Joka10
Soulsand
- Joined
- Jan 24, 2012
Alright, so, if you've done any sort of exploration... at all... in the map, you've probably seen stuff that's just ugly, gets in the way, or is in other ways undesirable. Ugly dirt huts that people made to survive one night and were too lazy to take down, paths of wool or cobblestone meant to help someone find their way back to their base, random block lines that were probably there for the purpose of building a wall but were never used, walls around a Herogate with tiny gates that you can technically get through but can be easily camped or temporarily blocked to kill people easily, random trenches... the list goes on.
Currently, things can only be claimed through a rather tedious and loophole-ridden system. It involves days of waiting, checking previous claims, and the activity of the users who own it. If the person who owns a structure has been inactive for long enough, and you wait a few days, you can claim it and do as you wish. However, if a user is still active and the structure is simply unused, there isn't too much you can do. Even if you can get permission to remove an unused structure, it's still a rather long process, and if something needs to go fairly quickly, it can't be helped.
Some Scenarios...
So, those are just a few scenarios. They're all very possible, and some of them have even happened. This is just crazy, I think. It should not be that difficult to get something removed, and if something tiny and insignificant yet apparently still used gets broken on accident, there shouldn't be punishment. I feel that the claim/removal system needs a bit of revision. Here is what I suggest:
Some Solutions
Well, those are my suggestions/opinions/stuff. I don't know if I'm looking at an outdated version of the rules, or if there are things like this already at work in the policies of the staff, but if these things aren't part of daily HC administration, I hope that they will be considered. Seriously, I'm all for the no-griefing thing, but at points, it can just be annoying...
Also, forgive the lack of formatting, please. I'm tired and don't care enough to use bolds/italics/fancystuff.
Currently, things can only be claimed through a rather tedious and loophole-ridden system. It involves days of waiting, checking previous claims, and the activity of the users who own it. If the person who owns a structure has been inactive for long enough, and you wait a few days, you can claim it and do as you wish. However, if a user is still active and the structure is simply unused, there isn't too much you can do. Even if you can get permission to remove an unused structure, it's still a rather long process, and if something needs to go fairly quickly, it can't be helped.
Some Scenarios...
Well, I'm kind of sick of how difficult it is to actually remove something within the rules... I once walked up to the Herogate nearest to my town, and was disgusted to see red wool placed in an ugly, staggered line through the water and across the landscape... I submitted a PE, as it is illegal to screw up the landscape for no reason and I wanted this trail gone. However, when I checked back later, the response to my PE was "It is a path to help the user find his base." and the red wool trail stayed there because it served a purpose. Seriously...? F3, /getpos, minimap... Why do you need to make a trail to find your way back? Since this, someone has removed the trail... I don't know if they got punished, or if anyone of power ever even noticed it, but it should've been gone with that PE.
Other things equally annoying happen. You can be walking to town or an MA after mining, and still have your pickaxe with you. You run into a little cobble wall blocking a pass that you usually move through. You're annoyed that someone blocked your usual route, so you just take down the wall. It's only a few blocks, anyway... no more than 10, and cobble is easy to get. Nothing might ever come of it... or the next day, some noob could log on and say "O MA GAD SUM1 GREEFD MI WAL!" and you'll get punished... The only way to know for sure if it's alright or not to go through or over that wall by modifying blocks is by submitting a PE to check on it. Another incident could be: you're clearing an area out to expand your town. You unknowingly strip away part of some guy's 2x2 dirt hut. You assume it's just a little cave or something... no big deal. Next day, you're paying the price.
Then there's the Herogate wall thing. If you go through the Northwest Herogate, you'll see a wall all around the protected zone. There are a couple holes in it for people to pass through, but, without a jumplike skill, you can't get into it all the time when you need to. At least two times, I've been killed trying to get inside because backflip lags and I can't get over the wall in time. The wall is fairly recent, and I'm pretty sure whoever made it still plays. Thus, if I decide I'm sick of this and want to take down the wall (which really serves no purpose other than to trap people outside, as far as I can tell), I could very well be reported. I could submit a PE requesting its removal, but nothing would come of it. Technically, it falls within the rules... though only just. Players aren't 100% blocked from using the gate, but it is pretty difficult if there happen to be campers out there.
Here's one more scenario: You're walking around looking for a spot to found your new town. You come to the perfect area, and there's a little wood hut down there. It's nothing special... some effort has been put into it, but not much more than chopping down trees. There's a little sign on the front saying "Bobby1234's Bungalow". You really want to build your town here. You get an administrator to check it out, and it turns out that Bobby hasn't been on for almost the amount of time it takes for something to be removed. The day before it is allowed to be officially claimed, Bobby logs on by accident... He had quit HC, but he had left it in his server list thing and accidently clicked it. He logs out. He was only on for a few seconds, but still, now you have to wait a long time to get rid of this hut.
Other things equally annoying happen. You can be walking to town or an MA after mining, and still have your pickaxe with you. You run into a little cobble wall blocking a pass that you usually move through. You're annoyed that someone blocked your usual route, so you just take down the wall. It's only a few blocks, anyway... no more than 10, and cobble is easy to get. Nothing might ever come of it... or the next day, some noob could log on and say "O MA GAD SUM1 GREEFD MI WAL!" and you'll get punished... The only way to know for sure if it's alright or not to go through or over that wall by modifying blocks is by submitting a PE to check on it. Another incident could be: you're clearing an area out to expand your town. You unknowingly strip away part of some guy's 2x2 dirt hut. You assume it's just a little cave or something... no big deal. Next day, you're paying the price.
Then there's the Herogate wall thing. If you go through the Northwest Herogate, you'll see a wall all around the protected zone. There are a couple holes in it for people to pass through, but, without a jumplike skill, you can't get into it all the time when you need to. At least two times, I've been killed trying to get inside because backflip lags and I can't get over the wall in time. The wall is fairly recent, and I'm pretty sure whoever made it still plays. Thus, if I decide I'm sick of this and want to take down the wall (which really serves no purpose other than to trap people outside, as far as I can tell), I could very well be reported. I could submit a PE requesting its removal, but nothing would come of it. Technically, it falls within the rules... though only just. Players aren't 100% blocked from using the gate, but it is pretty difficult if there happen to be campers out there.
Here's one more scenario: You're walking around looking for a spot to found your new town. You come to the perfect area, and there's a little wood hut down there. It's nothing special... some effort has been put into it, but not much more than chopping down trees. There's a little sign on the front saying "Bobby1234's Bungalow". You really want to build your town here. You get an administrator to check it out, and it turns out that Bobby hasn't been on for almost the amount of time it takes for something to be removed. The day before it is allowed to be officially claimed, Bobby logs on by accident... He had quit HC, but he had left it in his server list thing and accidently clicked it. He logs out. He was only on for a few seconds, but still, now you have to wait a long time to get rid of this hut.
So, those are just a few scenarios. They're all very possible, and some of them have even happened. This is just crazy, I think. It should not be that difficult to get something removed, and if something tiny and insignificant yet apparently still used gets broken on accident, there shouldn't be punishment. I feel that the claim/removal system needs a bit of revision. Here is what I suggest:
Some Solutions
In the incident of the Red Wool Path and others like it...
If the structure in question is very much so an eyesore to people, and the staff agree, it should not be kept simply because someone has a purpose for it. They should be told that they need to find another way to accomplish their purpose because what they have done is just disruptive. There shouldn't be a scenario like that of the Red Wool Path. There are PLENTY of other ways to find one's home again. It shouldn't have been kept around for that reason.
Basically: If someone makes an awful structure to serve a purpose that could be served in many other less disruptive ways, it should be removed...
In the incident of the Tiny Wall and the Dirt Hut and others like it...
The removal of something so insignificant should never be bounds for punishment. If someone is on their final warning before permaban and they do this, there is absolutely no reason to ban them. If it was really so hard for someone to gather the materials for a dirt hut or a 10 block cobble wall that they are legitimately upset about it, I don't really think that that is a player who would do well on this server, anyway...
Basically: Removal (complete or partial) of an absolutely insignificant and interfering structure made of the simplest of materials should not result in any punishment. It just shouldn't be an issue at all...
In the incident of the Herogate Wall and others like it...
An unregioned structure that is causing major interference, even if it took some amount of work to make, shouldn't have to be simply lived with. I suggest a system in which a charter-type-thing for the removal of a structure must be signed by a certain amount of people and given to an administrator for permission to remove the structure. The administrator could then check the structure to make sure that it would be okay to remove, and then the removal could be done.
Basically: can't really get any more basic than that...
In the incident of Bobby's Bungalow and others like it...
Inactivity shouldn't be judged simply by how long ago the player was last on. The time they spend online should also be part of it. A guy who is gone for a month, then logs on for 5 seconds, shouldn't be considered active. Also, if a user is active, but has a structure that they just don't use, that structure shouldn't be required to be kept around. If a guy builds a castle, but then moves across the map to somewhere else where he is very active, never to return to the castle again, that castle should be able to be removed.
Basically: Inactivity shouldn't be based purely on last login. Also, the amount that a structure is used should also be a factor.
If the structure in question is very much so an eyesore to people, and the staff agree, it should not be kept simply because someone has a purpose for it. They should be told that they need to find another way to accomplish their purpose because what they have done is just disruptive. There shouldn't be a scenario like that of the Red Wool Path. There are PLENTY of other ways to find one's home again. It shouldn't have been kept around for that reason.
Basically: If someone makes an awful structure to serve a purpose that could be served in many other less disruptive ways, it should be removed...
In the incident of the Tiny Wall and the Dirt Hut and others like it...
The removal of something so insignificant should never be bounds for punishment. If someone is on their final warning before permaban and they do this, there is absolutely no reason to ban them. If it was really so hard for someone to gather the materials for a dirt hut or a 10 block cobble wall that they are legitimately upset about it, I don't really think that that is a player who would do well on this server, anyway...
Basically: Removal (complete or partial) of an absolutely insignificant and interfering structure made of the simplest of materials should not result in any punishment. It just shouldn't be an issue at all...
In the incident of the Herogate Wall and others like it...
An unregioned structure that is causing major interference, even if it took some amount of work to make, shouldn't have to be simply lived with. I suggest a system in which a charter-type-thing for the removal of a structure must be signed by a certain amount of people and given to an administrator for permission to remove the structure. The administrator could then check the structure to make sure that it would be okay to remove, and then the removal could be done.
Basically: can't really get any more basic than that...
In the incident of Bobby's Bungalow and others like it...
Inactivity shouldn't be judged simply by how long ago the player was last on. The time they spend online should also be part of it. A guy who is gone for a month, then logs on for 5 seconds, shouldn't be considered active. Also, if a user is active, but has a structure that they just don't use, that structure shouldn't be required to be kept around. If a guy builds a castle, but then moves across the map to somewhere else where he is very active, never to return to the castle again, that castle should be able to be removed.
Basically: Inactivity shouldn't be based purely on last login. Also, the amount that a structure is used should also be a factor.
Well, those are my suggestions/opinions/stuff. I don't know if I'm looking at an outdated version of the rules, or if there are things like this already at work in the policies of the staff, but if these things aren't part of daily HC administration, I hope that they will be considered. Seriously, I'm all for the no-griefing thing, but at points, it can just be annoying...
Also, forgive the lack of formatting, please. I'm tired and don't care enough to use bolds/italics/fancystuff.
