Just what exactly is griefing now ?

[tobaul 28]

The only applicable rule left is this:

 

Game Rules
These apply to all servers.


"Wurm is a complex game that attracts many different kinds of players with different reasons for playing. The Wurm Rules are written to help keep this game running as smoothly as possible, while allowing players the freedom to play the game in a way they would like without spoiling the experience for others."

And that taken from the game rule page says it all.  The freedom cluster was designed as a play nice and be considerate server, and for the first cpl years i was on freedom the fcc did an excellent job of enforcing the peace, you either left your neighbors area alone or you dealt with Enki.  Then wurm grew and the enclosure rule was added as reinforcment to the fcc, the unintended offshoot of this was it created grey areas so fences sprang up everywhere, because rumor said if it wasnt fenced it was fair game perimeter or not.  Now wurm has grown some more and even more fences have been put up and no one is happy.  

 

Fcc,  and the enclosure rule are both being removed, but the first rule is still standing.   So does this mean that if someone rolls up to our deeds and clearcuts our perim, spoiling our day, is that griefing ?  How about if they haul off sev k of dirt, is that griefing, because by the definition of the first rule it states that it is..  Reasons given for the new changes were to make it easier on the staff, and frankly i dont see that happening without adding perim terraforming, mining and woodcutting permissions to the deed form.  That not only would go a long way toward easing the coming dev load it would avoid much of the conflict before it happened, and provide a good reason to remove many of the fences that will stay without some form of protection besides everyones opinion of what griefing is.  A great many players in wurm today still havent read the rules.  I could count on one hand the number of times in 5 years i have seen a player deliberatly block anothers path to his deed, but if that is an issue then add a 1 tile kings land to deeds or code in min distance between perims for any new deeds.

 

Mostly what im seeing is a large number of players assuming that perims are going to be free game for griefers, I have seen no announcement from Rolf stating this, nor have i seen any where in the rules that perim is public land to be defaced or destroyed at will.  Sure losing something you leave laying loose is expected but deforming the land is not.  It has been stated that the enclosure rule is going, not that anyone has the right to ruin anothers day. The recent changes were aimed at non paid for huge enclosures (which by the way has never been defined) but it seems perims have become the culprit, taking the brunt of the targeting. Free enclosures in the wild will be little affected, as they have nothing to lose.  They will either replace the fences far faster than one can destroy them or move to another area. 

 

I find it hard to believe that the dev team intended to make it possible to leave deeds setting in the middle of a wasteland created by a player who is bored or covets his neighbors perim dirt.  Many players are expecting this to happen, with more than a few looking forward to the carnage they can do.  Staff clarification or permission changes would be appreciiated to clear this up.  Deed owners on freedom need some peace of mind returned to them, so they stay deed owners.

 

We need more reasons to take fences down, not more reasons to put them up.

Edited April 29, 2014 by tobaul

[Lithien 268]

I would love to know what will be considered griefing after the changes go in as well. 

[Ozzieoutlaw 5]

Totally agree with you on the perim permissions for mining etc, As a deed owner on freedom i would love to see the Dev team bring this in... if not as tobaul stated i will not be a deed owner for much longer if nothing happens to permissions, so please consider this wisely, I think i will not be the only Mayor with this view  

[Judicator 539]

then add a 1 tile kings land to deeds or code in min distance between perims for any new deeds.

 

That's exactly what perimeter is today. You don't own your perimeter, it's just some tiles to separate you from your neighbour so you don't block eachother. It's free to use by anyone. Now you want to invent a perimeter to the perimeter? Endless chain of perimeters?

[Ayes 3,715]

Tobaul,

You make some good points here. In removing the enclosure protection rule being enforced by GM involvement the focus has been upon free land areas. What has been overlooked is the effect and impact it will have upon deed perimeters. I have even seen it stated at times that this change had nothing to do with perimeters so they should be kept out of this discussion. As you have pointed out, this is certainly not the case since this change has the capability to impact them in the negative manners that you have pointed out.

 

You have made a very good suggestion here which I have not seen before stated in this way, that is to attach permissions to deed perimeters that can be adjusted by the mayor. Those being building fencing, roads, terraforming, farming, forestry, etc. Or easy mode would just be to disallow these for anyone other than mayor, citizens and allied deeds. Since all deeds are structured (forced) as having 5 tile mandatory perimeters they should in turn have these restrictions available to them.

 

If it were me, I would restructure the 5 tile mandatory perimeter by reducing it to 4 tiles with deed permissions attached and having a 1 tile no build zone for fencing, hedges, housing and other blocking structures. This way it would keep others from messing with mandatory deed perimeters while providing 2 tiles between deeds that could never be blocked off for passage.

 

=Ayes=

Edited April 28, 2014 by Ayes

[dipse 231]

I think what people will happen when the FCC and enclosures are removed is blown out of proportion. I don't remember a huge amount of issue before they were added in the first place.

[Seara 686]

When I'm looking at a charge of griefing, I'm looking for why something was done; not what was done.

 

Griefing (from my point of view) is any action taken with the primary intention of making trouble for another player.  That is it's all about the intention of the action, not the action itself.

 

Thus, to try to make a list of "these actions are considered griefing" is totally missing the point.

 

 

 

A player can take take actions that cause you harm without intending to grief you.   You may report that as griefing, but I would not take any action before getting a reasonable feeling about why that action was taken by the other player.

[Lithien 268]

But isn't the problem always that you can't prove the primary intention?

 

Aren't you getting rid of the FCC since you say it isn't enforced anyway?

 

Do you not lack tools to deal with what many player's see as griefing?

 

Isn't the purpose of getting rid of enclosures to lessen the load on GMs from griefing calls?

 

Wouldn't it be smart then to think about the consequences of removing a deterrent to griefing like the FCC, and replacing it with something that actually makes your job easier?

 

Removing it with nothing in its place just means that now instead of pointing noobs to the FCC when exhibiting an "unwanted" behaviour (and most noobs (not intentional griefers) actually stop when you point out unintended consequences when they are written down as "rules"), I now need to put in a support call so you can judge their primary intent?

 

If perimeter is public land, are you going to tell people that some public land is less public, if you want to dig dirt to raise land on your deed? Are you telling me that my neighbours perimeter which is full of dirt is less public than another area? Or is it going to be up to the neighbour to go somewhere else and import more dirt in so he can leave his deed without climbing again. 

 

If I dig a moat around someone else's deed, so I can have a passage around it on a boat, is their ability to leave their deed without a boat more important than me getting around it on a boat?

 

Since the FCC was the only thing telling me I shouldn't change a landscape not on my deed, if other neighbours had issues with it, can I just change all giant steppe areas to sand if I want to?

 

And for those who think there really isn't going to be much griefing, since there wasn't much before the rules were put in in the first place, you are not counting on the people who are hellbent on showing you exactly how bad the idea is and actually flood you with griefing complaints.

[Thorakkanath 444]

Because destruction in wurm is such a slow and painful process (walls, fences, items etc.) it is really impossible to assume that it was not done with intent. Not to mention that a non malevolent player has no possible explanation ever  to justify spending 5-10-2-30 minutes to destroy an item (fence, item etc.) other than his own or because he was paid to do so by the owner.

 

It is as simple as that. Being caught in the act you can mount a million excuses, from 'not seeing a way around' to 'i want a path through here' and so on, all of them seemingly having nothing to do with a malevolence from the grievers part but in fact it has everything to do with it (him wanting to grief the other guy cause he dosen't like him). Remember that behavior is a player versus another player or better known as PvP. PvE means you need to worry about your environment not the other players.

 

So my conclusion is very simple, destruction of property of any sort (other than your own or paid by the owner to do so) is malevolence in my book, no matter what.

 

PS. Lithien makes a good point with terraforming. Especially terraforming in the perimeter done by others. Why? Well perimeters are supposed to be lands that you pay for (above the default 5, which is so not wanted if you ask me) to allow future deed expansion. Well if you pay for the land (even if less than deeds) it means you want to use the land. But if someone let's say comes to your perimeter and digs down to rock and takes all your dirt away how is that land usable for you anymore? You would have to work extra to get dirt or pay to get dirt...which is unfathomable considering you were already paying for that land in the first place. Just something to think about...

Edited April 28, 2014 by Thorakkanath

[Seara 686]

Well perimeters are supposed to be lands that you pay for

 

Paid perimeters stop others from deeding and house building in an area you may want to expand your deed into in the future.  That is all.  You don't own that land, you've simply "reserved" it.  If you want to truly own it, then deed it.

[Pingpong 1,070]

Paid perimeters stop others from deeding and house building in an area you may want to expand your deed into in the future.  That is all.  You don't own that land, you've simply "reserved" it.  If you want to truly own it, then deed it.

Once again we're back to "you must pay for perimeter but you can't always deed it"

[Leroy 315]

When I'm looking at a charge of griefing, I'm looking for why something was done; not what was done.

 

Griefing (from my point of view) is any action taken with the primary intention of making trouble for another player.  That is it's all about the intention of the action, not the action itself.

 

Thus, to try to make a list of "these actions are considered griefing" is totally missing the point.

 

 

 

A player can take take actions that cause you harm without intending to grief you.   You may report that as griefing, but I would not take any action before getting a reasonable feeling about why that action was taken by the other player.

 

 

There are AN individuals' enclosures, not deeds, I have to navigate around to get from starter town to my deed, just enclosures that weave through the area looking like some kind of voting district in Chicago, that will be the first to go. Grinding catapult skill on it will not be the intent, cutting travel time in half will be the intent... is that greifing? If not, would building gates through them be greifing? If not, would building a highway through it be greifing?

 

Now that I can enter into someones "not-an-enclosure, enclosure" as if it were public land, what can be done therein?

 

Removing the enclosure passage from the FCC seems like misinformation if entering into someones enclosure or bashing a section of fence will be against the FCC. Akin to having a section stating you may not call a player a harassing name based on race religion creed etc, then editing out the 'harassing' adjective. Does that mean name calling isn't harassing?

 

Given the reason provided on scratching the enclosure rules, free land hoarding and preventing players access to areas... Is it then acceptable to take enclosures as a form of greifing? The intent was to secure that land against anothers use, be it for building/ farming/ hunting or passage.

[Amber 337]

Sera, I understand what you are saying and I'd agree that motivation should figure into it but that leads to the issue of who decides if a motivation is justified or not.

 

Say I go out after the enclosure rule is removed and start bashing fences that I believe were placed only to hog land by someone. Am I a griefer? (If players can't do that very thing then what will be accomplished by removing the enclosure rule?)

 

Or let's take the oft sited statement that perimeters were intended to allow passage between deeds. So, if I bash an opening through both sides of some's perimeter horse pen because it's blocking me from getting to where I want to go is that griefing? The fence owner will lose their horses and that wasn't my motivation but I doubt that will make their owner feel any better about it. 

 

 

I'm sorry but I really can't see how removing both the enclosure rule and the FCC is going to make a GM's job any easier. On the contrary I think it's going to make your job all but impossible to do. 

[Willis 18]

Nice. This sounds great if done right.

Ayes pointed out some nice suggestions.

[Revelation 288]

Sera, I understand what you are saying and I'd agree that motivation should figure into it but that leads to the issue of who decides if a motivation is justified or not.

 

Say I go out after the enclosure rule is removed and start bashing fences that I believe were placed only to hog land by someone. Am I a griefer? (If players can't do that very thing then what will be accomplished by removing the enclosure rule?)

 

Or let's take the oft sited statement that perimeters were intended to allow passage between deeds. So, if I bash an opening through both sides of some's perimeter horse pen because it's blocking me from getting to where I want to go is that griefing? The fence owner will lose their horses and that wasn't my motivation but I doubt that will make their owner feel any better about it. 

 

 

I'm sorry but I really can't see how removing both the enclosure rule and the FCC is going to make a GM's job any easier. On the contrary I think it's going to make your job all but impossible to do. 

 

Not really, if someone bashed your fence and took your stuff they can quickly point out it's not their job to play policeman/woman and that you should have deeded it.

 

If it's on your deed, you own it.

If it's not on your deed, it belongs to anyone that can take it.

 

Heck at the moment it's already legal afaik to bash into someone's perimeter pen as long as it doesn't comply with the enclosure ruling and take whatever horses/stuff you find within. Purely for the fact that you want those horses. I wouldn't label it griefing until someone does it 2-3 times.

Although if your off-deed horse pen is bashed and emptied 3 times you're a dribbling idiot anyway for not deeding it.

[Kediec 280]

Once again we're back to "you must pay for perimeter but you can't always deed it"

Not quite true.

 

The only perimeter you "pay" for is perimeter that you can expand deed tiles into. The last 5 tiles of perimeter are always the free ones that come as part of the deed and have no cost to them.

 

Therefore, if you have 7 perimeter, you have the option to expand your deed into the first 2 perimeter tiles ( which are the ones you pay for), the other 5 are completely free.

[Sevenless 385]

The issue with griefing lies in the sheer fact that griefing is solely defined by the intent of an action.

 

The relevant portion of the wikipedia description: "A griefer is a player in a multiplayer video game who deliberately irritates and harasses other players within the game"

 

Kind of tough to make rulebooks about that one without judgement calls by GMs and mud slinging rolf deliberately stated they don't want to get into. I honestly feel like we're being stripped of any griefer protection, purely because it's a situation that cannot be hardcoded to prevent. Without a human to make judgement calls, griefers will find a way.

 

*shrugs*

Edited April 28, 2014 by Sevenless

[Willis 18]

Crying cos you need now to deed your of deed structures and fences?

Wurm is taking right direction here as it should be taken long time ago.

[Amber 337]

Not really, if someone bashed your fence and took your stuff they can quickly point out it's not their job to play policeman/woman and that you should have deeded it.

 

If it's on your deed, you own it.

If it's not on your deed, it belongs to anyone that can take it.

 

Heck at the moment it's already legal afaik to bash into someone's perimeter pen as long as it doesn't comply with the enclosure ruling and take whatever horses/stuff you find within. Purely for the fact that you want those horses. I wouldn't label it griefing until someone does it 2-3 times.

Although if your off-deed horse pen is bashed and emptied 3 times you're a dribbling idiot anyway for not deeding it.

 

So if I'm understanding your take on this I can do whatever I want to someone, for any reason, as long as I only do it to each person once?!? 

[Revelation 288]

So if I'm understanding your take on this I can do whatever I want to someone, for any reason, as long as I only do it to each person once?!? 

 

Eh, go for it, no skin off my nose.

 

If you don't pay to deed tiles you have no right or say in what happens to those tiles, no matter how much you would like to.

If someone leaves a good horse off deed, I will take it, if I find worthwhile tools off-deed, they will be mine.

 

I made a mistake with deed security once and lost over 100e worth of tools, it sucked, I got over it.

 

Being griefed is a learning experience, smart people only let it happen once and then implement countermeasures.

 

If you can think of anything, ANYTHING that you could do to me that I would not be able to prevent or not make worth your while, I'd like to hear it.

[Jeixi 146]

So if I'm understanding your take on this I can do whatever I want to someone, for any reason, as long as I only do it to each person once?!? 

 

Yes, pretty much this. More than once if you don't get caught. 

[Willis 18]

Yes, pretty much this. More than once if you don't get caught. 

 

If want to ruin your reputation of prem character then go ahead.

It just suck once you get Kos'd on every village and treated as dirt

[kinsi 1]

So if I'm understanding your take on this I can do whatever I want to someone, for any reason, as long as I only do it to each person once?!? 

 

No, you can do it as often as you like, you just need a new (more or less) good explanation why you did it...

[Seara 686]

So if I'm understanding your take on this I can do whatever I want to someone, for any reason, as long as I only do it to each person once?!? 

You should be doing thing "to players" at all.   If you are doing something "wrong" because of the other player involved, then I'd count it as griefing.

[Kyrmius 191]

Paid perimeters stop others from deeding and house building in an area you may want to expand your deed into in the future.  That is all.  You don't own that land, you've simply "reserved" it.  If you want to truly own it, then deed it.

 

That statement is a falsehood in that Perimeter tiles can NOT be for expansion under the current deed system and it's been proven many times.

 

Perimeters are pointless for as soon as another Players places ANYTHING on the first tile past your perimeter.... you can not expand your deed once this happens. Your deed and it's size are locked in. That's why I no longer tell new Player's their deed's perimeter is for their expansion, because unless we can expand our deeds and use tiles of the perimeter to do so without the mandatory creation of new perimeter tiles then the claim is a falsehood, and just confuses new Players not intimately familiar with Wurm's deed system. I tell new Players their perimeter tiles belong to the King, it is public land like a modern road easement.

 

I have not said much about this, but if CodeClubAB wants to claim perimeter is for expansion, and claim it without sounding like a liar, then we need to be able to expand on one or more sides independently, and we need to be able to use perimeters tiles for expansion without generating more perimeter tiles unless we choose to do so in the deed form. That is the only way CodeClubAB can claim perimeter is truly for expansion.

 

Players have used the current deed system and griefed other Players by blocking the other Player's future ability to expand their deed, simple by putting up a few one tile houses. To me the solution isn't turning on PvP and making houses destroyable, the solution is to Update/Upgrade the Deed system to allow expansion of any and/or all sides of a deed and do so using the current 5 tiles of perimeter without automatically requiring more perimeter tiles be generated. Doing this would allow Players that own deeds to handle their own problems in this area without calling for GMs to handle it.

Edited April 28, 2014 by Kyrmius