Map owner abuse?

I second this.

Should just revamp @mapowner into @mapblock, so that in cases like this people can and won't have to spam reports because of mapownership, the use of @mapblock would be @mapblock (username) for 5 mins. that command would give the blocked user 5 mins of weapon cancel and magic cancel debuff on the entire map. After the 5 mins are up or that player leaves/disconnects or goes to the FM or cash shop that map would refresh. can't complain to a GM if a said player can't kill a monster and only does 1 damage everytime.

 

A very similar thing happened to me where an afk guy held a map and I started killing mobs and he said "cc," I said "you're afk (he was not using the map in anyway, just holding it)," he said "no," and "check mapowner," and I said whatever and left; I didn't bother contesting for a different channel I just moved on to a different part of the quest for 20 mins or so, came back through the map again, he's afk still just holding the map...really bothers me that you have to respect that or you're in the wrong

 

R.I.P Taroumaru for protecting his map

 

It's all part of the process

 

I think they should add a random end timer to mapowner. Like the mapowner can lose ownership at a random time between 3 to 5 minutes if he doesn't attack. It makes being afk and holding maps for long times harder to do.

 

Just had the same thing happen to me today. Still an issue in 2021 lol

 

This happens at 5-6 all the time with a few players holding maps for over 3 hours at a time without using them. I submitted a report once on the forums in the hopes of getting GMs to just ask the guy to stop doing it, but they told me it is not a violation of the rules so it is perfectly okay to be doing this. If you can’t beat them join them I guess.

 

Personally, this is not an abuse of policy because this is how Map Owner system works and it's specified in the Terms and Conditions.

Spoiler: ML ToC (3.4)

Once mapowner is obtained, a player has the rights to:
- Kill monsters in the map themselves, or assign others the right to do so.
- Loot drops in the map themselves, or assign others the right to do so (such as those invited into party).
- Ask a player to leave the map IF deemed to be interfering to the gameplay of the mapowner and by extension, the mapowner's party. Interference includes the following but not limited to: kill stealing, looting drops, preventing other members from entering the map (applicable to member-capped maps, such as Manon), and affecting mob behavior or aggro (most notably AFKing at Windraiders in a place that pulls mobs away from the leecher).

 

@mapowner bs is working as intended ic

 

this mapowner business kinda stinks.
fighting for maps and ksing was an essential feature of maplestory

 

It's not an essential feature of MapleLegends and I prefer it that way.

 

Honestly I miss the days of KS war I had in my childhood days.... Still prefer current ML ownership system but I wont deny I miss my junky good ol days

 

Mapowner has flaws, sure. However, the alternative is a vicious cycle of KSing, defaming, nameshaming, yada yada yada.

 

you can disagree with me all you want but you know its true

 

While we’re at it, can we make selling a map a bannable offense?

 

If you want the GMs to do something about this, you gotta keep holding & selling maps. Ruin the experience for everyone but at the same time comply to the server's rules. Then the staff will finally realize it's a problem and make a change. kek

 

I have been playing MapleLegends for just under two weeks now and I have also noticed an issue with map ownership. In addition to people going AFK only to attack every few minutes to hold onto a map, I have noticed the amount of bishops and other mages unilaterally dominating maps that contain monsters that are as little as a quarter of the level of said mages. I get that they are offering their service of selling leech, but this forces newer players who cannot afford to buy leeching services to train at less efficient maps.

So In addition to tightening the limit on @mapowner, I think there should be a limit to the level of players that can hold maps. A guild Member of mine called this game, seemingly appropriately, "LeechLegends," as bishops selling leeching services for money dominate this game. Players, both new and old, make bishops for the soul purpose of selling leeching services as soon as they make it to 4th job.

I have never bought leeching services as I do not have the in-game financial means to do so, but I cannot possibly see how the service itself is not saturated since it seems like literally everyone is making a bishop in addition to the juxtaposition of the insane amount of sellers advertising via super megaphone vs the sellers. Will this game continue to be "LeechLegends?" I sure hope not. lol

 

It's called diversify. Training in MapleStory doesn't mean the end just because a favorite spot gets taken.

What sort of limit? Do specify further. Also, selling leech is going to be pretty much your money maker unless you can find alternatives.

Just because a leech market is saturated, does not mean that it's a leech 2 win.

 

I'm back because I have a few suggestions for map ownership revamps that may be better off in another thread but the ToS portion confuses me a bit so I thought I might ask, if someone uses mapowner soley to hold a map, can someone else mobbing be deemed "interfering to gameplay" as the rule implies? As far as the rules are concerned, that wouldn't be KSing in any way unless it's a long respawn timer enemy like bosses (if that's the holding reason) since the intent of the player is "holding." It wouldn't occur to be abuse of any of the other mentioned interferences to me either.

I'm not an advocate of KSing btw... I'm tired of as I become a higher level over time, I feel more interactions with other players feel strictly like business. Like my earlier comment, it's amazing how some people wouldn't permit use of the map in the downtime they are not using it but I believe that's mainly due to the way mapowner functions and not on the players themselves, since if they allowed a player to mob they would lose ownership if they didn't participate every 5 mins. It'd also be nice to have that grey-area question cleared up since I'm brainstorming mapowner revisions, the most simple being designate channel 1 to a non-mapowner channel, since the mentality of channel 1 generally is max player interaction.