OMG I got his attention! /em squeals
[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
Quote:
Originally Posted by nilbog
[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
source?
|
I'm going by two things. First, the wiki: if you look at the
history of the Recommended Levels and ZEM List, you'll see that some version of the same verbiage has been there since 2011!
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by wiki (emphasis added)
In the old days of live EQ the server sent the actual ZEM values, which were recorded by studious players. These values were used as a basis for the EQEmu numbers, and so are in place on most stock EQEmu servers. These numbers were never known to have changed over the history of classic EQ live.
The developers of p1999 have stated that they will not publicly release the current ZEM list, in the spirit of classic EQ.
The "stock" values given here, which may be representative as a whole, have definitely been changed in some zones.
|
When it comes to P99 knowledge, I defer to my elders, and my assumption was that if that was true in 2011, and no one has seen you post a contradiction to it since, then it's probably still true in 2020.
BUT ... if I can infer from your one-word post that that's not the case (please tell me I can), then I would
LOVE to correct that 9-year-old incorrect bit of wiki verbiage ... it's just that
to my knowledge your one word post here is the
entirety of what you've ever said about the matter.
My second "source" would be Kedge. I don't have the evidence handy right now, but I know people have reported the zone having a good ZEM in clasic, and the stock EQ Emu value for it is 100 (which would equate to a 143% increase) .. or at least it is according to the wiki. (I
swear I tried digging through the EQEmu GitHub but all I could find were the DB migrations; I don't know where they keep the seeds/fixture data.
[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.])
In any event, it certainly didn't seem to have a 143% mod on Blue when I last leveled there. But I freely admit I haven't researched this: because of my first "source", I really thought your team wasn't interested in any such research.