Bring back quest XP for those of us playing at a normal pace.

[Gorster]

Can I have your stuff?

[Gustoo]

Maybe there was a conspiracy that staff got wind of and some guilds have 100's of alts fully loaded with bone chips and crushbone belts and pads that they have stockpiled to rocket toons from 0 to 50 in mere hours and so staff did what they did.

There are probably reasons.

[Baler]

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

Maybe there was a conspiracy that staff got wind of and some guilds have 100's of alts fully loaded with bone chips and crushbone belts and pads that they have stockpiled to rocket toons from 0 to 50 in mere hours and so staff did what they did.

There are probably reasons.

most of that stuff you mentioned was nerfed when green launched.

[Kaaji1359]

This issue is pissing people off more and more as time goes on. 2-weeks would've been fine, but a month? Come on now. Constant people complaining about it in the newbie zones.

I love the top comment from the Reddit thread today:

When shit like this happens its a glaring reminder that this is a volunteer-led project largely dominated by poop socking weirdos.

The only way something like this gets greenlit is because the staff have completely lost perspective. The UN/fake lawyer thing is one of the most cringeworthy things I've ever seen. Now you have people fighting over server-wide firsts on an emulated server, and the staff actually think the right move is to inconvenience EVERYONE else on the server (Not to mention NOT CLASSIC) for some nutjobs on the forums.

Think about it - they decided that instead of allowing everyone to play and level normally, they would alter a fundamental aspect of the game, because an unemployed minority on Discord/forums were mad that the server-wide first to 60 on the THIRD p1999 server wouldn't be 'legit'. I can't imagine that anyone involved in p1999 has any sort of RL project development/management experience.

[Gorster]

That redit post is trash, paricularly the shot about project dev/management. People scream not classic, but ignore people having multi 50s on an account at Kunark launch which sure as hell isn't classic. Half the server being bound at the firepots on day one of Kunark certainly isn't classic, particularly when many of those bound would unironicly decry Luclin teleports of the PoK books as 'ruining the game'. Welcome to balancing classic rules with classic experience, the no lifers ruin shit for everyone else. Personally they should have just banned the hoarders and called it good.

[Baler]

P99 hasn't been classic for a long time and that's not even server bashing because it's the truth.

Can anyone think of any examples before they added CSR to VP?
To me that was the first step towards not classic. The poop sockers as people call them got the best of management and management shut their shit down. In turn opening the doors to not classic changes in the spirit of keeping the classic environment and community wellness.

Most people on p99 think this started with NToV but it didn't.

[Castle2.0]

Allowing people to bind @ firepots was classic. Everyone and their mother binding @ firepots didn't happen in classic.

One is a mechanism. One is a historical fact.

Are we trying to preserve the mechanisms of classic and fill that world with our own dreams? Or, are we trying to recreate the history of classic as it just-so happened?

If we had to choose one, I think we'd choose the former over the latter. Or we're just robo-elves reliving an overly told story, instead of telling our own stories.

What was great about open sandbox worlds? You had freedom. You didn't have to conform: Stand in this line. Ride this rollercoaster with this # of ups and downs. Smile, say cheese, get your picture, go home, and forget about the forgettable experience.

[Kaaji1359]

Originally Posted by Castle2.0 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Allowing people to bind @ firepots was classic. Everyone and their mother binding @ firepots didn't happen in classic.

One is a mechanism. One is a historical fact.

Are we trying to preserve the mechanisms of classic and fill that world with our own dreams? Or, are we trying to recreate the history of classic as it just-so happened?

If we had to choose one, I think we'd choose the former over the latter. Or we're just robo-elves reliving an overly told story, instead of telling our own stories.

What was great about open sandbox worlds? You had freedom. You didn't have to conform: Stand in this line. Ride this rollercoaster with this # of ups and downs. Smile, say cheese, get your picture, go home, and forget about the forgettable experience.

Really, I find it hilarious you're trying to defend destroying a core fundamental aspect of EverQuest, which affects 99% of the player base, just to prevent 0.01% of the player base from obtaining an early achievement. Especially considering all of the BETTER alternatives to just "turning off Quest experience for a month."

At it's core, this will (and has) alienated some of the returning player base which Project1999 relies on to keep a healthy population, all because the Devs were lazy and chose a poor solution rather than some of the MANY other ways this could have been fixed.

[NPC]

They could easily turn on exp quest for low level characters, and keep the exp quest off for anyone over 15th level.

[Sabin76]

Originally Posted by Kaaji1359 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Really, I find it hilarious you're trying to defend destroying a core fundamental aspect of EverQuest, which affects 99% of the player base, just to prevent 0.01% of the player base from obtaining an early achievement. Especially considering all of the BETTER alternatives to just "turning off Quest experience for a month."

At it's core, this will (and has) alienated some of the returning player base which Project1999 relies on to keep a healthy population, all because the Devs were lazy and chose a poor solution rather than some of the MANY other ways this could have been fixed.

I don't think you understand which side of the debate Castle is on...