Will return shortly to finally murder this thread and answer all questions in one fell swoop. Before I go on break, however, something important to remember, because everyone is making these so much more complicated than they need to be:
For anyone familiar with the old, Xzerion created (or at least posted - I don't know if he created them) camp rules, these are absolutely identical in every single way with the one new addition being that players have to reveal the name of the next person in line to take the camp. This is to prevent situations such as cecily highlighted earlier - wanting to "reserve the camp" for a guildie - that's all great and fine is you know who that guildie will be, but if you don't, you need to be honest and let that poor guy asking you for the next shot have the next shot when you're finished. If you do know whos next, that guy can literally be anywhere in the entirety of Norrath and come when it's his turn and no sooner and have 100% legit claim to be handed that camp. This is the way it's worked since 2010 - and it won't be modified anytime soon. As many of you may remember, the actual concept of a "list" was non-existent in that rule-set; you either had someone in line, or you didn't, and it didn't really go past that. People were of course allowed to make "impromptu" lines, but these would need to be individually verified and confirmed by each person waiting to take their turn, and anyone could easily say "no person waiting here, I want Jonnaaay to have it because he's my pal" so long as he didn't defraud you by assuring you a spot after him earlier.
I had a handful of ideas on ways to make this ... a bit more classic-like, but I know for sure this exact system was used on servers during classic, it's just than another "line based" system was more popular - its also however, more complicated for CSR to regulate, and relies heavily on people not being giant douchebags when a camp isn't handed to them. I'm trying to minimize my wonderful Guides dispute related headaches everytime I write out rules for clarification or simply because they needed to be updated and/or changed from outdated entries. This is one of those cases where it's almost exactly the same rules we've used forever on this server, with that one minor exception.
Will get down to the nitty gritty a little while later (there was someone earlier in this thread gunning for a lawyer spot on the TMO/IB team - or it looked that way at least. You should never try to rule lawyer the guy who wrote the rule you're attempting to lawyer - it's rude, and I ensure that every rule is written so that rule lawyers can be mercilessly crushed even with the most clever arguments - I've gotten very good at doing all updates/rewrites this way, and always look forward to testing that theory. Cant wait to test it once again!) I hope this clears up some issues that were being asked. If you keep your understanding of this rule-set simple, you won't have a problem, because it's meant to be easy to understand on all levels.
|