[vsniney]

Personally I don't think a Nether city should be subject to realm protection or rollbacks. If you want it bad enough you'll have to fight for it. Kill the griefers, and just rebuild what is destroyed. Players should still be subject to bans or other punishments aside from being caught by the city's occupants for being griefers, but to strictly enforce it sounds silly, imo.

[wimpycow]

Right. Explain this.

Intelli is actually getting INVOLVED in this. Okay?

Now, how come little dirt shacks on public land get rollbacks, whereas when the mighty admin-involved city of Dis gets griefed,

you'll have to fight for it

?

Dis is a proper majestic city which deserves to get at least ROLLBACKED, and maybe even protected (although there's very little chance of that now, unless it's

found to be a stable and good town

then I

should propose the idea of protecting the town under a realm-like system.

).

Now, get off the thread. Your criticism is not constructive,

in my opinion.

[jdankk]

Also, I want the idea the the factions around the city ARE allowed to grief the other faction platforms, and the other faction platforms ONLY. (So faction A can grief the other factions, and vice versa.) This creates a nice sense of competition between them, so to keep the "rivaling factions" aspect enhanced. Rollbacks should be implemented, but bans shouldn't, because, as I said, a sense of rivalry is always fun. (e.g. Ceteri-NTC and NTC-Trinity).

This suggestion would involve some major coding by Intelli. And you can't exactly force Intelli to do this for you, he has enough to do with the server as it is. Currently he's working on the new censor filter, finding a solution to redstone lag, and trying to get the party server up and running.

[wimpycow]

I meant griefing bans (and rollbacks) would be performed on the central hub, but only rollbacks (not bans) on the 12 faction platforms, so that the rivalry between the factions is enhanced