play nice policy enforced at all?

[Swish]

Sorry OP... Seal Team gotta level their alts for Kunark camp outs etc, sorry if it impacts your casual nostalgic EQ experience.

[tyrant49333]

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

I have my own play nice policy. I don't act like a dick. But if someone acts like a dick to me they can get fucked. I will absolutely KS the area I was camping without any ethical qualms.

Ban my account? K

I'll walk away without giving two fucks. But that's because I'm not overly invested in EQ like some of the armchair sloven elf lawyers.

Woah lookout guys we got a genuine badass here

[cd288]

Originally Posted by Elijah850 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

There are good people in this game, at all levels. There are people who respect others and operate under the same rules as real life i.e.: Treat others how you want to be treated. Unfortunately There a more out there that are "elitist" and "entitled", but not the way the trolls on this post portray them. The Entitled elistists I'm referring to are the lvl 50's that steal your camps or mobs and basically tell you to get lost. They are the problem and sadly they outnumber us who actually enjoy the co-op part of this game.

To me it depends on the camp. If it’s just your typical XP camp then I’m totally not going to go in and be like actually we’re in an outdoor zone you can’t camp the whole thing or stuff like that. But if it’s a really valuable cash camp for instance and you’re sitting there farming it for hours when you’re not getting any XP, then I don’t have a problem asking to split it up (and rule lawyering if you refuse).

[Bardp1999]

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

Sorry OP... Seal Team gotta level their alts for Kunark camp outs etc, sorry if it impacts your casual nostalgic EQ experience.

This is a little too close to the truth for my liking

[billwilliams]

Originally Posted by cd288 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

To me it depends on the camp. If it’s just your typical XP camp then I’m totally not going to go in and be like actually we’re in an outdoor zone you can’t camp the whole thing or stuff like that. But if it’s a really valuable cash camp for instance and you’re sitting there farming it for hours when you’re not getting any XP, then I don’t have a problem asking to split it up (and rule lawyering if you refuse).

You are a dumb-ASS - this is literally what I tried to do in both instances at the OOT sis hut (players not even getting xp, just cash farming for 24+ hour periods) in the RnF threads you flame me for BEFORE the players refused and THEN shit went the way you see it in their selective screenshots.

[Dolalin]

This was Verant's policy on camp disputes:

8.2.3 Contested Spawn Complaints

When a complaint is received indicating that a spawn or kill is contested, a disruption investigation should first be initiated according to the procedures of section 8.2.2 to determine if harassment or Zone/Area disruption is occurring. After following those procedures and issuing warnings as necessary, instruct the parties involved in the contested spawn situation to work out a compromise. Then leave the scene.

If another complaint is received involving the same spawn site, another disruption investigation should be initiated. After following those procedures and issuing warnings as necessary, if any of the parties involved were involved in the initial situation, establish a compromise for the parties to which the parties are required to abide. The compromise should be as described in section 8.2.3.1. Any party refusing to abide by the compromise established by the CS Representative should be issued a warning for disruption.

On PvP servers, where players can reach a solution to the contested spawn situation, the CS Representative does not need to require the players to share the spawn.

8.2.3.1
The compromise will require all parties to take turns killing the spawn(s). All parties involved in the contested spawn should be instructed to use /random 0 100 to choose a number. The CS Representative then uses /random 0 100. The individual with the closest number to the CS Representative’s number will be next in the rotation. The CS Representative then bases the rest of the rotation order on how close the other parties’ numbers were to theirs. The compromise established by a CS Representative must be objective and not require the CS Representative to choose one customer over another based on subjective criteria. The CS Representative is the arbiter in any disputes in establishing the compromise.

So Step 1 was, tell the players to stop the disruption and work out a sharing agreement.

If you got another petition, then Step 2 was to go there and enforce a compromise agreement. They would be forced to share the camp.

On Live, nobody had exclusive rights to a camp. That is a big difference between Live and P99 imo. I personally feel things should be more like Live.

[Dolalin]

Link is here btw:

http://wiki.project1999.com/Kunark_E...awn_Complaints

[magnetaress]

^^^ everywhine should be sharing lots

that means if 10 people want ac, you each get 1/10th of 1/8th of a chance to get at the AC every IRL 90 minutes. God bless you gready mossy twigs.

[magnetaress]

*greasy

[kaev]

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

On Live, nobody had exclusive rights to a camp. That is a big difference between Live and P99 imo. I personally feel things should be more like Live.

This ended a lot of disputes. When the char/group who could KS because more dps, or charm, or whatever were forced to share they often fucked off to somewhere else. Some camp disputes were one party trying to bully another off their camp, to be fair tho some were elf lawyers being dicks and demanding a share of a camp they weren't capable of breaking.