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

[loramin]

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

don't think it gets more simplistic than permanently locking out a toon once they get an item.

I'm sort of in favor of that, but really the decision on lockouts is almost totally separate from the decision on how to do /list, so they're really separate discussions.

The part I don't like about permanent lockouts is that it's not very EverQuesty. In any system the staff comes up with, if the item isn't no drop I don't think it's a bad thing to have people farming it and selling it.

Ultimately any system is going to require large amounts of time sunk to "win" an item. Not everyone will want to do that, and I don't see anything wrong (or out of character for EQ) in letting player A farm plat, character B farm a legacy item, and then those two players exchange their goods. Permanent lockout prevents that, and makes it much harder for people who'd rather farm plat to ever see a legacy item.

But for no drop legacy items? There is no reason for anyone to ever farm two, at least if they're lore (and I think they all are?), so it doesn't even require a lockout, because who is going to waste hours camping an item they already have, and can't use a second copy of?

[Izmael]

I agree that Everquestiness shall be respected. Permanent lockout (even though I wouldn't mind personally), isn't right. Droppable or nodrop. The lockout can be randomish though, just like it was for phase 1.

[Bristlebaner]

I think you should only be allowed to be on the list for 12 hours total. Anything beyond that is encouraging unhealthy behavior, as well as account sharing.

[Taiku]

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

I think you should only be allowed to be on the list for 12 hours total. Anything beyond that is encouraging unhealthy behavior, as well as account sharing.

This wouldn't work, having a time limit on the list would just cause chaos and a lot of anger as you would finally get to #1 and then not have enough time to get the item before your window was up.

This whole thing seems like some sort of psychological torture for people who are very invested, with the fear of missing out on the items, I think the whole thing is very unhealthy and rather unethical if people are spending DAYS at the keyboard to hit afk checks while they wait for their chance to wait for an item.

I've no investment in any of these items, but I wish there was a better solution.. I feel sad for the people who are spending days camping these items, having a way to limit the time invested would be ideal but a hard time cutoff seems rough, unless each spawn that didn't contain the item dropped like a fragment of the item, so you could spend 10 hours at a camp, and come away with 1/5th of the item or whatever it works out to be.

But anyway, not classic, so enjoy your fungi staff camp experience!

[loramin]

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

I wish there was a better solution

I think either the system Izmael has proposed (/list to join the item group), the system I proposed (/list to win the rights to kill the item mob for 10 minutes), or any other system that relies on "luck and patience" (ie. playing EverQuest) as opposed to not sleeping and clicking unclassic boxes, will be a vast improvement (but just so I'm not misunderstood, the current /list was also a vast improvement over no lists at all).

Any such "randomness, not staring at your screen endlessly" system would address all the concerns you listed and more.

[Taiku]

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

I think either the system Izmael has proposed (/list to join the item group), the system I proposed (/list to win the rights to kill the item mob for 10 minutes), or any other system that relies on "luck and patience" (ie. playing EverQuest) as opposed to not sleeping and clicking unclassic boxes, will be a vast improvement (but just so I'm not misunderstood, the current /list was also a vast improvement over no lists at all).

Any such "randomness, not staring at your screen endlessly" system would address all the concerns you listed and more.

Yeah for sure, I guess what I meant by a better solution was, a better solution implemented by the staff, there seems to be a lot of good suggestions on how to handle it a bit better, though I am curious if the p99 staff are even considering different routes to take with it or if they'll just leave it how it is, and if people actually want the item, that's just the price they have to pay to maybe get it.

By how people berate the staff and complain about this server I feel like they maybe feel it's a proper punishment!

I'm not quite sure how the /list system works as far as other non heavily contested, non legacy camps, can you /list at the AC in OOT and such? I think I would take some exception to a /list system that allowed someone to come claim a random chance to kill a mob someone had been previously camping for multiple hours. Sorry if I'm totally mistaken on how this works!

[loramin]

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

Yeah for sure, I guess what I meant by a better solution was, a better solution implemented by the staff, there seems to be a lot of good suggestions on how to handle it a bit better, though I am curious if the p99 staff are even considering different routes to take with it or if they'll just leave it how it is, and if people actually want the item, that's just the price they have to pay to maybe get it.

The staff here is ... cagey. Their style is not to post a thread saying "hey guys, we hear you have problems with /list, how could it be better?"

And you can probably guess why that is, given ...

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

how people berate the staff and complain about this server I feel like they maybe feel it's a proper punishment!

Thankfully the staff doesn't judge (or punish) the whole server for the actions of a few [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.] Instead, they just do their thing (in silence), and then spring whatever they feel is best for us on us, whenever they feel like it.

But, at the same time, I wouldn't assume they don't care about how we feel. There is a wealth of evidence to suggest that the staff reads this forum, and given that they do they'd be idiots to look at a good idea and go "yeah that'd be great, but it came from a player so we're not doing that."

To the contrary, I absolutely believe they listen to us ... they just do it very quietly.

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

I'm not quite sure how the /list system works as far as other non heavily contested, non legacy camps, can you /list at the AC in OOT and such? I think I would take some exception to a /list system that allowed someone to come claim a random chance to kill a mob someone had been previously camping for multiple hours. Sorry if I'm totally mistaken on how this works!

Currently /list is only for legacy mobs on Green, and it's likely to stay that way in the near future. Keep in mind that "automated GMing" is an experiment, and as this thread shows the result of that experiment has not been "we've got the perfect solution" ... yet.

Someday I think it'd be in everyone's interest (staff and players) to implement some form of "automated GMing" to problematic non-legacy NPCs like Hadden and the AC ... but the staff are likely going to keep "dipping their toe in the water" (of automated GMing) a lot more at first before they do that.

[Kich867]

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

I think either the system Izmael has proposed (/list to join the item group), the system I proposed (/list to win the rights to kill the item mob for 10 minutes), or any other system that relies on "luck and patience" (ie. playing EverQuest) as opposed to not sleeping and clicking unclassic boxes, will be a vast improvement (but just so I'm not misunderstood, the current /list was also a vast improvement over no lists at all).

Any such "randomness, not staring at your screen endlessly" system would address all the concerns you listed and more.

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.

[Izmael]

If you're in the top 6 on the list, there's 83 % chance you don't get it awarded when it drops.

The probability of it happening twice in a row is 69 %
3 in a row: 58 %
4 in a row: 48 %
5 in a row: 40 %
6 in a row: 33.5 %
10 in a row: 16 %
15 in a row: 6.5 %
20 in a row: 2.6 %
30 in a row: 0.4 %

Basically it will be fun to listen to these 0.4% stories in RnF.

[loramin]

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.

A "guarantee of treasure for those who wait" is something you have to lose to get rid of "endless AFK clicks". You can make the system reward those that wait for an insane time, or you can reward the patient and the lucky (but this means unlucky people might make hundreds of attempts and never get an item).

Which should we have? Well I'd answer that with another question: how many things (outside of lists) in EverQuest do you get by being lucky/patient (and the unlucky get screwed), and how many things do you have guaranteed because you sat somewhere for days without sleeping?