DO NOT CLONE MANGLER

Mangler is the exact WORST TLP to clone for future concepts. The exp is too slow, the idea around focus effects not being in was proven to be HIGHLY disliked, and overall just an absolutely trudge of a server.

You know what you should be copying? Selos, and improve on it as you got pretty close with that one.

Ways to improve Selos-type ruleset moving forward:
-Slow down expansion unlocks by another 4 weeks or 8 weeks
-FV Ruleset


BOOM, perfect....

Holly stepping down was supposed to be a breath of fresh air in terms of direction for TLPs and the future of EQ. Are we only getting more of the same "out of touch" decisions???

Immeasurably disappointed right now....

Well they haven't announced the specifics of the Aradune server except it will more like Mangler in XP rate, unlock time etc...there is still hope it will have a FV ruleset.

Which is already massive mistakes. The XP rate and Loot rates must be better than Mangler.

Good point. How about some Selos?

Everyone I know quit because it unlocked expansions too quickly . We loved the loot rates and exp though. If only it were a month or two slower on expansion unlocks :/ !

According to who?

I think you need to take a chill pill since the full rule set hasn't been disclosed yet, and you need to get some perspective since Mangler has thus far held a much higher population than Selo has and what are the TLP about?

Money & more people on a TLP = more money, it's not money for the sake of money either, it's for the long-term survival of the game & franchise.

So, modifying what has so far proven to be the most financially viable route to retain interest is sensible & reasonable, Phinigel was one of the most successful TLP, Mangler was an evolution of the Phinigel design & has done very well so far, they tried Selos & they tried Miragul, each found an audience but they were nowhere near the success that Phinigel was or Mangler is.

So the Mangler ruleset is not the worst for most players,it might be the worst for you & a few like you but that's not the same thing, and Selos is still running.

I don't think modelling the new TLP upon the most successful TLP so far is even remotely "making a mistake", so you are being fairly hysterical there. Just because you don't personally like the new ruleset doesn't mean it's a mistaken direction, you are arguing emotively, not rationally & that's not very smart.

exp? slow? mangler? did you even play on mangler?

cause yeah, no. exp is far from slow on mangler.

I'm not saying anyone is wrong about what will be popular in the future, but "clone the server that was less popular rather than one of the most popular TLPs in history" doesn't seem like a winning strategy overall.

I do think the idea of "selo's but slower unlocks" sounds cool, but we don't actually know what these new servers will be about. I find the delayed messaging pretty intriguing personally, because to me it says they're trying something that they'll *still* not 100% sure will work technically. So whatever it is, it's something new.

there was never a time selos had more people than mangler, what are you smokin?

I know. I'm replying to the OP. Probably should have quoted it. "You know what you should be copying? Selos"

oh, i see my reading comprehension failed me. sorry~ must be the corona

Mangler was painfully slow compared to other TLP. It was pretty much a Phinny clone with minor rule alterations.

Mangler is the least popular of the TLPs. People only moved from Selos -> Mangler because Selos unlocked expansions too quickly.

Mangler has faster XP than Phinny. The only TLP with faster XP than Mangler is Selo.

At most reasonable guesses, Mangler is top 3 in popularity for all TLPs, and still top 2 in current popularity across all servers alongside FV.

When Selos was in "popular" eras Mangler was no where in top 3. When Selos moved forward too quickly everyone moved to Mangler.

i mean, maybe you played on selos, that doesnt automatically make it more populated. selos never had more people on it than mangler, and mangler has the fastest exp of any tlp besides selos. which was really just a glorified event server.

Where did they say they were going to clone Mangler?

Mangler has always been more popular than Selo.

I mean I sympathise with your position and your rule set suggestions, but I don't understand the desire to make things up in support of them.

The expansions need to probably have customized unlocks based on what there is actually to do on them, not based on level increases. You start seeing the glaring omissions as you get to the later expansions. Thank baby jesus they fixed ldon unlock though (didnt they?).

The phinny tlp design has a lot of people that enjoy classic-pop in a familiar faction. Small changes like removal of focuses until luclin won't break that, nor will stuff like 2mo vs 3mo unlocks. This is a crowd that likes the known and reliable buys at least a bag and a few pots. They are BY FAR the largest plurality of eq tlpers.

There are also a lot of people who want to just play where they can randomly group. They want an active lfg scene no matter what else is going on. These people HATE joining established servers because you have to actually join a guild to get groups there - they hate it even if joining a guild gets them exactly what they claim to want (active groups) because they aren't looking to commit, they want pugs. This group plus the prior classic-pop cycle group combine to probably half or more of ALL the eq tlpers, and since that last group is the biggest they'll go to their server. Since these puggers follow the classic-pop treadmillers that means every tlp cycle has over half its prospective players going to the next phinny clone.

Phinny clones are how tlps are going to be unless or until something comes along thats more popular than phinny was.

Regarding the issue of a boxxing progression server versus a 'TrueBox' progression server, this is been a big issue for me for years but I recently came the conclusion that TrueBox doesn't solve most of the 'issues' I have with player behavior. So the question for me becomes, will offering a boxxing server attract and retain more long term players than a TrueBox server of the same type?

I am considering the boxxing server this time around even though I don't care to box very often.

I like 3 month unlocks, though I would like to see Kunark unlocked a month or two early.

I would love a FV ruleset. This is one server type I could say I would play all the way through until it caught up to live ...the only reason I haven't rolled on the existing FV server is because I don't know how to play live content, and aside from Mangler, no other server interested me enough up to this point to keep me all the way through - it was more fun for me to start over and go through the the content I love and am familiar with.

...

I've played a lot of private servers of other games, and guess which servers are typically the most popular?

The ones with faster XP gains, higher loot rates, better resource spawn rates, lower resource requirements, etc. ... players value convenience.

With boosted XP rates but Mangler style unlocks, that would give more players time to keep up and/or catch up. And it wouldn't hurt those who don't need the XP boost.

Edit: moved my question regarding boxxing server vs TrueBox to the top.