It all boils down to: HvC - Hyper vs. Casual

Pick a thread. Any thread.

- new LJ server vs just wait a bit (Hypers didn't want it)
- new poll / vote needed on 3 month progression (Hypers want Kunark NOW)
- high-level zone instances vs. non-instances (Hypers hate instancing)
- raid instances vs. non-raid-instances (Hypers hate instancing)

See a pattern?

The casual players call for change that will make the game better for the majority of players (ie casual and average gamers), and note hat ALL RF/LJ players are PAYING players. The casual players post irrefutable, logical reasons why their requests make sense, and cite specific evidence and examples as to why it will work.

Furthermore, as such, to date DBG has sided with this reasoning *every* *single* *time*. Not occasionally. Every time. The only one pending is raid instances. Everything else that calm, collected casuals have asked for, they have gotten. For obvious reasons: it is good for the community as a whole, which means good for DBG's bottom line. Not rocket science.

It all comes down to the same thing: hyper players poopsock to the top, and want to use that to HOLD EVERY POSSIBLE ADVANTAGE over casual players FOREVER at ALL COSTS despite obvious logic and benefit to the majority of the community, as a whole. It is selfish. Beyond selfish in fact. To ignore obvious logic because it doesn't help *you* dominate others in the way that you feel is appropriate is just flat-out wrong. It was wrong in 1999, but I was what it was. There is absolutely no reason for it to exist in 2015.

There is a reason why WoW won and EQ / EQ2 playerbase is a shadow of it.

The hypers grasp at straws. Make illogical arguments. Say "it isn't classic" or "it's not the game I played" or "it'll wreck the feel" or "this isn't what I signed up for and if you change it I QUIT".

Of course it's not the game you played. 98% of people if polled would not want corpse runs. Or to stare at a spell book. Get over it. So that argument makes zero sense. It is not 1999. Stop pretending it is 1999. If you want 1999, go to P1999.

Not once do they provide an argument that actually has merit and make sense how the proposed change would be BAD for the majority of the community, or BAD for DBG.

No, the emit made up excuses, because deep down the change is BAD for *them*, because their socks are poopy and they thought that would give them an unbreakable stranglehold on the server in perpetuity.

If they didn't think that they would get this stranglehold, then maybe they would have played a bit more casually. Perhaps if they knew raid zones would be instanced, their socks would be clean. But just because you chose to dirty them, don't push your dirty laundry on us.

DBG: give us raid instancing, please, not only for the benefit of the majority of players, but for your bottom-line as well. It should not be the same as other zone instancing, but perhaps do instancing like either EQ2 or later EQ expansions. Yes, this will take some engineering effort, so you had best get started on it now, because in 2-3 weeks other guilds are going to try to raid, and TL won't allow it.

Guess what happens then? People can only farm LGuk for so long...

You WILL see a mass-exodus at that time if raid's aren't instanced. It is inevitable.

You have listened to your casuals, as they are your cash cow. Please continue to do so. They are right. Their positions are for the betterment of the game as a whole for the majority of players. Their positions will result in the least amount of lost subscriptions, and therefore, their positions will earn you the most revenue.

Possibly some merit, but the calls for Kunark were for the same reason as the calls for instancing, so a bit off-base there. Those calls have died down; I support both instancing and supported Kunark. I don't see a need for early Kunark now, but I still believe in the flawed poll theories.

The Kunark earlier threads may be active but it's being continued by less people.

Considering even Fippy was better than this circus side show and did just fine til it progressed too far...

Keep on chasing that lowest common denominator my friend.

I would say it's more of a "Traditionalist" (people wanting this server to be as close to the game as it was in 99) vs. "Progressives" (people wanting this server to be more like how it is in the current live game).

you will find casuals and "hypers" in both camps.

You spent your whole post bashing raiders. You talk a lot about logic, but your only argument here is "Screw the hardcore players - therefore give us raid instancing."

Raid instancing would probably be great for the more casual playerbase. DBG has done a lot to try an accommodate the new TLP servers to todays time. Whenever they are working on something, Holly tweets about it, keeps us all up to date.

I am sure they are looking into raid instancing, I just have to keep repeating that I don't think it is as easy as you are all making it sound. They can't instance it like they have instanced the non-raid zones for obvious reasons. I really see no need to open multiple threads about this every single day. Your voice has been heard, I guarantee it. Whether they are able to do something about it I'm not sure.

Spending your time bashing people who have more time to play the game than you isn't exactly the best method of getting what you want.

For the record, I am one of those 'Hypers' as you call us and I was and still am all for instancing, for the new server (which I play on), and I am even ok with the 6 month lock (prefer to have Kunark out more for content rather than need). So your statement is completely opinion.

I want the servers to both last and that means including the casual gamers that want to see raid content on a non poop sock level. Hell I would love to be able to raid on my own scheduled time as well.

Well, the hypers should slow down, give the electrons a rest. They tend to post large number of posts in separate threads about the same things.

While we casuals tend to post one subject thread and talk about one thing.

The number of 'give us this' and 'take away that' threads beg to differ with this statement. It's not the 'Hypers' calling for buffs/nerfs

-Based on what happened to Vulak, lots of people didn't want LockJaw as that server will suffer from a severe lack of population soon enough ( a year ... maybe two). also, once the ''freshness'' of ragefire is gone, queues won't be half as bad. Nothing to do with Hyper VS casual.

Some people are not addicted to alts. Some already have 2 lvl 50s... in 3 months from now on even Mr. super Casual will have 2 or 3 toon lvl 50, geared with Lguk-solB stuff, and bored. Once again this brings us back to Fippy... at Fippy launch people asked for a super slow pace, low XP and bla bla bla... 2 months later they were screaming for kunark ( and won with an overwhelming majority) because... wether you like it or not, there's very little to do in classic.

where did you pull that one from?

There's a bunch of classic ''purist'' who dislike anything that wans't present in 1999... there's a bunch of gold-seller looking to monopolize stuff for krono, and resell those krono... it got nothing to do with hardcores or casual... i'm pretty sure the vast majority of raiders / wannabe raiders are in favor of instancing because... let's face it. if you arn't in the top 2 hardcore guild you'll be feasting on bits and scraps left by those 2 until PoP.

Actually, i'm willing to bet the '' IT'S NOT CLASSIC!!!!'' crowd actually don't raid at all.

I forsee /pickzone Plane of Hate 5 in our future...

We all love to see the raiders on their game you guys are great, and that is no joke.

What most of us voted for is a chance to level normally and get to that stage as a normal consequence not by any power leveling. I understand that Raids who are end gamers hate leveling, it is not their focus, but a fairly substantial majority voted for a longer classic period. I like your and support the idea of instancing the planes and the dragons. Same lockout periods just no cblocking.

+1. Can I cross-post my wall of text from the other thread here? You may enjoy reading it!

I am still hoping for a Dev reply on this thread. I think it is quite unbelievable that people are actually against the proper instancing (read: you cannot exploit it to get two or more kills of the same NPC before 1 spawn cycle is completed). I do not understand why my abilityto kill a mob (or lack thereof) affects your level of fun.

First, lets discuss the ratio of Raid NPCs to PCs, without raid instancing.

• The ratio of Raid NPCs to PCs is the lowest it has been, on any server, ever. Let me say that again in case you missed it, the Raid NPC to player ratio is at its lowest point in the history of Everquest.This point is not debatable, it is factual. Not only is it at its lowest point ever, I would wager that it is significantly lower than the next runner up (whatever that may be, possibly an earlier TLP). This statistic is severely exaggerated by the fact that we are (A) In classic, which has the least raid mobs and (B) This is the most crowded Everquest server, ever

• Now we will calculate the ratio of Raid NPCs to PCs. Let us assume that we have 6 raid bosses, and that we have 5,000 active players on Ragefire. This is a simple calculation, at 6:5,000 we have approximately one Raid Target per 833 players.

Second, let's discuss the percentage of players who will receive raid loot, again, without raid instancing.

• For this example, we will use the scenario from above. We will assume that each boss will drop 3 pieces of needed raid quality loot (read: loot will not rot) every single time, and spawn once per week. We will assume a period of 5.5 months (or approximately 24 weeks), to define as the time until Kunark launches (without intervention). We also assume that there are 16 item slots (IIRC, I could be forgetting 1 or 2). The number of raid loot pieces over the period of 24 weeks is approximately 432 (24 weeks * 6 npcs * 3 loots).

• Under assumption one (the more realistic one) let's assume that one guild of 100 players will monopolize all 6 spawns, and see how long it would take to fully gear every member. Well, we need 1,600 pieces of loot (16*100). Oh wait, they wouldn't even get close to 1,600 pieces of loot even if they killed every single raid target every time and looted every item. We can, however, assume that each member would get 1 piece of loot, or that 2% of the server population will receive raid loot before Kunark.

Due to the fact that even if this guild got all 432 pieces of loot and equipped every single piece that they wouldn't even been 1/3rd geared, we can assume that said guild will keep killing the mob. We can also assume that (partially due to a lack of PNP enforcement but also due to the above reasons), if another group attempted to kill that mob, said guild would interfere and attempt to kill it anyway. If I were a member of another guild who wanted to kill a raid target and this happened to me, this would be extremely discouraging (mostly due to a lack of PNP enforcement).

• Under assumption two (the extremely unrealistic one) we will assume that only one person will receive one piece of raid loot over this period of 5.5 months. This means that 432 / 5,000, or approximately 8.64% of the server could get a piece of raid loot. But this would never ever happen, and even 8.64% is an extremely low number.

Due to the above example, it is important to realize that instancing raids will not make the effective rarity of an item (per player) any lower than it would be on your typical server, regardless of whether it was Classic or Live. There will still be a huge demand for the Cloak of Flames, for example, regardless of if raids or instanced or not. The only thing refusing to instance raid encounters do is severely limit the number of players who can obtain a cloak of flames before classic, and make them rise to an absurdly inflated price.

Next, we will discuss the endgame of Everquest, pre-Luclin (read: the introduction of AAs)

I am strongly aware of the fact that, while all of us casuals are not level 50 yet, many of us will be (or at least be damn close and ready to raid) well before Kunark is upon us. The endgame of EverQuest pre-Luclin is all about raiding, quests, and items. There are no AAs to grind when your targets are down, and there is very little to do otherwise. If the majority of the player-base has nothing to do once they complete the leveling process, many will begin to leave the server. A lot about EverQuest involves patience, and instancing raids would not change this fact (just as the removal of corpse runs and PoK didn't remove the need for patience in game either). Personally, I can easily claim that if no raid targets are available once I am ready to raid, then I will unsub until I can raid.

I cannot think of many legitimate reasons why the people who are against instancing are so headstrong about it, but it is clear they are the vocal minority. I don't know what is most important to them, the ability to look down on others (without actually being better), the ability to sell items, or if its simply an I can have it and you can't immature attitude. To me, these people are the ones who seem like the entitled babies.

I fully understand the time commitment required to succeed in EverQuest, but this is not a classic server, it's a TLP server and the most crowded one ever at that. I would prefer it to be a happy, healthy, and crowded server that will last long-term, not turn into a graveyard for the few. Right now I'm having great experiences, and I want these experiences to be able to continue once I approach a higher level. However, without raid instancing, I'm afraid I'd have to quit my job and dump my girlfriend to even have a chance. It would become a job, it would no longer be fun, and I would leave.

TL;DR: +1 on implementing raid instancing. Please do it for the long-term health and stability of your server. Don’t listen to the naysayers, please. There is a reason raid instances became the norm, even in EverQuest, and its a damned good one.

1) I didn't want a new server because I didn't want to split the community. The massive amount of people is part of the charm of a progression server. The good news is that even with the Lockjaw crowd leaving, we are still super populated

2) I don't want Kunark now, I want the 6 months classic that I voted for. Just because I raid and play hardcore doesn't mean I don't enjoy the flowers.

3) I was one of the major supporters of instanced raids. I wanted all players, casual or hardcore, to at least be able to attempt the content in era.

4) Again... no we don't

So out of your 4 points, 3 of them are completely false. I'm what you define as a "hyper" gamer and debunk your thoughts.

I don't even play 10 hours a week and i'm already lvl 25... while also working on research and some time-consuming stuff like staff of the wheel.

you cannot balance content around the powergamers who pulled 72 hours in a row... but you also cannot balance content around the super casual dude that may log on for an hour every other friday...

I am a Hyper, I'm wearing several pieces of raid loot already... and I am in favor of instancing so I can kill more raid bosses than are available to us now.

All instancing raids will do though sadly is make me have to wake up more often at 3am.

Maybe a Hyper forum poster but until you make it to an actual raid Frenzic I don't even know how you can call yourself a raider.

I am neither a casual or a hyper. I fit into the mid-range of the spectrum. I think that's why my guild <Ceaseless> felt like a good fit from the start. And, I agree with Frenzic on all his points in this thread. I wasn't FOR Lockjaw at first, but the population on both servers is pretty high for now, and the queue is gone.

Define raiders.

I started EQ before Kunark came out. I was never in an "end-game content" guild, but through EQ, EQ2, Rift and Vanguard the guilds I were in completed most or all end game raids at our own pace. And we eventually defeated almost all of the content when we were active. So the *only* raiding capability the hypers have that I don't is winning the encounter in the first day/week/month it is released.

Why should those of us capable of beating raid content be prevented from taking the challenge if we are not willing to play on your schedule? I have never bought gear through auctions (or with real world money) and never will, so it is not like hypers are losing money because they can't corner the market on raid gear and sell it to me. Why do you get so much satisfaction from blocking me and thousands of others from experiencing content, when it does not alter your ability to play as you like?

Players currently raiding on Ragefire & Lockjaw

I also made no comment about preventing you from doing anything. In fact, I said instancing would likely be great, I just think it's harder to implement then you all think.

Oh look. A thread doing nothing but making general statements bashing "hypers" and lauding "casuals".

"all people who play a lot do this bad thing"

"all people who don't do this good thing"

Get over yourself. Making threads like this just puts a wedge in the divide in the "hyper" and "casual" playerbase.