#381
|
||||
|
Quote:
__________________
B]
| |||
|
#382
|
|||||
|
Quote:
__________________
Quote:
| ||||
|
#383
|
||||
|
Quote:
As much as this could be true, I believe this 1000-3000 players base is the one that wants "permanent classic" as they view the real EQ nostalgic experience as Classic-Kunark-Velious. I'm not really sure P99 would die once velious is released and beaten. I'm pretty sure a time locked server being released with the real time frame would challenge a lot of nostalgic players, as it wouldn't be as retarded as it is right now with mains and 3rd alts full VP. | |||
|
#384
|
|||
|
I do believe Velious is being intentionaly delayed as well, but not for worries about the server dying or anything else.
I believe it's being delayed because the staff himself (besides Nilbog) has lost interest in the project due to the intense CSR involved by its success. Basically, what makes P99 successful is the little GM intervention, everything is contested, etc. Server is alive because achievements mean something. On the other hand, it generates a lot of petitioning and drama. As much as raiders get bored of content, I can imagine how old it must be getting to go solve an FTE petition at Noble... Either way, the staff doesn't want to regulate the server, and don't want to deal with the mass of petitioning it involves. Imagine this with Velious. The amount of petitions would be 10 times higher. I just don't think they want to deal with it (and if you Watch latest Sirken's twitch, he states that he doesn't want "Headaches"). You got your answer pretty much. It's a vicious circle. | ||
|
#385
|
||||
|
Quote:
| |||
|
#386
|
|||
|
As old people leave new ones are just starting. And with the Velious release the server will not die. Didn't a gm mention a progression based server after its all said and done?
__________________
]
| ||
|
#387
|
|||
|
Easy raiding scene fix: 1. Remove training in VP, 2. Have server repops 3-4 weeks apart, 3. Remove variance.
Removing variance would probably be my last choice out of these 3 options. But I think the first 2 options together would increase competition in the raid scene immensely, without adding too much work for devs/GMs.
__________________
-Aftermath-
Tasslehof - 60 Druid Barlow - 60 monk Blueberrii - 60 Mage Gigglepurr - 60 Shaman Kids - 60 Rogue Fornfamnad - 60 Cleric | ||
|
#388
|
||||
|
Quote:
The staff has hinted that the community should work towards solving these problems ourselves over and over and over again. We have yet to do it. Maybe we will some day but ALL parties involved have to want to do it. I say, if you like non classic variance tracking competitions then keep your competition because the nostalgia i am looking for just isn't worth the time. What would be so hard about making a rotation with a set of rules like the next guild in the rotation has X amount of time to defeat said target before it becomes FFA? It's a rotation with competition still. | |||
Last edited by deneauth; 09-13-2013 at 11:59 PM..
|
|
#390
|
|||
|
I don't think this server currently has a big enough staff capable of enforcing the current rules on this server, as evidenced by such things as FTE shouts being implemented, training still being allowed in VP 2 + years after kunark release, and the generally chaotic atmosphere on the server during raids or even in primetime exp zones.
There are people regularly breaking server rules going unpunished, and its getting old. Furthermore I think releasing velious prior to hammering out any problems with kunark would be detrimental to the box in general. I mean who wants to log on when they have limited time to begin with, and there's a risk they will be trained repeatedly without any hope for recourse. If you aren't a solo class p99 becomes much more difficult because you end up having to rely on groups. When you are reliant on others, it takes time to get exp flowing, and you will be very disappointed when you put that time in only to have your session ruined by some asshole who trains without hesitation (intentionally or not) because there are no repercussions. Sure, there was training on live which may have at times been inevitable. But repeatedly and blatantly training people was something that always went enforced on live. Ps, I would support new GMs who's sole purpose was enforcing the servers rules fairly across guild lines, and one who displayed consistency with their decisions. There are many instances in the past where rules/rulings are changed and reversed on the fly or instances of one GM saying one thing and another GM saying something that is the complete opposite. Stuff like this needs to be minimalized, especially considering the level of trust amongst players for server staff members following past GM's indiscretions. Not trying to take a shot at any current GMs here but from what I've seen lately they have their plates full, p99 blue could probably use another 2 gms. One could be dedicated to raiding enforcement while the other handles enforcement of rules in any other situations. Of course this is an entirely different discussion altogether. This is just my observations of the current situation regaring the servers rules, suprisingly in terms of raiding AND non-raiding situations. For example, I mean just 2 weeks ago I watched a monk train a guildy 4 times (3 of which caught on fraps) blatantly intentionally, petition was made and fraps submitted. Gm response was that fraps isn't used as evidence by gms when trying to determine if a train was intentional. This is the exact opposite of what another GM regularly states in situations identical to this one. Perhaps current GMs are like too compartmentalized, because it seems on this occasion they were in direct contradiction of one another. I just really hope some kind of reform is made in regards to enforcement of rules and consistency of rules before velious drops, otherwise it is going to be utter anarchy there.
__________________
-Aftermath-
Tasslehof - 60 Druid Barlow - 60 monk Blueberrii - 60 Mage Gigglepurr - 60 Shaman Kids - 60 Rogue Fornfamnad - 60 Cleric | ||
Last edited by Tasslehofp99; 09-14-2013 at 02:43 AM..
Reason: spell checking and fact checking broz
|
|
|
|