Red TLP

Organise, Stand up and show up in force on ZEK to be counted or shuffle away on your knees!

The devs WOULD build a PvP TLP if there were enough players to make it a financially viable proposition, so all you have to do to convince them there is enough support is name a time & date and turn up en-masse - the devs would be more than happy to see you all show up in your hundreds or thousands.

Crying on the forums and taking pot shots at other forum users does absolutely squat.

All the "build it and they will come" day-dreaming in the world is going to do absolutely nothing.

For a community that was once able to organise the only kill of the Sleeper on any server the inability to organise a show of force in support of a PvP TLP so far is flat out embarrassing.

EQ PvP TLP Community is a joke.

ORGANIZE AND SHOW THE WORLD THAT YOU WANT A FREE TRADE RANDOMIZED LOOT SERVER!!!

I don't think anyone ever asked for random loot. But plenty of people showed that free trade is popular by FV being one of the most populated servers.

If that is the only difference, why can Red People not go red on a blue TLP server?

Because that's optional.

Oh I know this one. If you're red on a blue server you cannot be buffed nor can you buff other players in your group if they aren't red as well. Of course being in a arena will allow buffs to land but no one goes to stand around in an arena to be buffed

I'm not sure about heals though

By that logic, make the PVP server free trade too. It's popular.

I’ve never seen a dev post asking anyone who’s ever been interested in eq1 pvp and wanting a new server after almost 22 years to organize some lame event on zek to prove they want pvp…

Seems odd when there are so many threads asking for it and considering daybreak could make a poll…


Can you provide proof of a dev saying such a thing please and thank you ?

Or is that something you just repeat over and over without it being true ?

As has been said many times they still need to see proof of a demand for a pvp server

No, PvP is boring

Free trade is already popular. By your logic the proof of demand for the other variable doesn't matter.

TLDR - Bring on the PVP TLP Baby! Imagine posting this much about something you don't even wanna play on KEKW.

Red TLP WHEN?

I can't wait to dominate all you idiots

Literally this. You guys telling people to go play on a DEAD LIVE SERVER to prove they want a NEW 20+ expansions PREVIOUS CONTENT SERVER are absolutely pathetic.

Let people advocate for the way they want to play the game. Stop making it your mission to tell people how they enjoy something is "wrong" or "bad". Buncha losers

Trying to compare a random loot server which pretty much requires free trade to a pvp server? The fact still remains that the only pvp server is one of the most (if not the most) dead servers in the game and has been on life support for nearly 20 years. There is no proof of any demand for pvp and you can say there is proof that people don't want to pvp at all.

I am guessing no one (or very few) even thought of the idea of a random loot server before it was announced.

See you on Red TLP!

Too much crying didn't read.

RED SERVER WHEN

Lack of proof is not proof. Anyway, thanks for playing forumquest. You can head back to the "plz merge thorneblade into mischief" thread.

If there is such a demand for pvp you should be able to show that by getting people to play on zek or turn in books of discord on a newer tlp server. Though it sounds like the work is to hard and there really isn't enough demand.

Thank god there was such a massive desire for the Miragul server. That server is really popular and as I have learned in this thread, EQ devs will only consider a server if there is a massive demand for that ruleset!

/s

c l o w n s

There's plenty of proof of the interest in EQ PVP servers. Zek's population:


It's one of the most dead servers in EQ. Nobody but a few neckbeards wants a PVP server. I can identify two of the people who promote it on this thread as notoriously known cheaters. Sounds like a great environment to be on.