How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Ban

, ,

No, it really, really isn’t. Case in point: one of the “public works” I used to maintain on 1823 before I stopped playing there was a bridge over the segment of the river in tiles N6 and N7, connecting the northern jungle and southern jungle areas. It was a small build, not something that you would call memory-intensive or performance-degrading. Here, I kept a screenshot:

Why was it there? So I could drag a thrall that I knocked out on one side of the river to the other side, and from there to my base (or a wheel outpost, back when I had one).

Now, I have no idea if other people used it on a regular basis or not. I built it for me, and I used it for my purposes.

But that’s beside the point, because it doesn’t really matter who you built it for. The problem I have with your claims and ideas is that you want to use the rules to deal with the stuff that you don’t like, as opposed to the stuff that either harasses a specific player or makes things worse for everyone on the server:

None of that has anything to do whatsoever with what’s in the TOS. Quoting the relevant part of the TOS is getting old, but for some reason, people need to be reminded every now and again what the freaking rules actually freaking say:

Again, the rules talk about restricting other players’ access (either by blocking off content or intentionally hogging the terrain without giving it any use) and degrading performance. They don’t say anything about how you should build things for others, how you shouldn’t build far from your base, how you shouldn’t have more than one base, or anything like that.

People who complain about the letter of the rules without acknowledging their spirit go too far in one direction, but you went too far in the opposite direction and invented rules of your own.

I would go further and say that if what you say is what Funcom actually wants, then they should make that explicit. They should say that a PVE(-C) clan should share a base, and all the other stuff you mentioned, that cannot be inferred in any way from what they said.

And while we’re on that topic – and I hope you won’t take this as an attack – I’d say that coming up with your own rules like that is only going to make the situation worse. Things are already way too muddled up, as you can see here:

This is an assumption. I’m not criticizing @Pugilist, nor am I saying this assumption is valid or invalid. I’m just saying that it’s not something that the rules are clear about. It’s impossible to take the text of the rules and this screenshot, put them together, and come up with a clear conclusion.

Funcom needs to give us more information and/or better tools so we can reason about these things.

4 Likes