Oakwynd Feedback

Discussion in 'Time Locked Progression Servers' started by coltongrundy, Mar 18, 2023.

  1. Nessirfiti Augur


    NGE Emus are more popular for a couple reasons, they come complete out of the box, so to speak, whereas the Pre-CU servers are still in development.
    NGE Emus have space, when the pre-CU project said it's basically impossible and gave up.

    the NGE and Encounter locking are both fundamental changes to how the games play. The NGE was an attempt to revitalize the game, to try to stave off it being shut down by the release of SW:TOR, and Encounter locking is as far as I can tell an attempt to pander to people on the forums who are extremely upset that there are people who play Everquest differently than they do.
  2. Ruhi Augur

    almost all of the negative feedback i've seen has been based around ambiguous scenarios.

    FTE hasn't been explained in detail - most of the feedback is based on assumption.

    The social clubs you hang out in aren't a good data set for what the majority thinks.

    Most of the people i've talked to in my social circles are disappointed in no mischief 2.0, but they aren't gloom and doomy over FTE - most think it's a wash - 1 set of problems replacing another set of problems. that opinion is acceptable to me without knowing more information.

    so, my opinion is - let's see what fte really changes because i will enjoy learning how to play the game a different way - much like random loot - it was a mystery at first and exciting to kill this random named mob that usually drops junk.

    i think mischief is like letting a kid have all the candy and soda they want - if you don't keep that trend, they can get a little grumpy and overly emotional.
    Demetri likes this.
  3. Larsen Augur

    Those are completely different games where that feature doesn't have a negative impact on the fundamental gameplay. WoW's gameplay doesn't revolve in large part around camping rare mobs with high-value drops in the open world. Everquest does. I don't know why it's so difficult for some people to comprehend that a feature can be fine in one game without automatically making it fine in all games. It's very clear that this feature will cause a lot of problems unique to Everquest. Are posts like yours intentionally arguing in bad faith, knowing that it's nonsense, or does it just not occur to you that there's a difference between games and the features that belong in them?
    MasterMagnus likes this.
  4. filthytlpplayer Elder

    I disagree. I appreciate aspects of the Mischief ruleset, but I hated the emphasis on the Krono trade. Every conversation centered around how many Krono people had/earned since last time you talked. While leveling, before I learned who to avoid, I was in groups where people would win a roll on a DE mask, gate to sell it for a krono, and proceed to roll on and win more of them after returning to the camp. No concept of equality or reciprocity which is something that I value in EQ social interactions and a big part of why I still like the game. I like when in a hamlord camp people pass the SSoYs to the warrior, and the warrior passes the robes to the casters. I think there's value in that, and Mischief brought out the worst in people as far as needing to stack their Krono as the server focus. The raid loot RMT was insane on Mischief/Thornblade. Free trade just enabled this in a much easier way than selling loot rights and balancing instance lockouts between ones own guild raids. Single group farming time gear was stupid, and completely devalued the small group game. I didn't like how a single form of defense (or whatever AA) clickie drop meant suddenly the whole raid had that AA activated. It made an already fairly easy game that much easier. If they repeat the Mischief experiment, I'd like to see them tweak the formula, definitely add charges to raid AA click items, definitely switch up the "tiers," and I don't want to see it again at least until Mischief has run its course to live.
    Xhartor, Vindar and Zrender like this.
  5. Waring_McMarrin Augur

    Nope, that was happening even on the PvE side of things.
  6. Moforyguy12345 Augur

    What are you talking about. People in a traditional ruleset still roll NEED on everything for krono purposes.It sounds like what you are looking for is a GUILD group where items that benefit a class will go to that class for the betterment of the guild. PUG groups are NEED all because krono is king. I learned this after my first TLP.
  7. Waring_McMarrin Augur

    People speculating on why the server will fail based on assumptions that they are making based on a couple of sentences description are not adding value to the discussion. Until we know more about how the FTE rules are going to work we have no way of knowing if those "reasons" will actually be possible or not. It hasn't even been a week since the announcement was made and it will reach that mark later today.
  8. Zrender Augur

    Nah. FTE will be just as good for EQ as it was for WoW and every other non-PvP MMO since. Change is hard. And your statement : "intentionally arguing in bad faith"?? That's what you're doing. You have ZERO data of this feature in EQ vs the feature being active and well liked in MULTIPLE other MMOs that have tens of MILLIONS of monthly users.
  9. Waring_McMarrin Augur

    Saying that this server is going to fail for reason X when we don't know the how the FTE rules are going to work isn't feedback. Saying that they should discard the rules and go to a rule set that the poster likes without knowing how FTE is going to work isn't feedback. As we only have a couple sentences describing how it will work most of what is being used right now is speculation.
    Zrender likes this.
  10. 6BoxerOnCoirnav Lorekeeper

    Make EQ WOW Again
    Animosity and wade_watts like this.
  11. Nessirfiti Augur

    What you're forgetting though, is that in every single one of those MMOs, their implementation of Encounter locking isn't nearly as restrictive as what's been proposed in the letter.

    FFXIV, the most popular MMO out there, gives the first person to tag the mob credit for the kill no matter who kills it.

    WoW as far as I remember from last I played doesn't really have encounter locking, but more shared encounters. you beat on it, you get loot and XP from it.

    EVE? anyone can shoot anything, and the first person to chew the other persons leg off gets the loot. (Okay, not really, but Meh. the thought amuses me)

    At the very best, the devs looked at WoW and FFXIV, and thought "Alright, let's implement encounter locking, but in the worst way possible."

    I'd not hate the WoW or FFXIV implementation of encounter locking, It wouldn't be my first choice of features to add to the game, mostly because I think the game doesn't need any sort of encounter locking after a few expansions, and the people who are calling for it are being incredibly short sighted in doing so.
    Velisaris_MS and MasterMagnus like this.
  12. filthytlpplayer Elder

    Not universally. In my opinion Mischief exacerbated that point of view, and that detracted from the experience for me. I don't think that reciprocity and helping others needs to be limited to guild groups, and quite frankly that Krono is king mentality is the biggest departure from the nostalgia that these servers try to capture. I've passed on plenty of GEBS, for example, because I couldn't wear them and others could benefit from them more and taking that lead in PUGs often leads others to follow suit for that group for things that they don't need. Personally, I have zero interest in stacking Krono, if I need platinum from Krono I just buy them from Daybreak. Otherwise, they don't serve a purpose for me as I'm one of those rare players that prefers to earn my gear from playing the game as opposed to buying the loot rights, and I pay my TLP subs when I play with a credit card.
  13. MasterMagnus The Oracle of AllHigh


    You seem a bit agressive here.

    You were calm and spoke to me in the other thread, where I explained every single part of the FTE core mechanic has been explained. You accepted that, and you had me explain to you existing code is going to be the guide for how this mechanic works.

    I posted first how the looting will work as it does now, you responded to Tweedle Dee's later post, saying the exact same thing.

    Both of you want to act like it hasn't been defined, but you both see as clearly as I do how it will work for looting?

    Yes, that looks like bad faith from where I'm sitting.
    6BoxerOnCoirnav likes this.
  14. filthytlpplayer Elder

    All we have is speculation because all we have is a couple of sentences of a description. Any discussion is based on speculation at this point, pro-FTE, neutral, or anti-FTE. Based on experience with the game, a lot of the inferences based off of that two-sentence description are reasonable, and the skepticism that specific scenarios were considered is completely justified and has precedent based on poor implementations and oversights regarding other recent changes for other server rulesets.
    MasterMagnus likes this.
  15. MasterMagnus The Oracle of AllHigh


    I am this close to making that my sig. Well said.
  16. Zrender Augur

    I wasn't asking you for an explanation, I know how current looting works. I was asking if you had some new information regarding Oakwynd. I'm certainly not arguing in bad faith. I understand the fundamental implications of FTE and I want an EQ TLP that has it, have played EQ since beta and at least 5 other MMOs that use FTE or open tagging for years. How on earth could my arguments be in bad faith?
    Rijacki likes this.
  17. WeCameWeConquered Elder

    But the exponentially smaller and yet even more vocal forum minority - ie. the ones trying to prevent it - do know what's best for the game? LOL Sure, sure.
  18. WeCameWeConquered Elder

    There's a small fraction of the player base that doesn't like it. OTOH, it is by far the most popular TLP to date. In that regard, the smart money is on another Mischief - literally.
    Appren likes this.
  19. MasterMagnus The Oracle of AllHigh


    Fair enough, thank you for explaining that to me. I claim to read all, so if you had explained that before and I missed it, I further apologize.

    I guess I would compare to a reviewed call in football. They already said they are adding FTE, to change that would be an unlikely event, to over-rule their own initial call.

    You all don't need to silence dissent. Or stop people from talking about it. You are likely to get your desire soon enough.

    And in the end, it feels like trying to silence dissent, for no apparent reason. If your belief is sound on the topic, they will choose that path.

    So yes, I again apologize to you, but it does feel like bad faith, to me personally. I can't speak for others.

    And that's just Forum Quest Baby.
  20. Wtfagain Elder

    WHERE IS BOBBY!

    Only Bobby can bridge the gap between OG, veteran, over confident noob (played less than 10 years) and out of touch DPG decision makers.

    Only Bobby can explain FTE is DPGs way of combating a hand full of professional power levelers instead of paying some $20 an hour GMs to use their eyes to ban cheaters, because they might ban the sanctioned ones.

    Only Bobby can explain using a once a year TLP, that keeps thousands of loyal customers playing after 24 years, to test an unnecessary change to core game mechanics, is a dyck move. (I’m referring to Noah Dyck don’t ban me Angie)
    wade_watts and MasterMagnus like this.