I guess the community got a better understanding now about the phrase " we will offer the best classic daoc experience ever" . your goals are quite ambitious on the one hand and very insane on the other. You will never get a 100% perfect mirror of the 1.65 servers from the past, because some of the data can ´t be researched anymore what brings us to the aim & gain relation question.

Caemma got some good points in his textwall,-work should be divided in/for groups to care/archive for single goals/tasks and work should be priorized as some points are not really necessary to start the server even with good gaiming experience and bring the low priorize things later up like Shrouded isles.

I think the majority won ´t care if the water beetle is taken too much damage from a staff wielding lurikeen, but they care if the research of such things will cause one more year of waiting for playing .

Due to Abydos statement and the lag of good news about a calculated release date, I will count in at least another year of waiting until we ´ll play on Uthgard *sigh*.

Don´t get me wrong, I really appreciate staffs work, but if I had the chance to chose between playing Uth 1.0 now and keep the setting of the old server, or wait for a revamped Uth 2.0 for another 6+ months, my choice would be easy.

P.S @ staff if some things can ´t be researched, I´m pretty sure your community won ´t kill you if you implement/handle it custom like the way you feel.
Uthgard 1 was already awesome so Uthgard 2.0 will be even if some things are missing or not correct, no worry.

drezt10 wrote:Empty shells of mobs in DAoC? No way! I guess I did not realize how many of us were dying to play Uthgard 2.0 in hopes of cutting edge, flavorful PvE. I mean we did want SI but thats already cut ROFL. Extremely excited to analyze which bears are weak to slash on launch day. Keep up the meaningful work I guess.

.... I would be very excited to play cutting edge, flavourful PvE ... or lets say challenging and diverse PvE, as it was back then...for me that is an intrinsic part of the DAoC experience
there are enough i50 shards for the people who don't want to be bothered doing PvE.

cheers

To those assuming that PVE is the holdup: It is not. GM's do worldbuild, dev's do coding. As mentioned in the news, the coding has significant progress, (as does worldbuild, but again, we don't sit there and spam updates because as this and other threads have shown you are all quick to murder us if we event mention it).

Njor wrote:

drezt10 wrote:Empty shells of mobs in DAoC? No way! I guess I did not realize how many of us were dying to play Uthgard 2.0 in hopes of cutting edge, flavorful PvE. I mean we did want SI but thats already cut ROFL. Extremely excited to analyze which bears are weak to slash on launch day. Keep up the meaningful work I guess.

.... I would be very excited to play cutting edge, flavourful PvE ... or lets say challenging and diverse PvE, as it was back then...for me that is an intrinsic part of the DAoC experience
there are enough i50 shards for the people who don't want to be bothered doing PvE.

cheers

Anything short of extremely custom changes will not result in cutting edge or flavorful as far as PVE is concerned for DAOC. That is the point and why its a waste of time. If that is what you are after maybe try another game.

good health

Abydos wrote:To those assuming that PVE is the holdup: It is not. GM's do worldbuild, dev's do coding. As mentioned in the news, the coding has significant progress, (as does worldbuild, but again, we don't sit there and spam updates because as this and other threads have shown you are all quick to murder us if we event mention it).

So what exactly does take the most time? In my extremely limited mind it seems Uthgard 2.0 should entail an exact copy of Uthgard 1.0, removing new RA's, removing the ability to shear buffs, removing frostalf,half ogre,shar, deleting tajendi, adding old RA's, adding SI (oh wait nevermind), and uhhh whatever world building means, ????, ?????

maybe the old ra system will be the most difficult to construct?

cheers

drezt10 wrote:

Njor wrote:

drezt10 wrote:Empty shells of mobs in DAoC? No way! I guess I did not realize how many of us were dying to play Uthgard 2.0 in hopes of cutting edge, flavorful PvE. I mean we did want SI but thats already cut ROFL. Extremely excited to analyze which bears are weak to slash on launch day. Keep up the meaningful work I guess.

.... I would be very excited to play cutting edge, flavourful PvE ... or lets say challenging and diverse PvE, as it was back then...for me that is an intrinsic part of the DAoC experience
there are enough i50 shards for the people who don't want to be bothered doing PvE.

cheers

Anything short of extremely custom changes will not result in cutting edge or flavorful as far as PVE is concerned for DAOC. That is the point and why its a waste of time. If that is what you are after maybe try another game.

good health

I think you misunderstood,I started playing DAoC when it came out until ToA was released, so lets say I know the game
I actually do like DAoC PvE and lore as it was around classic/SI times
Uthgard staff was always clear that they are trying to rebuild this PvE part as well as the RvR side of 1.65

cheers

Ah yeah dude you got a good point DAoC classic pve was pretty amazing! Like do you remeber Wizard Lichas in Barrows? Uninterruptable Bolts dude... so tight, those were the days, hope we get those back man. Im going straight to barrows on day 1 Wizard Lichas better be shelling those bolts out or there will be hell to pay.

good health

drezt10 wrote:

Abydos wrote:To those assuming that PVE is the holdup: It is not. GM's do worldbuild, dev's do coding. As mentioned in the news, the coding has significant progress, (as does worldbuild, but again, we don't sit there and spam updates because as this and other threads have shown you are all quick to murder us if we event mention it).

So what exactly does take the most time? In my extremely limited mind it seems Uthgard 2.0 should entail an exact copy of Uthgard 1.0, removing new RA's, removing the ability to shear buffs, deleting tajendi, adding old RA's, adding SI (oh wait nevermind), and uhhh whatever world building means, ????, ?????

maybe the old ra system will be the most difficult to construct?

cheers

Necro and bonedancer completion required changes to how all mobs work, which was a significant effort. Pathing, also, which is't just for PVE - it affects RVR at MGs, keeps, and even for things like trees and forts. Additionally as we've stated before, our RVR system was a mess and it was not possible to even keep the system as it was to do things like fix the relic bonuses. These things take time. Fix a bug with BD? -> Break charm. Fix charm? Break aggro.

Abydos wrote:

drezt10 wrote:

Abydos wrote:To those assuming that PVE is the holdup: It is not. GM's do worldbuild, dev's do coding. As mentioned in the news, the coding has significant progress, (as does worldbuild, but again, we don't sit there and spam updates because as this and other threads have shown you are all quick to murder us if we event mention it).

So what exactly does take the most time? In my extremely limited mind it seems Uthgard 2.0 should entail an exact copy of Uthgard 1.0, removing new RA's, removing the ability to shear buffs, deleting tajendi, adding old RA's, adding SI (oh wait nevermind), and uhhh whatever world building means, ????, ?????

maybe the old ra system will be the most difficult to construct?

cheers

Necro and bonedancer completion required changes to how all mobs work, which was a significant effort. Pathing, also, which is't just for PVE - it affects RVR at MGs, keeps, and even for things like trees and forts. Additionally as we've stated before, our RVR system was a mess and it was not possible to even keep the system as it was to do things like fix the relic bonuses. These things take time. Fix a bug with BD? -> Break charm. Fix charm? Break aggro.

Ah ok, thanks for clearing that up for me.

cheers

drezt10 wrote:Ah yeah dude you got a good point DAoC classic pve was pretty amazing! Like do you remeber Wizard Lichas in Barrows? Uninterruptable Bolts dude... so tight, those were the days, hope we get those back man. Im going straight to barrows on day 1 Wizard Lichas better be shelling those bolts out or there will be hell to pay.

good health

I am not saying that everybody has to like challenging PvE, I do though

cheers

Njor wrote:

drezt10 wrote:Ah yeah dude you got a good point DAoC classic pve was pretty amazing! Like do you remeber Wizard Lichas in Barrows? Uninterruptable Bolts dude... so tight, those were the days, hope we get those back man. Im going straight to barrows on day 1 Wizard Lichas better be shelling those bolts out or there will be hell to pay.

good health

I am not saying that everybody has to like challenging PvE, I do though

cheers

There is nothing challenging about vanilla classic DAoC pve other than staying awake.

good health

I must say I'm looking forward to seeing if anyone organizes like Sons of Thor did. That was hilariously fun to watch.

drezt10 wrote:
There is nothing challenging about vanilla classic DAoC pve other than staying awake.

good health

I am probably not such a good player ... it helps to solo or duo content though if it is not challenging enough...

I remember those players who would only level with a fullgroup of optimal setup, only do the best xp yielding camps/dungeons so they can race through content and reach 50 as fast as possible ... leaving a group as soon as its not up to their 'standard'... very sad bunch ... usually the loudest in complaining about any perceived PvE bugs which would interfere with their levelling progress

so, what are you complaining about then? you don't want PvE at all? as I said, there are i50 shards ...

cheers

Njor wrote:

drezt10 wrote:
There is nothing challenging about vanilla classic DAoC pve other than staying awake.

good health

I am probably not such a good player ... it helps to solo or duo content though if it is not challenging enough...

I remember those players who would only level with a fullgroup of optimal setup, only do the best xp yielding camps/dungeons so they can race through content and reach 50 as fast as possible ... leaving a group as soon as its not up to their 'standard'... very sad bunch ... usually the loudest in complaining about any perceived PvE bugs which would interfere with their levelling progress

so, what are you complaining about then? you don't want PvE at all? as I said, there are i50 shards ...

cheers

on the contrary , I'm saying that I enjoyed the pve as it was on Uthgard 1.0 and do not understand why it would take so long to alter an already working system.

good health

drezt10 wrote:

Njor wrote:

drezt10 wrote:
There is nothing challenging about vanilla classic DAoC pve other than staying awake.

good health

I am probably not such a good player ... it helps to solo or duo content though if it is not challenging enough...

I remember those players who would only level with a fullgroup of optimal setup, only do the best xp yielding camps/dungeons so they can race through content and reach 50 as fast as possible ... leaving a group as soon as its not up to their 'standard'... very sad bunch ... usually the loudest in complaining about any perceived PvE bugs which would interfere with their levelling progress

so, what are you complaining about then? you don't want PvE at all? as I said, there are i50 shards ...

cheers

on the contrary , I'm saying that I enjoyed the pve as it was on Uthgard 1.0 and do not understand why it would take so long to alter an already working system.

good health

hm, sorry, seems I'm missing your point, you say vanilla classic was boring but Uthgard 1.0's stripped down version of classic DAoC was ok?