The only fair way to "fix" /list

[therealmd]

Why does everyone complain about this list system? Yes you may have to wait a ridiculous amount of hours to get an item because of sharing, but you at least have a chance. Without the list system you would literally have 0 chance at getting any legacy item. These items would be locked down by top guilds and no one else would ever get a shot. So yeah you have to wait, but it’s the only legit way any casual player stands a chance at obtaining a legacy item. Stop complaining already.

[DMN]

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

Since when sharing accounts is illegal or even wrong?

In EQ? About the time you were wishing for pubes.

[loramin]

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

Why does everyone complain about this list system? Yes you may have to wait a ridiculous amount of hours to get an item because of sharing, but you at least have a chance. Without the list system you would literally have 0 chance at getting any legacy item. These items would be locked down by top guilds and no one else would ever get a shot. So yeah you have to wait, but it’s the only legit way any casual player stands a chance at obtaining a legacy item. Stop complaining already.

Dude, don't let perfect be the enemy of the good. Yes, /list 1.0 is a million times better than not having lists at all. But no, that does not mean that a "2.0" /list couldn't be better.

And in fact, it could be much better, very easily. Simply change it so that you don't list for a position to wait, you list for a chance to get the mob when it spawns. As far as I can tell, this fixes all /list issues, and gets us back to:

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

Nah it should be changed to something more in the spirit of original EQ that this server is trying to emulate. Back then you could show up and camp/join a group at evil eye if you only had an hour or two to play and still get your shot at winning one.

[Sweetbaby Jesus]

Should make it so the list items are randomly awarded to one of the top 6 on list to mimic a group camping the mob instead of it being granted solely to the number 1 on list.

[loramin]

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

Should make it so the list items are randomly awarded to one of the top 6 on list to mimic a group camping the mob instead of it being granted solely to the number 1 on list.

I think that'd be cool too. The important thing to me is changing /list from being a reward for not playing EverQuest, to actually being EverQuest-like, and to me that boils down to the system fundamentally being about luck and patience (not avoiding sleep while clicking boxes).

Whether you have a "short list" or "no list", as long as someone can show up, try for a list item, then go to bed and come back the next day, that will feel more like EverQuest to me.

[Izmael]

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

Should make it so the list items are randomly awarded to one of the top 6 on list to mimic a group camping the mob instead of it being granted solely to the number 1 on list.

This.

It would fix the one obnoxious thing about lists - people you are grouped with, but are behind you in the queue, are interested in you going LD, dieing, missing a popup, etc.

It would also most likely get rid of some /petitions when the #1 is stalling because they can't or won't kill the mob for whatever reason and the others are unwilling to help (maybe hoping they'd muscle #1 into engaging and he'd die and drop off).

Now, of course sometimes a guy would join the /list, and get lucky and win the item at #5 or #6 and be out quickly, while the #1 or #2 have maybe been there for 48 hours already, but got unlucky with the random-to-first-6 award thing. It will be sometimes frustrating. But it will all smooth out in the long run because we all have the same amount of luck, in the long run.

[Mblake81]

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

Should make it so the list items are randomly awarded to one of the top 6 on list to mimic a group camping the mob instead of it being granted solely to the number 1 on list.

Should make it so that the item drops and is lootable by the group that camps it, opening up in some odd minutes after the kill if no one does.

[Izmael]

Originally Posted by Mblake81 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Should make it so that the item drops and is lootable by the group that camps it, opening up in some odd minutes after the kill if no one does.

But this would essentially remove the /list feature from the game - most current and future /list items never rot.

Randomly award to one of the top 6 is IMO the sweet spot. Most of the time it's the exp group anyway.

[Mblake81]

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

But this would essentially remove the /list feature from the game - most current and future /list items never rot.

Randomly award to one of the top 6 is IMO the sweet spot. Most of the time it's the exp group anyway.

Sure sounds good, maybe they can do some sort of /random 100 mechanic if its not too much trouble to code.

[Xathier]

I would like to see the /list work like this.

Named is killed and loot works like always to the group that kills it

When named dies /list uses same %drop rate chance, and if the item roll is successful, gives a confirmation box to the person at #1 and just puts it into the inventory of that person.

More items would enter the world faster and that would have to be watched, and all items would have to be lore.