[Need Help ASAP] Lists and Lines For Camps

[TRiCiDE]

Hello, we are camping AC in OOT. There is a list, some people were on the list and logged out for like 30 to 1 hour. I thought they were gone, I was never told anything. Its my turn so it doesn't affect me, but they want me to make sure they are on the list. They sent logs showing themselves on the list earlier and said its the rules.

Can someone tell me the rules for this?

[Encroaching Death]

Hello, we are camping AC in OOT. There is a list, some people were on the list and logged out for like 30 to 1 hour. I thought they were gone, I was never told anything. Its my turn so it doesn't affect me, but they want me to make sure they are on the list. They sent logs showing themselves on the list earlier and said its the rules.

Can someone tell me the rules for this?

I've heard of people logging onto their alts as they waited in line, but I'm not sure about logging out.

Seems kinda suspect..

Menden: Unofficially speaking, AC camp, sure. If you are next at the list I would stay near by so the trade off can happen quickly. If the list keeper gets his spawn and leaves and you are not there, you can lose the camp

https://wiki.project1999.com/Rulings#Holding_a_Camp_While_AFK

[TRiCiDE]

I've heard of people logging onto their alts as they waited in line, but I'm not sure about logging out.

Seems kinda suspect..

Menden: Unofficially speaking, AC camp, sure. If you are next at the list I would stay near by so the trade off can happen quickly. If the list keeper gets his spawn and leaves and you are not there, you can lose the camp

https://wiki.project1999.com/Rulings#Holding_a_Camp_While_AFK

Thank you for the link.

[Swish]

Elf court declares its yours, they weren't online.

Players do that crazy thing of "bro I'll be on my level 6 wizard, his name is Soandso" - which isn't really in the spirit of any list.

[sajbert]

The AC camp is a player run community agreement, not official camp rules.

There is a queue list and the player that holds the camp after AC spawns is STILL by server rules the holder of the camp and can give it to anyone he likes, techically anyway. As long as the PH isn’t left up for an unreasonable amount of time you have no right to interfere. Typically players camping AC allow people on the list to play on their alts and when AC pops or they tire they invite players on the list to show up and take over as per the player community agreement. As for what happens if someone enters a player agreement and breaks it, I believe GMs won’t look favorably upon it.

I.e. you are wrong. It’s not your camp.

[sajbert]

Thank you for the link.

Note ”If he leaves” and ”can”. He basically says, if you can’t take over the camp in due time you can’t hold claim to the camp.

This is no different than someone camping anything else and giving it to their friend, it doesn’t matter if you were sitting there waiting for the camp.

[loramin]

the holder of the camp and can give it to anyone he likes, techically anyway.

As for what happens if someone enters a player agreement and breaks it, I believe GMs won’t look favorably upon it.

These two statements seem to be at odds. If you got the camp through a list, then giving it to whoever you want would seem to violate the agreement (that each person in the list gives it to the next).

[DeathsSilkyMist]

If they are logged out for more than like 10-15 mins, I say they lose their spot. That small grace period is just to account for disconnects or zone crashing. It isn't really the responsibility of the list keeper to constantly /w the people in the list and check on them like a babysitter.

If you are playing an alt, stay online so you can be contacted when it's your turn. Ideally you should just afk park your toon there, thats what I did for Stormfeather. You are simply increasing your risk of losing your spot otherwise. If you are offline for an hour, there is no way to know if you are even coming back.

Logs are easily manipulated, so that isn't really proof of anything. You would need to ask the previous list holder to be sure.

[sajbert]

These two statements seem to be at odds. If you got the camp through a list, then giving it to whoever you want would seem to violate the agreement (that each person in the list gives it to the next).

No, because when the agreement is that you can add your alt onto the list you’re adhering to the agreement by playing your alt and logging back on ready to be handed the camp by the former campholder.

The confusion here stems from that one as per server camp rules cannot claim to still hold a camp if they logged off. This is a different situation entirely, the camp holder is still online and is about to pass it to whomever he wants (in this case honoring the player agreement).

[Infectious]

No, because when the agreement is that you can add your alt onto the list you’re adhering to the agreement by playing your alt and logging back on ready to be handed the camp by the former campholder.

The confusion here stems from that one as per server camp rules cannot claim to still hold a camp if they logged off. This is a different situation entirely, the camp holder is still online and is about to pass it to whomever he wants (in this case honoring the player agreement).

So you can hand the spot off to guild members and lock it down? Can a gm add to this? You should have to sit there if your on the list. No go "play alts" while you wait.

[Ooloo]

I think scout roll is essentially just a player agreement too right? But gm's afaik will punish people who don't stay to help kill, or bring chars below 55 to roll etc..

Or is that somehow different than the AC camp?

[sajbert]

So you can hand the spot off to guild members and lock it down? Can a gm add to this? You should have to sit there if your on the list. No go "play alts" while you wait.

You can do this with other camps. This is why /list was created. Guilds have monopolized several camps in the past.

The AC list falls under a player agreement and most choose to take part and honor it. Not sure what happens in case someone would simply find the camp open and if they’d forego the player agreement-system and camp multiple rings or pass only on to friends and guildies. This has happened but can’t recall what the consequence was as petitions started rolling in.

But once again, I have no idea why some people imagine the AC player agreement doesn’t allow you to camp and play your alt. As long as you are first in queue that responds and you show up promptly for next AC spawn and the camp holder doesn’t log or DC before then in order to hand it over you have rights to the camp.

[Swish]

I believe GMs won’t look favorably upon it.


This is the issue on pve servers, you think the GMs will rule in your favor, and boy are you going to be aggressive as heck to make that point in tells.

If you're not at the camp logged in waiting when the last guy got his AC ring it should go to someone who is sitting there patiently.

[Zeboim]

You absolutely could hand it to someone in your guild.

But it would, of course, be a dick move. One of the ultimate dick moves possible.

[sajbert]

This is the issue on pve servers, you think the GMs will rule in your favor, and boy are you going to be aggressive as heck to make that point in tells.

If you're not at the camp logged in waiting when the last guy got his AC ring it should go to someone who is sitting there patiently.

”Should”? In accordance to what rules or what established practice? The player agreement nor the server outdoor canp rules don’t support that claim.

Your OPINION may be that it ”should” go to whomever waited at the camp the longest but it’s not how it works. Why would we even want to push for it? It’d just be detrimental to fun.

[fortior]

You can just take any camp you want, OP. Just tell the tired Guide who pms you after 10000 petitions but really doesn’t care about non raid level disputes ‘oh sorry thought I was first’

[Chikorita]

Wish people would report actual guide interventions on actual situations so we had some kind of case law to go by. What players say is irrelevant. What guides do is relevant. Players make up all kinds of rules in their heads but they don't have the ban hammer so who cares. From reading this thread it sounds like you can just have a single guild lock down the camp forever.

"Can i get on the list"
"No, the list already goes on to infinity between CharA, CharB, CharC and CharD. Sorry"

[Encroaching Death]

You can just take any camp you want, OP. Just tell the tired Guide who pms you after 10000 petitions but really doesn’t care about non raid level disputes ‘oh sorry thought I was first’

4B93BoC9ylg

[loramin]

Wish people would report actual guide interventions on actual situations so we had some kind of case law to go by. What players say is irrelevant. What guides do is relevant.

https://wiki.project1999.com/Camp%20Rules is literally this. Everything listed there comes from a public GM ruling quote (https://wiki.project1999.com/Rulings).

From reading this thread it sounds like you can just have a single guild lock down the camp forever.

This is largely correct. It sounds (and is) incredibly lame, but our all-volunteer staff doesn't have the bandwidth to enforce proper/classic lists (https://wiki.project1999.com/Kunark_Era_Customer_Service_Guidelines#contested_s pawn_complaints) ... which is exactly why they introduced the P99 version ... /list.

[sajbert]

From reading this thread it sounds like you can just have a single guild lock down the camp forever.

"Can i get on the list"
"No, the list already goes on to infinity between CharA, CharB, CharC and CharD. Sorry"
This is exactly how it works as per the p99 camp rules. That is WHY there are player agreements as well as why /list was created for select camps.

[Infectious]

https://wiki.project1999.com/Camp%20Rules is literally this. Everything listed there comes from a public GM ruling quote (https://wiki.project1999.com/Rulings).



This is largely correct. It sounds (and is) incredibly lame, but our all-volunteer staff doesn't have the bandwidth to enforce proper/classic lists (https://wiki.project1999.com/Kunark_Era_Customer_Service_Guidelines#contested_s pawn_complaints) ... which is exactly why they introduced the P99 version ... /list.

So OOT AC, the next player has to have a presence in the zone or he loses his spot. Good to know.

[PatChapp]

So OOT AC, the next player has to have a presence in the zone or he loses his spot. Good to know.

The camp rules are pretty clear on this,the camp holder can pass to whomever they want as long as they are within a few minutes of spawn.

[sajbert]

”Unofficially speaking, AC camp, sure. If you are next at the list I would stay near by so the trade off can happen quickly. If the list keeper gets his spawn and leaves and you are not there, you can lose the camp. For SF, I find it dumb to have to stay in the zone for that long. But if you wish to keep your spot it's in your best interest to be there during the spawns.
The thing is, lists are really driven by the players, if you are the list keeper it's in your rights to tell people if they want on the list, they must stay in the zone.
Here's the thing folks, we want people to have fun, but there are lots of players who like to abuse what we say and what few rules we have out there. If we suspect you are lawyerquesting or being a dick, we have no issue suspending you for PNP. If you feel I'm not being fair, go speak to Llandris, Braknar or Sirken. Don't be a jerk to me, I'm really here to help you guys enjoy the game.
If you ever need help understanding how a camp in particular works, don't be afraid of posting in the petitions / exploits forums asking a question, I'm happy to work it out with you. But keep in mind, we don't have solid rules written down for specific camps because every situation is different, but we do state guidelines here and there.”


This really isn’t complicated. Camp holder decides and as long as he is still online he can give the camp to whomever he wants. In this case there is a list and camp holder agreed to let people onto the list who’re playing their alts, this is fine as long as they’re able to show up in reasonable time to take over.

It’s really not that hard. The only unknown (to me) is if someone betrays the /list and starts corpsing rings or giving it to their guild instead.

[loramin]

The camp rules are pretty clear on this,the camp holder can pass to whomever they want as long as they are within a few minutes of spawn.

Lies: the camp rules say nothing about "a few minutes" anywhere. I wish they specified time.

The only language we have to go on, officially, is that you have to wait "a reasonable amount of time" if you want to take a camp from someone. So if someone is going to give a camp to their guildie, but you wait 20 seconds, and they don't engage, you can take the camp ... as long as you're willing to bet that if a GM shows up, they consider 20 seconds "reasonable". (I would, but I'm no GM.)

[loramin]

”Unofficially speaking, AC camp, sure. If you are next at the list I would stay near by so the trade off can happen quickly. If the list keeper gets his spawn and leaves and you are not there, you can lose the camp. For SF, I find it dumb to have to stay in the zone for that long. But if you wish to keep your spot it's in your best interest to be there during the spawns.
The thing is, lists are really driven by the players, if you are the list keeper it's in your rights to tell people if they want on the list, they must stay in the zone.
Here's the thing folks, we want people to have fun, but there are lots of players who like to abuse what we say and what few rules we have out there. If we suspect you are lawyerquesting or being a dick, we have no issue suspending you for PNP. If you feel I'm not being fair, go speak to Llandris, Braknar or Sirken. Don't be a jerk to me, I'm really here to help you guys enjoy the game.
If you ever need help understanding how a camp in particular works, don't be afraid of posting in the petitions / exploits forums asking a question, I'm happy to work it out with you. But keep in mind, we don't have solid rules written down for specific camps because every situation is different, but we do state guidelines here and there.”

Where is that quote from? I'd love to add it to the rulings page.

The only unknown (to me) is if someone betrays the /list and starts corpsing rings or giving it to their guild instead.

This can't happen because of how /list works (except during the holiday double loot). Once you loot the item, you're off the list.

[PatChapp]

Lies: the camp rules say nothing about "a few minutes" anywhere. I wish they specified time.

.)

person handing off the camp must stay at the spawn until the next person in line arrives, if that person is on their way to take the camp. There is a little leeway here, and we refuse to set an exact timer on how long the placeholder can be up before the camp is forfeited, but in general it should never be for more than a couple minutes or so.

Copied directly from camp rules.

[loramin]

person handing off the camp must stay at the spawn until the next person in line arrives, if that person is on their way to take the camp. There is a little leeway here, and we refuse to set an exact timer on how long the placeholder can be up before the camp is forfeited, but in general it should never be for more than a couple minutes or so.

Copied directly from camp rules.

Ah, good catch! I'd forgotten about that for lists, and that quote is actually more specific than you indicated ("couple" being more specific than "few").

But still, with the "in general" and "or so" in there, it almost amounts to as much as "a reasonable amount of time". All we know is that if you wait at least two minutes you can probably take a camp from someone who claims there's someone on a list incoming ... but even that's not certain.

And it's also unclear ... let's say I get to AC and it's up, but someone is sitting there claiming their guildie is inc. If I wait one minute, then kill the AC, will I get in trouble?

All it would take is one sentence from the staff (eg. "You only get the right to rekill a mob you killed previously for exactly one minute after it spawns") to eliminate so much disagreement between players.

[Humerox]

The camp rules are pretty clear on this,the camp holder can pass to whomever they want as long as they are within a few minutes of spawn.

You have to honor a list. Handing off to whomever you want isn't honoring a list. Not only that...the campholder is required to tell you who is next on the list.

[PatChapp]

You have to honor a list. Handing off to whomever you want isn't honoring a list. Not only that...the campholder is required to tell you who is next on the list.

None of that is true,played held lists are a courtesy not a requirement.

https://wiki.project1999.com/Camp_Rules
Link to camp rules,with GM's take on it quoted.

Note where it says camp holder can pass to whoever they want.
This is obviously shitty of the person and most people will follow a player held list, but not doing so is right in the rulings as ok.

[loramin]

Note where it says camp holder can pass to whoever they want.

The staff has never said it in a quote I could find and record, but there's a very long precedent of them supporting the "camp holders can pass camp to whomever they want". A few motivated individuals have locked down camps for weeks on P99, and the staff did nothing.

Again, it's absolutely unclassic and a terrible policy ... but I don't think the staff wants it .... they just don't want to have to babysit every single camp exchange in the game either, and they don't want to eliminate handing off camps to friends/guildmates entirely, so I think they see it as the lesser of two evils.

[Chortles Snortles]

if you're not in zone when the next PH spawns, fuck off

[Humerox]

None of that is true,played held lists are a courtesy not a requirement.

https://wiki.project1999.com/Camp_Rules
Link to camp rules,with GM's take on it quoted.

Note where it says camp holder can pass to whoever they want.
This is obviously shitty of the person and most people will follow a player held list, but not doing so is right in the rulings as ok.

I don't see it noted anywhere in the rules that camps can be handed off to whomever the holder wants. What I do see is a requirement that someone be added to a camp list if asked and that notification of who is next on list is also a requirement. The player-defined rules are part of the PnP, and not honoring player-defined rules *can* warrant GM action.

[loramin]

I don't see it noted anywhere in the rules

You have to remember, the staff hates spelling out lots of explicit rules: that entire camp rules page had to be compiled by a player (me) from a bunch of disjointed random posts made by GMs over the course of a decade. And even that isn't "official" ... it's just that GMs tend to rule the same way as they describe in the forums.

Now, I could write a treatise on why I believe this approach is detrimental to them, and how their position on keeping rules as obscure as possible actually creates more disputes. That's why I took the time to compile the camp rules page ... and I'd argue that it's benefited the server for everyone to know the rules ... but again, it's not an official rulebook.

The only true rulebook is the PnP and what the GMs do in the game ... and again, we have a wealth of evidence from in-game that P99 staff support handing camps off to friends and guildmates, even when such handoffs result in weeks-long monopolization of camps by a few individuals.

[Chortles Snortles]

hey guys my opinion is beneficial, read all about it on the wiki
(lol)

[Humerox]

You have to remember, the staff hates spelling out lots of explicit rules: that entire camp rules page had to be compiled by a player (me) from a bunch of disjointed random posts made by GMs over the course of a decade. And even that isn't "official" ... it's just that GMs tend to rule the same way as they describe in the forums.

Now, I could write a treatise on why I believe this approach is detrimental to them, and how their position on keeping rules as obscure as possible actually creates more disputes. That's why I took the time to compile the camp rules page ... and I'd argue that it's benefited the server for everyone to know the rules ... but again, it's not an official rulebook.

The only true rulebook is the PnP and what the GMs do in the game ... and again, we have a wealth of evidence from in-game that P99 staff support handing camps off to friends and guildmates, even when such handoffs result in weeks-long monopolization of camps by a few individuals.

I'm well aware you wrote the page, having played P99 from just about server up. And thanks! It's also been MY experience that GMs have supported the player-rules almost universally...from the inception of PnP. I also remember the chaos before PnP was enacted, and it wasn't pretty. If people want to be asshats I guess that's up to them...but asshats are the reason I won't play blue anymore. And no asshats wanna play on red anymore, either...where asshats belong, lol. So...I like green, and so far green seems to favor good player etiquette. Which is all anyone asks.

Also...if we really want to get technical...FTE would apply after camp holder has item (and yeah, I know you can't tell it's been looted. hence, asshattery). However, this is contrary to established player server rules and etiquette...which is why GM's would and should support lists.

[dareo]

OOT AC is simple. You clear it and keep a list. Eventuallly, AC pops and you notify everyone on the list. People offline/not contactable at that time are skipped. People who are next and able to be there and clear the camp before the next PH are up. No need to make it any more complicated that that.

[Woodark]

I remember when the AC camp started on this server the player maintained list was so long that it required multiple macros to store all the names. I’m surprised this isn’t a /list camp.

Make some minor tweaks to the /list feature to catch players attempting to automate it and ban those that cheat.

[Coridan]

Wish people would report actual guide interventions on actual situations so we had some kind of case law to go by. What players say is irrelevant. What guides do is relevant. Players make up all kinds of rules in their heads but they don't have the ban hammer so who cares. From reading this thread it sounds like you can just have a single guild lock down the camp forever.

"Can i get on the list"
"No, the list already goes on to infinity between CharA, CharB, CharC and CharD. Sorry"

No one holding a camp needs to (or should be) maintaining anything beyond who is immediately next. If I'm camping something and Soandso is next, and someone else asks to get on the list. I tell him to message Soandso. If Soandso aint there when I'm done, I'm just fucking off and whoever gets there gets there.

[Toxigen]

what we need is more rogues pick pocketing beads

[Raj]

what we need is more rogues pick pocketing beads

[Cecily]

what we need is more rogues pick pocketing beads

Really what we need is someone to help move the stolen items.
@Cheekpoker @Handsomechad

[Gugg]

So you can hand the spot off to guild members and lock it down? Can a gm add to this? You should have to sit there if your on the list. No go "play alts" while you wait.

FYI: it is possible to fear kite nobles safely contrary to what you said in a closed thread.

[fortior]

No one holding a camp needs to (or should be) maintaining anything beyond who is immediately next. If I'm camping something and Soandso is next, and someone else asks to get on the list. I tell him to message Soandso. If Soandso aint there when I'm done, I'm just fucking off and whoever gets there gets there.

This, I message the next guy and it's his problem whether he's there fast enough to take the camp or not. If he takes 10 mins to log in and someone has taken it in the meantime, tough shit

[Arcaenus]

After reading, it seems there are quite a few opinions and ideas floating around but nothing definitive. Maybe its definitive in some peoples minds, but nothing is really set out and clear. It also seems (from what has been said here and in other places in the forums) that the GMs want players to figure things out / solve their own problems, and are inclined to uphold general population created solutions / customs.

Therefore, in an attempt to move towards a more concrete understanding, I propose the following, open for further debate and discussion:

###

It is the desire of the general Green server population that the following customs be upheld with respect to the OOT AC camp:

1. The current holder of the camp shall maintain the list of “next in line players”. When requested, the holder shall relay the list. Upon adding / removing someone from the list, he/she will announce the updated list in /ooc.
INTENT: the holder is the point person for updating / relaying the list while holding the camp — the whole list, not just the next name on the list. It’s communicated in /ooc to keep things transparent yet localized.

2. Upon successful killing / looting of the AC, the camp shall pass to the next name on the list (see #7).
INTENT: the holder does not get to pick who gets the camp next, the list shall be honored)

3. To be added to the list, a player must present themselves physically at the camp and ask the current holder to be added. The holder will update / announce the list accordingly.
INTENT: no sending a /tell from another zone asking to be added, or having a friend in zone ask for you to be added. You need to show up.

3.A) A person wishing to be added to the list, but give looting rights to their alt, shall make this known to the holder when requesting to be added. The holder adds their name along the format “Maintoon (looter: Alttoon)”.
INTENT: keep everything open, transparent, and organized

3.B) To maintain their places on the list, players must remain logged into the server, but are not required to remain in OOT. If playing an alt, the player will notify the holder, who will update the name on the list to format “Maintoon (alt: Twinktoon)”.
INTENT: unlike the “formal” (coded) /list camps - unique to p99- where online, active presence is required in close proximity to the spawn point to remain on the list, this “less formal” player-maintained camp list allows players to do other things (pretty darn generous IMO) provided they stay online and in the game.
Discussion: Is this too generous? In line with the spirit of the game? Should the custom be that if you want to stay on the list, you plant your butt at the AC camp and stay there until its your turn (just without the automated /afk checks coded into the “formal” /list camps?
INTENT: The intent of the list update is to keep everything open and transparent, and so that subsequent holders of the camp can maintain the list and have a known point of contact for names on the list).

4. If a player on the list goes offline (not on the server on any known identity) for a period longer than (say) 2 spawn cycles (just about 15 minutes), that name shall be removed from the list and the updated list stated in /ooc.
NOTE: it is NOT the responsibility of the holder to regularly and actively confirm everyone on the list is online (his/her responsibility is to maintain/relay the list). The practical assumption is, if someone new travels to the zone and asks to be on the list, then checks and notices the 3 names between the holder and their own are not online, he/she will say something to the holder (in /say? In /ooc?). The two of them will check via “/who all Soandso” following the next two spawns. If neither find the person online after 2 such spawn checks, the name will be removed and the updated list repeated in /ooc.
INTENT: you are already permitted to grind in another zone, in an alt, or even sit afk (!) and maintain your spot. Logging off for 3 hours, then logging in and expecting to keep your spot in line, just seems too much and not within the spirit of lists. Your power goes out for 2 hours? That’s life.

5. Upon successful killing / looting of the AC, the holder shall send a /tell to the next two names on the list advising of the kill. The holder will remain present / clear camp for 2 more spawn cycles. If the first in line is not in place to take the camp at that point (either has not ported in, logged in the main toon they camped at the spot, or is present but /afk or otherwise non-responsive, etc.) their name is removed and the holder notifies the second in line, who will then have 1 more cycle to be in place to take the camp.
INTENT: allowing for a reasonable transition between camp holders, while also establishing a “succession” path should next in line not show).
NOTE 1: it is strongly recommended, but not requires, that the first up on the list be in the zone, active, and ready to go.
NOTE 2: it is not intended that the outgoing or incoming holder be responsible for notifying everyone else on the list of the change; it is assumed/expected that anyone on the list will periodically look and see where things are at.

###

Discuss!

[PatChapp]

After reading, it seems there are quite a few opinions and ideas floating around but nothing definitive. Maybe its definitive in some peoples minds, but nothing is really set out and clear. It also seems (from what has been said here and in other places in the forums) that the GMs want players to figure things out / solve their own problems, and are inclined to uphold general population created solutions / customs.

Therefore, in an attempt to move towards a more concrete understanding, I propose the following, open for further debate and discussion:

###

It is the desire of the general Green server population that the following customs be upheld with respect to the OOT AC camp:

1. The current holder of the camp shall maintain the list of “next in line players”. When requested, the holder shall relay the list. Upon adding / removing someone from the list, he/she will announce the updated list in /ooc.
INTENT: the holder is the point person for updating / relaying the list while holding the camp — the whole list, not just the next name on the list. It’s communicated in /ooc to keep things transparent yet localized.

2. Upon successful killing / looting of the AC, the camp shall pass to the next name on the list (see #7).
INTENT: the holder does not get to pick who gets the camp next, the list shall be honored)

3. To be added to the list, a player must present themselves physically at the camp and ask the current holder to be added. The holder will update / announce the list accordingly.
INTENT: no sending a /tell from another zone asking to be added, or having a friend in zone ask for you to be added. You need to show up.

3.A) A person wishing to be added to the list, but give looting rights to their alt, shall make this known to the holder when requesting to be added. The holder adds their name along the format “Maintoon (looter: Alttoon)”.
INTENT: keep everything open, transparent, and organized

3.B) To maintain their places on the list, players must remain logged into the server, but are not required to remain in OOT. If playing an alt, the player will notify the holder, who will update the name on the list to format “Maintoon (alt: Twinktoon)”.
INTENT: unlike the “formal” (coded) /list camps - unique to p99- where online, active presence is required in close proximity to the spawn point to remain on the list, this “less formal” player-maintained camp list allows players to do other things (pretty darn generous IMO) provided they stay online and in the game.
Discussion: Is this too generous? In line with the spirit of the game? Should the custom be that if you want to stay on the list, you plant your butt at the AC camp and stay there until its your turn (just without the automated /afk checks coded into the “formal” /list camps?
INTENT: The intent of the list update is to keep everything open and transparent, and so that subsequent holders of the camp can maintain the list and have a known point of contact for names on the list).

4. If a player on the list goes offline (not on the server on any known identity) for a period longer than (say) 2 spawn cycles (just about 15 minutes), that name shall be removed from the list and the updated list stated in /ooc.
NOTE: it is NOT the responsibility of the holder to regularly and actively confirm everyone on the list is online (his/her responsibility is to maintain/relay the list). The practical assumption is, if someone new travels to the zone and asks to be on the list, then checks and notices the 3 names between the holder and their own are not online, he/she will say something to the holder (in /say? In /ooc?). The two of them will check via “/who all Soandso” following the next two spawns. If neither find the person online after 2 such spawn checks, the name will be removed and the updated list repeated in /ooc.
INTENT: you are already permitted to grind in another zone, in an alt, or even sit afk (!) and maintain your spot. Logging off for 3 hours, then logging in and expecting to keep your spot in line, just seems too much and not within the spirit of lists. Your power goes out for 2 hours? That’s life.

5. Upon successful killing / looting of the AC, the holder shall send a /tell to the next two names on the list advising of the kill. The holder will remain present / clear camp for 2 more spawn cycles. If the first in line is not in place to take the camp at that point (either has not ported in, logged in the main toon they camped at the spot, or is present but /afk or otherwise non-responsive, etc.) their name is removed and the holder notifies the second in line, who will then have 1 more cycle to be in place to take the camp.
INTENT: allowing for a reasonable transition between camp holders, while also establishing a “succession” path should next in line not show).
NOTE 1: it is strongly recommended, but not requires, that the first up on the list be in the zone, active, and ready to go.
NOTE 2: it is not intended that the outgoing or incoming holder be responsible for notifying everyone else on the list of the change; it is assumed/expected that anyone on the list will periodically look and see where things are at.

###

Discuss!

Ac camp works fine as is,no need to complicate things with a bunch of unenforceable clauses.

[dareo]

Over Complicated AC Rules:

Player can only join the AC camp if within a 50 loc block range of P 1016, -7900 in OOT.

Player must formally request to join the list in /tell, /say, and /ooc.

Player must actively search for and tattle on anyone in the list is offline or out of zone.

Player must engage the PH within 36 seconds of spawning.

Upon AC spawn the camp holder must formally make a press release in zone, on discord, and the P99 forums. All people next of list are sent a certified letter.

Rooting the AC or PH on another player in line for the camp is an automatic concession requiring a zone vacate and relist.

Not replying to Camp Checks within 83 seconds is a concede.

Leaving the AC island to buy food at sisters camp is a concede.

Anything longer than 3 minutes 12 seconds to kill the mob is considered stalling and is a camp concede.

The Ancient Cyclops may only be killed during in game hours of 9 pm and 8 am, if it spawns during the day time, the camp holder must keep it kited or root kited until 9 pm.

There is a strict class based limit on joining the list: No more than 2 druids, 2 wizards, 2 necros, ect may be on the list at any time.

There is a guild limit, no more than 2 players of the same guild may be on the list at the same time.

Pet classes must ignore p99 rules regarding afk camping and park their pets right on the spawn point to make it easier for them to AFK camp the AC. Nobody will know your AFK until the pirate sits there for a few minutes!


This is all a joke by the way. Keep it simple but fair at AC camp folks!

[DeliciousHalflings]

After reading, it seems there are quite a few opinions and ideas floating around but nothing definitive. Maybe its definitive in some peoples minds, but nothing is really set out and clear. It also seems (from what has been said here and in other places in the forums) that the GMs want players to figure things out / solve their own problems, and are inclined to uphold general population created solutions / customs.

Therefore, in an attempt to move towards a more concrete understanding, I propose the following, open for further debate and discussion:

###

It is the desire of the general Green server population that the following customs be upheld with respect to the OOT AC camp:

1. The current holder of the camp shall maintain the list of “next in line players”. When requested, the holder shall relay the list. Upon adding / removing someone from the list, he/she will announce the updated list in /ooc.
INTENT: the holder is the point person for updating / relaying the list while holding the camp — the whole list, not just the next name on the list. It’s communicated in /ooc to keep things transparent yet localized.

2. Upon successful killing / looting of the AC, the camp shall pass to the next name on the list (see #7).
INTENT: the holder does not get to pick who gets the camp next, the list shall be honored)

3. To be added to the list, a player must present themselves physically at the camp and ask the current holder to be added. The holder will update / announce the list accordingly.
INTENT: no sending a /tell from another zone asking to be added, or having a friend in zone ask for you to be added. You need to show up.

3.A) A person wishing to be added to the list, but give looting rights to their alt, shall make this known to the holder when requesting to be added. The holder adds their name along the format “Maintoon (looter: Alttoon)”.
INTENT: keep everything open, transparent, and organized

3.B) To maintain their places on the list, players must remain logged into the server, but are not required to remain in OOT. If playing an alt, the player will notify the holder, who will update the name on the list to format “Maintoon (alt: Twinktoon)”.
INTENT: unlike the “formal” (coded) /list camps - unique to p99- where online, active presence is required in close proximity to the spawn point to remain on the list, this “less formal” player-maintained camp list allows players to do other things (pretty darn generous IMO) provided they stay online and in the game.
Discussion: Is this too generous? In line with the spirit of the game? Should the custom be that if you want to stay on the list, you plant your butt at the AC camp and stay there until its your turn (just without the automated /afk checks coded into the “formal” /list camps?
INTENT: The intent of the list update is to keep everything open and transparent, and so that subsequent holders of the camp can maintain the list and have a known point of contact for names on the list).

4. If a player on the list goes offline (not on the server on any known identity) for a period longer than (say) 2 spawn cycles (just about 15 minutes), that name shall be removed from the list and the updated list stated in /ooc.
NOTE: it is NOT the responsibility of the holder to regularly and actively confirm everyone on the list is online (his/her responsibility is to maintain/relay the list). The practical assumption is, if someone new travels to the zone and asks to be on the list, then checks and notices the 3 names between the holder and their own are not online, he/she will say something to the holder (in /say? In /ooc?). The two of them will check via “/who all Soandso” following the next two spawns. If neither find the person online after 2 such spawn checks, the name will be removed and the updated list repeated in /ooc.
INTENT: you are already permitted to grind in another zone, in an alt, or even sit afk (!) and maintain your spot. Logging off for 3 hours, then logging in and expecting to keep your spot in line, just seems too much and not within the spirit of lists. Your power goes out for 2 hours? That’s life.

5. Upon successful killing / looting of the AC, the holder shall send a /tell to the next two names on the list advising of the kill. The holder will remain present / clear camp for 2 more spawn cycles. If the first in line is not in place to take the camp at that point (either has not ported in, logged in the main toon they camped at the spot, or is present but /afk or otherwise non-responsive, etc.) their name is removed and the holder notifies the second in line, who will then have 1 more cycle to be in place to take the camp.
INTENT: allowing for a reasonable transition between camp holders, while also establishing a “succession” path should next in line not show).
NOTE 1: it is strongly recommended, but not requires, that the first up on the list be in the zone, active, and ready to go.
NOTE 2: it is not intended that the outgoing or incoming holder be responsible for notifying everyone else on the list of the change; it is assumed/expected that anyone on the list will periodically look and see where things are at.

###

Discuss!

Dumb. Stop giving your opinion, it sucks.

I'm not going to waste my time waiting for whoever is next to physically get there after I get mine, let alone clear TWO spawn cycles after getting it. Not my job.

Having to keep track of everyone waiting for a camp? Also not my damn job. You want a camp? Fucking sit there and wait for it like the OG devs intended you to do. Socialize with those around you. I'm not gonna try to track down multiple people. That's almost as asinine as expecting someone to spam an updated list of multiple names at the whim of someone else.

Maybe people can just grow the hell up and learn to communicate like adults? Idk, I've never had an issue with getting things done in game without a shitload of drama. Maybe some of you (like you, specifically) are just too damned stupid to function in society, and probably shouldn't be playing what was intended to be a social game.

[Arcaenus]

Dumb. Stop giving your opinion, it sucks.

I'm not going to waste my time waiting for whoever is next to physically get there after I get mine, let alone clear TWO spawn cycles after getting it. Not my job.

Having to keep track of everyone waiting for a camp? Also not my damn job. You want a camp? Fucking sit there and wait for it like the OG devs intended you to do. Socialize with those around you. I'm not gonna try to track down multiple people. That's almost as asinine as expecting someone to spam an updated list of multiple names at the whim of someone else.

Maybe people can just grow the hell up and learn to communicate like adults? Idk, I've never had an issue with getting things done in game without a shitload of drama. Maybe some of you (like you, specifically) are just too damned stupid to function in society, and probably shouldn't be playing what was intended to be a social game.

Who let the trolls out? Take your own advice and learn how to communicate like an adult, starting with not telling people their opinions suck and then calling people stupid -- which is the epitome of anti-social behavior.

For the record, I am personally in general agreement with your apparent philosophy (once I found it through the ranting). Let me summarize what I think you were trying to say: You want the camp? Go there, ask to be on the list. Stay there, help and be social until it is your turn. Then man the camp, kill the bastard, loot the ring, and move on. Don't be an asshole and give the camp to someone not on the list. Also, don't be an asshole and log off for 5 hours, then whine that "someone wasn't following the rules" when they passed the camp to someone actually sitting there, logged in.

That's not the "system" or custom that was apparently in effect when I did go to the camp. And apparently, judging by the original post and the plethora of inconsistent answers that followed, there really isn't an answer.

So, being an adult, I posted the (long) set of proposed "rules" using elements of what seemed to be the custom in place to start a *discussion*. Yes, I expected dissent and pushback -- it's necessary to move to a real, thought-out solution. A simple "Too complicated, let's do this: ..." would be a productive, solution-oriented response, which, again, is what adults do in a functional society. You want to rant, rave, insult, and be generally unproductive instead? Then post your own thread in the rants section and get off this one.

[Arcaenus]

PatChapp: thank you for posting your opinion.

Dareo: nice use of parody to illustrate a very valid point that such a solution (intended as food for discussion) is too long and overcomplicated.

And to the troll: telling people their opinions suck and calling them stupid is the epitome of the anti-social behavior you were trying to rant against. Be constructive or take your rants and flames to the appropriate section.

For what it's worth, I actually agree with the essence of what I think you were trying to say (at least, what I think I found buried within the rants) than my original post, which was intended to encapsulate some of what customs some claimed to be in place and move the thread back on point into a discussion.

Let me see if I can summarize it:
Want the AC camp? Go there and ask whoever has it to be added to the list. Then sit there, be social, help out on occasion, and wait your turn. When your turn comes, kill the AC, loot the ring, and pass the camp to the next person. Do not be a jerk and try to hand it over to someone else who has not been on the list, sitting, waiting. Do not be an ingrate and log off for 5 hours, then come back and try to convince the person now at the camp that you should get your spot back. Want to log on an alt and grind away in another zone? Feel free, but don't assume that the holder or the other people physically sitting at the camp waiting will (or should) honor your (supposed) position in line while they have been sitting there, bored as heck, putting in the time.

[DeliciousHalflings]

*more clueless carebear bitching*

Your opinions are stupid. You proposed a bunch of convoluted bullshit while thinking 'man, I'm gonna look so smart posting all this stuff!', when in reality it just showed you're utterly clueless about both how the game was intended to be played by the OG + p99 devs AND the general behavior of the server. Stupid arbitrary rules suggestions adding extra work for everyone keeping track of who's doing what and whatever else always come from the people who can't get shit done on their own and just annoy everyone else with how bad they are.

I know just fine how to communicate. Snowflakes don't get a pass anymore with their trying to force everyone to accept stupid shit. Anarchy, motherfucker!

[Arcaenus]

Thank you for proving my point.

[DeliciousHalflings]

Let me see if I can summarize it:
Want the AC camp? Go there and ask whoever has it to be added to the list. Then sit there, be social, help out on occasion, and wait your turn. When your turn comes, kill the AC, loot the ring, and pass the camp to the next person. Do not be a jerk and try to hand it over to someone else who has not been on the list, sitting, waiting. Do not be an ingrate and log off for 5 hours, then come back and try to convince the person now at the camp that you should get your spot back. Want to log on an alt and grind away in another zone? Feel free, but don't assume that the holder or the other people physically sitting at the camp waiting will (or should) honor your (supposed) position in line while they have been sitting there, bored as heck, putting in the time.

Shoulda said that in the first place, rather than just kinda shit out of your mouth. People are too damn used to bad MMOs and other games that give instant gratification rewards. The entirety of EQ is a timesink grind. Sometimes, that means sitting and doing literally nothing but waiting your turn.

DO. THE. WORK.

[Swish]

Bring back the website that people signed up on in earlier green.

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

[sajbert]

And apparently, judging by the original post and the plethora of inconsistent answers that followed, there really isn't an answer.

No there is an answer. We KNOW how outdoor camps work and we KNOW that you can pass a camp to anyone you want and that if someone has been waiting there physically in line normally doesn’t mean shit.

We KNOW that OOT AC camp works on a player agreement ruleset and that the devs have acknowledged it and ask players to respect it. We KNOW that the player agreement breaks from standard camp rules. Filter my posts.

What we afaik aren’t sure of is if the player agreement forbids anyone to be camped out whilst on the list. What I and many others can testify to is that this is not how it has worked. Initially I remember there being 30+ people on the list using Kingdom’s site and I’ve never had to stay at the camp except when adding myself to the list and when it was my turn. Maybe someone can find the old kingdom page with the player made rules.

What we don’t know is what happens if no one on the list shows in time to take over or if camp holder fails to clear PHs and someone else outside of list grabs the camp. We don’t know if that person has to repect the player agreement at all in fact, could possibly start corpsing rings or give it to their guild etc.

What’s clear is that TC has no idea how the system works and yet decides he was unfairly treated, which he wasn’t.

[Woodark]

/list this camp