Just what exactly is griefing now ?

[joedobo 1,187]

As stated, it is all about the intent of the player. If the player's intent was to come to your property and steal all of your tools or whatever, because they did not like you, that is a clear case of grief. Now if a player sees your fences, sees the tools inside and says "Hey free tools", that is not grief, that is opportunism. You have methods of protection for your goods, if you do not use it or choose to risk it, that is 100% your fault. 

 

A Fo spawning 4k dirt to surround your perim and box you in? Totally griefing you as a player. A guy clear cuts your perim forest because they needed some wood? Totally acceptable. That is just as much his wood as it is yours. 

Oh so "griefing" will be defined by how well a person can negotiate? Write and wrong will be decided based on linguistics, intelligence, persuasion and other "politician" traits? And  that is just for the person talking to the GM. What if that FO person said they wanted to make some dirt towers in the forest? 

 

It should be simple....if its not deeded you can do whatever you want. Since we haven't heard anything about roads that will likely be an exception.

 

edit...I support expanding more deed controls onto perimeter. I'd do them all except decay prevention and guards.

Edited April 29, 2014 by joedobo

[tobaul 28]

No Gorgon it has never been acceptible to destroy an area around another player on freedom and even after next week there is still a rule protecting against this, On freedom spoiling anothers play experience is not allowed.  Aggresive behavior is not for the freedom cluster, those wishing to be aggressive should take it to the pvp servers where it belongs. This thead is asking the devs how they are going to control behavior on freedom. If you want the core of freedom changed then please, feel free to start a new thread on the topic.

[Hussars 511]

As stated, it is all about the intent of the player. If the player's intent was to come to your property and steal all of your tools or whatever, because they did not like you, that is a clear case of grief. Now if a player sees your fences, sees the tools inside and says "Hey free tools", that is not grief, that is opportunism. You have methods of protection for your goods, if you do not use it or choose to risk it, that is 100% your fault. 

 

A Fo spawning 4k dirt to surround your perim and box you in? Totally griefing you as a player. A guy clear cuts your perim forest because they needed some wood? Totally acceptable. That is just as much his wood as it is yours. 

Not picking on you or singling you out Gorgon, but using this as an example, so please don't think this is aimed at you specifically.

 

Newer player don't seem to understand that the PVE Freedom islands have a long history of "community" thought.  It's wasn't always about what was best for the individual at that point in time, but more about could I get the same result without intentionally pissing off the folks around me.

 

In the tree example, you're technically correct, open land is just that, open and available.  Perimeter areas were often considered (and treated) as "ask first" areas, even though anyone could just walk into them and start cutting down trees.  We did this (in part) because the drama/arguments aren't worth the value of trees in terms of skill gained or materials, but also because as a smaller player base, every friendly face opens up more options as to what you can achieve.

 

As Wurm grows, the rules of the "community" have not kept up with the changes in player focus (i.e more focus on self vs community impact) and now a lot of the "drama" is due to long term players, playing by one set of rules and newer players by another.

 

Events like the imp-along would likely never come to be, or have been as long running events as they have been, in this new community.  A lot of the people who started these types of things continued them because as a community we helped support them.  Just look at the fracturing of the current imp-along and summer/winter events hosted by players to see that they are not likely to continue for more than an other season or two.

[Leroy 315]

No Gorgon it has never been acceptible to destroy an area around another player on freedom and even after next week there is still a rule protecting against this, On freedom spoiling anothers play experience is not allowed. Aggresive behavior is not for the freedom cluster, those wishing to be aggressive should take it to the pvp servers where it belongs. This thead is asking the devs how they are going to control behavior on freedom. If you want the core of freedom changed then please, feel free to start a new thread on the topic.

I agree, but that fenced perimeter was negatively affecting my playstyle of making moats around people that built castles.

enclosure was not a rule but a guide as stated in many threads. removal of either a rule or guide has the same results though. only time will tell how what gets enforced, but I don't think people have forum access after a ban?

[KunAlt 844]

...

edit...I support expanding more deed controls onto perimeter. I'd do them all except decay prevention and guards.

 

You can already do this and more by paying and deeding the now perimeter tiles.

 

If you are talking about the 5 free perimeter tiles, then you are not paying for, so you have no rights to control it in any way.

[joedobo 1,187]

You can already do this and more by paying and deeding the now perimeter tiles.

 

If you are talking about the 5 free perimeter tiles, then you are not paying for, so you have no rights to control it in any way.

lol... the question is what happens when someone decides to bash my off deed fences down. then, I respond by destroying anything that someone makes and put the fences back? Keep in mind we would be talking about my perimeter so that someone wouldn't be able to make houses. Here I want to specifically point out that perimeter is only stopping others from making houses. 

 

 

I'm not going to put deed tiles over perimeter. I'm going to put fences all over the place and my skills, alts, and play time to make sure it stays that way.

[Willis 18]

People are funny. Be happy you even have perimeters at all.

[KunAlt 844]

lol... the question is what happens when someone decides to bash my off deed fences down. then, I respond by destroying anything that someone makes and put the fences back? Keep in mind we would be talking about my perimeter so that someone wouldn't be able to make houses. Here I want to specifically point out that perimeter is only stopping others from making houses. 

 

 

I'm not going to put deed tiles over perimeter. I'm going to put fences all over the place and my skills, alts, and play time to make sure it stays that way.

 

Problem is you (and others) say "my" perimeter and repeating it year to year leaded you to think perimeter is really of your property wen in fact never was, no the free 5 one, neither the extra ones you pay to keep people of funding new deeds close to you. Wen you pay a fee for perimeters you are buying the right to lock a portion of free land so no one but you can deed those tiles in the future as long as you keep paying the fee. This give you no other right over the land since you didn´t own it, the only way of own a tile is making it part of a deed. Its not yours, never was yours, but it can be yours in the future if you decide to pay the full price.

[joedobo 1,187]

Problem is you (and others) say "my" perimeter and repeating it year to year leaded you to think perimeter is really of your property wen in fact never was, no the free 5 one, neither the extra ones you pay to keep people of funding new deeds close to you. Wen you pay a fee for perimeters you are buying the right to lock a portion of free land so no one but you can deed those tiles in the future as long as you keep paying the fee. This give you no other right over the land since you didn´t own it, the only way of own a tile is making it part of a deed. Its not yours, never was yours, but it can be yours in the future if you decide to pay the full price.

Ok, Wurms perimeter. I don't really care about perimeter argument. I understand what it is. There are no problems with my understanding of perimeter. Again, it simply stops others from placing houses or deeds. This is an indisputable fact. 

 

I'm concerned and many others too want to know what is going to happen when people bash down fences just outside our deeds (perimeter or not). Then, we the deed owner go out and try to repair and undue any damage done by the fence basher. In situations like, who is the griefer? I know I won't be asking for GM help EVER. But the griefer may try and convince the GM that I'm the guilty party. Since it seems griefing is going to be determined by GM opinion and the negotiating skills of the parties involved it could get very ugly.

[Amber 337]

Ok, Wurms perimeter. I don't really care about perimeter argument. I understand what it is. There are no problems with my understanding of perimeter. Again, it simply stops others from placing houses or deeds. This is an indisputable fact. 

 

I'm concerned and many others too want to know what is going to happen when people bash down fences just outside our deeds (perimeter or not). Then, we the deed owner go out and try to repair and undue any damage done by the fence basher. In situations like, who is the griefer? I know I won't be asking for GM help EVER. But the griefer may try and convince the GM that I'm the guilty party. Since it seems griefing is going to be determined by GM opinion and the negotiating skills of the parties involved it could get very ugly.

 

Screen shots are your friend. Maybe a file of shots of the area surrounding your deed now and shots of any dmg done before you start repairing it? At least then you'd have proof that you were repairing/restoring the area rather than destroying it. 

[Shiraek 464]

I am a little concerned about these changes too.

 

I don't see how a tent solves anything, it sounds like it provides the same protection a 1x1 or 2x2 would. When I was a newbie the things I had messed with were farm tiles and such. I didn't own any animals but I'd guess they're a #1 target

 

Intuitively I feel removing the FCC is a mistake - now we have exactly what guideline to follow for how to behave on Freedom? Most people are nice, some just aren't, and the not nice ones tend to need a bit of direction, leadership, or even discipline. Removing highway protection also seems kinda crazy, and replacing legal enclosures with a... tent, seems... off.

 

But I'm no expert on enforcing game rules. Wait and see I suppose! From what I could tell, all that was needed was a minor edit to the enclosure rule specifying a maximum legal size, and maybe some better logging of who dug up which paved tile or broke which fence.

[joedobo 1,187]

I too don't see how the tent is going to help. How hard it is to make a 1x1 house?

 

The "wait and see" approach is a bad idea. Anyone familiar with Wurm should know that people will try to control land around their deeds. With enclosures gone players will rely on a more brute force approach. You can't attack others but you can destroy, load-up, and replace/make new fences.

 

Players parroting the mantra that people should deed what they want to control are preaching ideals that I know won't be followed. There is a big difference between what some player(s) thinks "should be" and what the game lets you do.

 

I see one of three paths.

1. GM intentionally bias all decision against deed owners/members. The idea here is if the deed owner wants to control land they should deed it. So any dispute will always side with the person not in the deed in order to discourage deeds from trying to control surrounding land.

 

2. GM take a "free for all" attitude. With a few exceptions (roads, heritage, imprisonment) if its not deeded a player can do what ever he or she wants.

 

3. GM gives the deed owner the benefit of the doubt. The logic here is that the deed is near by, they can't move easily, and must live with was done. Its also exemplifies good customer service since deeds represent paying customers.

 

 

As I see it; 1 is very unfavorable . 3 is favorable. 2 is a compromise.

[Weponsmith 36]

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.

 

\So it is up to the GM looking at the call to make a Personal Decision? Cause that has worked for the two years I have played this game. Best to make friends with a few so they always rule on your side. Cause that has never happened ever.

[Jakenheimer 63]

I believe the following formula can be used to determine if a griefing event has taken place.  You'll have to forgive me if my math is not perfect;  I've had a difficult time using it ever since algebra murdered my entire family.

A₁ - B₁ = g

Wherein
A₁ is the duration player A has been playing
B₁ is the duration player B has been playing
g is the severity of the griefing event

• Example A

Player A was quite fond of a tree which player B cut down.  Player A has been playing 3 years while player B has only been playing 1 year.  Using the above formula we find:

3 - 1 = 2

Any positive value for g means that player B is a griefer (a very bad griefer at that).

• Example B

Player A has built an off-deed ranch with dozens of animals.  Player B smashes the fences and slaughters all of the animals.  Player A has played a for a month while Player B  has played for three years (that's 36 months using math).

1 - 36 = -35

Here we find an inverse value of griefing which means that player A actually griefed player B by building his stupid noob ranch and forcing B to kill everything in it.  Noobs can be so inconsiderate at times.

• Example C

Player B enters the local area of player A and says "hello".  Player A has played like, since pre-alpha while player B just started playing this morning.

LSpA - FNG = ∞

Player B just griefed the hell out of player A and needs to be immediately banned.  What an jerk.

As you can see, unlike the subjective method of determining intentions, this formula is objective and can be used under any circumstance.  Now you can use actual numbers when complaining about new players, be it whining in game chat or even throwing a hissy fit on the forums.  Remember, your unwarranted sense of entitlement trumps whatever entertainment value other people may find in the game.

[Hussars 511]

I believe the following formula can be used to determine if a griefing event has taken place.  You'll have to forgive me if my math is not perfect;  I've had a difficult time using it ever since algebra murdered my entire family.

A₁ - B₁ = g

Wherein

A₁ is the duration player A has been playing

B₁ is the duration player B has been playing

g is the severity of the griefing event

• Example A

Player A was quite fond of a tree which player B cut down.  Player A has been playing 3 years while player B has only been playing 1 year.  Using the above formula we find:

3 - 1 = 2

Any positive value for g means that player B is a griefer (a very bad griefer at that).

• Example B

Player A has built an off-deed ranch with dozens of animals.  Player B smashes the fences and slaughters all of the animals.  Player A has played a for a month while Player B  has played for three years (that's 36 months using math).

1 - 36 = -35

Here we find an inverse value of griefing which means that player A actually griefed player B by building his stupid noob ranch and forcing B to kill everything in it.  Noobs can be so inconsiderate at times.

• Example C

Player B enters the local area of player A and says "hello".  Player A has played like, since pre-alpha while player B just started playing this morning.

LSpA - FNG = ∞

Player B just griefed the hell out of player A and needs to be immediately banned.  What an jerk.

As you can see, unlike the subjective method of determining intentions, this formula is objective and can be used under any circumstance.  Now you can use actual numbers when complaining about new players, be it whining in game chat or even throwing a hissy fit on the forums.  Remember, your unwarranted sense of entitlement trumps whatever entertainment value other people may find in the game.

 

You get bonus points for the algebra killing you family.  We continue to try and bring them to justice, but we can never get the proof to support the statement.

[tobaul 28]

This thread was made to understand how respect and consideration for each of us is to be enforced.  It is as much a concern for the ftp players as it is for deed holders.  In the past, prior to enclosures the community was small enough and considerate enough, as Hussar pointed out, that very few people even attemted to encroach on anothers area whether  it was deed perim or a ftp just getting started.  That has changed dramatically in the past year or so.  Four times in the past year I have had to call in a Gm, 0 times in the 4 prior to it.   No friend I know is going to get upset with a noob that takes trees for a cart, or plants a pumkin to get started, and all freely offer them all the help they need.  The problem is poor personal interpetations of the rules given by ca's, and with vets that have no respect or regard for thier neighbors area.   With the FCC and the enclosure rule gone, which by the way i agee with, the only thing left to keep aggresive players in check are the GM's, who in my experience have always done a great job.  Problem is now its all subjective, neither they nor the players have printed guidlines to follow.  In my opinion, with the coming cases the first question to be asked should be is the accused  in anothers area showing respect and consideration in what he is doing, thats easy to identify and cant be negotiated or lied around.  That is the priciple freedom grew on.  If you go back far enough, the new deed system when introduced, states perims are useable by anyone to farm or harvest from, and that protects the noobs from many bad experiences.  No way do i believe that it was ever intended as a shield for players to go in and clear cut or strip dirt from anothers area.  We dont need grief wars on freedom, nor does Enki need a never ending stream of complaints forwarded to him from players unsatisfied with a gm ruling.  We need assurance that something better is coming along to keep freedom peaceful and non aggressive whether it be concise guidelines or coded protections.  Inviting a large number of new players into a freedom grief war situation will not help Wurm's cause.   The problem is not so much the use of land or who ownes or does not own it,  but the removal or destruction of it, and how the players playing on it are treated.   The saying, deed it or lose it, has no place on a peaceful freedom, a non aggressive server that depends on ftp to grow.

Edited May 1, 2014 by tobaul