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

[Izmael]

So we just went through the first incarnation of the /list feature.
Post your thoughts and eventual suggestions for improvement.

I'll start.

The good: overall, a great success. It worked exactly as announced, I haven't ran into any glitches. It allowed people who aren't as dedicated to EQ as some others to still compete to an extent which is a Good Thing. Meanwhile, it allowed the most commited ones to still get the lion's share of the loot, as it should be.

Kudos for the implementation, to whoever did it (I assume Rogean).


The bad: how it draws people to wish others (with a better # position than them) failed and the inevitable lawyering that ensues. The mechanics of /list create too many situations where instead of camaraderie, it results in tension and hard feelings. It's hard to imagine the number of /petition that have been generated by the manastone camp alone.



A solution to this problem has been proposed - randomly award the coveted item to one of the first 6 players on the list - drawing the mechanics of a particular camp closer to what it would be without /list - an exp group camping it and /rolling on the loot.

I would like to know what the GMs and the rest of people who used /list think of it.

[Natewest1987]

find a way to prevent account sharing or the whole thing is BS

[xalg]

it makes account sharing a requirement for the most coveted items and it encourages those who can't or don't want to account share to stay up for unhealthy periods of time. if it was up to me, a random person on the list would be selected on each drop without regard to their position.

[Izmael]

But account sharing is fine. It involves trusting your friends and receive trust from them, which is good.

[sajbert]

This /list system was downright unhealthy, as in actually physically unhealthy.

It promoted account sharing, which isn’t recommended but somehow still allowed despite the obvious issues with it.

It is difficult to do as a person with actual real/life responsibilities.

It could be incredibly streaky. I saw 23 hours between J-boots drops, thus it’s a cointoss each attempt.



Thus, why not just make it so that you EITHER collect points each hour in queue OR that anyone who’s spent 1/5th of the time of the longest listed player gets a chance to roll on the item dropped. I.e. you can actually take a break and do it in segments.

[magnetaress]

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

This /list system was downright unhealthy, as in actually physically unhealthy.

It promoted account sharing, which isn’t recommended but somehow still allowed despite the obvious issues with it.

It is difficult to do as a person with actual real/life responsibilities.

It could be incredibly streaky. I saw 23 hours between J-boots drops, thus it’s a cointoss each attempt.



Thus, why not just make it so that you EITHER collect points each hour in queue OR that anyone who’s spent 1/5th of the time of the longest listed player gets a chance to roll on the item dropped. I.e. you can actually take a break and do it in segments.

whoever has the most played time should get the loot, veneration, respect your elders, once they loot it blocks them from list for 3 weeks IRL and subtracts a year or something from their played

[Indecisive]

But you're not camping the item yourself, which is the spirit of the system.

If your IP changes, you should be moved to the bottom of the list.

[Izmael]

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

But you're not camping the item yourself, which is the spirit of the system.

If your IP changes, you should be moved to the bottom of the list.

What's wrong with having someone helping you camp an item? It has been in EQ since day 1.

Also, if you declare it wrong, you cannot really police that. Someone's router can reboot and the IP changes. Or they are using mobile internet and IP changes often. Not to mention, sneaky people will find a way around it anyway (screen sharing etc, and you cannot really police that).

[Elijah850]

Agree with Indecisive

[Indecisive]

Yeah, there would be problems with it, just like every solution. Nothing would be perfect. But it would go a long way towards making it more fair for people who are willing to put in the work, without making it so only guilds or people with a friends list to the floor can win the item. That was the whole point of the /list system in the first place.

Back of the line on IP change, and random 1 - 6 on list to mimic full group.