Stacking ZP multistages?

Questions and Comments
#1

This has probably already been addressed somewhere in regards to the earlier techs but I couldn’t find anything on the forum when I searched for it…

So my question is if it’s a bad idea to stack ZP multistages? I remember reading somewhere that the density of the subs themselves matter, like Dragon Reborn would be difficult since it’s so dense and demanding.

Personally I am thinking of (some time in the future) stacking 2 of the three: EoG and/or QL, and/or Alchemist, and then maybe one more solo title. I believe those titles are a bit ‘lighter’ than DR or Khan or other major titles like Emperor, but I’d like to know what to expect before committing to a new multistage :slight_smile:

Would a stack with 2 multistage ZP + one more title be too demanding to run? (max 3 titles per stack, obviously.) Or maybe it’s too early to tell as the ms zp versions are fairly new?

3 Likes
Main Disc. Thread - Quintessence: Zero Point (Experimental) (Part 2)
#2

I was thinking this regarding alchemist

I would like to stack the first 3 stages in one cycle is it possible ?

2 Likes
#3

Wow, that’s… mind blowing. :grinning_face_with_smiling_eyes: Now I wonder too if that’s possible :joy:

1 Like
#4

I don’t know the official answer but my assumption would be that it would depend on the stages you’re running, and which sub.

If we take EOG as an example, I wouldn’t run the first stage with another stage because of the healing element of ST1, but I could conceivably run ST2 and ST3 as they focus on purpose and actualizing said-purpose.

Now if we take EF as an example, I don’t see why there would be a problem in running ST1 2 and 3 at the same time, since all 3 are conducive to each other’s success.

1 Like
#5

Won’t lie, I already plan to do this with my next stack (whenever EOG comes out) so I can stack mogul, rich and eog st4 with the cycle after that. Unless otherwise stated I see it as a good strategy but it’ll all depend on the individual. May not be a good thing to try for newcomers.

2 Likes
#6

It does indeed sounds reasonable that some stages from the same multistage can work in tandem, while others are best to run on their own - but it is an intriguing idea if parts of it can be stacked.

I guess it’s difficult to say right now… but for me I was thinking (for example) of running QL and Alchemist ST 1 in tandem, and then stage 2, and so on until finished, but compressing one program could could work too… unless it causes overexposure for that ‘area’ of one’s development…

1 Like
#7

I’ve done a few days of DR4 and Khan4. It seems ok

2 Likes
#8

I’ll answer with another question. What’s a good reason not follow the instructions of the people who created the subs because they know better than anyone how their products work?

2 Likes
#9

I don’t know the instructions of the Multi stagers zp . If there is a support article regarding multistage zp . I will follow it it’s okay :slightly_smiling_face:
That’s why this thread started .

1 Like
#10

instructions shminstructions. These are recommendations :wink:

1 Like
#11

For multi stagers, run one stage at a time until you feel ready to go to the next stage. Those stages build on each other. If you run stage 1 for a month or so and you feel ready to move to stage 2 and you want to keep on running stage 1 a bit more, I can understand that. But running 3 stages at the same time is just self sabotage, in my opinion. And you would be also exposing yourself to severe reconciliation. For example, if you’re running EoG, stage 1 is a clearing stage. Stage 2 is a vision and skills affirming stage. Stage 3 is when the sub helps you see and take advantage of money opportunities. How can stage 3 be possible if you haven’t cleared limiting beliefs at stage 1 and affirmed your vision at stage 2? You would just be asking for a tremendous amount of reconciliation, slow progress and possibly quitting all together. All those multi stagers have their internal progression logic. It’s better and safer if you just run them one by one. Remember that it’s a marathon not a sprint.

5 Likes
#12

I completely agree with what you said . And I used this way with Qv2 build and before . But maybe there is a new instructions for the ZP build .

1 Like
#13

The only thing different with ZP is that you run each stage for 45 days. Which means 21 days twice and with the washout period, that’s 45 days. Then move on to the next stage.

2 Likes
#14

ZP-multis are still new territory, and like always overdoing it is always a bad idea - even though we always want to :grinning:

Some stages might have more synergy than others, but going through the building stages first and then letting them sink in seems to be the prudent thing to do…

But what about running stage 1 of 2-3 different multistages at the same time, and then stage 2, and so on? Would it be too much to handle?

Also, would running 2 MS titles (of the same stages) and then add LB or sanguine to smooth things out be a viable stack?

#15

I’m trying to figure out if this is feasible or even a good idea… I want to try to use this unofficial listening pattern so that I can cram the stacks it into whole 3-week blocks and build upon that. My ADD and Autism demands it :sweat_smile:

So, the plan in theory is this:

Each ‘Stage’ or ‘Phase’ would have 2 different stacks that I run for 21 x 2 days. In this case one QL stack, and one EoG-Alchemist stack. Each stack would get a total of 40-ish days exposure with rest and washouts, and I’ve added one whole week of washout between stages. The idea is to use the same pattern for stage 3 and 4 for all three multistages.

This leaves some room for additional titles to run with the stacks, and personally I am considering CFW, LB, or Sanguine to smooth things out, counter recon and to lift spirits. I might add DRst4 somewhere, or titles geared towards specific purposes… And it might even be a good idea to run QL solo with the (to come?) experimental recon-counter scripting?

I also get the feeling that QL is denser than EoG/Alchemist since it also has physical/neural regeneration scripting in it, and is thus better suited in a ‘lighter’ stack. Is this accurate?

image
image626×541 8.61 KB

Would this be fine, or am I trying to hard and will risk overexposure? Will Saint and Fire be angry with me? :sweat_smile: I’m thinking I can always drop any ‘additional’ subs and focus only on the MS-titles if need be.

I’ve also been thinking about whether it would be more beneficial to focus on just a single or perhaps only two multistage titles, and then use other major titles to cover the other areas. One example would be to run QL-Alchemist, and then add solo-titles geared towards wealth like AM, RICH, and so on so that I can make progress in that area as well, despite dropping the multistage.

What do you guys think? Thoughts, ideas, critique? Yay, Nay, What the Hell? All feedback is welcome since this is still somewhat uncharted waters. :grinning:

1 Like
#16

Probably not but it’s going to be awkward for you to ask for support or advice from them if anything goes wrong.

2 Likes
#17

Yeah haha I know. Which is why I want to lift the idea and get feedback before I attempt any shenanigans :sweat_smile:

1 Like
#18

I’m currently running the Billion schedule actually. I think using 2 subs is the best way for that pattern, as it doesn’t lead to significant exposure. @Billions himself has said that 1/2 subs is the best stack for this kind of pattern.

You can risk overexposure but the entire idea is that even if you listen to 2 subs a day for the entire week, the extra day of washout in the weekend is supposed to lighten the load on your psyche.

For me personally, I’ve been experimenting with running 3 subs a day on this pattern and not gonna lie, it’s heavy. I’m currently on my washout period so I’m going to see what kind of results I get during the next few days. I’m looking into modifying the listening pattern in the next schedule, either I’m going to run Sub A+B on Monday, B+C on Wednesday and C+A on Friday, or I’m going to stick to 3 subs a day but only run ABC on Monday and Friday, giving me a 3 day break in the middle of the week, which technically can qualify as a washout (a weekly washout if you will). I’m leaning towards the former to be honest.

I also have plans to start QL in a couple of months, and I suspect that the load will be significant. I’m thinking of only running a 2 sub stack at that point but to be honest, I haven’t decided yet. It’s so hard to run 2 subs when you have so many great options.

3 Likes
#19

Currently on a washout. Next cycle im going to experiment with the following listening pattern… a 3 day washout every 2 weeks.

Monday, Wednesday, Friday, Sunday, Tuesday, Thursday, Rest rest rest.

I’m super sensitive to subs and am basically trying to create as little recon as possible, so this schedule meets a lot of good parts

  • consistent 1 day on 1 day off schedule.
  • easy to follow
  • listen to subs 2.5x a week
  • 3 day washout every 2 week
  • can be used with any number of subs, 1, 2, or 3 so long as you dont listen to all 3 in one day
  • more consistent than a mwf schedule in terms of constant inflow.
  • less exposure overall (which is a pro, or a con, depending on you)
5 Likes
Main Disc. Thread - Ascension Chamber ZP: Tips, Tricks Strategies
The start to the Beginning
#20

While I’m not super sensitive to subs (or at least I want to believe so haha :sweat_smile: ) I understand less is better in regards to integration, but the official listening pattern is a bit complicated for my adhd brain to keep track on so your way really works great. And sticking it to calendar weeks helps with the flow as well as tempering myself and not overindulge with the subs.

Let us know how the next cycle turns out! :smiley: