[panthers17nfl]

After a lengthy discussion with Kerovon a few nights ago, I came to a conclusion that there are two paths to go down when dealing with realm disputes.

Essentially, the issue lies in the fact that the purchasing of certain realms hints to or directly points at that player purchasing said realm as a means of harassment, or some other ill-intended meaning. Additionally, the purchasing of a realm underneath a player who owned a structure in that realm's bounds is seen as not only impolite and a personal attack, but harassment itself.

The other side of the argument points out a great irony in that the player who doesn't buy a realm ends up being protected by the system anyway; the other player will likely be banned for harassment for taking the realm, or forced to give it back to nature.

A. In the Defense of The Current Policy
It preaches that new players need be protected from their labors being snatched from them due to a player purchasing a realm over their land. Players should not be forced to buy in to a boring grind system in order to achieve fun, aka owning a realm. It also preaches that players should reap the benefits of the realm system before they even own a realm; they deserve an honor-system reservation of land they own structures on until they can afford the realm themselves.

However, in the event that the purchasing player has every right to take the realm from them (ex: the realm is bordering their city and needed to expand), they have the right to do so. The player still gets his 14 day exodus period, but is forced to move and respect the realm ownership nonetheless.

This philosophy boasts a more friendly and safe atmosphere that new and old players alike can grow to respect. It also teaches players to retain moral righteousness, wherein the latter philosophy is blind to such values.

B. In Support of a Survival-Of-The-Fittest Policy
This preaches that it is a tremendous irony for players to be protected by a system they aren't buying in to, and that if their un-purchased land be taken from them, it is something they should have well prepared for / expected / learn to deal with. If they are not willing to put in the work to protect their own property by owning the realm, they don't deserve the same protection as the players that do.

This philosophy is blind to intent (for better or for worse); any realms that are taken as a direct attempt to bother that player are nevertheless the property of that new owner. However, note that the player is still granted his 14 day exodus period, and so some may argue that Philo-B is still considered fair and legitimate.


I hope I presented both philosophies in as close to an unbiased nature as possible. I guess it helps that I have mixed feelings regarding the whole thing >>.

[savesthedazed]

I guess that I don't really care either way as long as a concrete policy comes out of this. I'll be able to adapt and no doubt so will everyone else.

That being said, it's always struck me that the structure of the new realm system supports philosophy B for a number of reasons. First and foremost, this is a survival server. Nothing is guaranteed to you and you generally must work in order to survive and prosper. Secondly, when Intelli decided that realms should cost 10,000 credits and originally had the block count set at 2,000, it sent a message (to me at least) that he wanted realms to be a little more difficult to obtain. If we enforce a policy along the lines of philosophy A, it will more or less negate that. I understand that we want new players to enjoy themselves, but I'm very much against coddling them. For every player who cries out about having their "property" stolen, there is likely a silent player who has learned to work with the system and prosper.

That's my take on things anyway.

[catsfuzz]

I chose A because if someone works really hard on a realm, has signs saying that they are going to buy the land and whatnot, but still haven't scraped up enough credits (destroy/placing 20,000 blocks), shouldn't have their realm ripped from under them.

[cgpirre]

Imho, if you start building your stuff on public land, that's at your own risk. The whole point of owning a realm is that your work for it so that the stuff you build on it is protected. No realm = no protection.
When I started I just walked 1500 blocks, dug myself in and closed up the hole, and started mining. No one ever found me and I soon had my own realm without building anything on the surface except for an ugly cobblestone cube for fast credits, and I build that one 3 realms away from where I was digging...

So, I vote B.

[Kress_91]

Kind of odd how on a survival server we hold scrubs hands like damn significant others'. The system needs to stop this idiotic approach to buying realms. If you've played since 3.0 started and only have 5k credits, that's your own damn fault. By now, evener out of buying and selling, I've owned about 9 realms and could own up to 6 right now.

It's not that hard to get the credits. People don't need constant handholding, they need beatings to shape up. We were all beaten down in 1.0 and 2.0 to get where we are today.

Option B all the way.

[Shampoo_Lord]

I feel like the harder it is to attain a realm, the more security and sanctity will be granted for them.

[Valendr0s]

You shouldn't build anything you don't expect to lose on a realm you don't own. And since it's only a problem with new players, just have a sign right at original spawn that says to go read the commands, rules and FAQ. Explain this very situation.

Anybody who doesn't read it is at fault.

Admins can't be policing everything.


Although, you could also make your first realm cheaper to purchase (say 1000 credits). This might limit some of this.

I chose A because if someone works really hard on a realm, has signs saying that they are going to buy the land and whatnot, but still haven't scraped up enough credits (destroy/placing 20,000 blocks), shouldn't have their realm ripped from under them.

Leaving: will finish later.

No,no,no... Run somewhat far, find semi-unoccupied area. Build small underground structure, and start digging. Get 9,500 credits. Come out from underground, and find new home - somewhere you actually want... Place 1000 blocks, purchase. Done.

Although I do agree that the first realm is much harder to obtain than each subsequent realm - Even prohibitively so. Maybe something can be done for first-time realm buyers without breaking the game too much.

[Kress_91]

You wanna refund all past buyers 9k credits then? Would you want to go through the system and refund everybody 9k credits for their very first realm?

Nope.

[catsfuzz]

I get that this is a survival server, so I have rethought my ideas a bit. I go with B, but so harassmnet is stopped and whatnot, lets say your collection of reamls have to be close to each other. Eh, within 4 realms, maybe more/less?

This is so that the angry trolls can't go buying their enimies realms from under them, when they (the "enemy") infact are going to buy it.

[Kress_91]

Catsfuzz, that's an idiotic idea.

For example, I am headquartered at one spot with 3 realms, I held a realm 3000 blocks away until last night, plus I still have a realm over 4000 blocks away at Celestis main.

Not everybody sees or feels a need to keep their realms together, and, in fact, I find it strategically wise to hold tactical points of interest around the map that are quickly reached via Nether gates.

Problem?

Who's realms have been mentioned as a likely purchase in this thread, Cats? The only person I see mentioning buying enemies' realms are you.