AFK Checks

The obvious end of this is everyone in The Nexus gets banned.

It seems to be implied in this thread that DBG is taking action against people for being AFK, which isn't against the EULA as far as I'm aware. Lots of "my friend went to pee for 1 minute and got suspended" but not much mention of any actions taken that would seemingly be required to make that AFK time suddenly against the EULA. The guy who got suspended for foraging, assuming that is the case, would be a good example of a GM overdoing it, because he did actually take an action without responding, but not a serious one. Where as in all my time in EQ, I have never managed to make my character take an action while I was AFK peeing or otherwise.

If GM's are saying "respond" and then taking action after a period of time even without player actions, then I agree there is a problem. If you are AFK they should leave you that way until you do something that would imply you are not AFK while still not responding. However, it's more likely that people are doing things while they appear to be AFK, that indicate they aren't, and having action taken against them. Some will certainly be false positives, and maybe a first time warning or a change in procedure could help avoid those. Just because there can be false positives doesn't mean most positives are false.

If only that was true...

I am calling BS on the "I got banned for just being AFK" talk. The Nexus is filled with AFK people who are not getting banned. I've been AFK at zone lines, and even in groups, with no GM contact or ban. If you are getting banned it is because your character is doing stuff while you are AFK. That is against the rules and you deserve to be banned for it. No GM is banning people for taking a piss while their character sits there doing nothing.
Stop lying y'all.

My opinion: No.

Everything they do is backwards. They let the automated multi-boxers (non-Rizlona) dp whatever they want and punish the casual boxer.

Clearly not the same thing.

That's the point. It's totally inconsistent.

I once was suspended for taking too long to reply even though I was at my computer the whole time(and in other conversations in tells). The GM didn't care that they received what I believed to be a timely response considering how tell windows work (new tells are just added to a tab). The whole transaction took 3-4 minutes from the GM's tell (mind you it's a random persons name in my chat window) to me finishing my current replies to people I know... to responding to the GM letting them know i'm at my machine. Poof, suspended.

The whole concept of AFK checking needs to be revised or thrown away if it's not causing any real grief to other players because at this point like Machen stated it's used as a weapon...the process is horrible, and people are exploiting it.

Terrible situation but I enjoyed my week break from EQ.

The companies running EverQuest over the years have previously, are currently, and likely will always maintain staff members that play this game as well as work on it. In ways we will never fully know, understand or be privy to their influence is felt ingame day to day. Some of those individuals identities were public over the years (Roshen etc), while most we will likely run into and not realize it.

These staff members will run across people they don't care for ingame...

Do I really need to finish this thought?

Don't take my word for it.

-Take it from a previous Everquest Dev team member and GM who streams on twitch today. He was very open about answering all of our probing questions, and I for one am gracious for that validation he finally gave us. Surprise...we weren't all crazy after all!

- Take it from Ser..nvm we won't go that far just yet...


There is nowhere in existence where you will find 100% consistency in enforcement of written policies in the game of EverQuest. Sometimes a unique situation will arise and judgement/discretion is needed. Sometimes checks on players are truly random. But now we know that some players have been targeted specifically based on an unfavorable interaction with an off-duty staff member. Some players have a bulls eye on their back that they may or may not even suspect was there.

Its like this anywhere you play EverQuest. Live, TLP, P99/EMUs. Either stop letting staff who play the game have access/influence to CS related issues resolution/enforcement tools... or make the employee's and staff who play known to everyone. Without one or the other, there can be no consistency, or quite frankly integrity in the process.

Pop up: Please respond with the answer to this question within 5 minutes: What is the capital of Thailand?

@accipiter Have you read the EULA? Maybe you should.

The problem is, many of their policies and attempts at communication is contradictory or doesn't make sense. When i was served my suspension, the reason in the robo-email "cheating" was given. When I looked under the EULA and policies the definition of cheating, it said third party software etc. I'm too technologically illiterate to use any of those programs. Since I was suspended, there was no way to contact Customer Service, or use anything associated with my account (they even suspended my "autorenew" payment schedule).

I had to use another account to contact CS for ask for an explanation. Instead I got an a reply from an arrogant "lead GM" saying that I had been suspended for "unINtended gameplay." Not "unATtended" game play, which is what afk is, but unINtended, meaning I somehow did not mean to go afk? Wouldn't that eliminate the need for the suspension? Whatever the reason, neither unattended nor unintended gameplay is listed in their EULA or policies as "cheating," which was the alleged reason for the suspension.

I'm pretty sure that the use of /say by GM's is the one way that they've found to contact suspicious looking characters that can't be circumvented with an automated countermeasure

That's a lazy excuse. If the GM's ask the player a follow-up question that requires an intelligent response, they would find out if the player is a bot or real. Instead they are perpetuating pathetic customer policing.

You're making a lot of assumptions

And the GMs don't make assumptions with their afk checks?

unINtended gameplay means cheating without using 3rd party programs but exploiting. Playing the game in a way that was not intended by the developers. Possibly your pet was killing while afk?

None of which was found in the policies that I checked. I did not have a pet.

Definition of unintended


: not planned as a purpose or goal : not deliberate or intended an unintended consequence/effect an unintended pregnancy

exactly what I said.

I'm not trying to accuse you of cheating.

I'm not trying to say the GM was correct.

I'm just telling you what they meant when they made the distinction of unINtended and unATended.

Not every thing that they may consider an exploit is laid out anywhere. So yes, you may have been doing something that is what we might call a 'gray area'.

So let me try to understand this. I received a suspension for something that wasn't against their published rules (being logged on whilst going to the bathroom), but somehow the GM got a bad vibe about the 2-3 min that I was afk with a medical issue, and it somehow must have been wrong in his/her eyes, and assigned the suspension on a hunch? When you ASSUME...

Great customer service there.

The problem with these hamfisted suspensions is that there are legions that have faced them. A cleric I know was afk at the zone line BAM! Suspended! A guy's son went to the door to let his girlfriend in BAM! Suspended! A bard farming bone chips and ACTIVELY running around- didn't see the tell BAM! Suspended! And if it happens again, Permaban! No due process and no chance to discuss the actions leading up to the ban/redress grievances.

It doesn't say what you think it says.