Survival Resolving discussion: How should we handle use of LWC on trapped chests?

[Tharine]

We started this discussion about a month ago over on the old forums, but I think we all ended up getting distracted by various issues as well as the move to the new forums, and we never picked it back up. In various talks with a number of people, and having played this revision out a bit more, I feel like a lot of us came to our own conclusions on how we would like to handle this particular issue, but I would like us to have some kind of concluding decision on the matter.

 

As it stands our current rule for use of LWC states:

• No use of LWC-locked blocks for the purpose of base defense or any other use than to protect the items within the locked block.
  • Admins reserve the right to remove LWC-locked blocks used for base defense. Chests and other lockable items may not be used to obstruct movement or access to an area.

The rule (as is) does indeed cover using trapped chests to block off particular areas of the map from others (that aren't on the protection) - and should we stick with the current ruling, my only proposal would be to perhaps better clarify this for other circumstances that are a bit at odds with the current wording. For example, the end grinder where a locked, trapped chest controls the functioning of the grinder is not specifically an 'area' (it drops the platform for the mobs) nor does it technically speaking 'obstruct movement' (except for them poor endermen). I'd be keen to perhaps reword the rule a bit to account for more things like that.

 

Personally speaking, I would be in favour of keeping/honouring the rule as it stands, and declaring that trapped chests are no different to any other container and should not be used for any purpose other than protecting the items inside it. I would like to hear others' opinions on how they might like to see us handle this particular issue, even if you're not a Survival regular.

[cmdrtebok]

Well I am of two minds. I feel that if you build some kind of base or grinder or something that requires LWC access to operate or enter then it is not allowed. However on the other hand I built an automatic brewing machine that uses a locked chest. When it was a regular button people would just press it over and over to gum up the machine and make it inoperable. In this case I am not using LWC for anything more than protecting my items which is what we use LWC for. So I guess I feel that it is context dependent. 

 

Also in this case I mean the only other answer is to not build this machine which is kind of crap when you think about it we have certain protections on the server to protect items but you cant use them to protect your items. What is the point of playing on this server if the things I build are rendered inoperable. On top of that the gumming of the machine is another example of "grief as much as you can within the letter of the rules" which is really shouldn't be encouraged. 

[uni0]

I agree about the auto brewer example. The sole purpose of a trapped chest in this case is to trigger a process that handles your own LWC items. I think this should be allowed.

 

About allowing end grinder or any other grinder to be operated via a lwc trapped chest, on one hand I can see the appeal of this but on the other hand I think this would cause other issues in the long term. The purpose of using lwc to protect items and not buildings was in part to promote openness and exploration. Imagine if end grinders were made private, does that mean everyone would have to start making their own end grinder? Not only would that cause technical issues because of grinder performance in the End is severely affected by multiple grinders, it'd also cause animosity among the community.

[Tharine]

From what you've described, I feel like the auto-brewer should be classified as a legal (such a weird word to use, can't think of a more appropriate one). Following our current setup, it's technically within the rules, as you are protecting the items - but not in said block, rather a series of hoppers and brewing stands as well. Perhaps we could better clarify that LWC is permissible for particular setups like this? I'm struggling a bit to think of a way to phrase such an allowance to make it clear that the use of LWC on trapped chests in such a scenario is because it's feeding into a setup that would already be covered by the owner's LWC protections, it just being that the 'trigger' is also LWC-locked.

[Tharine]

Blah, so many things to do for Survival that are getting lost in the shuffle. Revisiting this now because i've learned that the end grinder issue has arisen once again, so it's now more than necessary for us to properly address this. In the absence of any further discussion from anyone else, my proposal is to go ahead with supporting the current ruling and amending it only as such:

• No use of LWC-locked blocks for the purpose of base defense or any other use than to protect the items within the locked block. Valid protection extends to locking containers involved in larger, 'machine'-type builds such as auto-brewers and auto-furnaces. We will investigate any edge cases and aim to develop and uphold an objective handling of any cases which are deemed to be excessive use and/or abuse of the LWC plugin.
  • Admins reserve the right to remove LWC-locked blocks used for base defense. Chests and other lockable items may not be used to obstruct movement or access to an area.

Going to be doing some general 'housekeeping' tasks in the lead up to doing the usual check-in following the conclusion of the first week of the new revision, so I will aim to have this, amongst a few other things, sorted and announced by then.

[Tharine]

Updated the section of the wiki here to include the amendment to this rule. If you're in the possession of any locked containers that were previously fine but are now determined as against the rules, we will simply ask you to unlock them/make the necessary changes if you have not already done so yourself.