Poll: Shards?

[Lostprophets]

Originally Posted by Splorf22 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Read the Sky rotation thread in the guild section and then tell me we need more players.

I agree, we're too populated end-game. Playing nice is good but still too crowded...so correct me if I'm wrong but basically to sum up your wall of text in 4 words...

Instancing in Raid Zones?

[t0lkien]

If you want shards in any way shape or form, go to any of the hundreds of other cookie cutter MMOs available. Leave this one alone.

[fullmetalcoxman]

Originally Posted by t0lkien [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

If you want shards in any way shape or form, go to any of the hundreds of other cookie cutter MMOs available. Leave this one alone.

So you think it's fine the way it is?

[SirAlvarex]

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

I agree, we're too populated end-game. Playing nice is good but still too crowded...so correct me if I'm wrong but basically to sum up your wall of text in 4 words...

Instancing in Raid Zones?

Basically, but there is a set limit to the # of instances. So there'd be just 3 Sebilis' at all times.

Depending on how mobs are handled (whether mobs are all considered static objects in the database or dynamic ones created as the they spawn), it could be a nightmare to code. Plus more hardware.

It still wouldn't work tho. The real issue is that some guilds/players have 4+ accounts they can use to log onto any raid spawn. So now those guilds will just get 3x the loot since they can now compete for 2 more spawns on the new shards.

[Rhambuk]

Originally Posted by Splorf22 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

The server would be fine with 1500 players . . . .

I remember when i first started running through Nfreeport and there was a level 48 mage soloing 1 city guard. All camps were full, all solo camps were taken, and every other guard in the city was being solod by another caster.

it's possible and I would love to see it, but people don't have the patience for that anymore.

[Splorf22]

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

I agree, we're too populated end-game. Playing nice is good but still too crowded...so correct me if I'm wrong but basically to sum up your wall of text in 4 words...

Instancing in Raid Zones?

Three paragraphs is a wall of text? I weep for the Twitter generation [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

But no, as I said its specifically not instancing. Instancing is I take my guild to the entrance of Sebilis, we say create-zone, and we get a new complete copy of sebilis whenever we want, i.e. infinite raid mobs. Sharding would simply be at all times there are 3 copies of sebilis, and your character can only go to one. Again, think of it has having different servers running Project 1999 for the high-end zones but only one copy of the low-end zones.

[khanable]

not classic, no vote

[Ezrick]

Originally Posted by Splorf22 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Three paragraphs is a wall of text? I weep for the Twitter generation [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

But no, as I said its specifically not instancing. Instancing is I take my guild to the entrance of Sebilis, we say create-zone, and we get a new complete copy of sebilis whenever we want, i.e. infinite raid mobs. Sharding would simply be at all times there are 3 copies of sebilis, and your character can only go to one. Again, think of it has having different servers running Project 1999 for the high-end zones but only one copy of the low-end zones.

No, it doesn't work that way. To take the EQ2 instanced raid zones as an example: you would take your guild to Sebelis (it may be called for raid purposes 'Trakanon's Lair'), enter the zone and complete your raid. That raid zone then is unavailable to any player who entered for a set period of time (typically in EQ2 it was one week). The single group Sebelis zone would still be available to everyone, though without raid level mobs.

[Noselacri]

The basic idea is to split the server into multiple servers and allow /movelog, but only the high-end zones. Each guild can only exist on one shard. If you are in a global zone (all the low/mid level zones like Qeynos or East Commonlands or Mistmoore) you could find players of all guilds leveling up together and wearing and trading gear obtained in any of the various shards. However, whenever you zone into one of the sharded zones (zones like Sebilis or Sky) the server checks your shard flag and moves you to the appropriate copy, exactly as if you were playing on a separate server.

That's not actually quite what I had in mind. A guild wouldn't simply get its own instance of all of Sebilis, it would get a shard (a separate server, basically) containing only the actual raid targets as well as their associated trash mobs if relevant. This is important as guilds would otherwise just stay on their shard to farm fungi tunics and Velious quest armor. So P99 would have one communal Sebilis server, but Trakanon doesn't spawn in it; instead, each raid guild can move at will to their own designated shard where Trakanon spawns on his classic spawn cycle. Not every raid mob in the entire game would need to be moved to shards, just the ones that really matter and cause conflict. Shit like Phinny and Doljomoljowhatever could remain in the communal zones.

This is really going to be the only way to have a raid scene on P99 that doesn't utterly fuck over 90% of the playerbase. Proposed solutions tend to get nowhere because the most vocal people on the forum are largely the ones who aren't affected by the current situation, being in the crowd that gets to raid. This is why a poll is pointless. It's like asking a bunch of corporate executives if the minimum wage should be raised -- you'll get a reponse that sounds like it's the worst idea ever conceived. The fact remains that the raid situation is the biggest elephant in the room of the server's entire history, the most constant and prevalent problem, and actually one of the things that deviate the most from how Everquest was back in the day.

Ignoring the server's biggest problem will just cause it to continue to comprise about 30% of the discussions taking place on the forum, and to make players quit in frustration. Like I said in the other thread, it's the reason this server has less than a thousand players at peak despite being the best emulated server ever made and the only serious option for classic Everquest. Unfortunately, the developers don't seem to want the problem to get solved.

[DoucLangur]

I see you put some effort into a constructive suggestion. However I do see a couple of flaws here - especially because it would still mean that people on the same chart with hardcore guild xy could not ever get into the high end zones.

What I used to wish they would create back during EQlive progression times:
A cluster of servers Vanilla only - Kunark only - Velious only - Luclin only - etc., which would allow movelogs into the direction of newer expansions ONLY.

I.e. once raidguild001 wants to do Kunark, they would have to /movelog and leave the Vanilla server to the rest of the players who e.g. didn't yet get to kill Innoruuk/Cazic Thule, etc.

They can still kill the same old world mobs on their new Kunark server, but without influencing the Vanilla server economy.

Then when people wanna do Velious, they have to turn their back on the Kunark server, giving more and more players a shot at Veeshan's Peak.

While this may have been a good idea for Progression servers, I do not see this as an option for P1999, because we don't have enough players, I'm afraid...

Still - back then it would have given many casual players a chance to see content otherwise blocked by hardcore players.