EQ, EQ2, and Vanguard

[Faeandar]

So, I played EQ for a long time and still think it the greatest
computer game ever made but had some RL friends who wanted better
graphics and better crafting, buncha pansies really but.....

So we went to EQ2 for a very short time, before VG came out, switched
back to EQ, then to VG when it released.
The pansies all like VG better than EQ and we all like EQ and VG
better than EQ2. However, EQ2 and VG both seem far too easy to me
having been an EQ player since 6mo after release.

Not that I'm pining away for hell levels again but I do miss the
just-crowded-enough zones where anything could happen at any time
(trains in BlackBurrow for example) and enough difficulty that a group
required strategy and tactics regardless of class makeup.

We're not certain how long VG will be around since the subscriptions
are not very high so I wanted to get a feel for how EQ is these days.
I've been out for a year now and recall when I left that I could
easily get groups with the guild but pickups were difficult.
Some zones were barren, even entire continents in some cases but other
zones had quite a few people in it, which is what I like. I do play
MMO's after all, not MO's.

How has EQ fared in the last year? Can we still get groups or do we
need to come ready built? Are there enough people in different level
ranges to make groups possible?

Thanks.

~F

[Richard Carpenter]

Post by Faeandar
So, I played EQ for a long time and still think it the greatest
computer game ever made but had some RL friends who wanted better
graphics and better crafting, buncha pansies really but.....
So we went to EQ2 for a very short time, before VG came out, switched
back to EQ, then to VG when it released.
The pansies all like VG better than EQ and we all like EQ and VG
better than EQ2.  However, EQ2 and VG both seem far too easy to me
having been an EQ player since 6mo after release.
Not that I'm pining away for hell levels again but I do miss the
just-crowded-enough zones where anything could happen at any time
(trains in BlackBurrow for example) and enough difficulty that a group
required strategy and tactics regardless of class makeup.
We're not certain how long VG will be around since the subscriptions
are not very high so I wanted to get a feel for how EQ is these days.
I've been out for a year now and recall when I left that I could
easily get groups with the guild but pickups were difficult.
Some zones were barren, even entire continents in some cases but other
zones had quite a few people in it, which is what I like.  I do play
MMO's after all, not MO's.
How has EQ fared in the last year?  Can we still get groups or do we
need to come ready built?  Are there enough people in different level
ranges to make groups possible?

If you stick to the hot zones, it's certainly possible to find/start a
group, though chances of full groups are often slim. I would say it's
easier to group as you get to the mid to upper levels, as these days
the lower levels just don't require a group. Most of the lower level
players are at least fairly well-twinked, so they just plow through
the levels, not worrying about grouping until later, when it becomes
more a necessity.

It's like I've seen from all the latest MMORPG's that have come along
over the last few years - if people don't need to group, chances are
they won't bother with it.

My brother and I have been back playing EQ for a while, but we're
going to try Vanguard for a bit. I had played it during the first
month or so after launch, but it was just way to buggy at the time.
I'm hoping that in its first year the devs have been able to stabilize
it a bit. I still think it's just a beautiful game, better than EQ2,
IMO.

--
Richard Carpenter

[U***@hotmail.com]

On Sun, 9 Mar 2008 19:13:42 -0700 (PDT), Richard Carpenter

Post by Richard Carpenter
My brother and I have been back playing EQ for a while, but we're
going to try Vanguard for a bit. I had played it during the first
month or so after launch, but it was just way to buggy at the time.
I'm hoping that in its first year the devs have been able to stabilize
it a bit.

Isnt it a SOE game too ?
They didnt manage to "stabilize" EQ1 in 8 years (Crashing while
zoning,"west bug",mobs under the surface,etc.),EQ2 is even
worse in this department.
For me its back to the roots(Diablo2,UO on a freshard) for now
until they change their mind and fix all the game stopping bugs
and for the future I wish they only implement new features
which have been thoroughly tested.
If that slows down development thats fine with me,I am sooo
tired of all this buggy crap the gaming industry offerd us in
the last decade,weird that they got through with this,probably
I have other expectations than the rest of their customers.
Maybe it has something to do with age,at C64/Atari/Amiga times
there was no internet to distribute patches and games usually
did what they were expected to.
But compared to other industries their quality standards are
laughable,imagine a car working as reliably as a SOE game,lol.

[Vladesch]

Post by U***@hotmail.com
On Sun, 9 Mar 2008 19:13:42 -0700 (PDT), Richard Carpenter

Post by Richard Carpenter
My brother and I have been back playing EQ for a while, but we're
going to try Vanguard for a bit. I had played it during the first
month or so after launch, but it was just way to buggy at the time.
I'm hoping that in its first year the devs have been able to stabilize
it a bit.

Isnt it a SOE game too ?
They didnt manage to "stabilize" EQ1 in 8 years (Crashing while
zoning,"west bug",mobs under the surface,etc.),EQ2 is even
worse in this department.
For me its back to the roots(Diablo2,UO on a freshard) for now
until they change their mind and fix all the game stopping bugs
and for the future I wish they only implement new features
which have been thoroughly tested.
If that slows down development thats fine with me,I am sooo
tired of all this buggy crap the gaming industry offerd us in
the last decade,weird that they got through with this,probably
I have other expectations than the rest of their customers.
Maybe it has something to do with age,at C64/Atari/Amiga times
there was no internet to distribute patches and games usually
did what they were expected to.
But compared to other industries their quality standards are
laughable,imagine a car working as reliably as a SOE game,lol.

I'd say EQ's technical isues were the least of its problems (circa 2005).

[U***@hotmail.com]

Post by Vladesch

Post by U***@hotmail.com
On Sun, 9 Mar 2008 19:13:42 -0700 (PDT), Richard Carpenter

Post by Richard Carpenter
My brother and I have been back playing EQ for a while, but we're
going to try Vanguard for a bit. I had played it during the first
month or so after launch, but it was just way to buggy at the time.
I'm hoping that in its first year the devs have been able to stabilize
it a bit.

Isnt it a SOE game too ?
They didnt manage to "stabilize" EQ1 in 8 years (Crashing while
zoning,"west bug",mobs under the surface,etc.),EQ2 is even
worse in this department.
For me its back to the roots(Diablo2,UO on a freshard) for now
until they change their mind and fix all the game stopping bugs
and for the future I wish they only implement new features
which have been thoroughly tested.
If that slows down development thats fine with me,I am sooo
tired of all this buggy crap the gaming industry offerd us in
the last decade,weird that they got through with this,probably
I have other expectations than the rest of their customers.
Maybe it has something to do with age,at C64/Atari/Amiga times
there was no internet to distribute patches and games usually
did what they were expected to.
But compared to other industries their quality standards are
laughable,imagine a car working as reliably as a SOE game,lol.

I'd say EQ's technical isues were the least of its problems (circa 2005).

No,game play and depth are far superior compared to its competitors.
This trying to get the "casual" gamer into MMORPGs by dumbing them
down is disgusting.
Hm,2005,I think at this time it wasnt too bad,it really became
annoying with OoW and expansions after.

[Vladesch]

Post by U***@hotmail.com

Post by Vladesch

Post by U***@hotmail.com
On Sun, 9 Mar 2008 19:13:42 -0700 (PDT), Richard Carpenter

Post by Richard Carpenter
My brother and I have been back playing EQ for a while, but we're
going to try Vanguard for a bit. I had played it during the first
month or so after launch, but it was just way to buggy at the time.
I'm hoping that in its first year the devs have been able to stabilize
it a bit.

Isnt it a SOE game too ?
They didnt manage to "stabilize" EQ1 in 8 years (Crashing while
zoning,"west bug",mobs under the surface,etc.),EQ2 is even
worse in this department.
For me its back to the roots(Diablo2,UO on a freshard) for now
until they change their mind and fix all the game stopping bugs
and for the future I wish they only implement new features
which have been thoroughly tested.
If that slows down development thats fine with me,I am sooo
tired of all this buggy crap the gaming industry offerd us in
the last decade,weird that they got through with this,probably
I have other expectations than the rest of their customers.
Maybe it has something to do with age,at C64/Atari/Amiga times
there was no internet to distribute patches and games usually
did what they were expected to.
But compared to other industries their quality standards are
laughable,imagine a car working as reliably as a SOE game,lol.

I'd say EQ's technical isues were the least of its problems (circa 2005).

No,game play and depth are far superior compared to its competitors.
This trying to get the "casual" gamer into MMORPGs by dumbing them
down is disgusting.
Hm,2005,I think at this time it wasnt too bad,it really became
annoying with OoW and expansions after.

OOW was the final straw for me.
In particular having my basic mez spell as the *third* spell handin from a
rune that dropped off massively overcamped boss mobs.
Oh... but lets not forget I had the option of farming trash mobs in zones
where I couldnt perform my basic function of mezzing things. Yeah, every
group just was dying to have me.

Pure genius. GG soe.

[Tony]

Post by Vladesch
OOW was the final straw for me.
In particular having my basic mez spell as the *third* spell handin from a
rune that dropped off massively overcamped boss mobs.

They learned the lesson on that one.

Core spell lines are now vendor purchased, non-core spells and slightly
upgraded core spells are mob dropped or faction earned.

All spells up to and including level 70 OoW spells (but not including
'raid' spells, like ancients) are now researchable.

[Don Woods]

Post by Tony

Post by Vladesch
OOW was the final straw for me.
In particular having my basic mez spell as the *third* spell handin from a
rune that dropped off massively overcamped boss mobs.

They learned the lesson on that one.
Core spell lines are now vendor purchased, non-core spells and slightly
upgraded core spells are mob dropped or faction earned.
All spells up to and including level 70 OoW spells (but not including
'raid' spells, like ancients) are now researchable.

Not quite true. All of the spells formerly obtained via the OOW runes
can be crafted by players using the spell research skill. Likewise all
the spells that used to require PoP ethereal parchments and such, or
that used to require LDoN points.

Other than that, spells that could already be crafted using the old
"rune of this" and "words of that" random drops, are now crafted using
the new research system where the only dropped component is a parchment
(or papyrus or whatever) used for ALL spells of a given level, plus
assorted vendor-sold bits.

Spells that were obtained only via quests (such as Temperance), or only
as mob drops (such as Spirit of Eagle), still cannot be crafted. And
neither can melee tomes, dammit.

-- Don.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
-- See the a.g.e/EQ1 FAQ at http://www.iCynic.com/~don/EQ/age.faq.htm
--
-- Sukrasisx, Monk 76 on E. Marr Note: If you reply by mail,
-- Terrwini, Druid 60 on E. Marr I'll get to it sooner if you
-- Teviron, Knight 59 on E. Marr remove the "hyphen n s"
-- Wizbeau, Wizard 36 on E. Marr

[Tony]

Post by Don Woods

Post by Tony

Post by Vladesch
OOW was the final straw for me.
In particular having my basic mez spell as the *third* spell handin from a
rune that dropped off massively overcamped boss mobs.

They learned the lesson on that one.
Core spell lines are now vendor purchased, non-core spells and slightly
upgraded core spells are mob dropped or faction earned.
All spells up to and including level 70 OoW spells (but not including
'raid' spells, like ancients) are now researchable.

Not quite true. All of the spells formerly obtained via the OOW runes
can be crafted by players using the spell research skill. Likewise all
the spells that used to require PoP ethereal parchments and such, or
that used to require LDoN points.
Other than that, spells that could already be crafted using the old
"rune of this" and "words of that" random drops, are now crafted using
the new research system where the only dropped component is a parchment
(or papyrus or whatever) used for ALL spells of a given level, plus
assorted vendor-sold bits.
Spells that were obtained only via quests (such as Temperance), or only
as mob drops (such as Spirit of Eagle), still cannot be crafted. And
neither can melee tomes, dammit.

Yes, I generalised sorry.

[Faeandar]

Post by U***@hotmail.com
On Sun, 9 Mar 2008 19:13:42 -0700 (PDT), Richard Carpenter

Post by Richard Carpenter
My brother and I have been back playing EQ for a while, but we're
going to try Vanguard for a bit. I had played it during the first
month or so after launch, but it was just way to buggy at the time.
I'm hoping that in its first year the devs have been able to stabilize
it a bit.

Isnt it a SOE game too ?
They didnt manage to "stabilize" EQ1 in 8 years (Crashing while
zoning,"west bug",mobs under the surface,etc.),EQ2 is even
worse in this department.
For me its back to the roots(Diablo2,UO on a freshard) for now
until they change their mind and fix all the game stopping bugs
and for the future I wish they only implement new features
which have been thoroughly tested.
If that slows down development thats fine with me,I am sooo
tired of all this buggy crap the gaming industry offerd us in
the last decade,weird that they got through with this,probably
I have other expectations than the rest of their customers.
Maybe it has something to do with age,at C64/Atari/Amiga times
there was no internet to distribute patches and games usually
did what they were expected to.
But compared to other industries their quality standards are
laughable,imagine a car working as reliably as a SOE game,lol.

Back in the Atari days (800 and Mega-ST2 here) the games were nowhere
near as complex. We didn;t expect much from Dungeon Master because it
was already better than Beserk and Asteroids. There were still bugs
though, they just never got fixed.

These days, when you want to allow 300k+ players from anywhere on the
planet to interact in real time with everything and everyone else,
that's a serious challenge. I don't begrudge the bugs, I begrudge the
vision.

And if you are amazed that people have put up with bugs from MMO's I
can only assume you've never had a Microsoft OS.....

~F

[Faeandar]

On Sun, 9 Mar 2008 19:13:42 -0700 (PDT), Richard Carpenter

Post by Richard Carpenter

Post by Faeandar
So, I played EQ for a long time and still think it the greatest
computer game ever made but had some RL friends who wanted better
graphics and better crafting, buncha pansies really but.....
So we went to EQ2 for a very short time, before VG came out, switched
back to EQ, then to VG when it released.
The pansies all like VG better than EQ and we all like EQ and VG
better than EQ2.  However, EQ2 and VG both seem far too easy to me
having been an EQ player since 6mo after release.
Not that I'm pining away for hell levels again but I do miss the
just-crowded-enough zones where anything could happen at any time
(trains in BlackBurrow for example) and enough difficulty that a group
required strategy and tactics regardless of class makeup.
We're not certain how long VG will be around since the subscriptions
are not very high so I wanted to get a feel for how EQ is these days.
I've been out for a year now and recall when I left that I could
easily get groups with the guild but pickups were difficult.
Some zones were barren, even entire continents in some cases but other
zones had quite a few people in it, which is what I like.  I do play
MMO's after all, not MO's.
How has EQ fared in the last year?  Can we still get groups or do we
need to come ready built?  Are there enough people in different level
ranges to make groups possible?

If you stick to the hot zones, it's certainly possible to find/start a
group, though chances of full groups are often slim. I would say it's
easier to group as you get to the mid to upper levels, as these days
the lower levels just don't require a group. Most of the lower level
players are at least fairly well-twinked, so they just plow through
the levels, not worrying about grouping until later, when it becomes
more a necessity.
It's like I've seen from all the latest MMORPG's that have come along
over the last few years - if people don't need to group, chances are
they won't bother with it.
My brother and I have been back playing EQ for a while, but we're
going to try Vanguard for a bit. I had played it during the first
month or so after launch, but it was just way to buggy at the time.
I'm hoping that in its first year the devs have been able to stabilize
it a bit. I still think it's just a beautiful game, better than EQ2,
IMO.

It's sad to see people playing an MMO and not MM'ing. Sounds like a
ready made group is the best way to go, or at least a read made
trio....

Thanks.

~F