Quote:
Originally Posted by loramin
[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
It's all just so ... unclassic [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
(For the record, I supported /list 1.0 originally, but NO ONE remembers twenty-odd person days-long lines for ANYTHING on live. We just need a 2.0 version that trades 2nd, 3rd, 4th etc. places in line for a random chance for anyone on list to become #2. On live, good loot was always about patience and luck, and the same should be true here.) |
I have to agree. With skepticism (and some constructive criticism after playing them), I accepted the original /list system because of its need to automate what would otherwise be an untenable situation for GMs to maintain. I had hoped that some of the drawbacks would eventually get worked out later on.
The AFK checks on multi-day camp are atrocious and, honestly, unhealthy designed play. (If you can really call it "play" at all.)
There is no chance of the RNG rewarding a casual player (casual is anyone who can't sit for two days waiting for their turn --- not exaggerating). In classic EQ there is a chance that such a player gets rewarded. If it takes an average statistical player 100 hundred hours to farm an item, he should be able to break that commitment up (10 hours here --- so casual, 10 hours there, a few hours here, etc.) and, in the aggregate, commit enough time to eventually let the RNG give him his reward. Those players are shit out of luck with this system --- and, in my opinion, it is more than a small demographic.
I understand the need for creating an in-game system to somehow deal with this stuff, but I feel like there are better solutions that we should find in the future compared to the current iteration of /list.