Practice Change in the rule "Camping"

[MaxGamer803913]

Minecraft username:

MaxGamer803913​

Suggestion:

Change in the rule "Camping"​

Detailed description:

My suggestion was for the camping rule to be either removed because camping on top by placing blocks can be done for strategical purposes such as healing after bed gone for a better shot at winning the game. And for instances where players abuse glitch blocks to get on top of bases, this can come under exploiting bugs / abusing and not under camping. I wanted to bring this out because camping is an essential part and strategy for bedfight and UHC. Thank you.​

Reason(s):

It's just not reasonable to force a player to lose rather have him try and win the game.​

Example(s):

Player 1 vs Player 2. They exchange beds but 2 is full and 1 is on suppose 12hp. Now 1 would build up and camp till he gains more hp so that he gets a better shot at winning this game which is completely reasonoable.​

 

[Seni_UwU]

Yes, I totally agree with this statement. As I was banned mid game because of "camping" while I was stuck and could not get out. I see this as a total unfairness.

 

[Hjallis07]

Agree. It is generally in other servers not a rule. Stalling to heal is generally a part of PvP, and camping for a short while is one way to stall. It is also not disallowed in other PvP modes, so it seems inconsequential to have it as a rule in practice. A lot of the maps in practice also “encourage” camping by having safe spots. If “no camping” then is a rule, the server essentially encourages players to break rules if they do not also change the maps.

 

[EA0_2_0_8_]

Neutral

We do not necessarily punish players camping in a short period of time for strategic purposes. The camping rule is mainly for players who explicitly build up / pearl in unusual conditions in order to prolong the duration of games. Removing this rule and include all the camping punishment as exploiting would be way too harsh, as exploiting is for more severe offenses which gains you unfair advantages from abusing certain glitches/bugs.

​

 

[Seni_UwU]

Neutral

We do not necessarily punish players camping in a short period of time for strategic purposes. The camping rule is mainly for players who explicitly build up / pearl in unusual conditions in order to prolong the duration of games. Removing this rule and include all the camping punishment as exploiting would be way too harsh, as exploiting is for more severe offenses which gains you unfair advantages from abusing certain glitches/bugs.

​

I was banned for my “strategic” camping, I would appreciate if you take a look at my ban. Even if it a one day ban, I lost my practice winstreak for a false camping ban. I was one hit away from dying after getting my opponents bed, so I ran away and stayed down to heal up, which is totally strategic, so I can fight them. And after I was fully healed, I was trying to get out, but I couldn’t since the opponent was right above me. But I did actually get out just after, and he still didn’t care. And I do not know why staff doesn’t look at it from my perspective. I was literally stuck and I couldn’t get out but the staff member called it “camping” and banned me in that same game right before I was about to fight him. And from my perspective, i see this as staff abuse. Please help or you would have to make such places inaccessible.
Thank you.

 

[Hjallis07]

Neutral

We do not necessarily punish players camping in a short period of time for strategic purposes. The camping rule is mainly for players who explicitly build up / pearl in unusual conditions in order to prolong the duration of games. Removing this rule and include all the camping punishment as exploiting would be way too harsh, as exploiting is for more severe offenses which gains you unfair advantages from abusing certain glitches/bugs.

​

That should then be specified in the rule because the current rule is way to vague if that is the case. In fact I personally know someone who got banned for short term strategic camping, in a match against a staff member. Either this staff member was abusing staff or the rule is so vague that staff don’t know how to interpret the rule themselves.

 

[EA0_2_0_8_]

I understand the frustrations, and what I said in my previous reply may not have been entirely clear. The camping punishment will be issued due to the outcome (prolonging the game), not your strategy.

You are always allowed to take short-term tactics for an advantage (eg, Healing to re-fight). However, your strategy may not cover actions that would unnecessarily drag out a game, even unintentionally.

Your initial heal was a valid strategy. However, from the rule's perspective, if your opponent is unable to engage, it can appear as passive camping, which extends the game duration.

 

[Hjallis07]

I understand the frustrations, and what I said in my previous reply may not have been entirely clear. The camping punishment will be issued due to the outcome (prolonging the game), not your strategy.

You are always allowed to take short-term tactics for an advantage (eg, Healing to re-fight). However, your strategy may not cover actions that would unnecessarily drag out a game, even unintentionally.

Your initial heal was a valid strategy. However, from the rule's perspective, if your opponent is unable to engage, it can appear as passive camping, which extends the game duration.

On this. Wouldn't healing in every single situation drag out the game, as it takes time to heal? You also cannot heal if you are not avoiding the enemy, which would also drag out the game?

 

[EA0_2_0_8_]

On this. Wouldn't healing in every single situation drag out the game, as it takes time to heal? You also cannot heal if you are not avoiding the enemy, which would also drag out the game?

It all depends on the duration you took. And as I said above it depends on the outcome, not the strategy you are using, the context does not matter. If you prolonged the game making your opponent unable to fight you for a peroid of time, then it would be camping.