BUT I REALLY DO PLAY NICE!, AUGUST 14, 2000

[beversami]

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

I too came for the clown show

What would they do without their lead clown?

[Snortles Chortles]

[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

[Nirgon]

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

What would they do without their lead clown?

I'm not in the UN right now, but I link it to some pals for laughs. It really is hysterical.

[loramin]

I think what it all boils down to is, if you can't change the fundamental game itself (eg. the way live EQ does, using instancing), there's only so many "sharing mechanisms" to choose from.

Option #1: Race. The problem with this is you either need to add non-EQ rules to make racing fair (see raid racing on P99, with its "starting lines"), or it ultimately boils down to a clickfest, where the players who cheat the best (using the least detectable autoclickers) win.

Option #2: Queue. This is the /list approach, and taken to the extreme you get the extremely un-EverQuest-like "wait in line for guaranteed treasure" that we have on Green.

Option #3 Random: This is the fairest approach ... until you try for some mob 50 times in a row and keep missing your random chance. Then it feels decidedly unfair to the person who can never win.

Option #4: Popularity: This is what happens if you allow "lock-downs" in your PNP: inevitably some group of players will "lock a camp down", and then only they and their friends can camp it.

Personally, I think the best "play nice policies" mix the above. For instance, on P99 any uncontested (non-raid) mob is "FTE", ie. a race. But then once someone has the camp, it can turn into a lockdown (eg. current Heiro camp on Green, or countless camps in Blue's history), or it can turn into a queue (eg. OOT AC camp).

My true hope is that most things in P99 will ultimately move towards a combination of race, list, and random. In other words ... race to any uncontested, /list2.0 to be "next in line", and any subsequent people who arrive can /list2.0 to have a random chance to become "next in line" once the current "next in line" becomes the camp holder.

This system would eliminate lock-downs, while still giving the people who show up first their due advantage ... but it wouldn't turn any camp into "sit here for guaranteed loot". If you're not first/second, there's no guaranteed loot for you: you still have to be lucky ... just like it was on live.

[Nirgon]

The preface of: "there are posted server rules and GMs" usually gets the question asked of me "so what's the point of this"

It's basically because mob rule has decided they won't simply play by the server rules. This is the soft cave-in to that process, where if the retards get crazy enough the GMs do mostly whatever they say.

Knowing this and seeing correctly it through that lense makes the entire ordeal, especially the enabling of the retardation in there very entertaining.

[Nirgon]

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

I think what it all boils down to is, if you can't change the fundamental game itself (eg. the way live EQ does, using instancing), there's only so many "sharing mechanisms" to choose from.

Option #1: Race. The problem with this is you either need to add non-EQ rules to make racing fair (see raid racing on P99, with its "starting lines"), or it ultimately boils down to a clickfest, where the players who cheat the best (using the least detectable autoclickers) win.

Option #2: Queue. This is the /list approach, and taken to the extreme you get the extremely un-EverQuest-like "wait in line for guaranteed treasure" that we have on Green.

Option #3 Random: This is the fairest approach ... until you try for some mob 50 times in a row and keep missing your random chance. Then it feels decidedly unfair to the person who can never win.

Option #4: Popularity: This is what happens if you allow "lock-downs" in your PNP: inevitably some group of players will "lock a camp down", and then only they and their friends can camp it.

Personally, I think the best "play nice policies" mix the above. For instance, on P99 any uncontested (non-raid) mob is "FTE", ie. a race. But then once someone has the camp, it can turn into a lockdown (eg. current Heiro camp on Green, or countless camps in Blue's history), or it can turn into a queue (eg. OOT AC camp).

My true hope is that most things in P99 will ultimately move towards a combination of race, list, and random. In other words ... race to any uncontested, /list2.0 to be "next in line", and any subsequent people who arrive can /list2.0 to have a random chance to become "next in line" once the current "next in line" becomes the camp holder.

This system would eliminate lock-downs, while still giving the people who show up first their due advantage ... but it wouldn't turn any camp into "sit here for guaranteed loot". If you're not first/second, there's no guaranteed loot for you: you still have to be lucky ... just like it was on live.

Option #5 - form Erudite RP guild and make fun of/dunk on them until they harass the staff into disbanding it.

[Snortles Chortles]

[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

[RecondoJoe]

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

Option #2: Queue. This is the /list approach, and taken to the extreme you get the extremely un-EverQuest-like "wait in line for guaranteed treasure" that we have on Green.
.

Not really.

This is essentially the same thing as a guild locking down a camp indefinitely, but it also lets the entire server get a fair chance at the loot. It’s almost like you’re implying that the reason the players who are holding the camp are holding it because they earned it or worked harder, and that allowing other players access to the same content would be a form of welfare.

If I tried to do the same content and simply wasn’t able to do it, or wasn’t willing to put the same amount of hours in, then you might have a point. With JBOOTS this was actually often the case, with other players being required to kill the cyclops for the player in front of them.

But I’ll use Lower Guk as an example. I’ve done Frenzied camp many times, and actually had other players sit there and harass me and hope that I die the entire time so they can snipe the camp. If a /list system was implemented would they suddenly be required to help me do the content? No. It would just mean that when they are done with the camp they have to pass the camp off to someone who has been online and waiting the entire time and not one of their friends or gullies who just showed up 20 minutes ago.

Not to mention one of my friends actually camped Frenzied for like 36 hours straight and never got an FBSS. A list would simply help players get access to a camp. It wouldn’t solo the camp for them or guarantee that they get the item they are after.

Sometimes I feel like the bulk of the server is completely oblivious to how toxic the PNP is. I vividly remember Black Lotus having a low level Rogue call out Frenzied even though he couldn’t kill a single mob there, while his other guild mate rotated back and forth from Ghoul Lord and Frenzied every 30 minutes.

The PNP is literally the definition of welfare loot, but it actually protects the worst kind of people.

I can’t imagine watching this go on from a CSR perspective and being okay with it.

[starkind]

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

Not really.

This is essentially the same thing as a guild locking down a camp indefinitely, but it also lets the entire server get a fair chance at the loot. It’s almost like you’re implying that the reason the players who are holding the camp are holding it because they earned it or worked harder, and that allowing other players access to the same content would be a form of welfare.

If I tried to do the same content and simply wasn’t able to do it, or wasn’t willing to put the same amount of hours in, then you might have a point. With JBOOTS this was actually often the case, with other players being required to kill the cyclops for the player in front of them.

But I’ll use Lower Guk as an example. I’ve done Frenzied camp many times, and actually had other players sit there and harass me and hope that I die the entire time so they can snipe the camp. If a /list system was implemented would they suddenly be required to help me do the content? No. It would just mean that when they are done with the camp they have to pass the camp off to someone who has been online and waiting the entire time and not one of their friends or gullies who just showed up 20 minutes ago.

Not to mention one of my friends actually camped Frenzied for like 36 hours straight and never got an FBSS. A list would simply help players get access to a camp. It wouldn’t solo the camp for them or guarantee that they get the item they are after.

Sometimes I feel like the bulk of the server is completely oblivious to how toxic the PNP is. I vividly remember Black Lotus having a low level Rogue call out Frenzied even though he couldn’t kill a single mob there, while his other guild mate rotated back and forth from Ghoul Lord and Frenzied every 30 minutes.

The PNP is literally the definition of welfare loot, but it actually protects the worst kind of people.

I can’t imagine watching this go on from a CSR perspective and being okay with it.

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

Play nice used to not mean exclusive access to a camp or mob.

Play nice meant always you had to take turns with the player/group at each and every mob and camp.

So people would grp, they would have 6 chances to roll, and the one idiot trying to solo that mob would get 1 chance. Or 1 turn at the mob. 6 people, 6 turns, 1 person 1 turn. Problem simplified down to it's most basic level.

I never had a GM or GuiDE give exclusive access to a mob for any indefinate period of time. I had to share the smugglers in qeynos acqueducts with 4 ppl, 3 in my grp and 1 person soloing down there, and we all took turns, tho the grp helped each other and eventually the 1 guy just left because 4 ppl, = 4 turns.

[Horza]

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

Option #5 - form Erudite RP guild and make fun of/dunk on them until they harass the staff into disbanding it.

At least you got the staff disbanding your racist parody guild right.