Epic Camp Handoffs

[Amelinda]

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

The world isn't black and white... you can write a rule where somebody with stupid lawyer talk can make it seem like the opposite of its intent.

I think intent / vision of a rule is more important that nitpicking pronouns or verbs in a sentence.

Unfortunately there are MANY rules lawyers on this server who want to nitpick and rules lawyer and there are also more tattle tales on this server than in a pre-school classroom. and by "Tattle tales" i mean people who will tattle over the slightest non-issue rather than solving things themselves or manning (womaning) up and dealing with the person they have a problem with.

[QUOTE=Psionide;509695]What I still don't understand on p99 is other guilds trying to purposely fuck other guilds over. If it's simply because they don't like each other then ok I guess that's good enough, if its just simply competition to see who the better guild then ok I get the competetion but wouldn't they wanna see who was better with equal gear/circumstances?/QUOTE]

It's just because they don't like each other. but most of them don't have valid reasons not to like the other ones - they just don't like the guild tag that the other people wear.

[Autotune]

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

solving things themselves or manning (womaning) up and dealing with the person they have a problem with.

WOOT, when the tears start rolling, i'll direct them to you [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

[Juugox2]

lol not like your gonna get the camp tho that epic battle for hours will be more fun then that petty epic [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]DDD

[Chronoburn]

OH NOS NOW I'LL NEVER GET MY EPIC

[Glitterati]

Kinda glad right now us druids and rangers can sit in hippie drum circles smoking hobbit weed, drinking elvish wine foraging thru the grass.....

[Sajan]

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

Kinda glad right now us druids and rangers can sit in hippie drum circles smoking hobbit weed, drinking elvish wine foraging thru the grass.....

[Uthgaard]

JCP was an experiment of mine. The problem with the camp rules as they stand is that they are surrounded by extremely large grey areas with no means to determine the rightness or wrongness of a claim to a camp when it reaches a large permacamp situation.

When you have 15 or more people at a camp, each attempting to rationalize that their claim to a camp is tethered to how long someone else has been there, it's illogical and places all of the responsibility for figuring it out on the staff, and simply stated: players lie.

The JCP camp experiment was a success. It placed the responsibility back on the players, brought the amount of staff involvement down to a tiny fraction of its previous daily requirement, and reintroduced a previously absent component of holding a camp: responsibility.

With the extreme privelege of claim to a camp, comes the responsibility to invest one's own time into it. That it still runs with that rule in place is a testament to its success, and you can see from the poll here that it's favored more than 2.5 to 1 - with as many indifferent as there are for it - and those few voting against it being the players from major guilds that are most notorious for their hissy fits. They are motivated only by interest in preventing other players from meeting their goals, not in the interest of meeting their own.

With any privelege has to come some responsibility. In this case, it's either your responsibiliy or the staff's. You can see the logical conclusion.

[Motec]

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

JCP was an experiment of mine. The problem with the camp rules as they stand is that they are surrounded by extremely large grey areas with no means to determine the rightness or wrongness of a claim to a camp when it reaches a large permacamp situation.

When you have 15 or more people at a camp, each attempting to rationalize that their claim to a camp is tethered to how long someone else has been there, it's illogical and places all of the responsibility for figuring it out on the staff, and simply stated: players lie.

The JCP camp experiment was a success. It placed the responsibility back on the players, brought the amount of staff involvement down to a tiny fraction of its previous daily requirement, and reintroduced a previously absent component of holding a camp: responsibility.

With the extreme privelege of claim to a camp, comes the responsibility to invest one's own time into it. That it still runs with that rule in place is a testament to its success, and you can see from the poll here that it's favored more than 2.5 to 1 - with as many indifferent as there are for it - and those few voting against it being the players from major guilds that are most notorious for their hissy fits. They are motivated only by interest in preventing other players from meeting their goals, not in the interest of meeting their own.

With any privelege has to come some responsibility. In this case, it's either your responsibiliy or the staff's. You can see the logical conclusion.

Could of just made the prod no drop for 6 months.

Then claim that was classic and ignore all evidence, claims and good will to the contrary.

It's not like you don't blatantly change shit wrong all the time anyway.

[Orruar]

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

With the extreme privelege of claim to a camp, comes the responsibility to invest one's own time into it. That it still runs with that rule in place is a testament to its success, and you can see from the poll here that it's favored more than 2.5 to 1 - with as many indifferent as there are for it - and those few voting against it being the players from major guilds that are most notorious for their hissy fits. They are motivated only by interest in preventing other players from meeting their goals, not in the interest of meeting their own.

With any privelege has to come some responsibility. In this case, it's either your responsibiliy or the staff's. You can see the logical conclusion.

1) A majority of people would vote to enslave a minority for their own benefit. Doesn't mean it's the right thing to do. It's why America was founded as a Constitutional republic instead of a pure democracy.

2) I voted no and I'm the only one in my guild, so your assumption about only those in top guilds voting no is wrong. Some of us actually think that the players should work things out for themselves. Usually it starts with being reasonable and treating the other party as a reasonable person. A few things can cause this to break down rather quickly, which leads me to my next point.

3) When people think they can gain an advantage by bringing a GM into it, they will be less likely to try and work things out with their fellow player. If you're basically saying that a JCP rule will be put into place if people fight over spawns enough, and you already noted the popularity of the JCP rule, what do you think is going to happen?

Once you intervene here, you're going to be dragged in deeper and deeper. It's like a war. Either nuke the place, or don't get involved. There is no good middle ground. If you get a petition over some camp dispute at pawbuster, ae DT everyone in the area and despawn the warlord room for 48 hours, or do nothing. Anything in between will just lead to a bigger headache tomorrow.

[Flunklesnarkin]

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

1) A majority of people would vote to enslave a minority for their own benefit. Doesn't mean it's the right thing to do. It's why America was founded as a Constitutional republic instead of a pure democracy.

2) I voted no and I'm the only one in my guild, so your assumption about only those in top guilds voting no is wrong. Some of us actually think that the players should work things out for themselves. Usually it starts with being reasonable and treating the other party as a reasonable person. A few things can cause this to break down rather quickly, which leads me to my next point.

3) When people think they can gain an advantage by bringing a GM into it, they will be less likely to try and work things out with their fellow player. If you're basically saying that a JCP rule will be put into place if people fight over spawns enough, and you already noted the popularity of the JCP rule, what do you think is going to happen?

Once you intervene here, you're going to be dragged in deeper and deeper. It's like a war. Either nuke the place, or don't get involved. There is no good middle ground. If you get a petition over some camp dispute at pawbuster, ae DT everyone in the area and despawn the warlord room for 48 hours, or do nothing. Anything in between will just lead to a bigger headache tomorrow.

While i agree with the sentiment.. killing everybody in the area and despawning the monster wouldn't solve the problem.. if anything it would make camp griefing worse..

One guy gets item then his guild would perpetually dispute the camp for uber leetness status of their one player.


I don't believe anarchy is a good way to run a game.. heck even on the pvp red server they have rules.