New Instance Threshold

Discussion in 'Time Locked Progression Servers' started by Avanju, Jan 29, 2016.

  1. Brumski Augur

    They vary from zone to zone, but most are too high and it requires that every pick exceeds the threshold. Lguk requires 40 when 30 (5good groups) can completely clear out the zone.
  2. jiri_ Augur

    What are they based on? I've heard NPC count - does that include non-combat NPCs, including merchants or fluff? I'm thinking of HK as a zone with an issue now, and of CC and possibly The Overthere as one with possible problems in the future.
  3. Moranis Augur

    We zoned about 45 into SolB last night and popped 2 new instances, same thing with Skyfire Mountains (on Ragefire).
  4. Venthos Augur

    As I understand it, there is no automated algorithm. Each zone was purposely configured to their threshold. I am thoroughly amused by the theory crafting that goes on though about that they must "take into account NPC totals" and such.
  5. jiri_ Augur

    If each zone was purposely configured, then some were configured poorly.
  6. yerm Augur

    There are 5 commonly recognized camps just in dead side alone - BR, , sage, lord, frenzy (and their surroundings). Then you toss in a king, crusader, and elder and that's 8 camps.

    Just because lord is pulling sage's floor, and br are combined, and king is aeing the entire live zone, does NOT mean they need to poop out more instances to accommodate this kind of relentless spawn hogging.

    That's possible, but it's also very possible that people's expectations are configured poorly. As I've said before, I have NEVER despite practically living in the zone EVER seen lguk with nothing reasonable open in any pick. In fact it seems rare that king isn't open in at least one pick at any given time.

    This will come up again with seb and chardok. There'll be a half dozen picks, the best spots inside each will almost always be camped, and people will cry that there's not enough room. Meanwhile, there'll probably ALWAYS be space in at least one chardok pick at all times, just not in spots people particularly like.
  7. Avanju New Member


    That's the thing though. It's not "relentless spawn hogging."

    If you are in /sup and don't also have mobs to pull from BR, or sage/exe, then you will have a significant amount of downtime. Because /sup pulls from BR and sage/exe out of necessity, BR and sage/exe suffer large amounts of downtime.

    You keep bringing up king, but I think it's pretty unfair to ask a group of 35's to take on king. Therefore, the fact that king is "almost always open" is of little comfort for those looking for mobs of appropriate level (even if this is true).

    Your argument that "not everyone is entitled to an optimal camp" is compelling, but it fails to convince me and here's why:

    Blues give CRAP exp. I heard that exp from blues was nerfed big time in order to curb some of the AA swarming happening on live servers. Well I can definitely tell the difference on Phinny between killing blues and whites or better. Therefore, if I am in a group of six level 31 players, I want to kill mobs that are, on average, level 31-38. Lower, and I get crap exp. Higher, and the group is hitting the exp cap per mob killed and killing so slowly that exp is terrible.

    What are my options then at level 31? Well, BR is good, but if /sup has a decent group, we will suffer 30% downtime (except the puller who has to compete with /sup). /sup is decent, but if BR or exe/sage are good, we will suffer up to 40% downtime (again, except the poor puller). exe/sage is too high, and king is definitely out. Minotaurs could be viable, so long as everyone in the group is cool with killing on live side (I've never hunted there myself, but I know that at 35 everything is blue on average).
    Outside of Lguk, I could check Uguk, but the highest level mobs will be blue on average so that will be crap exp. I could check SolA, but again, blue mobs will be crap exp. I could check CT, and IF sewers are open (which only supports 1 group btw), then that would be a good camp. Temple mobs will range from green to red, but will be blue on average, so will be crap exp overall. I could go to a different zone, but ZEMs are so terrible that I would level faster even with 40% downtime in /sup.

    Now, I concede that I do not know every nook and cranny of classic, and it is very possible that there are other viable camps at 31. However, my group has already checked 4 picks worth of /sup and BR to no avail (no open camps and 40+ players in every pick). Our cleric doesn't want to hurt faction with live side (no clue why) so minos are out. We check SolA. Everything is blue. we ditch SolA to check CT. We get to sewers and pull a few mobs, then get a /ooc from the wizard at the other end of sewers who threatens to train us with his lvl 50 bard if we don't stop pulling "his" mobs. There aren't enough mobs and we don't want to deal with a griefer so we check the pyramid. we see green mobs so we leave. It has been 3 hours and I've gained 2 yellows of exp. The group breaks up. Well hey, maybe we will find /sup open tomorrow night.

    Now, this hypothetical was only slightly tweaked (to include the minos, cuz I didn't know about them at that point). This HAS happened to me. Are you saying that this is perfectly fine? This is the expectation? I find that a tad ridiculous.

    Unrest is even worse than Lguk. The amount of griefing that happens if you are at MR is insane. Everyone in the zone except basement is pulling from MR, so you get up to 50% downtime IF your puller is good. Now, admittedly I have also found UGuk surprisingly open at the similar level, but seeing how they are across the world from each other, it really sucks to run all the way to UGuk to find that level-appropriate camps are all taken.

    Here's the rub:
    Unrest "comfortably" supports 1 CY group, 1 MR group, 1 FP group, and 1 basement group. The more you squeeze more than 4 groups into UR, the more griefing there is. Currently, i'd say that the level of griefing is unacceptable. I'd argue a new instance should be created at 31 players (7 players over the "comfort" cap). There will still be competition between MR, FP, and CY, but not to the point of unreasonable griefing.

    Lguk "comfortably" supports 1 group 26-32 (minos) 1 group level 28-35 (BR + /sup), 1 group level 34 - 40 (/sup + sage/exe), 1 group level 38-42 (frenzy/hand/lord), and 1 group 42-45 (king).
    That's 30 players. I'm sure there are camps I don't know about, BUT there's also the problem that it doesn't help a group level 28-35 if king is open. Therefore, a new instance should be created at no more than 43 players (13 players over the "comfort" cap). Again, there's still competition, but not so much that you suffer 40% downtime, or encourage griefing.

    Other zones should follow this pattern. I also like what Brumski said earlier in the thread. If it doesn't already happen like this, new picks should be based off the total number of players across all picks.
    Agrippa likes this.
  8. Blehme New Member

    I actually think there are many more solutions to this problem, if viable experience is the primary objective. Although I agree that the thresholds are a bit high, this doesn't resolve this problem at all.

    As an example, I was in a group where we were in LGuk clearing all of the basement area (taking up exe,sage,hand,lord,frenzy and keeping mobs cleared the entire time). Some group setups/higher level groups are going to require multiple camps in these circumstances. So evaluating zones and lowering the threshold based on how many camps there are will not resolve this issue.

    I would instead rather see them re-evaluate ZEM ratings, and instead modify them so all zones are viable. So going to solb for example, would offer similar xp to guk. Shoehorning people into single zones is partly whats causing this problem.

    Another problem, is having to pick between zones to find an open camp. I think another possible solution would be to have OOC be all picks wide, or even have auto joined channels for the zone? This way you can say "FP_Pick1 camped" during CC's for unrest for example, so its significantly easier to determine which camps are available.

    I do like the idea of spending Krono to pop a personal instance though... Trying to farm a BAM with all the afk mages there makes me want to punch a baby...

    Anyways, mostly what I am getting at is there are lots of ideas and ways that these issues can be resolved. Rather than have a single idea and everyone attack it, how about provide additional solutions and opinions to create a solution. Thats how these progression server ideas were created in the first place. Lets build, rather than tear down.
    Avanju likes this.
  9. Avanju New Member

    Re-balancing ZEMs would be a huge help and open up so many options. However, I imagine that might be a lot more work than simply lowering instance thresholds. I love the idea of all-pick chat, but it will come at the cost of rendering /ooc train ineffective at helping anyone lol.

    Personal instances at a high cost is very intriguing. I imagine it would bring a lot of revenue to the table for DBG. The high cost is enough of a barrier so that it shouldn't fracture the community too much. However, I can easily see people selling "slots" to the instance and and leaving guildies afk in the zone so it stays open. It therefore has to come with limits: Only 6 unique characters can enter and it expires after 12 hours. Interestingly enough this would also help resolve the problem of the VP bottleneck when Kunark hits (maybe that's an argument against this though)

    I'm very open to other solutions to solve the griefing problems (including AFK farming), but I think we have to be realistic about the amount of resources devs can devote to something other than adjusting a few numbers.
  10. yerm Augur

    I don't know where to begin! For Lguk, you completely dismissed live side; it's as if only dead exists. Why does your group of low 30s need to be "convinced" to go do live side? It's not like it goes from elder to king either; there's the live keep and noble in between that can work fine for a higher 30s group. This has been the foundation of my argument - if dead side is all camped out and/or contested to where it's not good, but live side has plenty of open territory, the zone is NOT full and we do NOT need a new pick... go do live side! If you don't want to hurt faction, then frankly you don't get to hunt there, tough luck. Your example of sage and bumping into each other - this is what I expect! You shouldn't have endless mobs, you should have a new pick when there's not even a passable amount - a balanced middle ground that doesn't spawn new picks because only half the zone (dead) is camped and your cleric is a prima donna about a faction that doesn't matter at all.

    Your unrest picks again seem to argue for this interaction-free utopia with 4 uncontested camps. What's wrong with having to compete with a 5th group? Why are you entitled to regular pulls of white+ cons, and cannot abide these plebian blue cons that are not optimal xp? If unrest spat out picks to allow everyone an uncontested awesome camp, why both going anywhere else? That's the whole point of having SOME level of overcrowding and just offsetting the crippling levels of it - it creates zone wide load balancing. Unrest should not reach a level where there's nothing there (eg pre-picks when there's entire groups just waiting listing a spot), but it shouldn't be gentrified to allow perfect group situations. There SHOULD be contested camps and pulls!

    I am very strongly against the idea that the game should spawn picks at a level to routinely allow ideal camps in the best zem and/or loot dropping zones. There should always be a place to go, yes, but that should involve possibly out of the way, or bad loot, or having to compete for pulls or downtime, or hurting some useless live faction, or god forbid killing blue mobs.


    Blehme, I like most of your post (except krono for private instance god no), but realize that I am very strongly against ever load balancing around situations like a group clearing half of lguk by themselves. One group mass murdering sage, frenzy, and lord's camps by themselves means that a prospective group needs to muscle in... not get a new pick. The problem here isn't pick availability, it's a group's camp monopoly. This WILL happen in seb; if a group is mass aeing the entire top floor by themselves, it doesn't mean new seb picks should spawn after 24 players, it means you either have to move into one of those 3-4 monopolized camps and contest them, or leave for chardok or whatever.
  11. Avanju New Member

    I had a short-lived term as a fantasy author in high school when I wrote a short story for English class based on EQ lore. Copyright infringement? Probably, but it got me an A. Sadly, my career as an author never came to fruition.

    I think we are saying the same thing about balancing being required, but from my perspective, you are arguing for balance in the direction of "I want an unnecessarily aggravating game that systematically creates trolls and makes people want to quit." If I understand your perspective, you think I'm arguing in the direction of a "I want a silver platter."

    Both of those are extremes which I don't believe either of us are arguing for. The point is, it is my opinion that the instance thresholds are currently too high. If the devs agree with me (and I'm sure they have access to more data than I, e.g. /petition stats), then great, hopefully it will change. If not...I'm not sure how much longer I can put up with all the griefing and bad sports.
  12. jiri_ Augur

    Remember it's not always about Guk. Not every zone is a sprawling dungeon with high mob density. For example, as I've said now multiple times, High Keep, where every level-appropriate mob that doesn't give good-aligned faction hits is campable by a single group.
    Avanju likes this.
  13. Siddar Augur

  14. Blehme New Member


    This is your assumption, as we are not entirely aware of how or where this information is being handled. It could be a simple update to a single column in the database or could require extensive retooling of the client + distribute it as a patch update. But it seems with Hotzones/Server wide xp bonus', this is likely not the case as they don't require patches to update the experience ratings, but again we have no idea.


    You are also assuming the /pick threshhold option is a simple fix, and it could be just as difficult, or just as simple as the above option.



    Why cant you use /shout instead of /ooc if this became a reality? Or, anytime you enter a zone you join a zone channel (So you zone into unrest, and autojoin channel "Unrest" for example), which would allow cross pick talking? This may be an even better option, because you can /join these channels outside the zone and determine where to take a group before making the run.

    I absolutely agree that we shouldn't base these decisions around "Special circumstances" like my lguk group. And I would have LOVED to see someone try and contest that group, as mobs weren't up to contest =).

    I mostly agree with you about group camp monopolies. I think if the mobs are up, they dont belong to anyone until pulled. However, that being said I DONT agree with people contesting camps when mobs are being actively cleared. I generally give someone a minute or 2 to pull the mobs, but if they dont get pulled its not theirs and they should be taken. But claiming areas because "You need to share" I disagree with unless the group that was there first is on board.

    I have always LOVED EQ because of the "Play Nice" community mentality. Its not always like this, but in most cases the playerbase is encouraged to be nice and helpful. I see these as the gateways to angry situations that can really bring the community down. Maybe not, but worth mentioning maybe?
  15. Varisath Elder

    Yet again another example of "give them an inch and they want to stretch it a mile." In the grand time-line of Everquest's life, load balancing is still considered a brand new thing, and here you guys are already acting as if the game or DBG owes you something.

    Remember like hardly even 6 months ago when load balancing didn't exist and you were forced to go to live side guk to XP, or go to a sub-optimal camp? Did anyone here play on Fippy or any previous TLP? God forbid you had to suffer some slower XP or a camp that didn't drop exactly SMR or FBSS.

    Then DBG releases this awesome new thing that opened up basically an unlimited amount of places to group and the first thing people come crying about is they can't get exactly the camp that they want when they want it. This is the problem with giving the carebears or super casuals anything at all because no matter what you give them, they WILL want MORE.

    FFS, they just released quite possibly the greatest EQ server of all time that caters to not only the casual player but to the hardcore player at the same time as well and you're STILL HERE CRYING FOR MORE.

    MAKE IT STOP.
  16. Avanju New Member

    Daaang son. That is a lot of rage you have. You need to calm down and probably see a therapist. No one is crying for anything. We're having a discussion and giving suggestions as to improving the game experience for everyone.
  17. Varisath Elder

    Everyone's game experience was just improved a thousand times fold by the creation of load balancing and you're trying to stretch it out even more.

    I feel like you actually didn't even read any of yerm's excellent points about requiring players to move around the world and find other places to play. You started this thread claiming that Unrest needed even more picks open presumably because you wanted a specific camp in exactly Unrest, as opposed to not taking the time to start this thread in the first place and move to a different zone and find something else to do.
  18. O'Michael New Member

    Hm.... I've only level 29 but I don't have a clue what you guys are complaining about when it comes to blues being crap xp. Either you never played EQ back in the day or your group is to caster heavy.

    I know that as a group last night in MM we were killing light blue to red mobs.... While I did notice less xp per blue kill (obviously) we were killing them nearly four times as fast as we were able to kill a red con.

    Also, there are zones all over original EQ that you can get xp in..... as a matter of fact all of them.... If you care so much about the ZEM then I think you are missing the point of being part of the community... Go to an off zone and show people neat things that they never knew existed in EQ or go do some good old exploring with someone....

    I know for a fact that you can get more then 2 yellow in 2 hours at level 30 in open zones.

    Anyhow, sorry to , just annoyed with all the complaining. Seems like people forgot that you have to work for your enjoyment, not have it handed to you on a silver platter.

    P.S. I would of been fine starting on this server with NO /picks and no maps whatsoever.