Suggestion Remove the infinite protection on chests in towns

[Trizze]

Right now raiding is dead. This is because of the protection on all chests/doors/lifts/furnaces etc within townships.

Opening a chest in a township region gives a message saying this chest is protected and it wont let you open it. (Same thing goes for doors, lifts, furnaces etc.)

It should be removed in my opinion.

 

[JacobBurkey]

Right now raiding is dead. This is because of the protection on all chests within townships.

Opening a chest in a township region gives a message saying this chest is protected and it wont let you open it.

It should be removed in my opinion.

You literally just made another post after your first one was answered with the same exact question.

 

[Ice_Burner]

I prefer the more organized fights than just simple raiding. In my opinion it also gives players reason to not quit after all their shit has been stolen.
However, I feel you can be able to open chests and other things, and the players just have to cover up their doors/chests with dirt.

 

[Trizze]

You literally just made another post after your first one was answered with the same exact question.

Kainzo told me to post it in suggestions.

 

[Dsawemd]

If we let raiders access chests, they will simply cover everything with an ugly dirt lock, and everything will be the same just uglier.

 

[Trizze]

If we let raiders access chests, they will simply cover everything with an ugly dirt lock, and everything will be the same just uglier.

People forget to put dirt blocks above their chests. And are you willing to kill the biggest part of pvping for the sake of things looking pretty? That doesn't sound very much like the hardcore server I started playing on almost 4 years ago. :/

 

[LordZelkova]

Protect chests in the councilroom only.
All other chests must be protected by dirt.
Raiding needs something other than killing the same group 10 times a day.

 

[Trizze]

Protect chests in the councilroom only.
All other chests must be protected by dirt.
Raiding needs something other than killing the same group 10 times a day.

Why protected chests in the council room? Just use LWCs for the chests you want protected

 

[Dsawemd]

People may forget to cover chests but dirt locks and dirt airlocks will be used to stop any stealing. Forcing people to use block protection won't help pvp.

 

[Trizze]

Of course it will help pvp, like I said people forget about dirt blocks. And if you really want a nice looking town you can make a secure vault. Or just LWC the chests with good stuff in them.

 

[LordZelkova]

Why protected chests in the council room? Just use LWCs for the chests you want protected

Not everyone is gonna fork the money for an LWC. Also, I say protect chests there because it can an in my opinion should be used as a vault.

 

[Trizze]

Not everyone is gonna fork the money for an LWC. Also, I say protect chests there because it can an in my opinion should be used as a vault.

Why would you need a vault if you can place protected chests everywhere? xd

 

[LordZelkova]

Why would you need a vault if you can place protected chests everywhere? xd

Im saying. Get rid of the protected chests everywhere except in the council room because it should the town vault.

 

[Trizze]

Im saying. Get rid of the protected chests everywhere except in the council room because it should the town vault.

How big is a council room?

 

[LordZelkova]

Council Rooms are 11x11x11 Tier 1-3 Town, Building Cost: 2000
Town Halls are 17x17x17 Tier 4 town, Build Cost: 4500
City Halls are 19x19x19 Tier 5 Town, Build Cost: 8000
Capital Building is 23x23x23 Tier 6 town, Build Cost: 12000

 

[Beau_Nearh]

Thoughts;

Please distinguish the difference between "Raiding" a town and just robbing a town as though the current system. You have to lower the target SR (town) power to the point where block protection is deactivated (yes, that means you can actually break blocks and steal from chests). This is a good system as it actually takes resources to raid a well prepared town (don't forget how much time and resources the mayor has put into creating that town). Another point to add would be aesthetics. Taking off natural chest protection within a SR would just force the players to simply block the chest with a dirt block.


Changes I'd like to see;

+ Rather than having a passive deny chest/ door/ pressure plate ect interaction effect on the SR's, I'd like to see a region added that actually gives this effect (For you to deny these interactions, you have to build a specific region within your super region)

Pros;

+ Would address these issues 'raiders' are having regarding block interaction
+ would promote more raids/ privileging as this region would be able to be targeted by siege cannons but cost less to bring down when comparing to a super region (hamlet, village ect)
+ would require targeted towns to be more aware and active in defending their town
+ (place holder)

Cons;

+ May get a bit too confusing for newer players who are using township 3.0
+ may not be clear to newer users of the plugin that this region is required to stop block interaction


Right, I hope this helps and addresses your problems.

 

[LordZelkova]

-snip-

I really think that you shouldn't be able to destroy towns. Turn them off for a while sure, but not permanently destroyed. No one would build towns, and no one would build really fancy looking towns if they could be destroyed forever. I'm ok with changes to the raid system as I do agree its a little stupid. Its so costly to fund a siege and it does so little that its no worth it.

I like where you tried going with your idea but I just don't think it would work. The idea of having to spend more money just to get regular protection from a town is kinda dumb in my opinion.

 

[Trazil]

Not everyone is gonna fork the money for an LWC. Also, I say protect chests there because it can an in my opinion should be used as a vault.

If you don't wanna pay the money for an lwc then you don't need ultimate protections

 

[Beau_Nearh]

I really think that you shouldn't be able to destroy towns. Turn them off for a while sure, but not permanently destroyed. No one would build towns, and no one would build really fancy looking towns if they could be destroyed forever. I'm ok with changes to the raid system as I do agree its a little stupid. Its so costly to fund a siege and it does so little that its no worth it.

I like where you tried going with your idea but I just don't think it would work. The idea of having to spend more money just to get regular protection from a town is kinda dumb in my opinion.

Well we aren't talking a huge investment for this, I was thinking something down the lines of;

Unlock cost = £200
Build cost = £150
Payout = -£15 (negative 15)
Effect; denies player block interaction to non town members, drains 3 power per 24 hr cycle
Requirements; hamlet+


My whole goal is to make it optional, sure it's currently nice how it's currently set up now but I do agree with Trazil in an aspect and we have to find the middle ground. Also it would give an alternate to actually destroying the SR (think of this as a cheap raid that only allows access to un-blocked chests/ areas). Now, what are your thoughts @Trazil ? Is this the type of middle ground you want to see within townships or have I missed something?

 

[LordZelkova]

Well we aren't talking a huge investment for this, I was thinking something down the lines of;

Unlock cost = £200
Build cost = £150
Payout = -£15 (negative 15)
Effect; denies player block interaction to non town members, drains 3 power per 24 hr cycle
Requirements; hamlet+


My whole goal is to make it optional, sure it's currently nice how it's currently set up now but I do agree with Trazil in an aspect and we have to find the middle ground. Also it would give an alternate to actually destroying the SR (think of this as a cheap raid that only allows access to un-blocked chests/ areas). Now, what are your thoughts @Trazil ? Is this the type of middle ground you want to see within townships or have I missed something?

If we keep the unlock and build cost decently low I think it would be ok. Too high of a price will mean no one will use it and then whats the point?