Green99 pro strats and early game goals

[aaezil]

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

Perhaps some people will enjoy it. Don't think I will, Blue-server p99 bored me after 1 month when I found it (and I'm someone who ADORED the original Everquest). If the devs are only trying to copy the same old game code, it's going to play nothing like it did in 1999. It will be a hollow experience. I'm sure it will be marginally better than what current p99 is, because at least Old World era EQ has less boring timesinks and less twinking and creates a tighter community, but it's not going to be worth my time if they don't try to make the content more dynamic.

After reading that i’m glad the devs are making these emu servers for their enjoyment not for yours or mine

[Zuranthium]

Hmm, everyone wants to create something for their own enjoyment. Or for profit, which they believe will allow them buy enjoyment. It's more a question of if people know how to do such a thing, and how many other people will agree with their opinion and want to join in the same type of enjoyment.

A lot of people are running in circles without finding what they are looking for, often thinking they are on the right path, when they aren't. Some people may know exactly what's best for themselves and a certain system, but not have the means of making it happen. Such is the world, but do have to fight to shape it how we think is best.

[Pogi]

I would like to main a ranger this go around, but will Rangers be completely shunned from groups on a fresh server?

[cactus]

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

I'll play on Green if it's PvE, but dear god I hope it's Teams PvP.

"Play nice" rules are such a huge PITA on fresh PvE servers, especially one like this with no dynamic spawns or layering. Everything is going to be camped, around the clock.

Killing people for camps would be so much more fun.

agreed

[Wallicker]

Locking down the locket of escape 24/7 until it stops dropping then owning a monopoly on fast mobilizations to ToV.

[Mewse]

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

I would like to main a ranger this go around, but will Rangers be completely shunned from groups on a fresh server?

If exp penalties are going to be around, hybrids in general are going to have a tough time I think. Since the exp penalty doesn't just apply to you, but your whole group.

It's dumb, but it's classic - so that's probably how it's going to be on Green.

[Nuggie]

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

Locking down the locket of escape 24/7 until it stops dropping then owning a monopoly on fast mobilizations to ToV.

The first time around there were a few guilds that did lock out certain camps. They eventually lost them for one reason or another. Server goes down, someone falls asleep, sloppy play and dies, etc.

I think whatever current play nice rules are will make this succeed/fail.

[loramin]

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

The first time around there were a few guilds that did lock out certain camps. They eventually lost them for one reason or another. Server goes down, someone falls asleep, sloppy play and dies, etc.

I think whatever current play nice rules are will make this succeed/fail.

Please, gods of P99, all it will take is a slight rules amendment to our current PnP (something to the effect of "all camps must be passed to the next person waiting in line") to completely eliminate "camp locks".

And P99 should eliminate them, because "camp locks" were very much not a part of classic EQ. Heck, if you read the guide book from back then, people weren't even forced to pass to the next in line: if two people disagreed over a camp the guide just showed up and (after trying to get the two to compromise) literally made them /random to see who got it!

And after the random, the winner was forced to hand the camp over to the other person. Try locking a camp down with those rules [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Originally Posted by Customer Service Guidelines for EverQuest (Kunark Era, emphasis added)

8.2.3 Contested Spawn Complaints

When a complaint is received indicating that a spawn or kill is contested, a disruption investigation should first be initiated according to the procedures of section 8.2.2 to determine if harassment or Zone/Area disruption is occurring. After following those procedures and issuing warnings as necessary, instruct the parties involved in the contested spawn situation to work out a compromise. Then leave the scene.

If another complaint is received involving the same spawn site, another disruption investigation should be initiated. After following those procedures and issuing warnings as necessary, if any of the parties involved were involved in the initial situation, establish a compromise for the parties to which the parties are required to abide. The compromise should be as described in section 8.2.3.1. Any party refusing to abide by the compromise established by the CS Representative should be issued a warning for disruption.

Originally Posted by Customer Service Guidelines for EverQuest (Kunark Era)

8.2.2.2 When a Disruption call comes in, the process is as follows:

Identify the complainer and the suspected antagonist. Document their character name, level, zone, and account name.
Go to the zone in question, remaining invisible and anonymous, being sure not to tell
the petitioner you are coming.
Bring a fellow Guide if possible, preferably invisible and /anon.
Observe the behavior in question and that of those complaining.
If there is no problem with the behavior as you and your fellow Guide see it, then explain this to the complainer and close the call.

Originally Posted by Customer Service Guidelines for EverQuest (Kunark Era, emphasis added)

8.2.3.1 The compromise will require all parties to take turns killing the spawn(s). All parties involved in the contested spawn should be instructed to use /random 0 100 to choose a number. The CS Representative then uses /random 0 100. The individual with the closest number to the CS Representative’s number will be next in the rotation. The CS Representative then bases the rest of the rotation order on how close the other parties’ numbers were to theirs. The compromise established by a CS Representative must be objective and not require the CS Representative to choose one customer over another based on subjective criteria. The CS Representative is the arbiter in any disputes in establishing the compromise.

[Ltldogg]

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

Please, gods of P99, all it will take is a slight rules amendment (something to the effect of "all camps must be passed to the next person waiting in line") to completely eliminate "camp locks".

And P99 should eliminate them, because "camp locks" were very much not a part of classic EQ. Heck, if you read the guide book from back then, people weren't even forced to pass to the next in line: if someone else wanted the camp the guide just showed up and made the two random to see who got it!

Agree 100%

[fortior]

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

And P99 should eliminate them, because "camp locks" were very much not a part of classic EQ. Heck, if you read the guide book from back then, people weren't even forced to pass to the next in line: if two people disagreed over a camp the guide just showed up and (after trying to get the two to compromise) literally made them /random to see who got it!

Signed