Phinigel Flagging issues EoK to live

Discussion in 'Time Locked Progression Servers' started by Hendoh12, Jul 15, 2020.

  1. Hendoh12 Apprentice

    With EoK coming next month and the flagging model from EoK until live staying roughly the same can some of the artificial locks be handled different?

    When EoK launches next month here it will take 25 days of a eight week expansion to hit the final tier zone which is raiding on lockout timer.
    Other things compound this as well which is needing EoK visables to upgrade to RoS gear having less then a month for most people to experience the last tier zones.

    Looking for suggestions from some of the other guilds left on Phinny.
    Here is some stuff i heard and thought was reasonable and easy to hotfix.
    Loot and lockouts reduced to what Selo's has currently this felt right in UF gear and flags were flowing and helped progress through content and doing difficult in era achievements.
    EoK and TBL extended to 3 Months.
    McJumps, SirNaves, Numiko and 32 others like this.
  2. RainbowCane Elder

    The other "easy" solution is to change from 2x key drops to 3x for this expansion. That would mean only two clears of each tier to move forward instead of 3 clears, which is whats making this so restrictive.

    This would be inline with other fixes that have been made during Phinigel's progression. The 3 month thing has been shot down previously by devs. They talked about it, and decided against it.
    Tuzmin, Ulrin, Trowx and 4 others like this.
  3. Auesheet Lorekeeper

    As it stands, we will have to do T1 Raids x's 3, then T2 Raids x's 3 to be flagged for the final raid zone.

    I think simply reducing this so that we only have to clear the raids twice would be a great change. It worked out this way in TDS (only needed 2 clears to be flagged) and I don't think there were any complaints from the 3 raiding guilds on Phinigel.
  4. Morgen Elder

    Yes. Agree flagging should get fixed ASAP. The Underfoot model was good, IMO, and probably (maybe?) would take the least effort from devs- increase flags and loot. To be honest, XP should be considered too on, as there are a huge # of AA to get, but I won't hold my breath on that one.
    Trowx and Fatjack the glutton like this.
  5. Skuz I am become Wrath, the Destroyer of Worlds.

    Edit: misunderstood earlier posts:

    If devs shot down a 12 week EoK (which would have meant x2 keys was enough) and we are stuck with 8 week then 3x keys makes sense.

    I also think a "template" item should be made available in RoS to alleviate the problem of requiring EoK gear items to create RoS gear items on accelerated unlock servers, on live many guilds ended up farming EoK over & over for any returning or low raid attendance players in RoS/early TBL doing that on a server that moves through expansions way more quickly is hugely problematic.
  6. Roxas MM Augur

    lowering the lockouts is my least favourite solution by far tbh.
    I am really pro 3 months not only for flagging but for xp also, but well, we know what happened there.
    so lets up the key drops a bit more and at least the armor drops ? ( if that can be changed separately from other loot ?), we're almost there to live as the first progression server ever with active raiding guilds, so lets not shoot it down now.
    Trowx and Skuz like this.
  7. RainbowCane Elder

  8. Warrior007 Augur

    The root issues of this are two fold: how short and rich EoK is, along with an unusually high grade of time-locked requirements for raid progression in comparison to prior expansions. We only have eight weeks here.

    We had an internal meeting last night to discuss this. The general consensus is that we would like to see one or both of the following changes, keys increase and/or extending the expansion. Preferably both. I recall a post citing late expansions would be considered to expand to a 3 month unlock years ago.

    Keys:

    As it presently stands with double keys, it would take 10 days to access the second tier (Chardok), and a subsequent 10 days to access the final tier (Kor-Sha). This is assuming raiding on 5 day lockouts (not 4.5d morning raids) and finishing the subsequent tier immediately when available.

    Day 0: 4 T1 keys
    Day 5: 8 T1 keys:
    Day 10: 12 T1 keys, T2 access (3 clears)

    Day 10: 6 T2 keys
    Day 15: 12 T2 keys
    Day 20 16 T2 keys, T3 access (3 clears)

    Day 20: T3 clear

    Proposed change: modifying the keys/currency generated to 3x would put this in line with the majority of the prior expansions on TLP in mandating two cycles to access the subsequent tier.

    In The Darkened Sea, currency was doubled to fulfill this. This reduced the theoretical time to access the end content to 10 days from 30 days. TDS was also three months long.

    TDS Thread as a reference.

    Three Month Unlock:

    With the extent of content and requirements for step-up upgrades for the subsequent expansion, RoS, it would be fine and appropriate to extend this expansion to three months. I have not studied the future expansions in depth yet, although I have been told the type of progression is normal and standard. I and the majority of my team believe a 3 month unlock is more appropriate for these eras.


    TLDR: Change the keys at a minimum

    Everyone that we have spoken with and to agrees that the keys should be adjusted to be more in line with the prior expansions. Throttling the content this extensively is no good. TLP is about replayability and experiencing that in an appropriate amount of time is important for a level of reasonable fulfillment.

    If you agree that the keys should be adjusted, show your support by liking this post.
    Rajaah, Aziuno, SirNaves and 34 others like this.
  9. DeseanJackson Augur

    As a Selo player, I support increasing keying. It looks like we’ll be hitting EoK in November, and that’s slated to be a 28day expansion for us (4weeks).
  10. JBox New Member

    Just extend it to 3 months, there are 10k AAs to get in addition to clear the same nonsense multiple times.

    Increase the time of the expansion is basically a no effort fix that I believe all 3 guilds would be fine with.
    Ulrin and Skuz like this.
  11. Skuz I am become Wrath, the Destroyer of Worlds.

    Hmm, I don't think you are right.

    RoS system requires an EoK gear item & a Combine Draconic Scale Transmogrificant

    There is no item that replaces the EoK gear item in any of the combines to make RoS armors, something that was available in prior expansions for platinum to make tier 3 armor without a tier 2 item to put in the combination container.

    The RoS vendors sell EoK gears for RoS currency but that's not what I was referring to, and in that case it means making RoS gears eats up a lot of currency when you don't have EoK gear to use.
  12. Hendoh12 Apprentice

  13. Ythera Lorekeeper

    I support extending EoK to 3 months or increasing the key drops or reducing the requirement on the achievement for flagging.

    I'd like to thank Ngreth and Aristo for their past work on flagging/currency for the TLP servers in the past; without those changes they made, I wouldn't have been able to thoroughly enjoy the end content that each expansion has to offer.
    Nahdea, Aneuren and Skuz like this.
  14. Skuz I am become Wrath, the Destroyer of Worlds.

    Looks like poor Hendoh12 took too many hits to the cranium between posts.
  15. Darchon_Xegony Augur

    What I don't understand is why they bothered to code the Key and Currency amplification model to be 2x base for launch, 3x base 3 months after expansion launch and 4x base 6 months after expansion launch.

    They should just start all TLPs at 4x base keys and currency. All TLPs currently active will be going through these later era expansions in 3 months or less. Let people skip the re-farming keys aspect of raids to unlock the next tier. That design decision is based on a 12-month expansion cycle, encouraged to prolong involvement of live players in the current expansion. It is not needed on TLP servers.

    If you instead just let TLP players immediately unlock the next tier of raids after completing the prior one in full, it would be a much better user experience. You aren't worrying about people burning out and quitting because they consumed all the content too quickly on TLPs because there is always another expansion around the corner in the next month or two once you've completed the current one you are on.

    Regarding EoK, I do think it is an expansion worthy of a 3 month cycle even without the level increase. Gaining those 5 levels doesn't really take an extra month. What should be examined is the amount of content. In EoK there is a ton of AAs worth of content to work on and that alone should justify it being a 3 month expansion.
    Aneuren and Skuz like this.
  16. Boze TLP complaint factory

    Pretty sure they already fixed this to some extent:
    - Raid events from Veil of Alaris and later will now grant more progression keys after they have been open for 3, 6, and 9 months on all servers.
    - - Previously this would begin after 6 months. On progression servers these events will grant more progression keys as soon as the expansion unlocks, and add additional bonuses after each of the next two expansions unlock or at 3 month intervals, whichever is faster.

    https://forums.daybreakgames.com/eq/index.php?threads/game-update-notes-may-15-2019.257785/
  17. Skuz I am become Wrath, the Destroyer of Worlds.

    No level raise in EoK which is why the devs set it to be 8 weeks rather than 12 (Lev 110 comes with RoS)/

    The rest of your post is pretty much spot on, though I don't quite agree with having 4x keys from the start, 3x in an 8 weeker & 2x in a 12 weeker is plenty, Selo's only being 4 weeks per expansion but having halved unlocks means 3x would work there too.

    I am very much of the mind that EoK has so much content in it that it totally warrants a 12 week run though, I mean TBM had 8 weeks & isn't even half as big as EoK is.
  18. RainbowCane Elder

    @Boze this exact issue is specific to EoK. Namely, 2x keys (what we have now) is not enough on a 2 month timeline. Hence the request for 3x keys or a 3rd month.

    At this time however, changing the amount of keys for one specific expansion represents a large amount of work that Devs will be unable to do in this short period of time.

    However changing this expansion to 3 months is a much more "doable" solution, and thus that is what we are requesting.
    Dwert Diggler and Skuz like this.
  19. Nolrog Augur

    IMO, the amount of raid currency needs another bump as well. I'm not sure the current increase is enough.
  20. Aneuren Tempered Steel

    Dreamweaver and Devs,

    Some time ago, the decision was made to reduce the timeline on non-level increase expansions to 8 weeks for TLPs.

    I can understand this decision, especially given the impact that LDoN and PoR have on server communities. If you have read my posts here, you'll know that I always argue for inclusivity of content - that the maximum number of players should have frequent and equal access to all raid content in a given expansion. I personally would have enjoyed 3 months of LDoN. I would hate 3 months of PoR. And therein lies the difficulty of course, different players view these expansions differently.

    I think it is a mistake, however, to paint with a broad brush. It is easy to simply decide "all non-level increase expansions set to 8 weeks." It removes any bias or subjectivity in what expansions are "worthy" of 12 weeks.

    It is my hope that trends in server population were also studied before making that decision, but I do not know that it was and so I simply mention this as a possibility. Data (with context, not in a vacuum) would be helpful in evaluating these kinds of decisions.

    The problem is that not all non-level increase expansions are created equally. Gates of Discord has a tremendous amount of content; the gear is diverse and worth farming for; and the events are challenging/interesting/fun (depending on your guild's level of gear and skill). It is easily an expansion that could justify a 12 week stay. But it is not a level-increase expansion.

    Depths of Darkhollow - a non-level increase expansion. This expansion has a plethora of content; great single-group mission arcs; the five blood raids; and of course, Demiplane of Blood.

    Dragons of Norrath - a non-level increase expansion. Some stuff to do, not as much as the other expansions though. But, on the other hand, a real boon to non-raiders, and with some excellent chase items for raiders.

    The list goes on and on, but the point remains the same. Not all non-level increase expansions were created equally. But without data to show the impact of those expansions on server population, it is tricky to say for sure which expansions are "popular." But we can at least judge the amount of content provided.

    Accordingly, perhaps the policy should be re-evaluated. At minimum, the flagging and keying for each expansion should be tuned to allow raid guilds that raid on a set schedule to access end-game content without (a) needing to split full raids (i.e., I do not mean some of the lower-player-capped raids) to maximize flags; and (b) without needing to change raid nights each week to maximize lockouts. I know 2 and 3 months can seem like a great deal of time, but we really don't have all that much time in these expansions. TLPs give us the chance to relive all of our fond EQ memories, and as long as guilds are readily capable of defeating the content, they should have a fair period of time to farm that content not arbitrarily limited by flagging standards that made sense for live servers.

    As for my point (b) above, I can only say that you saw how the need to increase time-per-week for raiding impacted Selos. Most of the posts I have seen concerning that server advocate increased loot dropping instead of reduced lockouts. I would argue that it is always better to increase loot or flags, rather than enforce a policy that creates the need to raid extra nights per week - a sure recipe for burnout.

    And at a maximum, these expansions should be judged on their own merits for 8- vs 12-week expansions, instead of being fitted into a 1-size-fits-all approach.