EverQuest Producer’s Letter April 2023

They should have engaged the community first - It's not our fault they potentially wasted their time.

And they have already said they are listening to the feedback and working on a response. Just because they don't immediately backtrack on a decision because some don't like it doesn't mean they are not listening and preparing to engage the community.

Did they run this by the Crc at all? Even in a cursory manner? Or was this completely out of left field?

31 pages in short time feels like more then just 'some' people.

Edit: oops I missed TLP forum Oakwynd feedback; 75 pages.

They didn't engage the community first before developing something they knew would be controversial. That's their fault, not ours.

If they did bring it to the CRC, and those people said "Yeah, that's good...go with it", then clearly they chose the wrong people to represent the community.

Why do you all want Free Trade so badly? Mischief is a joke server where you roll Level 1 and a guild decks you out in full BiS planer then power levels you to max in a couple of days. How is that fun?

Reminds me of when Brad left because the game turned from enjoying the journey to "gotta get sick loot fast" and it seems the community here has bought completely into that mindset.

The number of pages does nothing to indicate the number of people as there are many who have many posts in that thread. Not to mention this was just announced with partial details and they have not fully explained the rules yet. It would be absolutely crazy for them to start making changes so quickly after the announcement before they have had a chance to fully explain the system and address concerns that people have.

And that can be said to go both ways as people are demanding changes before they have fully explained the rules or been given a chance to address the concerns that people are brining up. Give them some time to fully explain the rules and address concerns before writing of the new rules.

Devs when you respond. Please include a detailed reason for why you were considering this change. We as a whole do not see your vision. Many people have tried to guess at it. But there are overwhelmed with responses that detail the many holes.

Here are a few holes of my own. Whatever the reason for this change. A FTE rules limit the group to group interaction when out in the world. Yes lots of terrible things happen. But lots of great things happen too. By curtailing the worst it directly limits the great things. Many times groups have bonded together when something bad happens to them. It averages out the game. It makes it bland. Many times I have trained someone without intending to do so. I then spend time and resources to make it right. I have seen others do the same. Lots of people don't care about others when they play. But many more people are here to have fun and help each other.

Here is my suggestion.
Create my toned down Mischief clone.
Too much loot honestly. Was never a question if you got said item, but when. 25%ish less loot. Clean up the loot tables so parchments can't take potential drop away (ensure this change still ensures a 25% less total drop).
Tier the loot so all the Hardest content has the best loot. A DZ of 2 groups or less shouldn't have access too much of the best loot. 2-4 BiS items should be attainable. But the Best of the Best should be $$$.

After Mischief the vibe is that this is the new standard. While running my guild 95% (My other and I maintained 20-50 active members from kunark to Omens ) of my members are quoted that they don't think they could ever play on a normal server again. Why? Because they like being able to run low man raids and get good gear. It gives them something effective and meaningful to do outside of raid days.

If you do the FTE rules, which I highly discourage, make the server enticing. At worst people would say " Ya the FTE rules are lame for reasons 1-10, but I am loving the loot rules."

If this FTE Test server is a must. Treat it like a alpha/beta. Have 25 ( random large number ) different versions of the rules. Deploy the rule set every month or expansion or whatever and ask for feedback ( I'm sure your will get it if you ask for it or not ). Have an opt in survey with in game rewards for responding. Ill test it, but make it fun and reward me for it.

If devs are making key business decisions during what is most likely their most lucrative time of year with TLP's this is why we are in the situation we're in. Devs should be lending to the creative process not making customer facing decisions. If I was the product owner for TLP's I'd be considering a new job ( if DPG even has someone at the right level making these decisions)

Agree 100%. The lack of two-way communication is one of (several) root causes of the negative feedback.

That is a great question, but unfortunately impossible to answer.
1. No one knows who's in the CRC, and they're not allowed to tell us.
2. The CRC isn't allowed to talk about the CRC, otherwise they violate an NDA they were required to sign.
3. DPG chooses not to share anything about the CRC.

So by design, it is a nameless, voiceless, and enigmatic entity.

It's like Fight Club, but with gnomes and Cheetos.

What's crazy is that 24 years in the team running this game still doesn't understand how change averse this community is. Releasing a statement like this that is so lacking in detail while appearing to tear down core game mechanics, there was only one way this statement could have gone. For something of this magnitude waiting for details isn't sufficient. It was terribly irresponsible to not include detail on how this mechanic would work and why it is being added, especially considering the growing number of players on TLP servers that feel the devs are out of touch with that portion of the community.

What I'd like to know is...what EXACTLY did the dev team think the reaction to this was going to be? Did they REALLY AND TRULY believe that a change like this was going to be embraced and that we'd all be singing their praises?

I'm being totally serious here. If they honestly thought that something like this is what the players actually wanted, then they're more out of touch with this game and the player community than I had ever imagined. And that thought is pretty scary.

Here is another idea. If cost of maintaining another server is an issue, do a gofundme where everyone contributes. Set a goal of 10k, 20k, etc. If you don’t make the goal, you don’t implement another server. If you do make the goal, you not only make hundreds of people happy, you increase revenue for DBG.

Last thing I’ll say about the new rule set is that they are treating a new Mischief type server like an incredibly rare mob who only spawns once a week. But so far, we are going on three years waiting for another spawn! I mean I get that this is EQ, but two years is quite enough.

What is crazy is people expect the developers to do a complete u turn on something without giving them any chance to provide more details about it because of some complaints. You are right that the release lacked of a lot of details but we don't know the reasoning behind that and when they plan on releasing more details. They have already released a statement that they are collecting feedback and planning on providing another update soon. At this point I think we need to calm down a bit and let them publish the next update.

They should have had a detailed FAQ about how this FTE works in every situation released with the announcement. There are only about 8-10 situations anyway. It still won't matter because what they've stated already about how this works (like WoW's system) is not what people that play EQ want.

I honestly do not mind FTE locking at all, although I don't mind the current system either if they decide to go back on it. It's seriously something that is negligible unless you want to power level, and it sounds like most of you want a server with zero challenge and want to race to level cap as fast as possible.

Everyone says it will lead to griefing, as if boxers don't already grief the crap out of you by pushing you off a camp. Someone was talking about being a bard, training the zone and running in circles for hours, as if you can't already do that with the current ruleset and it's a bannable offense either way.

The only thing I dislike about it is you can't faction farm by taking one swing at an already engaged mob, but I'll take that for not having boxers KS me until I'm forced to log out.

Daybreak wouldn't make this change unless they had a good reason to. They probably have mountains of petitions from KS boxers ruining their night.

The mountain of hate from 40 year old men is hilarious to me. It's one server. Ignore it and go play D4 if you're all so upset.

As I said they should have provided more details and they have said that they are collecting feedback and going to provide more details as they can. As it has only 3 days since the information was released and still months before the release I think we can wait a little bit for more information.

Pick a few of these to amend the current Oakwynd Ruleset


1) Character lockouts not account- this is a great one since it makes the the new alt xp more
meaningful and people can join raids with more toons on same account
2) Free Trade
3) Krono becomes attuned to specific account after 1st trade
4) FTE based on % of damage 1st not 1st to engage
5) Increased solo exp
6) Random loot but mob loot tables fixed to be more in line with effort needed to kill original
boss
7) Bring xp and tradeskill increasing expansion benefits earlier in expansions
8) Make alot more items no drop but make them heirloom so alts can use them
9) Open up Beastlords and Zerkers from classic
10) Start off with 2 accounts per computer from velious and add an extra one every other
expansion unlock
11) Reduce number of missions needed to complete LDON on Tlps by 50%
12) Reduce spawn timers on certain mobs with out dated long respawns or increase the
chance of spawning mob needed after PH kills.

I agree with you a little on that.

That being said, failing to publish the details immediately was a bad call. Prior experience should have strongly suggested that this announcement wouldn't be well-received. It should have been obvious that players would want additional info, including but not limited to:

• Why? What are the motivation(s) for introducing the encounter locking mechanic? What is this mechanic supposed to prevent / allow / solve / enhance?
• Why is this being debuted on a new TLP, instead of a server like TEST/Beta?
• Deeper explanation of mechanic, including topics such as out-of-group healing/buffing, charms and mesmerization, how to mitigate griefing, etc.

Finally, given the expected controversy, I feel that immediately offering a second, traditional "opt out" TLP would have been a Smart Move.

The above didn't happen. Why or why not?

1. The optics/foresight were really that bad. Ouch.
2. The controversy was anticipated. But it wasn't deemed important/valuable enough to merit a better announcement.
3. The controversy was anticipated. But no one has the answers yet, because they're making this Encounter Locking mechanic up as we go.
4. The controversy was anticipated. The terse details were intentional. We'll tell you more when we see fit. You're not the boss of us.
5. Reasons that we plebs cannot possibly fathom, because it's beyond our comprehension.

Regardless of which applies, I think some flak is appropriate and deserved.