I like the current system, mostly because when I find a dungeon, I turn it into an XP farm for anyone to use, usually with a chest close by. If someone takes stuff out of the chest, I don't consider it stealing from me. Also, If I find a village I usually try to add doors to houses to boost the villager spawning, but I don't consider it "my" village.

And if someone wants to grief the XP farm and break the spawner, well, there are a LOT of dungeons on Agharta.

Or should I claim the 8x8 area around the spawner and leave the XP farm w/chest unclaimed? That would kind of suck for someone mining deep to come upon an unmineable 8x8 area.

The problem is the plugin used for protections. Many dont understand how to use the plugin and end up with no protection from griefers. Another problem I found was the block limit, because there is a limit to how big a protection you can make sometimes people run out of protection blocks, leaving half of their builds unprotected.

If someone doesn't know how to protect their land, they can easily ask in chat, as I have seen many people do, and if people are online, then 95% of the time someone will be helpful enough to explain it to them. Therefore, this is not a real excuse.

The limit on claim blocks is obviously intentional. It prevents people from claiming massive tracts of land and not building on all of it, like many people have done on the classic server. More claim blocks can be bought with mtc and are also accumulated automatically through just being on the server. The plugin itself is absolutely not 'the problem' in any realistic way.

The fact is the server is advertised as a no griefing server. So why is it being allowed? If you wanted a pvp/grief server... There is the pvp server? If aghast a turns into a griefing server what is the point of the pvp server?

It IS a no griefing server. If you protect your land, it doesn't get griefed. Period. If someone finds a way to circumvent protections, they will be banned. Period. Also, you DO know the difference between the two generally unrelated concepts of pvp and griefing, don't you? If not, I'm sorry, but I'm not going to take the time to explain it.

Basically, you get out what you put in. I know we don't see that staff work very hard behind the scenes, but if they put a bit more effort to support the no griefing rule the server would be a better place.

This goes both ways. Staff member put in plenty of work as it is. Every single person who plays on Agharta is provided the ability to protect what they build. If someone doesn't care enough to take 2 minutes (if that) to do that, why should staff members have to waste time dealing with it when it gets griefed?

And realistically speaking. The population isn't massive, and so the amount of griefs is minimal so it isn't like a massive work load being added on.

I guarantee it would require more time from any given mod to deal with 100% avoidable griefings than it would take for a player to click on the ground twice with a shovel.

So, in solution

The are probly afew options but I see these as the most viable:

1) get a new protection plugin that has not got a limit on the amount of blocks but is easy to use. A reasonable example is the old world guard. It's a decent plugin with a lot of tutorials on YouTube for it. One downside is that staff have to make it

2) increase the amount of blocks a player has/starts with hopefully making it so people have sufficient limits to protect their builds

3) keep everything the same but when a build is griefed roll back and ban the player who griefed

1) That sort plugin is much more of a hassle for not only staff members, but also for players. Who would want to have to wait for a mod to get to their petition when they can instantly do it themselves exactly the way they want it done with virtually no effort required? It just doesn't make any logical sense. Not to mention, it's also more complicated and/or time consuming to manage as far as making subclaims within a protection.

2) This I can get behind. I totally agree that the starting blocks is pretty insufficient, especially for brand new players who wouldn't have any mtc saved up to purchase more, and that either the amount gained over time should be somewhat increased or the mtc cost for additional blocks should be somewhat decreased.

3) Again, if a person cares enough to not want their build griefed, there is nothing stopping them from protecting it themselves. The only time this should even be an issue is if someone actually manages to circumvent protections.

Yes, the staff have a heavy work load, but I don't see how any of those options would be a massive increase proportionally in their workload.

I'm trying not to be negative, but I have to say. The staff applied for a position which is clearly noted that it will drastically affect their play time. I know I am not staff, I don't see behind the scenes, I don't know what it is like to be staff on Minetown, but as a player I can still see staff not doing outstanding pe's or staff duties because they "Cba". What needs to be understood is that staff duties come before personal play time.

Most, if not all of those pe's not getting done right away is because there are certain things that only certain staff members are able to do. If a pe requires an admin to do it, then you can't very well expect it to get done if the only staff online are mods or helpers. Other pe's require the player who made it to be available on the server in order for it get done. Don't assume someone is shirking their responsibilities if you don't know the whole story.

The limit on claim blocks is obviously intentional. It prevents people from claiming massive tracts of land and not building on all of it, like many people have done on the classic server. More claim blocks can be bought with mtc and are also accumulated automatically through just being on the server. The plugin itself is absolutely not 'the problem' in any realistic way

This I can get behind. I totally agree that the starting blocks is pretty insufficient,

Is it just me, or are those two statements completely contradicting each other? one says that the block limit is fine and should be the amount it is whereas the other says it is "Insufficient". please actually give one answer, not two...

Also, you DO know the difference between the two generally unrelated concepts of pvp and griefing, don't you?

Of coarse I know the difference between griefing and pvp. however usually they are paired together on servers...

Basically, you get out what you put in. I know we don't see that staff work very hard behind the scenes, but if they put a bit more effort to support the no griefing rule the server would be a better place.

This goes both ways. Staff member put in plenty of work as it is. Every single person who plays on Agharta is provided the ability to protect what they build. If someone doesn't care enough to take 2 minutes (if that) to do that, why should staff members have to waste time dealing with it when it gets griefed?

I said that I know staff put a lot of work in. I understand that. "Every single person who player on Agharta is provided the ability to protect what they build" well that's the issue. it works great on paper but in the real world the worst affected are new players. some don't know the plugin exists, some cannot work out how to use it (I have seen so many people unable to understand a simple explination to the plugin...), but the worst problem is the block limit, you even said yourself it is a problem. I know why it is there, im not an idiot, however the limit of it is the problem. new players need a larger amount of protection blocks to start off with.

So when the situation ends up with a build unprotected and it is griefed it is staff duty to fix it. and realistically speaking with the smaller population there are not many griefing cases anyway, it isn't as if this decision is going to mean tens of grief cases per day...

So, in solution

The are probly afew options but I see these as the most viable:

1) get a new protection plugin that has not got a limit on the amount of blocks but is easy to use. A reasonable example is the old world guard. It's a decent plugin with a lot of tutorials on YouTube for it. One downside is that staff have to make it

2) increase the amount of blocks a player has/starts with hopefully making it so people have sufficient limits to protect their builds

3) keep everything the same but when a build is griefed roll back and ban the player who griefed

1) That sort plugin is much more of a hassle for not only staff members, but also for players. Who would want to have to wait for a mod to get to their petition when they can instantly do it themselves exactly the way they want it done with virtually no effort required? It just doesn't make any logical sense. Not to mention, it's also more complicated and/or time consuming to manage as far as making subclaims within a protection.

2) This I can get behind. I totally agree that the starting blocks is pretty insufficient, especially for brand new players who wouldn't have any mtc saved up to purchase more, and that either the amount gained over time should be somewhat increased or the mtc cost for additional blocks should be somewhat decreased.

3) Again, if a person cares enough to not want their build griefed, there is nothing stopping them from protecting it themselves. The only time this should even be an issue is if someone actually manages to circumvent protections.

firstly, I state that these are a few options, im not saying they are the best im just saying they are options that we can use. So when you say that one option is a bad idea im not saying its a good idea... im just stating it is an option. I actually agree with you on option1. then once again you contradict your self with options 2 and 3. in option 2 you agree that it would be a good idea to increase the starting limit, due to the problem when people run out of blocks for a reasonable build. but then in option3 you say that people are lazy enough not to protect their builds when you clearly identified the main problem for not protecting builds is the block limit. Just to clarify I believe that option 2 is by far the best option of those 3.

Yes, the staff have a heavy work load, but I don't see how any of those options would be a massive increase proportionally in their workload.

This point still stands

I'm trying not to be negative, but I have to say. The staff applied for a position which is clearly noted that it will drastically affect their play time. I know I am not staff, I don't see behind the scenes, I don't know what it is like to be staff on Minetown, but as a player I can still see staff not doing outstanding pe's or staff duties because they "Cba". What needs to be understood is that staff duties come before personal play time.

Most, if not all of those pe's not getting done right away is because there are certain things that only certain staff members are able to do. If a pe requires an admin to do it, then you can't very well expect it to get done if the only staff online are mods or helpers. Other pe's require the player who made it to be available on the server in order for it get done. Don't assume someone is shirking their responsibilities if you don't know the whole story.

In hind sight that last paragraph was an unclear and somewhat foolish one to write. what I was trying to state was that in the PAST I had seen staff who were perfectly able to do a Pe but would not do it because they were 'busy' with their own personal play time. as far as I know that kind of behaviour in staff is gone. but it was an attempt to display the possibility of laziness to be a factor into this argument, however this factor would be extreamly small in comparison to others. Back on topic, which is griefing, maybe enable Moderators to have the ability to fully deal with a grief by themselves if they do not already have said ability? allowing griefs to be fixed faster.