Changes with the February Update: Developer Updates

God, but again - please be very, very careful about putting the numeric cap for Lich Sting taps too low.

Mortal Coil? Not a biggie; outside of swarming, it's 'nice to have' but not needed for tanking.

Nerfing the SK epic will require a whole lot of rebalance for SK tanking in raids and groups - for better or worse, we've essentially been designed around that thing scaling as we level up.

Ihavent had a chance to read the entire thread but saw the newest proposal for changes:

Thank you dev's for reconsidering the shadowknight epic changes. However, I am still worried that changing the code for our epic will somehow break it and it will never work the same on raids.. I guess we will see.

I have a few questions about the "Reasonable Hit Counter" which imo is the biggest issue at this point:

As far is what is a "reasonable" hit counter, If you need information I can ask the shadowknights in my guild to parse during raids and send that information to you to help determine what this number is. We are in the newer content so we can get that information from most any raid. It would also be relevant to ask group members to get a parse as well for their hit counters. Just let me know.

And would this hit counter be the same for everyone in the group? i.e. each group member gets x hits, or would it be a blanket hit counter for the whole group i.e. 6 group members all share the same hit counter?

I agree with the people who say nerf Beam and let the others alone, but after 100 sites yesterday and the result today i think there is no way to avoid this changes.

May be i am wrong but those changes are planned to avoid lag out the servers by mass pulling and not to cripple classes to useless.

For Example
before changes:
Headshot designed to kill
Assassinate designed to kill
Decap designed to kill

after:
u ve Headshot //Decap your target for 15% ... ?????

seriously that's not an improvment thats a joke... If there is no way to really improve the affected ability's for current content than give em something new.

Tha AA grants opt out/in is ok but why not reward people via achievments rewards when they go/gone
the hard way. U ve added so much items etc as reward for achievements why not create some cool stuff
for this big challenge.

Eildain_AB

Pandas?? Dude, they have Gingerbread Men...

I'm all for whatever it takes to see HS Rangers leave! So annoying to see people who don't know how to play your class. All classes should feel this way. Only thing I can say about the class nerfs is....it came years too late.

Sorry if I am being slow, but I don't understand what this means: "Another option that was frequently requested was the ability for players to halt all progress in their leveling if they so choose. As a result, the Glyph of Indeterminable Reward will have its level reduced to 51 and all the Alaran Knowledge requirements will be removed. Anyone who wants the ability to slow down their leveling can remove excess experience through use of this glyph."

It looks to me like you all are doing a beautiful job of listening to the customer base and trying to find compromise, which is more than I can say for most companies, so Huzzah and well done.

Actually, no. What is the level cap? What are they granting? Try again.

Let's get down to the facts, people only are crying about it, because they want to feel like they are special and uber for playing a MMO game for years. A healthy game does not penalize new players to such an extent that they don't want to play, if this encourages new players to play than this is much more viable business model than having a select few elitist players in the long run. Sorry about it

Totally support the AA's granting, thank you devs for this.

I will continue to play and be happy and I have spent years getting thousands of AAs without any leve bonus. I didn't even complain when they upped the experience levels and then put in the bonus experience. There are plenty of us who will keep playing.

about HS assassinate and decap, could it be possible to set it at 3 or 4 ppm if mob 1 level less than you then 1 more for each 2 lvl lower than you ?:
for a mob lvl 99 = 3 or 4
lvl 97 => 5
lvl 95=> 6
etc till a cap you will fix so trivial mobs will be killed easy and we still need to work on non trivial mobs ?

and about time too. Same thing with my first horse, man that took a week to earn the 10k required for the slower than SoW mount, but I did it, and massively proud I was at the time... but thank god I can get one for free that goes super fast now, good times!

IMO for the most part these changes were needed to tame the SK swarming , wasnt even thinking that it was taxing the server, it was more that it was when i was hunting in an area for an hour or so with no problems when all of a sudden a SK runs thru and adds everything i was killing to his 50 mobs he already had chaseing him
this went against the old play nice policy of not disrupting others game play
my thought on this are do what you did to the rangers AOE HS , drop it to being effective only on the targeted mob keep the multible agro spells active to keep ability to tank viable and keep multible mobs off the healers /casters and dps melee this will effectively do away with the swarming
you can also increase the damage to the single mob somewhat to be able to kill fast but only 1 mob at a time this was done with the HS decap and assasinate
another wish is to remove the humanoid only limit of the HS if assasinate and decap dont have it
even cutting the proc rate in half is quite a hit but 1 or 2 times a minute is a bit harsh
all in all, thanks for raiseing cap level to 99 , and the AA thing is a godsend to all my alts

You can't get additional aa when you're max. I'm not saying it's a gamebreaker for me personally but I absolutely understand the discontent over it. I'm max aa I earned the aa the "hard" way. I don't see anyway to compensate for it though since giving me 4k aa back will give me even fewer things to do. The last release took me three days to be done with. So I could sit around with 4070 banked aa and full quest rewards and 6 stored xp glyphs if they gave them back....

I have read a good portion of the comments by other community members, but honestly have focused more on responses by devs because those responses are most indicative of both their collective thinking and areas of redress if any is to be had.

My highest level is a 72 monk, so at this point I really cannot speak to any of the proposed changes related to the reduction in abilities associated with certain characters at higher levels.

To the question of AA Granting that has gone on. I see that there is a need to do something to attract new players and also help returning players (such as myself after about four year absence). The only difficulty I personally have with the pre-determined methodology for implementing the AA Grant is the either or choice that the devs have taken. EITHER you take the AA Grant and are then forced to take what they have pre-determined as your AA requisite needs, OR you don't take them and fall further behind in both content and ability.

I do believe that this is an artificially enforced Either Or situation, unless a response can be made as to why leaving player choice with newly opened AAs can be given that would somehow negatively effect game play and/or hosting by the servers. I have yet to see any response to that except for the reply that that was not the direction they had chosen to go.

I will address the major premise of the argument for AA Granting in two parts. The first part is the need to make new/returning players viable. The second part will be geared more toward the psychological premise/argument as has been applied thus far.

1. I have no disagreement with the need to make new/returning players viable as they are often just trying to grind through older content that is more of a flash and dash exp race to newer content/expansions/gear. The mercs were added because of grouping (along with other secondary and tertiary issues) to help these new/returning players, and I think to a greater extend after some of the push back it has been a resounding success for EQ. I also think, as time will only be able to support or contradict, that the AA Granting will have much the same effect long term for the game.

2. The psychological argument that it is more rewarding and impacting to an individual to get all of their goodies (AAs) at one time rather than in chunks does hold some truth to it, but it is also failing to recognize the diminution of the psyche in regards to accomplishment and choice. For the coding and implementation perhaps it is an all or none, but then I think such a dramatic change could be staged equally as well (unless the decision was made long before the community was asked, and now it is a time table and established work up that are the real issue).

2.a. To the idea of granting all AA at once. I think that setting benchmarks which could easily be coded for, or coded for with no more difficulty or minimally so than the current plan, would accomplish both giving the new/returning player the opportunity to become viable, but would also address that psychological need of accomplishment and satisfaction. Should X amount of AAs be given at 51, 55, 59, 65, 70, etc... as most AAs are currently laid out to specific levels I believe you resolve two issues:
1) You have now made character progression and game viability much more attainable
2) You have retained a sense of autonomy and player accomplishment by reaching certain milestones
or achievements by unlocking the next set of AAs.
3) You now allow players to get a set of AAs, disengage auto grant while grinding out some AAs while
he or she explores older content, which also meets some of the concerns of the 'What's the point'
responses.
4) You also reduce the one month Gold membership purchase effect, because now as these
individuals level (not all but perhaps a decent number) they will have to at least re-up to gain the next
tier of their AAs

2.b. The determination that the auto granted AAs will be uniform. I see a lost opportunity for EQ on this point as well. I would think, if it is the psychological impact you are focusing on honestly, that granting the AAs would be the only step that EQ would take, while it now leaves it up to the player to choose where said AAs would go. Honestly, perhaps 90% of the AAs granted would wind up exactly where you would put them, but that 10% is a significant number for individuality and choice. The investment in your character/toon is and always has been to some degree about your own personality and choice (good or bad ones).

2.b.1. Allowing a player to determine where he or she spends the granted AAs meet a psychological commitment to his or her character, because he or she has had some responsibility in the choice mechanism of how that character is individually defined.
2.b.2. Allowing a player to determine where he or she spends the granted AAs meets a psychological commitment to his or her character, because now there are some strategic decisions that can be made individualizing the character itself.
2.b.3 Allowing a player to determine where he or she spends the granted AAs meets a psychological commitment to their character, because now perhaps they can use some of these awarded AAs toward trade-skills (whether that is the smart move or not really isn't the point, it is the point that the play his or herself has chosen to make that decision).
2.b.4 Allowing a player to determine where he or she spends the granted AAs meets a psychological commitment to his or her character, because it is their choice finally. They are not forced to take things that were not wanted, AAs can be stored and unlocked as the player sees fit, AAs can be opted into without the loss of that individuality (whether actual or perceived).

Lastly, I would argue that if it is the psychological consideration that is driving some dynamics of the AA Granting then I would suggest giving greater thought to that game-player aspect. The reality is that for any of the highly dedicated (read Raiding characters) there is to a greater extent a cookie-cutter model that one is forced into, but even then it is the choice of that player to mirror a highly successful model for their own purposes and goals. However, the players you are gearing this toward are not in that category but still would like the idea of individuation in their choices. Opening up the AAs without pre-determined assignment achieves your goal of making new/returning players viable, but also retains the psychological impact of individual investment (and if like me, reading what the heck that AA even does). However, to simply auto grant AAs and pre-determinedly assign them then there is a greatly reduced investment in my character, I am not very motivated to read what all the new things are all at once and so perhaps you will have created another problem, the under performing player that was not aware of certain abilities or those that don't realize the impact of the new dynamics because of certain passive chains they have received and so become frustrated over 'something isn't right' but they can't put their fingers on.

As a side note. I play EQ2 as well, and whenever they have made huge changes to the AA lines there they have been re-set and so you have to re-fill your AAs. To some extent it is a pita, but most I have talked to in game liked that much better than just getting forced into some pre-determined chain/order. I know I have chained AAs because as I progressed in the game I realized certain earlier AAs were about as worthwhile as tying a 100lbs. weight to my neck and diving into the shallow end of an empty pool, but it took some experience to learn that lesson.

I am probably like the vast majority of those that you are gearing the AA Grant to...I am not going to go and study every AA, I am not going to sit and read legions of lore and text to know what things do because I know I won't remember most of it because I had no part in it. I am different than the vast majority of those players geared toward because I actually got on your boards and gave my thoughts, but there are quite a few that while remaining silent have strong opinions and in the end they speak with their membership because it is their choice, a psychologically gratifying experience of self-determination.

Also related to server lag, if you are "fixing" the server lag from swarming by doing this, then how are you going to address when a new expansion comes out and 200+ people are in a zone and approximately 100 or so mobs are being pulled and killed all at the same time and the server crashes? Its the same "concept" as swarming, with lots of mobs pathing and being killed at the same time. I'm curious ....

I am mostly fine with these changes, now that it has been stated that the AA handout will be optional. so I can continue to earn AAs on my characters, the way it should be. But I find it pretty funny how many people seem to think these changes are going to breathe new life into EQ and bring in tons of new players and what not.

EQ is not going to see a huge influx of new blood, it's just not going to happen. It is an old, archaic game with very dated, and horribly designed/optimized engine/code. The only reason people play EQ is because of the gameplay over newer games that are designed better and run/look better, with infinitely better designed UIs/mechanics. A huge part of that gameplay that makes people want to play EQ over those is things like the AA system, at least for some of them, perhaps I'll speak only for myself here.

Dumbing down a game like EQ, by doing things like giving a large number of the AAs for free, is far more likely to drive away people that are ALREADY playing it, then it is to get new people that will actually stick around.

Just my opinion, I'm just glad they are now making it optional. So I can ignore it and continue playing the game the way it should be played.

I

I think maybe we need to define EXACTLY what swarming is, I understand pulling 50+ mobs is bad, but how about 10-15? I would be quite content if the shining heal proc and the ward proc last long enough for this type of hunting. Maybe you could change it into a different type of spell depending on if you cast it on yourself or another person.

New expansions with new gear are predictable. (Reasonable) people can decide for themselves whether they want to grind after X bauble that will become obsolete in a month or three, or expend their limited in-game time in other pursuits - quests, TSing, working alts, whatever.

Big changes with no-notice - not predictable. Lots of opportunity for 'well gee, if I had known they were going to do X, I would have focused on Y these last couple of months instead.'

15 years, 5 gold accounts....I will be leaving....So now your going to give everyone 4K aa's to catch up and make everyone equal...so everyone is a clone basically on AA's.....your going to nerf swarming, HS, beaming etc...I think Sony better look at their customer base better. Most are longtime players that like to swarm, HS, Decap....Killing mobs in small groups is over....If you can't have fun why play....Also its BS that swarming lags other zones...never seen it ever...
But that's OK Sony....
Thanks for the memories EQ
Its Over!

Whats the point?

If your max AA your more than likely max level and have no need for any exp at all. I've not used LotD in years, exp is far to easy to gain.

Considering how it will not activate on anything trigger you would have to assume the ranger is only going to use the bow and never melee so this will drastically affect those numbers. without being triggered from our physical line of nukes this is going to be a huge difference.