Three simple changes to permanently end most griefing

[enragedcamel]

Here you go:

• Haunting items and structures can no longer set them on fire.
• Player-started fires can no longer destroy buildings or anything planted by players.
• A player must remain on a server for 5 days before they can hammer down player-built structures.

There we go. No more people joining a server and immediately destroying everything and then leaving.

[GiddyGuy]

You also forgot how ghosts can always 100% turn your food into wet goop in a crock pot by haunting it.

[jbeetle]

What would make more sense is a craftable item that protects against those things. Arbitrarily adding those rules will just lead to confusion.

[enragedcamel]

What would make more sense is a craftable item that protects against those things. Arbitrarily adding those rules will just lead to confusion.

 

I disagree. Considering the huge number of buildings you end up with in multiplayer, it's not feasible to craft a "protection" item for each one. It would get tedious very quickly.

[RalphKastro]

Simple? Yes. Good? Not so much. Consistent or reasonable? Not in any way.

Edit: also, I think that change N2 would actually not be so simple to implement, as there would be many ways for people to set fire to stuff aside from just torching.

[Dave0522]

There are mods that do all of those things and more. Protecting the server is the responsibility of the admin.

[jbeetle]

I disagree. Considering the huge number of buildings you end up with in multiplayer, it's not feasible to craft a "protection" item for each one. It would get tedious very quickly.

It wouldn't be a protection item for each one. Just like there isn't a fling-o-matic for each individual plant/building.

 

I do, however, agree that being a ghost is way too enjoyable at this point, especially since you can't even be very helpful - almost encouraged to grief. I'd like to believe they know this and are going to do something.

[ThaumicParrot]

What would make more sense is a craftable item that protects against those things. Arbitrarily adding those rules will just lead to confusion.

A ghastly Talisman! It could be a necklace that provides a ghost-force field when worn. 

[enragedcamel]

Simple? Yes. Good? Not so much. Consistent or reasonable? Not in any way.

Edit: also, I think that change N2 would actually not be so simple to implement, as there would be many ways for people to set fire to stuff aside from just torching.

 

I'm not sure what is not consistent or reasonable about implementing methods to prevent individuals from ruining the entire game for the whole server.

[RalphKastro]

I'm not sure what is not consistent or reasonable about implementing methods to prevent individuals from ruining the entire game for the whole server.

the way they're implemented. It's not consistent with the rules of the world.  

[GiddyGuy]

I do, however, agree that being a ghost is way too enjoyable at this point, especially since you can't even be very helpful - almost encouraged to grief. I'd like to believe they know this and are going to do something.

Ghosts are a little bit helpful they can turn pigs into werepigs for free, change flowers into evil flowers for nightmare fuel, (even though going insane to farm nightmare fuel is better) and turn trees into treeguards when you need living logs. :3

[enragedcamel]

the way they're implemented. It's not consistent with the rules of the world.  

 

Not sure what you mean. There are many rules that were changed for multiplayer. These could be added to the list.

[Dave0522]

I'm not sure what is not consistent or reasonable about implementing methods to prevent individuals from ruining the entire game for the whole server.

 

Methods have already been implemented. Mods exist for those not satisfied with the core game.

 

Why should developers have to make changes when the admin can make changes and protect the server. I run a server with all three of those changes implemented via mods and people still find new ways to disrupt other players. There is no simple solution...you do what you can and adapt. Ghost gotta haunt. Krampus gotta kramp. That's DST life.

[RalphKastro]

Not sure what you mean. There are many rules that were changed for multiplayer. These could be added to the list.

I don't mean the DS specific rules. I mean the rules of how the world works. There's no reason for structures and plants and whatever placed by players being burnable by everything but player-created fires. It doesn't make sense any way you look at it. What is so special about player made fires and structures that one can't touch the other? Should Generated structures be unburnable by player fire too? Does that mean that if a controlled forest fire gets out of control, there's no risk of the player losing the base near it? It sounds simple, but it's both too complicated and doesn't make any sense.

And is there any in-game reason for why players can't hammer anything? Give me one, and I'll accept it.

But about the Ghost one, yeah everything about them needs to be changed in order for them to work in public servers.

[jbeetle]

Ghosts are a little bit helpful they can turn pigs into werepigs for free, change flowers into evil flowers for nightmare fuel, (even though going insane to farm nightmare fuel is better) and turn trees into treeguards when you need living logs. :3

True enough. The "fun" of being evil or just the outright interest of being evil weighs a lot more heavily right now than being a nice ghost.

 

I don't mean the DS specific rules. I mean the rules of how the world works. There's no reason for structures and plants and whatever placed by players being burnable by everything but player-created fires. 

 

Inconsistent game mechanics, and I agree. If it could be conveyed to the player in a logical way, I wouldn't mind it. But just saying "this is the way it is, but I'm not going to tell you that, nor am I going to tell you why" is bad game design from a game mechanics point-of-view.

[leonseye]

If they could permanently end griefing w/ "3 simple changes", they would have done that by now.

 

/shrug

[XirmiX]

Simple? Yes. Good? Not so much. Consistent or reasonable? Not in any way.

Edit: also, I think that change N2 would actually not be so simple to implement, as there would be many ways for people to set fire to stuff aside from just torching.

How is it that this is a topic you really understand well? Then again, I am quite impressed with your understanding of anarchism, since most people just gagle on about the old false claim >_>

But to get on to the topic, I must say that I agree with you on the criticism of this matter.

Here are better solutions as to how to stop griefing:

* players (be it in ghost or alive form) can not light anything on fire that is near enough anything else to cause chain reaction (this would solve most fire griefer problems. Upon trying to light a tree, which could cause a chain reaction at the time, the character of the player would announce something like "I wouldn't want the fire to spread" (for Wilson) or "If it all burns now, there will be nothing to burn later" (for Willow)).

* a locking and unlocking system, by which a player can then grant access to his or her built chests/ice boxes/scaled chests be it for one of them, certain number of them or all of them. Each player would represent a key and a lock by which they would be able to open a certain structure, and each player would be able to see whether they have the full access of that type of key or if only for certain things. Chests/ice boxes/scaled chests would need be first built with everyone having access to them and afterwards the player would then need to make a lock, say with 1 gold and then attach the lock to that chest/ice box/scaled chest. (this would solve most of the looter griefer problems while still staying convenient as locks with keys would be optional).

* for the structures that player did not build, that player could not hammer them. Not in a form of what one mod has (where when you try to hammer a structure not built by you, you can hit it with hammer and lose durability, but the structure won't get destroyed), but that similarly to the fire griefer solution, the character of the player would announce something like "I wouldn't want to wreck such masterpiece" (from Wilson) or "I would prefer if it got burnt instead" (from Willow). Now you might think that these structures might be possible to burn instead, but this can be solved if you keep even two structures crafted close enough to each other, and if one is science machine, well the easiest other structure can simply be a sign! Both impossible to wreck by other players and due to them being close together, wouldn't be possible to burn either. But even so, I think that there is no reason for anyone to be ablr to burn structures as it is more inconvenient tjan helpful, so just making it impossible for players to light any structures on fire seems legit enough to be in the actual game. Also, in terma of set piece spawning structures, I think those being possible to hammer by anyone seems ok, since we don't really have any base set pieces, they're all just a bunch of traps. In terms of for which structures this would apply would be like chests, ice boxes, drying racks, scaled chests, bee boxes, crafting machines, lightning rods, ice flingomatics, thermal measurers, rainometers, firepits, endothermic fire pits, basic and improved farms, tents and siesta lean tos. Pretty much walls being the only ones possible to hammer bt anyone, except the moonrock walls.

What do you guys think of these 3 solutions?

[enragedcamel]

There are mods that do all of those things and more. Protecting the server is the responsibility of the admin.

 

The servers that are run by Klei don't have mods, hth.

[Dave0522]

The servers that are run by Klei don't have mods, hth.

 

The admins of that server choose not to install mods. You choose to play on those servers and should  accept the risk. You also have the option to play on modded servers which implement your changes or host your own with a password.

 

Making those changes will not permanently end griefing. Play on any modded server with the changes you listed and you'll soon realize your list is lacking. The game doesn't need to be changed. Just make better server selections or accept the risk when joining servers without mods. People will always find new ways to disrupt other players when things aren't going their way...nothing will change that.

[enragedcamel]

The admins of that server choose not to install mods. You choose to play on those servers and should  accept the risk. You also have the option to play on modded servers which implement your changes or host your own with a password.

 

Making those changes will not permanently end griefing. Play on any modded server with the changes you listed and you'll soon realize your list is lacking. The game doesn't need to be changed. Just make better server selections or accept the risk when joining servers without mods.

 

The problem with modded servers is that there aren't any that have only the mods you want. In fact, most modded servers these days have 20 or more mods turned on, which changes the game so much that it loses its meaning.

 

Anti-griefing is a simple quality of life feature. It should not require mods. Mods should be for extras. The fact that there are mods that implement anti-griefing is not an argument against implementing the feature in the core game.

 

People will always find new ways to disrupt other players when things aren't going their way...nothing will change that.

 

A simple vote-kick mechanism that kicks on majority vote would go a long way towards mitigating it however.

[Dave0522]

A simple vote-kick mechanism that kicks on majority vote would go a long way towards mitigating it however.

 

Agreed.

[DarkXero]

We might as well remove the workable and burnable components from structures built and items planted.

 

Votekicking, and having an admin/mod to take care of a server should be enough.

[SageKun]

Here you go:

• Haunting items and structures can no longer set them on fire.
• Player-started fires can no longer destroy buildings or anything planted by players.
• A player must remain on a server for 5 days before they can hammer down player-built structures.

There we go. No more people joining a server and immediately destroying everything and then leaving.

 

Number 1 ruins the point of haunting as having positive and negative effects.

Number 2 is just silly. People are going to grief, Klei already put in enough to stop griefing such as rolebacks/kicks and bans. 

I honestly think klei has put enough to stop griefing and should just focus on bug fixes/ balances / new content instead of putting in things that limit one of the biggest ideas in don't starve and don't starve together.

"Its your world, your rules"

[XirmiX]

The admins of that server choose not to install mods. You choose to play on those servers and should accept the risk. You also have the option to play on modded servers which implement your changes or host your own with a password.

Making those changes will not permanently end griefing. Play on any modded server with the changes you listed and you'll soon realize your list is lacking. The game doesn't need to be changed. Just make better server selections or accept the risk when joining servers without mods. People will always find new ways to disrupt other players when things aren't going their way...nothing will change that.

Mate, we already have enough password protected servers out there. And no wonder why nobody really plays anymore on Klei's servers!

[XirmiX]

Number 1 ruins the point of haunting as having positive and negative effects.

Number 2 is just silly. People are going to grief, Klei already put in enough to stop griefing such as rolebacks/kicks and bans.

I honestly think klei has put enough to stop griefing and should just focus on bug fixes/ balances / new content instead of putting in things that limit one of the biggest ideas in don't starve and don't starve together.

"Its your world, your rules"

Except it's not "your world, your rules" when some random douchebag comes in and creates damage worse than what a giant would do.