Hmmm. Interesting discussion. Here's my 2¢ from a currently inactive player:
• Although I groan inwardly at the idea of an "all PvP, all the time" map, I get it. It is certainly worth trying, if only for the fact that the current arrangement isn't really working as well as it could.
• I used to be one of those crazy road-building hermits. I built a lot of roads on Bastion. Not so much on the current map, though. That was due to a combination of constantly being interrupted by trigger-happy PvPers and becoming more busy IRL. I am definitely what would be considered a "casual" gamer. These days, I rarely, if ever, can find a whole day to just chill and play MineCraft. My discretionary leisure time is limited so, to me, it is valuable and I invest it carefully.
• And that segues to my main point: At the end of the day, the most valuable thing a player has is their own time. For example, if I happen across a pile of sweet dropped loot, only to be ganked seconds later and have it taken away from me -- well, I'm not going to get too bent out of shape about that. Regardless of the in-game value of the loot, my investment of personal time was minimal. Easy come, easy go. But if I spend several hours building a stretch of road, only to log on the next day and find it ripped to Hell -- rest assured, I will rage. I might even go so far as to cuss people out in chat. I know that sounds mild and silly, but that's about as outwardly demonstrative as I get on HeroCraft.
• Ultimately, I don't care what form it takes, but I would want some assurance that there will be some way that I can invest my personal time into this server that can't be arbitrarily taken away or destroyed by an ill-bred vandal. And since the core joy of playing MineCraft is building cool stuff and manipulating the virtual environment, that means some way to protect builds. Yes, LWCs are awesome for storing stuff and protecting it, but that isn't what I mean. And, yes, I suppose whatever in-game currency we end up with would be a "safe" repository of value, but that isn't what I mean either. Protecting builds is the key.
• Accordingly, regarding the proposal to allow "non-rollback," no-recourse griefing of so-called soft blocks? F*ck that. F*ck that long, deep, and hard. Soft blocks make things look nice. Soft blocks include some of the best ornamental options. And this gets back to the whole "investment of time" thing: Few people will bother building aesthetically pleasing structures if said structures can easily wrecked by other players. As in, "Oh, that ornamental fascia you spent an entire day building? Yeah, it's gone and you are SOL, Dude." Unless modified, the current proposal will likely result in a proliferation of primarily utilitarian structures. Bleh.
• I am not one to criticize without offering an alternative, however. You want structures and towns to be "siege-able?" Super. Then why not require people to actually use siege-like tactics? For example, instead letting attackers dig through city walls in a few seconds, make them use siege ladders to get over the walls. That is, during siege times, the BUILD perms are altered to allow anyone to place ladders.
• For another example, allow placement of TNT (a custom item version, not the generic stuff) during sieges. Maybe the Engineers and Miners can place something called "siege TNT," and they get a very limited amount to use during a siege. Code a new skill called "Sapper" perhaps, which creates 1-2 Siege TNT in their inventory. The skill can only be used during siege time in a siege zone. The cool down period is such that it can be used only once during a siege period, and any unused Siege TNT disappears at the end of the siege. That would make breaching walls possible, but would limit the amount of damage to people builds. It would also force attackers to put some thought and planning into their siege strategy, instead of just Zerg-rushing and indiscriminate wall-bashing.
• I have also followed the discussion about town protection zones and the customary "no-build" zone of 100 blocks around towns and homes. If the new area protections are based off of the placement of special blocks, why not add both functions to the same block? Suppose that "Entry level block A," when placed, protects an area 25 blocks out from the protection block in all four cardinal directions, up to the skybox, and down 25 blocks (or down to Y=30, whichever is fewer). Additionally, the block would create a buffer zone an additional 50-100 blocks out from the main protection area, in which NO ONE (including the block owner!) can build or destroy. Maybe some limitations, such as allowing the mining of exposed ores so that players can still run the caves in buffer areas. Protected areas always trump buffer zones, so a town's expanding buffer zone couldn't wipe out a solo player's little home. Moreover, the way to expand protected areas would either be organically, by placing additional claim blocks at the very edges of one's protected area, or transitionally, by removing a low-level claim block and then quickly replacing it with an upgraded version.
• Anyway, I apologize for the meandering wall of text. I am an irredeemable PvE player, but I am trying to find a way to accomodate the aspirations and play style of the PvPers, while retaining the possibility for people like me to still have fun, too.
tl:dr; If y'all could kindly dial it back on wrecking my stuff, I'd be much obliged.
