If it's not Classic w/ QoL... - Phoenix Freeshard

Then what is it?

Phoenix started as a silver bullet for all the players leaving Uth2...it was always 'Classic w/ QoL.' Beta was OF w/ old RAs (except right at the end I guess).

I get trying to 'listen to the community,' but switching to NF 6 months after launch is a huge change.

If 'Classic w/ QoL' is obviously not Phoenix... what is? Is there a project goal? I think players might appreciate knowing if simple majority votes will determine the servers future settings.

Sat 22 Jun 2019 8:03 PM by ExcretusMaximus

It was never "Classic with QoL" it was "1.65 with any changes we feel are beneficial."

Sat 22 Jun 2019 8:43 PM by cuuchulain79

ExcretusMaximus wrote: ↑
Sat 22 Jun 2019 8:03 PM
It was never "Classic with QoL" it was "1.65 with any changes we feel are beneficial."

Really? I feel like so much hype and buzz was generated with, "Classic w/ QoL." Even the main page refers to 1.65 as a foundation....?

I do hope the transition to NF goes well...

It would be great a staff member could chime in WRT what Phoenix is trying to become....? NF w/ simplified New RAs, and SI era temps? A chimera of whatever sounds good month to month?

Sat 22 Jun 2019 9:34 PM by

gruenesschaf

1.65 as the foundation and changes from there. We said quite often that we don't follow a particular patch level, we just have a baseline.

We also consider it rather unlikely to ever reach a goal that could be considered done with no more changes ever, there is just not a single mmo that is just done. The dilemma basically is no changes = player loss due to boredom and stagnation eventually, any change = risk to alienate some while (attempting to) making it better for the majority, otherwise what would be the point.
However, what we'll try hard to do is to not introduce a gear treadmill, additions / alternatives sure but not forcing people to re-template over and over and some things are just off limits like warlocks or introducing huge amounts of forced pve to compete in rvr like toa did when it was released.

As I said in another thread already, with Uthgard and this server we have a pretty nice experiment now that shows that neither patch dogmatism nor actually doing changes (until now at least) contribute visibly to the player decline and it practically all boils down to the initial hype followed by boredom leading to eventual player loss.

Is NF, given how large a change it is all at once and the entrenched opinions, likely to cause a visible player drop? Yes, however, it likely also has a higher chance to retain a higher number at the end of august while it'll also be easier to do adjustments to handle a larger and smaller population.

And once again regarding the beta:
We said over and over again that we would start doing adjustments in the I50 phase, ie near the end in november. Everything before then was basically just testing the general gameplay / mechanics.
I really still don't understand the comments saying we tested OF Ras for 6 months then suddenly changed and instantly released, it just so happened that OF ras were there while testing _all_ game mechanics for bugs, the RAs are / were, just like we said back then, a super tiny part of the work.
Huge parts of the code base were entirely rewritten, from the database stack to networking, the entire world update system or even the effect system, melee combat or NPC AI, compared to that the skills / abilities used by players really are just the most visible yet insignificant part of what had to be tested in the beta. And that's ignoring all of the other supporting stuff that had to be created like the admin backend or the huge amount of changes to the remaining parts of the code base to allow more than 1000 clients without becoming unplayable.
The beta was literally that, a beta to test a work in progress project and get it to the point where it's actually playable without running into game breaking bugs at every turn.

Sun 23 Jun 2019 12:11 AM by ExcretusMaximus

cuuchulain79 wrote: ↑
Sat 22 Jun 2019 8:43 PM
It would be great a staff member could chime in WRT what Phoenix is trying to become....?

Wow, ask and ye shall receive.

Sun 23 Jun 2019 6:03 PM by cuuchulain79

gruenesschaf wrote: ↑
Sat 22 Jun 2019 9:34 PM
...Uthgard and this server we have a pretty nice experiment now that shows that neither patch dogmatism nor actually doing changes (until now at least) contribute visibly to the player decline and it practically all boils down to the initial hype followed by boredom leading to eventual player loss...

I'm just curious here...why is this the plan? You seem comfortable making changes to everything, as long as you're not failing faster than a failed server. Taking a different route to the iceberg the Titanic hit, is still a sunk ship...

Why not look at some long standing freeshards that maintain a playable, populated, fun atmosphere? (They surely don't have as much rapid change or a plain anti-fun setting.)

Sun 23 Jun 2019 6:10 PM by Lordzolio

OMG... Why did we come to Phoenix ??

https://www.reddit.com/r/CamelotUnchained/comments/a6d8zx/phoenix_daoc_dark_age_of_camelot_freeshard/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HztPIrS5UZc

This is why i came to play OLD SCHOOL DAOC if i wanted to play NF I would have stayed on live......

Populations is already down, and bet your ass even more when NF goes Live...

This is why people came to phoenix in the first place OLD SCHOOL DAOC OLD FRONTIERS.. No ToA .. etc...

Honestly, how many people would have left live and Uthgard to come phoenix if it was NF from day one ??

Half ? more ? less ?

Sun 23 Jun 2019 6:14 PM by Gweinyth

cuuchulain79 wrote: ↑
Sun 23 Jun 2019 6:03 PM
gruenesschaf wrote: ↑
Sat 22 Jun 2019 9:34 PM
...Uthgard and this server we have a pretty nice experiment now that shows that neither patch dogmatism nor actually doing changes (until now at least) contribute visibly to the player decline and it practically all boils down to the initial hype followed by boredom leading to eventual player loss...

I'm just curious here...why is this the plan? You seem comfortable making changes to everything, as long as you're not failing faster than a failed server. Taking a different route to the iceberg the Titanic hit, is still a sunk ship...

Why not look at some long standing freeshards that maintain a playable, populated, fun atmosphere? (They surely don't have as much rapid change or a plain anti-fun setting.)

Your projecting your opinion on what should be considered. "a plain anti-fun setting" to you maybe but the majority appear to feel it was better.

Sun 23 Jun 2019 6:16 PM by Lordzolio

" A classic approach to the game with a pre-Trials of Atlantis ruleset with the Old Frontiers zones "

" So if you like classic DAoC and have played it in the past and want to experience this great game again, waiting for CU to launch, on a server with a hard-working staff and dedicated player base, come join Phoenix on January 12th 2019! "

https://www.reddit.com/r/CamelotUnchained/comments/a6d8zx/phoenix_daoc_dark_age_of_camelot_freeshard/

Sun 23 Jun 2019 8:02 PM by phixion

gruenesschaf wrote: ↑
Sat 22 Jun 2019 9:34 PM
As I said in another thread already, with Uthgard and this server we have a pretty nice experiment now that shows that neither patch dogmatism nor actually doing changes (until now at least) contribute visibly to the player decline and it practically all boils down to the initial hype followed by boredom leading to eventual player loss.

You cannot deny that the server lost players after the Charge changes.

I'd go as far to say that all major changes result in some player loss, it just depends on how many it maintains or attracts with the changes it makes.

Sun 23 Jun 2019 8:13 PM by cuuchulain79

Gweinyth wrote: ↑
Sun 23 Jun 2019 6:14 PM
cuuchulain79 wrote: ↑
Sun 23 Jun 2019 6:03 PM
gruenesschaf wrote: ↑
Sat 22 Jun 2019 9:34 PM
...Uthgard and this server we have a pretty nice experiment now that shows that neither patch dogmatism nor actually doing changes (until now at least) contribute visibly to the player decline and it practically all boils down to the initial hype followed by boredom leading to eventual player loss...

I'm just curious here...why is this the plan? You seem comfortable making changes to everything, as long as you're not failing faster than a failed server. Taking a different route to the iceberg the Titanic hit, is still a sunk ship...

Why not look at some long standing freeshards that maintain a playable, populated, fun atmosphere? (They surely don't have as much rapid change or a plain anti-fun setting.)

Your projecting your opinion on what should be considered. "a plain anti-fun setting" to you maybe but the majority appear to feel it was better.

Sorry to be unclear, I was referring to the main two recent DAoC shards:

(Popular, long lasting free shards), surely don't have as much rapid change (like Phoenix) or a plain anti-fun setting (like strict 1.65).

Basically I'm saying: It's an old game....just pick a fun setting and go for it....with DAoC I think there was a very high interest in "Classic W/ QoL."

Frankly, I don't understand the validation of the staff here in saying, "Our lack of a plan is working just as well as a Bad-Plan...."

You had a "good plan." There was so much buzz for "Classic w/ QoL." Why did that plan get thrown out the window?

Sun 23 Jun 2019 8:36 PM by Enyore

cuuchulain79 wrote: ↑
Sat 22 Jun 2019 7:40 PM
I get trying to 'listen to the community,' but switching to NF 6 months after launch is a huge change.

We voted and the staff listened and thanks for that.
Majority wants NF, don't like? go play Uthgard.

Can we have NF now please???

Sun 23 Jun 2019 9:35 PM by

gruenesschaf

cuuchulain79 wrote: ↑
Sun 23 Jun 2019 8:13 PM
Sorry to be unclear, I was referring to the main two recent DAoC shards:

(Popular, long lasting free shards), surely don't have as much rapid change (like Phoenix) or a plain anti-fun setting (like strict 1.65).

Basically I'm saying: It's an old game....just pick a fun setting and go for it....with DAoC I think there was a very high interest in "Classic W/ QoL."

Rapid changes, did I miss anything aside from these:
The somewhat frequent changes to our entirely custom task system
The bug fix where salvage loot had a up to 10 times higher drop chance than intended on some mobs
The charge change where, due to not requiring an item to be worn and not setting items on cd once equipped, practically everyone ran with all of them at once
Not allowing dot poisons to tick on reapplication because it was too strong which only became really obvious due to /switch as then literally everyone did it and not only a couple "good" ones
Adjustments to some classes like friar
Bug fixes like bd pet damage

If not, what did you expect? We should just leave all bugs in, ignore any new meta development and just let it play out "because stuff worked like that back then" while ignoring qol that made it way easier to get to / achieve certain stuff?

The one thing we'd definitely concede is the task system changes, yes, that were quite a few but how else should we deal with it when it doesn't work out as expected, just leave it as is and say oh well next time?

Then there are the nostalgia tinted glasses when it comes to any patch level, literally every single one has issues that become apparent when you play it for longer time, most people seem to forget that live actually changed quite frequently and even 1.65 was only there for a month. The only two good things about having a set patch level is that you can just say "was like that, working as intended" and that you know exactly what to expect, however that comes at the cost of complete stagnation.

Sun 23 Jun 2019 10:04 PM by cuuchulain79

I think 'rapid changes' is a fine term for the first 6 months of Phoenix...if you're asking me to explain why, that's not a good sign

Regardless of nit picking the phrase 'rapid changes'...

Am I correct to assume you're content losing players at the same rate as a failed server?

Is it not a good suggestion to look at successful RPG free shards, and stop comparing yourselves to a failed one, or a live game...?

Sun 23 Jun 2019 10:21 PM by

gruenesschaf

cuuchulain79 wrote: ↑
Sun 23 Jun 2019 10:04 PM
I think 'rapid changes' is a fine term for the first 6 months of Phoenix...if you're asking me to explain why, that's not a good sign

I'd like it made concrete. Which changes are you referring to / including in that and what would a reasonable timeline be to make those changes if not half a year?

Ignoring the task changes entirely, I still stand behind practically all changes, sure the charge one I would have very much preferred that we had realized / caught it in beta and launched with the requirement to have charges equipped and starting the cd on equip, this would also nicely have made it so that good templates are hard(er) to achieve. Alas, we didn't and since we don't / didn't want to make people retemplate we nerfed charges. The other part of the change, making buffer able to fully buff the group, is in my eyes a unrelated net positive change that however was a requirement given the charge nerf.

cuuchulain79 wrote: ↑
Sun 23 Jun 2019 10:04 PM
Am I correct to assume you're content losing players at the same rate as a failed server?

That's a quite stupid assumption.

Sun 23 Jun 2019 10:22 PM by szputnyik

cuuchulain79 wrote: Am I correct to assume you're content losing players at the same rate as a failed server?

Literally over 60% of people voted for the recent change and you guys still try to make a point why it`s a bad decision? Get your shit together and accept that your idea how DAOC should be played is a minority opinon

Sun 23 Jun 2019 10:57 PM by Ashman

szputnyik wrote: ↑
Sun 23 Jun 2019 10:22 PM
Literally over 60% of people

100% of people still playing on ywain vote for ywain....

retarded argument m8tey

Sun 23 Jun 2019 11:22 PM by cuuchulain79

gruenesschaf wrote: ↑
Sun 23 Jun 2019 10:21 PM
cuuchulain79 wrote: ↑
Sun 23 Jun 2019 10:04 PM
Am I correct to assume you're content losing players at the same rate as a failed server?

That's a quite stupid assumption.

Sorry if it seems stupid...I've brought up time and time again that just b/c you're not losing players faster than Uth2, doesn't mean you're paving the way to a healthy server...once again, it's literally like saying, "we're not sailing worse than the Titanic!":

gruenesschaf wrote: ↑
Sat 22 Jun 2019 9:34 PM
neither patch dogmatism nor actually doing changes (until now at least) contribute visibly to the player decline and it practically all boils down to the initial hype followed by boredom leading to eventual player loss.

I've brought up a few times of aiming for a healthy server....not validating constant change by saying it's not any worse than a failing/failed server.

Speaking of "rapid changes"...what do you want me to do? Copy+paste every note about something that's been changed since launch? Those all add to the environment of things changing...rapidly.
---

szputnyik wrote: ↑
Sun 23 Jun 2019 10:22 PM
Literally over 60% of people voted for the recent change and you guys still try to make a point why it`s a bad decision? Get your shit together and accept that your idea how DAOC should be played is a minority opinon

Yeah, what can possibly go wrong...that's a big enough margin to institute a gigantic foundational change...right? Even the devs are aware they're gambling here (hoping for better retain value in 5 weeks....)

Sun 23 Jun 2019 11:35 PM by

gruenesschaf

cuuchulain79 wrote: ↑
Sun 23 Jun 2019 11:22 PM
gruenesschaf wrote: ↑
Sat 22 Jun 2019 9:34 PM
neither patch dogmatism nor actually doing changes (until now at least) contribute visibly to the player decline and it practically all boils down to the initial hype followed by boredom leading to eventual player loss.

I've brought up a few times of aiming for a healthy server....not validating constant change by saying it's not any worse than a failing/failed server.

Is it maybe possible that the changes are not done for the sake of changing things but to make it better and is it possible that the comparison to uthgard is done in response to people claiming any change kills the server?

If not changing had as much positive impact as people claim there would never have been the player loss on uthgard, however, there was and we had exactly the same curve here with a different approach which makes it quite obvious that the setting / changes / not changing etc. aren't the big driver as most people claim / think.

If the drops here were in response to specific changes I would expect that to be clearly visible in the player graph, but it isn't, it's literally the result of the hype -> boredom / moving on cycle which in turn leads to lower pop which makes more people go on until some equilibrium is reached that will be maintained until something major happens. I don't think anyone realistically expected that we, or any server for that matter, would retain the majority of the launch population.
Sure we didn't expect it to be exactly as uthgard but quite a bit slower due to not having the chunk of people leave because the race to 50 takes too long and hence more in rvr, but maybe we have the exact opposite of people reaching their goal, whatever it may be, in the time they quit uthgard due to not even reaching the level 50 milestone, who knows.

Mon 24 Jun 2019 1:13 AM by Kaseylol

Ashman wrote: ↑
Sun 23 Jun 2019 10:57 PM
szputnyik wrote: ↑
Sun 23 Jun 2019 10:22 PM
Literally over 60% of people

100% of people still playing on ywain vote for ywain....

retarded argument m8tey

What's your point here? The people not playing ywain, if they were playing ywain, would vote ywain? Then why aren't they playing ywain?

Talk about retarded arguments.

Mon 24 Jun 2019 1:18 AM by Svekt

gruenesschaf - First off, thank you for taking the time to reply in this thread.

We've had some bad moves and some good moves. This is all relative to opinions. i.e. Some people have been happy with all the changes, some with some, and some that are never ever happy.

While there are times that I have felt the server would knee-jerk reaction fail, it didn't. We have a wonderful team dedicated to the player base here. Simply put, you can not please all the people all the time and that clearly shows here in the forum.

I can say tho, that in my opinion this server is doing 1000x better than Uthgard ever did. I have multiple 50's with full templates on BOTH servers. You literally could not get a response from them if you pleaded on forums. If you said ANYTHING against a dev there or about what they did you ate a ban full or temporary. Uthgard was as close to a dictatorship as you can possibly get. They flat out IGNORED the player base and would go ACTUAL MONTHS without posting a news post etc etc. On top of that Abydos and a couple others would get pretty nasty with the players as well when in conversation with them. While I have seen some of the devs/gms get a little fiesty here, I have never ever seen them treat the player base as disrespectfully as uthgard did. There is absolutely zero comparison to be made here other than the revelation that players come and go on their own choice as mentioned by gruenesschaf. Ie the hype, the boredom, and then leaving for something new.. It happens and as far as I'm concerned, I expect the phoenix to be up and running with a population that can sustain RvR for much longer than uth2 did.

I am one of those players that prefers CLASSIC everything here, but even with NF on its way I will still be here. What daoc needs is a population, and NF will best support that population with the way the server is currently running. Keeps will be stretched further apart making it easier to get into and defend. I love choke points and the battles around them but try not to abuse them. There are some players who have abused the choke points and forced other players to quit long before random changes happened. So what is best for the server now, is to make a switch to NF. For the better of the life of the server. Do I like it, no, will I adapt, yes.

to gruenesschaf and the rest of the staff that give us the time of day even when they are frustrated with us, THANK YOU. I know there is a large back and forth here but I know my voice is being heard.

Perfect example: After the charge nerf, I ripped into devs on forums about how there should be a polling system or vote system in place that doesn't only take place on the forums because I felt like a lot of players didn't get a chance to give their input and would be by shortly to leave input. what ensued after was 40 pages of chaos about why did you nerf my charges and why didn't I know it was in discussion...

THE VERY NEXT LARGE CHANGE SAW A POLL / SURVEY.

Give feed back, don't be a dick, and accept what happens. You may not like it, but I'm pretty sure you are already unhappy with things in your life but you deal with that stuff too. You can handle a change in the game, its not the end of the world so stop acting like it.

Much respect, Svekt

Mon 24 Jun 2019 2:16 AM by Budikah

Almost all games bleed off seemingly 2/3rds of their launch population and eventually settle into that comfortable 1/3rd that is left. You could troll through the player charts on Steam or elsewhere for ages and likely find the same thing.

It's not to say there aren't other factors - DAoC has a relatively dated game play loop that seems to have long periods of inactivity built into it. While I think many of the changes that were made here on Phoenix are a good start, I think the core of it is that there are way too many possibilities for negative outcomes when I player decides to log into the game and play. Some stem from the requirement of needing other people, others come from the way the base game/class design plays out. You might find yourself not needed or wanted in your desired activity, or there aren't enough people to support that - or perhaps you just run out with all your pieces in place and the only other group that is out simply wipes the floor with you over and over again.

To make the changes to those core game play loops means you aren't really playing DAoC anymore - but something heavily derived from it's spirit in the same engine.

Mon 24 Jun 2019 3:11 AM by Moid

gruenesschaf wrote: ↑
Sun 23 Jun 2019 11:35 PM
If the drops here were in response to specific changes I would expect that to be clearly visible in the player graph, but it isn't, it's literally the result of the hype -> boredom / moving on cycle which in turn leads to lower pop which makes more people go on until some equilibrium is reached that will be maintained until something major happens. I don't think anyone realistically expected that we, or any server for that matter, would retain the majority of the launch population.
Sure we didn't expect it to be exactly as uthgard but quite a bit slower due to not having the chunk of people leave because the race to 50 takes too long and hence more in rvr, but maybe we have the exact opposite of people reaching their goal, whatever it may be, in the time they quit uthgard due to not even reaching the level 50 milestone, who knows.

I’m just one person but I’m here to tell you that you are not seeing in the graphs of the population decline the details. The graphs do look fairly smooth. But don’t lie to yourself here, there are people who have abandoned Phoenix due to changes you have made and are continuing to make.

I know this because I have stopped playing due to the changes you’ve made. I had no goals PvE, RvR, or otherwise. My hope was I would have some fun playing DAoC again and maybe make some new friends and enemies along the way. I didn’t get bored either.

What happened in my case is you guys pissed me off with enough changes that I decided I was tired of you and your server. It all began with the change to the RvR task system granting credit regardless of which realm you’re in (end result - Emain becomes RvR central again). Then the Friar buffs pissed me off because you buffed a goddamn class due to the people playing the realm refusing to play the class and that’s just as stupid as it gets. Then I put time into acquiring items with charges on them only to see that time blow to oblivion with the charged item nerfs. Finally you nerfed the drop rates for salvageables which I also put a great deal of time and effort into. Yeah, I spent time, days and weeks, running around the realm killing all kinds of mobs recording results and measuring to find the best mob I could to farm gold.

None of the changes listed about was a bug or game breaking they were all changes that were completely optional. None were exploits available to only a select few. None imbalanced RvR, on the contrary the change to the RvR task system created an imbalance as it drove almost all RvR back into Emain.

I didn’t leave after the first change. Nope, I stuck around to see how things would play out and adjusted to the change. I continued to have fun while being annoyed about the change. I didn’t leave after the second change. Again, I stuck around to see how things would play out and tried to ignore the irritation building up inside.

Do you get it now? It wasn’t until I reached my personal threshold of annoying changes that I stopped playing but I stopped playing solely due to the annoying changes. And I didn’t quit right after a change, nope, in fact I quit right before the NF test began. So you can gawk at the graphs or population numbers all you want but you will never be able to see how one too many stupid changes finally convinced me that Phoenix is no longer enjoyable enough for me. And I personally think that I’m not all that different than most people. I had an investment in the game that I didn’t want to throw away so naturally I wasn’t going to stop playing as a result of a single change. I also wasn’t going to stop playing immediately after a change that really pissed me off.

I was only going to stop playing after I had enough and that threshold is different for everyone. My advice? Stop trying to convince yourself and anyone else that people don’t stop playing due to changes because people do quit due to changes. You had a good thing going and you keep screwing it up and no, that doesn’t mean you shouldn’t make any changes, it means you have to be patient and do incredible due diligence before making any change.

Mon 24 Jun 2019 3:30 AM by Leandrys

Charges were game breaking, salvage loots were game breaking, friar in their initial state were broken and not really interesting for Albion, and guess what, they're still not, the tasks didn't bring action to Emain, all action on OF ALWAYS END ON EMAIN, not matters what you try. Yes, it helped the movement, but it was going to end this way, no matters what the staff would imagine. So yeah, you're biased, and whining for wrong reasons.

Guess what ? Old Frontiers are ubber crap, the server pissed out a lot of its own population cause of that original choice, it was never gonna maintain 2K+ population with this terrible design, OF was shit, OF is shit, OF will always be shit, NF isn't perfect by far, but it's still better than this total failure of a map.

And even is NF was worst, which it isn't, a lot of people didn't came on Phoenix for OF, they came to play some kind of old school and simplificated DAOC without TOA/Catacombs/laby, that's all, we ate our bowl of shit everyday on OF for months even if a lot of people simply didn't like this map at all, but we had to deal with the individualist choice of a few melancolic hipsters, we still loved daoc and one map shouldn't be a YE!!!/NE!!! when it comes to playing DAOC, now it has clearly been a total disaster as scheduled, it's time for a change, and NF it is.

F***ing play the game instead of behaving like angry spoiled kids.

Mon 24 Jun 2019 4:58 AM by

gruenesschaf

Moid wrote: ↑
Mon 24 Jun 2019 3:11 AM
What happened in my case is you guys pissed me off with enough changes that I decided I was tired of you and your server. It all began with the change to the RvR task system granting credit regardless of which realm you’re in (end result - Emain becomes RvR central again). Then the Friar buffs pissed me off because you buffed a goddamn class due to the people playing the realm refusing to play the class and that’s just as stupid as it gets. Then I put time into acquiring items with charges on them only to see that time blow to oblivion with the charged item nerfs. Finally you nerfed the drop rates for salvageables which I also put a great deal of time and effort into. Yeah, I spent time, days and weeks, running around the realm killing all kinds of mobs recording results and measuring to find the best mob I could to farm gold.

Not trying to say you're wrong as it's a personal opinion / perception, however each change there has a perfectly reasonable and even positive intention behind it:
Task change was to promote not only zerg play but instead give people who want to do small man / 8v8 the reasonable option to go somewhere else without feeling they miss out on the task rps
Buffing an underplayed class that, considering the alternatives / available group spots, at least appeared to be underperforming, if that's not a reason to buff a class then what is?
Charge change no question, that definitely didn't go over too well with solos / those relying on the charges. However, I mentioned quite a few times the preferred alternative were it not for the fact it would have required retemplating.
Some of the changed mobs literally had a 50% drop chance for the salvage items, other 25% when the intended rate was about 5% - like pretty much the majority of other mobs already had, all in all only very few mobs had the extremely high rate.

Moid wrote: ↑
Mon 24 Jun 2019 3:11 AM
I was only going to stop playing after I had enough and that threshold is different for everyone. My advice? Stop trying to convince yourself and anyone else that people don’t stop playing due to changes because people do quit due to changes. You had a good thing going and you keep screwing it up and no, that doesn’t mean you shouldn’t make any changes, it means you have to be patient and do incredible due diligence before making any change.

I don't think I said anywhere that the changes did nothing, I only said that it's not the main driver.

Mon 24 Jun 2019 6:20 AM by Enyore

I wanted to voice another opinion on this subject, but Svekt said it better than i ever could.

Good perspective and i actually think the emain bottle-neck is one of the only real major problem on the server and it will completely fixed with NF.

Mon 24 Jun 2019 12:33 PM by chryso

Who cares what it is called? Stop whining and either play or don't play.

Mon 24 Jun 2019 5:09 PM by cere2

Quitting because of changes.
Well, I can make this long drawn out post of why I quit because of OF and little to no changes for too long. But I won't so here a quick rundown.

Quick summary is.
#1 Running to Emain prior to them placing ports in keeps etc
#2 Stealth detection for archers. Run 10 min to emain, eat a perf while in stealth. Rinse/repeat
#3 Chokepoints run 10 mins to Emain, wait for FG to go through MG or risk going through a gauntlet of 10-15 stealth camped on the MG.
#4 Keep defense, just horrible. No chance/los to attack from inside to outside keep, once inside a TWF would end you and your entire group.
#5 Keep offense, per reason #4 most keeps were empty because impossible to even have a chance vs greater numbers.

Anyhow, I could say a lot of people left because of those and many other reasons. But those are just opinions.
You saying it all happened due to changes may be what happened personally, but you have zero clue if that had more effect than anything else.

All in all if you hate the changes enough to quit, then do so. I hated the fact that stuff wasn't changing for my style, so I quit.
But since then they have fixed many of the issues I had, last being OF map. So now I am back.
I didn't give a giant whine thread as to why I quit, I just did...and kept checking to see if things got better. Perhaps you should do the same.

Mon 24 Jun 2019 6:25 PM by cuuchulain79

All I'm saying, is, why walk away from the simple, broad appeal of "Classic w/ QoL?"

6 Months into the project, I think it's obvious this is a 100% custom server.

"Classic w/ QoL" is an appealing setting for a lot of DAoC fans. By making changes that further and further have eventually pushed the setting to "totally custom," Phoenix has essentially lost broad appeal, in favor of making more and more custom changes for the favor of its shrinking community. Like all 100% custom free shards, it will really only appeal to its dedicated fans, and have a very tough time attracting new players. Which is fine, it's their project, and keeping their player-base happy is obviously a higher priority than doing what a lot of folks thought was happening: Making a great, fun, "Classic w/ QoL" DAoC shard.

With the success of 2 "classic" free-shards released in the last few years, it's obvious there is a place in gaming for a "Classic w/ QoL" DAoC shard....I think we just haven't really seen it yet. Uthgard struggled to make any QoL changes (quickly anyway), and Phoenix has now spread its wings and is a 100% custom server.

I hope the fans of Custom Camelot get years of enjoyment here....you can all brag about your rp/hr and vote in whatever changes the staff will let you vote on

Tue 25 Jun 2019 12:23 PM by Sleepwell

@gruenesschaf are NF RA's next on the list? I was shocked how fast the environment changed and now NF is live. That was due to the majority of the player base wanting NF (or a change in general). Are new RA's gonna happen that same way? NF will become stale just like OF did. When that becomes the case, what can we speculate will be the next carrot?

Tue 25 Jun 2019 1:15 PM by ExcretusMaximus

Sleepwell wrote: ↑
Tue 25 Jun 2019 12:23 PM
@gruenesschaf are NF RA's next on the list? I was shocked how fast the environment changed and now NF is live. That was due to the majority of the player base wanting NF (or a change in general). Are new RA's gonna happen that same way? NF will become stale just like OF did. When that becomes the case, what can we speculate will be the next carrot?

NF RAs have always been on this server. The only real exception is the NF Charge, which they haven't implemented because they feel ToA ML abilities are required to deal with Charging light tanks (Grapple, Bodyguard, etc).

Tue 25 Jun 2019 1:30 PM by Sleepwell

Thanks for the reply. I guess i was vague. Maybe i should have said "true" NF ra's. Charge included. MOS included. NF PD, etc.

I can accept an answer like "this is completely custom to match our environment". It would be nice to know the vision/direction though. If the vision/direction is to allow the population to determine that direction, then thats something :-)

Wed 26 Jun 2019 11:19 AM by

gruenesschaf

Sleepwell wrote: ↑
Tue 25 Jun 2019 1:30 PM
Thanks for the reply. I guess i was vague. Maybe i should have said "true" NF ra's. Charge included. MOS included. NF PD, etc.

I can accept an answer like "this is completely custom to match our environment". It would be nice to know the vision/direction though. If the vision/direction is to allow the population to determine that direction, then thats something :-)

There still wouldn't be MOS if we went with "true" nf ras as live / nnf ras were basically the inspiration to put mos into the stealth line back when we still had OF ras. Anyways, I really think stealth detection as it is right now is in a pretty good place since making assassin vs archer range the same.

As for PD, I don't think it can reasonably be justified to give casters anymore of an edge currently and imo PD and AoM do precisely the same thing, just reducing the damage, which they do at the same cost here as well.

Charge really is the thing that on the one hand it looks like it would be nice to give melees some minor boost, however, charge would do that only for light tanks at the cost of mostly invalidating hybrids and it would also pretty much require some counter. I mean sure one could make a charge variant with a downside like 50% damage reduction while it's active, but charge is not only rather polarizing but it's also super likely that it would push it in the other direction.

Wed 26 Jun 2019 12:58 PM by Sleepwell

I appreciate the answer. Just having a general concept of the vision of the developers helps. It does appear that it lines up currently and will remain a "custom" mix to fit your concept. If it remains like that, its easier to decide what characters to play. I was asking in hopes to find if that direction would change on a whim due to population feedback. Ideas and opinions change like the seasons and its frustrating trying to keep up like that :-).