Claim Griefing Discussion / Let's Make the Server Great Again

[Aanker]

The OP has been edited to reflect the need for a more constructive dialogue, see page 5 and onwards for rule suggestions on how to make the server work better and give the community a more positive, fun spirit.

[Diglytron]

Totally agree, this is done with the sole purpose of harrassing and annoying other players and should be stopped and punished, first of all the claims should be simply unclaimed by moderation and the building of the cobble removed. They've done it before, building huge 'battlebots' of cobble next to ppl their land and this is just simply to annoy those ppl, moderation, seeing we want a lively server this time without constant harrasment, should act quite fast.

also shouldn't be to hard to make a rule against this, right. Not claiming next to other ppl's chunck, like Josst suggested, was a okay suggestion I think.

[Gnomosapien]

But that's the embassy

[elofan]

So far as I've known, building & claiming next to someone's claims, as well as building a siege tower next to someone's claims (Whether the seiged faction is offline or online) has always been legal, or has been legal as long as I have played.
The land that was unclaimed (to facilitate a mob spawner underneath) from what i understood, had no build on top of it, and in fact, could have been claimed by the faction and then toggled mob spawning. There was no damage to any existing structures, and the cobble structure currently there will be unclaimed when the war is over, along with the claims made today for the siege tower.

This server is for factions PvP and is not marketed as any kind of 'carebear' or 'casual' server (not to say that it is considered a 'hardcore' or 'Elite PvP' server). Because of this, you should expect unsightly siege towers, cannon shots, and other damage in/around a base.


NK has in no way, destroyed, disfigured, or rendered the base unuseable.
The only damage that I see here is to the aesthetic of their base and to their ego, neither of which is damaged permanently.

[Aanker]

So far as I've known, building & claiming next to someone's claims, as well as building a siege tower next to someone's claims (Whether the seiged faction is offline or online) has always been legal, or has been legal as long as I have played.

It has not always been legal, and during the servers with the best interfaction PvP (see later) it was not allowed.

The land that was unclaimed (to facilitate a mob spawner underneath) from what i understood, had no build on top of it, and in fact, could have been claimed by the faction and then toggled mob spawning. There was no damage to any existing structures, and the cobble structure currently there will be unclaimed when the war is over, along with the claims made today for the siege tower.

Do you speak as Head of Moderation or as an NK member? Or both? Hard to know which.

This server is for factions PvP and is not marketed as any kind of 'carebear' or 'casual' server (not to say that it is considered a 'hardcore' or 'Elite PvP' server). Because of this, you should expect unsightly siege towers, cannon shots, and other damage in/around a base.

Again, when the community had the best interfaction PvP and battles it was either on servers where this type of behaviour was not allowed, or between factions with players that behaved maturely. No one, not even the most hardcore PvPer, benefits from the vitriolic environment that this sort of trolling creates. And as Josst states, this is a community server. We haven't even marketed ourselves yet to my knowledge. A community thrives or dies from its communal spirit or lack thereof.

What is even a carebear server? Or a casual server? Didn't the previous server call itself Carebears at War, toting a mature community as its drawing point?

NK has in no way, destroyed, disfigured, or rendered the base unuseable.

Yes it has. And the mob spawner is unusable, so there goes the Northman source of XP.

The only damage that I see here is to the aesthetic of their base and to their ego, neither of which is damaged permanently.

In a game like Minecraft, aesthetic means a lot. I can't read Northman minds, so I cannot comment on their ego, but I think neither an NK member nor the chief of staff can do that either.

[The Hedge Knight]

This server is for factions PvP

Its a community server. If you think this kind of thing creates a good sense of community then I question your judgement.

[ForteS]

I'm not against siege towers (obviously) but they should be built only when the defending faction is online, I don't know if this was the case or not... But it doesn't seem fair and log on a with a massive enemy structure right next to you.

[abbews]

I'm not against siege towers (obviously) but they should be built only when the defending faction is online, I don't know if this was the case or not... But it doesn't seem fair and log on a with a massive enemy structure right next to you.

They built a massive claimed siege tower while we were offline as well.

[Gnomosapien]

If you have this much of a problem with it you know where the Battlemoat is.

[Burgess]

This whole thing would've been avoided if the Northmen hadn't hilariously had unclaimed bits in their base and left all their doors open. I wasn't their but it was very much a 'holy they've left it all open what do we do with it moment'

Bit disapointing for a faction apparently so revered for their prowess in war to make a serious of obvious blunders like this.

[123brogan]

We offer protection for areas that a faction intends to claim. Although Northmen didn't intend to claim these two chunks, that was because of the false belief that mob spawners had to be left unclaimed. I'm in favor of of simply interpreting that as an intent to claim and undoing the NK claims. I don't think Northmen should be punished because we staffers failed to properly communicate all the features of the factions plugin.

I'm fine with people claiming siege towers. However, I recall there was once a rule that they couldn't be built when the defenders were offline, and I am strongly in favour of introducing that rule here. There's no point in building defenses at all if the enemy are already inside them when you log on.

This whole thing would've been avoided if the Northmen hadn't hilariously had unclaimed bits in their base and left all their doors open. I wasn't their but it was very much a 'holy

they've left it all open what do we do with it moment'

Bit disapointing for a faction apparently so revered for their prowess in war to make a serious of obvious blunders like this.

That's not the Northmen's fault though. We failed to properly explain how the new factions plugin worked. Northmen wouldn't have left those chunks unclaimed otherwise.

[Aanker]

If you have this much of a problem with it you know where the Battlemoat is.

Yeah, maybe we should talk about the Battlemoat as well.

[Gnomosapien]

Yeah, maybe we should talk about the Battlemoat as well.

Okay, ask Rickie why you're wrong

[Katsumoto]

I agree that you shouldn't be allowed to build siege towers when the enemy is offline, as it indeed renders defences pointless. I don't know if there was ever a rule against it but I know for certain it was against the rules to log off in enemy territory.

[Jeregor]

As an official statement from North Korea all I have to say is if you provide us with rules to follow regarding things in this thread we will gladly follow them. We were unaware that building siege towers while the enemy is offline is against the rules and I would like to point out that we gave them ample time once they were on to build and use their fortifications. Its not like they logged on into cannon fire or a drawbridge. Fighting took at least 20 minutes to heat up once they were on and probably 30-40 minutes before they charged into our tower (in a battle which we clearly lost). If moderation doesn't agree with our claims inside their base feel free to remove them or have me log on and remove them whichever works. But we would like a rule regarding claims inside enemy territory to follow in the future. As for people complaining about the battle moat I feel like Aanker couldn't care less about "gamey forts" and just doesn't like how it looks. In which case I would officially say that I don't like holes in the ground that do not form moats or how they look and all holes in the ground which are not moats should be removed including any and all dwarven structures as I do not find them visually appealing

[123brogan]

We were unaware that building siege towers while the enemy is offline is against the rules

Well let me reassure you that it isn't currently against the rules.

[Aanker]

As for people complaining about the battle moat I feel like Aanker couldn't care less about "gamey forts" and just doesn't like how it looks.

Alright, reveal to me how you can read my mind.

With North Korea's logic, you should claim every chunk within render distance of your base to avoid a "battle bot" being built by your base. Ever since their introduction to the server, several of these events have occurred and obviously keep occurring. While you may think it's hilarious, the laugh's on the victim. Many players have been driven from the server because of these very petty actions, meant only to troll and never to encourage PvP. I have been here from the start and has gone downhill for a while. It is not all of North Korea, but actions that have been performed by their members were not done before and outright frowned upon by staff.

This. So much this. Downhill ever since Map 2. It's a constant push on the boundaries of what's allowed, only and ever only for the purpose of trolling and harassing other players. It goes from the chat to the playstyle to the way neighbours have been treated (accept 'Moatism' or get annexed). Never quite disallowed by the rules, but then, the rules never have a chance to catch up, do they?

[ForteS]

As an official statement from North Korea all I have to say is if you provide us with rules to follow regarding things in this thread we will gladly follow them. We were unaware that building siege towers while the enemy is offline is against the rules and I would like to point out that we gave them ample time once they were on to build and use their fortifications. Its not like they logged on into cannon fire or a drawbridge. Fighting took at least 20 minutes to heat up once they were on and probably 30-40 minutes before they charged into our tower (in a battle which we clearly lost). If moderation doesn't agree with our claims inside their base feel free to remove them or have me log on and remove them whichever works. But we would like a rule regarding claims inside enemy territory to follow in the future. As for people complaining about the battle moat I feel like Aanker couldn't care less about "gamey forts" and just doesn't like how it looks. In which case I would officially say that I don't like holes in the ground that do not form moats or how they look and all holes in the ground which are not moats should be removed including any and all dwarven structures as I do not find them visually appealing

Thing is, this shouldn't even need to be a rule, you should be conscious enough to realize that that isn't the correct way to play the game, that's like cheating, and a d$&? move. Just saying...

[Pat89]

You can't punish people for a rule made after the fact. So if they unclaim this thing after the war, I'm personally fine with it.

For future cases though it should be considered if this is the kind of thing that is wanted on this server or not. But right now, it has been done and there's no rule against it, so not much can be done about it.

[abbews]

With North Korea's logic, you should claim every chunk within render distance of your base to avoid a "battle bot" being built by your base. Ever since their introduction to the server, several of these events have occurred and obviously keep occurring. While you may think it's hilarious, the laugh's on the victim. Many players have been driven from the server because of these very petty actions, meant only to troll and never to encourage PvP. I have been here from the start and has gone downhill for a while. It is not all of North Korea, but actions that have been performed by their members were not done before and outright frowned upon by staff.