Zappo wrote:@Celad: You're trying to ignore the fact that your mentioned s/c charge IS NOT REAL CLASSIC state? Should i write it again why? nahhh, just read the posts above

Uh? Can you explain sorry?

What annoys me most is when delicate or sensitive questions relating staff work, statements or opinions are asked or discussed, the staff itself seems to avoid these kind of discussions rather than listen and respond to what their playerbase thinks about such controversial topics.

This creates a rather insecure image of our staff and is quite annoying to those who rightfully and respectfully seek answers or solutions.

All in all, avoiding these discussions definately is not helping to improve staff-community relations or the server itself in any way.

Thats not really up to us if the staff doesn't want to answer the discussed questions now is it?

Can I have some answers please?

Imho the staff can only answer that they do this custom change just because they want, just because they like it, just because they can, well, that's for sure: you made the server, you run the server, you can make everything you want with it.

Under the cover of the "classic server" that don't have to be "easy play" we can see simply a custom server, made by the staff in the way they like it.

I respect this, and although this i think this is actually the best daoc server (because of the implementation and most because the great - incredible for a free shard - management from GMs), so i will continue to play here without problems.

But please, can someone from the staff just show a little bit of bravery and honesty stating that this CUSTOM decision has nothing to do with DAoC and it is the way it is just because the staff like it?

Celad wrote:Can I have some answers please?

Imho the staff can only answer that they do this custom change just because they want, just because they like it, just because they can, well, that's for sure: you made the server, you run the server, you can make everything you want with it.

Under the cover of the "classic server" that don't have to be "easy play" we can see simply a custom server, made by the staff in the way they like it.

I respect this, and although this i think this is actually the best daoc server (because of the implementation and most because the great - incredible for a free shard - management from GMs), so i will continue to play here without problems.

Well yea, no sensible person will deny their right to do as they please. That's not the issue though...

Celad wrote:But please, can someone from the staff just show a little bit of bravery and honesty stating that this CUSTOM decision has nothing to do with DAoC and it is the way it is just because the staff like it?

The issue is that they tend to avoid giving clear justifications for their actions when the community is curious about why they handle(d) things in the way they did.

Still waiting for answers here.

Please.

Still waiting for answers here.

Please.

Musikus wrote:the S/C charges that are available in midgard classic-zone are removed..

why?

midgard has the luck that 2 SI-drops with that charge drop in malmohus (arnulf) and raumanik (WoW-Cloak).
hibernias S/C-charges drop in the SI-Zones...
Albions S/C-Charges drop in the SI-Zones...

since alb and hib would not have access to the charge this would create an imbalance...thats why staff removed them.

i think this should be your answer...
the only thing you could ask the staff is to implement it for all 3 realms in classic zones or equivalent imo
but well, as stated, they are overlooking the whole charge/pot buff issue so maybe you just wait for that first

(this is what i meant not real classic state since "real classic state" in this case SI-times would be that all realms have access to s/c charge)

Zappo wrote:

Musikus wrote:the S/C charges that are available in midgard classic-zone are removed..

why?

midgard has the luck that 2 SI-drops with that charge drop in malmohus (arnulf) and raumanik (WoW-Cloak).
hibernias S/C-charges drop in the SI-Zones...
Albions S/C-Charges drop in the SI-Zones...

since alb and hib would not have access to the charge this would create an imbalance...thats why staff removed them.

i think this should be your answer...
the only thing you could ask the staff is to implement it for all 3 realms in classic zones or equivalent imo
but well, as stated, they are overlooking the whole charge/pot buff issue so maybe you just wait for that first

(this is what i meant not real classic state since "real classic state" in this case SI-times would be that all realms have access to s/c charge)

Are you a GM? No.
Your quote answer all my questions? No.

Celad wrote:

Zappo wrote:@Celad: You're trying to ignore the fact that your mentioned s/c charge IS NOT REAL CLASSIC state? Should i write it again why? nahhh, just read the posts above

Uh? Can you explain sorry?

forgot to add this.

Zappo wrote:but well, as stated, they are overlooking the whole charge/pot buff issue so maybe you just wait for that first

what ya think of this?

Old discussion..coming up multible times:


There have been SI drops with S/C charges in midgard classic zones. There have not been similar SI drops in albion or hibernia since they get such drops only in SI zones. Uthgard has no SI zones.

Summary: Thats an imbalance that is not livelike or classic. So we needed a solution.

Two solutions were discussed (internal discussion). We could give mobs of the same level in the albion and hibernia classic similar items (or at least the SI zone loot). Or we could remove the item from the mid mob and put it on mobs accessable to alle realms.

We discussed it and we chose the second solution. Reason was, that it was less customization and the staff wanted to keep S/C charges as rare as possible.

It was a decision made by the staff long ago. The staff knew the alternatives and decided to it the way it is at the moment.

Summary: Staff decision, based on knowledge of possible alternatives. Its a decision and will not be undone until further notice. Accept it! Someone has to make the decisions and thats the staff. We are aware that the decisions are not always accepted or even respected by the whole community. But thats the way it is.

Camulos

Zappo wrote:

Celad wrote:

Zappo wrote:@Celad: You're trying to ignore the fact that your mentioned s/c charge IS NOT REAL CLASSIC state? Should i write it again why? nahhh, just read the posts above

Uh? Can you explain sorry?

forgot to add this.

Oh, that question. Ok, but i will glad if you show me a proof that charges have been added on the necklace only after the addition of SI zones. Just to be sure.

Zappo wrote:but well, as stated, they are overlooking the whole charge/pot buff issue so maybe you just wait for that first

what ya think of this?[/quote]

I think that if staff is working of something else this is good, but has nothing to do with the possibility to have an answer.
They just ignore this thread (and a lot about this issue).


EDIT: Thanks Camulos, i wrote this post before you submit yours.
The best is:

Camulos wrote:that it was less customization and the staff wanted to keep S/C charges as rare as possible

Topic can be closed now.

You know what? You are one of my favorite kind of forum user. You do not use the search function (S/C charge is an old discussion), you seem to ignore facts that do not support your opinion (SI drop) and when i give you the explanation you demanded to get you insult me.

Nice...

Camulos

PS.: by the way - topic losed

PS2.: consider yourself warned - next insult, you get some days offtime