The adventure I had yesterday!

[EuedeAdodooedoe]

Here I'll be talking about what went about in the world I was in as well as the amount of awesome things that made the game challenging, even for us late-game players. And then evaluate it as to what I think can be concluded from it for TTA DLC as well as various changes that could be made to the game.

So, yesterday I played on the server I typically play on. We planned to go to Dragonfly and farm some scales and perhaps even go for a kill. However, the sheer amounts of things that happened one right after another stopped us from getting to achieve our plans and in the end we had to leave it for another day.

First, we had some base work to do. I was working on getting more cobblestones in base whilst placing down some other kinds of natural turf in place of it so it doesn't look ugly out there in the world (and because I'm OCD like it; don't ever burn non-renewable turf! It can turn out to be useful later on as "land-fill", but the good kind of one). Then a few newbies came in. It was Spring, though as I remember 2 of them died and left or simply died. One came over to us; Wilson. I explained a few things about the game and what he could do and he said "ok" after some of the things I said. To our disappointment, the Wilson turned out to be a griefer. One flingo got wrecked before he could be banned unfortunately and so we had to sacrifice another gear for rebuilding it. He burnt 2 rabbit houses and made an attempt at burning our grass. Fortunately I was able to save all the grass in time, though one of the hay walls nearby became of a black texture, so that was kinda interesting (a glitch that makes things look cool! And yes; I could still repair the crispy wall ). Oh and a telelocator focus got destroyed, but we didn't much care for that; I was sort of planning to get rid of it anyway.

Next we had a frog rain. Since there was like 5 of us pros who come in regularly, the sheer amounts of frog legs we got and the sheer amounts of tooth traps triggered was immense. Houndiuses that we had placed also actually became useful in this situation. After that we were nearing Summer and a few other newbies came. We checked the amount of hours each of them had played and one of them, a Wickerbottom had played quite a bit and later told me they had played on their own and survived 94 days. The Wickerbottom player came to our base when it was already Summer, so considering all that they knew quite well what they were doing. The other two, a Wilson and a Willow were newbies who had played just a few hours. Willow came just before Summer, so they were fine and experienced two hound attacks with us. Wilson came to our base during Summer... Dead. But we got them rezurrected. What made me happy is that both the Willow and the Wilson players were learning from what I taught them; crafting stuff that's important under various tabs, cooking in crockpot various good food items. Even though one of our pros distrusted the Willow and started a poll to kick them, luckily it didn't go through. It's sad how griefer actions can make professionals hostile towards newbies and create prejudices. I'm guilty of this too in terms of PvP, though that's a whole another story.

So, as to my comments, thoughts and conclusions of this:

* We need a way to make the game a bit more newbie friendly and design it in such a way that professionals don't become hostile and distrustiful due to the act of griefing. The way to do this seems to be changing mechanics tad bit to prevent griefing in the first place andmake it less common, especially with burning as it creates unnecessary frame drops. With griefers, it's like having something in-between a volcano eruption in SW and normal smouldering, except that it's all year round and has a rare chance of ocurring. That can make creating a decent base to use for long-term survival pretty much impossible. Remember that our world is hundreds of days old and people still come and teaching them about the game and having them go through all of these intense things with us is just awesome, except when it comes to griefing. Then it's a bummer to everyone but the griefer(s).

* For TTA creating some things that happen late-game that are intense, but with breaks seems like the way to go. Frog rain has always been one of those intense things. An idea I've had is that in late-game there could be some creature that would appear for one random player on the server, stalk the player slowly and would teleport kind of to the player once the player is too far. When engaged in combat, the thing could freeze/spew slime or something along the lines towards the player and then attack the player. This would not stop until the player or the thing is dead. And the thing would stalk the player forever if not killed, so cooperation/pigs needed. Perhaps it's too muchlike Ewecus, but who knows what could be made!

* It would be good if something were done with harsh seasons in terms of newbies; if the main base is not nearby and there's no resources around to pick, how will you survive? One thought I had, which some might be familiar with is a container which can share inventory of a container with the same kind and that you could mark these containers with something so that their inventory gets shared. That way, when a newbie joins, I could just drop off some stuff in a container like that at base and it would teleport to the container near portal so that the newbie can take some basic stuff to survive a harsh season with some knoledge and not die instantly (even as a pro, joining in the middle of Summer or Winter can mean guaranteed death)! I'm not sure why some people have disliked this idea, but regardless, that's the closest to helping out newbies without changing seasonal mechanics as we can get to really.

 

So, what do you guys take from all this?

[Arlesienne]

"We need a way to make the game a bit more newbie friendly and design it in such a way that professionals don't become hostile and distrustful due to the act of griefing" - nice, but how do you change humanity? Sorry to play your advocatus diaboli and the cynic, but humans are bastards. Only our species is capable of killing for sport. Griefing is something which will be done, because some just like to cause misery. Designing the game against distrust - sounds like an utopy for me. It would require dealing with their minds, simply put.

[EuedeAdodooedoe]

No, my point is that having something in the game that prevents griefing in the first place (i.e. mechanic changing) more or less could deal with that.

Very hard or impossible to grief > Less or No griefing happening > Lees distrustful pros become to those who recently have joined.

But so long as people whine about having mechanics changed (saying that changing mechanics of the game should not be done because reasons and muh feelings and "because griefers are gonna find ways to grief anyway so we shouldn't even try", even though that could be taken into account and then continuously changed to better deal with griefing. It's like saying "oh, we should stop fixing the game's bugs, errors, crashes and glitches, just because more of other bugs, errors, crashes and glitches are going to appear". No; nobody I know thinks that. And I don't think Klei does either with the sheer amount of bug fixing they have done. Yes; these things will possibly never be 100% eradicated, but the point is to eradicate as much of it as possible and keep fixing until none notices anything. Same goes for griefing, though it seems like some people don't take it seriously enough and just want to deal with it AFTER the damage has already been done most likely due to wanting to "put up order" in the game or for the sake of revenge), even though for the most part this can be done without interfering with normal gameplay too and basically these mechanics, unless your intent is to grief would come unnoticed, and so, well, we're just shooting ourselves in the foot... or more precisely, we're hammering and then burning our foot >.>

[Arlesienne]

The problem is that there is no way for a machine to differentiate malicious intent from a purposeful action with a benevolent intention or just a mistake. This is why coming up with antigriefing solutions through game mechanics is pretty much a lost cause.

[EuedeAdodooedoe]

The game doesn't have to know malicious intent. Who in their right mind is gonna light their base on fire and that not being considered griefing? "Hei, man, I'll just burn down all of our chests is that okay?" "Sure, man, wha... WHAT?!".

As I see it, there are 4 types of griefing:

* Burning

* Hammering

* Looting

* Bringing hostile mobs into the base on purpose to wreck the base/stop players from using it (e.g. tentacles or spiders)

 

Burning can easily be dealt with and in the past I've described how.

Looting also easy; creating a system where you can create spcial containers which you can protect via a code and so only people who have entered the right code can access its contents (similarly for ice boxes) and can hammer the structure only when its open (plus having a hard-to-come by item that can get the structure open without entering the code to avoid unwanted protected structures from being made to a point where getting rid of them would only be by using console. Could always use Weather Pain anyways as well!)

Hammering, whilst not completely removable due to people actually wanting to hammer structures without malicious intent, unlike for burning down structures, it is still possible to make the system more secure; things like Flingos could have increased hammering hits (e.g. 20) and being able to repair hammering hits for a particular structure could keep it from being hammered until the griefer gets banned. In other words a griefer would simply show their grim face by trying to hammer a flingo or something else. In turn, the thing would not get hammered and the griefer would be banned, even though some custone would be wasted for repairing a flingo or something else for other structures. Also, when hitting something via hammer or hammering something, not being able to pick up anything on the ground for a few seconds could also be used. Whilst this can interfere a little with hammering down things and rebuilding them, it won't so much; just hammer all you need, wait a few seconds (e.g. 10) and you can pick the stuff up again. This could also make players who want to hammer something down without malicious intent to think before they hammer. Cause many times, I've hammered something and then regretted it, either just after I hit it the last time or a few seconds later because I remembered there is something else I wanted to craft (if it's a machine) or for whatever other use other structures are.

And finally bringing hostile mobs into base to grief other players. Spider nests and Tentacles by Webbers or Wickerbottoms is a fine example of this. What could be done? Prevent Tentacle bokk from being read near any crafting machines, drying racks, farms (other kind of structures you might wanna place down actually right next to a tentacle farm though so that can be taken out from the conditions) is one way of doing things. And if crafting machines take more hits to hammer, well, the griefer would first need to hammer the structure, which I've already addressed. And as for spiders; make spider queens not be possible to plant down their nests near any structures and prevent spider nests being plantable near structures as a player as well. This would avoid Webber-only bases being made, which really isn't that good of a thing anyway.

 

Would all of this implemented prevent griefing completely? Probably not. Would it lessen it significantly? Or at least reduce the damage done by griefing significantly? Absolutely. And even if griefers find other ways to do these griefings, they would simply make us look into some other mechanics, which we could adjust to stop that type of griefing from happening or lessen it significantly as well. And hei, all I've mentioned can be dismissed/have a different solution implemented/discussed about/brought up anyway. There's many ways of doing things. But having preventative mechanics that consider what players who want to play normally would want to do and what griefers would want to normally do seems like the only way of dealing with griefing much better than the existing mods for these kinds of things out there as well as lessen griefing overall significantly or the damage done by griefing being next to insignificant or whatnot.

[Arlesienne]

Sometimes, burning CAN be useful. Even of objects. Have you never had an instance of just HAVING to get more light/warmth/a random variation thereof and no time to hammer everything down? There are too many variables. If I was banned from my own server for burning my own structures down if I needed, well, I would be rightfully indignant about it. This extends to other aspects. For instance I like having tentacles near or IN my base for protection. And if your system thought it griefing that I or my Wickerbottom friend spawned some, what would the consequences be? That's the problem: people play the game in different ways. They have different strategies. I doubt it could be implemented in the code, and even if it could be, it would then require constant edits to accommodate new items, new tactics and so on.

[EuedeAdodooedoe]

48 minutes ago, Arlesienne said:

Sometimes, burning CAN be useful. Even of objects. Have you never had an instance of just HAVING to get more light/warmth/a random variation thereof and no time to hammer everything down? There are too many variables. If I was banned from my own server for burning my own structures down if I needed, well, I would be rightfully indignant about it. This extends to other aspects. For instance I like having tentacles near or IN my base for protection. And if your system thought it griefing that I or my Wickerbottom friend spawned some, what would the consequences be? That's the problem: people play the game in different ways. They have different strategies. I doubt it could be implemented in the code, and even if it could be, it would then require constant edits to accommodate new items, new tactics and so on.

You like tentacles in your base?

For protection from what?! This is supposed to be a cooperative game so if you do this to keep others out of your base, you're playing the game wrong. Or shouldn't even be playing Don't Starve TOGETHER in the first place! Also this wouldn't prevent spawning tentacles near your base, just IN your base. Having them IN your base would even be bad for yourself, so what even... These kind of weird actions can be modded to your liking, but for most a lot people who want to play the game as is intended, including myself griefing matters.

 

And okay, lets say the only thing to light nearby was your own base. Still, better to die than have the whole base destroyed and unusable... and if the base is destroyed, how are you even going to survive in the long run anyway? You'll most likely die regardless unless your play-style is usually nomadic.

[Arlesienne]

Please do not start yelling at me. Spawning tentacles at the entrance against hounds and players entering through the gap between the sea and the closest wall segment is nothing to be ashamed of. Nobody will accuse me of being unwelcoming. Your point "better to die" is also fairly moot in survival if you're the only person on the server and cannot be revived, not to mention wilderness.

[EuedeAdodooedoe]

31 minutes ago, Arlesienne said:

Please do not start yelling at me. Spawning tentacles at the entrance against hounds and players entering through the gap between the sea and the closest wall segment is nothing to be ashamed of. Nobody will accuse me of being unwelcoming. Your point "better to die" is also fairly moot in survival if you're the only person on the server and cannot be revived, not to mention wilderness.

Sorry, but I can't but hate people who are unwelcoming. It goes against all reason and logic; because you're playing a multiplayer game about cooperation... whilst you're defending your base from anyone else entering in.

As for dying, if you're gonna die regardless due to burning down a base, then yeah. Regardless, whether it's malicious intent or not, burning down a base is considered griefing. And yeah, survival servers don't last that long regardless. But for the sake of fun not ending due to a base burning down, but due to server just restarting, implementing what I've suggested would be good.

[Muche]

A tentacle field is perfectly safe if you just walk through it and don't stop (you have enough time to pick up an item from the ground though). Thus the only places it can cause problems that could be considered griefing is right on top of a portal, a resurrection stone, a wormhole or a sinkhole.

[Faintly Macabre]

3 hours ago, EuedeAdodooedoe said:

Sorry, but I can't but hate people who are unwelcoming. It goes against all reason and logic; because you're playing a multiplayer game about cooperation... whilst you're defending your base from anyone else entering in.

You have an unreasonably difficult time understanding the viewpoints of anyone but yourself.

[EuedeAdodooedoe]

1 hour ago, TheHalcyonOne said:

You have an unreasonably difficult time understanding the viewpoints of anyone but yourself.

Not entirely true. But come on; why do people play mutliplayer (I'm assuming he'd be playing on a public server the eay he has talked about it) and then place tentacles right in camp to quite literally say "**** you" to whomever comes over.

I don't understand things that aren't explained to me, yes. Do you expect me to be able to read your minds? I mean, come on. Give me one reason why people who play multiplayer on public servers with some friend(s) or even just by themselves and then go show a middle finger to others (being hostile through prejudice or whatever) should not be considered scummy people? Please, I genuinely want to know if you can give me one good reason for it.

[EuedeAdodooedoe]

3 hours ago, Muche said:

A tentacle field is perfectly safe if you just walk through it and don't stop (you have enough time to pick up an item from the ground though). Thus the only places it can cause problems that could be considered griefing is right on top of a portal, a resurrection stone, a wormhole or a sinkhole.

 

3 hours ago, Muche said:

A tentacle field is perfectly safe if you just walk through it and don't stop (you have enough time to pick up an item from the ground though). Thus the only places it can cause problems that could be considered griefing is right on top of a portal, a resurrection stone, a wormhole or a sinkhole.

Perhaps you have a point. Though doing something like that to prevent other players from getting to your base, don't you think that's being kind of a ****? 

[Faintly Macabre]

5 hours ago, EuedeAdodooedoe said:

I can't [help?] but hate people

37 minutes ago, EuedeAdodooedoe said:

Though doing something like that to prevent other players from getting to your base, don't you think that's being kind of a ****?

39 minutes ago, EuedeAdodooedoe said:

scummy

I live around plenty of mountains I could move a grain of sand at a time if I needed some time wasted, thanks.

[Muche]

14 minutes ago, EuedeAdodooedoe said:

Perhaps you have a point. Though doing something like that to prevent other players from getting to your base, don't you think that's being kind of a ****? 

Again, tentacle field is safe to walk through. Thus if the field is outside of the base, anyone can get to the base.

Even if the field is inside the base, as long as the tentacles are sparse enough, the base is mostly usable, you just have discover them, so you know which base's amenities are safe to use as well, not just walk through.

[Wexton]

Well i think placing tentacles on some stategical places on the base can me more or less good for hounds,like on the entrance.Just make sure to place a sign or something so people notices it.Anyways i prefer the old tooth trap field away from the base for hounds.

 

And even with that.Usually a griefer its not going to play a lot of time for getting amazing tools just for griefing.Usually they just take Willow to start with a way to burn without needing to find resources(wich may be hard on late game servers)and just go around burning everything.Or looking like a normal player until they find the base.usually they dont go for something so complex.Maybe changing some stuff like Willow initial lighter or Webber's spider egg sould be done as well.

[Arlesienne]

10 hours ago, TheHalcyonOne said:

You have an unreasonably difficult time understanding the viewpoints of anyone but yourself.

Honestly...

"(...) You're playing the game wrong. Or shouldn't even be playing Don't Starve TOGETHER in the first place!", "I can't but hate people who are unwelcoming", "(...) Come on; why do people play mutliplayer (I'm assuming he'd be playing on a public server the eay he has talked about it) and then place tentacles right in camp to quite literally say "**** you" to whomever comes over.

I don't understand things that aren't explained to me, yes. Do you expect me to be able to read your minds? I mean, come on. Give me one reason why people who play multiplayer on public servers with some friend(s) or even just by themselves and then go show a middle finger to others (being hostile through prejudice or whatever) should not be considered scummy people?" - is it just me or it indeed sounds plain wrong?

How do you go about judging me if I have never seen you on my servers? Why is it so straightforward for you to assume I am unwelcoming and then start calling me expletives? Go ask people who actually played with me if they felt I was unwelcoming or hostile. There are several threads in Server Bulletin if you will not go straight to group members.

If you did have any point to accuse me of what you are accusing me of, you would know I run some of the more popular public worlds aimed at cooperation and lending newbies a helping hand. All my servers are heavily co-op. I offer help when PvP is on as well. As an admin, it is my role to ensure everyone is having fun. If the attitude did not work, I would not have to expand server slots to 16 through the LUA to accommodate everyone.

I would greatly appreciate if you desisted when it comes to your current behaviour - if not towards me, then at least towards others. Nobody deserves to go through something like that, especially when it is completely unjustified and backed by no evidence. And once again... I am not a "he". I would have thought the nick nudging towards Bizet is clear enough, but despite my age (I doubt you are my peer in this regard), people still manage to surprise me ;).

To reiterate: you use tentacles against mobs, which are controlled by AI, meaning: intellectually-challenged. You build a triple wall with just one space for a fake entrance where you put tentacles on a plot of land facing the sea. The game lets you build walls up to a certain proximity to said sea. The gap created this way lets a player slip, but not mobs. The tentacle trap triggers when a mob is close enough (for instance hounds, werepigs or a deerclops, who inherently stop at walls to tear at them) and it aggroes. Slow mobs like treeguards are even better for that. My players know about this trick and are smart, so unlike mobs, they do not walk straight into the bubbles.

Use it or don't, but don't go aggressive on me. I did nothing wrong to be treated like that. I am waiting patiently for what comes next. My servers use the techniques and they work for people. If we agree hammering something down is too much effort and time, I see no reason not to torch it. People are not simple. They cannot be defined for easy reference in the manner of "the elves are a lithe, pointy-eared people who excel at poverty" (sorry, that went a bit too far) "people who use elaborate mob-repelling techniques we have not thought of are scummy, hostile and unwelcoming". AI as we know it will never outwit a human. Creating mechanics-based antigriefing methods is incredibly hard with little payback for the time invested because of that simple fact. It is not to say it's not worthy, but it is hardly what Klei ought to do in the first place. People complain about the official servers being full of griefers - some solution would be having human admins on board to react. That would make a change. Automatically banning people who use a torch or the-like without knowing the reason behind it is just a harmful oversimplification. I simply stand by the belief it is better to have to recover from 77 griefers than unjustly ban one innocent person.

[EuedeAdodooedoe]

2 hours ago, Arlesienne said:

Honestly...

"(...) You're playing the game wrong. Or shouldn't even be playing Don't Starve TOGETHER in the first place!", "I can't but hate people who are unwelcoming", "(...) Come on; why do people play mutliplayer (I'm assuming he'd be playing on a public server the eay he has talked about it) and then place tentacles right in camp to quite literally say "**** you" to whomever comes over.

I don't understand things that aren't explained to me, yes. Do you expect me to be able to read your minds? I mean, come on. Give me one reason why people who play multiplayer on public servers with some friend(s) or even just by themselves and then go show a middle finger to others (being hostile through prejudice or whatever) should not be considered scummy people?" - is it just me or it indeed sounds plain wrong?

How do you go about judging me if I have never seen you on my servers? Why is it so straightforward for you to assume I am unwelcoming and then start calling me expletives? Go ask people who actually played with me if they felt I was unwelcoming or hostile. There are several threads in Server Bulletin if you will not go straight to group members. Okay, perhaps I misunderstood there. You said " For instance I like having tentacles near or IN my base for protection. " however a big problem with this is that people are likely to die from tentacles, especially if they're new if you place them in your base, therefore placing tentacles IN your base regardless of the intent would be bad for players in general. If it's nearby and it's made obvious then perhaps not. Regardless, if you're placing tentacles close to your base for protection from hounds at a walled out entrance, the mechanics I've described would not necessarily disallow you to do so. It all would depend on the range. If it's drying racks, farms, crafting stations for instance or perhaps just the crafting machines that you cannot spawn tentacles nearby (and also the portal, as @Muche reasoned so well for) within like 2 or 3 turf radius of, then would that prevent players from spawning them. In what scenario could this be a problem without the intent being griefing? 

Also something a bit more on the whole dying thing and burning stuff. Newcomers who are trying to keep warm could light whole forests on fire, just to stay warm. The damage done would be catastrophic where as, if you can only burn something that has 3 or less flammable things within a fire-spreading radius or whatnot, you would not cause too much damage. And besides, it makes for a greater challenge a tad bit when trying to survive from cold in general. Or perhaps what if you could only light things that would spread farther when you're nearly about to start losing health from freezing and perhaps things that get burned, instead of turning to ash (e.g. grass, saplings, reeds, spiky bushes etc.) would have burnt versions for them and naturally occurring stuff that would get burnt (world-generate) and have not been dug up and replanted could simply turn to ash later on or simply despawn, where as dug-up stuff would stay burnt until touched (which would turn them into ash) or something could be done to restore them back to not being burnt, like using Ice Staves or some kind of other or a brand new magic item or something. Flowers already have textures for burnt state in the files, I believe and burnt spiky bushes already exist, just that spiky bushes don't turn into burnt ones when you actually burn them yourself, which tbh is kind of weird.  <= contradicts my previous statement.

If you did have any point to accuse me of what you are accusing me of, you would know I run some of the more popular public worlds aimed at cooperation and lending newbies a helping hand. All my servers are heavily co-op. I offer help when PvP is on as well. As an admin, it is my role to ensure everyone is having fun It isn't your duty just because it's your server. That's for everybody, in order to have fun with everyone else playing the game. If the attitude did not work, I would not have to expand server slots to 16 through the LUA to accommodate everyone. I will say, going a bit off-topic that it's hard to survive if everyone is crammed up a lot of the time, because of how quickly resources come and go and because too many newbies and only a few pros can cause some serious problems. And I'm speaking with just having like 4/5 pros online and 5/6 newbies (10 players total) so idk how you manage with 16.

I would greatly appreciate if you desisted when it comes to your current behaviour  - if not towards me, then at least towards others. I wish I could, but I cannot. I do not know how else to say something. I hate to throw in unnecessary words as the amount I write already takes up huge amounts of my time. I like to be direct so that my message is clear. I would suggest reading my signature underneath my posts, if you have not already. Nobody deserves to go through something like that, especially when it is completely unjustified and backed by no evidence. Again, I misunderstood and I apologise for it. I guess I should have asked "protection from what?" first. And once again... I am not a "he" Okay, did not notice you saying you're a she or whatever else in-between?. I would have thought the nick nudging towards Bizet is clear enough Not sure what you're talking about here., but despite my age (I doubt you are my peer in this regard), people still manage to surprise me ;).

To reiterate: you use tentacles against mobs, which are controlled by AI, meaning: intellectually-challenged [artificial intelligence?]. You build a triple wall with just one space for a fake entrance where you put tentacles on a plot of land facing the sea. The game lets you build walls up to a certain proximity to said sea. The gap created this way lets a player slip, but not mobs. The tentacle trap triggers when a mob is close enough (for instance hounds, werepigs or a deerclops, who inherently stop at walls to tear at them) and it aggroes. Slow mobs like treeguards are even better for that. My players know about this trick and are smart, so unlike mobs, they do not walk straight into the bubbles. Still confused as to how this works. Could you elaborate/show a visual example of how this works?

Use it or don't, but don't go aggressive on me. I did nothing wrong to be treated like that. I am waiting patiently for what comes next. My servers use the techniques and they work for people From what you know, if you place tentacles IN your base, how many have died from them? I'm assuming your server is public and accessible to everybody.. If we agree hammering something down is too much effort and time, I see no reason not to torch it You get more resources back and you don't look like a griefer. That's why.. People are not simple Doesn't mean their actions cannot be understood and that based on that, the mechanics of the game cannot be implemented to suit general players well, whilst preventing griefing to at least a decent extent. They cannot be defined for easy reference in the manner of "the elves are a lithe, pointy-eared people who excel at poverty" (sorry, that went a bit too far) ...No idea V('^')V though I don't look at things in simple terms. Things are complex, however not to a point where you can't grasp something more or less accurately "people who use elaborate mob-repelling techniques we have not thought of are scummy, hostile and unwelcoming". AI as we know it will never outwit a human. Creating mechanics-based antigriefing methods is incredibly hard with little payback for the time invested because of that simple fact. It is not to say it's not worthy, but it is hardly what Klei ought to do in the first place It is because it's an issue, just like bugs, errors, crashes and glitches that ought to be addressed.. People complain about the official servers being full of griefers - some solution would be having human admins on board to react. That would make a change. Automatically banning people who use a torch or the-like without knowing the reason behind it is just a harmful oversimplification. I simply stand by the belief it is better to have to recover from 77 griefers than unjustly ban one innocent person. If by this you mean that having admins on the server manage it would be generally speaking bad, then I would agree. Though, if you're against that and against what I have proposed or whatever else that has been proposed as a solution to griefing... Do you just want to let it happen?

 

[Arlesienne]

1. Players don't die to tentacles I place as, primo, I let everyone in the public chat know about them if I use the technique, especially when someone comes to the base the first time and, secundo, they see the bubbles. I have never had a death (or harm) from pet tentacles on any of my servers. The only harm I had was some newbies killing Wilfreds before I could explain their purpose.

2. No tentacles at spawn is a rule which I would like to see enforced. I worry Klei will, for now at least, with Through the Ages, cede this to modders to take care of.

3. I want to be able to have a houndius shootius relatively close when building defenses. If the change took care of all "ifs", then fine. I know it would be damnedly hard though.

4. I can survive with many newbies just fine with my settings (if you want, I can show you how to set such a server up). Granted, *I* may go around nearly starving (the worse Wes for the win!), but the others are fine. In fact, I have had the pleasure to see newbies turn into professionals. On those servers.

5. I understand you get resources back from hammering, but sometimes it is not the way to go (hint: setpieces).

6. You can understand people (a 50% chance with each case: you do or you don't), but they change constantly, so a genius programmer would have to constantly redesign the code. We assume there IS such a genius programmer available.

7. The quote is Sten's, naturally.

8. Klei has more than DST to address, sadly, and a limited number of people. Knowing a bit about how such things work, they have to choose what can be achieved with a sensible amount of effort within a sensible amount of time, no sentiments-style. I am all in for antigriefing methods, but I am a weathered realist not too wish for too ideal a situation. Your enthusiasm is commendable, yet you are an idealist.

9. Gender is irrelevant, although I am not making any efforts to conceal mine here, it can be found out about through the forums. Bizet? Of course George Bizet and L'Arlésienne :)!

10. Of course I read your signature, yet the message was clear ("scummy", "**** you", "shouldn't play" and the rest). Not only I understood it as hurtful as other posts proved. *I* want to forget about the thing, but for the sake of you and others, try not to post when you lack time to triple-check if it isn't like that. We are fine, but let's learn from this, okay?

11. A plan of the simplest version of the trap. Now in ASCII, will try drawing it later when I have the means to do that.

11111111111111111111111

1                                    1

1                                    1

1                                    1

1 2 XXXXX T XXXXX 2 1

1 2 XXXXX T XXXXX 2 1

1 2 XXXXX T XXXXX 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

1 is the sea. 2 is the tiny amount of land a player can walk through, the patch between the sea and the outermost wall segment. X is a wall segment. You want at least three as hounds can bite you through two. T is where a tentacle can be spawned.

Assume you are hunted by hounds. You run through the little rim of land. Hounds cannot squeeze in there, so they get into the tunnel. Tentacles start attacking them and they aggro. Now you sit a safe distance away and watch the two mobs attack each other while possibly finishing off the attackers (not tentacles) with darts or other ranged weapons.

It is even easier with slow mobs like treeguards as you need less tentacles.

By the way, it is my spin on the classic panic room. You can use it when there is no material for tooth traps at hand (also, you have to reset them each time, unlike tentacles), yet you either have naturally-available tentacles or "On Tentacles" with Wickerbottom or Maxwell. It works best with branching worlds and swamps since they often face the sea.

[Muche]

@EuedeAdodooedoe, tentacles attack in the radius of 4. Thus the protection radius around a structure of 4 might be enough (8 around a portal etc.)

Generally, my impression of your suggestions is that you mention only positives (how the change in question will prevent a form of griefing), not negatives (how it will affect the game difficulty/tone).
For example, your fire protection suggestions (unable to light a structure, light an item on the ground if there is something else flammable near it, full campfires will not cause nearby items to catch a fire). Yes, they are only a small part of the game, so changing them would not affect the game at large. However, it would make the game more foolproof/dumbed down (and remove one advantage of a firepit over campfire). You don't speak of these consequences, making it seem you've only thought through the positives.
BTW, this is also the reason change notes are quite useful. For example,

notes: "Telelocator Staff can no longer target other Players on a non-PvP server", which sparked a debate. Imagine if it wasn't in the notes. People would be submitting duplicate bugs that it's no longer working. By noting it, it's shown that the change was intentional and is not a bug, and people could discuss whether it was a good design decision.

 

Thus, the question changes from "how to protect players from griefers" to "how much should the player be protected from their own mistakes", or alternatively, "how much of the 'uncompromising wilderness' can the game lose, before the tagline needs to be changed".

[EuedeAdodooedoe]

15 minutes ago, Muche said:

@EuedeAdodooedoe, tentacles attack in the radius of 4. Thus the protection radius around a structure of 4 might be enough (8 around a portal etc.)

Generally, my impression of your suggestions is that you mention only positives (how the change in question will prevent a form of griefing), not negatives (how it will affect the game difficulty/tone).
For example, your fire protection suggestions (unable to light a structure, light an item on the ground if there is something else flammable near it, full campfires will not cause nearby items to catch a fire). Yes, they are only a small part of the game, so changing them would not affect the game at large. However, it would make the game more foolproof/dumbed down (and remove one advantage of a firepit over campfire). You don't speak of these consequences, making it seem you've only thought through the positives.
BTW, this is also the reason change notes are quite useful. For example,

notes: "Telelocator Staff can no longer target other Players on a non-PvP server", which sparked a debate. Imagine if it wasn't in the notes. People would be submitting duplicate bugs that it's no longer working. By noting it, it's shown that the change was intentional and is not a bug, and people could discuss whether it was a good design decision.

 

Thus, the question changes from "how to protect players from griefers" to "how much should the player be protected from their own mistakes", or alternatively, "how much of the 'uncompromising wilderness' can the game lose, before the tagline needs to be changed".

That's a very good point. I have thought about the negatives, although perhaps not through a lot of them (I think it was either thanks to you or someone else as to why I then talked about it). But that's the whole point; to discuss them, to see what problems they might arise. And the "how much should the player be protected from their own mistakes" or "how much of the 'uncompromising wilderness' can the game lose, before the tagline needs to be changed". Cause I mean, the fire spreading was one step and I think that was a step in the right direction because not only did it stop light-griefing from being too huge of an issue, but also got rid of an exploit hugely used by a lot of experienced players in the single player. Also it's become the type of fire that actually makes a tad bit more sense.

And in terms of "how much of the 'uncompromising wilderness' can the game lose, before the tagline needs to be changed" that is what I'm trying to make sure I take in mind in a sense when making my suggestions; to prevent griefing, but also to not make the things that naturally occur to do the kind of things griefing would in a sense do, so Deerclops and Bearger destroying structures, Fire hounds, Summer smouldering or Lightning fire still burning down stuff as is intended by the game, unless you're prepared for it.