunark. The levelof irony would be lovely.

[guineapig]

durp

The goal of the server is to replicate classic as much as possible, including the raid scene.
The discussion here includes members of many guilds, including DA and IB, who agree with the general idea and many people miss the thrill of the race.

Most of what you said was so far off topic I will not comment on it.

[Nealio]

The goal of the server is to replicate classic as much as possible, including the raid scene.
The discussion here includes members of many guilds, including DA and IB, who agree with the general idea and many people miss the thrill of the race.

Most of what you said was so far off topic I will not comment on it.

Exactly what he said.

[Hobby]

You guys should remember, regarding the tags, that we CAN see who tags these things.


Keep the rants and flames in that section.

[President]

The goal of the server is to replicate classic as much as possible, including the raid scene.
The discussion here includes members of many guilds, including DA and IB, who agree with the general idea and many people miss the thrill of the race.

Most of what you said was so far off topic I will not comment on it.

Next time don't even bother reading what he says. I got about 6 words in, checked his name, and realized it's not even worth it.

[Pycoba_rng]

The goal of the server is to replicate classic as much as possible, including the raid scene.
The discussion here includes members of many guilds, including DA and IB, who agree with the general idea and many people miss the thrill of the race.

Most of what you said was so far off topic I will not comment on it.

You just don't seem to get it. Why is it the Gm's/ Dev's problem to moderate the garbage people do on the server? You want poopsocking destroyed? More targets? Then you should be adressing the players that choose to do this. Having a dev or gm's implement something to help the needs of those who wont even help themselfs. Is borderline ridiculous. If they even implemented these simulated patch day respawns. People would still find a way to ask for more implementation of spawns/cycles etc. Point being this is being looked on by gms and devs as pathetic. When a community of 600 - 800 active players at times can't come up with a solution for themselfs in game. It sure says a lot about the players and whether not this is a good idea. It already speaks for itself.

[Nealio]

You just don't seem to get it. Why is it the Gm's/ Dev's problem to moderate the ... BLAH BLAH BLAH.

I wish there was a way to moderate those who have never played classic EQ live so they can stay out of discussions on how to make a classic EQ simulator actually simulate classic EQ.

[Shiftin]

Was fun tonight. Thanks gms.

[Jenni D]

wait. did this actually happen? but i was asleep :( damn american favouritism!! :)

[mitic]

It already speaks for itself.

hi mate, hows it going with your guild poison/venom!

wait. did this actually happen? but i was asleep :( damn american favouritism!! :)

and i was at work, obv favouritism! QQ

[Lazortag]

Will future patches reset boss timers as well?

[Shiftin]

wait. did this actually happen? but i was asleep :( damn american favouritism!! :)

It was midnight roughly when the servers came up, i'm not sure that qualifies as america primetime.

[President]

It was midnight roughly when the servers came up, i'm not sure that qualifies as america primetime.

I was about to say I was asleep when I found out about it and I'm on mountain time.

Would be nice to know if this is going to start being more regular.

[Benebric]

It was brought down for other issues, this wasn't really an intentional server repop. Corpses were insta poofing

[Shiftin]

It was brought down for other issues, this wasn't really an intentional server repop. Corpses were insta poofing

The downtime wasn't intentional. Uthgaard resetting the scripts to pop everything was, and he broadcasted as much.

[Mcbard]

So who got what so we can put the argument to rest? :)

Or will people argue that it didn't happen during "Prime" play times or some other random excuse?

[Rogean]

Uthgaard resetting the scripts to pop everything was, and he broadcasted as much.

What gave you the idea that Uthgaard did it?

Oh and it's not script based.

[President]

So, is this something we can expect to be a more common occurrence?

[Shiftin]

So who got what so we can put the argument to rest? :)

Or will people argue that it didn't happen during "Prime" play times or some other random excuse?

IB got Vox, Draco and CT. I won't speak to the other mobs we didn't go for but from what I've heard things happenned.

What gave you the idea that Uthgaard did it?

Oh and it's not script based.

He made the broadcast. /shrug. Thank you to whoever made the call. Manual, script based or accidental it was a fun reminder of classic patch days, even if it isn't a super frequent occurence.

Cheers.

[Felix]

Last night was fun. It would be nice to see more of these occurrences.

[Uthgaard]

I said it was intentional since everyone was asking. Rogean did it obv.

[President]

Thanks Guys!