Kingdoms Brainstorming

[cevkiv 156]

Ideally, you would only be able to use a baton on someone who had done something criminal in a town. If they've tried to grief your town, what's wrong with beating the shit out of them?

[cnumartyr 14]

How do you "flag" this criminal as caught? Opening a chest with someone seeing them? Or auto flagged after opening someone elses chest?

I mean I know how in theory, I'm just wondering what the limitations are with the coding. Would they be able to program it so you had to see them in the chest?

I like the idea of it just being city vs city. You can claim citizenship in a city, and if you go to another one, they can beat you and imprison you if they feel like it. It's WAR.

City-States.

...I call Rhodes.

[cevkiv 156]

Sigh.

[EternalUndeath 1,208]

Lol, the limit is something like 10 from what i've seen, i made a post about it, and dunk said that he (sadly) could not do anything about it.

I still support the jail time being only logged in time, and non afk.

Talk to spanser about that, I think he's the one who owns and operates the forum

[Jed1314 420]

Sigh.

What frustrates you so ? You have managed to get a fair few of the boards active members (myself included) on board with your plan.

How do you "flag" this criminal as caught? Opening a chest with someone seeing them? Or auto flagged after opening someone elses chest?

I mean I know how in theory, I'm just wondering what the limitations are with the coding. Would they be able to program it so you had to see them in the chest?

I like the idea of it just being city vs city. You can claim citizenship in a city, and if you go to another one, they can beat you and imprison you if they feel like it. It's WAR.

City-States.

...I call Rhodes.

I disagree with being able to beat and imprison people who come to your city. This is meant as a moderation tool, and I can only see that being abused and causing bad blood on servers. Please remember that we need to cater for peaceful servers as well (as much as I love war)

[cnumartyr 14]

What frustrates you so ? You have managed to get a fair few of the boards active members (myself included) on board with your plan.

I disagree with being able to beat and imprison people who come to your city. This is meant as a moderation tool, and I can only see that being abused and causing bad blood on servers. Please remember that we need to cater for peaceful servers as well (as much as I love war)

Well this could again go back to what I had mentioned before. Specifically a server config option to enable or disable city safety options.

I know you had said you want no city to be "safe." However, what if I have a server where I want it safe? An option to enable city controls or disable them server side lets you set up cities with our without PvP.

And again, it doesn't mean you HAVE to beat anyone who comes into your city. It's an option to imprison an opposing citizen. This happens all the time in real life when people are unjustly imprisoned while in a foreign country. If you enter an opposing city you do so at your own risk. It would also force cities to meet at neutral points to facilitate trade.

[Jed1314 420]

Well this could again go back to what I had mentioned before. Specifically a server config option to enable or disable city safety options.

I know you had said you want no city to be "safe." However, what if I have a server where I want it safe? An option to enable city controls or disable them server side lets you set up cities with our without PvP.

And again, it doesn't mean you HAVE to beat anyone who comes into your city. It's an option to imprison an opposing citizen. This happens all the time in real life when people are unjustly imprisoned while in a foreign country. If you enter an opposing city you do so at your own risk. It would also force cities to meet at neutral points to facilitate trade.

You are arguing on an outdated opinion. After talking with Cevkiv, I have come to agree with him.

Expecting me to turn off block protection to play the server as a political, war enabled server is unfair for one simple reason. War isn't the same as griefing. By disabling all block protection, I leave the users possessions vulnerable to pointless and grief motivated destruction.

I am a proponent of Cevkiv's system of block protection. I will not re-quote it, as it has been stated many times in the previous pages, but I advise you take a look.

I want something which is quite a duality. I want every city to be safe, apart from when the time comes for it not to be. I don't want towns getting leveled randomly by individual players, but large organised groups should be able to destroy towns. This goes some way to reflecting how difficult it is to actually rip apart a town.

For another example (and I suspect the basis of Cevkiv's suggestion) check out civcrafts block protection method. To me, it is spot on.

Yes, but it still leaves far too much room for abuse. It's not about needing to beat people who come into your city, it's about being able to do it to people for no reason. I certainly wouldn't be happy allowing it on a server I ran. It may be realistic, but it is not conductive to fun servers. Perhaps it could be a configurable option, but not a mandatory one.

Also, it is really necessary to add a "no pvp" configuration ? If Pvp is banned on the server, just ban/jail people for doing it. No need to code extra things in.

[bsb23 303]

Agree with the ideas of the above although I'm still not a hundred percent onboard with cevkiv.

cevkiv: I have a problem with this still we are still taking more shortcuts special permissions for usage makes just as much sense as random tp why can't I hit people with the stick? I should get in a lot trouble if I do that would make sense. What is stopping me?You have a descision sir you've changed ideas before and I urge for you to do it again. Your choices are a special permission stick that can only be used on bad guys and will instantly knock them unconscious, a greifer stick that anyone can use to instantly freeze players, or a normal frickin baton that anyone can use if they can find one it takes several hits to prevent spamming and will eventually render the other player incapacitated. What are the advantages of this? It will probably take more than one guard to take down a criminal because by the time you start hitting him with the baton he will be hitting you with a sword if you were alone this could be a problem.

[Arthur_Dent 36]

Agree with the ideas of the above although I'm still not a hundred percent onboard with cevkiv.

cevkiv: I have a problem with this still we are still taking more shortcuts special permissions for usage makes just as much sense as random tp why can't I hit people with the stick? I should get in a lot trouble if I do that would make sense. What is stopping me?You have a descision sir you've changed ideas before and I urge for you to do it again. Your choices are a special permission stick that can only be used on bad guys and will instantly knock them unconscious, a greifer stick that anyone can use to instantly freeze players, or a normal frickin baton that anyone can use if they can find one it takes several hits to prevent spamming and will eventually render the other player incapacitated. What are the advantages of this? It will probably take more than one guard to take down a criminal because by the time you start hitting him with the baton he will be hitting you with a sword if you were alone this could be a problem.

When I heard the baton idea, I thought it would be something akin to a wooden club, maybe dealing a little less damage than a sword. If it's just a one hit freeze, that's just too overpowered. Then due to it being a "non lethal" weapon, the criminal would be unconscious.

Basically, I agree. It shouldn't be an "insta-freeze" thing. It should take several people, maybe the "town guards" , to hunt down and subdue a criminal.

[cnumartyr 14]

When I heard the baton idea, I thought it would be something akin to a wooden club, maybe dealing a little less damage than a sword. If it's just a one hit freeze, that's just too overpowered. Then due to it being a "non lethal" weapon, the criminal would be unconscious.

Basically, I agree. It shouldn't be an "insta-freeze" thing. It should take several people, maybe the "town guards" , to hunt down and subdue a criminal.

And if the criminal whips out a sword and fights back I'm putting down the baton and getting out my mace.

[Arthur_Dent 36]

And if the criminal whips out a sword and fights back I'm putting down the baton and getting out my mace.

Exactly what I was thinking. Or, the criminal hunting party would be big enough to subdue the criminal.

[cevkiv 156]

The Baton is a blunt weapon, and blunt weapons are good at bypassing armor. All the armor in TFC that you can craft (and in vanilla Minecraft) is plate. Plate provides excellent protection against slashing and hacking, moderate protection against piercing and thrusting weapons, and very little protection against bludgeoning weapons. Weapons designed to kill people wearing plate are either blunt weapons that rely on the force of the impact being transmitted through the armor to cause disorientation, or on the force of the impact itself deforming the plate it hits.

If you look at weapons specifically designed to deal with people who wear plate, they fall into one of two categorys:

I'm going to hit you so hard it doesn't matter that you're wearing plate, the sheer force of the impact will cause damage anyway, or

I'm going to hit you with a weapon designed to puncture the plate itself.

Let me tell you from personal experience, wearing a helmet does indeed reduce the damage one will sustain from getting hit in the head, particularly for a very well made, padded helmet. However, I have been knocked unconscious more than once, even while wearing a well designed, constructed, and padded helmet, simply from the sheer force of the blow being too much for my body to take. Someone with a baseball bat and a moderate amount of strength hitting you upside the head, even wearing a helmet, can knock your ass out faster than you can say, "Shit oh dear".

Using a baton would help to bypass much of the protection offered by plate armor, and if you're wearing leather armor you might as well not even be wearing armor. It shouldn't deal as much damage as sword would to an unarmored person, but I think it should deal a fixed amount of damage to people in armor, regardless of what kind or quality of armor they're wearing. When using a blunt weapon on a person wearing plate, you're rarely relying on the ability to actually deform the armor itself (although, having had a helm stuck on my head before after a particularly hard hit, it can happen), as most people are simply not strong enough to deform 1/16th to 1/8th inch thick steel or iron, but most people are still strong enough to just KO someone with a well placed hit to the head.

Hell, you don't even have to get hit in the head. A good blow to the back, even through armor, can disable you long enough for someone to finish you off.

The point of this rambling is that this is, once again, meant to deter the casual griefer, who generally will not be wearing any sort of armor or have any sort of decent weapon. Someone who simply logs onto the server and tries to do as much damage as possible in as short a period of time as possible. A casual griefer, attacking a city, will be confronted by people who are wearing armor. Someone with a baton and armor against the casual griefer should be in no danger themselves. However, against someone from another city which has decided to declare war, or from some bandit raiding party, who will both have weapons and armor, a single individual with a baton may not suffice. The person with the baton may need to take the attacker by surprise, and get in a hit or two before the raider can switch from pickax or siege tool to sword and retaliate. Against a ready opponent with sword and armor, while the person with the baton will be dealing a constant amount of damage no matter what armor is being worn, it will be less than the amount of damage that a sword should deal against a similarly equipped opponent. To repeat, an unarmed and unarmored griefer should stand no chance against a person in, say, copper armor with a baton, but someone with a copper sword and copper armor should be able to dispatch someone with a baton and copper armor. Or someone with an iron sword and iron armor should be able to dispatch someone with a baton and iron armor. You either need more than one person with a baton to overcome an individual who has similar resources, or to take them by surprise, or to attack them with some other weapon and try to get the finishing blow with the baton.

[cevkiv 156]

Also, I'd just like to point something out:

The easiest kind of wall to make would be made out of wood.

It would be the quickest to build, and the easiest to reinforce, as it doesn't require the creation of a pickax to set up a wood wall.

However, a wood wall would be very susceptible to fire. Even a reinforced wood wall. Mainly because the fire should spread. A town with a wood wall and wood structures would require some sort of well or other water source that could be used to put out fires.

There might be the need for the addition of some sort of infinite finite water generation in the form of natural springs: If the water is removed from the spring, it will refill to a default level after a certain period of time. This would make picking a location for a town more believable/realistic, as a good source of water was a consideration for settling in an area, and, depending on how the agriculture changes are made, might be necessary for the large-scale farming a town would need.

[Walmart Germaphobe 15]

Also, I'd just like to point something out:

The easiest kind of wall to make would be made out of wood.

It would be the quickest to build, and the easiest to reinforce, as it doesn't require the creation of a pickax to set up a wood wall.

However, a wood wall would be very susceptible to fire. Even a reinforced wood wall. Mainly because the fire should spread. A town with a wood wall and wood structures would require some sort of well or other water source that could be used to put out fires.

There might be the need for the addition of some sort of infinite finite water generation in the form of natural springs: If the water is removed from the spring, it will refill to a default level after a certain period of time. This would make picking a location for a town more believable/realistic, as a good source of water was a consideration for settling in an area, and, depending on how the agriculture changes are made, might be necessary for the large-scale farming a town would need.

good idea with the water, and you should be able to get water from flow blocks if so

[cevkiv 156]

I really would like to see building a town require a lot more thought and planning than simply, "I craft a Hearth/Town Stone and plop it down."

You'd want to search around for a good source of minerals, and, as I wrote above, depending upon the agriculture changes, a good source of water.

Furthermore, the defensibility of the area in question should be a concern. I think the best town might be one built underground, Dwarf Fortress style. I can't remember if it's possible to build a piston in TFC without exploiting lava and water mechanics, but I really, really, really would like to create a Dwarf Fortress underneath a mountain with a concealed entrance. Then we would dig deeply, and greedily, without fear of discovery. Or, in being discovered, the knowledge that we have a whole farking mountain above us the invaders have to go through.

[dunkleosteus 2,425]

I really would like to see building a town require a lot more thought and planning than simply, "I craft a Hearth/Town Stone and plop it down."

You'd want to search around for a good source of minerals, and, as I wrote above, depending upon the agriculture changes, a good source of water.

Furthermore, the defensibility of the area in question should be a concern. I think the best town might be one built underground, Dwarf Fortress style. I can't remember if it's possible to build a piston in TFC without exploiting lava and water mechanics, but I really, really, really would like to create a Dwarf Fortress underneath a mountain with a concealed entrance. Then we would dig deeply, and greedily, without fear of discovery. Or, in being discovered, the knowledge that we have a whole farking mountain above us the invaders have to go through.

nah, pistons will be used, but not til much later game

[cevkiv 156]

nah, pistons will be used, but not til much later game

But, at the moment, it's not possible to craft one without using vanilla cobble, right?

[bsb23 303]

Greeks had pistons using steam it can't be too late game.

[dunkleosteus 2,425]

Greeks had pistons using steam it can't be too late game.

shut your mouth.

they can and will.

[bsb23 303]

Ouch, just saying. Oh well as long as i can make automatic doors eventually I'm happy. (The Greeks made those too)

[dunkleosteus 2,425]

Ouch, just saying. Oh well as long as i can make automatic doors eventually I'm happy. (The Greeks made those too)

...please stop telling me about the greeks. We have ideas for pistons which do not involve early game.

and I used to watch the history channel relig- I mean constantly.

I am well aware of what the greeks did.

(sorry for the rudeness earlier)

[bsb23 303]

Just messing around if I really wanted to go into Greek history for some odd reason it definitely wouldn't be in the middle of a discussion. And no problem with the rudeness, I really could care less.

Back to arguing with everyone else though, whose for tp arrests, whose for unconscious dragging arrests? Should I make a poll for this? (I vote dragging)

[antimattergizmo 41]

dumbassery

[dunkleosteus 2,425]

Dragging would be fun, now if they could make Minecraft pain translate IRL and you could drag the little bastards through fields of cactus I would be completely supportive •3•

I don't think this forum is the place to express your sadistic urges for hurting other human beings. (or anything else living, for that matter)

[antimattergizmo 41]

even more dumbassery