Rules regarding camps when someone has gotten the named spawn

[Samoht]

Idols (or lack there of) don't keep you from competing. There are a lot of targets in this game. Velious introduced TONS of new bosses in MANY different zones.

Guilds can do Tunare, Kael, Sleepers, Zlandi, Yeli, WToV, Dain, etc without even clicking an idol. That's just the new Velious content.

Let's be honest, though. Is OPs complaint about Riot and Vanquish keeping the idol camp on lock down or is this just another passive complaint about the NToV train meta?

Is OP in kittens? Please tell me OP is in kittens.

[Zenren]

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

Idols (or lack there of) don't keep you from competing. There are a lot of targets in this game. Velious introduced TONS of new bosses in MANY different zones.

Guilds can do Tunare, Kael, Sleepers, Zlandi, Yeli, WToV, Dain, etc without even clicking an idol. That's just the new Velious content.

Let's be honest, though. Is OPs complaint about Riot and Vanquish keeping the idol camp on lock down or is this just another passive complaint about the NToV train meta?

Is OP in kittens? Please tell me OP is in kittens.

Is OP recognizing that this is the kind of attitude that they're talking about, the "we can do it and we are going to do it and if you don't like it go <bleep> yourself attitude." I'm not mentioning names, because it's really not about guild's so much as it is behavior that's really inappropriate and unfair to the community. As an aside, I don't think Kittens would actually allow people to lockdown a camp like this, they have a "play nice" rule that means members aren't supposed to be disruptive towards the community or zone, and this is pretty disruptive. There's a reason the general populous isn't calling the KWSM names or complaining about how they're stealing camps or acting like jerks. This is just an aside since you went there and thought naming names was a good thing. Nice spamming btw.

[Samoht]

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

it is behavior that's really inappropriate and unfair to the community.

Unfair how exactly? That's what I'm waiting for any of you to explain. Shiny Brass Idols have basically zero use for anybody outside of the guilds camping them.

Are you upset just because you can't camp them to sell them to the guilds that want them?

[DeathsSilkyMist]

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

Is OP recognizing that this is the kind of attitude that they're talking about, the "we can do it and we are going to do it and if you don't like it go <bleep> yourself attitude." I'm not mentioning names, because it's really not about guild's so much as it is behavior that's really inappropriate and unfair to the community. As an aside, I don't think Kittens would actually allow people to lockdown a camp like this, they have a "play nice" rule that means members aren't supposed to be disruptive towards the community or zone, and this is pretty disruptive. There's a reason the general populous isn't calling the KWSM names or complaining about how they're stealing camps or acting like jerks. This is just an aside since you went there and thought naming names was a good thing. Nice spamming btw.

Not trying to be mean here, but when you play a non-instanced MMO, this is what you sign up for. There is competition for resources. Literally just about every other MMO on the market (including EQ live and TLP) offer instancing. If you don't like a non-instanced MMO, play another game.

There is no solution to this problem other than instancing, and people like playing here because it is non-instanced. Once you make P99 instanced, it will be the death of the server because you are now basically trying to be a free TLP server, in direct competition with the paid TLP servers. It will probably get shut down at that point. It won't even be that much different than the TLP servers once you put in instancing. If you want instancing, play the TLP servers.

Kittens would camp these items around the clock too if they had players willing to do so. The only reason why Kittens doesn't do this is because they are more casual than the top raiding guilds. That doesn't make them altruistic, or play more fairly. This isn't meant to be an insult to Kittens, I think they are a great guild and a huge benefit to this server. But that "play nice policy" you are talking about is the same as the P99 play nice policy, you can't be disruptive to the zone.

Camping an item is not considered zone disruption. It would be silly to say that, since you have no idea if the player is even getting the item they are after. EQ can screw you over to the point where you are waiting literal days in time for an item. How are you going to prove that? Will you just force someone to stop camping an item because you want a turn? That is just as selfish, and if you were honest with yourself you would probably consider that zone disruption too. You are forcing players to change what they are doing to fit your schedule.

[Videri]

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

Idols (or lack there of) don't keep you from competing. There are a lot of targets in this game. Velious introduced TONS of new bosses in MANY different zones.

Guilds can do Tunare, Kael, Sleepers, Zlandi, Yeli, WToV, Dain, etc without even clicking an idol. That's just the new Velious content.

Let's be honest, though. Is OPs complaint about Riot and Vanquish keeping the idol camp on lock down or is this just another passive complaint about the NToV train meta?

Is OP in kittens? Please tell me OP is in kittens.

Lesser raid guilds also encourage/incentivize members to get a list of items including DA idols. You're right that a lot of raid content doesn't require DA idols, but people still try to get one because they believe it's necessary to be prepared for general raiding. Guilds and players trying to claw their way up the raid ladder will camp these idols and other stuff too, despite the fact that they don't need them for Dain or whatever.

[ReoDobbs]

The fact the the person can dictate who they hand the camp off to is a shit rule. I'm not sure why people are citing "the PnP" (hypocritical name btw) when the OP asked for opinions on the behavior and not what the rules of the server are.

It's a scumbag move, end of story but typical and people are rewarded for scumbagging under the "play nice policy"

[loramin]

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

The fact the the person can dictate who they hand the camp off to is a shit rule.

This. The PnP are largely awesome, and when they're not it's usually because of a limit of our all-volunteer GM team. This rule is an anomaly: it isn't needed by volunteer GMs, and it makes the server worse by encouraging lockdowns on camps.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

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

This. The PnP are largely awesome, and when they're not it's usually because of a limit of our all-volunteer GM team. This rule is an anomaly: it isn't needed by volunteer GMs, and it makes the server worse by encouraging lockdowns on camps.

The person owning the camp getting to pick makes the most sense. Unless they implement /list globally (which would really suck), there is no way to know who the correct next person in line is. Lets say you go to the bathroom, come back, and three people are there waiting for you to finish camping the mob.

Who got there first, second and third? No way to know if the other players disagree, unless you were recording or catch some good evidence in your logs. Unless we require everyone to record and/or use logs when playing, most people wouldn't have this kind of evidence.

Someone has to make the final decision without GM intervention (they don't have time to arbitrate every dispute), and that person is obviously the camp owner. I am not sure how you would handle this situation otherwise, since the people who arrived have no ownership or claim on the camp currently, so their opinions are equally worthless compared to the current camp owner.

It wouldn't be fair to the camp owner if the people waiting in line somehow had more say on the matter than the current camp owner. Forcibly taking over a camp is camp stealing, and against the rules. That is basically what would end up happening if the people waiting in line could somehow overrule the current camp owner. If it was a vote, of course the current camp owner would get voted out lol.

[loramin]

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

The person owning the camp getting to pick makes the most sense. Unless they implement /list globally (which would really suck), there is no way to know who the correct next person in line is. Lets say you go to the bathroom, come back, and three people are there waiting for you to finish camping the mob.

Who got there first, second and third? No way to know if the other players disagree, unless you were recording or catch some good evidence in your logs. Unless we require everyone to record and/or use logs when playing, most people wouldn't have this kind of evidence.

Someone has to make the final decision without GM intervention (they don't have time to arbitrate every dispute), and that person is obviously the camp owner. I am not sure how you would handle this situation otherwise, since the people who arrived have no ownership or claim on the camp currently, so their opinions are equally worthless compared to the current camp owner.

It wouldn't be fair to the camp owner if the people waiting in line somehow had more say on the matter than the current camp owner. Forcibly taking over a camp is camp stealing, and against the rules. That is basically what would end up happening if the people waiting in line could somehow overrule the current camp owner. If it was a vote, of course the current camp owner would get voted out lol.

None of that has to be like that. It could be very simple: if three people are waiting for the camp, they random and the winner takes it.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

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

None of that has to be like that. It could be very simple: if three people are waiting for the camp, they random and the winner takes it.

I think you missed my point. The method of determining who is in line is not relevant. The problem is who handles disputes when they arise, besides a GM?

Let's take your example and say three people are in line. They all /random to determine line order. But let's say the person who got third place in line honestly didn't get the /random messages from the other players and demands a re-roll. The other two players don't agree, and assume the third place player is attempting to initiate a re-roll to get a better position in line. Who settles this dispute? It can't be the three players attempting to determine line order, as they all have an equal stake in the line order. Their bias will probably affect any decision they make to find a resolution.

Either you require a GM at that point, or the owner of the camp becomes the deciding factor. No other person can take an elevated authority in this matter, as everybody in line has an equal stake in becoming the next camp owner. So you can't trust them to make a selfless decision when it comes to who should be next. I am not saying there aren't selfless people out there that will give up their spot, but it is more of the exception than the rule.

And please do not try and cite special camps like Ring 8 or Scout Tools. Those camps have special rules, and normally enough players are rolling to where people can come to a consensus as to who won. GMs probably are willing to handle a dispute for those camps than random camps as well, since there are special rules. Most camps only have a few players in line maximum, so it becomes more difficult to handle disputes, as it will often devolve into he-said she-said.

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

So, actually I thought the rule was that a list was kept and you had to state who was second when asked and if you don't respond then the person who asked automatically gets the camp by default.

Yes, that is the AFK rules in terms of being able to take a camp if no one responds. However, most people do not just instantly take a camp if you do not respond in 5 seconds. It is bad manners because people do sometimes go to the bathroom for a minute, and you would probably want the same courtesy. I already mentioned this earlier in the thread. You can potentially take a camp if everyone at the camp is AFK for too long. Ask the person/people if they are around and wait like 15 minutes. If you don't get a response, you have the right to take the camp. The other person/people will complain of course, but it doesn't matter. You should just record the person being AFK for 15 minutes, so you can use it as evidence later if elf laywering is needed.

Also, if multiple people are in line, usually they will tell you they are in line. Even if someone lies about line order, if they are there already when you get there, at minimum you are behind the responsive people.

Finally, I do not believe lines are a hard rule, other than the /list camps on Green. Lines are typically the most commonly agreed upon player rule that most people obey, but there is technically no requirement to enforce it lol. The only person that matters is the current camp owner, everybody else is just a potential camp owner. It's more of a gentleman's agreement that most people obey, because if you are too much of a dick people won't play with you, and also you would be pissed if someone else disobeyed the agreement.

TLDR: The owner of the camp gets to pick because disputes between potential camp owners do arise, and the GM's do not have time to handle every single dispute. They place the responsibility of the dispute on the camp owner, because he is the only one who doesn't have a stake in who gets the camp next. This makes sense, because the camp owner is already camping the item. GM's shouldn't need to get involved unless someone attempts to forcibly take the camp. Now, does this mean the camp owner can use that authority to get his buddies into the camp next? Yes it does, but there really isn't a way around that, unless you allow camp stealing to occur in fringe cases like this. I don't think you would want that lol.