People Stealing Nameds.

Stevil_Firebrand · 03-10-2007, 05:01 PM

Something has got to be done about this.

I am sick of carving my way to a named and having someone come up from behind and taking the named whilst I take the last mobs. It's just disgusting. I'm pig sick of being a victim of this and am starting to think about cancelling my account because of it. I've been grouped in Fallen Gate and people have took nameds after we've cleared the way and today I was in Thundering Steppes killing the place holders for Bloodtalon for 2 hours and a group turns up kills a couple of non-PH griffons and then kills Bloodtalon.

How long am I going to wait for the next spawn? Who's going to come steal it the next time?

There needs to be a criteria for killing nameds that needs to be introduced. You should have to have killed X amount of something and X amount of something else before you can kill them to stop greedy players coming and taking the prize of your hard work. Only when we establish proper ownership will this be fair.

If something like this happened then it may be possible solution to prevent botting and camping.

Mareth · 03-10-2007, 05:05 PM

"If something like this happened then it may be possible solution to prevent botting and camping." Wait, what?

Stevil_Firebrand · 03-10-2007, 05:24 PM

Well if you had to kill 5 of type x mob and 7 of type y mobs before you could kill John Barnes ^^^ Heroic, you wouldn't be able to camp the last room where the named spawns as once you'd killed him you'd have to kill the required mobs again.

Similarly you wouldn't be able to script a bot to get the required elements before the bot auto-attacked the named.

This is not about making it more difficult, the requirements could be the mobs you have to kill on your way through the dungeon before you naturally get to the named but it prevents people sneaking up behind you and taking what you worked hard for without putting the effort in.

Ilirith · 03-10-2007, 05:29 PM

erm, if a bot can attack a named, then it can for gods sake also check a few variables first to see if it have killed the required mobs... Mind you that those who make the bots, they arent [Removed for Content] like most of those who just use em, those who make em are usually rather intelligent as well as they know what they are doing. Would be more of a hassle for SOE to implement than a coder to adapt too. //Elimia

Stevil_Firebrand · 03-10-2007, 05:32 PM

But this isn't really about botting... it's about people who are playing the game stealing named mobs from other players.

I couldn't lower myself to do that.

EDIT: In fact I completely disagree with you. I've never seen a bot running round a dungeon before. ~hey are normally dumped where they need to be and set to kill what they have to. It would be a lot easier to code a requirement to kill before a named than it would to code a bot to kill trash mobs over and over before killing a named and then have it go kill trash mobs again.

Ilirith · 03-10-2007, 05:41 PM

There are many more than you think that are botting, as you said, you never see botters running around.. well there you just said it... How do you know that they werent botters? i doubt you talked with all of em, but you just assume they werent because there are tons of botters that just dump their toons somewhere to repeatively kill some mobs. again, yes this aren't about botting, but the OP's suggestion did also have the, "might prevent botting and camping". Just my two cent/copper/isk/etc. //Elimia {EDIT} Don't you think there are any Harvesting bots either? They would have to run around and harvest the nodes, would be the same thing with killing trash mobs prior to nameds. {/EDIT}

Stevil_Firebrand · 03-10-2007, 05:49 PM

So should we abandon all ideas because botters could 'easy code' around everything?

Ilirith · 03-10-2007, 05:53 PM

No, i never said that, nor would i want that. But the OP's suggestion would be more of a hassle ( or just as big a hassle ) as it would be for the coders to adapt their bot to the new requirements. As well as, personally i would find it _very_ annoying having to kill x of y etc. myself i dont have a big problem with nameds getting stolen, except from botters, because people,atleast on my server ( Runnyeye ) mostly have somewhat common sense and most of them actually _ask_ if you need the named or if you are farming it, where they might then ask to get the kill if they need it and you were just farming. //Elimia

Norrsken · 03-10-2007, 07:37 PM

Stevil_Firebrand wrote:

So should we abandon all ideas because botters could 'easy code' around everything?

Nah, just come up with ideas that arent easily circumvented. Making fixes that just take a coffe break to circumvent isnt effective. SMILEY

Savanja · 03-10-2007, 08:06 PM

Unfortunately, MMOs depend on the honesty and kindness of other players. And just like IRL, there are jerks out there that are totally okay with swooping in on another group's coattails and taking what they need. It is a shame, but I consider it one of the typicals of this kind of gaming.

Ganlu · 03-10-2007, 08:29 PM

As far as I know, the TOS of the game does not specify any "rights" to mobs, that's why there's an encounter locking system. Whoever tags the mob first, gets the kill/loot. Now, as a rule I never kill a named even in the same room as another group that seem to be making their way toward it, and always ask if others need a quest update. Not all players are like this though, and they're not breaking any rules. If you see another group that looks like they're ready to pounce on your named, you can always root/mez the named or something to lock it to you while you finish the stuff around it. If someone does steal a named from me (i.e., they kill it after I've cleared the way to it), I make sure to let them know that I don't consider what they did good "sportsmanship" (for lack of a better word), and many times they will offer apologies or have misunderstood because they were coming from another direction.

Moonblosso · 03-10-2007, 09:06 PM

Like Ilirith, I don't really have a problem with that on my server (Splitpaw) - people are generally polite and won't steal your mob, will ask you first, or ask you join up with you. It just plain ole good manners!!

Laoch69 · 03-11-2007, 12:06 AM

You are talking about "rights" to a publicly contested named in a wide open zone like Thundering steppes.

If you don't want something "stolen" from you, then a) lock your encounters and b) attack the named before someone else does.

If that doesn't work, then don't worry about it and move on.

Zodiak · 03-11-2007, 01:17 AM

For the most part in Everquest 2 the people you come across are going to be kind and generous people. There are rotten apples in game though, just like in RL. Its something you have to deal with when you play an MMO over a single player RPG. =/

Dasein · 03-11-2007, 02:51 AM

Quest update mobs should be triggered in some manner, This trigger could be as simple as moving through an area or involve multiple steps and items. If this means these mobs do not drop loot or give XP, that's fine.

Spyderbite · 03-11-2007, 03:05 AM

Stevil_Firebrand wrote:

Something has got to be done about this.

Bah! Just kill them! You can do that where I come from. SMILEY

Pendant · 03-11-2007, 07:30 AM

Dasein wrote:

Quest update mobs should be triggered in some manner, This trigger could be as simple as moving through an area or involve multiple steps and items. If this means these mobs do not drop loot or give XP, that's fine.

/agree

The big problem here is the aggravation factor: we're comparing two different playstyles: the quester and the looter. Looter thinks it's fine to grab the mob because 'contested mobs are a part of the game': quester feels cheated because the looter hasn't worked for it (either by killing stuff en-route or by hours of camping awaiting a spawn).

In some cases you can have both parties being 'questers' and BOTH ending up with a bad taste in the mouth over the experience, because someone has to lose. Example: Invis group camping Tome of Death in the Ruins of Varsoon has the mob 'ganked' by another quest group that has fought its way in as the Tome spawns. One group wins, the other loses: both end up with a bad feeling instead of the GOOD feeling that a game is supposed to generate!

Slapfish · 03-11-2007, 09:55 AM

Yup- I hate this too. Happened a few days ago in CT with the named we needed for an HQ.

The only problem with a formula like kill 4 x's, and then 6 y's, and then when BigBaddy spawns you can kill him, is that it would ruin the possibility of just stumbling onto a named and being able to kill him. If you did, you'd have to stop and look up the correct combination needed to be able to kill him, then go back, kill sthe x's and y's and get him. They would also have to make the MOB's non-aggro because it wouldn't be exactly fair to get jumped by a named, but not be allowed to kill it until you'd killed the x's and y's.

So I'm not sure what the solution is. Perhaps it might not be necessary to kill x's and y's, but if you HAVE done so, it would lock the named to you, or your group for a period of time. The in-game reasoning behind it is that perhaps the MOB has taken notice that you are killing his minions and is waiting for you to finish you off. Then the whole thing could be on a timer basis (you know, after you have your shot you can't kill BigBaddy again for 24 hours or something) to keep people from camping the x's and y's and effectively keeping the named perma-locked.

Might work. This would be especially nice for those named MOBs needed for HQ's and other important quests.

On another note, I've long thought that some form of in-game player feedback/rating system would be nice. I'm not sure how it would be implemented (especially to avoid abuse) but if players knew their bad manners would have repurcussions it might reduce it somewhat.

Stevil_Firebrand · 03-11-2007, 02:54 PM

Look I don't think that the mob actually belongs to me. What I feel is that killing placeholders for 2 hours earns me the right to take it out when it pops. I know that there's no rule that say's that that mob becomes mine... but I believe it should be changed so that it would. The reality of it is is that there are cheeky feckers out there who will take the mob from you and kill it without consequence and if you ask them why they did it you just get abuse. The worst part is there is no retribution that you can take either.

I don't think that mobs such as this that take real hard work to get up to should be 'contestable' and should be linked to the work you have to put in to get there. Why are these mobs classed as contestable anyway? It's he who clicks first that counts. That's not a contest in my opinion.

It's also amazing how people know how well botters code in these forums. I think SOE should take a peak at their accounts.

Natak · 03-11-2007, 02:59 PM

Stevil_Firebrand wrote:

Look I don't think that the mob actually belongs to me. What I feel is that killing placeholders for 2 hours earns me the right to take it out when it pops. I know that there's no rule that say's that that mob becomes mine... but I believe it should be changed so that it would. The reality of it is is that there are cheeky feckers out there who will take the mob from you and kill it without consequence and if you ask them why they did it you just get abuse. The worst part is there is no retribution that you can take either.
While i agree that you "should" have a chance at the mob, the hard part is proving you were there for 2 hours. You cannot expect Joe smith to watch you for the entire 2 hours to make sure that you weren't killing ph's to get the named to spawn. This is where i think the idea of triggered spawns should come to play (i think you suggested it?)
I don't think that mobs such as this that take real hard work to get up to should be 'contestable' and should be linked to the work you have to put in to get there. Why are these mobs classed as contestable anyway? It's he who clicks first that counts. That's not a contest in my opinion.
It's also amazing how people know how well botters code in these forums. I think SOE should take a peak at their accounts.
It is well known and well documented the various techniques used to create third party bots and farmers. Accusing those that provide information on a public board of being botters themselves is very bad form.

Jrral · 03-11-2007, 03:42 PM

Stevil_Firebrand wrote:

Look I don't think that the mob actually belongs to me. What I feel is that killing placeholders for 2 hours earns me the right to take it out when it pops.

Actually you do get a "right" to a named if you're killing placeholders. Mobs are contested, but there's another bit of the TOS that says nobody has the right to disrupt the game for others or monopolize content. If you're clearing placeholders or other mobs needed to get to a named and someone else takes advantage of that by coming in through the area you've cleared to take the named before you can finish the last mobs you're engaged with and engage him, that's disruptive play. Scroll your log back to where you started to kill the placeholders or the last mobs that block the way to the named and take a /report (make sure the part where the interloper goes for the named is included in the 100-line window), and /petition him for game disruption. If you have time, telling him before he starts on the named that you've been killing placeholders for that named for X amount of time and that if he needs the named you'll group with him so you all get credit will improve your standing with CS immensely on the matter. With that kind of statement to him in the record, if he ignores you and goes for the named alone it's almost certain he's going to get dinged by CS. Note: do not mention farming or botting. Do not allege that they stole the named from you. The allegation is that they are disrupting play by taking advantage of your clearing of placeholders to avoid having to do it themselves.

Hollywood · 03-11-2007, 04:31 PM

Jrral@Unrest wrote:

With that kind of statement to him in the record, if he ignores you and goes for the named alone it's almost certain he's going to get dinged by CS.

I seriously doubt that.

Ji · 03-11-2007, 05:06 PM

See? The community in EQ1 had a much more hospitable approach to this. The would simply ask if they could have the kill so they could finish their quest or whatever. It seems that none of those game ethics came over to EQ2.

Just last week I was farming eye's in Barren Sky. I had only been there for about 10 mins when a ranger rolls up and start pulling from right next to me. I asked him if I could have the ye's and he could have the named and the gazers. His reply was "I'll take whatever I want". So I told him "ok dick, it's all yours".

I mean cmon people. Respect other peoples camps and find one that suits you until their gone! If someone is camping a named every day for ungodly periods of time then, by all means, ask them to leave or tactfully approach the situation.

Ji · 03-11-2007, 05:08 PM

http://forums.station.sony.com/eq2/...topic_id=351771

Lornick · 03-11-2007, 05:18 PM

Jixx wrote:

See? The community in EQ1 had a much more hospitable approach to this. The would simply ask if they could have the kill so they could finish their quest or whatever. It seems that none of those game ethics came over to EQ2.

You're joking right? I played EQ1. I can assure you that I've seen alot more named ganking in EQ1 then in EQ2. In fact it's even arguable whether you can have a named 'ganked' from you in EQ2 since if you engage it first then you'll get credit for the kill. It's a billion times worse when you actually engage a mob first and a group or player with more dps gets credit for a kill you engaged first (which is how EQ1 worked. Whoever did 51% or more of the damage gets credit). I play alot and really haven't had many issues at all with other players involving named mobs with EQ2. Asking for all kinds of weird code that would no doubt be buggy as hell to avoid a problem that doesn't really exist would be far more disruptive to the game then leaving things alone. Here's a little tip for you. Generally speaking mobs in this game have respawn timers. Learn the timers for the PH/named your looking for and be sure your there and ready the second they spawn. You'll never have this trouble again if you do.

Pendant · 03-11-2007, 05:23 PM

Jixx wrote:

http://forums.station.sony.com/eq2/...topic_id=351771

Totally on-topic. Totally awesome SMILEY

Pendant · 03-11-2007, 05:27 PM

Lornick wrote:

Here's a little tip for you. Generally speaking mobs in this game have respawn timers. Learn the timers for the PH/named your looking for and be sure your there and ready the second they spawn. You'll never have this trouble again if you do.

Sadly, I have to disagree with this. IMO the fact that some respawns can be so perfectly timed is utilised by those who are prepared to exploit the game's mechanics to the detriment of those who would like to play this as 'just a fun game'.

Ji · 03-11-2007, 05:41 PM

Lornick wrote:

Jixx wrote:
See? The community in EQ1 had a much more hospitable approach to this. The would simply ask if they could have the kill so they could finish their quest or whatever. It seems that none of those game ethics came over to EQ2.
You're joking right? I played EQ1. I can assure you that I've seen alot more named ganking in EQ1 then in EQ2. In fact it's even arguable whether you can have a named 'ganked' from you in EQ2 since if you engage it first then you'll get credit for the kill. It's a billion times worse when you actually engage a mob first and a group or player with more dps gets credit for a kill you engaged first (which is how EQ1 worked. Whoever did 51% or more of the damage gets credit). I play alot and really haven't had many issues at all with other players involving named mobs with EQ2. Asking for all kinds of weird code that would no doubt be buggy as hell to avoid a problem that doesn't really exist would be far more disruptive to the game then leaving things alone. Here's a little tip for you. Generally speaking mobs in this game have respawn timers. Learn the timers for the PH/named your looking for and be sure your there and ready the second they spawn. You'll never have this trouble again if you do.

What are you talking about? Do you know?

TheStateFish · 03-11-2007, 06:38 PM

You should be able to handle more than 1 encounter at a time, so if you see a named, just pull it first. First to pull it gets ownership, thats a perfect system. You can't own mobs, rooms, zones, and there are no such things as camps based on the terms of service, so you can beat the bots and ninja's by being faster than them.

The best fix would be to remove all loot and aa from all named for all quests, so you can complete your quests without hassle. Or were you just going for the loot yourself? Doing so would leave the game kinda barren of master chest drops, and the bots would be permacamping the 5 named left in the world.

erin · 03-11-2007, 07:17 PM

Jixx wrote:

See? The community in EQ1 had a much more hospitable approach to this. The would simply ask if they could have the kill so they could finish their quest or whatever. It seems that none of those game ethics came over to EQ2.
Just last week I was farming eye's in Barren Sky. I had only been there for about 10 mins when a ranger rolls up and start pulling from right next to me. I asked him if I could have the ye's and he could have the named and the gazers. His reply was "I'll take whatever I want". So I told him "ok [I cannot control my vocabulary], it's all yours".
I mean cmon people. Respect other peoples camps and find one that suits you until their gone! If someone is camping a named every day for ungodly periods of time then, by all means, ask them to leave or tactfully approach the situation.

LOL. I can tell you that I got ganked in EQ1 many hundreds of times more than has ever happened in EQ2. Encounter locking ftw. And I've been playing EQ2 since launch. And your story is sad, but not because of what you think. You were farming eyes and expected to hold an entire open area. That's rather selfish and rude of you, so the guy's response, while also rude, isn't unexpected at all. You have no right to claim an entire area to "farm". I see this a lot with people harvesting, where they want to hold large chunks of ground. While that would be very nice (I harvest a ton), it isn't how the game is set up. You need to learn to deal with how the game is, not how you want it to be. There are no camps in this game. It was deliberately set up from day one that there are no camps. Remove camp from your philosophy. I do respect folks "camping" PHers to get a named, but some people don't. But to expect people to respect a camp of common mobs? Not going to happen, it isn't intended, and very rarely will someone be that accomodating. The key comment you made is right there "Respect other peoples camps". There are no camps. Ask in any level channel to see if people accept the concept of a camp, like what you were claiming (an area of common mobs). The answer will almost always be no. This isn't EQ1.

03-10-2007, 07:37 PM	#9
Norrsken Loremaster Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 6,450	Stevil_Firebrand wrote: So should we abandon all ideas because botters could 'easy code' around everything? Nah, just come up with ideas that arent easily circumvented. Making fixes that just take a coffe break to circumvent isnt effective. __________________

03-10-2007, 08:06 PM	#10
Savanja Fansite Staff Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 397	Unfortunately, MMOs depend on the honesty and kindness of other players. And just like IRL, there are jerks out there that are totally okay with swooping in on another group's coattails and taking what they need. It is a shame, but I consider it one of the typicals of this kind of gaming. __________________ ~Savanja~

03-10-2007, 08:29 PM	#11
Ganlu General Join Date: Aug 2005 Posts: 315	As far as I know, the TOS of the game does not specify any "rights" to mobs, that's why there's an encounter locking system. Whoever tags the mob first, gets the kill/loot. Now, as a rule I never kill a named even in the same room as another group that seem to be making their way toward it, and always ask if others need a quest update. Not all players are like this though, and they're not breaking any rules. If you see another group that looks like they're ready to pounce on your named, you can always root/mez the named or something to lock it to you while you finish the stuff around it. If someone does steal a named from me (i.e., they kill it after I've cleared the way to it), I make sure to let them know that I don't consider what they did good "sportsmanship" (for lack of a better word), and many times they will offer apologies or have misunderstood because they were coming from another direction. __________________

03-11-2007, 12:06 AM	#13
Laoch69 Loremaster Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Vancouver, BC Posts: 189	You are talking about "rights" to a publicly contested named in a wide open zone like Thundering steppes. If you don't want something "stolen" from you, then a) lock your encounters and b) attack the named before someone else does. If that doesn't work, then don't worry about it and move on. __________________

03-11-2007, 01:17 AM	#14
Zodiak Loremaster Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: San Diego, CA Posts: 34	For the most part in Everquest 2 the people you come across are going to be kind and generous people. There are rotten apples in game though, just like in RL. Its something you have to deal with when you play an MMO over a single player RPG. =/ __________________

03-10-2007, 05:01 PM	#1
Stevil_Firebrand Loremaster Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 27	Something has got to be done about this. I am sick of carving my way to a named and having someone come up from behind and taking the named whilst I take the last mobs. It's just disgusting. I'm pig sick of being a victim of this and am starting to think about cancelling my account because of it. I've been grouped in Fallen Gate and people have took nameds after we've cleared the way and today I was in Thundering Steppes killing the place holders for Bloodtalon for 2 hours and a group turns up kills a couple of non-PH griffons and then kills Bloodtalon. How long am I going to wait for the next spawn? Who's going to come steal it the next time? There needs to be a criteria for killing nameds that needs to be introduced. You should have to have killed X amount of something and X amount of something else before you can kill them to stop greedy players coming and taking the prize of your hard work. Only when we establish proper ownership will this be fair. If something like this happened then it may be possible solution to prevent botting and camping.

03-10-2007, 05:05 PM	#2
Mareth Loremaster Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: Everfrost aka Norway Posts: 380	"If something like this happened then it may be possible solution to prevent botting and camping." Wait, what?

03-10-2007, 05:24 PM	#3
Stevil_Firebrand Loremaster Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 27	Well if you had to kill 5 of type x mob and 7 of type y mobs before you could kill John Barnes ^^^ Heroic, you wouldn't be able to camp the last room where the named spawns as once you'd killed him you'd have to kill the required mobs again. Similarly you wouldn't be able to script a bot to get the required elements before the bot auto-attacked the named. This is not about making it more difficult, the requirements could be the mobs you have to kill on your way through the dungeon before you naturally get to the named but it prevents people sneaking up behind you and taking what you worked hard for without putting the effort in.

03-10-2007, 05:29 PM	#4
Ilirith Loremaster Join Date: May 2006 Location: Denmark Posts: 32	erm, if a bot can attack a named, then it can for gods sake also check a few variables first to see if it have killed the required mobs... Mind you that those who make the bots, they arent [Removed for Content] like most of those who just use em, those who make em are usually rather intelligent as well as they know what they are doing. Would be more of a hassle for SOE to implement than a coder to adapt too. //Elimia

03-10-2007, 05:32 PM	#5
Stevil_Firebrand Loremaster Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 27	But this isn't really about botting... it's about people who are playing the game stealing named mobs from other players. I couldn't lower myself to do that. EDIT: In fact I completely disagree with you. I've never seen a bot running round a dungeon before. ~hey are normally dumped where they need to be and set to kill what they have to. It would be a lot easier to code a requirement to kill before a named than it would to code a bot to kill trash mobs over and over before killing a named and then have it go kill trash mobs again.

03-10-2007, 05:41 PM	#6
Ilirith Loremaster Join Date: May 2006 Location: Denmark Posts: 32	There are many more than you think that are botting, as you said, you never see botters running around.. well there you just said it... How do you know that they werent botters? i doubt you talked with all of em, but you just assume they werent because there are tons of botters that just dump their toons somewhere to repeatively kill some mobs. again, yes this aren't about botting, but the OP's suggestion did also have the, "might prevent botting and camping". Just my two cent/copper/isk/etc. //Elimia {EDIT} Don't you think there are any Harvesting bots either? They would have to run around and harvest the nodes, would be the same thing with killing trash mobs prior to nameds. {/EDIT}

03-10-2007, 05:49 PM	#7
Stevil_Firebrand Loremaster Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 27	So should we abandon all ideas because botters could 'easy code' around everything?

03-10-2007, 05:53 PM	#8
Ilirith Loremaster Join Date: May 2006 Location: Denmark Posts: 32	No, i never said that, nor would i want that. But the OP's suggestion would be more of a hassle ( or just as big a hassle ) as it would be for the coders to adapt their bot to the new requirements. As well as, personally i would find it _very_ annoying having to kill x of y etc. myself i dont have a big problem with nameds getting stolen, except from botters, because people,atleast on my server ( Runnyeye ) mostly have somewhat common sense and most of them actually _ask_ if you need the named or if you are farming it, where they might then ask to get the kill if they need it and you were just farming. //Elimia

03-10-2007, 09:06 PM	#12
Moonblosso General Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 29	Like Ilirith, I don't really have a problem with that on my server (Splitpaw) - people are generally polite and won't steal your mob, will ask you first, or ask you join up with you. It just plain ole good manners!!

03-11-2007, 02:51 AM	#15
Dasein Loremaster Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 2,847	Quest update mobs should be triggered in some manner, This trigger could be as simple as moving through an area or involve multiple steps and items. If this means these mobs do not drop loot or give XP, that's fine. __________________ Troll Lord Casywdian

03-11-2007, 03:05 AM	#16
Spyderbite Server: Venekor Guild: Dark Vengeance Rank: Member Loremaster Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Connecticut Posts: 4,262	Stevil_Firebrand wrote: Something has got to be done about this. Bah! Just kill them! You can do that where I come from.

03-11-2007, 07:30 AM	#17
Pendant Loremaster Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 166	Dasein wrote: Quest update mobs should be triggered in some manner, This trigger could be as simple as moving through an area or involve multiple steps and items. If this means these mobs do not drop loot or give XP, that's fine. /agree The big problem here is the aggravation factor: we're comparing two different playstyles: the quester and the looter. Looter thinks it's fine to grab the mob because 'contested mobs are a part of the game': quester feels cheated because the looter hasn't worked for it (either by killing stuff en-route or by hours of camping awaiting a spawn). In some cases you can have both parties being 'questers' and BOTH ending up with a bad taste in the mouth over the experience, because someone has to lose. Example: Invis group camping Tome of Death in the Ruins of Varsoon has the mob 'ganked' by another quest group that has fought its way in as the Tome spawns. One group wins, the other loses: both end up with a bad feeling instead of the GOOD feeling that a game is supposed to generate! __________________ -- seefar@nektulos Smelly Nelly of Lonewolf What am I doing here? I'd rather be in Norrath!

03-11-2007, 09:55 AM	#18
Slapfish Loremaster Join Date: Apr 2005 Posts: 166	Yup- I hate this too. Happened a few days ago in CT with the named we needed for an HQ. The only problem with a formula like kill 4 x's, and then 6 y's, and then when BigBaddy spawns you can kill him, is that it would ruin the possibility of just stumbling onto a named and being able to kill him. If you did, you'd have to stop and look up the correct combination needed to be able to kill him, then go back, kill sthe x's and y's and get him. They would also have to make the MOB's non-aggro because it wouldn't be exactly fair to get jumped by a named, but not be allowed to kill it until you'd killed the x's and y's. So I'm not sure what the solution is. Perhaps it might not be necessary to kill x's and y's, but if you HAVE done so, it would lock the named to you, or your group for a period of time. The in-game reasoning behind it is that perhaps the MOB has taken notice that you are killing his minions and is waiting for you to finish you off. Then the whole thing could be on a timer basis (you know, after you have your shot you can't kill BigBaddy again for 24 hours or something) to keep people from camping the x's and y's and effectively keeping the named perma-locked. Might work. This would be especially nice for those named MOBs needed for HQ's and other important quests. On another note, I've long thought that some form of in-game player feedback/rating system would be nice. I'm not sure how it would be implemented (especially to avoid abuse) but if players knew their bad manners would have repurcussions it might reduce it somewhat.

03-11-2007, 02:54 PM	#19
Stevil_Firebrand Loremaster Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 27	Look I don't think that the mob actually belongs to me. What I feel is that killing placeholders for 2 hours earns me the right to take it out when it pops. I know that there's no rule that say's that that mob becomes mine... but I believe it should be changed so that it would. The reality of it is is that there are cheeky feckers out there who will take the mob from you and kill it without consequence and if you ask them why they did it you just get abuse. The worst part is there is no retribution that you can take either. I don't think that mobs such as this that take real hard work to get up to should be 'contestable' and should be linked to the work you have to put in to get there. Why are these mobs classed as contestable anyway? It's he who clicks first that counts. That's not a contest in my opinion. It's also amazing how people know how well botters code in these forums. I think SOE should take a peak at their accounts.

03-11-2007, 02:59 PM	#20
Natak Loremaster Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 122	Stevil_Firebrand wrote: Look I don't think that the mob actually belongs to me. What I feel is that killing placeholders for 2 hours earns me the right to take it out when it pops. I know that there's no rule that say's that that mob becomes mine... but I believe it should be changed so that it would. The reality of it is is that there are cheeky feckers out there who will take the mob from you and kill it without consequence and if you ask them why they did it you just get abuse. The worst part is there is no retribution that you can take either. While i agree that you "should" have a chance at the mob, the hard part is proving you were there for 2 hours. You cannot expect Joe smith to watch you for the entire 2 hours to make sure that you weren't killing ph's to get the named to spawn. This is where i think the idea of triggered spawns should come to play (i think you suggested it?) I don't think that mobs such as this that take real hard work to get up to should be 'contestable' and should be linked to the work you have to put in to get there. Why are these mobs classed as contestable anyway? It's he who clicks first that counts. That's not a contest in my opinion. It's also amazing how people know how well botters code in these forums. I think SOE should take a peak at their accounts. It is well known and well documented the various techniques used to create third party bots and farmers. Accusing those that provide information on a public board of being botters themselves is very bad form.

03-11-2007, 03:42 PM	#21
Jrral Loremaster Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: San Diego, CA Posts: 2,610	Stevil_Firebrand wrote: Look I don't think that the mob actually belongs to me. What I feel is that killing placeholders for 2 hours earns me the right to take it out when it pops. Actually you do get a "right" to a named if you're killing placeholders. Mobs are contested, but there's another bit of the TOS that says nobody has the right to disrupt the game for others or monopolize content. If you're clearing placeholders or other mobs needed to get to a named and someone else takes advantage of that by coming in through the area you've cleared to take the named before you can finish the last mobs you're engaged with and engage him, that's disruptive play. Scroll your log back to where you started to kill the placeholders or the last mobs that block the way to the named and take a /report (make sure the part where the interloper goes for the named is included in the 100-line window), and /petition him for game disruption. If you have time, telling him before he starts on the named that you've been killing placeholders for that named for X amount of time and that if he needs the named you'll group with him so you all get credit will improve your standing with CS immensely on the matter. With that kind of statement to him in the record, if he ignores you and goes for the named alone it's almost certain he's going to get dinged by CS. Note: do not mention farming or botting. Do not allege that they stole the named from you. The allegation is that they are disrupting play by taking advantage of your clearing of placeholders to avoid having to do it themselves.

03-11-2007, 04:31 PM	#22
Hollywood Loremaster Join Date: Apr 2005 Posts: 86	Jrral@Unrest wrote: With that kind of statement to him in the record, if he ignores you and goes for the named alone it's almost certain he's going to get dinged by CS. I seriously doubt that. __________________ Sometimes I doubt your commitment to Sparkle Motion...

03-11-2007, 05:06 PM	#23
Ji General Join Date: Feb 2007 Posts: 280	See? The community in EQ1 had a much more hospitable approach to this. The would simply ask if they could have the kill so they could finish their quest or whatever. It seems that none of those game ethics came over to EQ2. Just last week I was farming eye's in Barren Sky. I had only been there for about 10 mins when a ranger rolls up and start pulling from right next to me. I asked him if I could have the ye's and he could have the named and the gazers. His reply was "I'll take whatever I want". So I told him "ok dick, it's all yours". I mean cmon people. Respect other peoples camps and find one that suits you until their gone! If someone is camping a named every day for ungodly periods of time then, by all means, ask them to leave or tactfully approach the situation.

03-11-2007, 05:08 PM	#24
Ji General Join Date: Feb 2007 Posts: 280	http://forums.station.sony.com/eq2/...topic_id=351771

03-11-2007, 05:18 PM	#25
Lornick Loremaster Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Boise, ID Posts: 1,114	Jixx wrote: See? The community in EQ1 had a much more hospitable approach to this. The would simply ask if they could have the kill so they could finish their quest or whatever. It seems that none of those game ethics came over to EQ2. You're joking right? I played EQ1. I can assure you that I've seen alot more named ganking in EQ1 then in EQ2. In fact it's even arguable whether you can have a named 'ganked' from you in EQ2 since if you engage it first then you'll get credit for the kill. It's a billion times worse when you actually engage a mob first and a group or player with more dps gets credit for a kill you engaged first (which is how EQ1 worked. Whoever did 51% or more of the damage gets credit). I play alot and really haven't had many issues at all with other players involving named mobs with EQ2. Asking for all kinds of weird code that would no doubt be buggy as hell to avoid a problem that doesn't really exist would be far more disruptive to the game then leaving things alone. Here's a little tip for you. Generally speaking mobs in this game have respawn timers. Learn the timers for the PH/named your looking for and be sure your there and ready the second they spawn. You'll never have this trouble again if you do. __________________

03-11-2007, 05:23 PM	#26
Pendant Loremaster Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 166	Jixx wrote: http://forums.station.sony.com/eq2/...topic_id=351771 Totally on-topic. Totally awesome __________________ -- seefar@nektulos Smelly Nelly of Lonewolf What am I doing here? I'd rather be in Norrath!

03-11-2007, 05:27 PM	#27
Pendant Loremaster Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 166	Lornick wrote: Here's a little tip for you. Generally speaking mobs in this game have respawn timers. Learn the timers for the PH/named your looking for and be sure your there and ready the second they spawn. You'll never have this trouble again if you do. Sadly, I have to disagree with this. IMO the fact that some respawns can be so perfectly timed is utilised by those who are prepared to exploit the game's mechanics to the detriment of those who would like to play this as 'just a fun game'. __________________ -- seefar@nektulos Smelly Nelly of Lonewolf What am I doing here? I'd rather be in Norrath!

03-11-2007, 05:41 PM	#28
Ji General Join Date: Feb 2007 Posts: 280	Lornick wrote: Jixx wrote: See? The community in EQ1 had a much more hospitable approach to this. The would simply ask if they could have the kill so they could finish their quest or whatever. It seems that none of those game ethics came over to EQ2. You're joking right? I played EQ1. I can assure you that I've seen alot more named ganking in EQ1 then in EQ2. In fact it's even arguable whether you can have a named 'ganked' from you in EQ2 since if you engage it first then you'll get credit for the kill. It's a billion times worse when you actually engage a mob first and a group or player with more dps gets credit for a kill you engaged first (which is how EQ1 worked. Whoever did 51% or more of the damage gets credit). I play alot and really haven't had many issues at all with other players involving named mobs with EQ2. Asking for all kinds of weird code that would no doubt be buggy as hell to avoid a problem that doesn't really exist would be far more disruptive to the game then leaving things alone. Here's a little tip for you. Generally speaking mobs in this game have respawn timers. Learn the timers for the PH/named your looking for and be sure your there and ready the second they spawn. You'll never have this trouble again if you do. What are you talking about? Do you know?

03-11-2007, 06:38 PM	#29
TheStateFish Loremaster Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 153	You should be able to handle more than 1 encounter at a time, so if you see a named, just pull it first. First to pull it gets ownership, thats a perfect system. You can't own mobs, rooms, zones, and there are no such things as camps based on the terms of service, so you can beat the bots and ninja's by being faster than them. The best fix would be to remove all loot and aa from all named for all quests, so you can complete your quests without hassle. Or were you just going for the loot yourself? Doing so would leave the game kinda barren of master chest drops, and the bots would be permacamping the 5 named left in the world. __________________

03-11-2007, 07:17 PM	#30
erin Loremaster Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 1,834	Jixx wrote: See? The community in EQ1 had a much more hospitable approach to this. The would simply ask if they could have the kill so they could finish their quest or whatever. It seems that none of those game ethics came over to EQ2. Just last week I was farming eye's in Barren Sky. I had only been there for about 10 mins when a ranger rolls up and start pulling from right next to me. I asked him if I could have the ye's and he could have the named and the gazers. His reply was "I'll take whatever I want". So I told him "ok [I cannot control my vocabulary], it's all yours". I mean cmon people. Respect other peoples camps and find one that suits you until their gone! If someone is camping a named every day for ungodly periods of time then, by all means, ask them to leave or tactfully approach the situation. LOL. I can tell you that I got ganked in EQ1 many hundreds of times more than has ever happened in EQ2. Encounter locking ftw. And I've been playing EQ2 since launch. And your story is sad, but not because of what you think. You were farming eyes and expected to hold an entire open area. That's rather selfish and rude of you, so the guy's response, while also rude, isn't unexpected at all. You have no right to claim an entire area to "farm". I see this a lot with people harvesting, where they want to hold large chunks of ground. While that would be very nice (I harvest a ton), it isn't how the game is set up. You need to learn to deal with how the game is, not how you want it to be. There are no camps in this game. It was deliberately set up from day one that there are no camps. Remove camp from your philosophy. I do respect folks "camping" PHers to get a named, but some people don't. But to expect people to respect a camp of common mobs? Not going to happen, it isn't intended, and very rarely will someone be that accomodating. The key comment you made is right there "Respect other peoples camps". There are no camps. Ask in any level channel to see if people accept the concept of a camp, like what you were claiming (an area of common mobs). The answer will almost always be no. This isn't EQ1.