Roland

Reasoning behind the Guidelines Just a list of good behavior suggestions. Some mod authors have a...casual...view of copyright infringement and plagiarism. Sticking an image of a Coke can into your mod probably isn't going to set alarms off over at Coca-Cola and most would probably not think twice about lifting such images off the internet somewhere. We hope that people won't take that same view with the work of their fellow mod authors here in our community. We hope that out of respect for each other you will always seek permission first even if there is no request by the mod author requiring it simply because it is the decent thing to do and is sure to engender good feelings even if the answer is, "Sure, you didn't need to ask" and then giving credit whenever possible. To alleviate any fears, we as a Moderator staff are not going to police mods for copyright infringement. If we were ever to get a cease and desist letter regarding any copyright infringements (as unlikely as that might be) we would notify the mod author and give him or her a chance to remove the offending material. If unable to get a reply or if the mod author refused to remove the material then we would have to delete the mod and possibly ban the user from the forum. In other words we will let companies police their own intellectual property if they wish but we will also comply with their wishes should they make a stink. Most likely as long as everyone is following the rules of not monetizing their mods there will be no problems at all and things will go on as they have with no real change.

Reasoning behind the Rules Rule 1 & 2 The fact is that TFP owns all the mods as soon as they are uploaded. Period. Mod Authors do not have any control over what they have posted and it is at TFP's discretion how mods are used. As we all know, TFP is very generous and plans to be even more generous in the future with their game and what they will allow to be modified and changed and derived. It is in that spirit that they, in turn, expect all of the mod authors who make use of TFP's code and files to also be generous and allow others to be creative with their work. However, TFP also expressed a desire to support those who want some measure of protection for their creativity and who might like some say as to how their work is being used (aka The Hitler Principle). Therefore they have decided to allow those authors who feel it is important to do so to set their own permission levels for the use of their mods. From the feedback we have received we believe that most mod authors will not bother with a Terms of Use statement and so there will really be very little change or impact from what has gone on before. We also believe from what has been said that most if not all mod authors that do want to include a Terms of Use will usually grant permission for their work to be used and to be further modded if they are asked beforehand. So as long as people remember to be as generous as TFP is in their own work and to be respectful enough to ask first and give credit there should be no problems going forward. Also this places the burden on the mod author to choose his or her own level of permissions and there won't need to be one size fits all permission rule for everyone. Rule 3 One way to not share your mod is to divide up all your files between server and client and then invite people to come to your server to experience the changes you've made to the game. That is perfectly fine to do but you cannot create a mod author thread in the modding forum to advertise your server. Rules 4 & 6 Selling the derivative work of 7 Days to Die violates your EULA with The Fun Pimps and cannot be tolerated if it becomes known. Having a small link or button for voluntary donations is fine but that is the extent of what is allowed. Also posting your mod at another site that charges fees is not allowed nor is advertising your mod that exclusive to your server and then charging admission to your server. You cannot monetize your mods in any way. Posting your mod at another site should always be accompanied by a link back to this modding forum where they could also download your mod independently of the other site. Rule 5 Mod Author threads have one topic and one topic only which is discussion to help downloaders, to report bugs, to collaborate with and help the mod author, and in all ways to promote and enhance the thread for that mod. Any arguments or disputes or accusatory posts are considered off-topic and if reported will result in infractions and bans. We want all disputes handled privately. Period.

General Guidelines Our community of modding is based on the idea of collaborating, sharing, and standing on the shoulders of others to ever improve. It is important that there is respect and honor shown to each other. The following are guidelines for conduct we suggest in order for you to avoid any legal issues and/or any disputes with other members of our forum. Again, these are codes of conduct we hope everyone will choose to follow. 1) Copyrighted work should be used only with permission of the original creator. This includes content from other games, from DLCs, music creators, images found on the internet or from other file authors. Even if you are from a country that does not have copyright laws it is expected that you will seek the permission from copyright owners before using their property in your own mod. 2) All files uploaded should have been created by the uploader or used with permission from the original author of the content before uploading the file. 3) You should always provide appropriate credit when possible to authors who have given you permission to use their content within the file description. 4) If you are collaborating with one or more other users to create a file then you should have a written agreement that is maintained as to who is the original author of what so that questions and misunderstandings do not arise later. 5) If you give your permission to another author for them to use your work within their own modifications then you cannot take back that permission once the other author's file has been released. 6) If you upload your file you should understand that you no longer have control over how it is used. TFP is the sole owner of all derivative content created using their code and files. Also, other users could use your work without your permission. Before uploading your file you should decide whether you can accept these possibilities. 7) If you are using assets and/or tools under a license that you purchased then you are bound by that EULA and should not grant any permissions to others to re-use those assets if that would cause you to breach that EULA. Make sure you understand and abide by all EULA's that cover what you have purchased. Forum Rules These rules will be enforced and used to arbitrate disagreements. Failure to comply with these rules could result in the removal of your uploaded file and thread and possibly a permanent ban from the forums. 1) All files uploaded become the sole property of The Fun Pimps as derivative works of 7 Days to Die. TFP offers all mods on its site as open source material and free to download and to modify subject to the following stipulations: All mod authors MAY CHOOSE to include a personal Terms of Use* as a separate post in the thread featuring their mod. The Terms of Use should list the permissions you are granting with your mod and what permissions you are withholding unless contacted first. Any mod without a Terms of Use in its description will be considered to be open source. Your Terms of Use cannot contradict the rules and guidelines set here. All mod authors must disclose any tools or assets in their mod that they have licensed. Such licenses only grant the person who purchased them the right to use those tools and/or assets and they cannot give permission for others to re-use them in their own mods. If a mod has been left inactive for a year and the mod author cannot be reached then any Terms of Use will be removed and that mod will be considered open source. 2) All forum users must abide by the Terms of Use of the mods they download. By downloading the mod you are agreeing to the Terms of Use of the mod author. 3) Since Steam Workshop support is still pending, the Mods sub-forum in particular serves as a de facto repository for publicly released mods. Thus all threads in the Mods sub-forum must contain a link to download the mod. Unreleased works in progress can be discussed in the Discussion and Requests sub-forum instead. If you have a modded server, where the mod is not available outside of that server, then you can showcase that server in the Servers & Coummunity sub-forum. 4) Do not actively solicit for donations. You may include a link in your thread for voluntary donations but no financial sum should ever be required of users to download part or all of your file. This includes not requiring payment to be part of a team of testers for early access to a new version of your mod that you are developing. You can have a private team but nobody should be required to pay to be on the team. 5) Never post off-topic content in another mod author's thread. If you have a dispute handle it through mail and get a moderator involved. Arguing in a mod author's thread disrupts the thread and makes it impossible for the mod author to effectively communicate with his followers. These types of posts should be reported at once. 6) Do not distribute a mod posted here on another website without the mod author's express permission. Mod authors are free to post their mods on other sites, so long as they (i) abide by the conditions set out by those sites, (ii) maintain a link to the mod which can be accessed independent of the other site. *You may choose to use one of the licenses from creative commons as your Terms of Use if you so wish. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/

"Raidees" is my new favorite word. Thanks Poojam "Watch out someone rekt Phil's base and he's all butt hurt over it. He's such a raidee..."

Madmole is not of the same mind as the developers behind H1Z1 and thinks they made a mistake splitting their game into two separate games (and charging for both). I seriously doubt he would follow in those steps. I said PvP mode because that is the language that has been used by the developers in their general talk about the subject. Nobody has made concrete plans in this respect and this thread is just to start centralizing different ideas about what could benefit PvP play. I think the main idea of the developers is that they are not going to alter the current game to make it work for PvP gameplay and there is a sense among (not just Gazz and I) some that there actually should be some differences in the approach to this game when thinking solo and co-op versus competitive play. The good news is that if you and Bloom really truly feel that the current game is perfect for PvP as it stands and just needs larger servers, fixed glitches, and better admin tools then you are set because I'm certain that those three things are on the high priority list once the game goes beta and they start looking for what optimization can give them in the way of player numbers and of course polishing away all the rough edges so people can't look through the ground etc.. Separate mode in my mind is like what they used to have for Horde Mode and Arena Mode. A separate mode within the same game at no extra charge where fun additional options can be done to create competitive games within the world of 7 Days to Die. So in something like that Gazz could design and configure his indestructible single claim block and all the "carebears" who I supposed don't really do PvP up to your standards can create their own servers and play something that they call PvP but that Bloom would call "crap" but its okay because you guys would still be playing the regular default 7 Days to Die on your servers in a competitive atmosphere with all the deep vertical progression, multiple claim blocks, and "learn how or leave!" attitude you wish. There will never be just one way to force everyone. The nice thing about different modes is that weird experimental options that would never work in the standard survival game could be implemented and made available and it would have no detrimental effect on the balance of the core experience. So guys. Chill. We are looking for ideas for cool ADDITIONAL ways to look at PvP and create options for a wide range of people who like to play PvP and "PvP" depending on how religiously you want to look at your own version of competitive play. And many of these ideas will be in a separate mode (Just like Horde Mode used to be) so that if you like the way the game works currently it won't be polluted.

I think Bloom has been irreparably scarred by the anti-PvP sentiments on the forum these past couple of years so his knee-jerk reaction to anything we say is that we are against PvP. We talk about additional options for configuring servers in more ways than currently exist and he says that is less choice and argues that keeping what we have now represents more choice than adding additional options.... I don't know how many times I have to write that nothing I put forward as an idea is anything more than extra options for people to choose and how many more times he is going to read that as THROW AWAY EVERYTHING AND FORCE ONE PLAYSTYLE!!!!!!

I think a big part of the issue is the inability to walk off a major setback that many players have. Rage quitting wouldn't be so universally understood if it didn't happen. Bloom explained to me that early game bases are easily destroyed but they take no real effort and that late game bases are too difficult to destroy but they take a huge amount of effort. His perspective seems to be that building an early wood or cobblestone fort or basic underground base might just take an evening of work and so no big deal if it is destroyed because you haven't lost much at all. From his perspective that is true (because he said it) but for a lot of people losing your base completely or having it re-claimed by somebody else is too much of a loss for them to want to continue. It doesn't matter that it was only one evening's work. It doesn't matter that it would be easier for them to start over and get back up to speed on THIS server since they still have their skills and such than it would be to start over somewhere else. Their feelings have been hurt and they now hate this server and won't play on it. Both of you have admitted that this is true because you both have stated that on well run PvP servers guys like you will raid but not destroy an early base because you don't want to drive away the new players. Well the fact is that there are PvP players that are not so responsible as you and Bloom in wanting to build a good community on your server and not make things too disheartening for the new players. In fact there are a lot of those kinds of players out there and so unless TFP puts some kind of structure in place to safeguard the early bases of these new players they are going to quit. "Players I made rage quit" is not an official stat that is recorded in the game but it is a stat that some players love to increase. I do think that these ideas about claimblocks should be options that can be chosen by server admins so that there can be servers where raiding can occur but total base destruction cannot or as Hal suggested total base recovery is something easily accomplished.

I can see the benefits of having settings that would allow PvE players to "get into" PvP on terms that would be more appealing to them. It certainly would be smart from a business standpoint for TFP to cater to that. On the other hand, I see what you are saying and I believe that I am ignorant of what truly PvP players want the more I read what you and Bloom have to say. I also think that your big three points above are exactly right for what needs to happen on a systemic level. Changing options is not enough. I see that. 30+ server support, admin tools, and PvP killing glitches and exploits definitely need to be high priority targets from the developers. As far as options I think the key is to have as many as we can think of so that the game can easily be configured to settings that make veteran PvPers smile as well as make PvP enticing to the rest.

^^In that case the short bus is that way <<

Thanks for the education. You're right that I hadn't considered those points. I still think that for some servers and some players whose temperaments are not inclined to lead them to a "I learned something valuable and my next base will be better" moment and will instead lead them to a game uninstall action--having something to protect their base could be useful. And lets face it, there ARE some people who look at one evening's work on a base as a big deal and there are others who don't care about preserving the noobs on the server and all they live for is utter destruction.

Since when have they done that? Are landclaims mandatory now? Can't they be removed if the server owner wants them removed? Can't their damage modifier be adjusted? I don't think anyone is calling for a change to this policy of optional claim blocks.

This is where I have to disagree with you big G I think there are quite a lot of gamers who don't expect their base getting completely leveled as a standard of PvP. Raided? sure. Killed and robbed? Absolutely. But once again, if you had the expectation of your base being destroyed completely and your brand of fun is to completely decimate someone else's base then you could search for a server that promoted that. You just posted that finding a server right for you is the most important thing to remember. So really you can't be against a landclaim block as an option for servers to use if you could always find a server that didn't use them.

Not hugely disagreeing with me because I actually agree with the sentiment that rl considerations should not be factored in to how the game is designed. I don't want people who are offline to be 100% safe from raids any more than you do. I do want griefing controllable. A claimblock that is itself indestructible and can't be stolen that offers zero protection until say...20 blocks (configurable by server) are destroyed within the claim area and then when so triggered switches to 100% protection for everything in the claim area for 12 hours real time does not seem like it would stifle base raiding in the least. It would stop someone from completely destroying a base at least for 12 hours when they could then return and destroy 20 more blocks. What would be the logic against such a claimblock being available to servers that want to use it? I can turn around the same logic all the anti-claimblock people are using: Don't like such a claimblock? Then go find a different server that doesn't use it. Having additional destructible claimblocks could be cool because they could do different things: +10% damage for traps one-hit demolition of blocks in zone increased SI in zone extended protection zone beyond the central block +1 healing/second within zone faster crafting time within zone etc.

You should always read any of my ideas as being options available to server owners. I am against a fixed ruleset that everyone must follow just as you are. Also, it seems that people are taking "indestructible claimblock" to mean "indestructible base" and that is not what I mean. I think a claim block should be dynamic as others have mentioned so that it allows the infiltration of a base and stealing any loot found but not the complete destruction of a base. Building an elaborate base only to have it razed to a crater is way different than building an elaborate base and a team of guys find a weakness and use it to get in and raid me. The former is what I would consider griefing unless the point of the server was to completely destroy bases and that was posted as the server rules so people would know. Everything that Poojam and Bloom have written about the fun of infiltrating and the fun of creatively designing unassailable bases can be accomplished without completely destroying someone's base. Am I wrong in my assumption that you two fellows like to raid but do not completely destroy and level bases that you raid? What would be the purpose of completely undoing someone's efforts in that way? How does such a brutal penalty promote PvP? I'm not talking about using landclaim blocks to keep bases and loot 100% safe when I'm offline. I'm talking about a system whereby someone can't grief me by wreaking complete destruction while I'm offline. The indestructible landclaim couldn't be removed or destroyed and after a certain number of blocks had been broken in the landclaim area then it would make the rest 100% indestructible. That way people can raid but not grief. Base building is a big investment just like character progression. Completely destroying a base would be like someone having the option to reset all your skills, wellness, and progression back to zero when they killed you. Losing that much investment might be okay for some but I'm willing to bet that for many typical players signing on to see all their work erased whether it be base or character stats would be too demoralizing to continue. The nice thing about the indestructible claim block is you could set it to be zero so that infiltration doesn't take hours. Bases would be completely unprotected until that last block was destroyed and then the protection would go to 100% instantly and no more destruction on that base would be possible for a period of time. Let me emphasize that these suggestions are meant as possible options that could be set server to server.

I fixed the quote to remove any inflammatory language. Now back to topic please. Seeing how threads like these have derailed into PvP vs nonPvP and hardcore vs casuals insulting each other I will not tolerate any language that is insulting or disrespectful of opposing ideas. If someone doesn't know how to disagree without being disagreeable they better not post. ----------------------------- What about a single claim block that is indestructible but needs nodes to extend its claim zone and the nodes are destructible? Then you could have different nodes that add different abilities. It would be like adding perks to your base and allow for more customization and also provide the infiltration feeling of removing layers of protection.

I didn't remove any posts. If you click the little double arrow in the heading of any quote it will link you to the original post the quote is referring to. Also I'm not defending the guy's ideas. I was simply refuting Bloom's assumption that his own particular view as he laid it out is the norm and anything else is ridiculous. That is not the same as agreeing with the other guy. I admitted that I was probably wrong about throwing out all progression and making everyone equal. I do think that some of the inequalities in the current game aren't going to work without some adjustment. Guppy mentioned wellness leading to a weak gets weaker spiral. That's one. The vertical progression is too deep in my opinion. It needs to be lessened and the speed of going from basic to maxed needs to be increased. Leveled loot just cannot work when things are competitive. The low level guy has to have a decent chance of getting a purple sniper that could possibly even the odds a bit between him and a high level player. Things like that give hope and bring excitement to new players. I do think that many people would enjoy joining a server in progress if they can get up to speed and competitive rather quickly and have a decent chance of scavenging good loot that will help decrease the gap.

Games are meant to be fun and competitive and not necessarily a simulation of the dog eat dog world of Darwinian philosophy. The former is what the typical majority of gamers enjoy as a default version and the latter is what hardcore niche gamers enjoy by changing settings and/or modding. This is a good discussion of different ideas but it doesn't need you calling other people ridiculous or inexplicably feeling offended by someone who can't play the game as much as someone else. Keep things civil. Disagree but don't demean other ideas or your voice will go missing from this discussion. Personally, I think you have great ideas. Now work on your delivery...

I think this is a preference thing. I will say that upon further reflection and reading I agree that a somewhat shallower vertical progression would probably be okay but I also think that there will be plenty of people who will not look at two weeks of hiding and building up before emerging to compete as something that will hold their interest. I have no idea which type of player is the majority but like Jax said you get quite a lot of PvP players across several games crying out for a more level playing field and doing away with features that create such huge margins in relative player power. Now I get that 7 Days to Die PvP doesn't have to be like the rest and this game can have its own brand of PvP that bucks the norm and maintains a strong player progression and if I am wrong that would be a cool distinction to have and our servers will be robust with 1000s of players. But if I'm not wrong then 7 Days to Die PvP will just be a niche experience that only caters to a small segment of all PvP players and our PvP community will stay small.

ummmm.....I don't think you know these developers very well. Whatever happens, it will be able to be reconfigured.

Read the thread and you will come to see that not all players have a united opinion on well....anything. I'm just trying to summarize the opinions shared. I report. You decide.

I don't know. As I read through the thread getting the summary it seemed that for a PvP centered mode of play more people are wanting a much faster progression, easier building, and richer harvesting with a shorter vertical progression gap between new players and maxed out players. Bloom seems the most hardcore in wanting it to be a slow progression that takes lots of work and effort and to maintain a well-earned big advantage to longtime players. You say you agree with him 1000% but in reading some of your earlier posts brought over from the other thread and even your newer ones now you seem a bit more moderate in this area than he. I'm willing to admit that my first post calling for removal of skills and perks and experience altogether was probably too draconian of a change but I think Bloom's stance is the other extreme and really is not going to appeal to the broader market of PvPers....yourself included going by some of your own writings.

Well you must not be completely disagreeing with me because I mostly said what you did but in a more general way. Whether the progression is made faster or we start people at a higher point in the current progression the effect is that people get up to speed faster which was my point. I like your thoughts on the how. Whether it should or should not be a separate mode is immaterial. It will be. There isn't much point debating that issue here. Even your suggestion of lopping off the bottom portion of progression and starting higher is not going to sit well with most PvE players and that is just one simple issue. We already have PvP servers and PvE servers and if PvP servers start using the PvP mode then I don't see any further fracturing of the player base. Really what needs to be in place are options so that servers that do want 100% level playing field can adjust how much XP is earned and where players start and end with skills and perks etc. That way it can be anything from zero penalty for dying to losing 100 hours of grinding and building for dying or anything in between.

@Bloom: I really wonder whether most PvPers really want what you do in regards to progression and an unequal playing field. In theory someone might say they would like the challenge of starting on a server that is already at day 100 with most others already well established but in reality people often quit a server and never return if they die enough to reduce their wellness to 70. I think you are at the hard-core end of the spectrum in this regard. I think that there can be progression and grind to get mats but that they shouldn't be as long term and grindy as they are in the current vanilla game. Getting more resources for harvesting, and shortening the progression from low to max would be good IMO. Right now we have a lot of players reporting that they grind exclusively to get their skills up before they start engaging other players. Making it a faster journey to the point that typical players like to start actually PvPing would make the early game less of a chore before the "real playing" begins. Also new spawns could have a better chance of staying off the radar until they get up to a higher level if it doesn't take so long to get there. TLDR: The time and effort investment for getting up to speed in terms of a base, high quality weapons/ loot, and character stats is currently too long and too grindy for mass appeal PvP.

I will start with player progression and experience. My opinion is there shouldn't be any. Make all players maxed out on all skills and perks from day one and remove experience from the game. With that aspect of the game removed everyone will be relatively equal and there will be no insurmountable differences in strength between someone who has been on the server for weeks and a new player who just signed on. PvP worked so much better before the game introduced all the experience, skills, and perks.

No more derailing this thread. I cleaned up all the stuff that should have been handled by pm if at all. Please always be courteous, especially when posting in someone else's modding thread and you are a modder yourself. Any further problems will be dealt with by vacations from the forums.