- Created by Harakiri on Dec 24, 2016 -

The second Auditor Test has started, everyone who already participated in the first phase has been automatically added. We leave the Tutorial grounds for a more hands on experience in this phase.

Auditors will have access to the new Phase 2 forum, to get started please follow this .

If you have not been part of the first Auditor phase, do not worry - I will add more people over time. The server has less raw power than your mobile device (because we don't need much) so I'm carefully watching the load first. People who are seriously interested in testing can send me a PM with the subject Auditor and they might be added immediately.

No matter if you have been chosen or not for now, eqclassic.org wishes everyone a Merry Christmas!

[ img ]

- Created by Harakiri on Feb 6, 2014 -

There wasn't much information available about our first testing phase.
Well, this is about to change!

The first Auditor Phase was successfully held from April to end of June 2013.
About 100 users were invited to participate in the first testing stage. The group consisted mostly of forum members who had earned auditor status http://www.eqclassic.org/autism.php.

I'm not going into details about the test playground, but there is a sample video by one of our members here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_UGdDEWDd00

The test server stability was excellent, even Yeahlight and me were surprised that we only had 2 crashes in the 3 month time-frame, which only happen right at the beginning btw. This in itself is evidence enough that after years of development without external testing, the coding quality produced for EQC is more than just good.

More developers doesn't necessarily mean more stable and complete code, if you don't understand the bigger picture and only part of a server mechanic, you are more likely to break things or implement it wrong. I know for people without development background this is not easy to understand, developing a server is not like building a house were you just add more workers and it will somehow be done quicker and not fall apart. A meal will also not cook faster if you just add more cooks.

Now for some statistics.

About 50 Users reported in total over 400 issues.
About 200 issues were valid and almost all have been fixed now.

6 Testers reported about 50% of the valid issues. These reported at least 10 issues each, and the No #1 reported 25 valid issues.

Here is a top 10 list of *valid* issues reported

| TreatsEQ     |    25 |
| fatal_error  |    18 |
| adeptation   |    15 |
| Loki         |    14 |
| Naeadil      |    14 |
| Beledric     |    10 |
| Deathrydar   |     9 |
| Tiiden       |     7 |
| Deattas      |     5 |
| Deantodd     |     5 |

Thanks to every tester and reporter, and especially to the above people - we were able to massively improve the server quality.

So, you are asking, what now ?

I have updated the Roadmap to reflect the current project status. As you can see a few things cannot be simply just implemented without knowing what needs exactly to be done.

This is a reoccurring theme also for fixing issues, most of the time is spent on actual research and not on development. When you see the issues that were resolved, significantly more time went into verifying that the reported issue is valid and should be implemented in that way.

BTW: Since a few people still haven't grasped it, as long as I didn't make a statement regarding this project - any reports are probably false. Additionally, any posts with my name in the subject will most likely not be read by me.

- Created by Yeahlight on Oct 19, 2013 -

Ownership of everything EQClassic related has been transferred to Harakiri. From this point forward, I cannot guarantee communication under my name as legitimate, but you may always verify messages, requests, etc. by sending me an e-mail at Yeahlight@gmail.com.

All private messages have been purged from the database. If you really need something from a past private message, feel free to contact me to recover it.

- Created by Yeahlight on Oct 15, 2013 -

The feedback I have received in private (PM, e-mail, etc.) has been downright appalling--truly shameful remarks. I have never had the displeasure of leading so many entitled individuals and I am utterly embarrassed to be associated with this community.

If he wishes to continue tolerating your nonsense, I am leaving things to Harakiri. If you have anything terribly important you want to save from private messages, back them up now; I will be nuking them prior to transferring the forum database.

Regardless of what Harakiri decides to do, if you think I am about to hand over my work to someone else, think again.

To the dozen or so people I would have loved to create a server for, I am truly sorry I will not be able to deliver one.

- Created by Yeahlight on Jul 15, 2013 -

Many of you have recently reached out to me asking about the project's status, so I might as well take the time to address everyone.

Testing started on April 5th and I recently closed it on July 9th. The testing environment was very small, so our testers simply exhausted the content (I was only expecting the content to keep them busy for three or four weeks). I have recently become very busy at work, so I am not yet sure when the next testing phase will begin.

We did discover a few key things from this first testing phase. Starting with the bad, roughly 10% of users experienced an issue with the UDP/IP handshaking stage (this stage occurs when connecting to the server and while zoning). The severity of this issue ranged from an occasional problem to completely preventing the connection. We do not yet have enough data to say this for certain, but this seems to be a problem with recovering from packet loss during the handshaking stage (a number of these users were connecting through hotspots and other wireless connections). We have also experienced a number of issues with running the client under Windows 8, but I believe most of these have been resolved by now. On the plus side, we learned that our work is unbelievably stable. In the 2,250+ hours the server was online, we only experienced two crashes, both of which were due to silly mistakes (an infinite loop in the forage routine and a race condition in the PC trading routine). This level of stability for software that was never tested in the past is just absurd and we are really happy about that.

As some of you already know, I reached out to SoE in February with a partnership proposal, which exchanged full liability and monthly subscriptions for the rights to possess and distribute their intellectual property (IP). Although the deal was entirely in their favor (I would have essentially been an unpaid slave), they ultimately said no. I believe I have made it quite clear in the past how critical legitimate data is to me (there is no close; you either have it or you don't), so it should come as no surprise when I say I have zero interest in hosting a server without it. Plus, despite what so many others will have you believe, it is unlawful to distribute SoE's IP without their consent--you cannot argue against this.

Although I was not expecting SoE to accept my proposal, I was relying on them doing so. At this point, my only option for this project is to create an original content server, but I doubt I will have the motivation to do so. While I refuse to be involved with any classic-era content server, this does not mean one cannot exist under our work.

- Created by Yeahlight on Jun 1, 2013 -

The faction reward drawings have been retired. Congratulations to all of the past winners.

EQClassic.org is in no way affiliated with Sony, Sony Online Entertainment or Verant Interactive
EverQuest, The Ruins of Kunark and The Scars of Velious are registered trademarks of Sony Online Entertainment LLC
All material contained herein is copyright to their respective artists