Camp times? 12 hours? 24?

[Gravydoo II]

Can a group just sit there for as long as they please and take every mob? Claim to have a list but dont actually go in order, just by "needs" on blue mobs 6v1?

[jolanar]

AFAIK there are no limits on camp times and you are not obligated to invite people based on how long they are waiting.

[Tethler]

Yes.

Regarding lists, if your tank leaves, you aren't gonna take a second healer just because that person is next, etc.

[Hibbs]

Can a group just sit there for as long as they please and take every mob? Claim to have a list but dont actually go in order, just by "needs" on blue mobs 6v1?

I think what you are talking about is an xp group.

I was always under the impression on p99 that if you are xping in a group or solo nothing obligates you to add anyone you dont want in your group. Some people prefer to solo, duo, trio, or full group w.e.

And for time frames; there is no cut off time limit for someone to stop exping lol. If they are pulling stuff and keeping an area down its camped by that person/group.

If the people you are talking about was being power leveled or something I usually feel a way. It sucks when you are trying to get some xp but a group can pull 3/4 of a dungeon cuz they have a 60 druid sitting behind them. That drive me nuts. Server rules dont really align with that kind of behavior.

If it's like a camp where they are waiting for a spawn or something... like AC. If you show up and someone is sitting there you can request a list and the person is supposed to tell you then and there who is the next person in line. If they dont answer you I think you would just say okay then I'm next. Usually I'd hang out or something to make sure no one else shows up. /shrug all I got. Hope it was helpful lol

[Legidias]

If its HHP idol, camp is ∞ hours long

[DMN]

If its HHP idol, camp is ∞ hours long

Like george carlin "It's a big list, but you ain't on it."

[loramin]

If the group/person is camping a LORE item they have to give up the camp after they acquire it. Otherwise, yes a single group/person can stay at a single camp indefinitely.

I think many players here would love to see a limit enforced, but I think the problem is that implementing one is tricky. For instance, what if a group changes out one member: is it considered a "new" group? What if it changes half its members? What if several people rotate a camp, passing it off to each other, so no one player ever has it for very long?

Without a good, simple, and easy to enforce rule, we're stuck with the system we have.

[loramin]

So you're not allowed to just corpse an endless amount of lore items and retain the camp anymore? Interesting

Correct. Technically it was always that way: when you die or zone you give up any camp, and you have to die to corpse the LORE item. However, people used to exploit others' ignorance to keep camping LORE items repeatedly, and now (from what I understand at least; I haven't actually tried doing it myself) the staff cracks down on that.

[Optti]

the players would love to see a limit on how long we can camp something implemented? who are you dude

[loramin]

the players would love to see a limit on how long we can camp something implemented? who are you dude

A) I said "many", and B) I honestly don't think most people on this server like the idea of a handful of people "locking" a camp down and monopolizing it for themselves for weeks at a time (something which absolutely has happened in the past with certain popular camps).

[Danth]

Loramin's right, if you get out of the high-end echo chamber and interact with the majority of the population. However, those sorts of camp restrictions tend to fall into the category of, "might be nice, but dunno how to realistically make it work."

In practice the number of camps that are permanently locked down in this fashion is rather small. It's a big game.

Danth

[Legidias]

If it goes away, entertaining threads like the one recently on Drusella Sathir will disappear too though D=

[Kirgoth123]

I think most players who only have 90 minutes to play would like some rule implemented to have big camp drops show up in their bank at the beginning of every session. Lets get to work on this: fungi, seahorse belt, narandi lance, all that shit, make it appear in bank for players with low playtime. I mean shit, everybody deserves gear they didnt put the time and effort in to attain.
While were at it, enchanters cant charm, shamans can't slow, necros have no pets, and pls remove mages from the game thanks. Will make it a lot easier on the other people to get phat lewtz. Man its rough playing a video game.

[Xaeophi]

A) I said "many", and B) I honestly don't think most people on this server like the idea of a handful of people "locking" a camp down and monopolizing it for themselves for weeks at a time (something which absolutely has happened in the past with certain popular camps).

Made a select few people millions before the nerf.

[Grizzler]

I have to agree. I enjoy camping in Droga with my alts. However since the chardock change, can't get down to chief at all cause all the 60's keeping it locked down.

It does get frustrating when you have a level appropriate group for a dungeon and the main camps are held by max levels indefinitely.

[loramin]

I have to agree. I enjoy camping in Droga with my alts. However since the chardock change, can't get down to chief at all cause all the 60's keeping it locked down.

It does get frustrating when you have a level appropriate group for a dungeon and the main camps are held by max levels indefinitely.

FWIW this is a (relatively) short-term problem. Right now Chardok 2.0 is new, and so everyone wants to do Droga ATM. But in time that excitement will die down.

I predict than in a year from now Droga may not be quite back to its old/dead self, but it should be much much closer and it should totally be possible for lower level groups to get camps there.

[Grizzler]

FWIW this is a (relatively) short-term problem. Right now Chardok 2.0 is new, and so everyone wants to do Droga ATM. But in time that excitement will die down.

I predict than in a year from now Droga may not be quite back to its old/dead self, but it should be much much closer and it should totally be possible for lower level groups to get camps there.

O there is definitely room for folks. The other night saw 26 ppl in there at one point and there were still tons of mobs. Wished more folks used it cause the money and xp is great for folks 35-44. Overall it does stink waiting for a single person to leave a camp so a group can take it but your probably right, its just popular right now.

Although gotta watch for the traitors, we killed one cause we were camping warder and some of the guys were not to happy.

[loramin]

Although gotta watch for the traitors, we killed one cause we were camping warder and some of the guys were not to happy.

Heh, I can imagine :) But really they shouldn't be; all you killing traitor means is they have to wait a little longer to ... get to wait a whole lot longer (to win a Shady Goblin roll).

[Optti]

I don't see anything wrong with locking a camp down, people need the item...

I get that it sucks trying to gear your main or whatever against alts but it shouldn't really matter.

This is everquest, no one is promised loot or camps, it is an interactive game. Interact and figure out how to get what you want.

[loramin]

I don't see anything wrong with locking a camp down, people need the item...

I get that it sucks trying to gear your main or whatever against alts but it shouldn't really matter.

This is everquest, no one is promised loot or camps, it is an interactive game. Interact and figure out how to get what you want.

I think it conflicts with how live was, and many people still want that experience here.

People never locked down camps in the classic era, or at least I've seen no in-era evidence of it. But I have seen the Verant guide book from that era (it got posted here awhile back), which included a play nice policy that specifically prohibited that sort of thing. In fact, it encouraged GMs to kick players out of camps once they got their item.

P99 is not live, and in this area in particular it especially isn't, because live had full-time paid GMs (and "sort of paid" guides), and P99 only has volunteers. But whatever policies P99 has to have in order for it to function, it won't change people pining for the classic EQ that they remember.

[DMN]

Drelzna was locked down on some servers be certain guilds/groups of people to extort as much cash from anyone who wanted to get boots. There were also guilds that would hold the frenzy for weeks.

[loramin]

I've seen no in-era evidence

I'm talking specifically about vanilla through Velious here. Again, I've seen the GM guidebook from that period, and the PNP in it was pretty clear about this stuff (way stronger than the P99 policies).

[DMN]

Well, it happened. Drelzna, the frenzy, and eventually the evil eye all got this sort of thing happening where guilds would lock them down and only switch in other guildies.

[loramin]

Well, it happened. Drelzna, the frenzy, and eventually the evil eye all got this sort of thing happening where guilds would lock them down and only switch in other guildies.

I'm not saying I don't believe you, but we're talking 20 year old memories of a 2 year period here. It's extremely easy (and extremely common here) for people to misremember stuff from Luclin on as coming from the classic era. Given that I've seen lots of posts from that time, and again, nothing whatsoever about camp lockdowns in that period, plus that directly contradicts the GM guidebook from that period, I'm ... suspicious of your (and anyone's) memories.

So again like everything else here we should base our opinions on evidence, and for that we all really should be asking Rygar what he's seen.

[DMN]

Why wouldn't a guild, with the members to do so, not lock down the EE? You can easily rotate people in that don't currently have a manastone so your claimed rules would not be relevant. On fenin for the first year or so DPS trumped all -- everywhere. You could easilly have mobs stole from you if someone else wanted, if you wanted to risk getting blacklisted however, which happened to many-an-asshole back in the day.

[loramin]

Why wouldn't a guild, with the members to do so, not lock down the EE? You can easily rotate people in that don't currently have a manastone so your claimed rules would not be relevant. On fenin for the first year or so DPS trumped all -- everywhere. You could easilly have mobs stole from you if someone else wanted, if you wanted to risk getting blacklisted however, which happened to many-an-asshole back in the day.

Your logic is that of a P99 player, not like a live player in '99-'01. I'm sorry, but if you want to convince me that the GMs ignored their own manual in the classic era it will take evidence. Go bribe Rygar ;)

[DMN]

Hrm. I'm not so sure guilds are going to want to go around bragging about permacamping vital end game items like the manastone once was. And people who bitch about it risk getting blacklisted. But absence of proof is not proof of absence. Also it's interesting you mention p99 and the "logic" of it. The result of too many rats and not enough cheese. Same thing happened in original EQ, but even worse. You had 2 dragons and that was it. Kedge wasn't itemized. Capped level players slumming around CT for rubicite for their twinks because they had nothing better to do.

[Gravydoo II]

that was happening for a while with shralok packs.. nobody was allowed to even get on the list. it was "between friends" which meant "fuck you noob, who cares if they are lvl 20 mobs and im a 53."

[Danth]

The defining characteristic of GM-led rule enforcement in the original game was the wild inconsistency of it all. Rulings and interpretation of the "play nice policy" varied from one server to the next, from one guide/GM to the next, and in many cases a given GM/guide would rule differently for different players. Both the guides and to a lesser (but still significant) degree the GMs were notoriously corrupt and quite often favored some entities over others. The only example the originals set is an example of how not to run things.

Danth

[Nilstoniakrath]

The defining characteristic of GM-led rule enforcement in the original game was the wild inconsistency of it all. Rulings and interpretation of the "play nice policy" varied from one server to the next, from one guide/GM to the next, and in many cases a given GM/guide would rule differently for different players. Both the guides and to a lesser (but still significant) degree the GMs were notoriously corrupt and quite often favored some entities over others. The only example the originals set is an example of how not to run things.

Danth

This is exactly why Blue sucks and Red is not so bad. Artificial rules about handing off camps to others and what not. Bottlenecks on key loots for MQs. Just let the players fight it out.

[Danth]

This is exactly why Blue sucks and Red is not so bad. Artificial rules about handing off camps to others and what not. Bottlenecks on key loots for MQs. Just let the players fight it out.

Can't agree there, my opinion of red and its culture is unfit for posting on this forum. Blue has some faults, but it's a decent experience overall.

Danth

[Tethler]

that was happening for a while with shralok packs.. nobody was allowed to even get on the list. it was "between friends" which meant "fuck you noob, who cares if they are lvl 20 mobs and im a 53."

I never experienced this on Terris-Thule. Was always level 10-high teens grouping here in classic era. Level appropriate groups always took prescedence.

[DMN]

Maybe they are talking about p99? I don't remember the pack guy being all that hot of a camped item in classic either. maybe because boxes of abu kar weren't terribly rare to get as drops. The granite tomahawk guy, man he was perma camped with people waitingin line. Maybe that's the guy he's thinking of.

[Optti]

You don't need evidence that camping items happened, people had the items, that is the evidence.

You need evidence to prove that there were rules in place that prevented this sort of thing during classic, that would prove your point.

Show me rules that say there is a limit on how long a camp can be held or that a player who owns a particular item is not allowed in said corresponding camp please.

[loramin]

You don't need evidence that camping items happened, people had the items, that is the evidence.

You need evidence to prove that there were rules in place that prevented this sort of thing during classic, that would prove your point.

Show me rules that say there is a limit on how long a camp can be held or that a player who owns a particular item is not allowed in said corresponding camp please.

8.2.3 Contested Spawn Complaints


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.

In other words, when two people fought over the camp there was no letting anyone keep it: they just made both parties roll off for it, then pass it in a rotation.

The idea of a camp being held for so long that a GM would even have to come back more than once wasn't even considered, let alone someone holding a camp for even 24 hours! The idea of "locking" a camp for days, let alone months at a time, was quite frankly impossible according to these guidelines: disputes were resolved by the random mechanism on the second GM visit, and if people didn't like it they faced GM wrath (... except on PvP servers of course.)

And I should note what a relatively small portion of the GM guidebook that section is (there were seven more entire sections before, and one after plus some apendices). Camp disputes really weren't the bulk of CSR work on live; they were busy dealing with people falling through the world and other such nonsense :)

But again, all this is irrelevant here: P99 does not have a paid staff of GMs/Guides, so it's unreasonable to expect similar CSR policies here. Our volunteers have less time and more difficult players, so I imagine that's why they can't "babysit" camp rotations to re-create classic policies.

I post the above only to point out how distorted people's memories of live are ... but even then (as others have noted) CSR policies were applied wildly inconsistently, so even with this "proof" it's hard to say anyone's memories are "wrong", because the people staffing their server might have ignored the book. Also, pretty much everyone live feared GMs, so there was very little if any comprehensive "testing" of these policies by players :D

[Jimjam]

The number of times I have 't fell thru the world is rather nonclassic.

[DMN]

I think 90% of the guides duties were responding to "my corpse is lost/stuck. HALP"

[Gravydoo II]

Maybe they are talking about p99? I don't remember the pack guy being all that hot of a camped item in classic either. maybe because boxes of abu kar weren't terribly rare to get as drops. The granite tomahawk guy, man he was perma camped with people waitingin line. Maybe that's the guy he's thinking of.


I was talking about P99. Ive only been on here for 1.5 months or so... The shralok packs are damn near impossible to get into line. Most of the time, the people wont even reply if you talk to him because they know you gonna ask about list. No reply, no list.

[elwing]

If you are after the pack, forget about hhp, go to kiticor, the mob there is static, almost on the wall on a safe spot during the night, spawn in around 1/3 ph kill and has the bag 100%... Don't go on the hhp camp unless you want the idols, with all the heavy competition...