We need another "Monopolizing Scout in WW" thread

[Pokesan]

scout lawmaking is a great argument for the red server

[zachg300]

everyone just be cool and do the roll like the 8th ring, it was alot nicer going out there and having an actual chance at the scout. YAY FOR THE ROLL!

[shuklak]

If the whole server is driven by "classic" ideology then out only makes sense to have some pnp in effect. Were lines respected by gms back in the day? I can't recall but i do know there was an enforced pnp.

[Ikon]

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

If the whole server is driven by "classic" ideology then out only makes sense to have some pnp in effect. Were lines respected by gms back in the day? I can't recall but i do know there was an enforced pnp.

Yeah lists were enforced by GMs / Guides. The idea of lists were developed by players because involving guides / GMs ended up in arguing players both losing out. If two players were disagreeing buy one was being unreasonable the latter lost out.

The official line basically went "sort it out or accept our decision which you both probably won't like" and "no mob / camp can be monopolized, if you're arguing over a spawn then we'll force you to take turns at PH".

Also it was prohibited to kill and get an item , corpse it and keep camping if someone was waiting. You could not give a camp to your friend / alt if someone was waiting.

[Ikon]

Heres the evidence:
blic
Gordon Wrinn - Executive Producer of EQ / Public Relations

Date : 10/03/2000

Topic : Play Nice, Or...

This came of the official EverQuest message boards.
Kill Stealing Policy :

Kill Stealing is now officially defined as Killing an NPC or Mob for any reason, that is already attacking another player. Any player that is caught intentionally kill stealing by a guide or GM may now be warned. These warnings when accumulated, can lead to the player being suspended or banned from EverQuest by a GM.

Play Nice Policy :

Spawns in the game can no longer be claimed or controlled by a single player or group. Whether it is a single or multiple spawn, for an item or for XP, low or high level, all groups wishing to camp a spawn must work out some type of rotation or means to share the spawn.

This information somehow got leaked before we were ready to comment on it, hence it showing up on the boards before we had a chance to talk to you about it.
I'll have a new Producer's Letter up early next week to address the new rules, how they are going to be enforced, and the spirit behind the letter.

- Gordon

The Play Nice Policies were created because a growing number of customers were being subordinated by other, more powerful, groups of players. These other groups would claim "ownership" of spawns, loot drops, and even entire zones, refusing to allow other people a chance to experience them. On some servers, guilds had certain areas camped 24x7.

The play nice policies, in regards to spawns and camping, are designed to promote equal access to the areas. If a group can get into a room, they have as much right to be there as anyone else. Are the policies perfect? No, of course what is? No matter what policy we adopt, there will be people who are helped by the policy, and others that are hurt. Sometimes the policy may help them in one instance and hurt in another.

As I've mentioned in the past, if anyone has any ideas for policies that are easy to understand, are enforcable, do not require a larger CS team than before or after the Play nice policies, and will please everyone, I'd be happy to discuss them. - Gordon

I probably should pay more attention to these but I can't remember if this was addressed specificly.
Let me explain I waited 2 hours for the acient croc spawn in Guk and when I finally got it a level 51 druid came along and claimed that it was his spawn and I could leave or stay but would not get to kill it. I took this to being kill stealing and I petitioned as such. The GM Axgoreth came and basicly said that I had to share the spawn. Which was fine but that clearly wasn't what the other druid had in mind. Did I miss something in the rules that states if you're level 51 you can just claim any spawn at any time no matter who was camping it?

Sep 26, 2000 05:11:46 P.M.
New Message RE:Play Nice Rules (modified 0 times) Arjaizen
Profile
Yes, you have to "share" the spawn. But if you were waiting 2 hours for the spawn, and the lvl 51 just walked up as it was happening and took it, he was kill stealing, and should have been charged with doing so by the GM. If, however the croc had spawned a number of times, and you had already killed it looking for a certain item (which you didn't get,) then the druid had every right to the kill. You don't get rights to a certain spawn over and over until you get a particular rare drop, you just get the right to a shot at it when your turn comes around. So it all depends on which scenario described above comes closest to reality. If it's the former, the GM screwed you. If the latter, it was the right decision.
-Arjaizen

Sep 27, 2000 10:13:15 A.M.
New Message RE:Play Nice Rules (modified 0 times) Monnet
Profile
I understand what you are saying and sharing the spawn was what the GM stated and I was certainly willing to do that. However the druid in question stated everything the GM wanted to hear when he was there and proceded to tell me that I wouldn't even get a chance to kill one. And sence he could kill it in one shot there was little doubt that he was right. The GM was petitioned a couple times but refused to do anything but tell me I have to share the spawn. He refused to even listen to what was going on nor did he want to see screenshots of the situation. Following your theory sence we both wanted the same thing I should have had the oppertunity to take the next one after he killed one (hense shareing) but while we were waiting for the GM there were 3 spawns, I got to take none.
I'm going to quit griping now.

https://web.archive.org/web/20010112...age=2&Session=

An EQ Guide that went a bit nuts:

Play nice policies. My personal feelings aside (lay off the wacky weed, Verant), I get to enforce it. Do you know how much I hate you at the end of a long shift? What kind of asshole thinks the king room in Lower Guk can be shared by TWO GROUPS OF 12? Conversely, what kind of screaming cocksucker thinks it’s okay to camp the king room for 36 hours? I think you both suck. The only people lamer than you are the ones that PNP over derv camps in North Ro and then act surprised when I send one group to the DESERTED derv camp a 30 second walk away.

https://eatingbees.wordpress.com/the...g-a-guide-you/

Why the devs are refusing to implement this policy is very very strange. The current one they have is extremely complex, frustrating and frankly stupid (racing, FTE etc)

IN regards to Scout, with the PnP you could not turn up repeatedly to a spawn, unless it was not camped and clickie your way into getting the item over and over again. As the PNP stated you had to share, meaning lists, rotation and it was much fairer.

[MerkelMacron]

you pussies ever heard of red99?

#lowTproblems
#bluepixelballs

[Ikon]

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

you pussies ever heard of red99?

#lowTproblems
#bluepixelballs

[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
Your post reminded me of this guy from ND [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

[EQsale]

no one complaining anymore? is stuff resolved? ^^

[Ikon]

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

no one complaining anymore? is stuff resolved? ^^

Very unlikely.

[Swish]

Requoting from Ikon's post...

The play nice policies, in regards to spawns and camping, are designed to promote equal access to the areas. If a group can get into a room, they have as much right to be there as anyone else. Are the policies perfect? No, of course what is? No matter what policy we adopt, there will be people who are helped by the policy, and others that are hurt. Sometimes the policy may help them in one instance and hurt in another.

As I've mentioned in the past, if anyone has any ideas for policies that are easy to understand, are enforcable, do not require a larger CS team than before or after the Play nice policies, and will please everyone, I'd be happy to discuss them. - Gordon

So much truth in one post, can't make everyone happy and moving goalposts in any direction will upset people. Take the "wipe red" thread for example, if it was wiped do you think everyone (everyone) will be happy with the outcome? I doubt it, it just moves the conversation on to something else people are unhappy about or want done differently [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]