PvP town and Banning Permissions, Does it cross the line?

I just looked up the stretch goals from the kickstarter since smack mentioned the stretch goal "World is a Stage". For those of you who were not around or have not heard of it. Of course this stretch goal was met long ago. Here is the description written for this stretch goal. See below:

$1.9M: The World is a Stage!

A new City Center Theater building

Rentable by an individual or group for a performance

Only approved individuals may enter backstage or on stage

Players must pay to enter seating areas

Viewers may only emote, such as claps (claps are tracked to “rate” the performance)

Money goes to performers for their performance

Also useable for weddings and other community events!

We add a full complement of “masks” and “costumes” for use at various events.

 

Yes, please ask for more structures like that, along with the kinds of restrictions you want players to have in the "spectator" area(s) in your "event". The tech is all already done, as the Arena PvP basement proves this. Just ask for more so even PvP towns (the whole point of the OP) do not have to resort to exploiting scene instance mechanics to ban players from an entire scene.

 

Its to the point they get a thread shut down to insure that those ridiculous ban powers remain.

I dont think any alternative ideas will get traction unless enough people complain.

I put for (with input from others) a limited van idea..PoT owners can ban for 1 hour for 1st offence and then if the person comes backhand continues to be an issue then a 24 hour ban can be put in place with an auto report to Port.

This stops multiple PoTs from banning all at the same time if they are friends and it protects PoT owners from grinders and from making overly emotional decisions.

 

Why is this such a major issue I agree with budner ( what is the world coming to) that any town that abuses its ban would become a ghost town. I have said my self I would want the option but probably not use it. Ratsnest I believe has already said no matter what no ban will ever be issued. @Envyco Gaming I believe said he would never ban most pot owners who are pure PvP won't ever need to or will use it. The few minor town owners that will or would abuse it is probably such a slim number its effects or negligible. Unless some one really pissed off the core members of the game there's 250 some odd pot even with a large scale organization pull I never see a player ever being banned from more than 1/4 of them

 

The Arena basement is a start, but it is also a separate scene. Having it done this way is not ideal. Being able to apply that to a public area within another scene is not yet in place. There is also no schedule I've seen for adding the stage functionality wide-scale.

Sometimes you need to ban toxic players from an entire scene. Until such time as they can be banned from the entire game. It is also an existing mechanic; ideally you should be able to mute them to everyone in the scene and allow other players/guards to deal with them quietly. Failing that (i.e., dealing with cheaters), a staggered ban could be used: first ban kicks them from zone (expulsion), the second blocks them from reentering for 15 minutes (warning), then one day (banned). You should have the option to report them at the same time as issuing a ban. (Note there is no permanent option; if they need to be permanently banned, Port should handle that.)

 

I'm sure there are. That doesn't mean they will get what they want.

 

Heh, we'll see.

 

I think we're all anxious to see the Q4 2015 schedule update

Port should handle bans from entire scenes. Players can be given in-game tools to hold disruption-free events in any town..

And also, to be clear and not to derail the thread, but the OP is also only talking about PvP towns right now. Given the above posts, it makes even less sense to keep the existing powers as they are implemented currently.

 

Why would Port ban anyone from a scene? If a player is disruptive enough that Port needs to step in, its going to be more drastic than that.

I'm not sure what tools, other than a set number of pre-designed arena/theater/tavern buildings, will be given to players. Are we supposed to be able to drop a lot-sized Oracle bubble that disables PvP within for a period of time? (Actually, that might be interesting... dammit, now I want a machine to do this and summon watchers.)

I don't think PvP towns need to be treated differently than any other town. Any change to banning should work regardless of location. There is no need for permanent scene bans *anywhere* in the game. Now other methods to deal with this would be great; being blocked by the town owner might shift the person into FPO mode when they zone in.

The devs have a good handle of this, just the current implementation is lacking...

 

Right, my phrasing was specific. If there's no reason why Port would ban anyone from a scene, why would / should that power even be granted to players, as already done? If the answer is, it's temporary until other solutions are in place, sure, that's fine (e.g. World is a Stage stretch goal, more structures like Arena PvP, etc.).

Yeah, I hope they fix the implementation and provide those alternate means too.

 

Well as the stretch goal has the potential to free up events from griefing and interruption and is usable in certain circumstances. Why not create a 'town events option' that is accessable in the town management option to turn off or on during the event. This will cause a notice to happen when anyone is entering the town. Banning does not have to be the only answer. I am not in total agreement to give players banning rights. Find other options and settings for events. I also think that pvp flagged means pvp flagged and you are good to be attacked. Otherwise pvp is meaningless. To take care of event coordination should be a separate issue but it should not take away from pvp status being just that. Instead of arguing back and forth about banning which is by no means a perfect solution to event security. Banning hurts pvp status severely. Find another way. Give a town permission to state an event is in progress and make the rules for it such as a pvp town can not stay in event status always but for the duration of the event and then back to regular pvp status. I also agree to 'if you do not want your pvp town to pvp" don't make it a pvp town, but since you did you will have rules that do not hurt the pvp status of this game. Do what is good for the game and think about what is good for the game. Banning is not the only solution.

 

Sounds to me more that you are questioning the reason for PvP POTs in general. Why have that when there is open PvP. I can see the logic in that position.

 

This thread is like the twilight zone. In a bad way. Why do players get power over other players?

 

Not clear which side you're on. Arguably a player that can harass a POT and not be banned, has power over other players!

 

Maybe these pots should be instanced pots and not enter able from the overland map. A pvp might think its a pvp area mistakenly.

 

And the opposite has a PoT that can ban players for no reason.

 

does this mean you told all of bmc to come vote on this poll?

 

Can I ask you how you know for sure this is not going away?

 

I think statistical data would be interesting here.

How pot are PvP enabled
How many of these would ban

Really there is no issue here. They few that would abuse it no one would go to this is classic making a mountain over a mole hill.

Just because a function is there you don't have to use it.

 

I can't see the difference with a POT and a house. Are people under the same thinking that house owners should not be able to ban people from their house? It breaks immersion in the same way. It's every bit exploitable as banning from a POT.