Stormfeather rules need to change

[DeathsSilkyMist]

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

Something has to change. If you ban selling loot rights these people that take camps for 90% of the time will just corpse the item and sell the MQ. I don't have a solution, but the way it is right now when someone has a camp for 90% of the time it's just incredibly not fun. Maybe do what Maddus mentioned and make there be a cooldown per account?

There is no elegant solution, aside from instancing. But P99 will never do that.

The devs aren't going to want to keep track of who's looted what over the past X days. They have this information of course, but they probably do not have an automated tool that prevents you from looting a specific item. Too much effort to build this for just a few specific camps, and the GM's probably don't have time to manually enforce it.

The available options would be:
1. FTE like Lodi
2. A forced roll like Ring 8 or Scout
3. A List

None of these options give you a great chance of looting Stormfeather. Personally I like the list option the best, as I can at least predict how much time it will take to get the item.

There are people who lose roll on scout like 50 times in a row, or just never get FTE.

[Zuranthium]

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

Something has to change. If you ban selling loot rights these people that take camps for 90% of the time will just corpse the item and sell the MQ.

The problem (aside from the game having bad spawn and quest design) is that p99 does not follow the Classic EQ rules. Nobody ever owned a camp in Classic EQ. You either won by DPS (policy during the first year of the game) or you were required to rotate (play nice policy).

The unclassic policy on p99 allows people to monopolize camps, directing catering to no-lifers and RMT'ers.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

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

The problem (aside from the game having bad spawn and quest design) is that p99 does not follow the Classic EQ rules. Nobody ever owned a camp in Classic EQ. You either won by DPS (policy during the first year of the game) or you were required to rotate (play nice policy).

The unclassic policy on p99 allows people to monopolize camps, directing catering to no-lifers and RMT'ers.

A DPS policy would allow monopolization as well. You just have a static group of 6 wizards nuke the mob and split the MQ money. You could box multiple chars on live too.

Rotations are just pseudo instancing.

[BradZax]

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

A DPS policy would allow monopolization as well. You just have a static group of 6 wizards nuke the mob and split the MQ money. You could box multiple chars on live too.

Rotations are just pseudo instancing.

can steal the kill with a trak tooth in that scenario for when you really want a map! [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

now a bunch of SK gangsters keeping it down would be tough.

[Belambic]

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

The problem (aside from the game having bad spawn and quest design) is that p99 does not follow the Classic EQ rules. Nobody ever owned a camp in Classic EQ. You either won by DPS (policy during the first year of the game) or you were required to rotate (play nice policy).

The unclassic policy on p99 allows people to monopolize camps, directing catering to no-lifers and RMT'ers.

When you say no one ever owned a camp in classic, what exactly do you mean by that?

[DeathsSilkyMist]

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

can steal the kill with a trak tooth in that scenario for when you really want a map! [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

now a bunch of SK gangsters keeping it down would be tough.

Good point lol. 6 level 60 SK's with HT disc would be tough to beat. A no lifer could box all 6 too on live. Just gotta be in position and press 1 button.

[Zuranthium]

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

A DPS policy would allow monopolization as well. You just have a static group of 6 wizards nuke the mob and split the MQ money.

DPS race doesn't allow monopolization at all. A single player doesn't have 6 wizards and if a 6 person group wants to try and perma hold a camp (much less lucrative and much harder to maintain and coordinate), anyone else can gather 6 wizards themselves and compete for the camp (SK's would be best here).

If that many people are gathered then it essentially becomes "which group happened to click their nukes the fastest" (similar to FTE but requiring more people and coordination to win), with the added strategy of determining exactly which nuke is best for the target — you want the fastest way to deal majority damage, which fluctuates depending on exactly how many people are there.

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

Rotations are just pseudo instancing.

Rotations aren't instancing; you're not sitting in a zone alone and it doesn't create more loot in the game world as a whole. The current p99 rules are the most anti-social and pro-cheater thing possible, basically turning camps into instancing for 1 single no-lifer.

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

When you say no one ever owned a camp in classic, what exactly do you mean by that?

I mean exactly that - nobody was ever allowed to have a camp to themselves. The classic play nice policy dictated that people MUST share, using rotations, if anyone else comes and wants to camp the same spawn. And before the play nice policy it was DPS race.

This is the exact wording the devs used when instituting the play nice policy:

Like any society, we have our underbelly. They are the ones who claim ownership of servers, zones, or spawns.

There are cases where two or more groups wish to kill the same thing. In these cases, the groups are required to compromise.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

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

DPS race doesn't allow monopolization at all. A single player doesn't have 6 wizards and if a 6 person group wants to try and perma hold a camp (much less lucrative and much harder to maintain and coordinate), anyone else can gather 6 wizards themselves and compete for the camp (SK's would be best here).

If that many people are gathered then it essentially becomes "which group happened to click their nukes the fastest" (similar to FTE but requiring more people and coordination to win), with the added strategy of determining exactly which nuke is best for the target — you want the fastest way to deal majority damage, which fluctuates depending on exactly how many people are there.



Rotations aren't instancing; you're not sitting in a zone alone and it doesn't create more loot in the game world as a whole. The current p99 rules are the most anti-social and pro-cheater thing possible, basically turning camps into instancing for 1 single no-lifer.



I mean exactly that - nobody was ever allowed to have a camp to themselves. The classic play nice policy dictated that people MUST share, using rotations, if anyone else comes and wants to camp the same spawn. And before the play nice policy it was DPS race.

This is the exact wording the devs used when instituting the play nice policy:

Rotations are psuedo instancing.

A simple example is let's say 3 guilds are on rotation for Vulak, and Vulak has his normal 7 day timer:

1. Guild A gets Vulak Week 1
2. Guild B gets Vulak Week 2
3. Guild C gets Vulak week 3
4. Guild A gets Vulak Week 4
5. Guild B gets Vulak Week 5
6. Guild C gets Vulak week 6

If you had guild specific instancing on a 42 day cooldown:

1. Guild A gets Vulak Week 1
2. Guild B gets Vulak Week 1
3. Guild C gets Vulak week 1
4. Guild A gets Vulak Week 6
5. Guild B gets Vulak Week 6
6. Guild C gets Vulak week 6

Each guild would get the same number of uncontested Vulaks per year. Functionally rotations and instancing are the same for the purpose of getting the kills people acrually want. You typically don't see ToV trash or HoT contested enough on P99 for instancing trash mobs to matter in terms of drops.

If you think camps couldn't be monopolized on live in 1999, you are simply wrong. People could box multiple accounts. Does a DPS policy allow competition? Sure. But you are going to lose most of the time against a static group of 12 SK's with HT. If that group wins the camp 90% of the time, most people would consider that monopolization.

Even camps on P99 aren't actually monopolized 24/7 by one person or group forever. Back when guilds were permacamping idols for raids, there were times where people didn't replace one another at a camp, and a different guild or player took over.

If someone never logs out, but is AFK, the P99 PnP allows you to take that camp if they don't engage the mob after a period of time. Most people just aren't willing to out neck beard the existing neckbeards by watching them 24/7 for a mistake.

If you really want to take a camp, get some friends together who can rotate 24/7 on a camp that is being taken. You'll probably find a mistake and exploit it.

[BradZax]

guys its been like 17 years.

Just vote for an in game president every year to decide the rules IMO

would be fun to have in game elections too and immersive

[Zuranthium]

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

Functionally rotations and instancing are the same for the purpose of getting the kills people actually want.

No they aren't. Instancing means everyone does content separately, whenever they want to. Rotations mean you're still in the game world with everyone else (will hear talk, need to react to trains) and you need to kill the spawn exactly when it comes up, and if you fail to get the kill, then the next group available gets their chance.

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

If you think camps couldn't be monopolized on live in 1999, you are simply wrong. People could box multiple accounts. Does a DPS policy allow competition? Sure. But you are going to lose most of the time against a static group of 12 SK's with HT.

Very few people were boxing back then and 12 people joining forces is not at all a monopoly, ANYONE else can gather that same force together if they want to, and there's never going to be the same 12 people continually spending all of their time at a camp like this. It's not lucrative and having more than 6 doesn't help much.