The best I can do in the mean time is rewrite guides that are inaccurate/have holes in them that I have found. Like the velious armor guides and Kael Drakkel's zone guide.:p:p
see more
change skype name

An unfortunate side effect of these player made agreements, is that once the GM's decide they are established rules, there is really no easy way to change them. All it takes is one person to disagree, and you eat a suspension for violating a player made agreement.

Yeah also no matter how many times they are posted here, 75% of the player base will be completely unaware of anything until some guy starts yelling at them that they are being petitioned for violating some player agreement they never agreed to. This is equivalent to clickwrapping.

Yeah. There is a wiki entry on a player made agreement on Angry Goblin. Any chance to have that cemented in the orignial post?

https://wiki.project1999.com/An_angr...ayer_Agreement

I mentioned the other day that doing a:

/random 1 - ## <- Character Level

could be a better way to go at Scout/Ring rolls.

Some people seemed to like the idea. (the level 60's)
And obviously the sub 60's are going to hate the idea.


This would give level 60 toons a slightly better chance at winning these contested rolls over the endless amount of shit alts and bots anywhere from level 45-55.


I don't expect this to actually go anywhere, but since I typed it up... whatever.

Just like establishing a player agreement, the way to make changes to one actually happen is to "prosthelytize". Convince everyone there that it's a good idea: get as many people as possible to say "I'll do it if everyone else will", then be as charming and persuasive as possible to get the rest on board. Even lone holdouts tend to give in or go away over time, if you can be patient and over time persuade the rest ... but it's not easy.

Just because it's not in their short term best interest doesn't mean lower level players aren't interested in a more fair system ... but you'll have to convince people of that.

Hadden camp etiquette
 

Sup my doods,

Need a final word on this one. As you all know hadden is a 6 hr timed mob in Q hills. Can you be legit afk for extended periods in between spawns (only coming back to kill) and still claim camp? I've heard both arguments from other players. I have occasionally seen lists going (like for Stormfeather) but not sure this is appropriate as one player pointed out to me, this is because of SF's variance and once SF is in window, it is expected that player should be present (and not AFK). For the sake of clarity I reckon it should be as follows:

1. If you're at the Hadden camp and another player looking for camp sends you a tell and you don't respond for 15 mins, you lost it.

2. if Hadden pops or is up and you're at the camp and you don't respond to another players tell within 5 mins (I.E. obviously AFK) you lost the camp.

3. If Hadden is up and you leave him be cos he has a pole instead of earring and you don't want the faction hit, you lost the camp.

4. The Camp belongs to a player over several successive spawns until they get their earring. Once that drops, that player has to give up the camp to whoever else is present.

What do you guys reckon?

Clungina Gruntbucket

If the person is AFK at hadden its fine but if hadden is up and has been for over 5 mins than you are allowed to kill it.

If a person wants to afk for the 6 hours and come back just to kill hadden they are allowed to do it. As long as they dont log out or leave the area they have the camp.

Numbers 2-4 are technically covered by current camp rules. Failing to kill within a reasonable time (number 2 and 3) forfeits camp. Getting a lore item drop you're farming also passes camp according to camp rules (i.e. no corpsing while camp is contested).

Number 1 doesn't violate any rules, and doesn't impact anyone really.

Not sure how you expect someone to follow a policy or rule if there is no info / posting about it.. that just ignorant.

Sadly I can fully declare too little / too late in terms of this public posting because I was subject to the same suspension back on 07-30-2018 and yet voiced my concern about how can you suspend someone over something they have no way of knowing back then. I can probably bet others faced same before me.