What exactly will be handled as griefing?

I just asked myself what exactly will be griefing and what not in the final game (with user made beacons, the regeneration process and all other features added). I think it’s important to have a global and joint answer for Oort on this question because we have to know what is allowed and what not (and to be reported when seen). I also want the devs to join in here cuz they are responsible for the game and should find a solution which makes the most player happy without being to careless or to strict.

So please give me your opinions on what is griefing (when all game features are added) so that we can start a creative discussion :wink:

I would start by linking to an older post. A definition of griefing and actions that can be taken are still very much in development. I would also be interested to continue learning opinions from players.

Griefing is the act of intentionally doing something to make another player annoyed, angry of furious. it can be things such as destroying builds, preventing movement, constant stalking, removing blocks under the person, etc… etc…

With beacons, I think the definition of griefing can be very narrow.

What is griefing:

  • making offensive structures (ie: phalli, racist symbols, etc)

What is not griefing:

  • Destroying structures. If you did not protect it with a beacon, that is your own fault.
  • Destroying structures in a guild/town setting. This is only if there is the ability to micromanage beacon permissions. This is considering the ability to allow/deny specific people to build in specific areas.
  • Destroying large parts of the terrain. Resource gathering is part of the game, and if terrain regeneration works decently well that will make this issue pretty irrelevant.
  • Leaving floating trees/blocks or noob towers. Terrain regeneration should fix all of this, so not really a problem.
5 Likes

Problem with this definition is in inevitable circumstances where one player feels annoyed and another player didn’t intend for them to be annoyed.

I very much agree with @alexanderyou’s definitions above.

2 Likes

While I, on the other hand, am annoyed by alexanderyou’s definitions, and therefore he is griefing. (See what I did there?)

  • Destroying structures. If you did not protect it with a beacon, that is your own fault.

Yeah–no. Presumably beacons aren’t just like pocket change. Everyone doesn’t just have one jingling around waiting to be used. That one would even want to destroy someone else’s structure just because it’s there and available for destruction does not fit my definition of maturity. Sorry–can’t go with that “rule.”

2 Likes

Yes, there should be a more narrow definition of what structure destruction is griefing and what not. For example if I build a set of layers and ladders to reach some cliffs for mining this should stay at least for a while when I’m working. If someone comes and destroys it I may get annoyed so it’s griefing. But if I leave and the structure remains after destroying it should not be a problem for me so he may feel free to do it.

May be we can build temporal beacons which only last for a day or two for that purpose. That would reduce the griefing aspect without leaving to much “garbage buildings” in the worlds. This could also be used to make a building save before the player can effort a permanent beacon for it :wink:

What I’m imagining beacons as is something you

  • set two corners of a cubic region
  • requires some kind of upkeep
  • you can build up a certain amount of ‘upkeep’ so if you go on a trip or something your build will stay

This would make it so out of use buildings will eventually be unprotected and regenerate the terrain. Beacons could require upkeep based on the volume of blocks protected, so small builds wouldn’t require much, but cities would require significantly more.

And your opinion of beacons not being pocket change, yeah, they wont and shouldn’t be. If you want to build something but can’t afford a beacon, you join a city.

If you want something that logs all changes made to blocks by every player in every world, that would put a gigantic unnecessary strain on the server. It’s a building game, but also an RPG. I don’t raid, but I see raiding as an essential part of PvP.

There should likely be different considerations for PvP and non-PvP configurations. Different expectations hence different rules.

5 Likes

Well presumably players don’t have so many important buildings spread out over such a wide area that they’d need beacons to be as available as pocket change. And maybe it’s just me, but I wouldn’t destroy a building for the sake of destroying something. I’d do it for the resources. I’m not about to break a minecraft house made of just dirt and with no chests, but if I see someone lining up unprotected diamond blocks, you’d better better I’m gunning for those. And again, there’s a disconnect between my intentions and the other persons interpretation, which means we should really stay away from any sort of definition that can change that easily.

Does that make more sense?

1 Like

Maybe PvP worlds could be the only ones with titans, so you need to go through them to get to the next tier, but can build and explore on non pvp. Also pvp worlds could have a higher resource density.

Maybe have the upkeep cost of beacons be a lot cheaper on non-pvp worlds, which would let people have more casual gameplay.

And what if you don’t want to fight other people to be able to fight titans?
The rest is ok for me but titans only on pvp worlds is a no-go in my opinion.

4 Likes

Same as Kuma said, the idea of only using titans on pvp worlds would be horrible, in general people are split into pve and pvp players, however pve does not mean ‘‘no fighting’’ alot of the people commonly defined as ‘‘pve’’ players tend to do ‘‘raids’’ or endgame content or harder content, etc… if anything i would say no titans on pvp worlds and only have them on pve worlds, because pvp is about ‘‘player vs player’’ and a titan counts as ‘‘enviroment’’ AKA the ‘‘PVE’’ part.

Your other argument was for builders and explores on pve worlds? is it a sort of ‘‘i should be allowed on all pve worlds to not be bothered and i shouldn’t have to fight titans to progress’’ cause that was discussed here:

https://forum.oortonline.com/t/is-tiers-system-truly-necessary/544

also i still highly disagree with upkeep, and it have been discussed alot, but it sounds like an absolutely horrible idea to me

However it is off topic so i will shut up now xD

1 Like

typo
Please fix
thanks :kissing_heart:

and I agree with your post (once you fix it)

Much appreciated, the PVP and PVE messed me up xD

True I didn’t think about it that way. I’m just throwing suggestions out, but the main point about griefing not really being a problem still applies. If something isn’t in a beacon, it might be destroyed.

when beacons are going to be placeable, i completely agree with that, destroying non protected buildings are fair game, my definiton of griefing in those cases would be for example following a person around and destroying the blocks he stand on, or pull mobs into the dude constantly, hinder him from entering places he need to go in or hindering him from coming out, those kind of things.

3 Likes