Genesis Forums

Zugzug wrote: There are still items that have a limited number of 'instances' in the world (for example, if there are already 5 spawned, then one of those would need to get broken for another one to get a chance to spawn on an npc).

Anyway to get confirmation on this? I thought limits were removed but just marginally harder to find equipment when more of them are spawned? Like there used to be 3 GBS but now there is an unlimited amount but it is just VERY hard to find one after 3 have been secured.

If this isn't the case I need to find time for Johnny, I'm behind on the hoarding game!

Johnny wrote:

Zugzug wrote: There are still items that have a limited number of 'instances' in the world (for example, if there are already 5 spawned, then one of those would need to get broken for another one to get a chance to spawn on an npc).

Anyway to get confirmation on this? I thought limits were removed but just marginally harder to find equipment when more of them are spawned? Like there used to be 3 GBS but now there is an unlimited amount but it is just VERY hard to find one after 3 have been secured.

If this isn't the case I need to find time for Johnny, I'm behind on the hoarding game!

You should mail every domain and ask them to confirm that all the items have been changed over from the "old" system to the "new" system of spawn limits. When you have written confirmation from every domain, you will have your proof

Johnny wrote:

Zugzug wrote: There are still items that have a limited number of 'instances' in the world (for example, if there are already 5 spawned, then one of those would need to get broken for another one to get a chance to spawn on an npc).

Anyway to get confirmation on this? I thought limits were removed but just marginally harder to find equipment when more of them are spawned? Like there used to be 3 GBS but now there is an unlimited amount but it is just VERY hard to find one after 3 have been secured.

If this isn't the case I need to find time for Johnny, I'm behind on the hoarding game!

1. find time for Johnny!

2. from discord:

Gorboth 09/17/2018
There are no hard limits. We did away with that in 2015.

Manipura 09/17/2018
On no item whatsoever? That's amazing.
Thanks for clearing that up.
I wasn't sure.

Gorboth 09/17/2018
No hard limits, no. There is a % dice roll when npcs spawn that does respond to how many have already spawned with that item.

Good news, and confirmation (as if anyone needed it) that Raelle is cooler than a polar bear's toenails.

Just make everything save 1 arma then it's worth imbuing but it goes *poof* no matter what at the second arma, simple.

What about remove all non dull and non breakable properties? Then everything can break and you need to farm again.
On top of that, change the decay system completely. All items decay at a rate in combat regardless if you are tanking or not(non-tanks still have the drawback then) same with weapons, regardless of whether you are attacking with them or not (prevents spellcaster from just holding or wielding an item but not actually attacking with it). And we already have a way of checking that stuff through adrenaline.

How about just making ALL items decay over time. Even those that aren't used and sit in a rack?

That way the enormous stores of non-used items are automatically cycled unless the guild makes an effort to keep things in a good condition.

I miss the EQ hunt, and right now it is basically impossible to find anything useful, and I don't need it either.

Thalric wrote: ↑

29 Aug 2019 21:13

How about just making ALL items decay over time. Even those that aren't used and sit in a rack?

That way the enormous stores of non-used items are automatically cycled unless the guild makes an effort to keep things in a good condition.

I miss the EQ hunt, and right now it is basically impossible to find anything useful, and I don't need it either.

Not sure how that makes any sense. If your guild has a rack that makes weapons/armours rust/get damaged, find a better rackmaster.

On the other hand, ALL used equipment in battle should wear down, regardless of whether worn by tank or scummy swarmers

However, do note that our (players) opinions do not really matter in these cases. It will be as admin decides, and maybe after they make a decision, they will post a "poll" on the forums.

Zugzug wrote: ↑

29 Aug 2019 23:46

However, do note that our (players) opinions do not really matter in these cases. It will be as admin decides, and maybe after they make a decision, they will post a "poll" on the forums.

Did you not know, or forgot, that this entire change happened mainly because of a large number of players, new and old, was not happy with the old system, and wanted a change?

And speaking about polls, the most one-sided poll I've ever seen was regarding this topic some years ago, when a large majority voted for a system where at least some EQ would save on a person, instead of being lost when you quit. Many different solutions were discussed, for example making only non-magic EQ save forever, or a set number of items that you could "mark" for saving, or a locker system, etc. This change was not admin-driven at first, it was something a large number of players (and wizards) asked for. Also, a large number of new players complained on the old system, which was another big reason to make a change. Without the players being the driving force behind this I doubt it would have happened. I do not think we would have just woken up one day and thought "Hey, lets change how EQ saves!", despite everyone being happy with how it worked before.

I still think the new way is the right way to go, and that it will become even better after some of the side-effects are sorted out. But don't say the admin doesn't listen to players, that's both unfair and completely wrong, especially in this case. Obviously we don't agree with everything all players say and suggest, but that doesn't mean we are not listening. In this particular case we listened a lot, and still are!

Cherek wrote: ↑

30 Aug 2019 17:33

Zugzug wrote: ↑

29 Aug 2019 23:46

However, do note that our (players) opinions do not really matter in these cases. It will be as admin decides, and maybe after they make a decision, they will post a "poll" on the forums.

Did you not know, or forgot, that this entire change happened mainly because of a large number of players, new and old, was not happy with the old system, and wanted a change?

Huh? No, this entire change happened only because of big hope PC Gamer article would bring us hundreds of NEW people suddenly. With no change 99% of those new people would give up quickly, noticing their eq loss after logout. So you rushed with a change only because of hundreds of NEW people who didn't come. No change was implemented for years, listening to the numerous proposals from OLD players.

Then an article appeared on the horizon, admin rushed suddenly with the simplest possible change, with side-effects impacting game balance seriously, side-effects you simply can't solve for a looong time already. You could have transformed those few OP no-dull weapons into slow-dull (quick, simple and fair). If it still wasn't enough you could have always discuss/analyze another big global change like:
- allowing non-dulling weapons being average quality only, with top quality gear always dulling normally/slowly,
- global decay system etc.
If you had just fixed a few OP weapons as a part of a 'saving eq change', people would have waited for a global change much more patiently (or it wouldn't be needed anymore).