Sebilis Crypt Camp

[Spitty]

I understand that you're not taking sides, Derubael, but your ruling exhibits favoritism. Whether intended or not, that's the reality of how this is going to play out.

Anyone that can demonstrate that they could clear the entire camp is going to be favored.

I'll submit just one example - I'm clearing duke, a solo player shows up and wants duke too and calls his buddies in. They proceed to clear the other 3 PHs, petition, I'm booted and then that solo player moves into duke and proceeds to do exactly what I was just doing, except with GM enforcement.

Best case, I leave camp and am extremely annoyed. Worst case, I monitor the situation, re-petition and now you're an hour into a service situation that could have been alleviated by simply enforcing the precedent that I was clearing a camp and am thus entitled to maintain that to the best of my ability.

What Jeremy and Nastinate have said is the best-case scenario, from my rather experienced perspective; there's an uneasy truce at crypt, but most people work things out on the spot.

It's not ideal if a group comes down and finds one person that's clearing duke, but they're demonstrating that they can legitimately and successfully clear that spawn and should be left alone. That has been, and ideally should be, the established precedent here.

To rule otherwise - besides the implied immorality of forcing people to stop doing what's within their means on this server - is going to have some immediate, unpleasant and far-reaching consequences.

[baalzy]

Originally Posted by Derubael [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Please feel free to submit a document with rulings and definitions for 50 different camps, because none of us are going to do it.

Lets crowd source one then.

To begin lets list the highly 'contested' camps by zone and what rules to apply

Sebilis:
The Crypt this includes the 4 named in little rooms and the wandering named.
1) If the camp is completely unclaimed then any person(s) who enter may choose to take whichever room(s) they're capable of holding.
2) If the camp is partially claimed and another group wishes to be present, the original occupant(s) retain rights to the camps which they were already capable of clearing
3) If a group is capable of holding all 4 rooms plus the wanderer and was the first to arrive at an uncontested camp then no other player(s) may claim any portion of this camp.
4) If the original group is fully clearing the Crypt and also making pulls from the nearby emperor camp and a new group arrives, the original must choose which camp they wish to retain. Either the crypt or the emp.




I am mostly a solo'er and will freely admit I'm not really knowledgeable on all of the camps but I'll gladly compile a list from peoples replies and put it into another thread later to flesh out/discuss.

[fadetree]

Originally Posted by baalzy [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Lets crowd source one then.

You can't crowd source it, it will dissolve into endless arguments. Again, there is no possibility of a 'clearly stated ruleset that everyone can agree on'. There isn't even one that 'most people would agree on'. The staff needs to do it using their own opinions, and then tell everybody to stfu.

[Nirgon]

Originally Posted by Splorf22 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

They probably called CC and he was AFK, so they showed up and found him there.

As long as he is rather promptly pulling the mobs (aka not 5minutes in between it spawning), its his imo.

If he's not holding down all 4? Well, hopefully he's at least holding down the hiero (killed within a small window of it spawning). The one's he's having trouble with and getting every 5th pass or not holding down? He can try to be a dick here, it should be obvious from observation what's going on by a GM and he will be remembered as a jerk by the GM reporting and also lose whatever he isn't holding down when the GM comes to resolve the dispute. Probably with a mention that he needs to stop being a dick.

[Ele]

"Camp" boundaries should not be defined via server rules. They are fluid and should only be determined by the player base 1) as a reference point to the general area being cleared, 2) by day to day interactions of what is reasonably maintained, 3) the named/ph being claimed.

As an anecdote on live, KC/Seb supported upwards of 100 people during prime time, here it is overcrowded with 30-36. LGuk would have upwards of 120, SolB up to 90. People had to split up the commonly referenced "camps" as known here on P99 into even smaller subdivisions to be able to support that many people. Groups were sometimes limited to a camp of 3-6 mobs, which would drive people here insane. We some how managed to survive classic.

If people want to play the be-an-asshole game and start squeezing people out of camps and rules lawyering, let them be named and shamed by the general populace. Institute a no-asshole policy and start suspending and banning people causing problems, when people start losing their pixels, the rest will figure out how to handle disputes like civilized people.

[Derubael]

Spitty - ty, your post was well thought out and informative.

SAKURAGI (cause you'll never be splorf or loraen to me) - i understand where you are coming from, and i think the current rules as they are laid out in the "camps, defined" thread are so unbelievably easy to abuse that i kind of hate the fact that they are there at all. That's why, as Nirgon stated, we're allowed to make our own calls at our own discretion based on the situation. I cannot tell you how many times i've had people try to bullshit lawyer me into making a silly decision based on that thread.

In case you guys didn't notice, I'm trying to get input on how situations like crypt should be handled moving forward, and what the best way to clearly define that is to the community. In the end, we still have the final call when we're petitioned to come into a dispute, but I wanted input from you guys on how to make those situations more clear so you DONT have to call ina GM.

Also, and you can quote me on this because we were just talking about it, in order to camp King Tranix you have to keep the fire giants cleared. You can't just FD a monk on top of tranix till he pops and call it 'camped'.

Going to take a few more opinions from you guys on this and then lock the thread.

Again - if you were to create a rule on the seb crypt, how would you word it, where would it apply (IE, just the crypt, or other camps as well?) and when?

thx guys [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

[fadetree]

Originally Posted by Ele [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

"Camp" boundaries should not be defined via server rules. They are fluid and should only be determined by the player base 1) as a reference point to the general area being cleared, 2) by day to day interactions of what is reasonably maintained, 3) the named/ph being claimed.

As an anecdote on live, KC/Seb supported upwards of 100 people during prime time, here it is overcrowded with 30-36. LGuk would have upwards of 120, SolB up to 90. People had to split up the commonly referenced "camps" as known here on P99 into even smaller subdivisions to be able to support that many people. Groups were sometimes limited to a camp of 3-6 mobs, which would drive people here insane. We some how managed to survive classic.

If people want to play the be-an-asshole game and start squeezing people out of camps and rules lawyering, let them be named and shamed by the general populace. Institute a no-asshole policy and start suspending and banning people causing problems, when people start losing their pixels, the rest will figure out how to handle disputes like civilized people.

I understand, but you are talking about what 'should' be. That's nice, but it is not the same as what actually is, namely assholes and lawyering galore.

[CodyF86]

I have to be honest I had to read through this thread 4 times to make sure
I half-way understood what the actual issue was then I reread it a 5th
time when I realized that I was agreeing with Jeremy... [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

If you are sitting on a mobs spawn point then you are camping it. Whenever I
have done the crypt, if there was someone in there killing the hiero then we
killed everything else until they were done.

This thread is going to cause the staff more headaches than the actual
crypt.

Aaradin
The A-Team

[Thulack]

Personally my view on any camp that doesnt require a raid mob to kill is if a person is clearing the camp it is their's. If a person if killing 1 mob in a camp then that mob is theres and the rest are FFA. But that person has to be there first for them to decide how they want to do it. If 1 person camping hiero then the next person or group to come along can take duke or duke/others but they cant force the person out of hiero because they were there first.

[Barkingturtle]

If I'm hunting the Warden in Upper Guk, do I need to clear those two jerk-frogs on the platform?

Seriously, in the four years I've played on this server, I've always assumed the only safe way to claim a mob was to sit on its spawn and engage it the instant it pops. Now I need to make friends, too?

Asking way too much, imo.