Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

[EQ2] More character slots - if you pay for them!

Last response: in Video Games
Share
Anonymous
December 10, 2004 12:14:16 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

According to this post on the official forums:
http://eqiiforums.station.sony.com/eq2/board/message?bo...

you can get an extra four slots by signing up for a Station Access subscription
($21.99 p/m), which also gets you all the other games from SOE.

So everyone who predicted this, you were right - they're trying to get
alt-oholics to fork out more cash.

Rich
Anonymous
December 10, 2004 12:14:17 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

Richard Wingrove wrote:
> According to this post on the official forums:
> http://eqiiforums.station.sony.com/eq2/board/message?bo...
>
> you can get an extra four slots by signing up for a Station Access subscription
> ($21.99 p/m), which also gets you all the other games from SOE.
>
> So everyone who predicted this, you were right - they're trying to get
> alt-oholics to fork out more cash.

<shrug>

After Final Fantasy proved it would work (The 'average' jp player has
3.5 chars, the average us player has 2.5, according to the last census)
I'm surprised more companies are not looking at similar tricks.
(Final Fantasy method, in a nutshell:
$12.95 a month gets you your account and one 'content ID'. An account
can hold up to 16 Final Fantasy content IDs.
$1.00 per month gets you an additional Content ID.
You do not need a worldpass (in-game issued number to allow someone to
get onto your server) to put your alts on the same server you are, or
they get assigned a random server like everyone else (if you don't have
another server's world pass that's active atm).
However, in a flip of their pay for alts logic, you can change jobs with
minor effort (earning a few of the advanced jobs can be tricky though),
so if you are happy with your race and name, you can, and in fact some
do, play a dozen different jobs with one character.
My character is a 34 monk, 16 Samurai, 15 Warrior, 15 Thief, 13 Red
Mage, 6 White mage, 6 Ranger, and 2 Black Mage
Anonymous
December 10, 2004 12:32:01 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

"Richard Wingrove" <me@privacy.net> wrote in
news:31rtapF3f2j8jU1@individual.net:

> According to this post on the official forums:
> http://eqiiforums.station.sony.com/eq2/board/message?
board.id=news_anno
> uncements&message.id=28
>
> you can get an extra four slots by signing up for a Station Access
> subscription ($21.99 p/m), which also gets you all the other games
> from SOE.
>
> So everyone who predicted this, you were right - they're trying to get
> alt-oholics to fork out more cash.
>
> Rich
>
>
>

My name is Bebinn and yes, I'm an alt-oholic. In 4 years of playing EQ,
I still have the very first character I ever made (woodelf ranger on
bristlebane named Bebinn, of course) plus innumerable alts I made just
to try out different classes. I have filled up at least 3 servers and
test with characters. My son has a server filled with characters from
when we weren't so addicted and still shared with him, LOL. Then when
EQOA came out I started filling those servers up too. When FFXI came
out I considered switching to that game until I found out they charge
extra based on how many alts you have. I'd be paying over $100 a month
if EQ did that. Even though I no longer play a toon, I keep them
around, never know when I'll get the bug to go back to one. Name a
server and I probably have at least one character on it, half the time
it's a Bebinn. There's at least 8 toons named Bebinn on the EQ servers,
2 on the EQOA ones, and now one on EQ2's Faydark server.

Regarding the "fork out more cash": I'm already signed up for the
Station Access so we can play all 3 games, yet another benefit to having
it, that's a nice thing. Now, I gotta get back in EQ2 and figure out
why Bebinn didn't zone to Qeynos Harbor a few minutes ago.
Related resources
Can't find your answer ? Ask !
Anonymous
December 10, 2004 12:32:02 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

Bebinn wrote:
> "Richard Wingrove" <me@privacy.net> wrote in
> news:31rtapF3f2j8jU1@individual.net:
>
>
>>According to this post on the official forums:
>>http://eqiiforums.station.sony.com/eq2/board/message?
>
> board.id=news_anno
>
>>uncements&message.id=28
>>
>>you can get an extra four slots by signing up for a Station Access
>>subscription ($21.99 p/m), which also gets you all the other games
>>from SOE.
>>
>>So everyone who predicted this, you were right - they're trying to get
>>alt-oholics to fork out more cash.
>>
>>Rich
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> My name is Bebinn and yes, I'm an alt-oholic. In 4 years of playing EQ,
> EQOA came out I started filling those servers up too. When FFXI came
> out I considered switching to that game until I found out they charge
> extra based on how many alts you have. I'd be paying over $100 a month
If you just want to try other classes, in Final Fantasy one character
can be all jobs... in fact I ran into a jp player that explained, in
broken english + translator, that he was leveling up his last job.. he
had all others (18 total jobs I think) at least at 70. (cap 75) He was
busy leveling Dragoon through the 30s.

Me, I can't concieve of that much time.
December 10, 2004 3:55:24 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

In article <41B8D058.F45F488B@gomonarch.com>,
XvirtualDoNotSpamMe@gomonarch.com says...
>
>
> Richard Wingrove wrote:
>
> > According to this post on the official forums:
> > http://eqiiforums.station.sony.com/eq2/board/message?bo...
> >
> > you can get an extra four slots by signing up for a Station Access subscription
> > ($21.99 p/m), which also gets you all the other games from SOE.
> >
> > So everyone who predicted this, you were right - they're trying to get
> > alt-oholics to fork out more cash.
>
> Good for them! I had a lot of Alts in CoH and I think it is reasonable to charge for them. If I
> get 4 gallons of gas at the gas station and later want 4 more, I shouldn't get them for free.
>

Suppose I buy a used car at the dealer with 4 gallons of gas in it for
$2000.00. If I want 4 more gallons of gas should I have to pay another
1500.00?

Perhaps you think we should only get 4 bank slots, with the option of
paying $6/mo for another 4? Or perhaps our game banks can only hold a
maxium of 999 coins, with the option of paying another $2/mo for the
ability to hold 9999. Or perhaps a limit of 2 people on your friends
list, with the ability to add 5 more for $1/mo. Perhaps characters
should only be an adventurer OR an artisan... unless you pay another
$3/mo to make your character able to do both? Perhaps, you should only
be able to make good OR evil characters without a nominal upcharge of
$5/mo to double the amount of 'content' you get to see.

I bought everquest the game, and I pay a subscription to access it.
Period. I shouldn't have to shell out an additional monthly fee for
every feature in the game i want to use. Trying more than 4 of the 40+
options shouldn't require spending a boat load of cash extra.

HD space is cheap. I don't need unlimited characters. Howabout a maximum
of 50. Lets go nuts and say that needs 1GB of space. (Which is utterly
ridiculous... I'd be willing to spend 50c/mo to up the number of slots
from 4 to 50. And I'd still be paying far more than its worth.
Anonymous
December 10, 2004 4:13:36 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

42 wrote:
> In article <41B8F6DD.5BF911CE@gomonarch.com>,
> XvirtualDoNotSpamMe@gomonarch.com says...
> >
> > > Suppose I buy a used car at the dealer with 4 gallons of gas in
it for
> > > $2000.00. If I want 4 more gallons of gas should I have to pay
another
> > > 1500.00?
> >
> > No.
>
> Why not? its the same thing.
>
It's not actually the same thing - paying for extra slots is even less
value comparably. If you convert things to how much time you get for
your money. In your example you would get to use your car for twice as
long for less than twice the money. As the time that anyone has to
play is finite, paying extra money for twice as many character slots
would not allow you to play the game any more than you already do.
(assuming that you already play as much as you can)

The question that I am debating is this - will paying an extra $7(?)
increase my enjoyment whilst I am playing? If I get bored playing one
character I could get more enjoyment from the game playing an alt. 4
characters is not enough for me - I have 2 mages, a scout and a
fighter. The only expendable one of those is the fighter as I haven't
started playing it yet. I would like to try at least two of the
fighter classes and at least two of the priest classes. Fortunately I
have no inclination to try any other scout class (I am a predator on my
way to Assassin) and I have no inclination to try a sorceror right now
- otherwise 8 slots might not be enough!
(Sorry started rambling there)

steve.kaye
Anonymous
December 10, 2004 5:13:39 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

On Thu, 9 Dec 2004 21:14:16 -0000, "Richard Wingrove" <me@privacy.net>
wrote:

>According to this post on the official forums:
>http://eqiiforums.station.sony.com/eq2/board/message?bo...
>
>you can get an extra four slots by signing up for a Station Access subscription
>($21.99 p/m), which also gets you all the other games from SOE.
>
>So everyone who predicted this, you were right - they're trying to get
>alt-oholics to fork out more cash.
>
>Rich
>
Just as well I'm happy with my main and 1 alt...

--

Bunnies aren't just cute like everybody supposes !
They got them hoppy legs and twitchy little noses !
And what's with all the carrots ?
What do they need such good eyesight for anyway ?
Bunnies ! Bunnies ! It must be BUNNIES !
December 10, 2004 9:19:46 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

In article <41B8F6DD.5BF911CE@gomonarch.com>,
XvirtualDoNotSpamMe@gomonarch.com says...
>
>
> 42 wrote:
>
> > In article <41B8D058.F45F488B@gomonarch.com>,
> > XvirtualDoNotSpamMe@gomonarch.com says...
> > >
> > >
> > > Richard Wingrove wrote:
> > >
> > > > According to this post on the official forums:
> > > > http://eqiiforums.station.sony.com/eq2/board/message?bo...
> > > >
> > > > you can get an extra four slots by signing up for a Station Access subscription
> > > > ($21.99 p/m), which also gets you all the other games from SOE.
> > > >
> > > > So everyone who predicted this, you were right - they're trying to get
> > > > alt-oholics to fork out more cash.
> > >
> > > Good for them! I had a lot of Alts in CoH and I think it is reasonable to charge for them. If I
> > > get 4 gallons of gas at the gas station and later want 4 more, I shouldn't get them for free.
> > >
> >
> > Suppose I buy a used car at the dealer with 4 gallons of gas in it for
> > $2000.00. If I want 4 more gallons of gas should I have to pay another
> > 1500.00?
>
> No.

Why not? its the same thing.

> >
> >
> > Perhaps you think we should only get 4 bank slots, with the option of
> > paying $6/mo for another 4? Or perhaps our game banks can only hold a
> > maxium of 999 coins, with the option of paying another $2/mo for the
> > ability to hold 9999. Or perhaps a limit of 2 people on your friends
> > list, with the ability to add 5 more for $1/mo. Perhaps characters
> > should only be an adventurer OR an artisan... unless you pay another
> > $3/mo to make your character able to do both? Perhaps, you should only
> > be able to make good OR evil characters without a nominal upcharge of
> > $5/mo to double the amount of 'content' you get to see.
>
> Sure why not. If they character slots have no value people will not pay for them. IF they do have
> value, then naturally the concept will prove it's worth!

Ah I see. Well I disagree completely, and think they are each idiotic
suggestions. Not everything that has value should cost extra.

And charging 75% the base cost for a nominal value add is even more
ridiculous.

> >
> >
> > I bought everquest the game, and I pay a subscription to access it.
> > Period. I shouldn't have to shell out an additional monthly fee for
> > every feature in the game i want to use. Trying more than 4 of the 40+
> > options shouldn't require spending a boat load of cash extra.
>
> Vote with your money and leave or pay out the $$ for it.

I did. You'll note I -haven't- bought EQ2 yet. And won't until I'm
satisfied with the value.

> >
> >
> > HD space is cheap. I don't need unlimited characters. Howabout a maximum
> > of 50. Lets go nuts and say that needs 1GB of space. (Which is utterly
> > ridiculous... I'd be willing to spend 50c/mo to up the number of slots
> > from 4 to 50. And I'd still be paying far more than its worth.
>
> SO you agree that some fee for more characters is worth now a price has to be settled on!

No. My point was they were ripping you off huge.

However, if they'd released it with 50 slots for 13.45 instead of 4 for
12.95 I'd have bought it by now.
Anonymous
December 10, 2004 1:35:58 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

"Bebinn" <bebinn@invalid.com> wrote in message
news:Xns95BAA827CB7431bebinn11msn11com1@199.45.49.11...


> Regarding the "fork out more cash": I'm already signed up for the
> Station Access so we can play all 3 games, yet another benefit to having
> it, that's a nice thing. Now, I gotta get back in EQ2 and figure out
> why Bebinn didn't zone to Qeynos Harbor a few minutes ago.

Hehehe..I think I will signup then...with my eq1 account (which I want to
continue playing) it will save me money anyways, so it is extra

--
*Pamela*
eq2.simonette.najena
eq2.floriana.najena
eq1.agapanthus.bristlebane
Anonymous
December 10, 2004 3:04:20 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

42 wrote:
> In article <41B8D058.F45F488B@gomonarch.com>,
> XvirtualDoNotSpamMe@gomonarch.com says...
> >
> >
> > Richard Wingrove wrote:
> >
> > > According to this post on the official forums:
> > >
http://eqiiforums.station.sony.com/eq2/board/message?bo...
> > >
> > > you can get an extra four slots by signing up for a Station
Access subscription
> > > ($21.99 p/m), which also gets you all the other games from SOE.
> > >
> > > So everyone who predicted this, you were right - they're trying
to get
> > > alt-oholics to fork out more cash.
> >
> > Good for them! I had a lot of Alts in CoH and I think it is
reasonable to charge for them. If I
> > get 4 gallons of gas at the gas station and later want 4 more, I
shouldn't get them for free.
> >
>
> Suppose I buy a used car at the dealer with 4 gallons of gas in it
for
> $2000.00. If I want 4 more gallons of gas should I have to pay
another
> 1500.00?
>
> Perhaps you think we should only get 4 bank slots, with the option of

> paying $6/mo for another 4? Or perhaps our game banks can only hold a

> maxium of 999 coins, with the option of paying another $2/mo for the
> ability to hold 9999. Or perhaps a limit of 2 people on your friends
> list, with the ability to add 5 more for $1/mo. Perhaps characters
> should only be an adventurer OR an artisan... unless you pay another
> $3/mo to make your character able to do both? Perhaps, you should
only
> be able to make good OR evil characters without a nominal upcharge of

> $5/mo to double the amount of 'content' you get to see.
>
> I bought everquest the game, and I pay a subscription to access it.
> Period. I shouldn't have to shell out an additional monthly fee for
> every feature in the game i want to use. Trying more than 4 of the
40+
> options shouldn't require spending a boat load of cash extra.
>
> HD space is cheap. I don't need unlimited characters. Howabout a
maximum
> of 50. Lets go nuts and say that needs 1GB of space. (Which is
utterly
> ridiculous... I'd be willing to spend 50c/mo to up the number of
slots
> from 4 to 50. And I'd still be paying far more than its worth.

I think your analogy of the used car and gas is faulty . What is being
done with the "pay more get 4 more character slots" or most of the
rhetorical examples you put forward is more analogous to buying a car
and dickering over the options. The base model will run just fine, but
having things like air conditioning, power steering, CD/AM/FM radio and
stereo speakers, and the High Performance package, etc. make the car
more enjoyable.

If you don't like the options and consider the base model to be
undesirable because of the lack of those options you don't want to pay
for, then you don't buy the car (or game).

Analogies are often imperfect and the car purchase one is definitely
imperfect.

=30=
Anonymous
December 10, 2004 3:56:00 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

I was hoping that SOE wouldn't do this. They seem to be aware that they
have a public relations problem with at least a large part of their EQL
customer base (or maybe they think the summit fixed all that, I dunno). I
was crossing my fingers that maybe they would make at least a token effort
to show in EQII that they really do care about player's enjoyment of the
game more than squeezing every last possible cent out that they can. I was
disappointed when they sold beta slots, and now I'm disappointed that they
are selling character slots.

Don't get me wrong. I think they are a business, and have every right
to make a profit. Heck, even a healthy profit. I had no problems with
them when they raised the monthly rate in EQL. But I, like many others,
grew impatient with the "cut Customer Service and don't worry about fixing
bugs in the game while we churn out uninspired expansions that we can make
as much money as is possible" attitude that seemed to be the driving force
in SOE.

Well, they certainly have the right to operate that way. Just like I
have a right to walk away.

--
Annie

In EQII:

Unsubscribing

AGE EverQuest Live FAQ:
http://www.icynic.com/~don/EQ/age.faq.htm

Mirrored at:
http://webpages.charter.net/lenny13/age.faq.htm

http://www.derfy.net/agefaq.html

_______

If you can't figure out my email address, you're not supposed to write me.
Anonymous
December 10, 2004 3:56:01 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

On Fri, 10 Dec 2004 12:56:00 -0600, Annie Benson-Lennaman
<teapray@realpeopleonly.yahoo.com> wrote:

>But I, like many others,
>grew impatient with the "cut Customer Service and don't worry about fixing
>bugs in the game while we churn out uninspired expansions that we can make
>as much money as is possible" attitude that seemed to be the driving force
>in SOE

On a related side-note, have there been any plans mentioned of another
expansion since OoW for EQL?

--
Dark Tyger

Sympathy for the retailer:
http://www.actsofgord.com/index.html
"Door's to your left" -Gord
(I have no association with this site. Just thought it was funny as hell)

Protect free speech: http://stopfcc.com/
December 10, 2004 4:10:48 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

Nobody even dreamed of charging a monthly fee for a game until EQ1 came out.
Since Verant proved people where willing to pay for it, now everyone else
does.

FFXI proved people were willing to pay for additional characters, so now
everyone else does.

It's pure business. They don't make and maintain the games for the love of
the art. They do it for the money, plain and simple. If people are willing
to pay for something, you bet there will be companies selling it.

I don't like it one bit, but I know there's nothing you or I can do about
it:
1) I won't stop playing the game because of it (I like the game, duh).
2) I will have to think carefully what my alts will be because I certainly
will NOT pay extra.
3) They won't change their minds because there WILL be people paying for it.

"Richard Wingrove" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:31rtapF3f2j8jU1@individual.net...
> According to this post on the official forums:
> http://eqiiforums.station.sony.com/eq2/board/message?bo...
>
> you can get an extra four slots by signing up for a Station Access
> subscription
> ($21.99 p/m), which also gets you all the other games from SOE.
>
> So everyone who predicted this, you were right - they're trying to get
> alt-oholics to fork out more cash.
>
> Rich
>
>
Anonymous
December 10, 2004 4:10:49 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

On Fri, 10 Dec 2004 13:10:48 -0500, "Manuel" <My@NoMailLand.com>
wrote:

>Nobody even dreamed of charging a monthly fee for a game until EQ1 came out.

The Realm, Meridian 51(?), Ultima Online, and several pay to play MUDs
were all out well before EQ1 and all charged monthly fees. That's not
to mention "matchmaking" services for online gaming such as Kali that
charged, though Kali's fee was a one-time fee. Check your facts before
making a fool of yourself with such blatantly ignorant statements.

--
Dark Tyger

Sympathy for the retailer:
http://www.actsofgord.com/index.html
"Door's to your left" -Gord
(I have no association with this site. Just thought it was funny as hell)

Protect free speech: http://stopfcc.com/
Anonymous
December 10, 2004 4:17:52 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

"Richard Wingrove" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:31rtapF3f2j8jU1@individual.net...
> According to this post on the official forums:
>
http://eqiiforums.station.sony.com/eq2/board/message?bo...
>
> you can get an extra four slots by signing up for a Station Access
subscription
> ($21.99 p/m), which also gets you all the other games from SOE.
>
> So everyone who predicted this, you were right - they're trying to get
> alt-oholics to fork out more cash.
>
> Rich
>
>

OMG, that's so bullsh%^. More and more of this stuff and I'm gonna quit
this game and head to WoW. It's already a more fun game (at least to me).
Anonymous
December 10, 2004 4:19:03 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

<My@NoMailLand.com> wrote:
> Nobody even dreamed of charging a monthly fee for a game until EQ1 came out.
> Since Verant proved people where willing to pay for it, now everyone else
> does.

They may not have dreamed it, but they sure as hell *did* it.

Is it just me, or is today's youth 100% convinced that nothing happened
before they were around to see it?
Anonymous
December 10, 2004 9:04:44 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

"ttman21" <ttman21@cox.net> wrote in news:1102700799.220783.80240
@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com:
> Graeme Faelban wrote:
>>
>> I assume this must be a future feature being talked about. I do play
>
>> both eq1 and 2, and have the pass, and have 4 character slots in eq2.
>
> You should have 4 more slots right now. Although the main character
> screen shows 4 characters, if you click on create character, you can
> create 4 more.
>

Please don't toppost here.

Cool, I'll give it a try tonight.

--
On Erollisi Marr in <Sanctuary of Marr>
Ancient Graeme Faelban, Barbarian Prophet of 69 seasons

On Steamfont in <Bane of Evil>
Graeme, 17 Dwarven Shaman, 14 Scholar
Anonymous
December 10, 2004 9:33:09 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

Manuel wrote:

> Nobody even dreamed of charging a monthly fee for a game until EQ1 came out.
> Since Verant proved people where willing to pay for it, now everyone else
> does.

MMORPGs did not begin with Everquest, or
even Ultima Online for that matter (well, the
Massively part maybe, they certainly took the
number of players to greater heights than I ever
envisioned.) My online multiplayer rpg gaming
experience goes back to 1988 on Compuserve.
(Raise your hand if you're a true trailblazer that
even knows what the heck things like CI$ and
GEnie even were).
Anonymous
December 10, 2004 9:33:10 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

On Fri, 10 Dec 2004 18:33:09 GMT, Bruce Smith <misterbe@sprynet.com>
wrote:

>(Raise your hand if you're a true trailblazer that
>even knows what the heck things like CI$ and
>GEnie even were).

What, that was only a decade ago, give or take a couple years. :p 

--
Dark Tyger

Sympathy for the retailer:
http://www.actsofgord.com/index.html
"Door's to your left" -Gord
(I have no association with this site. Just thought it was funny as hell)

Protect free speech: http://stopfcc.com/
Anonymous
December 10, 2004 9:33:44 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

"Manuel" <My@NoMailLand.com> wrote in message
> Nobody even dreamed of charging a monthly fee for a game until EQ1 came
out.
> Since Verant proved people where willing to pay for it, now everyone else
> does.

You mean when I was playing Meridian 59, they weren't *really* charging me
every month? That's good to know. But, where'd the cash go? Oh, my credit
card must've sprung a leak.
Anonymous
December 11, 2004 12:42:00 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

"Rom Gin" <romulator@adelphia.net> wrote in
news:gcydnavXgdPBjyfcRVn-3g@adelphia.com:

>
> "Richard Wingrove" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
> news:31rtapF3f2j8jU1@individual.net...
>> According to this post on the official forums:
>>
> http://eqiiforums.station.sony.com/eq2/board/message?bo...
> uncements&message.id=28
>>
>> you can get an extra four slots by signing up for a Station Access
> subscription
>> ($21.99 p/m), which also gets you all the other games from SOE.
>>
>> So everyone who predicted this, you were right - they're trying to
>> get alt-oholics to fork out more cash.
>>
>> Rich
>>
>>
>
> OMG, that's so bullsh%^. More and more of this stuff and I'm gonna
> quit this game and head to WoW. It's already a more fun game (at
> least to me).

Then why aren't you there already? Seriously. (?)

--
Rumble

"The floggings will continue until morale improves."
-- Blackbeard
Anonymous
December 11, 2004 12:42:01 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

> >>
> >>
> >
> > OMG, that's so bullsh%^. More and more of this stuff and I'm gonna
> > quit this game and head to WoW. It's already a more fun game (at
> > least to me).
>
> Then why aren't you there already? Seriously. (?)
>
> --

The difference being I was planning on staying for the long haul and play
anyways even if it's not exceptional. I was planning on playing the 3 other
classes I created up to higher levels in addition to the caster I made. I
think now I will just play my caster as far as it is still entertaining. If
I make it to the max level, and I'll probably quit then. Play CoH and WoW
for a bit and finally return to EQ1. Even if I'm not playing any other
games, I'm sure I'll be there at EQ1 when they turn off the lights.....
December 11, 2004 4:15:00 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

In article <1102709060.543649.234740@c13g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>,
hidone@hotmail.com says...
>
> 42 wrote:
> > In article <41B8D058.F45F488B@gomonarch.com>,
> > XvirtualDoNotSpamMe@gomonarch.com says...
> > >
> > >
> > > Richard Wingrove wrote:
> > >
> > > > According to this post on the official forums:
> > > >
> http://eqiiforums.station.sony.com/eq2/board/message?bo...
> > > >
> > > > you can get an extra four slots by signing up for a Station
> Access subscription
> > > > ($21.99 p/m), which also gets you all the other games from SOE.
> > > >
> > > > So everyone who predicted this, you were right - they're trying
> to get
> > > > alt-oholics to fork out more cash.
> > >
> > > Good for them! I had a lot of Alts in CoH and I think it is
> reasonable to charge for them. If I
> > > get 4 gallons of gas at the gas station and later want 4 more, I
> shouldn't get them for free.
> > >
> >
> > Suppose I buy a used car at the dealer with 4 gallons of gas in it
> for
> > $2000.00. If I want 4 more gallons of gas should I have to pay
> another
> > 1500.00?
> >
> > Perhaps you think we should only get 4 bank slots, with the option of
>
> > paying $6/mo for another 4? Or perhaps our game banks can only hold a
>
> > maxium of 999 coins, with the option of paying another $2/mo for the
> > ability to hold 9999. Or perhaps a limit of 2 people on your friends
> > list, with the ability to add 5 more for $1/mo. Perhaps characters
> > should only be an adventurer OR an artisan... unless you pay another
> > $3/mo to make your character able to do both? Perhaps, you should
> only
> > be able to make good OR evil characters without a nominal upcharge of
>
> > $5/mo to double the amount of 'content' you get to see.
> >
> > I bought everquest the game, and I pay a subscription to access it.
> > Period. I shouldn't have to shell out an additional monthly fee for
> > every feature in the game i want to use. Trying more than 4 of the
> 40+
> > options shouldn't require spending a boat load of cash extra.
> >
> > HD space is cheap. I don't need unlimited characters. Howabout a
> maximum
> > of 50. Lets go nuts and say that needs 1GB of space. (Which is
> utterly
> > ridiculous... I'd be willing to spend 50c/mo to up the number of
> slots
> > from 4 to 50. And I'd still be paying far more than its worth.
>
> I think your analogy of the used car and gas is faulty . What is being
> done with the "pay more get 4 more character slots" or most of the
> rhetorical examples you put forward is more analogous to buying a car
> and dickering over the options. The base model will run just fine, but
> having things like air conditioning, power steering, CD/AM/FM radio and
> stereo speakers, and the High Performance package, etc. make the car
> more enjoyable.

You can think whatever you like but comparing character slots to options
like air or p/s is bullshit.

When you buy EQ you can make any one of the 40+ different character
types. The game -comes- with support for all of them, the subscription -
comes- with support for all of them.

Character slots are not an expansion to the base game. They merely let
you play with more of the options you've already purchased -at the same
time-.

If you bought a car that *included* air conditioning, powersteering, and
a cd player. (Ie the components were *all* already IN the car that you
are driving, but the dealership set it up so that in order to have the
radio on at the same time you used the Power Steering you had to pay an
extra monthly fee then we'd have a much closer approximation for what
EQ2 is doing with such limited character slots. (And EQ2 is worse,
because you -can- delete characters to free the slot for new characters,
but that means you have start over from scratch on the old character if
you want to play him some more... at least when you turn the radio back
on after making a tight turn you don't have to start the CD at track 1
again.

> If you don't like the options and consider the base model to be
> undesirable because of the lack of those options you don't want to pay
> for, then you don't buy the car (or game).

This is self evident. I've already said I haven't bought EQ2.

But for what its worth, there is a considerable difference between
buying the car without options, and buying the car with the options
included and then having to pay extra to actually use them.

> Analogies are often imperfect and the car purchase one is definitely
> imperfect.

It was better than yours.
Anonymous
December 11, 2004 5:15:30 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

On Fri, 10 Dec 2004 13:19:03 -0600, Faned <faned@wyld.qx.net> wrote:

><My@NoMailLand.com> wrote:
>> Nobody even dreamed of charging a monthly fee for a game until EQ1 came out.
>> Since Verant proved people where willing to pay for it, now everyone else
>> does.
>
>They may not have dreamed it, but they sure as hell *did* it.
>
>Is it just me, or is today's youth 100% convinced that nothing happened
>before they were around to see it?

No, it's every generation's youth that think that. :) 

--

Bunnies aren't just cute like everybody supposes !
They got them hoppy legs and twitchy little noses !
And what's with all the carrots ?
What do they need such good eyesight for anyway ?
Bunnies ! Bunnies ! It must be BUNNIES !
Anonymous
December 11, 2004 6:49:29 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

On Sat, 11 Dec 2004 02:15:30 +0000, Mark Morrison <drdpikeuk@aol.com>
wrote:

>On Fri, 10 Dec 2004 13:19:03 -0600, Faned <faned@wyld.qx.net> wrote:
>
>><My@NoMailLand.com> wrote:
>>> Nobody even dreamed of charging a monthly fee for a game until EQ1 came out.
>>> Since Verant proved people where willing to pay for it, now everyone else
>>> does.
>>
>>They may not have dreamed it, but they sure as hell *did* it.
>>
>>Is it just me, or is today's youth 100% convinced that nothing happened
>>before they were around to see it?
>
>No, it's every generation's youth that think that. :) 

Heh, the true origin of the Schrodinger's Cat thought experiment
rears its head.
Anonymous
December 11, 2004 11:03:40 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

"Richard Wingrove" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:31rtapF3f2j8jU1@individual.net...
> According to this post on the official forums:
> http://eqiiforums.station.sony.com/eq2/board/message?bo...
>
> you can get an extra four slots by signing up for a Station Access
> subscription
> ($21.99 p/m), which also gets you all the other games from SOE.
>

So what the heck are character slots (more slots on your char to carry
stuff, or 4 more chars you can create)?
Anonymous
December 11, 2004 12:10:37 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

On Sat, 11 Dec 2004 08:03:40 GMT, "Jim Appel"
<apDIE-SPAM-DIEpel@efn.org> wrote:

>
>"Richard Wingrove" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
>news:31rtapF3f2j8jU1@individual.net...
>> According to this post on the official forums:
>> http://eqiiforums.station.sony.com/eq2/board/message?bo...
>>
>> you can get an extra four slots by signing up for a Station Access
>> subscription
>> ($21.99 p/m), which also gets you all the other games from SOE.
>>
>
>So what the heck are character slots (more slots on your char to carry
>stuff, or 4 more chars you can create)?
>

Exactly what it sounds like, 4 more characters you can create.

--
Dark Tyger

Sympathy for the retailer:
http://www.actsofgord.com/index.html
"Door's to your left" -Gord
(I have no association with this site. Just thought it was funny as hell)

Protect free speech: http://stopfcc.com/
Anonymous
December 11, 2004 2:20:21 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

Jim Appel wrote:
> So what the heck are character slots (more slots on your char to carry
> stuff, or 4 more chars you can create)?

The ability to create four more characters on your account, for a total of
eight.

Pretty chintzy, IMO, as were some of the attempts to dump some of the
"extras" on you when creating your account.

I moved to playing WoW simply because I can't play two MMOGs at once. I
enjoyed EQ2 almost equally and figured on returning to it once I played WoW
out (which I didn't think would take that long).

But it appears as though there's more to WoW than I initially believed, and
some of SOE's pettiness is causing me to rethink my notion of returning to
EQ2. Time will tell, I suppose.


--
chainbreaker
Anonymous
December 11, 2004 3:31:01 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

"Dark Tyger" <darktiger@somewhere.net> wrote in message
news:mpujr0t6rdg4adcbc0lpn840utvr0ohk49@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 10 Dec 2004 12:56:00 -0600, Annie Benson-Lennaman
> <teapray@realpeopleonly.yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >But I, like many others,
> >grew impatient with the "cut Customer Service and don't worry about fixing
> >bugs in the game while we churn out uninspired expansions that we can make
> >as much money as is possible" attitude that seemed to be the driving force
> >in SOE
>
> On a related side-note, have there been any plans mentioned of another
> expansion since OoW for EQL?

Another player summit next month - I fully expect an announcement there about
a new expansion (with new player models one of the selling points).

--
Simond
"I ask for so little. Just fear me, love me, do as I say and I will be your
slave." - Jareth the Goblin King, Labyrinth
Anonymous
December 11, 2004 7:01:30 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

In article <41B9EBE3.E6884F91@sprynet.com>,
Bruce Smith <misterbe@sprynet.com> wrote:

> Manuel wrote:
>
> > Nobody even dreamed of charging a monthly fee for a game until EQ1 came out.
> > Since Verant proved people where willing to pay for it, now everyone else
> > does.
>
> MMORPGs did not begin with Everquest, or
> even Ultima Online for that matter (well, the
> Massively part maybe, they certainly took the
> number of players to greater heights than I ever
> envisioned.) My online multiplayer rpg gaming
> experience goes back to 1988 on Compuserve.
> (Raise your hand if you're a true trailblazer that
> even knows what the heck things like CI$ and
> GEnie even were).

Gemstone III on GEnie costs me $500 one month in 1991...that was the
phone bill plus the hourly rate ($6.00/hr)
Anonymous
December 12, 2004 12:16:13 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

On Fri, 10 Dec 2004 13:10:48 -0500, "Manuel" <My@NoMailLand.com>
wrotC:D RIVE_E

>Nobody even dreamed of charging a monthly fee for a game until EQ1 came out.

Other than the people making Ultima Online, Gemstone, Dragonquest,
Meridian 59, that even earlier one which was on that online service
that totally tanked...you know what I mean...

It amazes me how clueless people are about the history of their own
medium.

(Some of the above may have charged HOURLY fees, instead. I know UO
was monthly. But all were "pay to play".)
*----------------------------------------------------*
Evolution doesn't take prisoners:Lizard
"I've heard of this thing men call 'empathy', but I've never
once been afflicted with it, thanks the Gods." Bruno The Bandit
http://www.mrlizard.com
Anonymous
December 12, 2004 12:16:36 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

On Fri, 10 Dec 2004 18:33:09 GMT, Bruce Smith <misterbe@sprynet.com>
wrotC:D RIVE_E

>(Raise your hand if you're a true trailblazer that
>even knows what the heck things like CI$ and
>GEnie even were).

Hand riased!

Played Kesmai on CI$. And the original NWN on AOL.
*----------------------------------------------------*
Evolution doesn't take prisoners:Lizard
"I've heard of this thing men call 'empathy', but I've never
once been afflicted with it, thanks the Gods." Bruno The Bandit
http://www.mrlizard.com
Anonymous
December 12, 2004 11:18:19 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

"Wayne Rasmussen" <XvirtualDoNotSpamMe@gomonarch.com> wrote in message
news:41BC94E0.A389DD5C@gomonarch.com...
>
>


*snip stupid back and forth argument that is degenerating rapidly*


>
> So should you get unlimited numbers of slots? If there should be a limit
how many is the limit?

One for each class combination which offers a distinct game experience.

There are twenty four unique classes in EQ2. As is, you only get to
experience four of them, unless you wish to constantly delete and recreate
your characters, in most cases never reaching the levels where they become
thier own unique class.

If they want to divide it so that no more than 4 are on each server that's one
thing. But only four across all servers is insane.


--
Davian - Wood Elf Warrior on Guk
Talynne - Half Elf Rogue on Guk
Dearic - Dwarven Shaman on Guk
Anonymous
December 12, 2004 11:18:20 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

You avoided a question I asked and didn't even bother to copy it.


Davian wrote:

> "Wayne Rasmussen" <XvirtualDoNotSpamMe@gomonarch.com> wrote in message
> news:41BC94E0.A389DD5C@gomonarch.com...
> >
> >
>
> *snip stupid back and forth argument that is degenerating rapidly*
>
> >
> > So should you get unlimited numbers of slots? If there should be a limit
> how many is the limit?
>
> One for each class combination which offers a distinct game experience.
>
> There are twenty four unique classes in EQ2. As is, you only get to
> experience four of them, unless you wish to constantly delete and recreate
> your characters, in most cases never reaching the levels where they become
> thier own unique class.
>
> If they want to divide it so that no more than 4 are on each server that's one
> thing. But only four across all servers is insane.
>
> --
> Davian - Wood Elf Warrior on Guk
> Talynne - Half Elf Rogue on Guk
> Dearic - Dwarven Shaman on Guk
December 12, 2004 11:52:54 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

In article <41BCAFA2.6FDE61A@gomonarch.com>,
XvirtualDoNotSpamMe@gomonarch.com says...
> You avoided a question I asked and didn't even bother to copy it.

1) It was a different responder.
2) You neglected to address what he did respond to, making your comment
pretty hypocritical.
December 13, 2004 12:09:15 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

In article <41BC94E0.A389DD5C@gomonarch.com>,
XvirtualDoNotSpamMe@gomonarch.com says...
>
>
> 42 wrote:
>
> > In article <41B8F6DD.5BF911CE@gomonarch.com>,
> > XvirtualDoNotSpamMe@gomonarch.com says...
> > >
> > >
> > > 42 wrote:
> > >
> > > > In article <41B8D058.F45F488B@gomonarch.com>,
> > > > XvirtualDoNotSpamMe@gomonarch.com says...
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Richard Wingrove wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > According to this post on the official forums:
> > > > > > http://eqiiforums.station.sony.com/eq2/board/message?bo...
> > > > > >
> > > > > > you can get an extra four slots by signing up for a Station Access subscription
> > > > > > ($21.99 p/m), which also gets you all the other games from SOE.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > So everyone who predicted this, you were right - they're trying to get
> > > > > > alt-oholics to fork out more cash.
> > > > >
> > > > > Good for them! I had a lot of Alts in CoH and I think it is reasonable to charge for them. If I
> > > > > get 4 gallons of gas at the gas station and later want 4 more, I shouldn't get them for free.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > Suppose I buy a used car at the dealer with 4 gallons of gas in it for
> > > > $2000.00. If I want 4 more gallons of gas should I have to pay another
> > > > 1500.00?
> > >
> > > No.
> >
> > Why not? its the same thing.
>
> I buy gas a gallaon at a time, you could pay extra of extra slots if they decide to offer such a plan.

Paying X for the EQ2 box includes the ability to make 20+ classes, the
13bucks subscription includes the content for each of those 20+
classes... your paying for all that content, but your prevented from
using it. Unless you *double* your payment.


> >
> >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Perhaps you think we should only get 4 bank slots, with the option of
> > > > paying $6/mo for another 4? Or perhaps our game banks can only hold a
> > > > maxium of 999 coins, with the option of paying another $2/mo for the
> > > > ability to hold 9999. Or perhaps a limit of 2 people on your friends
> > > > list, with the ability to add 5 more for $1/mo. Perhaps characters
> > > > should only be an adventurer OR an artisan... unless you pay another
> > > > $3/mo to make your character able to do both? Perhaps, you should only
> > > > be able to make good OR evil characters without a nominal upcharge of
> > > > $5/mo to double the amount of 'content' you get to see.
> > >
> > > Sure why not. If they character slots have no value people will not pay for them. IF they do have
> > > value, then naturally the concept will prove it's worth!
> >
> > Ah I see. Well I disagree completely, and think they are each idiotic
> > suggestions. Not everything that has value should cost extra.
>
> You can think whatever you like, you don't matter to me at all. If something has a value someone somewhere
> at sometime will try to charge for it.

Doesn't make it right. I presume you enjoy living; that life has value
to you? would you pay someone 500 bucks a week not to shoot you?


> >
> >
> > And charging 75% the base cost for a nominal value add is even more
> > ridiculous.
>
> So should you get unlimited numbers of slots?

Did I say that? No, I didn't.

> If there should be a limit how many is the limit?

Ideally enough to enjoy all the options the game has to offer. (ie one
for each distinct class would suffice as a minimum.)

> What is a
> player wants double that limit, how much should that cost him?

I don't much care. Once the basic package comes with a reasonable value,
I don't much care what they tack on as extras because I won't need them.

They're selling a car and charging you extra for priviledge of using
your trunk. I don't care how much they charge for a trailer but I expect
to use the trunk for free.




> >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > I bought everquest the game, and I pay a subscription to access it.
> > > > Period. I shouldn't have to shell out an additional monthly fee for
> > > > every feature in the game i want to use. Trying more than 4 of the 40+
> > > > options shouldn't require spending a boat load of cash extra.
> > >
> > > Vote with your money and leave or pay out the $$ for it.
> >
> > I did. You'll note I -haven't- bought EQ2 yet. And won't until I'm
> > satisfied with the value.
>
> I don't believe it will ever be worth your value.

That's a stretch. I'm not asking for much. Enough character slots to
play all the paths the game has to offer is not that much.

> >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > HD space is cheap. I don't need unlimited characters. Howabout a maximum
> > > > of 50. Lets go nuts and say that needs 1GB of space. (Which is utterly
> > > > ridiculous... I'd be willing to spend 50c/mo to up the number of slots
> > > > from 4 to 50. And I'd still be paying far more than its worth.
> > >
> > > SO you agree that some fee for more characters is worth now a price has to be settled on!
> >
> > No. My point was they were ripping you off huge.
>
> Listen you don't get to tell me that. I choose that if I want to and I do not feel ripped off.

Its amazing how people will put blinders in front of their own eyes to
justify their own purchases. Enjoy your extra character slots.
Anonymous
December 13, 2004 12:44:09 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

Wayne Rasmussen wrote:
> You avoided a question I asked and didn't even bother to copy it.
>
You top posted.
Anonymous
December 13, 2004 3:56:32 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

Wayne Rasmussen <XvirtualDoNotSpamMe@gomonarch.com> wrote:
>
>
> Like that is going to bother me son. I have been on the Internet longer than yo
> u
> have so nice try.

And yet you top post *and* can't set your line length right.

Slow learner, eh?
December 13, 2004 4:24:49 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

42 wrote:

>> So should you get unlimited numbers of slots?
>
> Did I say that? No, I didn't.
>
>> If there should be a limit how many is the limit?
>
> Ideally enough to enjoy all the options the game has to offer. (ie one
> for each distinct class would suffice as a minimum.)

There's *already* enough to enjoy all the options the
game has to offer. All that's *required* is one slot.
You're the one who doesn't want to delete the old
character, after all -- you CAN play EVERY race &
class combo if you're willing to do that. Even better,
you have TWO -- so you can even create a new one
and twink it. With four you can even do that for each
city...

Yes, I'd prefer more slots. But the argument you can't
enjoy the full game without them isn't based on any
real requirement...
Anonymous
December 13, 2004 5:37:17 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

"Wolfie" <dbgbdwolf@gte.net> wrote in message
news:Bb6vd.156351$6w6.24093@tornado.tampabay.rr.com...
> Yes, I'd prefer more slots. But the argument you can't
> enjoy the full game without them isn't based on any
> real requirement...
>
>
I don't like the tradeskill interdependency at the moment - having
additional slots would certainly help out.
Six would be nice =)
Anonymous
December 13, 2004 5:37:18 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

On Mon, 13 Dec 2004 02:37:17 GMT, "Pamela Carlton"
<lambchop@whocareswhere.com> wrote:

>
>"Wolfie" <dbgbdwolf@gte.net> wrote in message
>news:Bb6vd.156351$6w6.24093@tornado.tampabay.rr.com...
>> Yes, I'd prefer more slots. But the argument you can't
>> enjoy the full game without them isn't based on any
>> real requirement...
>>
>>
>I don't like the tradeskill interdependency at the moment - having
>additional slots would certainly help out.
>Six would be nice =)

The interdependency is a little too hefty, yeah. Some interdependency
is good, but they go overboard.

--
Dark Tyger

Sympathy for the retailer:
http://www.actsofgord.com/index.html
"Door's to your left" -Gord
(I have no association with this site. Just thought it was funny as hell)

Protect free speech: http://stopfcc.com/
Anonymous
December 13, 2004 6:03:29 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

"Wolfie" <dbgbdwolf@gte.net> wrote in message
news:Bb6vd.156351$6w6.24093@tornado.tampabay.rr.com...
> 42 wrote:
>
> >> So should you get unlimited numbers of slots?
> >
> > Did I say that? No, I didn't.
> >
> >> If there should be a limit how many is the limit?
> >
> > Ideally enough to enjoy all the options the game has to offer. (ie one
> > for each distinct class would suffice as a minimum.)
>
> There's *already* enough to enjoy all the options the
> game has to offer. All that's *required* is one slot.

Not good enough. If you want to play that way, fine. I don't.

> You're the one who doesn't want to delete the old
> character, after all -- you CAN play EVERY race &
> class combo if you're willing to do that. Even better,
> you have TWO -- so you can even create a new one
> and twink it. With four you can even do that for each
> city...
>

In a game that takes several hundred hours of playtime to even *get* to your
final class, and several thousand hours to fully explore it, asking a player
to start from the beginning every time they want to take a break and try one
of the other classes is completely unacceptable.

> Yes, I'd prefer more slots. But the argument you can't
> enjoy the full game without them isn't based on any
> real requirement...

It is for me. I don't have the time or the inclination to restart every
time.

It's a poor business decision. That it's costing them sales already. For
myself, it may not have cost them the original sale, but it will still have an
impact. The end result is going to be that once I'm tired of playing my
first four characters, I'm most likely going to leave for the next game. For
Sony this is still a bad thing. They need to keep players long enough for
them to form long term friendships. Because that's what keeps people paying
their monthly fees and buying each expansion as it comes out.

Considering that the costs of offering additional character slots on each
account are almost nothing, I can't see what they could possibly think to gain
from this. Other than perhaps the mistaken belief that a significant number
of people will buy second accounts so they don't have to delete their
characters. I don't know about you, but for me that's even less likely than
deciding to delete my characters, change classes and play again.


--
Davian - Wood Elf Warrior on Guk
Talynne - Half Elf Rogue on Guk
Dearic - Dwarven Shaman on Guk
Anonymous
December 13, 2004 8:44:58 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

In article <Bb6vd.156351$6w6.24093@tornado.tampabay.rr.com>, Wolfie wrote:
> Yes, I'd prefer more slots. But the argument you can't enjoy the full
> game without them isn't based on any real requirement...

One good character to play, one evil character to play, one good character
to be a vendor, and one evil character to be a vendor. That uses all your
slots.

And then there are those of us who knew people from EQ1, and they ended up
on different servers. I could consume 4 slots just trying to get one
character on each server where people I know from EQ1 and want to play with
ended up.

--
--Tim Smith
December 13, 2004 10:36:05 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

Davian wrote:

> In a game that takes several hundred hours of playtime to even *get*
> to your final class, and several thousand hours to fully explore it,
> asking a player to start from the beginning every time they want to
> take a break and try one of the other classes is completely
> unacceptable.

Uh, you have to start from the beginning anyway. You can't
start at level 20... And you have FOUR slots -- that means
you can twink, at least within the game's limits. The ONLY
impact it has is you can't leave alts sitting all over the place;
there's a "cost" associated with abandoning a character.
I don't have a lot of problem with that -- I deleted chars in
EQ1 once I decided I didn't care for the race/class too.

> Considering that the costs of offering additional character slots on
> each account are almost nothing, I can't see what they could possibly
> think to gain from this.

*shrug* Me either. But I think the argument "you can't enjoy
the game without more slots" is nonsense.

If anything, I'd say the decision to let you have more slots
if you pay more is a bad business decision -- they should
have kept it at four until they got the game running as is.
Now some tradeskillers won't have the forced interaction
they were looking for, the economy will be distorted by
more twinking, etc. I'd have let it run as is for a while,
then let everyone have more slots when Frogloks were
unlocked, and not charged for it.
Anonymous
December 13, 2004 8:03:24 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

On Sun, 12 Dec 2004 23:22:01 -0800, Dark Tyger
<darktiger@somewhere.net> wrote:

>On Mon, 13 Dec 2004 02:37:17 GMT, "Pamela Carlton"
><lambchop@whocareswhere.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>"Wolfie" <dbgbdwolf@gte.net> wrote in message
>>news:Bb6vd.156351$6w6.24093@tornado.tampabay.rr.com...
>>> Yes, I'd prefer more slots. But the argument you can't
>>> enjoy the full game without them isn't based on any
>>> real requirement...
>>>
>>>
>>I don't like the tradeskill interdependency at the moment - having
>>additional slots would certainly help out.
>>Six would be nice =)
>
>The interdependency is a little too hefty, yeah. Some interdependency
>is good, but they go overboard.

And it goes too deep, too.

For example, I need Iron Sheets to make Maple Strongboxes. Fair
enough, but the person making the Iron Sheets needs Eolith Temper to
make the sheets, so he, in turn, needs a scholar.

Hence my 2 alts. With my main I now have 1 of the three Crafting
types. Annoying, but necessary if you want to be able to craft at
your own speed, and don't want to be hanging around for a week to get
a component, or spend a fortune to buy them from the broker.

--

Bunnies aren't just cute like everybody supposes !
They got them hoppy legs and twitchy little noses !
And what's with all the carrots ?
What do they need such good eyesight for anyway ?
Bunnies ! Bunnies ! It must be BUNNIES !
Anonymous
December 13, 2004 9:31:29 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

42 <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in news:MPG.1c264f8b23f422ae989919@shawnews:

> In article <41BCAFA2.6FDE61A@gomonarch.com>,
> XvirtualDoNotSpamMe@gomonarch.com says...
>> You avoided a question I asked and didn't even bother to copy it.
>
> 1) It was a different responder.
> 2) You neglected to address what he did respond to, making your comment
> pretty hypocritical.
>

and

3) You topposted.

--
On Erollisi Marr in <Sanctuary of Marr>
Ancient Graeme Faelban, Barbarian Prophet of 69 seasons

On Steamfont in <Bane of Evil>
Graeme, 17 Dwarven Shaman, 14 Scholar
Anonymous
December 13, 2004 9:37:37 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

Mark Morrison <drdpikeuk@aol.com> wrote in
news:7jirr0lgmdj4i6qd4b5i5i82juovlj4jkt@4ax.com:

> On Sun, 12 Dec 2004 23:22:01 -0800, Dark Tyger
> <darktiger@somewhere.net> wrote:
>
>>On Mon, 13 Dec 2004 02:37:17 GMT, "Pamela Carlton"
>><lambchop@whocareswhere.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>"Wolfie" <dbgbdwolf@gte.net> wrote in message
>>>news:Bb6vd.156351$6w6.24093@tornado.tampabay.rr.com...
>>>> Yes, I'd prefer more slots. But the argument you can't
>>>> enjoy the full game without them isn't based on any
>>>> real requirement...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>I don't like the tradeskill interdependency at the moment - having
>>>additional slots would certainly help out.
>>>Six would be nice =)
>>
>>The interdependency is a little too hefty, yeah. Some interdependency
>>is good, but they go overboard.
>
> And it goes too deep, too.
>
> For example, I need Iron Sheets to make Maple Strongboxes. Fair
> enough, but the person making the Iron Sheets needs Eolith Temper to
> make the sheets, so he, in turn, needs a scholar.
>
> Hence my 2 alts. With my main I now have 1 of the three Crafting
> types. Annoying, but necessary if you want to be able to craft at
> your own speed, and don't want to be hanging around for a week to get
> a component, or spend a fortune to buy them from the broker.
>

Well, for the tier 2 stuff, you currently can do it all on one character
as far as I know. You can learn the level 10 recipes for other
tradeskill archetypes, which is what is required to make the
subcomponents that I have had a need for so far. In particular, I am a
Scholar, and I have learned the level 10 recipes for making my own paper
and quills so that I can make the tier 2 spells and runes. I am
expecting that this will not hold true for tier 3 however, and am
expecting eventually that you will need someone in each of the sub
classes in order to actually make the high end stuff, but, I don't know
yet.

--
On Erollisi Marr in <Sanctuary of Marr>
Ancient Graeme Faelban, Barbarian Prophet of 69 seasons

On Steamfont in <Bane of Evil>
Graeme, 17 Dwarven Shaman, 14 Scholar
Anonymous
December 14, 2004 10:48:06 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

On the calendar, in the box marked 12/13/2004 10:37 AM ^ Graeme Faelban
scratched:
>
> Well, for the tier 2 stuff, you currently can do it all on one character
> as far as I know. You can learn the level 10 recipes for other
> tradeskill archetypes, which is what is required to make the
> subcomponents that I have had a need for so far. In particular, I am a
> Scholar, and I have learned the level 10 recipes for making my own paper
> and quills so that I can make the tier 2 spells and runes. I am
> expecting that this will not hold true for tier 3 however, and am
> expecting eventually that you will need someone in each of the sub
> classes in order to actually make the high end stuff, but, I don't know
> yet.
>

That was a bug and is no longer possible. It's presumed that
eventually, they'll get around to removing the non-class specific
recipes from everyone's recipe books.

Inyidd
--
Nyarlathotep casts a spell
Anonymous
December 14, 2004 4:39:40 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

"Davian" <davian@nospammindspring.com> wrote in message news:fI1vd.1327
> "Wayne Rasmussen" <XvirtualDoNotSpamMe@gomonarch.com> wrote in > >
> > So should you get unlimited numbers of slots? If there should be a
limit
> how many is the limit?
>
> One for each class combination which offers a distinct game experience.
>
> There are twenty four unique classes in EQ2. As is, you only get to
> experience four of them, unless you wish to constantly delete and recreate
> your characters, in most cases never reaching the levels where they become
> thier own unique class.
>
> If they want to divide it so that no more than 4 are on each server that's
one
> thing. But only four across all servers is insane.

So you're wanting a minimum of 216 slots? They'll need to bring more
servers online if you are limiting it to 4 per server.
!