Ice Giants camp

[adm5893]

There are three Ice Giants in Everfrost Peaks zone. One towards the back near the entrance of Permafrost Zone entrance and two further to the west; one in the north tower and one in the south tower.

Is there two "camps" one for the "Back" near Permafrost and the other for the "Front" for the two towers?

Or is there a total of three camps due to the area being considered outdoors.

[loramin]

There's player convention, and then there's server-mandated rule. Typically players treat all the giants, or at least the front two, as a single camp.

However, as an outdoor zone technically each player can only claim a single giant spawn ... IF there are three players all wanting to do ice giants at once.

See https://www.project1999.com/forums/showthread.php?t=325349

Open Outdoor Zones can be anything from Western Wastes, Karanas or West Commons. There are no staff recognized camps for this zone type outside of single spawn points. Examples of single spawn types might be Ocean of Tears Ancient Cyclops, Iceclad Ocean Stormfeather, or Qeynos Hills Hadden. Though, any single spawn point can be claimed, that is the only spawn you can hunt (if being contested). If you are to claim this point you must get aggro/First to Encounter (FTE) within a reasonable amount of time.

[Jimjam]

Almost any time I pass the giants they are being shared by 2 or more players. I assume soloing, but perhaps in a group with each player tending a spawn of their own.

[starkind]

Ya ppl do them for static afk pp. So they usually don't fight.

Red99 is where to go if you want all three.

[renegadeofunk]

I've noticed it's pretty rare that someone throws the book at me and demands to split the front giants, but it does happen once in a while. Like Loramin said they're technically separate camps.

[cd288]

Almost any time I pass the giants they are being shared by 2 or more players. I assume soloing, but perhaps in a group with each player tending a spawn of their own.

Yeah I agree almost never seen one person monopolizing all the giants. I feel like it’s pretty much convention that they are multiple camps

[Maliant]

Leveled my mage from 45-55 on IG camp. Such an awesome camp to simultaneously level a COTH mage while farming a shit ton of wort pots for your primary raider.

It’s a gentleman’s agreement, like most camps in EverQuest should be. When I was level 45 I could hardly do the one back giant. By the time I was level 52 or so I could pretty easily keep all three down but if someone ever showed up they’d always take the back one and I would message them when I was leaving and ask if they’d like the fronts.

In all that time I only had one bad experience where someone just blatantly attempted to steal the giants I was camping and a GM had to intervene. If someone really wants to lawyer quest they can claim one of the front giants as a camp and that is their right per server rules.

[Arvan]

On live i remember having a great time there sometimes even forming 2-3 man groups to down them. On p99 though it was polar opposite :( i had someone throw quite the tantrum in 2014 or so cause they were killing all 3 and didn’t want to share. It was slightly funny at least.

[Dulian]

I specifically spoke with a GM about this issue. I had the front two giants, and a mage rolled up and told me to pick one since he was taking the other. He certainly could have handled it better, but I reached out to a GM who informed me that each Ice Giant in Everfrost is a single camp.

[adm5893]

Thank you all for your feedback.

[Ghost of Starman]

On live i remember having a great time there sometimes even forming 2-3 man groups to down them. On p99 though it was polar opposite :( i had someone throw quite the tantrum in 2014 or so cause they were killing all 3 and didn’t want to share. It was slightly funny at least.

My favorite camp squabble was a few years back when someone tried to claim that they were camping every gnome in Sol A and were deadly serious about it attempting to petition.
That's the closest I've seen to someone believing they owned a whole zone.

[SantagarBrax]

However, as an outdoor zone technically each player can only claim a single giant spawn ... IF there are three players all wanting to do ice giants at once.

See https://www.project1999.com/forums/showthread.php?t=325349

Incorrect and only implemented due to the overwhelming population on Green at launch. Wasn't true in classic and certainly not true on Blue and in fact, is contrary to the very link provided posted by Rogean "You do not necessarily need to be at the spawn point to call it 'claimed' while it is uncontested, however, if someone else wishes to contest the 'camp' you do need to return to the 'camp' and maintain a presence at or very near the spawn(s) in order to hold it.."

For example: Specs in oasis is 1 camp, not 7 or 8. (forget # of mobs in the top of the tower) Considerate players often do share mobs not in close proximity or if there are more than they can handle, etc.

It's past time for GM's to revise this broken rule on Green and return to the real rules, as previously written and understood since EQ launch. We're teaching new Guides the wrong method.

[loramin]

We're teaching new Guides the wrong method.

You seem to be a little confused as to who makes the rules around here. Hint: it's not us players.

[SantagarBrax]

Not Classic and no longer relevant to why they implemented the rule. There's no reason to keep the ruling in place and no reason rules shouldn't adapt more towards a more classic experience, especially in this particular situation.

New Guides learning the wrong methods extends to players learning the wrong methods. It's not something to condone. Other players get rules changed all the time, no reason to be quiet when it no longer serves the original purpose.

[ickthas]

Not Classic and no longer relevant to why they implemented the rule. There's no reason to keep the ruling in place and no reason rules shouldn't adapt more towards a more classic experience, especially in this particular situation.

New Guides learning the wrong methods extends to players learning the wrong methods. It's not something to condone. Other players get rules changed all the time, no reason to be quiet when it no longer serves the original purpose.

It does serve a purpose though. It prevents monopolization of spawns by high level players. A level 60 farming cash can easily hold down those three giants, but a level 45 *should* get a shot at at least one. Similar thing for treants in SK.

[cd288]

Incorrect and only implemented due to the overwhelming population on Green at launch. Wasn't true in classic and certainly not true on Blue and in fact, is contrary to the very link provided posted by Rogean "You do not necessarily need to be at the spawn point to call it 'claimed' while it is uncontested, however, if someone else wishes to contest the 'camp' you do need to return to the 'camp' and maintain a presence at or very near the spawn(s) in order to hold it.."

For example: Specs in oasis is 1 camp, not 7 or 8. (forget # of mobs in the top of the tower) Considerate players often do share mobs not in close proximity or if there are more than they can handle, etc.

It's past time for GM's to revise this broken rule on Green and return to the real rules, as previously written and understood since EQ launch. We're teaching new Guides the wrong method.

You’re actually wrong. The one spawn outdoor thing was a rule well before Green ever existed.

You’re right that most players will respect the specs as one camp. However they don’t HAVE to. Technically someone could come and claim one of the spawns as theirs if they wanted to

[SantagarBrax]

cd288, you say a lot of incorrect information on these forums, at an alarming rate too. Everyone should take anything you have to say with a grain of salt.

[cd288]

cd288, you say a lot of incorrect information on these forums, at an alarming rate too. Everyone should take anything you have to say with a grain of salt.

The one spawn outdoors was a rule on Blue before Green existed. It’s been that way for quite awhile bubs. Sorry it upsets you

[Ripqozko]

cd288, you say a lot of incorrect information on these forums, at an alarming rate too. Everyone should take anything you have to say with a grain of salt.

hes correct, this pre dated green the 1 outdoor spawn rule.

[Toxigen]

Sorry you don't got wort pots hope this helps?

[Ananka]

It is three separate camps and anyone saying different is being greedy. When there's only 1 or 2 players there, great, take two or all three but in my experience it's always been handled really nicely when the third person arrives. I always ask very nicely if there's a spot free when I'm the third person arriving and I've never had a problem. If there's a fourth or more they ask each individually to be put on a list. I throw the odd buff like sow on other classes and tell people hey you can take the next couple spawns due to an urgent quick afk if they want to. It's been a nice experience there.

[Valakut]

FWIW seafuries were always the same protocol as ice giants and look what happened to seafuries because all the big brain VP farmers needed plat for recharges.

dont trust anyone on the subject except

Guide Menden (https://www.project1999.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2903516&postcount=12%7C)

[Menden]

FWIW seafuries were always the same protocol as ice giants and look what happened to seafuries because all the big brain VP farmers needed plat for recharges.

dont trust anyone on the subject except

Guide Menden (https://www.project1999.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2903516&postcount=12%7C)

[evilwizard]

So does this mean that when claiming a dungeon camp, you are allowed to pick a single room to camp but not all of the surrounding rooms - even if they're conventionally considered to be a part of the camp? e.g. frenzy in lguk typically includes all of the frogs outside up to the invis floor -- but someone could come in and say they're camping those frogs and the person at frenzy would have to choose bloodthirsty room OR the outside room?

[cd288]

So does this mean that when claiming a dungeon camp, you are allowed to pick a single room to camp but not all of the surrounding rooms - even if they're conventionally considered to be a part of the camp? e.g. frenzy in lguk typically includes all of the frogs outside up to the invis floor -- but someone could come in and say they're camping those frogs and the person at frenzy would have to choose bloodthirsty room OR the outside room?

No. The single spawn thing is for outdoor zones. Staff have stated dungeon camps work differently

[loramin]

So does this mean that when claiming a dungeon camp, you are allowed to pick a single room to camp but not all of the surrounding rooms - even if they're conventionally considered to be a part of the camp? e.g. frenzy in lguk typically includes all of the frogs outside up to the invis floor -- but someone could come in and say they're camping those frogs and the person at frenzy would have to choose bloodthirsty room OR the outside room?

No. The single spawn thing is for outdoor zones. Staff have stated dungeon camps work differently

While you are correct, the way they work differently is (basically) that instead of a single mob, you get a room. Technically it's not a room, it's "line of sight(LOS)/agro range" ... which in most cases will be a room.

This is why "the crypt" in Sebilis is technically considered five camps (the main room and the four sub-rooms) on Project 1999. It's incredibly unclassic, but the (all-volunteer) staff likes nice simple/consistent rules and doesn't want to make an exception for Crypt.

(Although they do make a few exceptions, eg. you don't have to have LOS to camp Sebilis King).

[cd288]

While you are correct, the way they work differently is (basically) that instead of a single mob, you get a room. Technically it's not a room, it's "line of sight(LOS)/agro range" ... which in most cases will be a room.

This is why "the crypt" in Sebilis is technically considered five camps (the main room and the four sub-rooms) on Project 1999. It's incredibly unclassic, but the (all-volunteer) staff likes nice simple/consistent rules and doesn't want to make an exception for Crypt.

(Although they do make a few exceptions, eg. you don't have to have LOS to camp Sebilis King).

What are you talking about I have never seen them once respond to a petition and say the crypt is separate camps. Anytime there’s been a dispute the original party gets the whole crypt

[Arvan]

What are you talking about I have never seen them once respond to a petition and say the crypt is separate camps. Anytime there’s been a dispute the original party gets the whole crypt

5 different guides will give you 5 different rulings welcome to p1999

[Snaggles]

Most people won’t petition to split crypt up into multiple camps because it’s barely tolerable as one entire camp. I think most of the sane people would prefer to leave than lawyerquest because it’s more efficient and there is a slim fear of setting a precident. That doesn’t mean it’s not possible. It’s technically four rooms…call dibs on a spawn inside a room is silly but an entire room is classic. It’s almost like four corners, a door, and a roof resemble a place one might “camp”.

[loramin]

What are you talking about I have never seen them once respond to a petition and say the crypt is separate camps. Anytime there’s been a dispute the original party gets the whole crypt

Inside dungeons you can potentially camp a single "camp" (typically a single room) instead of just 1 spawn point, but again the focus is on forcing players to share the content as much as possible. This is why Crypt in Seb is commonly considered a single camp by players, but if pressed the staff will let individual players camp individual rooms in it.

Pretty accurate.

The original posts were longer, and you can read the full exchange here (https://www.project1999.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2907068&postcount=48).

To be clear, Menden never actually says "yes Loramin is specifically correct about Crypt" (he just generally agrees with my post) ... but if you search the forum history you can absolutely find people complaining about Shaman soloing individual Crypt rooms.

[magnetaress]

All three ice giants r open on r99

Move to rnf.

Case closed.

[loramin]

5 different guides will give you 5 different rulings welcome to p1999

Well, and also the details matter. If the Shaman got to their individual room at 1AM when no one was on, and held it until 6AM when a group shows up, I don't think the GMs would let the group take the camp from them simply because they have more people.

But conversely if a group is holding Crypt down, and while they are doing one room they spend a bit too much time and another room respawns, so a Shaman (who happens to get there at the right time) takes it, I wouldn't be surprised to hear the GM say "they were holding down the camp, you didn't give them a reasonable amount of time, Crypt is still theirs".

[Chortles Snortles]

trust me i know what the GMs think
(lol)

[cd288]

Did you just quote a random comment of yours and then paste a Menden quote after it to make it look like you’re right

[loramin]

Did you just quote a random comment of yours and then paste a Menden quote after it to make it look like you’re right

As I already wrote:

The original posts were longer, and you can read the full exchange here (https://www.project1999.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2907068&postcount=48).

That link will take you to the post, and there's a link to the thread in the upper-right.

[Chortles Snortles]

https://i.imgur.com/g0TsZCO.gif