Question: Chardok named camping policy.

[Goregasmic]

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

So, here's the "fun" thing about P99: there are multiple versions of the rules, and they don't all agree. If you check the one that's linked to from the Starting Zone, ie. https://www.project1999.com/forums/s...d.php?t=325349, you'll see nothing about that.

I'm reading the "pnp enhanced" version here with seemed the most up to date.

https://wiki.project1999.com/Play_Nice_Policy_Enhanced

I suspect this rule was added specifically for the chardok situation since it is probably where 99% of that happens.

[Lookingforrez]

The only solution to this problem is to nerf enchanters and shaman to the point that they can't solo Chardok anymore.

[Goregasmic]

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

The only solution to this problem is to nerf enchanters and shaman to the point that they can't solo Chardok anymore.

You forgot necros and druids.

[loramin]

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

I'm reading the "pnp enhanced" version here with seemed the most up to date.

https://wiki.project1999.com/Play_Nice_Policy_Enhanced

I suspect this rule was added specifically for the chardok situation since it is probably where 99% of that happens.

I made that page with the best of intentions: I thought if people could more easily read the rules, they could more easily follow them. However, I knew the rules might change someday, so I let anyone update the page.

Unfortunately another editor (who doesn't have a history of being malicious, so I'm guessing it was a well-intended mistake?) made a change to that page: https://wiki.project1999.com/index.p...2&oldid=234153

However, as far as I know, there have been no changes to the official rules. I'll admin-lock the page to prevent future issues, and I'm sorry for the confusion ... but the rules I've quoted are the correct ones.

[sajbert]

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

One can Gate with or without leaving the zone.

If the OP did leave the zone, he clearly lost all his camps the moment he gated. But, if he gated in-zone, there's no rule against walking away from your camps ... as long as you're back when respawn happens (or a "reasonable" amount of time thereafter).

Even if you gate in zone you left the camp and lost LoS to the target. Forfeit.

[loramin]

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

Even if you gate in zone you left the camp and lost LoS to the target. Forfeit.

That's not how the rules work: you only lose the camp if you leave the zone, die, or fail to engage the respawn in a "reasonable" amount of time:

that 'camp' can be considered held by the player doing the killing so long as they are keeping the placeholders (or the room if there are no placeholders) cleared, within the same zone, do not die or log off.

[loramin]

BTW, I use that term "reasonable amount of time" because I'm referencing a GM ruling (well, there's actually several that use that term, but this is one):

Players can absolutely go AFK while camping SF, but they must engage within a reasonable amount of time. I would say 5ish minutes for this encounter.

Beyond that quote, I don't think the staff has every made public what the normal (non-SF) mob "reasonable amount of time" is ... but I think most would agree it's not very long.

[bcbrown]

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

Yeah that wasn't lost on me but you get there around when mob was due to pop and someone is killing your mob that's annoying AF.

Yeah, it's annoying, but being annoyed doesn't give you the right to kill-steal and train.

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

But zone dynamic is half the time people don't answer CC because everyone is AFK, if not straight up logging between kills, also people fight or suicide stuff and answer later so a not immediate CC answer doesn't mean much I realized. Finding a named and realizing it is claimed is part of the deal. You could make a CC and then kill what isnt claimed but you'll get into fights all the time.

I'm aware there's an informal understanding between Chardok farmers, but the key word there is informal. If 1) you are not in zone; 2) you do not respond to a CC; 3) the mob is up; then that mob is not camped. If you are not in zone when the mob pops it is not your mob.

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

I called it coming down and when I got there I told him I was camping it and I was getting no answer until he gated out. In retrospect I should just have invited him but I took a wrong snap decision.

If you just arrive in zone for the first time and "called it coming down" before getting to the camp, and when you get there someone else is mid-fight, would you think you deserve the camp? You zoned out. You went AFK. You dilly-dallied at the entrance buffing friends. If you were AFK at the camp, sure. But you were AFK out of zone. C'mon.

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

Knowing people gate out all the time due to zone dynamics and it is deemed legal, I don't feel that is a strong argument. I often gate out, jboots immediately and run in to realize I missed a CC.

There's nothing "deemed legal" about it, just an unofficial understanding between the people who're usually farming Chardok not to aggressively contest other people's camps. Just because some people agree to afford leniance to each other doesn't give you the right to kill-steal and train someone who didn't afford you that leniance.

Look, if you gate out and immediately run down to the camp before anyone else is there, it's still your camp. If you gate out, immediately run down, and someone else is sitting there with no spawn yet then maybe you've got an argument. But that's not what happened.

[sajbert]

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

That's not how the rules work: you only lose the camp if you leave the zone, die, or fail to engage the respawn in a "reasonable" amount of time:

Then why for instance these camp specific rules such as drolvarg captain in Karnor's or Fungi King in seb:
"Is a camp, and due to his location players do not need to maintain presence directly on his spawn point to camp him "
"Is a camp (with nearby mushrooms), and due to his location players do not need to maintain presence directly on his spawn point to camp him "
https://wiki.project1999.com/Camp_Rules

Or rulings on AFK such as this
"For the most part, a camp is yours as long as you have presence at that camp. If you die, go LD or leave the zone you can lose the camp if another player calls you on it. SF, AC, Lucan are no exceptions. "
https://wiki.project1999.com/Rulings#Camps

[sajbert]

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

Just because some people agree to afford leniance to each other doesn't give you the right to kill-steal and train someone who didn't afford you that leniance.

This.