Question for the Devs: Can we police ourselves?

[Aamer Khan]

In the Rules of Conduct PDF, paragraph 13 it states that players may NOT...

13. Engage in “disruptive behavior� that is deemed to include, but is not limited
to, conduct that purposely interferes with the normal flow of game-play or
interferes with other players’ use and enjoyment of the Game.

Many have concluded that this can apply to spawn "hogging". Hogging herein defined as camping a spawn to kill a periodically spawning mob, so as to prevent others from having the chance to kill said mob.

Examples could include:
Killing Umyaar for sport by bipeds to prevent dragons from completing thier quest.
Killing Reklar every time he spawns to prevent others from getting his loot.

The first example shows interference in normal flow of game-play, and the second shows interference in other players use and enjoyment of the game. Both are called disruptive by those that are affected.

So, my question is...

If EII will not enforce the Eula, and rules of conduct, how far are we allowed to go in policing ourselves?

Can we inform the shards we play on about those that are disruptive?
Can we do anything else?

I am only interested in a response from Nagafen or any other EII rep. Player opinions will not answer this question.

[Deth]

Why not post this in the sticked Q&A thread at the top?

[Theolaerynn]

If EII will not enforce the Eula, and rules of conduct, how far are we allowed to go in policing ourselves?

And yet, didn't you just answer yourself in that same sentence? If there is no enforcement then you are allowed to do anything that you wish.

[Aamer Khan]

Actually ... NO.

From a new rule posted on these boards, I don't believe we will be able to post the names of anyone that is disruptive towards others game play. And since EII can ill afford to start banning anyone atm, I would have to conclude that we are left to our own devices.

However, well we be found guilty of some hidden rule, if we announce the names of such disruptive players in marketplace?

Thus, my question is still valid and remains to be answered by an EII rep.

[pevil2000]

Whilst EII can always give a rough answer right now, til they rewrite their own EULA, you can't really be sure. Perhaps take a looka t the EULA for their other games and see what they tend to say.

[Sharduk]

The " Sharduk forum rule " does not prohibit us from openly discussing disruptive or exploiting toons on server chat channels. As i read it , it is specifically written for the forums.

As much as I disagree with the practice of spawn camping, I dont intrepet it as a violation of the EULA, nor IMO , would be a corresponding "anti - camping" coop effort.

Sharduk

[Death-knell]

In the Rules of Conduct PDF, paragraph 13 it states that players may NOT...


I am only interested in a response from Nagafen or any other EII rep. Player opinions will not answer this question.

Then maybe you might want to PM them. These are PUBLIC forums.

And no we can't police ourselves.

[Rhyssa]

From a new rule posted on these boards, I don't believe we will be able to post the names of anyone that is disruptive towards others game play. And since EII can ill afford to start banning anyone atm, I would have to conclude that we are left to our own devices.

Obviously I can't answer your original question as I'm not a dev.

I do have a couple of observations and interpretations though.

First, if EII does nothing about exploiters, then they are giving those people tacit permission to continue to do so.

Second, we aren't allowed to post details of said exploits or those who use them on these boards or else we will be banned from the forums.
Great idea, punish those who aren't exploiting and reward those are doing so.

Third, we aren't allowed to publish what the exploits are, or we will be banned from the forums.
So, it's ok for those who are already exploiting to continue to do so, but no-one else is allowed to know how so that they can use the same exploits. Not only are exploiters not punished, they're actually given preferential treatment.

[pevil2000]

I don't think its particularly that Rhyssa, its the same on all 'official' boards. It's too easy to take someone you don't like (say if me and you didn't get on) and I could come on here saying "omg Rhyssa was exploiting! Ban her! If you see her, get her killed!". People may or may not believe me, but you can be sure some people would, you'd get griefed and then probably end up leaving because its just no fun.

Now, if EII get it privately mailed to them with evidence and STILL do nothing, then they're getting preferential treatment

[snickel]

1) I think it is a very good rule that an offender's name shall not be posted on this board. There is too much chance of false alarms: of players that might be unjustly or erroneusly accused.

2) I have not found any statement by EII that indicated they didn't bother about exploits. I would notifiy them by PM or mail and ask them to check their logs to substantiate my claim that a certain player went against the rules. And then the ball is in their court. And I would expect them to act.

3) There are ways that 'policing' can be done by players -- for example when I witness a player behaving in a game-destructive fashion, I shall

-- talk to him to find out whether he did it on purpose.
-- If he did, I would put him on my personal 'blacklist' -- no groupings with him, no crafting for him.
-- And I would contact his guild and ask them their opinion of his actions and what they intended to do about it. Depending on the answer, the guild itself might land on my blacklist.

So the sanctions that I would put into effect as a player would amount to social isolation of the respective player. This is within the rules.

[Aamer Khan]

Death-Knell, Why can't we police ourselves?

My thought is that if the SHARD voted and authorized a few folks to be constables, they could witness any disruptive activity, and with screenshots, send this to EII for review.

These constables would have NO power over others, just a responsibility to report disruptive activity. EII would be the Court of the land, where anyone reported as being disruptive, could work it out with EII.

With something like this in place, we would at least keep the issue infront of EII. Now, perhaps some don't view this as important. However, if enough players on a shard actually vote a few into these constable positions, then I have to conclude that the shard feels it's enough of a problem to warrant this.

If they DON'T want such a body to report disruptive activity, then it won't happen.

[Jayne]

Don't think there is any problem with sending in a ticket or a pm to Dark or any other EI rep. I am sure they would like to know whom is abusing the game. If one choses to go that route its their perogative.

[Sharduk]

I only wish you were correct Jayne

I sent DE a PM here on he forums and a tell in game asking him to respond if he wanted any detailed information on the exploits.

That was last week, and I have yet to get a response, nor do I expect one.

I can only conclude that exploiting is so far down on thier " list " that the community can't expect any EI support.

Surprising since a tell to the offenders saying "hey ! we have a complaint against you for XXX XXX and we are watching. Be advised that such XXX XXX is contrary to the EULA. If you are observerd XXX XXX we will take the appropriate action up to and including suspension or banning you from further play".

A tell like this would probably solve the problem.

Sharduk

[Jayne]

Hummm that is interesting to say the least. Does it mean they are unable to make updates thus cannot eliminate cheats/exploits? Or are they back logged and can't answer your request? Guess we have to wait and see

[pevil2000]

It's also possibly that their is a privacy rule for them. Guild Wars, for example, has such a thing. I reported over a year ago now a guy who was griefing me a lot (I won't go into details). They did reply saying they'd look into it, but they will never reply telling you what has happened. After all, if they ban said person and tell you, that's as good as shouting on the forums "Pevil is a griefer! She got banned!" which is not a good thing for a company to be seen doing. Especially if it turns out the 'evidence' was wrong. You can monitor these things and guess at what happened though; I added this guy to my friends list and saw he didn't log on for 3 days. Could be a coincidence, could have been a temp ban.

[Jayne]

That is true. TG did that. Currently doesnt sound like EI has thought of this issue, or low on there priority list.

Personally I think billing and Eula would be the foundation of there ownership of HZ. Those two things are required to operate and have concrete guidelines for the game. I would put these first before worrying about adding more content to a game that will just be further exploited.

Jayne

[Justa Mirage]

Ok Aamer... let me ask you THIS question about your statement:

If I am invited, let's say, to a Raknor or Fafnir hunt, because people are trying to get all the pieces to make the quest items, and I end up getting on a team of players that some disgruntled player thinks are "spawn hogging" the quest mobs and I are pinned up with the rest of the players as being someone who spawn hogs... then... how is that fair?

in-game grudges need not be policed by EI. Which is what it really boils down to. I would guess if you were the first to gather a team, go kill <mob boss>, reap the rewards, then you were more successful than the other group going out to do the same thing.

I get invites to do these hunts, and I am always happy to participate. I just hope that in the future, I don't find my character on the post office wall

I have a good one for you Aamer but I will ask you in-game

[Jayne]

LOL not all people are being asked to participate. And Aamer is asking because he is being approached in other ways, so this is a question he has and some clarification he wants and so do many others.

And by the way Daknor and faf are not the mobs in question, i get asked to those too

[Aamer Khan]

Justa, what you give as an example is no where near what I'm talking about.

Let me be very careful here lest I be banned from the boards.

( from the post about not mentioning exploits by DarkEnigmaa, I'm not willing to even acknowledge that such things exist. Since as I read it, if I even say there is something specific that players can do to cheat I could get banned ( even if I don't say how ))

If there was some method that could be used to prevent you from taking part in those hunts, would you just be a disgruntled player mad at somebody stronger or more advanced? Or would it be possible that you would view it differently?

There is no spoon.

[Tantalyr]

I can certainly see how so-called "camping a spawn" can be terribly misinterpreted and, thus, lead to a terribly unfortunate--and undeserved--community response.

Take Valkor, for instance. I've been on any number of hunts of the beast. Why? Because my main character has maxed Cleric and triple teched heal spells. And because I have quite a bit of experience hunting Valkor and know when and what healing spells to fire off. And I usually play early mornings (NA time) when Valkor is often up. So I often get invited by various folks to hunt him. And, thus, it would not be unusual at all to see me in some group hunting him on any particular morning.

Now am I "camping" Valkor? I don't think so. I don't log out at the fortress just to be the first to log in and catch him up. I don't initiate hunting groups to go after him (rather, I'm always invited to join some group or another). And I'm darn sure not hunting for the purpose of making sure that no one else ever gets his loot drops. In fact, in literally dozens of hunts I've never taken a single weapon/scale drop from him--I let other members of whatever group I'm with do that.

But given the regularity with which I'm invited to join groups to hunt Valkor--particularly in the early morning hours--I can sure see how someone would think I'm "camping" Valkor. And it just ain't so, Joe.