My crap post for today.

[Cuktus]

Sometimes I group, like last night. Sometimes I solo, like the night before last night. I am not going to give up my camp, whatever it is, just cause someone else wants wants it. It is strange to me someone would even ask me to do so. Now, if I can't hold everything I am claiming, sure, take the mobs I am not "engaging within a reasonable time". I have no problem with that.
This also works in reverse. There is no expectation on my part of mobs being free when I show up to a zone. Why would I?
OP said he gave up his camp for a group of lower level players. That it was the right thing to do. Why? What makes 6 people who didn't bother to scout out their camp more important then the first guy to start killing crap?

[bum3]

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

OP said he gave up his camp for a group of lower level players. That it was the right thing to do. Why? What makes 6 people who didn't bother to scout out their camp more important then the first guy to start killing crap?

I'll answer this by saying that I wasn't getting exp for every mob. And impeding experience of other players is against the play nice policy. If all the mobs were giving me experience then that wouldn't have been the case. So, yeah it was the right thing to do. When I was a guide on Tunare... I forced many players to leave their non-exp camps for groups that could. If it was a good item camp it was with the understanding that the person who had to give up their non-exp camp it got first loot of it. Most players were happy with this, except the ones who wanted multiples of that item to sell.

[Cuktus]

Originally Posted by bum3 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I'll answer this by saying that I wasn't getting exp for every mob. And impeding experience of other players is against the play nice policy. If all the mobs were giving me experience then that wouldn't have been the case. So, yeah it was the right thing to do. When I was a guide on Tunare... I forced many players to leave their non-exp camps for groups that could. If it was a good item camp it was with the understanding that the person who had to give up their non-exp camp it got first loot of it. Most players were happy with this, except the ones who wanted multiples of that item to sell.

Impeding xp gains and killing green, I dont think those are the same thing. Live rules and p99 rules are different. I looked in the PNP and I cant find any mention that mobs are required to grant xp to be claimed as part of a camp. I could very well be wrong here.

[bum3]

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

Impeding xp gains and killing green, I dont think those are the same thing. Live rules and p99 rules are different. I looked in the PNP and I cant find any mention that mobs are required to grant xp to be claimed as part of a camp. I could very well be wrong here.

It doesn't specify. But that doesn't mean it's not the "right thing to do". Number 10 says you must not disrupt the normal playability of a zone or area. My interpretation, which includes guide guidelines from live circa 2000, that "normal playability" of a zone or area is for the purpose of gaining experience for character advancement. Raid zones/mobs are for gaining of high end items. The next part in bold "-Monopolizing most or all of the kills in an area." Which unless the person killing greens is only taking the named.. they are killing most of the mobs in the area.. because they can. If you want to follow the camp rules for dungeons.. then you can only take the room you claim and if there is a door or bend, what is on other side isn't yours to claim. Out door camps are a single spawn point.

Simple way I look at it is... don't be a prick. If you are trying to get certain items. Tell the group, hey, if you don't mind giving me the bone chips, you can have these mobs for exp. You'll find many people will be happy for arrangements like that. And that's what guides mean by players compromise before petitioning.

An example is in Crushbone other night. My group setup at Iron Orc and there was a group at tents. I contacted that group and said.. please leave us the cents and you can have our legions. Even though we could kill the red legions with a lvl 6-8 group, it made us have long downtimes and cents didn't give them exp anyway. They were more than happy to make this arrangement.

[Cuktus]

Originally Posted by bum3 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

It doesn't specify. But that doesn't mean it's not the "right thing to do". Number 10 says you must not disrupt the normal playability of a zone or area. My interpretation, which includes guide guidelines from live circa 2000, that "normal playability" of a zone or area is for the purpose of gaining experience for character advancement. Raid zones/mobs are for gaining of high end items. The next part in bold "-Monopolizing most or all of the kills in an area." Which unless the person killing greens is only taking the named.. they are killing most of the mobs in the area.. because they can. If you want to follow the camp rules for dungeons.. then you can only take the room you claim and if there is a door or bend, what is on other side isn't yours to claim. Out door camps are a single spawn point.

Simple way I look at it is... don't be a prick. If you are trying to get certain items. Tell the group, hey, if you don't mind giving me the bone chips, you can have these mobs for exp. You'll find many people will be happy for arrangements like that. And that's what guides mean by players compromise before petitioning.

An example is in Crushbone other night. My group setup at Iron Orc and there was a group at tents. I contacted that group and said.. please leave us the cents and you can have our legions. Even though we could kill the red legions with a lvl 6-8 group, it made us have long downtimes and cents didn't give them exp anyway. They were more than happy to make this arrangement.

I completely agree with you, "Don't be a prick". Absolutely. Your example is great, btw. Trading less effective mobs for more effective mobs just makes sense. Reds slow you down, while the other group had some crappy xp granting greens to trade for them. This has that wonderful classic community feel we all love.

I brought up greens and camps and granting xp in my last post on this thread, I regret that. I don't want to rules lawyer issues like this. We, the players, have added... not rules, per say, more like social norms, that are not listed anywhere. For example, the one mob camp in outdoor zones. We, the players, pretty much except that this isn't a real thing. For example, Millers in Qhills or Treants in SK. Guards outside of arena. The rule is there, no doubt, and if a guide/GM shows up and says, give it up, I will do so, no questions asked. But another player /petitioning for that to happen, well, like you say, don't be a prick.

To that end, here is my question: If I am soloing in Befallen for a few hour and have to clear green spawns to get those tasty low blue mobs I actually want, should I have to give up the camp for other players who can xp off both? Morally, not rules lawyery. To add some context, lets say giving up 1/2 of the spawns would making staying in location completely not worth the time for either party. Its an all or nothing kind of deal. Also, lets say, the party does not want to just clear the greens. They are completely able to hold down everything I have, regardless if they all spawn high. Who is the prick?

[bum3]

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

To that end, here is my question: If I am soloing in Befallen for a few hour and have to clear green spawns to get those tasty low blue mobs I actually want, should I have to give up the camp for other players who can xp off both? Morally, not rules lawyery. To add some context, lets say giving up 1/2 of the spawns would making staying in location completely not worth the time for either party. Its an all or nothing kind of deal. Also, lets say, the party does not want to just clear the greens. They are completely able to hold down everything I have, regardless if they all spawn high. Who is the prick?

Have the discussion with them. This is a social game designed around grouping. Experience penalties for classes that can solo and group bonuses to encourage grouping. I'd say that in your scenario the higher farmer is more of the prick (my opinion of course). You are already only getting half the mobs. But you expect them to get none just in case you will get a chance at a little more than half the spawns. If you are getting exp off every single mob then it's a moot point because that wasn't the case when I gave up the area I was killing. I would also say you are too high for the area you are in and need to move to a level appropriate area. It's up to you on how you handle it. And up to the group to /ignore you and add you to do not group list for the future. It might never effect you. But I have seen people excluded not only from future groups but from raids or guilds because they were on a few peoples list. Sure you can do the same. But 6 vs 1 isn't good odds to future prospects. And people making these lists are more common then you think.

[jacob54311]

Originally Posted by bum3 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Experience penalties for classes that can solo

Pretty sure that can't be the rationale for the hybrid xp penalty. If it were, druids, chanters, necros would have the biggest penalties in the game.