[Rule Change] Rule 3.3

[MarkusAurelius124]

To whom it may concern, After seeing the new changes to Rule 3.3 regarding Claim-blocking, I must say it just looks like a blatant throwing away of staff's responsibilities. I understand that tickets must have been opened repeatedly and staff had to deal daily with probably dozens (or hundreds) of them, but this new rule seems, at first glance, absurd. It allows the Tentacle claiming style of blocking a town, which would not only create ridiculous towns but also cuck towns that wanted to expand in specific areas. It doesn't discuss Swarm blocking (When a nation creates a swarm of towns around the target), nor towns that are already surrounded on 2/4 by either Ocean, or other towns. I'm not saying towns won't eventually be unable to expand due to the development of the region, but just allowing to block 2/4 of them is absurd.

Edit: A possible solution to the situation would be to revert and examine each case individually. Yes, it's at times very demanding of both manpower and time, and I understand the desire for a specific rule for all to abide by, but in this case too many players would fall between the cracks for it to be justified. If needed, recruit more moderators, or even assign a specific task force to deal with claim-blocking issues. I'll be more than glad to spearhead such efforts if necessary or even take part in them.

[DeadGlamour]

Lol look on Jerusalem, they cant expand now, this new rule is way too exploitable and will just lead to more toxicity and claimblocks.

[EliteFromYT]

Jerusalem and israel big losers, they spawn kill others and deserve the punishment, also who cares about jerusalem, should have expanded when they could, go at the ocean, make platforms and live there.

[Cactusinapumpkin]

Ocean platforms are not allowed and I understand how odd it is to see people claimblocking and using the 1/4 of water and 2/4 claimblock and the other side blocked in with another town. The rules were becoming very conflict with crowded areas and I believe that the new rule will simplify the process and allow mayors to attempt to work things out on their own instead of further restrictions. I did not push for this but I can tell you that I feel this will allow mods to interfere less and have to make less difficult decisions that wouldn’t benefit either mayor. This is a geopolitical server and this rule still protects new towns from becoming completely engulfed which is our purpose of the rule, To protect new towns.

[Cactusinapumpkin]

“I must say it just looks like a blatant throwing away of staff's responsibilities. I understand that tickets must have been opened repeatedly and staff had to deal daily with probably dozens (or hundreds) of them” we do get a lot of claimblocking tickets and to better assist everyone with their individual tickets we need to make changes to better serve the community and get more tickets resolved on a more timely fashion. We can’t focus on making a decision because two mayors are not in agreement because of the rules. Please bear with us as mods we are voluntarily doing everything we can to help the community while also balancing our irl responsibilities and some mods actually have active in game responsibilities still too

[MarkusAurelius124]

Ocean platforms are not allowed and I understand how odd it is to see people claimblocking and using the 1/4 of water and 2/4 claimblock and the other side blocked in with another town. The rules were becoming very conflict with crowded areas and I believe that the new rule will simplify the process and allow mayors to attempt to work things out on their own instead of further restrictions. I did not push for this but I can tell you that I feel this will allow mods to interfere less and have to make less difficult decisions that wouldn’t benefit either mayor. This is a geopolitical server and this rule still protects new towns from becoming completely engulfed which is our purpose of the rule, To protect new towns.

Exactly the problem, Geopolitical, but a Minecraft server. What it means is that while IRL situations like this would have many different ways to solve, on the server the only way right now is making a deal, which might work if the person likes you, but if he doesn't, or more often than not, he's just a troll, you're screwed. As in real life, if there's a land dispute, there should be two options - Making a deal, and if a deal can't be made, taking it to an authority on the matter. All this does is remove the authority, leaving victims to be victims. New towns are great, but it doesn't matter how you treat the top floors if you ignore the foundations.

[MarkusAurelius124]

“I must say it just looks like a blatant throwing away of staff's responsibilities. I understand that tickets must have been opened repeatedly and staff had to deal daily with probably dozens (or hundreds) of them” we do get a lot of claimblocking tickets and to better assist everyone with their individual tickets we need to make changes to better serve the community and get more tickets resolved on a more timely fashion. We can’t focus on making a decision because two mayors are not in agreement because of the rules. Please bear with us as mods we are voluntarily doing everything we can to help the community while also balancing our irl responsibilities and some mods actually have active in game responsibilities still too

I absolutely understand the various responsibilities of the modding staff, all of which are done voluntarily using their own free time, and I infinitely appreciate it. At the same time, changing rules because the server's understaffed isn't a solution, it's a resignation. This is a massive, global server - Get more moderators if needed, or re-focus current goals in a way that doesn't hurt the playerbase. This isn't just about two mayors, this is about every town in the game. Once a town gets claimblocked because of the new rule, and the mayor has no where to expand, it's game over. If the old rule worked up until this one, it can work again.

[Cactusinapumpkin]

Geopolitical means fighting for territory and if you don’t want to fight for territory you can make agreements. It’s not that we don’t have enough people to go through claimblocking tickets it’s simply the amount of time difficult claimblocking tickets take especially in crowded areas were the rules mostly didn’t apply. I just finished a claimblocking ticket that took about 4 months because the area was crowded and both mayors could agree to any resemblance of a solution. It can be quite draining. This way allows people to be more active and defend their territory by actually playing and be active.

[DeadGlamour]

IRL You can fight others, here you can try and claim once and that it, once you lose theres no hope, besides that a game, we shouldnt just destroy the fun for players entirely, as some towns cant expand thus play, theres no successful game which doesnt let you play anymore if you fail.

[MarkusAurelius124]

Geopolitical means fighting for territory and if you don’t want to fight for territory you can make agreements. It’s not that we don’t have enough people to go through claimblocking tickets it’s simply the amount of time difficult claimblocking tickets take especially in crowded areas were the rules mostly didn’t apply. I just finished a claimblocking ticket that took about 4 months because the area was crowded and both mayors could agree to any resemblance of a solution. It can be quite draining. This way allows people to be more active and defend their territory by actually playing and be active.

That's the thing, you can't actually 'fight' for territory. Once it's claimed it's claimed, even when the War plugin is implemented the best you can do is add towns to your nation. There's no fight, you either claim it first or you get screwed. And I agree, a claim ticket shouldn't take 4 months. That's why my suggestion is, don't change the rule, change the process of handling claimblocking ticket to make it more efficient.

[Cactusinapumpkin]

What do you suggest we change in the process of handling claimblocking ticket to make it more efficient that doesn’t mean a change in the old rule? Should we just remove one chunk in the middle without taking time and considering the facts around the situation. Usually the reason we get claimblocking tickets is because the issue is too out of hand to be maturely agreed upon in game like it should have been in the first place.

[Cactusinapumpkin]

“we shouldnt just destroy the fun for players entirely, as some towns cant expand thus play“ I havnt expanded any in about 6months. I hardly have a large town as well and used to be number one on top playtime. If you want to you can make a town in an area that is not crowded already and expand as much as you want like by the new world spawn. Fighting is about strategy and not really just killing someone and taking their stuff.

[MarkusAurelius124]

What do you suggest we change in the process of handling claimblocking ticket to make it more efficient that doesn’t mean a change in the old rule? Should we just remove one chunk in the middle without taking time and considering the facts around the situation. Usually the reason we get claimblocking tickets is because the issue is too out of hand to be maturely agreed upon in game like it should have been in the first place.

Court style - Side A presents arguments, Side B presents arguments, moderator asks for clarification when necessary, then makes the call. The idea of enforcing the Claimblocking rule isn't mediation, it's to determine which side is Victim and which is Offender. If Side A and Side B want to make a deal, mods aren't required. Mods should only be required when a higher authority needs to make the tough call. I understand a lot of mods wouldn't want to make the "tough calls", but that's a part of their position.

[MarkusAurelius124]

“we shouldnt just destroy the fun for players entirely, as some towns cant expand thus play“ I havnt expanded any in about 6months. I hardly have a large town as well and used to be number one on top playtime. If you want to you can make a town in an area that is not crowded already and expand as much as you want like by the new world spawn. Fighting is about strategy and not really just killing someone and taking their stuff.

I'm not talking about new towns (even though it's still a problem for them, especially since so many lands are already occupied), I'm talking about current towns, towns that have been formed from the beginning of the server until the rule change. And this thread isn't about PVP, it's about a rule change that basically gave permission for people to screw others. Players aren't handling the situation by themselves because of the new rule, the only difference is that victims of it can't do anything about it now.

[Cactusinapumpkin]

Yes you explained the process of how we normally do claimblocking tickets and the “tough calls” were the issues where we would have to state that because the area was too crowded, that the rule doesn’t apply here. So we agreed to change an obsolete rule and replaced it with one that didn’t interfere with how the server has changed

[MarkusAurelius124]

Yes you explained the process of how we normally do claimblocking tickets and the “tough calls” were the issues where we would have to state that because the area was too crowded, that the rule doesn’t apply here. So we agreed to change an obsolete rule and replaced it with one that didn’t interfere with how the server has changed

It doesn't interfere with how the server HAS changed, it does interfere with how the server WILL change. I understand the benefits of this rule change, but in no way do they outweigh (Swarm Blocking, Tentacle Blocking, Ocean Blocking ETC) the negative consequences. It's just too general. All it does is stop claimblocking in cases when the claimblock is SUPER obvious, which a moderator in a ticket could determine in a heartbeat. As I said, that's great for the moderators, but everyone who's getting claimblocked in ANY way that's not SUPER obvious, is screwed. With the right approach to handling claimblocking tickets, no matter how difficult they are, a ticket would take, at most, a week to close. If the staff cares about the players, they would go the extra mile.

[Cactusinapumpkin]

“With the right approach to handling claimblocking tickets, no matter how difficult they are, a ticket would take, at most, a week to close.” Im glad you have an opinion about this issue but you haven’t suggested an actual suggestion, what is the right approach that we aren’t already doing? What is the level of specificity that you would consider it to be less generalized but generalized enough to work for everyone and not too specific that people find ways to circumvent the rule?

[DeadGlamour]

“we shouldnt just destroy the fun for players entirely, as some towns cant expand thus play“ I havnt expanded any in about 6months. I hardly have a large town as well and used to be number one on top playtime. If you want to you can make a town in an area that is not crowded already and expand as much as you want like by the new world spawn. Fighting is about strategy and not really just killing someone and taking their stuff.

Well maybe you have fun without expanding but it still leads to the same problem, You lose access to features, permanently. That not a good game design.

[MarkusAurelius124]

“With the right approach to handling claimblocking tickets, no matter how difficult they are, a ticket would take, at most, a week to close.” Im glad you have an opinion about this issue but you haven’t suggested an actual suggestion, what is the right approach that we aren’t already doing? What is the level of specificity that you would consider it to be less generalized but generalized enough to work for everyone and not too specific that people find ways to circumvent the rule?

My apologies. English isn't my first language, it seems I've gotten something mixed. In the previous post, when I wrote "Too general" I was mistaken, the correct phrase would be "Too specific". As in, it's too specific because it doesn't address other forms of claimblocking. It's the other way around. The current rule specifically serves players in cases where claim blocking is obvious (3/4). I gave many suggestions. For starters, go back to the old rule, or make this one more general. Off the top of my head -

1. "Purposefully and maliciously blocking off other towns using claims is illegal. Mayors are advised to mediate among themselves. Should that be impossible, it would be left to staff's discretion."

1a. The result of this would an expanded amount of claimblocking tickets, yes. To that end, my suggestions would be: A) Hire more moderators to handle he influx of tickets. B) In the legal field there's a term called 'Preliminary Hearing'. It's the stage when, before proceeding to trial, a judge must decide if there's enough evidence to charge the person with a crime. In this case, a person who opened a ticket would need to provide enough evidence to justify advancing it to the next stage. The moderator in charge of filtering quickly looks over the charges and evidence, advances it if needed, and if not, explains why and closes the ticket. Basically, a better, more efficient filtering system. C) And when all else fails, even if the process will take time, even if there will be many tickets and not enough moderators - At least players will know that their problems would be eventually addressed, and not just give up immediately.

2. Alternatively, keep the current rule, but add common forms of claimblocking to it - Swarm blocking, Ocean Blocking, Tentacle Blocking etc. Basically, change it in a way that preserves the spirit of "3/4", but still gives players options for aid. Ex: "Blocking 3/4 of a town is considered illegal. Other forms of claimblocking will be determined by staff's discretion." I understand this might seem too general, but keep in mind that even though Murder isn't legal, there is still a variety of different situations and cases that the courts handle every day regarding murder, not all with the same result.

3. After you improve the filtering system, make the ticket system more efficient: A) Improve coordination between the moderators, I've witnessed myself one moderator's decision being overthrown by another because the two had no knowledge of each other's cases. Put an organizational system in place to keep ticket rulings into an archive moderators can access, where they can at most, view old tickets details, or at least, the names of ticket openers and the moderators in charge of them. That way moderators in charge of both tickets and filtering will have an easier time handling them. B) If needed, create a script for handling tickets. I myself was in a ticket that lasted months where multiple players were added to it, while the ticket itself was just about one town blocking another. There should be only three people in a claimblocking ticket - The Moderator, Mayor A and Mayor B. Place time limits - If a ticket is opened and the Offender doesn't respond after an amount of time, the ticket goes to the Victim. If the Victim doesn't respond after an amount of time, the ticket is dropped. C) And again, I cannot stress this enough - IMPROVE COORDINATION BETWEEN MODERATORS. There should not be a situation where a player goes "This moderator is slow, this one is fast, this one cares more/less than others, Ill open a new ticket so a better moderator will decide". Create or improve the set of guidelines for moderators to follow when handling/filtering tickets, or a script for them to follow if needed.

This is a rough draft of things, if necessary I can work with staff to form a script and/or set of guidelines. Also, as I am no moderator I can only comment using personal experience and understanding of the situation, if I had the actual "guidebook" Moderators are given I'd be able to offer more specific suggestions and changes.

[DeadGlamour]

I think that the problems with the new claimblock rule are rather obvious, but I'd list them anyway: Its too specific and easy to be exploited, it ignores sea bodies, swarm blocking, and lets people make entire claim arms, and most importantly, it allows players to 100% block towns, thus preventing them important game feature and prevents them to play the server in the long term. Hell, its even worse than most war plugins, which werent added because builders would rather be peaceful, well, that even worse for builders than a war plugin, in a war plugin you are offered to chance to protect yourself, and if you fail you dont lose your town and have a chance to rise back and fight again, in this new rule there is no rising back, there is no fight, a nation could claimblock you in 20 minutes if they wished to using multiple towns and claim blocks.

But, there is some reason in the new rule, the old rule was too vague, too general, leaving mods to handle way too many tickets some taking months to handle, yet this is no excuse to throw the community under the buss.

I am in no mean just ranting, this is constructive criticism and I also got my own suggestion for a rule, it might be more complex than both of the versions but it should be enough to cover most if not all major cases and be easily understood to finish tickets fast enough.

Claim Blocking Surrounding other towns with claims is also not allowed, about 3/4 of the town's available land has to be surrounded for it to count as illegal. Available land means area not blocked by either other towns or the sea, so if a town is already half blocked into the sea and the other half is blocked by another town this half will be considered a claimblock and removed as its more than 3/4 of the available land. note I , 1 problem which could arise is this: Lets say town A blocks 40% of towns B available land, and town C blocks more of town's A to increase town's B claimblock relative block to 75%, in this case I suggest removing town's C block, unless it does the requirements of the next note: note II Swarm blocking, if towns work together, or have a big suspicion(being in the same nation, being friends) of working together their claimblocking will count as 1 town so if 1 town blocks 50% and the other another 50% they will both get removed.

and 1 last suggestion:

Making New Towns New towns count as claimblocking and will be removed if they pass at least 1 condition:

• Surrounded by at least around 75% (oceans are out of the equation, so if a town is made near the sea it will act like the sea side doesnt exist and only count available land using towns).
• Blocks around 50% of another's town available land.

Clarification : this is to protect the old towns, not the new town and to protect towns which want to claim areas.

[Semisol]

This screwed me over a long time ago, while having ownership of a town and the ticket being left open for a month or so, then just being closed with "your town seems like a claimblock", while the other town was literally intruding into mine and my claim was just made by the previous owner of the town and possibly was an incomplete build region. This rule creates a lot of things that can be exploited, and I have to say this, EMC staff are corrupt and accept changes without thinking about the consequences. (remove this part if you like but, that will just most probably be censorship.)

We need a detailed rule, not 75% of the town or other stuff. We need to take in count good faith claims that were created for expansion and claims that have been made for ruining the experience for others or preventing other towns from expanding intentionally.

And people are abusing this. We need a solution. We need a system to make exceptions to rules, where if it was a mistake it would just be reverted while an intentional action done to damage someone else that is not 100% covered by the rules (such as, the 75% rule) can be punished.

[Semisol]

“we shouldnt just destroy the fun for players entirely, as some towns cant expand thus play“ I havnt expanded any in about 6months. I hardly have a large town as well and used to be number one on top playtime. If you want to you can make a town in an area that is not crowded already and expand as much as you want like by the new world spawn. Fighting is about strategy and not really just killing someone and taking their stuff.

The problem is, the land is lost forever and there is no way to get it back.

EDIT: wrong quote

[coblobster2]

and mods tell me the problems are not with the rules. Well, it is either the mods or the rules. I think it is both. Mods never seem to be on the same page so they disagree. Ok, that makes sense but when it comes modding they need to come to a good conclusion. I get making claimblocking legal to an extent. I think the main problem with this rule change is that it was very sudden so people were not able to prepare. We have seen this happen with other stuff such as the mapart rule, fishing rod exploit, and nation names rule being suddenly enforced (yes this last one is not a big deal cause they don't get warned but people lose gold). Not allowing time for people to prepare puts some people into a sudden advantage which is okay eventually but if it gives someone an immediate advantage then it is an issue. It is almost as if an admin went on the server one day and said if you have 30 fix books you get a 3k gold. People would not be happy because they did not know ahead of time to keep the fix books. I am not sure what extent to allow claimblocking cause it kind of depends on the location but this rule does seem to not outlaw enough that people pointed out above. The worst part is that this rule was made on here and people seemed to be happy with it but since it was on github where no one looks the community is now mad. please make a forum.

[coblobster2]

I would love if more people tried making treaties but the truth is there are younger, older, trolls, and toxic people who just won't be able to. Some areas of the world do this like where I am but even some of those were some of my least favorite days on EMC. Had insults flying, shouting wars, and countless arguments with people over borders and they were not even my borders. Borders are always a problem on EMC and expecting everyone to make a treaty just does not seem like a feasible response. I think this could be another job for helpers. help create border agreements.

[Barbay1]

Proposal how to deal with new town built inside a hollow claim If the rules changed so that hollow claims are not allowed, another town shouldn't be allowed, because then they can claim that they've being claimblocked.
1) We should give the surrounding town mayor some time (1 week per chunk, depending on the number of chunks) to fix the hollow claim.
2) As for the little town ... it needs to be refunded and deleted, until the time is up and the surrounding town mayor either fixes the hollow claim or rearranges his chunks 3) Mods should be able to help the surrounding town mayor rearrange his chunks.

[Barbay1]

Proposed changes to 3.3 Claimblocking Hollow claims on a lake A town that surrounds a lake (or large body of water) is not required to claim the lake, because of our terraforming rules (i.e. they can't build on the water that much).

[DeadGlamour]

Proposal how to deal with new town built inside a hollow claim If the rules changed so that hollow claims are not allowed, another town shouldn't be allowed, because then they can claim that they've being claimblocked.

1. We should give the surrounding town mayor some time (1 week per chunk, depending on the number of chunks) to fix the hollow claim.
2. As for the little town ... it needs to be refunded and deleted, until the time is up and the surrounding town mayor either fixes the hollow claim or rearranges his chunks
3. Mods should be able to help the surrounding town mayor rearrange his chunks.

I personally dont see the need for this, rules already forbid hollow claiming and if some1 hollow claims a large area they should just have the area removed.

Proposed changes to 3.3 Claimblocking Hollow claims on a lake A town that surrounds a lake (or large body of water) is not required to claim the lake, because of our terraforming rules (i.e. they can't build on the water that much).

Absolutly agree, towns around bodies of water shouldnt be bothered to claim massive areas of useless waters you cant build in nor does any1 want.

Also sorry for the double posting (1 got deleted), I inmistake pressed comment before finishing.

[Barbay1]

The problem with a town inside a town is ... 1) It's just recent that hollow claims are visible 2) I think the town should have a week or so readjust its chunks, because it may require a mod's help 3) I've been told last year that marking out your territory before you have enough gold to claim all of the land is ok, because it's planned expansion. Of course things may change now because of newer hollow claims rules. 4) Even though it's a hollow claim, it's kind of rude to build inside one, because of (3) above.

[MarkusAurelius124]

So is this thread as dead as EMC?

[Colt44Magnum]

So is this thread as dead as EMC?

Yes, though at one point I thought I remember seeing Karl push an update to this rule on the old website but its not on the new one so I don't know if it actually was updated. Seems we will be stuck with the good ol 3/4 rule until more people complain. The two nations that were the epicenter of getting this rule changed back are both now as dead as a door knob

[Semisol]

So is this thread as dead as EMC?

more dead than emc.

So is this thread as dead as EMC?

Yes, though at one point I thought I remember seeing Karl push an update to this rule on the old website but its not on the new one so I don't know if it actually was updated. Seems we will be stuck with the good ol 3/4 rule until more people complain. The two nations that were the epicenter of getting this rule changed back are both now as dead as a door knob

ok