Would EQ be better off without GMs?

[Corrodith]

Serious question. Let's assume that there was no need for "god powers" to correct for technical errors in the game itself (such as lost corpses, handing out rezes after server hiccups, etc.) or trivial things such as surname changes.

In the absence of GMs, could the community govern itself in matters such as camp or raid mob disputes better than GMs typically do? Does the presence of GMs to fall back on for rulings actually prohibit players from coming up with solutions among themselves? Let's also assume that players have the capability, within reason, to see relevant objective game information regarding encounters (agro lists, etc) so this specifically applies to the role of GMs in making binding rulings on disputes.

[Versus]

It would be a grief fest. So many anonymous, heartless e-thugs would bully and train people off the server that the P99 population would reflect the Red population.

IMO.

[Ele]

The problems would winnow themselves down, because people would quickly lose interest in playing a GAME and leave the server or consolidate themselves into one unit. (See Red99)

There is absolutely nothing preventing people from coming together right this instant and building and enforcing a player made rule set within the confines of what the server admins have already established.

[Ele]

Additionally the only non-gm mechanisms you have to try to force someone to behave on a blue server are 1) shame/ostracization, 2) training, or 3) kill stealing. A red server provides the additional recourse of 4) player killing.

All of the above can be used by either side of a dispute to achieve their version of justice. Without an independent arbitrator (GM/guide), one person would eventually out grief the other enough to leave the area or the game entirely. With the VZ/TZ rejects brigade and the amount of forum trolls in general, a GM-less server would quickly burn down in flames save for the few sadists/masochists/exploiters/hackers that enjoy griefing each other rather than playing the PvE game.

The honest people that just want to enjoy the PvE aspect in peace would find other refuge.

[Alarti0001]

On fennin ro the community handled the problems gm presence was non existant and it was a great time. We had 2-3 top guilds competing for loots till PoP at least too.

[Zereh]

Yeah, it's unfortunate that Broject99 has always been about who you know instead of how you treated your fellow players. All you need around here are some phone numbers of the people who make the calls and you're golden.

[Razdeline]

Looks like a classic outcry in reaction to TMO's recent wrist slapping.

Worst poll ive ever seen.

[Kinosh]

Cazic Thule GM's never handled the competing guilds cause it showed favoritism if they did. They were vary helpful in the technical errors in game.

[Zereh]

I have no horse in this race, I haven't raided on Blue for over six months. I'm speaking from my experiences from the beginning of my time here, long before TMO ever existed.

[Razdeline]

I have no horse in this race, I haven't raided on Blue for over six months. I'm speaking from my experiences from the beginning of my time here, long before TMO ever existed.

Yet here you are

[Corrodith]

Looks like a classic outcry in reaction to TMO's recent wrist slapping.


Nope just serious philosophical question raised for some interesting discussion. Decent arguments so far. It's a tough question. Obviously RL works far better without rulers: "GM powers" are incredibly destructive in RL.

At least in EQ they don't tax your platinum!

Also as part of this discussion, what are some ways we can solve problems better without involving GMs? Being more active about creating blacklists for known trainers/ks'ers? Possibly guilds using organized trade sanctions between each other? In exhaustion of all other options there are always player duels. These efforts could be organized through forums.

Seems like the community could get a lot more creative with things here. Has anyone ever played a mmorpg where people did organize more creative ways to enforce basic "play nice" rules without GM intervention?

Interested to hear people's input.

[azeth]

Yes, the server would be better off without in game guides/GMs enforcing rules.

Temporarily I imagine the server would see mass griefing/training etc. However, I personally think these shenanigans would only strengthen guilds by promoting a "us versus them" mentality.

It's unnecessary for Ambrotos to pop into Fear to rule on XYZ event. How about, whichever group gets the exp wins? Don't like it? Don't show up.

[azeth]

I will never understand why the guides/GMs on P99 bothered to walk the fine line of hard ass & man-of-the-people.

If you're going to punish people for infractions, then punish them.

ie. petition & proof of intentionally training another guild - random equipped item deleted.
2nd offense - 2 items deleted
3rd offense - 6 month suspension

Hell, how about proof of ninja looting/griefing = character deletion.

[azeth]

Apologies for the 3rd consecutive post, kind of bored this morning at work.

Anyways, I'm sure many folks remember the DA/Transcendence Innoruuk poopsock fest. DA and Trans camped out on the spawn point, neither really had appropriate claim with proof of who was their first. Inno popped, my DA DPS group got the kill, looted & scooted. A moment later Rogean ruled that Transcendence was etitled to the loot.

Hey how about this wild idea, since DA and Transcendence just wasted your time Rogean, how about delete all of Innos loot, suspend us both?

This is why folks never could get behind GM decisions. 99% of the time the result was just nonsensical and favored one guild.

[Corrodith]

I think VP (when there were 2 guilds that could compete there) was an excellent case in point for how lack of GM involvement leads to player agreements. There were no holds barred. If you wanted to hold your own there you had to have an organized raid force capable of dodging another guild's trains and staying alive. There were times where it was chaotic at the beginning, but then the establishment of stalemate as it proved too difficult for either IB or TMO to kill dragons in the presence of each other's trains. Clearly, eventually dragons would have died, but it would have proved to be far more inconvenience than it was worth, so a rotation was worked out that lasted many months.

Later on, another guild tried to enter VP. In a trial by fire it was determined that their raid force did not have the organization to survive in VP long enough to attempt a dragon. Thus, no rotation.

[Alarti0001]

Temporarily I imagine the server would see mass griefing/training etc. However, I personally think these shenanigans would only strengthen guilds by promoting a "us versus them" mentality.



This, it worked for years on fennin ro, and fennin ro probably has some of the strongest across guild relations that last till this day.

[SamwiseBanned]

I think the main prob is the quality of GMs we have. this is not a troll but ive seen a certain GM completely fly off the handle. Rogean needs to find someone who has no involvement in the project and someone who is fair and impartial. the fact that rules very per gm and the punishments range from slap on the wrist to guild deletion proves they cannot enforce or maintain order in a fair way in raid zones. this isnt an attack on the staff but compared to live the gms here feel like 12 year old modding a yahoo chat room.

[SamwiseBanned]

*compared to live, the GMs here fk no edit button

[Artah]

This is a tough question because we need GMs for all kinds of reasons but micro managing 30 year old cry babies shouldn't be one of them.

[Hitchens]

I don't see how this would work in a setting where there are no direct consequences to actions. It would work on a red server, not on a blue.

[Corrodith]

I don't see how this would work in a setting where there are no direct consequences to actions. It would work on a red server, not on a blue.

What I'm saying is it HAS worked here. Read my above post about VP.

[azeth]

An non-GM policed confrontation would basically go as follows:

Group A arrives at Camp X, claiming it.

Group B dislikes this and trains them.

Group A dislikes this and trains them back.

Groups A and B agree to cease training on terms Y & Z.

[JenJen]

whats to stop "individual C" griefing without a care in the world

[azeth]

whats to stop "individual C" griefing without a care in the world

Diablo 3

[Frieza_Prexus]

What I'm saying is it HAS worked here. Read my above post about VP.

Until memory blur became an issue.

The freemarket principle is being misapplied I believe. In a proper situation you have a recourse. The detriment to yourself for trolling or griefing is greater than the gain.

Here, on a blue server, a very small minority can break the game in ways that gives little to no recourse to the larger groups. In effect, you give veto power to a small group of individuals. The unique mechanics of EQ make this an uphill battle.

Keep in mind that on live people paid real money for their accounts. Given that the game was so new and special, people developed a much stronger attachment to their reputations. People wanted to see high end content.

Here, people are far less attached and some would rather grief than play. As it stands, a lawless environment would empower them far more than it restrained them.

[Ele]

Here, people are far less attached and some would rather grief than play. As it stands, a lawless environment would empower them far more than it restrained them.

Some men just want to watch the world burn.

[Hitchens]

What I'm saying is it HAS worked here. Read my above post about VP.

I read your post about VP and I reject your premise.

[Hitchens]

The freemarket principle is being misapplied I believe.

It most certainly is.

[Joroz]

The problem isn't really with the gm's, its with the rules. If there is a stated no train rule 95% will follow it trying to be a good player within the rules, the 5% that break it is what the gm's have to come enforce. Rules will be different on here than any of the live servers since they need to shape the population to their goals. Live you had 40 different options to go to if you didn't like the server you were on so they could get their revenue anyways. On here its 1 shot, people leave, population dwindles and it becomes a private playground. If that's what they wanted they would make or remove rules to enforce to make that happen.

[Corrodith]

Do you really foresee people training each other out of camps etc if there were no GM intervention? I could see maybe at low-mid level where people don't have as much invested in their character, but at high level where reputation matters so much? doubt it. I think for the most part the average player at high level who has been around a while is fairly respectful and decent of another person's claim to a camp (at least when it's just a "camp" and not a highly coveted raid mob).

[Hitchens]

There is no financial investment in the reputation of a character on a free server and there is no emotional investment in the reputation of a character you purchased on the forums.

[Corrodith]

The freemarket principle is being misapplied I believe. In a proper situation you have a recourse. The detriment to yourself for trolling or griefing is greater than the gain.


Xasten, while I am obviously invoking the free market principle here, I do understand that there are limitations to the types of recourses available and ability to transfer consequences to "destructive parties". I think, though, that in general, basic game mechanics create a level playing field where groups of players can leverage their relative organizational strengths to establish agreements in absence of GMs. When you put stuff like training on the table, it ends up making it much harder to compete in traditional ways via poopsocking and batphone races because it can turn into a 12 hour chess match once the training starts, and even for the ultra-hardcore this is not often viable due to play time constraints.

[Hitchens]

You're trying to turn free market philosophy into a panacea.

It is not.

[Corrodith]

You're trying to turn free market philosophy into a panacea.

It is not.

I'm sorry, was that an argument?

[Hitchens]

Yes, and if you don't figure it out you're just another preacher.

[Autotune]

whats to stop "individual C" griefing without a care in the world

Hello, I am Individual C.

[Frieza_Prexus]

For the majority, no Gms would undisputedly lead to community solutions, yes. That much is clear.

However, there is still the unaddressed minority with functional "veto power" in terms of abuses. There is little to no recourse against these individuals. Therein lies your problem.

[Autotune]

For the majority, no Gms would undisputedly lead to community solutions, yes. That much is clear.

However, there is still the unaddressed minority with functional "veto power" in terms of abuses. There is little to no recourse against these individuals. Therein lies your problem.

you act as if there is no problem to begin with.

[Corrodith]

For the majority, no Gms would undisputedly lead to community solutions, yes. That much is clear.

However, there is still the unaddressed minority with functional "veto power" in terms of abuses. There is little to no recourse against these individuals. Therein lies your problem.

What do we have now? A minority (basically 2 active individuals) who are GMs that have functional veto power in terms of abuse. There is *zero* recourse against these individuals.

Which is the better situation? IMO at least a player can be trained/griefed/ks'ed back. And a player doesn't have the power to literally stop you from playing the game on a whim.

[azeth]

i do think P99 would've been better off without in-game guide/GM enforced rules from the getgo.

but given the avg population (im seeing ~350 avg) I'm unsure if the "masses" who'd work to oust the inevitable griefers are actually present.

[Zithax]

It would be way better. GM's do nothing but corrupt and pick sides, even worse so on emu because they are former players with huge biases.

[Dagner]

It would be way better. GM's do nothing but corrupt and pick sides, even worse so on emu because they are former players with huge biases.

pretty much sums up the thread