Quote:
Originally Posted by thdapparels
[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
As someone that has held this camp in shifts for 96 hours. Its horrible, it sucks, constant pressure is obnoxious. It requires a coordinated group of players being on in shifts to really lock it down. All of these are tough obstacles to overcome, but this is the way it should be. Stop trying to make every camp snaccpack accessible. I am a fan of solo artist challenges, but trying to rework a camp to make it solo artist viable appeases a couple people, not the majority.
|
I'm all for making things "real classic hard" ... but P99's policy on DS and the list camps simply isn't classic.
Look, guilds absolutely, 100% monopolized content in classic ... but they were just more active than their competitors: they never truly "locked" anything down the way people here do, because there was no camp holding in classic. It didn't matter if you, or your guild, had been sitting there for 100 hours: you had no more claim to the mob than anyone else.
That may sound crazy to everyone here who is used to the P99 way, but we have the GM Guidelines from Kunark/Velious, so we know exactly how camp disputes were resolved in classic:
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by https://wiki.project1999.com/Kunark_Era_Customer_Service_Guidelines#Contested
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.
|
TLDR; /list and the Play Nice Policies have served P99 well over the years ... but the server can be better AND more classic by switching to a random system. Keep /list, and use it in more places like DS (with a little adjustment required, as noted in this thread) ... but make it so everyone on the list (#2 or #29) has a chance to become #1 when #1 leaves.
08-09-2024, 04:35 PM
Hybrid Mode
