Some core issues with antonica in classic eq(why everyone goes to guk)

[Roth]

So I am someone that has always wanted to go off the beaten path, but I've had a reality check the last couple days that made me realize what the core problems are.

-guk has an insane zem for no reason. Compare to cazicthule's zem of 85 and there is literally no reason to go to cazicthule over guk.

-guk has lower hp mobs. I don't know why this is, but in general it's just way easier to kill frogs. I brought a group to runnyeye and for some reason everything had insane hp.

-All the other dungeons have tons of healers, casters, or punishing mechanics. guk has this but not to the same degree.

So basically, if you actually try some of these unpopular zones, you'll realize really quick that there is just no reason to not go to guk. Honestly the original dev's just did a terrible job balancing the zones and since we're using all those values there's no way to fix it. There is just no good place to level other than guk 18+ on antonica if you actually want good exp, period.

edit: I forgot to add sol a/sol b and najena are fine as well. But your options are limited.

[derpcake2]

git guk

[jacob54311]

This risk/reward issue has been a problem with EQ through out the time I played, not just classic.

Game design that pretty much strongly encourages players to ignore big parts of the game. I remember in Lost Dungeons of Norrath seemed like everyone would keep doing the same handful of dungeons over and over and over again, because of the way the rewards were set up.

Players will opt for repetition if it means making much faster progress. It's unfortunate. They kind of tried to do something about it with hot zones, but didn't go nearly as far as they could have, IMO. Imagine if zem's like the one in GUK moved around every week or month or whatever?

[Roth]

Originally Posted by jacob54311 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

This risk/reward issue has been a problem with EQ through out the time I played, not just classic.

Game design that pretty much strongly encourages players to ignore big parts of the game. I remember in Lost Dungeons of Norrath seemed like everyone would keep doing the same handful of dungeons over and over and over again, because of the way the rewards were set up.

Players will opt for repetition if it means making much faster progress. It's unfortunate. They kind of tried to do something about it with hot zones, but didn't go nearly as far as they could have, IMO. Imagine if zem's like the one in GUK moved around every week or month or whatever?

If the game was balanced to reward people properly, I think it would be a lot better. For example give runnyeye a 180 zem.... it's a hard zone and deserves it. Buff the zem in permafrost or ct.

[branamil]

Honestly the way they coded casters in this game just isnt worth it. They hit just as hard as warrior mobs but you also have to deal with the insane shit they cast, and through the walls and ceilings too.

[Keza]

Idk. Guk is better overall but mostly I'd say because of loot. I trio'd a mage/war/dru on blue primarily in SolB and the exp was crazy good. We had no loot drops running the tunnel area of SolB that connects to SolA, but the exp was absurdly good and well made up for any design/loot deficits. The mobs I believe are warrior/shamans. I don't think SolB has wizards though, which I consider to be the worst mob to fight. There's a reason no one exps in places like perma/sola, and it's not just location. Getting nuked for 200+ blows.

This is one of those things where I wouldn't mind a small bit of non-classic interference, just to give people an actual reason to go to other places.

[jacob54311]

Originally Posted by Keza [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Idk. Guk is better overall but mostly I'd say because of loot. I trio'd a mage/war/dru on blue primarily in SolB and the exp was crazy good. We had no loot drops running the tunnel area of SolB that connects to SolA, but the exp was absurdly good and well made up for any design/loot deficits. The mobs I believe are warrior/shamans. I don't think SolB has wizards though, which I consider to be the worst mob to fight. There's a reason no one exps in places like perma/sola, and it's not just location. Getting nuked for 200+ blows.

This is one of those things where I wouldn't mind a small bit of non-classic interference, just to give people an actual reason to go to other places.

Yeah. Tweaking the ZEM's in some of these zones so that they make more sense wouldn't really change how the game is played.

[Roth]

Originally Posted by Keza [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Idk. Guk is better overall but mostly I'd say because of loot. I trio'd a mage/war/dru on blue primarily in SolB and the exp was crazy good. We had no loot drops running the tunnel area of SolB that connects to SolA, but the exp was absurdly good and well made up for any design/loot deficits. The mobs I believe are warrior/shamans. I don't think SolB has wizards though, which I consider to be the worst mob to fight. There's a reason no one exps in places like perma/sola, and it's not just location. Getting nuked for 200+ blows.

This is one of those things where I wouldn't mind a small bit of non-classic interference, just to give people an actual reason to go to other places.

Solb has the same zem as lower guk, but the issue with sol b is that the mobs have higher hp. But solb isn't a deserted zone, it isn't nearly as problematic as some other places. Same with sol a - sol a is fine in comparison to the worst zones.

[Lordess]

Originally Posted by Roth [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Solb has the same zem as lower guk, but the issue with sol b is that the mobs have higher hp. But solb isn't a deserted zone, it isn't nearly as problematic as some other places. Same with sol a - sol a is fine in comparison to the worst zones.

SolB becomes a lot more popular once people start getting better geared and are able to stay ahead of respawns in spite of the higher average hp on mobs. But sadly what a lot of people have said in this thread are true. Back in classic though people didn’t really know about ZEMs and just grouped where they felt safest or could easily find groups, that’s why Aviaks, Gnoll spires, undead in Lake Rathe, Cyclopes and giant skelies in Rathe mountains, etc, were all popular spots to level back then. Only the Bravest attempted to level in dungeons because of how dangerous they were, not even realizing they were getting more xp per kill probably until around Kunark when a bit more was known about the mechanics that were going on behind the scenes.

[Wwen42]

Originally Posted by Keza [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Idk. Guk is better overall but mostly I'd say because of loot. I trio'd a mage/war/dru on blue primarily in SolB and the exp was crazy good. We had no loot drops running the tunnel area of SolB that connects to SolA, but the exp was absurdly good and well made up for any design/loot deficits. The mobs I believe are warrior/shamans. I don't think SolB has wizards though, which I consider to be the worst mob to fight. There's a reason no one exps in places like perma/sola, and it's not just location. Getting nuked for 200+ blows.

This is one of those things where I wouldn't mind a small bit of non-classic interference, just to give people an actual reason to go to other places.

I agree, a light touch to make subtle improvements is what I'd want to do. The core elements of EQ was solid, but lacked a lot of polish. FFXI blew me away with how polished everything was compared to EQ. The amount of content that went untouched because Verant never bothered to try and fix stuff seems like a real wasted opportunity.