Roshen, tell us more about your enforcement plans.

Here's what makes no sense at all. Daybreak Gaming Company has suggested multiple times that they feel "contested content" is something unique from EQ history that people should experience. Yet, if guilds successfully contest the content, then the obvious result is one group will receive the benefits of that content over other groups. This will lead to petitions and then forced sharing. Or people will decide to share before that happens. Either way, if people are forced to share, whether pro-actively or reactively, then the content is not truly contested, is it? Which logically takes us back to square one, if Daybreak Gaming Company doesn't want content to be contested, why suggest that contested content is this great historical thing?

Real issue is most times when something is contested and one side has won fairly, the other side still cries foul because they do not want to back down or admit defeat. Lies, accusations and manipulation starts flying around until the real truth is skewed.

I took it more that they liked how the community came together when it came to contested content. And of course the "Hans Gruber" message seemed to reinforce my previous take on their thoughts.

Of course, lets also not forget the manipulations people try to do on rotations and such. People constantly try to game the system to take advantage of others rather than keeping things equitable.

If they've learned anything from talking and watching P99 it should be this: Ban fast and ban hard. No gray areas. People will whine, then the rest will fall in line.

GM intervention and mediation is far too time consuming and dumb for both players and staff. Just go nuts qitwith the banhammer. Rule with fear. Gamers only learn the hard way, so leave the kid gloves at home.

The problem with the approach, is that, it isn't a classic feel to everyone. There were hardcore, non carebear servers, where everything was contested. Like it was on Fippy? Maybe not to that degree, but to suggest that it didnt happen would be false.

So, are they going to allow things to be how they were on non-carebear servers? Or are they going to insist that guilds rotate and "play nice"? How does that work out from a fair standpoint for any guild with more than 20 players, considering there isn't enough content, even with 6 month, or even a year(Because its not like Kunark adds that many raid targets) to gear an entire guild of more than that? At what point does this become "Casual Classic server" vs "Time-Locked Progression?"

The other problem is, even if by some miracle every single spawn has a fair victory, there is still 3-4 times the guilds/players for the same content. They seem unwilling to acknowledge this.

And then there's group content; that's going to be a real mess. Back in the day, if I wanted to, for example, camp something in LGuk, if it was camped I'd come back later, or more likely I would possibly get into a group camping it. But that doesn't work today. FBSS for example will not be camped until the player gets one for his character, it will be camped until the player gets one for all of his melee characters (which, with 6 boxers prevalent, can be several) AND most players will likely stay there until he gets one to sell, AND some people will no doubt perma-camp it as an ongoing business.

Now, one could argue that "well that guy is camping FBSS to sell, so you can camp something else to sell". Well, that doesn't work either, for you see, while boxing was possible back in the day, it was not as prevalent. Today, however, each meaningful item is unlikely to be camped by a group of characters controlled by 6 different players, but instead, camped by 6 characters controlled by the same person. In this fashion, even the idea of spreading the farming out to form a trade economy is ruined, as there's not enough camps for everyone.

If that's how they want to play it then it completely reinforces the point: "Enjoy contested content that is unique to the Classic EverQuest experience!". "Wait, no, don't actually contest it, or you're banned."

People actually pay for this, unlike P99, and deserve to have the gaming company treat their purchase, and their time commitment in building a character, with more respect than that.

Also, with all due respect, saying "This is kind of the law, but not really, until we decide it really is" and "If you break that law when we decide to implement it, you'll maybe have something done, but we're not going to tell you what it is" either A. Means they have no idea what they're actually going to do. or B. They're planning on doing it from day one, and will instantly come down on raid guilds for breaking their unwritten play policy.

Doesn't that seem kind of on track with DBG current trend of Customer Service?

They have a written policy already I would expect that is what will be enforced if it becomes needed.
For those that don't know what the current policy is maybe they should go read it, of course those that don;t care what the policy is will break it. I hope like heck they ban rule breakers and ban them hard right at the beginning, maybe if they do we won't have tons of a'hats breaking the rules here is a link just in case someone is unaware of the rules https://help.daybreakgames.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/16211/kw/play nice

I would love for you to point me in the direction of that policy, considering it changed every other day on Fippy to match the GM's mood. We saw it all, First in Force, first to attack, dps race, Lord of the Rings trivia, dueling. So by all means, point me in the direction that our server GM's clearly had no idea about!

just added the link in the above post but here is the relevant section.


2. You must comply with arbitration for contested spawns.

There are cases where two or more groups wish to kill the same NPC or hunt in the same area. In these cases, the groups are required to compromise.

If an equitable compromise cannot be reached between the players prior to EverQuest Customer Service Staff involvement, the Game Master will mandate a compromise. Any such compromise is final and not open to debate. Refusing to abide by these terms will be considered disruption and may result in disciplinary action.

It is therefore strongly suggested that the groups make every attempt to reach a compromise that they can live with prior to involving an Game Master, who may mandate a compromise that does not suit you to the extent that a player-devised compromise would.

Note: A "group" in this case is defined as a party of one or more characters that are united in a common belief or goal and are capable of completing that goal.

I know how to solve this, leg wars.

I played on a half dozen servers at a raiding tier (including Veeshan) and Guided for a server generally considered one of the most competitive during the early days (Sol Ro) - to claim anything close to Fippy happened on them is abject lunacy that involves literally rewriting the history books.

Across all of them total, I can count times where something like Fippy's daily drama occurred on a single hand. Rotations were the norm for around a third of the servers and respected races were the norm for the rest barring a few outlying cases that weren't the "day to day" of the server.

This did start to change around Luclin on some servers (when "Ogre Walls" became a bit of a thing for Ssra) but even then it wasn't exactly commonplace, we're talking guilds would do it for a month or so. Not years day in and day out.

And nothing in the "Time Locked Progression" title implies anything about it being hardcore or softcore - forcing your own demented version of things onto the server, especially in direct defiance on what is CLEARLY REQUESTED in the poll results + beta announcement post is lunacy.

PS - Interesting that your name is registered on a major RMT site - I wonder how your guildmates feel about that? Couldn't possibly want to monopolize content for enriching your wallet could you?

You don't seem to be familiar with what's leading to this discussion. 99% of people know what the play nice policy says...

What generated this was Daybreak's statements that led players to believe that this server will not have full GM support, leading many of us to believe that they will not respond to petitions in a timely fashion. If that turns out to be true, then after there is no GM response, players will start deciding that they need to fight back in kind - i.e. bring their best DPS classes and fight for the mobs.

You, on the other hand, seem to be under the impression that petitioning will result in timely GM action. If that could be relied upon, then great! But what are you personally going to do if you cannot resolve a group camp or raid, and receive no GM assistance? What if it it happens twice? Three times? Are you just going to keep letting the other guys win or are you going to fight back?

The only reason they were forced to keep doing random nonsense was because you folks kept pushing the envelope and defying them over and over again while they weren't given teeth.

See the arbitration clause above - you're supposed to compromise or stick to arbitration when it's done.

Clearly this time rather than random arbitration they're going to do something out of the Old Testament. (Soddom and Gamorrah? King Solomon? Something else? The suspense is killing me) So please, do your worst at getting yourself removed from the EQ gene pool rather than trying to actually create a tolerable environment on the server.

I don't consider losing someone like you that thinks only of themselves over the community as a whole much of a loss at all.

If you have 10 guilds in line for a 3 day spawn, you're looking at 1 kill a month. If instancing is out of the question, increasing the spawn rate seems logical.

I'm happy we are actually getting a progression server, regardless of the vote options.

I actually thought at least Classic + Kunark would have won the vote. This would have alleviated a great deal of congestion in the group and raid game. Kunark has a great deal of content for level 1 to 50 (over half of the expansion). If the vote was for Classic or Classic + Kunark, I'm pretty sure most of the people that voted for the trilogy would vote for Classic + Kunark. If you add the votes for trilogy with the Classic + Kunark, would it have been greater than the votes for just Classic?

Anyway, like I said before, I'm excited they are even giving us a server =)

Ohhhhh....this reminds me. I saw at least one person say they would have preferred Kunark, but that they voted Classic to offset the possibility that their Kunark vote would have been counted with Velious.

I don't get why this is even being discussed, do you people actually think the top guilds are 1. going to work out any kind of rotation/sharing or 2. actually honor any said deal once they start hitting raid targets? If you do then this is probably your first time on a TLP. This is going to come down to GM mediation and if Daybreak doesn't know that yet then they are in for quite a surprise.

Honestly that would be 6 kills per (and remember some stuff like [non Noble] Sky spawns daily) unlock - TLP 1.0 assuming zero competition you'd have gotten 4, 2.0 assuming zero competition you'd have gotten 8.

All things considered it's not bad, and that's with a guild count that sounds reasonable not some number that sounds implausible.

What we're discussing from the Poll results announcement is:

Clearly they don't want to have to intervene, but if things get to the point where they feel they must - it's not going to be pretty for the offenders. Period.

Daybreak is saying "Be reasonable to each other and make rotations or some other agreement to get along" and waiting to see if some jerks push back with some sort of response in mind.