What's new

Why Siege is a good Idea.

Velocityshot

Level 30
Jul 19, 2011
383
3
Credits
39,924
Aggression has been known for its PvP. Anyone who joins now wouldn't think that. Our server is basically a SMP server with optional PvP. No wars, no spawn fighting, no nothing. There is no way to take factions down, theres no way to put a hole in a faction.



Siege would have changed all of that. We could get into bases, kill everyone, steal everything, and actually have fun. But two people begging, Val and Eric, made all that dissapear. let me say this, Eric is a huge pussy who can't fight, thats why he doesn't want it. Don't believe me? He made a thread asking for people not to kill him on the first day. . .



Valetino hasn't been on in a while, and either way, 4 Veteran members wanting Siege > 1 Veteran member wanting siege.



I sit on the server all day with virtually nothing to do but help people and moderate chat. With Siege, I could get a game plan, get some back up factions, get base coords, and stalk my enemy. ANd always have something to look forward to. Or, I could be getting ready to defend my base, making boobytraps everywhere, having an awesome time making like an adventure map to my chest room. I could sit on my castle walls pelting enemies with arrows. In general, have an awesome time PvPing and being in an astounding war.



But without siege, I'll probably sit in my base for hours mining. Watching naked nubs kill each other with stone swords at spawn, and be overall bored. And I wouldn't be the only one doing this.



You put too much stress on PvP, there are so many flaws. Factions making everything impossible. Now claiming land costs money, that makes everything even more impossible. And I think you've taken away the fun of so many members by taking it away. People won't rage and quit. Because it opens the door for revenge. Making a new faction, getting new members, and getting back at them. The only reason people think it will cause rage, is because of how stupid and improbable it is on Aggression 1.0.



That being said, I want to recommend putting Siege back in. It would not only make many veteran members happy, but it would give the community something new. PvP servers that have Siege are the fun servers. Aggression before BoN was so much more fun because claiming land and killing factions was actually possible. Thats why I stayed so active and always doing something. Now I have found myself jumping around my fountain at spawn, talking to members, reminiscing about the old Aggression, I like to think that 1.1 will change this, but I know it won't.



So I beg you to implement siege, without it, Aggression will be just as boring and full of poor nubs as it will ever be. Nothing that was implemented besides events will make Aggression more fun. Just V.I.P. tiers, everything being more money, limiting things for us, etc.



I've made my story far more dramatic than it really is, to make it more appealing, i love Aggression and we have great staff always doing things for us. Don't take this the wrong way, I respect that you always do things for us, I am in no way trying to sound ungrateful. I just think siege would be a great way to have tons of fun on Aggression.
 

Laithes

Level 47
Nov 26, 2010
1,522
0
Credits
22,379
I support this, but let's define how exactly we want siege to work. I wasn't 100% happy with/wanted some questions answered about the old siege. But yes, overall I myself am doing much of what Velocity is doing, consistently being pretty bored. I've even played Halo as a substitute for MC, because I have no good PvP to partake in. Not to mention that I've noticed it's also hurt the RMM, we've lost a few members as a result of this. Also, let's make a poll to see who actually wants siege, so that we can decide fairly.
 

erskew

Level 32
Jul 18, 2011
427
0
Credits
13,489
Just have to say thanks for posting this, Velocity. I agree that siege needs to be implemented for the majority of the server that truly PvPs (or sits at the spawn waiting for PvP). The removal of it is literally asking for people to sit outside bases for hours and camp, while Siege allows people to actually raid. And, as laithes said, a poll should work.
 

erskew

Level 32
Jul 18, 2011
427
0
Credits
13,489
He's not opposing the cost for that stuff, he's opposing the removal of siege, obviously. As I pointed out, you don't do anything during raiding but wait outside a base for hours on end to no outcome, which obviously ruins the point of raiding. That's what he was saying.
 

Dannie

Level 29
Jul 3, 2011
358
1
Credits
15,297
Are you guys taking the piss out of me?

Fill this in to your liking and PM me a copy. Try and make factions as fun as possible using this config file. Why? Because that's what is possible with Factions.

Factions Plugin Thread @ Bukkit



Code:
  "colorMember": "GREEN",

  "colorAlly": "LIGHT_PURPLE",

  "colorNeutral": "WHITE",

  "colorEnemy": "RED",

  "colorSystem": "YELLOW",

  "colorChrome": "GOLD",

  "colorCommand": "AQUA",

  "colorParameter": "DARK_AQUA",

  "powerPlayerMax": 10.0,

  "powerPlayerMin": -10.0,

  "powerPerMinute": 0.4,

  "powerPerDeath": 4.0,

  "powerRegenOffline": false,

  "powerFactionMax": 0.0,

  "prefixAdmin": "+",

  "prefixMod": "-",

  "factionTagLengthMin": 3,

  "factionTagLengthMax": 10,

  "factionTagForceUpperCase": false,

  "newFactionsDefaultOpen": false,

  "showMapFactionKey": true,

  "showNeutralFactionsOnMap": true,

  "showEnemyFactionsOnMap": true,

  "CanLeaveWithNegativePower": true,

  "chatTagEnabled": true,

  "chatTagRelationColored": true,

  "chatTagReplaceString": "{FACTION}",

  "chatTagInsertAfterString": "",

  "chatTagInsertBeforeString": "",

  "chatTagInsertIndex": 1,

  "chatTagPadBefore": false,

  "chatTagPadAfter": false,

  "chatTagFormat": "%s§f",

  "factionChatFormat": "%s§f %s",

  "allowNoSlashCommand": true,

  "autoLeaveAfterDaysOfInactivity": 7.0,

  "homesEnabled": true,

  "homesMustBeInClaimedTerritory": true,

  "homesTeleportToOnDeath": true,

  "homesRespawnFromNoPowerLossWorlds": true,

  "homesTeleportCommandEnabled": true,

  "homesTeleportAllowedFromEnemyTerritory": false,

  "homesTeleportAllowedFromDifferentWorld": true,

  "homesTeleportAllowedEnemyDistance": 32.0,

  "homesTeleportIgnoreEnemiesIfInOwnTerritory": true,

  "disablePVPBetweenNeutralFactions": false,

  "disablePVPForFactionlessPlayers": false,

  "enablePVPAgainstFactionlessInAttackersLand": false,

  "noPVPDamageToOthersForXSecondsAfterLogin": 5,

  "peacefulTerritoryDisablePVP": true,

  "peacefulTerritoryDisableMonsters": false,

  "peacefulMembersDisablePowerLoss": true,

  "claimsMustBeConnected": false,

  "claimsCanBeUnconnectedIfOwnedByOtherFaction": true,

  "claimsRequireMinFactionMembers": 1,

  "considerFactionsReallyOfflineAfterXMinutes": 0.0,

  "actionDeniedPainAmount": 1,

  "territoryNeutralDenyCommands": [],

  "territoryEnemyDenyCommands": [

    "home",

    "sethome",

    "spawn"

  ],

  "territoryShieldFactor": 0.3,

  "territoryDenyBuild": true,

  "territoryDenyBuildWhenOffline": true,

  "territoryPainBuild": false,

  "territoryPainBuildWhenOffline": false,

  "territoryDenyUseage": true,

  "territoryEnemyDenyBuild": true,

  "territoryEnemyDenyBuildWhenOffline": true,

  "territoryEnemyPainBuild": false,

  "territoryEnemyPainBuildWhenOffline": false,

  "territoryEnemyDenyUseage": true,

  "territoryEnemyProtectMaterials": true,

  "territoryAllyDenyBuild": true,

  "territoryAllyDenyBuildWhenOffline": true,

  "territoryAllyPainBuild": false,

  "territoryAllyPainBuildWhenOffline": false,

  "territoryAllyDenyUseage": true,

  "territoryAllyProtectMaterials": true,

  "territoryBlockCreepers": false,

  "territoryBlockCreepersWhenOffline": false,

  "territoryBlockFireballs": false,

  "territoryBlockFireballsWhenOffline": false,

  "territoryBlockTNT": false,

  "territoryBlockTNTWhenOffline": false,

  "safeZoneDenyBuild": true,

  "safeZoneDenyUseage": true,

  "safeZoneBlockTNT": true,

  "safeZonePreventAllDamageToPlayers": false,

  "warZoneDenyBuild": true,

  "warZoneDenyUseage": true,

  "warZoneBlockCreepers": false,

  "warZoneBlockFireballs": false,

  "warZoneBlockTNT": true,

  "warZonePowerLoss": true,

  "warZoneFriendlyFire": false,

  "wildernessDenyBuild": false,

  "wildernessDenyUseage": false,

  "wildernessBlockCreepers": false,

  "wildernessBlockFireballs": false,

  "wildernessBlockTNT": false,

  "wildernessPowerLoss": true,

  "ownedAreasEnabled": true,

  "ownedAreasLimitPerFaction": 0,

  "ownedAreasModeratorsCanSet": false,

  "ownedAreaModeratorsBypass": true,

  "ownedAreaDenyBuild": true,

  "ownedAreaPainBuild": false,

  "ownedAreaProtectMaterials": true,

  "ownedAreaDenyUseage": true,

  "ownedLandMessage": "Owner(s): ",

  "publicLandMessage": "Public faction land.",

  "ownedMessageOnBorder": true,

  "ownedMessageInsideTerritory": true,

  "ownedMessageByChunk": false,

  "pistonProtectionThroughDenyBuild": true,

  "territoryProtectedMaterials": [

    "TRAP_DOOR",

    "DISPENSER",

    "WOODEN_DOOR",

    "FURNACE"

  ],

  "territoryDenyUseageMaterials": [

    "LAVA_BUCKET",

    "BUCKET",

    "WATER_BUCKET",

    "FLINT_AND_STEEL"

  ],

  "territoryProtectedMaterialsWhenOffline": [

    "TRAP_DOOR",

    "DISPENSER",

    "WOODEN_DOOR",

    "FURNACE"

  ],

  "territoryDenyUseageMaterialsWhenOffline": [

    "LAVA_BUCKET",

    "BUCKET",

    "WATER_BUCKET",

    "FLINT_AND_STEEL"

  ],

  "spoutFactionTagsOverNames": true,

  "spoutFactionTitlesOverNames": true,

  "spoutFactionAdminCapes": true,

  "spoutFactionModeratorCapes": true,

  "capeAlly": "https://github.com/MassiveCraft/Factions/raw/master/capes/ally.png",

  "capeEnemy": "https://github.com/MassiveCraft/Factions/raw/master/capes/enemy.png",

  "capeMember": "https://github.com/MassiveCraft/Factions/raw/master/capes/member.png",

  "capeNeutral": "https://github.com/MassiveCraft/Factions/raw/master/capes/neutral.png",

  "capePeaceful": "https://github.com/MassiveCraft/Factions/raw/master/capes/peaceful.png",

  "econIConomyEnabled": true,

  "econEssentialsEcoEnabled": false,

  "econCostClaimWilderness": 30.0,

  "econCostClaimFromFactionBonus": 30.0,

  "econClaimAdditionalMultiplier": 0.5,

  "econClaimRefundMultiplier": 0.7,

  "econCostCreate": 500.0,

  "econCostOwner": 15.0,

  "econCostSethome": 30.0,

  "econCostJoin": 0.0,

  "econCostLeave": 0.0,

  "econCostKick": 0.0,

  "econCostInvite": 0.0,

  "econCostHome": 0.0,

  "econCostTag": 0.0,

  "econCostDesc": 0.0,

  "econCostTitle": 0.0,

  "econCostList": 0.0,

  "econCostMap": 0.0,

  "econCostPower": 0.0,

  "econCostShow": 0.0,

  "econCostOpen": 0.0,

  "econCostAlly": 0.0,

  "econCostEnemy": 0.0,

  "econCostNeutral": 0.0,

  "econCostNoBoom": 0.0,

  "worldsNoClaiming": [],

  "worldsNoPowerLoss": [],

  "worldsIgnorePvP": [],

  "worldsNoWildernessProtection": []



Most of it if self explanatory, ask here if your not sure.
 

Valetino

Level 25
Jul 5, 2011
260
0
Credits
14,707
Oh No You Didn't



Bitch, you startin' something or what?



"Valetino hasn't been on in a while, and either way, 4 Veteran members wanting Siege > 1 Veteran member wanting siege."



Uh, more than like 10 people are against it, plus I made good reasons on why it is a bad idea, sure I may of not bothered to read your post properly, but that is just because I don't see this going anywhere.



Look at the likes my thread got, then look at yours, yes some people didn't see this or bother to like, but same with me, I have more people that support the idea of no siege, you have less, I have more, as in I got 3 PS3, you have 0, but I also have this cake, like you know know how I have two balls? and Tanja has none? you may think, "But I have balls" Yes, granted you have balls, but I have balls of steel, that is how the likes are working on these threads,

Ya know? more is better than lesss, less is worse than more, if this was about blood in our bodies, you would be dead, I would be alive, I look better than you, you look worse than me, as in you fugly bitch! I r a lovely little cute teddy, put it this way, I got a king's sized bed, you have a wee little baby cot.



You get my point right?



Plus.











You sicken me.
 

Roze

Level 37
Staff member
Administrator
May 23, 2010
600
1
Credits
15,858
I support this, but let's define how exactly we want siege to work. I wasn't 100% happy with/wanted some questions answered about the old siege. But yes, overall I myself am doing much of what Velocity is doing, consistently being pretty bored. I've even played Halo as a substitute for MC, because I have no good PvP to partake in. Not to mention that I've noticed it's also hurt the RMM, we've lost a few members as a result of this. Also, let's make a poll to see who actually wants siege, so that we can decide fairly.

That is incorrect, and very far from being correct.

Also, have you guys even put your selfish minds aside and though of the server's admins and mods. They have to guide and run these repetitive sieges.

Don't you think they would want some form of break from the tedious task of watching and maintaining the sieges?
 

Laithes

Level 47
Nov 26, 2010
1,522
0
Credits
22,379
How haven't we lost members? Even if it's only temporary, I've noticed people stopping logging on because they don't have much to do. We were down to 15 members at one point Roze.Yes we've gained members from recruitment, but I hardly see any RMM members on, even if I'm there for at least two or three hours.



And how are we being selfish by proposing something we'd like to see implemented on the server? The admins and mods can always veto it if they on't like how much work it creates for them. And I mean, Dannie proposed it, and Erskew seems to be for it by his post here, and I haven't seen any admins saying this is a bad idea, so I don't get your point, saying that before any of them seems to openly have a problem. And like I said above, if it just doesn't work, they can cut it out. Why kill something before you get to test it? We're saying, we want that inital test at least, we want some more involved form of PvP, and want to see if this will provide that.



And Valetino, that argument's basically "fuck you my post has more likes".
 

erskew

Level 32
Jul 18, 2011
427
0
Credits
13,489
Also, have you guys even put your selfish minds aside and though of the server's admins and mods. They have to guide and run these repetitive sieges.

We were the ones who announced siege. So if it was removed because of some players wanting it gone, it is perfectly fine that they try to appeal the removal. :p
 

Laithes

Level 47
Nov 26, 2010
1,522
0
Credits
22,379
Even so, Vale's thread's been there for a while. Velocity's been here for a day and has one like less than Vale's.



With Erskew's like, that makes them even.





 

Valetino

Level 25
Jul 5, 2011
260
0
Credits
14,707
"And Valetino, that argument's basically "fuck you my post has more likes"."



No shit XD



"Look at the likes my thread got, then look at yours, yes some people didn't see this or bother to like, but same with me, I have more people that support the idea of no siege, you have less, I have more, as in I got 3 PS3, you have 0, but I also have this cake, like you know know how I have two balls? and Tanja has none? you may think, "But I have balls" Yes, granted you have balls, but I have balls of steel, that is how the likes are working on these threads,

Ya know? more is better than lesss, less is worse than more, if this was about blood in our bodies, you would be dead, I would be alive, I look better than you, you look worse than me, as in you fugly bitch! I r a lovely little cute teddy, put it this way, I got a king's sized bed, you have a wee little baby cot.



You get my point right?"



All that was a joke, you do understand that..right?

The whole qoute was me just making a joke of pointing out I had more likes.....



WHY DO I EVEN BOTHER!



This makes me feel it is not even worth trying if you think I am serious *sob*



So you special people know, I am joking in this post too:/



Anyway, Laithes has a point, my

"And Valetino, that argument's basically "fuck you my post has more likes"."



I do have more likes on my thread (plus in general), plus it is basically a great argument really, we are not even able to see the "like" that a certain someone would do if they were MAN ENOUGH! (*Glares at "You")

--- merged: Aug 27, 2011 at 2:29 PM ---

Certain someone needs to like my post..
 

Admin

Level 50
Staff member
Administrator
Feb 16, 2011
13,011
54
Credits
56,717
@Laithes



Your argument is basically "I support this" and " I get bored" those are not real reasons.



Also



it if they on't like how much work it creates for them.



We're saying, we want that inital test at least, we want some more involved form of PvP, and want to see if this will provide that.



Please revise this post. I saw the lack of grammar and spelling and stopped reading after line 2.​
 
Top