Synergetrick

Before anyone brings up the old "but base owner locations" chestnut, I'd like to point out that there is functionality in this forum software, whether by default or by plugin, that allows you to make a thread that only you and "staff members" can see in a particular subforum.

Why? This doesn't help anybody. I don't expect you to have the entire conversation in #redditmc but the least you could do is offer "we're looking into this" or something on the forums. I asked after you specifically either in-game or in Mumble (I forget which), and redwall_hp. In redwall's case I asked another moderator to tag me when their conversation in Admin and Mod was over so I could have a quick word about it. That never happened. Moving to this or any other solution (including Glacier, but that is broken in multiple ways which I am not willing to fix anymore) mid-rev would not work. Consequently, bringing this into a new revision is the best (if not the only) way because it would break so many things and confuse players.

While you're technically incorrect (there's no "guideline" for how permissions do or don't work - they're a set of allow / deny flags for player actions), you're kind of also correct. There's no plugin to my knowledge that allows this sort of behaviour. That said, I'm pretty sure I could get one working with WorldGuard in about fifty lines of code total.

Actually it doesn't seem to be being discussed at all. I've tried to contact two of the S admins three times now to no avail, and I believe others have as well. On topic, this is a bad idea. Mumberthrax pretty much hit the nail on the head. The owners of those public farms do it out of generosity. To demand more of their time in keeping it replanted would cause them to disappear quite quickly.

I've updated this now. Removed the hash from the database because storing it is nonsensical if there's a chance that the values it depends on - x, y and z - can be modified.

This is then exploitable by the select unsavoury few who could camp that area or the player and kill them repeatedly while they attempt to replace, causing it to never be replaced (or take long enough that it's deemed voluntary grief). I prefer the unwritten rule, honestly.

Hi. I coded (and stole some old code from SafeBuckets for) this plugin which should fit the intended use-case. Relatively untested as I'm typing this at 1am, however it Worked4Me™. Has persistence in way of a standard database which stores ID / World Name / Hash. I found no reason to store x/y/z individually, however if someone can prove that it's necessary I'm happy to change this functionality. I added in something that I'm unsure is present in SafeBuckets; the monitoring of the "EntityChangeBlockEvent" event, which is called, among other executors, when gravel falls onto a block. The only caveat is this to the deprecation of type IDs (block material IDs), you have to use the internal names. As such, things like redstone repeaters are actually called "DIODE", and redstone itself is "REDSTONE_WIRE". There's very little I can do about that without coding in natural language processing. Edit: I've been discussing this with md_5 just now and I'm going to be making a few edits to the hashing system. c45y also pointed out that it's a good idea to store x/y/z for manual correction if somehow the automation breaks. As such, if you're using this anywhere please realise that it'll break with the next few commits I make.

We had our disagreements totebro, but there's no denying you're great at what you do. Good luck in your future ventures!

As of currently, the Macro Mod is banned on Survival according to MrLoud15. I'm still waiting to hear an amendment about that, as I was given the okay for it about a year ago by a higher-up until now. It's also been in the ModJar for as long as I can remember.

Guess you could say you don't want it AlLnAtuRal.

I like this idea quite a lot, and had a clan-encouraging idea earlier. From my conversation with MrLoud15 earlier:

The way this used to work is that the regular backups that are made are shipped off to another box (if I recall, it's the redditpublic.com box owned by darkskynet) and a cartograph is rendered there. This is why it only updated every few days. Right now, the cartos are on the same box as everything else, which doesn't really change anything as it's still generated from a backup. To clarify as to scope of data sent, the server sends the chunks in an x radius around the player. For PvE, this radius is 7 (thanks to slide23 for that info). To send all chunk data on PvE, you'd be sending (4000/16)2 chunks; 62,500 chunks at the same rate that you send the regular 225 -- (2x+1)2 where x = 7 -- chunks to each normal player. That's 277 times more data to that player than all others, effectively tripling the average PvE peak-time population (277 / 80).

Bumping to ensure that attention to this thread, and our posts with questions and concerns are not lost. Please respond.

No I didn't. While you have the irritating habit of flapping around with words instead of just getting to the point, your question (or at least what has been inferred by myself and others) is that if beds are enabled on Survival (and people play on PvE for beds), why can't we enable PvP on Creative? While I answered your question directly in my reply (with a tl;dr of they're nowhere near the same thing, same as what Draykhar said), the reason I threw the question the way I did on the PvE server is because of this previous comment: As for combat logging and bed-killing, there's various ways that can be resolved that I can see, although some of the approaches may not be acceptable: If a player is re-killed at his bed, modify the death message to note the particular player is spawncampingThis is more a social approach than any, however it may help clear up (and nullify) combat logging cases if the death messages are recorded as different and it's clear a player is spawncamping. Grant temporary (we're talking perhaps 2-3 seconds) invulnerability upon respawnI believe Minecraft already does this by default, but not for quite this long. I was considering adding a command to teleport the player back to the actual spawn during this time, allowing them to get away. Make a player, upon respawning at their bed, invulnerable until they move (this includes moving the camera)This has approximately the same impact as currently; players who have been killed can idle in spawn until their killers go away. So much as moving the camera would remove this invulnerability thereby preventing players from getting to nearby chests, but I could change it to be any x/y/z movement + interactions, instead of including pitch/yaw (camera) changes.