Archived Safezone Survival

This suggestion has been archived / closed and can no longer be voted on.
Mecharic

Mecharic

I'm tempermental, deal with it.
Joined
Jul 2, 2012
Messages
3,026
Reaction score
7,046
Points
0
Age
30
Location
United States, East Coast
Faction
Al'Darub
Roleplay Guilds
Emerald Alliance
TL:WR - PvPers have Warzone for PvP among themselves, RPers should get Safezone for roleplay in survival.

Long Version:

The biggest gripe roleplayers have with the survival worlds is the fact that they can, at literally any time, be attacked and ruthlessly killed by PvPers. In order to avoid such a horrid death, they need to invest is massive (often ugly and immersion-shattering) walls to keep PvPers out - or they can just stay in Regalia where it's safe. There are probably dozens of Roleplayers who would much rather design their own towns in survival than be stuck with Regalia's style (not saying Regalia has bad constructs, just that not everyone likes the style). People who'd like to roleplay as races not accepted in Regalia, but don't want to spend the entire time hiding or in the sewers. Well, why not allow factions to buy Safezone Chunks the same way they can buy Warzone chunks?

Doing so would finally provide protection to roleplayers in survival worlds, enticing them to leave Regalia and actually, you know, survive. They'll need to pay upkeep tax on the faction that controls the Safezone, and like warzone it would need to be entirely surrounded. It would also have an initial expense (I think 5k is a good price, same as Warzone) which would require they earn money to pay for it or get together into factions to pay for it. Furthermore, they would need to gather or buy supplies to build the safezone area, be it a single building in a faction or an entire town protected by a wall.

Now, I know that this would give the advantage to Roleplayers in their safezones, but considering they can currently go to Regalia and roleplay there in security even more complete than anything a safezone could offer, I feel this is a good way to expand Roleplay beyond Regalia, out into factions.

Rules List:
  1. Must be completely encircled/contained by a building. Building must have doors or gate that can be closed. Cannot be more than 1 building.
  2. Maximum of 8 chunks of safezone per faction. (Enough for a single decent building).
  3. Safezone must be surrounded entirely by Faction Claim.
  4. Safezone cannot be the only building at the location (must be part of a town that exist outside the building).
Ok, discuss! What can be improved? What flaws are there? If you're a roleplayer, would you be interested in having safezones in faction-built & run towns? If you're a PvPer, do you think this is tolerable, and what rules would you put in place to prevent safezone abuse? Staff, is this even doable, logistics wise?

Thanks for reading! Sorry if I missed any details :)
~ Mecharic, Casual Gamer

EDITS: Added Rules List
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0 Downvote
This suggestion has been closed. Votes are no longer accepted.
The way I see it, if you can afford the money to have a safezone added to your faction, then there shouldn't be an issue.

While I will say this would somewhat discourage raiding, at the same time it's not like it changes anything. RPers will still be safe from PvPers, whether in a safezone or regalia. At least now they can do what they want wherever they want, and with enough regals.

On the plus side, this should help bump the playercount in survival worlds a bit, which looks good from the hub.

I like the idea, as it offers a good solution to a bunch of arguments.
 
There is literally no way you could prevent abuse of this without a tech implementation, not that that's my only problem with this.
 
Its not comparable. A warzone has strict guidelines. A warzone is an enclosed space that you cant enter and exit willy nilly. So if you make a park a safezone there would be no accountability! So I have to agree with @jes_ it would be abused. Like a "cant touch me" kind of thing but not even behind a door but in open air.
 
This is... not a good idea in my opinion. Already, if you are in a enclosed room, you cant be killed by anyone, since they cant get in, so this seems kinda pointless and/or a waste of money. Also like @Zacatero and @jes_ said, it would be very easily abused.
 
I want to clarify something

@Mecharic I am aware of your goal for making this thread, and that is to make roleplayers more comfortable in the survival world. I am all for that. I support it 100%. However i do not believe this idea, if implemented, will do anything more than cause more issues.

So im not arguing with your motivation, but just this specific idea.
 
Survival worlds do have RP safe zones though. Literally every world spawn is PvP disabled some of which even have really nice RP towns... why would RPers need even more on top of that?
 
jes_ said:
There is literally no way you could prevent abuse of this without a tech implementation, not that that's my only problem with this.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

I do not think it would be difficult to put a set of regulations in place to minimize or eliminate abuse of safezones. Perhaps a rule stating they can only exist within buildings, so that if a PvPer manages to get inside, say, a Pub, they can't wreck havoc with roleplayers just trying to enjoy the game.

What other problems do you have (that aren't listed below)?

Zacatero said:
Its not comparable. A warzone has strict guidelines. A warzone is an enclosed space that you cant enter and exit willy nilly. So if you make a park a safezone there would be no accountability! So I have to agree with @jes_ it would be abused. Like a "cant touch me" kind of thing but not even behind a door but in open air.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

What if players needed to build the part with a fence or wall around it, and a little notice that it's a safezone? Or it was limited to being inside buildings, to protect taverns or churches? As it is, roleplayers are just as untouchable in Regalia as they would be in a safezone... so why would this really be so different? (I mean aside from being in survival)

falconhand said:
This is... not a good idea in my opinion. Already, if you are in a enclosed room, you cant be killed by anyone, since they cant get in, so this seems kinda pointless and/or a waste of money. Also like @Zacatero and @jes_ said, it would be very easily abused.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

An enclosed room can easily be entered if someone accidentally opens a door. Suddenly there isn't any safe space anymore.

Jackmo_Jones said:
Survival worlds do have RP safe zones though. Literally every world spawn is PvP disabled some of which even have really nice RP towns... why would RPers need even more on top of that?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

While the spawn towns are pretty nice, they don't really have roleplay 'hub' type setups and aren't customizable. They are static, a player can't even store items or place items to make the building 'theirs' per-say. Maybe if they set up areashop in the spawn towns this would be more viable a statement.

-----------------

It would be very nice to see some suggestions on how to improve this, rather than merely stating what you view as wrong with it. Don't shoot the idea down, offer alterations that you would find more tolerable, or even suggestions that would help protect roleplayers so that they no longer feel the need to hide in Regalia.
 
Mecharic said:
What if players needed to build the part with a fence or wall around it, and a little notice that it's a safezone? Or it was limited to being inside buildings, to protect taverns or churches? As it is, roleplayers are just as untouchable in Regalia as they would be in a safezone... so why would this really be so different? (I mean aside from being in survival)
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
But see... whats the point of making it a safezone at that point? Its already inside. Unless you let a raider in,

Mecharic said:
An enclosed room can easily be entered if someone accidentally opens a door. Suddenly there isn't any safe space anymore.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Okay but... thats the fault of whoever it was. Its not like its the raider's fault that the defender opens a door for them
 
This could be the most easily abused thing on the server (Other than MCMMO, hehe). You could literally Ally a Safezone faction and then run into it when you're losing a fight, and hey presto, you're invincible.

In addition to this, I don't believe in the idea as a whole. I like the GOAL of this function, to allow for RPers being more comfortable in the Factions/Survival worlds, but it breaks the whole premise of Survival; to survive, and that includes players as well as the environment, not to mention that this is entirely unrealistic and ill-fitting with the lore of the server, because it's not like in the Middle Ages or in places like Fendarfell and New Ceardia you would have areas where people are completely untouchable WITHOUT building "Big ugly walls that break immersion" (Which by the way isn't true, I've seen plenty of factions where the walls looked nice and kept people out, i.e. Atheria, and all you would need to do is research the height limit for throwing an enderpearl and you wouldn't even need to build it as high as Atheria did).
 
jes_ said:
There is literally no way you could prevent abuse of this without a tech implementation, not that that's my only problem with this.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Running in and out of a spawn zone is punishable, so why can't it be the same for safezones? The only way I can see this being abused is through laziness of someone not reporting it.

falconhand said:
This is... not a good idea in my opinion. Already, if you are in a enclosed room, you cant be killed by anyone, since they cant get in, so this seems kinda pointless and/or a waste of money. Also like @Zacatero and @jes_ said, it would be very easily abused.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Through my PvP experience there has always been one player willing to open doors for you.
 
PurgingFlame said:
Running in and out of a spawn zone is punishable, so why can't it be the same for safezones? The only way I can see this being abused is through laziness of someone not reporting it.



Through my PvP experience there has always been one player willing to open doors for you.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
It poses a larger issue for people to be running in and out of their OWN safezones.
 
Coming from a roleplayer...

Just build something to keep you safe, it's not like it's stopping you from. Roleplaying because you'll still need to make everything else and plenty of cities/kingdoms/whateveryourebuilding have walls, so it's not unrealistic.
 
AtticCat said:
Coming from a roleplayer...

Just build something to keep you safe, it's not like it's stopping you from. Roleplaying because you'll still need to make everything else and plenty of cities/kingdoms/whateveryourebuilding have walls, so it's not unrealistic.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...


True, and right now it seems that underground bases {dwarven} and underwater bases {maiar i think} are popular, and those, if done corrrectly are nearly raid proof.
 
falconhand said:
True, and right now it seems that underground bases {dwarven} and underwater bases {maiar i think} are popular, and those, if done corrrectly are nearly raid proof.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
(Yeah it's Maiar)
Exactly and for nearly every other rp race, walls are not uncommon at all! And they aren't that hard to make, just a bit time consuming.
 
Zacatero said:
Its not comparable. A warzone has strict guidelines. A warzone is an enclosed space that you cant enter and exit willy nilly. So if you make a park a safezone there would be no accountability! So I have to agree with @jes_ it would be abused. Like a "cant touch me" kind of thing but not even behind a door but in open air.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
You can literally enter and exit a warzone willy nilly, by walking out the door as you please.
 
  • A faction can only have 1 WarZone faction.
  • There needs to be a prebuilt chunk-based Arena that will contain the WarZone.
  • It needs to be closed and have an entrance that you open to get thru.
  • There need to be proper signs.This will be inspected by an admin before enabling the WarZone.
  • Tricking people into the WarZone will cause you to violate the WarZone agreement and it will be revoked.
  • The WarZone will be disbanded when the faction disbands.
  • The WarZone cannot be moved, you will have to purchase new chunks instead.

    from the Warzone announcement awhile back.

    The rules for these are pretty reasonable, so why not translate them to a Safezone? The way I see this feature is a money sink. And any money sink is a good money sink.

    Sure, hiding in a building does the same thing. But hiding in a building doesn't take away 5000r from the economy. People can tp to Regalia, but it doesn't cost them 5000r to do so.

    I've posted it once and I'll post it again: it's not like this changes anything from the current situation for people hiding indoors. But it removes money from the economy, so how is this a bad idea?
Perhaps there is a RPer from an enemy faction that wants to RP with people in another enemy faction. The safezone allows that enemy to be in the faction without fear of getting his ass handed to him from everyone else. The Warzone rules can be applied to the Safezones in a similar fashion.

So to summarize: if there's a way to bring people closer together, get rid of 5000r regals in one go, and have a similar setup to a system already in place, what else is there to say besides yes?
 
Zacatero said:
@Gethelp can verify this. You need to have a door you can only enter through. Meaning your only ways of exit are either teleporting or dying
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I've never heard of such rule, as Mithril had the biggest Arena and there was always a button on both sides, on top of being able to pearl out.
 
Brycea111 said:
I've never heard of such rule, as Mithril had the biggest Arena and there was always a button on both sides, on top of being able to pearl out.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Well u cant stop pearling if its an open air arena sure but i was told when building my warzone for Cadun when we had buttons on both sides that it wasnt allowed so idk man
 
Im not trying to seem pessimistic about this i just imagine a lot of people complaining about abuse of this
 
jes_ said:
So basically you want us to record 24/7, because that's the only way you could get proof of that.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

No, he wants you to record raids. Something you should already be doing in case some epic fight happens or you catch someone hacking. Don't be so dramatic.
 
Everyone has been looking at this all wrong! Instead of making survival more appealing, we need to make Regalia less appealing. It is quite simple. People seem to think that Regalia is a safe haven where they can safely hide from raids, or roleplay (obviously), but what if that were to change? I say that a zombie infestation should happen. Roleplayers rarely have any decent gear to fight with, so the hoards of zombies should take care of them fairly quick. Next, have a plague hit the entire city, so that you will randomly be poisoned and withered constantly, making it miserable to roleplay. Finally, allow pvp to be enabled, and watch as they tear themselves to pieces...

Just a joke
 
Note that warzone abuse means tricking someone into entering. Safezone abuse would come from people intentionally entering the area which comes much more easily. Furthermore, what about those of us unable to record, do we simply get no protection from safezone abuse?

If my position has not been evident, I am strongly against this being added. Warzones allow us to take actions that would not be possible otherwise without changing faction relations, kicking people, etc, but it doesn't block people from roleplaying there if they really wanted to. By contrast, safezones do not enable any activity that wasn't possible before without taking extreme measures and actually blocks activity that normally would have been allowed.
 
FireFan96 said:
I've posted it once and I'll post it again: it's not like this changes anything from the current situation for people hiding indoors. But it removes money from the economy, so how is this a bad idea?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Actually, it is different from just hiding inside. When hiding inside, it is possible to still pvp if someone does manage to get in. With safezones, it doesn't matter if the raider can get in. With safezones, there is no longer any reason to bother building securily.
 
I dont think the way to get more people to the survival worlds.... is by making it possible to make areas like regalia
 
Last edited:
TheComputerGeek2 said:
Actually, it is different from just hiding inside. When hiding inside, it is possible to still pvp if someone does manage to get in. With safezones, it doesn't matter if the raider can get in. With safezones, there is no longer any reason to bother building securily.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Fair point, but it seems highly situational if all I need to do to be safe is hide behind a door with all the walls fully built.

And if raiders appear, I can also just as easily tp to Regalia and go about my RP there, something which seems to piss PvPers off, from the amount of threads that keep popping up.

The way I see it, the safezone has the following benefits:
  • It's a money sink. And with the current inflation, any money sink is a good money sink.
  • It keeps the player count in faction worlds up. Of course Regalia has the largest player count, but that doesn't mean factions can't have 100 people online at the same time. A safezone allows RPers (and pacifists) to enjoy Massivecraft the way they want to.
  • It makes the survival worlds more inclusive. There's more to factions than just potting up and killing the first person you see. Some people prefer to play Massive, and even Minecraft in general, in a peaceful setting. Maybe all someone wants to do is have cute little garden or plant crops all day long, all while looking at the sun shining down on them. A safezone would allow these sorts of pacifist players to enjoy the survival worlds, which as a result might persuade other players to go to them as well. Sure, a lot of you guys prefer to PvP and raid, etc. But guess what, not everyone likes to play the game that way.
  • It literally doesn't make that big of a deal. People will still hide in buildings. People will still go to Regalia. And people will still leave the server and play peaceful in single player.

Here is an idea which aims to not only bring more people into the survival worlds, but also bridges the gap which is the PvP/RP community split. This is one server, so why the heck do we have a polarized community? Half of the problems here come up because nobody bothers to think about adding anything to the conversation. Here I am typing this long worded explanation to provide my own take on the matter as objectively as possible, yet the majority of the responses are "This idea is stupid, because of x reason." I don't see any suggestions to try and improve the idea, just giving some hypothetical outcome that has little backing to it.

So, I'll stand by what I said. This idea is a great idea. It is an attempt to try and bring two opposing sides back together. Yet this is becoming like every other survival thread, and slowly descending into an argument rather than constructive feedback.

Everyone keeps bitching that there's a million problems, yet when an idea like this comes a knocking to help rectify some of them, it just gets thrown into the fire before it has a chance to grow.
 
Excuse my language. But I don't think anybody could give a damn about having more players in survival, just for the numbers. The idea is trying to get more people to participate in survival, which this SafeZone idea really just makes portions of the survival world exactly like Regalia.. so I don't really think this is on par with the end goal
 
Mecharic said:
TL:WR - PvPers have Warzone for PvP among themselves, RPers should get Safezone for roleplay in survival.

Long Version:

The biggest gripe roleplayers have with the survival worlds is the fact that they can, at literally any time, be attacked and ruthlessly killed by PvPers. In order to avoid such a horrid death, they need to invest is massive (often ugly and immersion-shattering) walls to keep PvPers out - or they can just stay in Regalia where it's safe. There are probably dozens of Roleplayers who would much rather design their own towns in survival than be stuck with Regalia's style (not saying Regalia has bad constructs, just that not everyone likes the style). People who'd like to roleplay as races not accepted in Regalia, but don't want to spend the entire time hiding or in the sewers. Well, why not allow factions to buy Safezone Chunks the same way they can buy Warzone chunks?

Doing so would finally provide protection to roleplayers in survival worlds, enticing them to leave Regalia and actually, you know, survive. They'll need to pay upkeep tax on the faction that controls the Safezone, and like warzone it would need to be entirely surrounded. It would also have an initial expense (I think 5k is a good price, same as Warzone) which would require they earn money to pay for it or get together into factions to pay for it. Furthermore, they would need to gather or buy supplies to build the safezone area, be it a single building in a faction or an entire town protected by a wall.

Now, I know that this would give the advantage to Roleplayers in their safezones, but considering they can currently go to Regalia and roleplay there in security even more complete than anything a safezone could offer, I feel this is a good way to expand Roleplay beyond Regalia, out into factions.

Ok, discuss! What can be improved? What flaws are there? If you're a roleplayer, would you be interested in having safezones in faction-built & run towns? If you're a PvPer, do you think this is tolerable, and what rules would you put in place to prevent safezone abuse? Staff, is this even doable, logistics wise?

Thanks for reading! Sorry if I missed any details :)
~ Mecharic, Casual Gamer
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Meh. I'm no pvp-er, nor am I much of a role player, but I completely agree that this can and will be abused. Furthermore I am relatively sure that you can apply on the forums to host a lore event, where you cannot legally be raided for the duration of the event. I dunno if thats still a thing, but it was/is a good idea.
 
I think this idea is a little off-putting when the question of abuse is met with throwing the blame on the other person... Meaning that it's now the responsibility of the other person to always be recording... So it's their fault if the safe zone is abused and they didn't get it on recording..
 
Zacatero said:
Excuse my language. But I don't think anybody could give a damn about having more players in survival, just for the numbers. The idea is trying to get more people to participate in survival, which this SafeZone idea really just makes portions of the survival world exactly like Regalia.. so I don't really think this is on par with the end goal
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Well the idea is that a faction will have 1 safezone, probably a public building like a tavern, pub, or guild hall. The rest of the town will still be raidable and survival, and they still need money for taxes, resources for building, and general supplies to maintain their faction. This will entice them to enter the survival worlds, and give them a reason to participate in the survival worlds. As it is right now Roleplayers have exactly 1 reason to go to any survival world: unique designs. And that is heavily offset by the following: PvP, Resources to Build, Time to Build, Taxes to Maintain, Lack of other Roleplayers, Mobs, PvPers harassing people while they try to roleplay inside buildings. This idea is meant to counter those downsides with a surefire upside.
 
What do people think of rules like so:
  1. Must be completely encircled/contained by a building. Building must have doors or gate that can be closed. Cannot be more than 1 building.
  2. Maximum of 8 chunks of safezone per faction. (Enough for a single decent building).
  3. Safezone must be surrounded entirely by Faction Claim.
  4. Safezone cannot be the only building at the location (must be part of a town that exist outside the building).
 
Zacatero said:
I think this idea is a little off-putting when the question of abuse is met with throwing the blame on the other person... Meaning that it's now the responsibility of the other person to always be recording... So it's their fault if the safe zone is abused and they didn't get it on recording..
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Woah there buddo. Now you're just twisting my words. I never said anything about recording, I said that if this were to be abused you should create a ticket.

Now then, let's discuss this a little. All I'm hearing is "This'll be abused" or "I don't like this I can see it being abused." Which really is not concluding to anything. In my opinion, if these safe zones were to be implemented they'd have to be strictly regulated. E.g. Any form of antagonising coming from the safe-zone towards raiders will result in punishment and in more severe cases the safe-zone being disbanded, regular checks to make sure that the safe-zone is actually being used for it's intended use. You get the idea.
 
Also, if you have the mentality of "Staff never answer tickets so I am not going to bother making one." it is very much your own fault that the issue is not being resolved, because you're not making an effort.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom