Found my first a-hole on the Blue Server

[cd288]

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

In the PnP, please show how me where it says that sitting down in front of a spawn point (that you didn't kill) grants you exclusive ownership of the next spawn at that point.

Buddy, if you kill the spawn and then log off (i.e., you leave the zone and the camp) I can now come claim that camp and kill the next spawn.

There's never been a scenario where a GM has responded to a petition and given the camp back to the person who left the zone. It now becomes the new camper's camp. It doesn't matter if the spawns are down when the next person arrives at the camp. If no one is there it's now their camp...as long as they clear the spawns within a reasonable amount of time on respawn. It's really odd that someone who has apparently been on this sever a long time is being obtuse about how the staff views camps.

[cd288]

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

"online experiences may vary" in eula applies to CSR rulings also.

everyone focusing on the rule lawyering, the tells is what rubs me the wrong way with the passive aggressiveness "you can have the camp if you really want it" my brother in christ you're in the warrens together what the fuck do you think he's sitting there for.

The PnP is also old. Staff have consistently ruled this as the new arrival at the camp gets the camp if the other person left the zone.

Take sisters camp in LFay for example. Someone who can't vendor in zone runs back to Steamfont to sell at the Druid rings. Someone logs in for a session, sees there's no one at the camp, spawns are down so does a /who in the zone and finds it empty but for them, they can now claim that camp. I have watched staff rule this way countless times for 7 years on this camp and basically every other.

[loramin]

The PnP are the server rules, not whatever you imagine them to be. And again ...

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

In the PnP, please show how me where it says that sitting down in front of a spawn point (that you didn't kill) grants you exclusive ownership of the next spawn at that point.

[sammoHung]

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

The PnP are the server rules, not whatever you imagine them to be. And again ...

After some digging - Loramin is indeed correct. The first player lost their camp after leaving the zone, making in unclaimed.

From: https://wiki.project1999.com/Play_Ni...e.2FLose_Camps

Losing Camps
Players lose camps when any of the following occurs:
...
The player leaves the zone, dies, or similarly "reloads"

But, that doesn't mean just sitting at the spawn gives the second player the camp:

From: https://wiki.project1999.com/Play_Ni...Unclaimed_Camp

You can claim an unclaimed camp by being the first to engage a mob at that camp.

[sammoHung]

All of that being said: Fuckin communicate, people.

If I was at the spawn point and nobody was there - but then someone showed up:

Me: Hey, were you camping this?
Them: Yes
Me: Ok, have a great day - good luck!

It's that damn simple. The fuckin pixels aren't going anywhere. King respawns every 48 minutes until the server shuts down.

[shovelquest]

Theres 1 post ITT per player on this server

[cd288]

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

The PnP are the server rules, not whatever you imagine them to be. And again ...

Of course they're not what I imagine them to be. They're what the staff has repeatedly ruled they are in live situations. At that point, it doesn't matter what the PnP says if the staff consistently rules in a somewhat different manner.

Your argument is like saying "well this law uses these words, and the Supreme Court has ruled this is what words mean, but that doesn't matter and we should just ignore that."

The argument that you should be making is that the PnP be updated to be in line with how the staff treats the situations in real time. This has been an issue plaguing P99 in the past. The staff begins ruling something a certain way consistently, but it's technically in conflict with the plain language of the PnP. This is one of those situations where a player would be wise to not abide strictly by the language of the PnP and assume they can just come in and FTE the camp...the staff have suspended people for that in the past.

[loramin]

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

Of course they're not what I imagine them to be. They're what the staff has repeatedly ruled they are in live situations. At that point, it doesn't matter what the PnP says if the staff consistently rules in a somewhat different manner.

Your argument is like saying "well this law uses these words, and the Supreme Court has ruled this is what words mean, but that doesn't matter and we should just ignore that."

The argument that you should be making is that the PnP be updated to be in line with how the staff treats the situations in real time. This has been an issue plaguing P99 in the past. The staff begins ruling something a certain way consistently, but it's technically in conflict with the plain language of the PnP. This is one of those situations where a player would be wise to not abide strictly by the language of the PnP and assume they can just come in and FTE the camp...the staff have suspended people for that in the past.

My argument is that the people enforcing the rules generally adhere to the posted rules (ie. the PnP).

When a single poster reports "but my friend's mother's uncle's cousin got a different ruling one time at band camp", it doesn't change my opinion.

[cd288]

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

My argument is that the people enforcing the rules generally adhere to the posted rules (ie. the PnP).

When a single poster reports "but my friend's mother's uncle's cousin got a different ruling one time at band camp", it doesn't change my opinion.

They don't on this issue though? Anyone who has played on this server for years knows that, which is why I'm so surprised you're debating this...or maybe you haven't played in a long time and are just reading the forums.

At any rate, if that's your opinion you're welcome to have it. But anyone reading this thread would be wise to ignore it and expect the staff to rule that whoever is sitting at the camp has claimed the camp if the prior person has left the zone or hasn't left the zone but returned to the camp and cleared spawns within a reasonable period of time of them spawning. Which is the way staff have ruled for years regardless of what the PnP on the Wiki says.

[loramin]

Yup, anyone reading this can decide which ruleset to follow: CD288's beliefs, or the rules spelled out by the server's creators.