If LDoNs required only 1 person to activate, many soloers would be able to enjoy the game.

If the requirements were lowered, both my wife and I would reactivate our accounts and be back in the game, in LDoNs as a duo.

With EQ2 gearing instances to match the strength of the party, couldn't EQ1 do the same?

GIVE ME A REASON TO GO STATION-ACCESS!

No doubt - and what would it hurt?

It might actually make Everquest characters feel.... powerful.

This attitude is part of the problem.

Some stuff in a game need to be group only.  Some solo only.  Both needs to be fun and appeal to their respective player pools.  How can you attract soloers to a solo activity?  Giving the BEST solo rewards which make them the best soloers is the start.  As long as the best soloers needs to group, you won't have happy soloers.

Removing group content and making it solo is merely taking Bob's cloths and giving them to Jack.  They need a new set of cloths, not to share the same cloths  (althought sharing can be fun, depending with who and if at the same time)!

Part of the problem? Why? How?

I don't believe that just making a suggestion means that I'm calling for out-of-balance changes. There's already a slider on LDoNs. Why not slide it all the way down to solo-ability? You get less adventure points.

How difficult could that be? You have a scale of reward that still encourages grouping. But now you have a CHOICE that didn't exist before.

What's wrong with CHOICE?

Well...

The best grouper need to be someone who earn everything in group.  If you can be just as good in groups without grouping, this is wrong.

The best soloer need to be someone who earn everything in solo.  If folks can be good soloers without soloing this is wrong.

Making a mix cannot work as 1 side will only be leaning on the system to get an advantage.  But don't fear, EQ doesn't listen to me and they will either never adapt or do it like WoW.  Now LDoN is outdated and I guess what I say hardly matter.  However, the way you think to want to pull a system 1 side or another is part of the problem.  Soloers deserve their system, their hierarchy...and if they want to progress groupwise, then they need to group.

Giving group rewards to soloer is killing the grouping system and if you make it longer in solo, you also hinder solo by making it a slow progression.  Mixing everything is the way of the lazy devs.  Groupers need group gear, soloers need solo gear (and the same apply to Raid and PvP).

SWG is at its final stand.  They will try to survive until Christmas ie the TooW expansion.  Then depending on whether or not PS3 numbers look good or bad, they will either shut it down or it will live on in console. 

If I were a betting man, I would say it fails. 

SWG is at its final stand.  They will try to survive until Christmas ie the TooW expansion.  Then depending on whether or not PS3 numbers look good or bad, they will either shut it down or it will live on in console. 

If I were a betting man, I would say it fails. 

  Anofalye, any MMO, EQ included, should focus &/or encourage group play, but also having the ability to have a moderate soloable existence isn't terrible.  Sony(SOE) didn't care about customers complaining long ago about LFGing not being able to progress, because with no/little competition they didn't have to care.  That type of stagnant short-sighted vision is hurting now.  i agree there should definitely be a difference between raid-centric gear/items & solo, groupable gear/items.  i don't think anyone suggested that they should be same quality either.  However, with Sony's EQ's conning system not being accurate for today's game.  Dwindling populations, & the unbalanced levels/class issues as always.  There has, & will be, those better at soloing than others at certain points.  With Sony's EQ it's all about the gear!   For the example of the LDoNs, at one time they required (4) players.  Sony(SOE) reduced it to (3) later on.  & by grouping & disbanding it can even be played solo or partnered.  Omens tried a soloable Task system, i heard it wasn't really soloable as advertised & pretty much failed, but Sony(SOE) trying such a system shows that there was a need/desire for it ... that is if Sony(SOE) really wanted it to succeed.  A couple years ago at the FanFaire in New Orleans, around the time when Sony(SOE) was spouting that they wanted to hear from the customers/players/EQ community, many voiced about changes to LDoNs to where a Sony(SOE) employee stated that there would be no changes to the LDoNs.  Then again, DoN pretty much has the upgraded version of LDoNs.  So besides a game design issue it was maybe for marketing & $ value.  At this stage of EQ's tenure, having the option of solo LDoNs wont hurt the game nor unbalance the game further.  Rumor has it, drops were decreased anyway when Omens was released to 'persuade' more Omens' playing.  There could have to be some moderate retuning for the LDoNs, but all the tools seem to be already in place.  Another point i have to agree with Anofalye on is that it probably wont matter anyway, Sony(SOE) seems to have a deaf ear nowadays.  i still think Everquest could be a kick-ass movie too.

  Q the Monk, Veiled One residing, unofficial pet class of Sony's EQ     

Originally posted by jabez

SWG is at its final stand.  They will try to survive until Christmas ie the TooW expansion.  Then depending on whether or not PS3 numbers look good or bad, they will either shut it down or it will live on in console. 

If I were a betting man, I would say it fails. 

Originally posted by Tilden

If LDoNs required only 1 person to activate, many soloers would be able to enjoy the game.

If the requirements were lowered, both my wife and I would reactivate our accounts and be back in the game, in LDoNs as a duo.

With EQ2 gearing instances to match the strength of the party, couldn't EQ1 do the same?

GIVE ME A REASON TO GO STATION-ACCESS!