TLP Ruleset Evolution.

With the 20th Anniversary and two new TLP servers looming, the squawking for ruleset changes is deafening.

As an example, there has been a myriad of proposals to slow Selo down through various means such as 6 or 8 week unlocks, bundling expansions, starting in classic, or longer initial release times. Sometimes, compromise is two people agreeing to do something wrong. Selo's has a theme. That theme is fast progression. This server's, any server's, best future, in my opinion, comes with making decisions that are consistent with an overall idea. Letting it be a fast server, with exceptions to cater to those who want something different creates an amalgamation of rules that ultimately move the server away from desired rulesets. Neither those wishing a faster server nor a slower one will be content with a compromised result.

This push to mold these servers into one's dream is motivated, I think, by the lack of creativity with past TLPs and further fueled by DBG's rare public acknowledgment giving genuine consideration to player feedback.

Until not so long ago, TLPs followed a single, non-diverging, evolved ruleset. In the past, TLP changes have progressively improved the general experience by fixing bugs, removing voting, removing expansion completion barriers, twiddling XP rates, adding /pick, adding AoCs, limiting box armies, and finding new ways to leverage microtransactions.

DBG, for all their faults, have stabilized the base TLP experience into something substantial; all be it tired at this point. Lots of folks are complaining about not getting a TLP server with FV loot or PvP or something. Others complain about having almost the same ruleset being release for the third time. This stability is a necessary stepping stone to more creative endeavors. DBG has already begun using the stable TLP base to fork off modestly unique rulesets, such as Agnarr and Selo. In my opinion, we finally see EQ positioned where these things can become a reality. As the TLP process continues to mature, I hope the future holds increasing ruleset variation and perhaps moderately faster TLP server releases.

As a community, perhaps we shouldn't be behaving as if this is our last hope; we may have the most cause to be hopeful now than ever before.

Point taken but selo is the premier ruleset to combine with open trade loot. Not doing it now is both a missed opportunity for all those seeking it and will make it harder in the future unless such future server is also like selo.

At this point, it seems the majority of squawking has subsided now that the rule sets are fairly established (although they did just adjust the LoY release).

While there is still a few squawkers, it seems the majority of folks seem relatively satisfied with the outcome for the two upcoming servers. The guild recruitment forum serves as a testament to the positive outlook, with over an entire page of recruitment threads specifically for Selo/Mangler.

This was my motivation for the post. Or, at least, it was the last straw.

Edit: That thread. No necessarily the decision from it.

Selos just turned out to be EQezmode for hardcore raiders and players with a lot of time to commit to the game, why would you want to add FV rules to make it even easier? It’s already going to me a massive cakewalk and loot piñata for those with that play style.
I wouldn’t want FV rules on a true casual server but I think it would be better suited for that type of server.

What makes you call it "already" a cakewalk? Slow exp and slow unlocks dont constitute difficulty (only time) and if you mean aoc, thats long established as standard.

Edit, faster lockouts are also only a time concern and dont make the actual encounters easier.

I wouldn't call those 2 changes for "improvements", but rather "steps in the wrong direction".

You're in the minority with that view. I think that most consider TLPs far too easy and too grindy (at least in the case of Coirnav/Phinny). And focus effects, I don't care either way. I certainly don't think that the loss of focus effects makes the game much harder.

What does "voting" and "completion barries" have to do with TLPs being too easy and too grindy - let alone "focus effects"?!
Your post seems out of context and is not making any sense at all.

Removing focus effects is a step towards making TLPs more similar to classic Everquest. Classic Everquest is difficult, challenging and rewarding, in ways that live Everquest are not. TLPs are getting closer to that, albeit slowly.

As far as voting, I wasn't even commenting on that, but having gone through the disaster of a server of Lockjaw/Ragefire, with 6 month periods for each expansion prior to even opening the vote... suffice to say I am glad we don't vote on unlocks anymore. Of course, if you're proposing a system where we could vote after a month or two to unlock Kunark I would love that, since 3 months of classic is at least 1 month too much.

If we could all go back to 1999, literally back in time, the bugs would be annoying, and the death penalty and slow xp would present a pure time sink, but would the encounters themselves actually be more challenging? I mean sure, there are some considerations like 30 necro raids wouldn't work since dots didn't stack back then -

I don't think so. With the exception of naked CR being an obvious big timesink then the major reason everything felt harder and more dangerous back then was because very few had any real clue of what they were doing and/or what needed to be done (including the devs). It was all one big steep learning curve back then.

Not really. For every change they make like motm or removing focus effects, there are five or six balance adjustments to live that make the TLP's easier.

Such as?

Exactly! Raids were tough back then because you had to figure them out. These days the only challenge is how many hours you are willing to put in each day. It's why you see the top raiding guilds within a few days of one another on accomplishments instead of the months or more you saw back in the early 2000s. It's why you see even casual guilds complete all content in era.

The challenges are on the live current side of the game now. TLPs are nostalgia, as they should be.

I agree with the bug aspect, also as far as internet and hardware back then it was rough (zoning in particular took a long time in '99 unless you had an amazing connection that the majority just did not have). But core game mechanics on live and on TLPs are nothing like they were in original as far as difficulty. What I mean by this is resist checks vs mobs - on these TLPs you can often land the majority of your spells on yellow mobs for example, whereas back in the day dark blues would resist a fair amount. It's very rare for dark blues to resist spells. Another example is Necro/Enchanter charm, both last longer and are more effective due to how the resist checks for that were changed over the years. Another is how monk FD works on these TLPs vs classic. There are plenty of other examples of this. But no, the game would not be that much more of a timesink, it would absolutely be much more difficult however.

He's probably referring to the balance changes over the years on live, from 2002 (early Luclin ish) to now. There was a change in Everquest's design around then, where nearly every fix / change made the game harder, to where nearly every change was to make the game easier.

I agree as far as raiding goes - EQ raiding has never been difficult, outside of having to figure out encounters when they were brand new like you've said. That's a relatively small aspect of Everquest though.

Baby steps.

--Adviser Jade

Recent AC mitigation changes.
The innate aa boost.
Bard bellow nuking for 130k

Those are just top of my head within the last year

All those changes only affect lvl lvl85+ chars iirc and the change to Innate melee AAs was actually a hefty nerf as far as any TLP still in pre-SoD content goes (the dmg modifier was reduced for character lvl40-80 and increased for lvl85+).

If you like the Selos concept, but really wanted it to have free trade loot the best way to "vote" is to play on Selos and show that its niche/different ruleset works. Might end up with multiple future Selos that way.

They build off what works. If there was no money in a classic start we'd never have seen one again after Fippy/Vulak (beginning of this modern progression age --lots of adjustments done for it, lots has been similar to it. Combine/Sleeper are more like a Beta of progression in hindsight). Show there is more money in Luclin start... that could get interesting.

Sometimes they are daring and build off what didn't work that well (Quarm event was a pretty big home run off the old ashes of Mayong 51/50 concept).