I'll be nice for now and not mention names. But there was a certain high level, massively AA'd paladin and his group behaving in a way that I find deplorable, and the actions of his group were causing other groups in these zones to behave badly as well, so I just needed to rant.
The Paladin's group started out with one camp in BoT, then proceeded to walk all over other people's camps...starting from SB, moving to SM, ST, back down and taking North as well. I will admit they had a massive amount of DPS and were killing very quickly, but all of these areas were camped. Needless to say, this really got everyone else in BoT angry. Another group decided to start training the pally's group...and in the process ended up wiping out some of the other people who'd been walked all over. During camp checks, the paladin called "South Loop - Sb,SM,ST". Someone commented that there was no such thing...he said "Camps are player created, oh look, I'm a player, I created a camp". While I recognize that officially there are no camps, by common usage there are, and it's common courtesy to take only one.
The drama continues. After people causing trains to try to get back at the pally's group drive just about everyone out of BoT, pally's group moves to Tactics, where I hear about his antics from some guildies.
Pally's group anulled a charmed pet from my guildies, then stole their kill while they were dealing with the loose pet. They then trained my guildies while going after the named mob from that camp. They then parked themselves in the doorway and proceeded to pull the entire bottom part of the zone. =P
Now that I've described the drama, I have a few questions (still ranting, but still questions):
1) Does behavior like that in BoT constitute "disruption of gameplay"? Certainly the people who caused the trains were, but what about the group waltzing through everyone else's camps?
2) Does this kind of thing happen a lot? Or is this paladin the only one who does it? (He's got a certain reputation on my server)
3) Is there actually anything you can do about a guy like this, besides moving to another zone? Obviously taking another camp in the same zone doesn't work, he pretty much claims the entire zone.
/rant off
Needed to get all that out..thanks for reading.
- Forums
- EverQuest
- General Discussion
- BoT/Tactics drama, rant about a group
BoT/Tactics drama, rant about a groupFollow
1. No if you are not actively in combat with a mob it is considered fair game.
2. Yes because SoE refuse to put into the game that Camps are an active and real part of the game.
3. No there isn't since he did not by the sound of it initiate combate with any mob that was already aggro'd by anyone.
Just as an aside this
is totally against the rules and could lead to a ban if he had reported it.
yes it's not nice but it is totally within the rules of the game as set out by SoE.
You have my sympathy
2. Yes because SoE refuse to put into the game that Camps are an active and real part of the game.
3. No there isn't since he did not by the sound of it initiate combate with any mob that was already aggro'd by anyone.
Just as an aside this
Quote:
Another group decided to start training the pally's group..
is totally against the rules and could lead to a ban if he had reported it.
yes it's not nice but it is totally within the rules of the game as set out by SoE.
You have my sympathy
I just dinged 62 recently and went to BOT for the first time. got a group at Oreen and had to listen to some of the crap going on in the zone. luckily noone messed with our camp, but man is there some shady crap goin on in that zone.
i've heard rumor about the pp sellers pharming ornate and such there..and that makes the most sense, especially when you see people walking over others and not saying a word. at one point, someone even said "EQ is not a game, its a JOB".
man i wish sony would get off their lazy ***** and do something. they are letting their game get destroyed piece by piece.
i've heard rumor about the pp sellers pharming ornate and such there..and that makes the most sense, especially when you see people walking over others and not saying a word. at one point, someone even said "EQ is not a game, its a JOB".
man i wish sony would get off their lazy ***** and do something. they are letting their game get destroyed piece by piece.
Bastion of Thunder absolutely sucks.
The bummer is, when you have a good group the (AA)XP is massive and the drops are not shabby either.
Also, it is not referred to as Karnor's Castle for the 62+ crowd for nothing, either.
The bummer is, when you have a good group the (AA)XP is massive and the drops are not shabby either.
Also, it is not referred to as Karnor's Castle for the 62+ crowd for nothing, either.
I would leave BOT in this case and find a more hastle free zone (plenty others out there). This seems to be a pretty extreme case of rudeness. I haven't ever seen anyone blatantly call 3 camps and march right threw other people camps taking mobs (although things like Deep South poaching Middle South mobs on the edge kinda things happen)
BUT..... if you were to run from the GY in BOT to the CY uninvis.... running right past said Pally and his group..... not technically training (i mean invis drops, ces la vie).... well, I for one would not fault you.
BUT..... if you were to run from the GY in BOT to the CY uninvis.... running right past said Pally and his group..... not technically training (i mean invis drops, ces la vie).... well, I for one would not fault you.
The problem is not new really. Ignoring any other rudnesses and whatnot, the real issue here is that camps have always been player defined. The problem here is that what you define as a single camp is not necessarily what someone else would. This has gotten more significant as the game has aged and the difference in capabilities between two groups of similarly leveled characters can be very dramatic due to differences in AAs and gear.
Most people define a "camp" as an area with specific static spawns that's of the right size for a level appropriate group to handle. Most camps are going to be clumps of mobs, but not all. What the "right size" is is usually based on the kill rate of the group and the spawn rate of the mobs.
If you can kill just a single "clump" of mobs in the time it takes for those mobs to respawn, then that's your "camp". If you can kill 3 or 4 of those clumps in that same time, then that is your camp. Which one is right? After all, there's no labels on those mobs saying which ones are in which camps. In that way, the paladin was actually correct. Camps are player defined, and he's a player, so he's logically enough going to define his "camp" as an area of mobs that his group can keep killed.
And before you start with the whole: "But they are separate camps!" idea. The idea of loops of mobs has been around since the old Lguk days. It was common for a single group to hold multiple rooms, and as long as they were able to keep those mobs killed, that was legitimately "their camp". Most folks respected this, but then you always got arguments (nothing really changes).
I've seen some people who consider each individual IG spawn in EF as a separate "camp", even though they are feet away from eachother, and have a slow enough spawn rate that many folks could easily keep all 3 of them cleared.'
I've commented on this before when discussing whether someone has a camp. If you arrive at a spot where mobs spawn, and there are currently no mobs there (ie: They are dead), then that spot is very clearly being actively cleared. Even if no one is currently there, it's reasonable to state that since they killed the last spawn of those mobs, that they have the right to kill the next one (that's really the whole point of a camp, right?). Regardless of whatever arbitrary lines you want to draw up over what camp is what, and who can take what areas, fundamentally, it's about how many mobs your particular group can kill in a set amount of time. That's all that matters.
So. Regardless of how much of a jerk this guy was, if his group was the first to clear those mobs, and he continually responded to camp checks stating which mobs his group was clearing, then in my book, his grouped owned that "camp". If other groups were ignoring his responses to camp checks, and were setting up shop in spots his group was already keeping clear, then they were the ones in the wrong. His group had every right to those mobs (moreso then the squatters IMO). If folks were then training his group for this, then they were doubly in the wrong.
I'm not going to comment on his actions in Tactics. However, I'm betting that if his group hadn't been connstantly trained (no one that was in tactics took part in any of the verbal arguing at all?), his group probably would have been just fine. Sometimes, what goes around comes around. Again though, your post on that part doesn't really include enough info to make an assessment of guilt. If this guy has a rep as an A-hole, then that's something else. I don't know any of the parties though...
Most people define a "camp" as an area with specific static spawns that's of the right size for a level appropriate group to handle. Most camps are going to be clumps of mobs, but not all. What the "right size" is is usually based on the kill rate of the group and the spawn rate of the mobs.
If you can kill just a single "clump" of mobs in the time it takes for those mobs to respawn, then that's your "camp". If you can kill 3 or 4 of those clumps in that same time, then that is your camp. Which one is right? After all, there's no labels on those mobs saying which ones are in which camps. In that way, the paladin was actually correct. Camps are player defined, and he's a player, so he's logically enough going to define his "camp" as an area of mobs that his group can keep killed.
And before you start with the whole: "But they are separate camps!" idea. The idea of loops of mobs has been around since the old Lguk days. It was common for a single group to hold multiple rooms, and as long as they were able to keep those mobs killed, that was legitimately "their camp". Most folks respected this, but then you always got arguments (nothing really changes).
I've seen some people who consider each individual IG spawn in EF as a separate "camp", even though they are feet away from eachother, and have a slow enough spawn rate that many folks could easily keep all 3 of them cleared.'
I've commented on this before when discussing whether someone has a camp. If you arrive at a spot where mobs spawn, and there are currently no mobs there (ie: They are dead), then that spot is very clearly being actively cleared. Even if no one is currently there, it's reasonable to state that since they killed the last spawn of those mobs, that they have the right to kill the next one (that's really the whole point of a camp, right?). Regardless of whatever arbitrary lines you want to draw up over what camp is what, and who can take what areas, fundamentally, it's about how many mobs your particular group can kill in a set amount of time. That's all that matters.
So. Regardless of how much of a jerk this guy was, if his group was the first to clear those mobs, and he continually responded to camp checks stating which mobs his group was clearing, then in my book, his grouped owned that "camp". If other groups were ignoring his responses to camp checks, and were setting up shop in spots his group was already keeping clear, then they were the ones in the wrong. His group had every right to those mobs (moreso then the squatters IMO). If folks were then training his group for this, then they were doubly in the wrong.
I'm not going to comment on his actions in Tactics. However, I'm betting that if his group hadn't been connstantly trained (no one that was in tactics took part in any of the verbal arguing at all?), his group probably would have been just fine. Sometimes, what goes around comes around. Again though, your post on that part doesn't really include enough info to make an assessment of guilt. If this guy has a rep as an A-hole, then that's something else. I don't know any of the parties though...
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
well from gbaji's arguement i guess it all comes down to who was there first? tho by the sounds of it this guy sounds like a bit of a jerk (ive only heard one side of the arguement) but it seems to me that sometimes people who are in uber guilds and have lots of AAs seem to let it go to their head thats its ok for them to do whatever they want and they act like right jerks, course there are lots of really nice people too but the ones who think they own the place really deserve banning (IMO)
I know most people think GM's won't help much in a situation like this, but I've been present in a couple of similar cases when a GM insisted that all the players involved stop disrupting other people's fun and work out a way to share the zone. Otherwise they were told that all the players involved would have to leave the zone.
It's not so much a case of whether or not camps are recognised, but more that one group is knowingly disrupting what others are trying to do.
It's not so much a case of whether or not camps are recognised, but more that one group is knowingly disrupting what others are trying to do.
BoT is a good zone to go for loot and ok exp. PoV cave (if I ge the whole cave, no annoying 'outter cave' group nonsense) is where the AA exp grind sweet spot is.
I have seen something similar to this in HHK. One group gets there at one of those rare occasions when no one else is there ( although the fresh bodies everywhere should have given them a clue)...they begin pulling every gobby in the basement and manage it ok.
Pretty soon another group shows up and does a camp check and the existing group calls "everything". As it turns out the last group all were killed and they were filtering back in after some long CRs.
I had joined the group camping "everything" but it started to get ugly between us and the arriving groups. Me and the warrior I came in with left the group, because it just seemed wrong to try to camp the whole basement. Everyone knows there are at least three distinct camps there. And true they are player defined, they have turned into accepted camps that all should respect...regardless of the "rules".
EQ is a game of social dynamics as much as anything. This is very similar to the way our laws have evolved. Social standards and accepted practices have been around long before laws. People should respect a society's accepted practices. The Pally in the first example should understand that in the zone there are several camps, not just one big one for his group. Other people were obviously in those camps trying to play accordingly. Even if they show up later, the decent and acceptable thing to do is give up a couple of the camps. He should have his pick of what he wants to keep, but he should not keep all of the.
Let's face it, we make a lot of our own rules. I completely understand what the people trainng creatures were trying to do...that is the posse justice mentality. Thier gut reaction was the same as anyone victimized by those who go around accepted practices...to take the matter into their own hands and teach him a lesson so he does not try it again. Their decision ended up being no better and in many ways worse than what he was doing.
After further review...I will point out that the example states that the pally started in one camp and then proceded to go to other camps where people already were. That is wrong and is not excusable.
Pretty soon another group shows up and does a camp check and the existing group calls "everything". As it turns out the last group all were killed and they were filtering back in after some long CRs.
I had joined the group camping "everything" but it started to get ugly between us and the arriving groups. Me and the warrior I came in with left the group, because it just seemed wrong to try to camp the whole basement. Everyone knows there are at least three distinct camps there. And true they are player defined, they have turned into accepted camps that all should respect...regardless of the "rules".
EQ is a game of social dynamics as much as anything. This is very similar to the way our laws have evolved. Social standards and accepted practices have been around long before laws. People should respect a society's accepted practices. The Pally in the first example should understand that in the zone there are several camps, not just one big one for his group. Other people were obviously in those camps trying to play accordingly. Even if they show up later, the decent and acceptable thing to do is give up a couple of the camps. He should have his pick of what he wants to keep, but he should not keep all of the.
Let's face it, we make a lot of our own rules. I completely understand what the people trainng creatures were trying to do...that is the posse justice mentality. Thier gut reaction was the same as anyone victimized by those who go around accepted practices...to take the matter into their own hands and teach him a lesson so he does not try it again. Their decision ended up being no better and in many ways worse than what he was doing.
After further review...I will point out that the example states that the pally started in one camp and then proceded to go to other camps where people already were. That is wrong and is not excusable.
Assailant wrote:
BoT is a good zone to go for loot and ok exp. PoV cave (if I ge the whole cave, no annoying 'outter cave' group nonsense) is where the AA exp grind sweet spot is.
And that's the exact point I'm making. To you, having separate "outer and inner" cave camps is silly. To others, it's the rule, or "common courtesy". I've found that largely the difference is based purely on what your group can handle. A group that can handle both areas, will think it's silly to split them (they're essentially getting their exp rate cut in half because another group wants to hem in on half their "camp"). A group that can only handle the spawns in one or the other will insist that splitting them is fair (and it is... to them).
Same logic with the BoT issue. If this group was able to hold down all the mobs in those three adjacent locations, then they certainly had a legitimate claim to them. They probably also thought it was "silly" for people to insist on splitting them up. After all, if you can take all three areas, but two other groups each insist on taking one and "sharing" them, you've just had your exp and loot rate cut by 66%. Is that fair to your group?
That is why I never look at things in terms of camps. I try actively to avoid the idea that specific areas are somehow separated into distinct camps. To me, if a group of mobs are already being killed by another group, those mobs are theirs. It's really that simple. Now. If they are unable to keep up with the spawn rate, then I'd expect to be able to take the extras, but that's usually not an issue. A group will kinda be forced to reduce it's pull radius down to the area it can actually keep despawned. If they don't, they'll risk huge trains on themselves.
The point being that I have no right to artificially force them to reduce their kill rate just because I want to kill some mobs in the same area. If I just arrived, I could go elsewhere. There are plenty more mobs to kill in the game today then there are groups killing them. Always. This is not pre-kunark LGuk/SolB guys. There are other zones to hunt in.
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
Thanks to the great god of 1100110 up in the sky there is a solution.
Eventually, when pretty much every hunting zone in the game is instanced I guess we we wont have to deal with obnoxious people like the paladin in BoT. (Unless you are unlucky enough to get him in your group
)
But, it won't be the same game, I do wonder how the old social spirit of a common love and a common purpose might survive?
Eventually, when pretty much every hunting zone in the game is instanced I guess we we wont have to deal with obnoxious people like the paladin in BoT. (Unless you are unlucky enough to get him in your group
) But, it won't be the same game, I do wonder how the old social spirit of a common love and a common purpose might survive?
all these arguments about being able to take whatever mobs you can keep cleared are very nice , but it's not what this guy was doing
"The Paladin's group started out with one camp in BoT, then proceeded to walk all over other people's camps...starting from SB, moving to SM, ST, back down and taking North as well. I will admit they had a massive amount of DPS and were killing very quickly, but all of these areas were camped"
enough said . he was stealing from other peoples camps , and if the gm's won't do anything then at least he'd go on my 'never lift a finger for this jerk' list .
"The Paladin's group started out with one camp in BoT, then proceeded to walk all over other people's camps...starting from SB, moving to SM, ST, back down and taking North as well. I will admit they had a massive amount of DPS and were killing very quickly, but all of these areas were camped"
enough said . he was stealing from other peoples camps , and if the gm's won't do anything then at least he'd go on my 'never lift a finger for this jerk' list .
It does sound like the Pally was being an aggressive jerk because he realized his group could clear the entire area. When that happens, and the other areas are already taken - it's time to find a harder zone.
publiusvarus wrote:
we all know liberals are well adjusted american citizens who only want what's best for society. While conservatives are evil money grubbing scum who only want to sh*t on the little man and rob the world of its resources.
Harthina wrote:
They then parked themselves in the doorway.
But hard to prove even with a couple of screenshot......
Bot can be awful but does provide one of the fastest forms of AA and can supply runes and ornate armour.
I hunt there with guild and friends but we do not camp near the 4 way intersection if possible. The trains are frequent and destructive.
My favourite spot is actually the little ramp up to Oreen by his room. A safe spot this area can be pulled to in absolute safety and you may even find oreen there too for an attempt for a rune
People do not train named rooms or the pads to the bot towers, you are safe.
Another good spot is also on the zone in area to the Bot towers. Each courtyard is populated by2 gargolyes and what I call 'bees'. These are easy, nice experience and the camp is safe. No trains, no competition. No drops either .. but there is no guarantee of that in other camps either
The worst behaviour I have ever seen in BoT? I was camping what is known as 'tables' with a guild/friends group (the earth side room with the 2 tables and the krigers that spawn on them). Suddenly from no where a monk comes training through our entire camp with giants from air and water wings. He had deliberately attempted to wipe our group to clear it for his won. Luckily for us we had stopped pulling to rebuff etc and we were tucked away in the safe corner.
BoT is paludal II.
I hunt there with guild and friends but we do not camp near the 4 way intersection if possible. The trains are frequent and destructive.
My favourite spot is actually the little ramp up to Oreen by his room. A safe spot this area can be pulled to in absolute safety and you may even find oreen there too for an attempt for a rune
People do not train named rooms or the pads to the bot towers, you are safe.
Another good spot is also on the zone in area to the Bot towers. Each courtyard is populated by2 gargolyes and what I call 'bees'. These are easy, nice experience and the camp is safe. No trains, no competition. No drops either .. but there is no guarantee of that in other camps either
The worst behaviour I have ever seen in BoT? I was camping what is known as 'tables' with a guild/friends group (the earth side room with the 2 tables and the krigers that spawn on them). Suddenly from no where a monk comes training through our entire camp with giants from air and water wings. He had deliberately attempted to wipe our group to clear it for his won. Luckily for us we had stopped pulling to rebuff etc and we were tucked away in the safe corner.
BoT is paludal II.
Quote:
Same logic with the BoT issue. If this group was able to hold down all the mobs in those three adjacent locations, then they certainly had a legitimate claim to them. They probably also thought it was "silly" for people to insist on splitting them up. After all, if you can take all three areas, but two other groups each insist on taking one and "sharing" them, you've just had your exp and loot rate cut by 66%. Is that fair to your group?
The concept of camp has been as much about fairly sharing the mobs in a popular zone as it has been about how many mobs a group can kill. Though out the history of EQ most groups in the most popular zones have always been able to kill more mobs than spawn in their camp.
BoT is a popular zone and has well defined camps that are accepted by almost everyone. More often than not these camp are camped. In other words the players of EQ have agreed on how to fairly share the mobs in BoT, and for any one player (or group) to clame more than their share of mobs (just because they can kill that many) is unaccepatble behavor.
On the other hand,
My firends and I often hunt in some of the back-water zones. A few weeks ago we were in Veksar, camping what could be called two camps (we were the only ones in the zone). After a few hours a second group zones in and /ooc camp check. I tell them what mobs we are camping, and they say that we are camping more than one camp and must give up one or the other. I tell them that there are plenty of other camps in the zone that have the same lvl of mobs and decent drops and that they should respect our camp and take one or more of the other camps. In the end they did come and try and take one of the camps, however we were killing fast enough to keep the area cleared and they soon moved on.
The differance?
1. We were at the camps first.
2. Our camping more than one camp wasn't preventing the other group from having a good camp in the zone.
So yes you are intitled to a camp that is as big as your group can kill...Provided you are not depribing other of the oppertunity to hunt in the zone. If you are camping more than one camp and there are no uncamped camps in the zone and a new group show up, you should pick which of your camps you want to keep and give up the other.
Remember Might for Right, not might makes right.....
24 posts
Heh, there will be a**holes no matter where ya go and at what level. Some people just have no respect for others. That said, don't ya wish they had kept Tier 2 zones locked for flags now? I remember what a pleasure BoT used to be before they opened up the zones. Now I avoid it at all costs.
I remember what a pleasure BoT used to be before they opened up the zones. Now I avoid it at all costs.First off, talk to his guild if he has one. If he's in an "uber" guild, his guildleader may not care what he does, but if enough people complain it may be enough of a headache to get him a talking-to.
As far as what he was doing in BoT, that's pretty much allowed as long as he wasn't actively killstealing. Dispelling someone's charm in tactics is bannable, though, and they should have definitely /reported the dispel message and petitioned them.
As far as what he was doing in BoT, that's pretty much allowed as long as he wasn't actively killstealing. Dispelling someone's charm in tactics is bannable, though, and they should have definitely /reported the dispel message and petitioned them.
10 posts
After reading a lot of what is being said in here I would have to agree that the paladins group was behaving badly. But the big picture is not whether or not who steped on who but is rather why dont uber guild members move on in the game. From what I have seen in regard to many members of what we would call UBER guilds is that while they are able to do some amazing things with mass quantities of members to achieve the loot they desire they are in fact less adventurous when not followed by mass groups of people. For one if the group is able to claim the whole zone of BOT then one would be safe to imagine that the dangers involved with the zone for a group of their magnitude are very light and they should move on and test their skills at a different location. The reason they stay, the all mighty dollar. More pp means for some twink they have better equipment to try and make them uber by farming the bazaar. I would love to see groups moving into zones that are more dangerous and harder to kill in to make it a challenge for them. But lets face it once you are time flagged and equipped what is left but farming for money. The game has hit an end. After you have killed every god in the game what is left for you to accomplish, other than to show off for the world at how powerfull you are. So more than likely yes for a uber member the quote of how everquest is a job is quite true, lets face it raiding seven days a week for 6hrs a day yea that is job, and while the loot is good, raiding all that time would make you go a little batty as well.
Falconi wrote:
all these arguments about being able to take whatever mobs you can keep cleared are very nice , but it's not what this guy was doing
"The Paladin's group started out with one camp in BoT, then proceeded to walk all over other people's camps...starting from SB, moving to SM, ST, back down and taking North as well. I will admit they had a massive amount of DPS and were killing very quickly, but all of these areas were camped"
enough said . he was stealing from other peoples camps , and if the gm's won't do anything then at least he'd go on my 'never lift a finger for this jerk' list .
"The Paladin's group started out with one camp in BoT, then proceeded to walk all over other people's camps...starting from SB, moving to SM, ST, back down and taking North as well. I will admit they had a massive amount of DPS and were killing very quickly, but all of these areas were camped"
enough said . he was stealing from other peoples camps , and if the gm's won't do anything then at least he'd go on my 'never lift a finger for this jerk' list .
Hmmm... well. I've been reading this forum long enough that I never take just one side of the story and assume that's all there is to it. Were you there? Then you don't really know what was happening. At what point in the midst of this "drama", did the OP arrive? He doesn't say. Did he actually witness this group come in and hem in on other people's camps? Or did he just assume it from the fact that there were arguments about the camps?
This is telling (and follows right after the bit you quoted):
Quote:
During camp checks, the paladin called "South Loop - Sb,SM,ST". Someone commented that there was no such thing...he said "Camps are player created, oh look, I'm a player, I created a camp". While I recognize that officially there are no camps, by common usage there are, and it's common courtesy to take only one.
See the problem I have here is one of order. Was this group there first, claimed that entire set of "camps", but others refused to recognize their claim? How many folks feel obligated to inflict their idea of "common courtesy to take only one" on others who don't feel the same way? I can easily see how this same situation could come about with a very different backstory:
Paladins group arrives in BoT. They find that Sb, SM, and ST are all open. They begin killing all three areas in a cycle. After awile, other groups trickle in. They do a camp check, but argue that the paladin's group "can't claim more then one camp". They then show up at a camp they want, see that the paladin's group isn't there, sit their butts down and wait for respawns. By the time the respawns start occuring, the paladin's group is back and a fight over spawns begins.
Alternatively, some folks may not have bothered to do a camp check. They just see a "camp" that's not occupied and squat there. Same situation applies, but now you've got two groups claiming the same mobs with each feeling that they have the "right" to them.
Remember, you're only hearing one side of the story in the OP. Usually when folks post stuff they have a vested interest in convincing people that their side is the right side. I tend to assume that half the details are left out or just outright wrong in a post like this and always try to present the alternatives.
Does that mean what I'm talking about happened? Nope. I have no idea. I'm just pointing out that making assumptions about who's got what camp based on hearsay is kinda silly. This is why I just have a general rule that if a mob is cleared, someone killed the last spawn. Whether they are currently at the spawn location or not is irrelevant. What matters is whether they return when the mob respawns. If they do, then it's their mob. It's really that simple. If everyone followed that rule, 99% of all camp arguments would cease. Group that is currently keeping a spawn killed has right to the next spawn. It's just not that complicated.
It's when people come up with artificial boundaries on camps, and rules about camps that problems occur. "They have to be sitting in the same room as the spawn". "They have to return within a set amount of time" (only time that should matter is the respawn on the mobs). "They only get one of what I consider a camp regardless of what they can actually kill". All of those are artificial rules that people make up. You'd think such rules would prevent arguments, but they don't. I've actually seen more camp disputes occur because someone insists on certain "rules" rather then just following common sense.
The Veksar example is a perfect one. I've seen this a thousand times as well. People get it in their head's that particular sets of mobs are single camps and that a group can only claim one. They'll try to use that to get what they want even when there are tons of other places to go. As I said above, I've very rarely seen groups actually just arrive and start pulling mobs that you're already killing. I have many many many times seen people try to take mobs my group is already killing because they think that we should share with them. It's ludicrous given the vast numbers of potential camps in the game today. Back when the only two places for 40+ people to camp was SolB and LGuk, this kind of parcelling of areas was pretty much impossible to avoid. Today? There's just no reason for it. Every single group online at any given time has plenty of room to kill every mob they possibly can without interferrence from another group. The mere fact that two groups are arguing about spawns is evidence enough that there are more groups there then the spawn rate can support. Someone needs to move.
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
This is the type of problem that makes me happy I play on RZ.
If another group or even player interferes with your camp/access/gameplay you kill them. You might die in the effort, but its easily solved problem. From the sounds of the original poster, the group that came along was a high powered group of kick-butt types who had the ability to walk over whom ever they wanted. That said, I bet if two or three of the groups they were walking over got together and gave them free rides to their respective bind points it would give them pause.
My guild has gone to war over just this issue. It does take away from regular game play, but then again, why did you level up that character and get all the AA?
If another group or even player interferes with your camp/access/gameplay you kill them. You might die in the effort, but its easily solved problem. From the sounds of the original poster, the group that came along was a high powered group of kick-butt types who had the ability to walk over whom ever they wanted. That said, I bet if two or three of the groups they were walking over got together and gave them free rides to their respective bind points it would give them pause.
My guild has gone to war over just this issue. It does take away from regular game play, but then again, why did you level up that character and get all the AA?
i obviously can't speak for everyone, but i know one thing in my eq life that causes tension is the fact that a lot of times its HARD to find a group. if you get settled in somewhere and get the group going and exp starts flowing, your not going to just pick up and move somewhere else. If the idea even arises, 1-2 people will say they don't want to go there, 2 others will go LD and not return and the rest will go with you but then log off when you don't get people to fill the other spots soon enough. this is all assuming every player in this equation is a "good" player. if not, a whole new set of issues arise.
I wish it were a lot easier to find people open to do anything in game...its one of my biggest pet peeves right now. everyone is so uptight all the time, that you end up getting frustrated yourself before you find anything worthwhile to do.
I wish it were a lot easier to find people open to do anything in game...its one of my biggest pet peeves right now. everyone is so uptight all the time, that you end up getting frustrated yourself before you find anything worthwhile to do.
This stuff doesn't just happen with high-levels. You should see the arguements in the Nektulos Forest newbie zone over camps for calcified skellie parts. I had one spot solo camped for a good hour or so, had to chase a mob for the kill, then returned to find someone in the spot who said "This is my camp, you have to leave" and immediately tried to /duel me. Mature.
On the whole philosophical issue of "camping", I have to chime in, though I expect some good flaming ...
The argument that "they were there first, so it's their camp" is rather weak. Why? These are PUBLIC servers. Nothing in that zone is yours (assuming you're not in an instanced zone) - it belongs to everyone who paid for an account on that server. Common courtesy and a little public relations would go a long way in resolving any conflict, but some people would rather live by the "me, me, me" credo. If someone is already at a camp you'd like to visit, just freaking send a /tell and ask "Hey, we'd love to camp here for a bit too - how about we rotate on a couple of camps?" or some such. You know, win-win situation and all that crap. Unfortunately, it seems the kiddies (not necessarily in age, but maturity level) who play this game were never taught the concept of "share".
On the whole philosophical issue of "camping", I have to chime in, though I expect some good flaming ...
The argument that "they were there first, so it's their camp" is rather weak. Why? These are PUBLIC servers. Nothing in that zone is yours (assuming you're not in an instanced zone) - it belongs to everyone who paid for an account on that server. Common courtesy and a little public relations would go a long way in resolving any conflict, but some people would rather live by the "me, me, me" credo. If someone is already at a camp you'd like to visit, just freaking send a /tell and ask "Hey, we'd love to camp here for a bit too - how about we rotate on a couple of camps?" or some such. You know, win-win situation and all that crap. Unfortunately, it seems the kiddies (not necessarily in age, but maturity level) who play this game were never taught the concept of "share".
Message has high abuse count and will not be displayed.
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
/agree
Wow, gbaji, yes!
Wow, gbaji, yes!
Recent Visitors: 279
All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (279)
- Forums
- EverQuest
- General Discussion
- BoT/Tactics drama, rant about a group
© 2024 Fanbyte LLC