/list feature first phase completed - reviews and suggestions for the future

[Phaezed-Reality]

end of welfare pixel era is over, for now. may brad rest easy again.

[fadetree]

there is no way to prevent account sharing of one sort or the other. People will do anything they possibly can to get around any rules or conditions. There is no way to prevent people gaming this feature by substituting other humans behind the char.

[GnomeCaptain]

List is terrible.

Creating a situation in which the only people that win are those that cheat (with account sharing) or stay glued to their screens for 24-48 hours or more (and thus threaten their own lives) is incredibly irresponsible.

And it's about as far from EQ as possible, which is ironic given this project is supposed to be all about recreating classic.

[fadetree]

Well, the only other options are to:
1. allow kill stealing, camp fighting, young lawyering, and mass hysteria to go on willy nilly with no redress.
2. Have a GM spend 100% of their time physically watching the camp.
3. remove all legacy items and be done with it.

There are no good solutions here. There is one sort of less terrible solution, which is the current list system. I probably would have gone with #3. Even the suggestion for changing the list system to a random award of the item is terrible, because bad rng will screw you over, you could have some poot who just got there get the item after you've been waiting 40 hours, plus guilds would overload the list with people to increase chances. It is just not solveable.

[boukk]

-Permanent lockout (no reseting with sever reset either)
-Randomly awarded to top 6-12

[boukk]

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

I like this idea ... as I like any idea that returns /list to playing EverQuest (ie. luck and patience) instead of playing a non-EQ made-up game (click the box every few minutes).

That being said, I don't think the group thing is necessary at all, and it'd be simpler to just list for a random chance to kill the mob when it spawns. To solve the "people don't kill their own mob" problem, make it so winning /list only gives you a ten minute window to kill: if you fail to do so in that time, /list happens again, giving the mob to someone else.

Again, I'm happy with any "more-EverQuesty" solution (and also, to be clear, /list 1.0 is still far more "EverQuesty" than not having a list at all) ... it's just that among all possible solutions I favor simpler ones over complex ones.

Solo kill fungus king? hmmmm [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

[boukk]

Originally Posted by Kich867 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

The random person in "group" solution makes a lot of sense but only if your chances of receiving the item increases each time you don't get it. At face value, handing it to someone in the top 6 could mean you never end up receiving it.

Just like any group then, can happen but how likely is it?

[Kohedron]

As janky as it sounds, I actually agree with awarding it randomly to the first 6 in line

[magnetaress]

Sometimes we need to just let bad things happen. In order for the community to grow and mature. Kill stealing should be legal. I guess. Like 99% of the time.

[Gatorsmash]

1- list records your MAC address. This is already shared info when you connect to your IP.

2. Add AHK detection. Not sure why people think ahk stuff happens in fps full loot games and not here but it does and did.

Edit - And for the uninitiated, takes about 15 mins to script AHK to click on a random Box or fill out a field in a window