Author Topic: MP Motion to Start a Vote: DISCUSSION of Farm Regulation  (Read 2995 times)

Offline TheLegend12369 (OP)

  • Staff Member
  • Cheese
  • *****
  • Posts: 199
  • Llamas: 2
  • I'm not very creative, it is what it is.
    • View profile
MP Motion to Start a Vote: DISCUSSION of Farm Regulation
« on: 16 April 2020, 03:35:46 PM »
This motion has gained the necessary support to be brought to vote. The motion would call for the following:

1) Automatic or Industrialized Farms will no longer be allowed to be used when more than 5 people are on.
     (a) Anyone who is found still afking or using one of these farms after the player limit is reached will be asked to tp away or turn off their farm.
          -Failure to comply will result in the farm being disabled.

The Signatories are as follows: Protoape (chef), Naomi, Brutalfive, theodorf, and Jack_Aubry (seaborgium). The motion was approved by the CM (TheLegend12369) and the following staff: Moderator TheLegend12369 , Admin Essos (Yvette), and Moderator CyphurTheFox.

This thread is for discussing the items in motion. Please be kind to each other. Post any concerns or ideas you might have below.
« Last Edit: 16 April 2020, 04:12:25 PM by TheLegend12369 »
reasons to vote legend: im literally in love with him, what a god, very cool, enjoys a good hammock

Offline Brutalfive

  • Member of Parliament
  • Cheese
  • *****
  • Posts: 78
  • Llamas: 0
    • View profile
Re: MP Motion to Start a Vote: DISCUSSION of Farm Regulation
« Reply #1 on: 16 April 2020, 03:50:43 PM »
What size would the pumpkin farm need to be to have to follow the following regulations. Also would this only be a restriction of P
pump farms, or all farms, and if not all farms could a list be provided.

Offline Frog

  • Staff Member
  • Cheese
  • *****
  • Posts: 94
  • Llamas: 1
  • The Illustrious Pancake of Anitoch
    • View profile
Re: MP Motion to Start a Vote: DISCUSSION of Farm Regulation
« Reply #2 on: 16 April 2020, 03:54:04 PM »
Perhaps the repercussions should scale before outright disabling the farm. It would probably be best not to ban players that offend repeatedly, but a temporary region seizure could be in order.

Would something like this work?:

First offence - kick & warning;
Second offence - kick & warning;
Third offence - disablement;
Fourth offence - temp seizure of region.


Offline CyphurTheFox

  • Staff Member
  • Villager
  • *****
  • Posts: 49
  • Llamas: 1
    • View profile
Re: MP Motion to Start a Vote: DISCUSSION of Farm Regulation
« Reply #3 on: 16 April 2020, 03:57:00 PM »
Perhaps the repercussions should scale before outright disabling the farm. It would probably be best not to ban players that offend repeatedly, but a temporary region seizure could be in order.

Would something like this work?:

First offence - kick & warning;
Second offence - kick & warning;
Third offence - disablement;
Fourth offence - temp seizure of region.



It may also be prudent to include a clause where if the person was there afking before player count reached 5, then whatever action is taken isn't counted against them? As much as I like this rule, I don't want my farm seized over the fact that I was afk when 4 other people joined
Lol next time don't go places you shouldn't be.
BULLSHIEET, KEEP BEING ADVENTUROUS PAL. I COMMEND THIS MAN

Offline Frog

  • Staff Member
  • Cheese
  • *****
  • Posts: 94
  • Llamas: 1
  • The Illustrious Pancake of Anitoch
    • View profile
Re: MP Motion to Start a Vote: DISCUSSION of Farm Regulation
« Reply #4 on: 16 April 2020, 04:15:41 PM »
Perhaps the repercussions should scale before outright disabling the farm. It would probably be best not to ban players that offend repeatedly, but a temporary region seizure could be in order.

Would something like this work?:

First offence - kick & warning;
Second offence - kick & warning;
Third offence - disablement;
Fourth offence - temp seizure of region.



It may also be prudent to include a clause where if the person was there afking before player count reached 5, then whatever action is taken isn't counted against them? As much as I like this rule, I don't want my farm seized over the fact that I was afk when 4 other people joined

True, just wanted some scalability to make sure that it's not too hard on people that are first offenders. I guess the 4th offence punishment is a bit harsh.

Offline PengBunny

  • Member of Parliament
  • Cheese
  • *****
  • Posts: 522
  • Llamas: 11
    • View profile
Re: MP Motion to Start a Vote: DISCUSSION of Farm Regulation
« Reply #5 on: 16 April 2020, 05:03:19 PM »
Perhaps the repercussions should scale before outright disabling the farm. It would probably be best not to ban players that offend repeatedly, but a temporary region seizure could be in order.

Would something like this work?:

First offence - kick & warning;
Second offence - kick & warning;
Third offence - disablement;
Fourth offence - temp seizure of region.



It may also be prudent to include a clause where if the person was there afking before player count reached 5, then whatever action is taken isn't counted against them? As much as I like this rule, I don't want my farm seized over the fact that I was afk when 4 other people joined

True, just wanted some scalability to make sure that it's not too hard on people that are first offenders. I guess the 4th offence punishment is a bit harsh.

I disagree that the 4th offence is harsh, if you get to the 4th offense you are obviously ignoring the regulation so you should be punished. Otherwise we will still see everyone using farms as usual if we give them a slap on the wrists. Seizure of the region is a perfect punishment because it doesn't limit you from still playing VillageCraft (like a ban would) and renders the farm useless.
You know a thread is really bad when PengBunny posts on it.


My daddy is Air

air when the fuck did you do this ^^^

Offline Akomine

  • Staff Member | Administrator
  • Cheese
  • *****
  • Posts: 2827
  • Llamas: 19
  • Meep Meep
    • View profile
Re: MP Motion to Start a Vote: DISCUSSION of Farm Regulation
« Reply #6 on: 16 April 2020, 05:09:57 PM »
Some thoughts:

What defines an industrialized size auto farm? Would a small farm be permitted? This should be defined.

In the case of someone afk at a farm, and then people join, staff can attempt to warn them, and if they don't respond, they can kick them.

I would worry less about defining the punishments (staff can determine as needed), and worry more about defining the rule to be clear and leave no room for confusion or grey areas.

Ako is gay and has superaids - Air

Offline TheLegend12369 (OP)

  • Staff Member
  • Cheese
  • *****
  • Posts: 199
  • Llamas: 2
  • I'm not very creative, it is what it is.
    • View profile
Re: MP Motion to Start a Vote: DISCUSSION of Farm Regulation
« Reply #7 on: 16 April 2020, 05:27:57 PM »
I would say any farm that uses redstone to harvest or hoppers for transport of harvests would be considered industrialized. That would mean farms such as pumpkin farms or guardian farms.
reasons to vote legend: im literally in love with him, what a god, very cool, enjoys a good hammock

Offline luisc99

  • Staff Member | Administrator
  • Cheese
  • *****
  • Posts: 1279
  • Llamas: 44
    • View profile
Re: MP Motion to Start a Vote: DISCUSSION of Farm Regulation
« Reply #8 on: 16 April 2020, 06:12:22 PM »
I would say any farm that uses redstone to harvest or hoppers for transport of harvests would be considered industrialized. That would mean farms such as pumpkin farms or guardian farms.
Is there a size limit on this? I can think of examples where this could become silly. Eg: I have a little 16-block cocoa farm which uses Redstone to harvest. Would this be covered under the rules?

Also can we be clear that "more than 5" implies that 6 players are required for the rules to take effect?

What happens with farms which are hard to disable? I know there's some guardian farms where the collection can be disabled but the spawning itself cannot. Are people allowed to go near these areas, or is it a complete ban on being in the vicinity with >5 players online?

Are we building an exit condition into this or is it just staying forever? Should the rule be reviewed after x weeks? After an update?
"Damn Luis is fuckin good" ~ airborne101st45 - 2018-02-12

"You are god. Or Lucifer, your choice" ~ Akomine - 2017-09-06

"if people were making gay lists then you'd be the first one up there, followed by a black drag queen called queen sheniqua" ~ Lividup64 - 2017-07-08

"Luis da man, confirmed." ~ Akomine - 2017-04-21

"ta" ~ Lividup64 - 2017-03-11

"Hi, we still trust and love luisc99, he is a good pal and I'd let him take my girlfriend out to a romantic dinner" ~ airborne101st45 - 2017-03-04

"We aren't no one. We are gods" ~ Akomine - 2016-08-13

"Shut up you self-interested, entitled chode, criticizing luis's scheduling. He tries to accommodate people. Fuck your optional saturday lunch you fat fuck. fuck you" ~ Akomine - 2016-02-13

"THAT'S RIGHT! I GOT IT! I'LL HACK THE OZONE LAYER!" ~ Lividup64 - 2015-10-26

"THAT'S RIGHT! I GOT IT! I'LL HACK GREENHOUSES!" ~ catty610 - 2015-10-23

"It's an electric field" ~ ChaosMushrooms - 2015-06-29

"A blade of grass is a commonplace on Earth; it would be a miracle on Mars. Our descendants on Mars will know the value of a patch of green. And if a blade of grass is priceless, what is the value of a human being?" ~ Carl Sagan - 1994

Offline Yvette

  • Staff Member | Administrator
  • Cheese
  • *****
  • Posts: 302
  • Llamas: 1
    • View profile
Re: MP Motion to Start a Vote: DISCUSSION of Farm Regulation
« Reply #9 on: 16 April 2020, 07:02:06 PM »
I would be in favour of a review upon our update to 1.16
VC always has been like this. It has ebbs and flows, just like my menstrual periods

<[VIP] ~VieuxRiche> get with your reading skills and dont piss off powerful elite

How the fuck is @Jakrelia staff, shes probably r/againsthatesubreddits or some gay shit. 0/10 review on yelp.

Offline OctoGamer

  • Member of Parliament
  • Cheese
  • *****
  • Posts: 1092
  • Llamas: 10
  • fuck you all I hate everyone
    • View profile
Re: MP Motion to Start a Vote: DISCUSSION of Farm Regulation
« Reply #10 on: 16 April 2020, 07:44:31 PM »
If this were implemented, a large part of my "player experience" would just be removed from VC.

FUCK ME, IM ALL OUT OF ENEMIES, FUCK ME, IM ALL OUT OF ENEMIES, FUCK ME, IM ALL OUT OF ENEMIES


Offline Akomine

  • Staff Member | Administrator
  • Cheese
  • *****
  • Posts: 2827
  • Llamas: 19
  • Meep Meep
    • View profile
Re: MP Motion to Start a Vote: DISCUSSION of Farm Regulation
« Reply #11 on: 16 April 2020, 08:13:32 PM »
Good thoughts Luis.

Agreed Yv.


If this were implemented, a large part of my "player experience" would just be removed from VC.

What if we made it more than 10 players?

Or does that destroy the purpose at that point?


Ako is gay and has superaids - Air

Offline OctoGamer

  • Member of Parliament
  • Cheese
  • *****
  • Posts: 1092
  • Llamas: 10
  • fuck you all I hate everyone
    • View profile
Re: MP Motion to Start a Vote: DISCUSSION of Farm Regulation
« Reply #12 on: 16 April 2020, 08:26:11 PM »
Good thoughts Luis.

Agreed Yv.


If this were implemented, a large part of my "player experience" would just be removed from VC.

What if we made it more than 10 players?

Or does that destroy the purpose at that point?
I am on at times, at my base, with over 15 players, and there isn't tps drops below 18. I am still not convinced farms are that major of a cause, and if they are, still not convinced its mine.  but yea 10 sounds better than 5 because to be honest I don't wish to play when 5 people are on and 3 are staff.

FUCK ME, IM ALL OUT OF ENEMIES, FUCK ME, IM ALL OUT OF ENEMIES, FUCK ME, IM ALL OUT OF ENEMIES


Offline Naomi

  • Community Minister
  • Cheese
  • ***
  • Posts: 156
  • Llamas: 1
  • #LighthouseSwag
    • View profile
Re: MP Motion to Start a Vote: DISCUSSION of Farm Regulation
« Reply #13 on: 16 April 2020, 09:13:43 PM »
Yeah I know 10 were on the other day and Octo was at his farm and there was no lag, I feel like more then 10 is a good number to start at and it can be revised if needed.
There are a lot of attitudes going on around here, Don't let me get one.

reasons to vote naomi: second sexiest person on the ballot, slight southern drawl, has won woman of the year every year since 1899 (the mainstream media doesn't want you to know)

Lividup64

  • Guest
Re: MP Motion to Start a Vote: DISCUSSION of Farm Regulation
« Reply #14 on: 17 April 2020, 10:06:55 AM »
Disagree, seems like unnecessary regulation for the sake of regulation.

Offline Yvette

  • Staff Member | Administrator
  • Cheese
  • *****
  • Posts: 302
  • Llamas: 1
    • View profile
Re: MP Motion to Start a Vote: DISCUSSION of Farm Regulation
« Reply #15 on: 17 April 2020, 12:13:45 PM »
Nobody is regulating for the sake of regulation. Respectfully, you haven't played enough to experience the nearly unplayable lag spikes during peak times lately, and the widespread frustration that led to this long, painful discussion and now to this.

Completely in favour of this rule as is written in the OP, but with the stipulation of a review upon update to 1.16
VC always has been like this. It has ebbs and flows, just like my menstrual periods

<[VIP] ~VieuxRiche> get with your reading skills and dont piss off powerful elite

How the fuck is @Jakrelia staff, shes probably r/againsthatesubreddits or some gay shit. 0/10 review on yelp.

Offline PengBunny

  • Member of Parliament
  • Cheese
  • *****
  • Posts: 522
  • Llamas: 11
    • View profile
Re: MP Motion to Start a Vote: DISCUSSION of Farm Regulation
« Reply #16 on: 17 April 2020, 01:13:54 PM »
Nobody is regulating for the sake of regulation. Respectfully, you haven't played enough to experience the nearly unplayable lag spikes during peak times lately, and the widespread frustration that led to this long, painful discussion and now to this.

Completely in favour of this rule as is written in the OP, but with the stipulation of a review upon update to 1.16

I second this
You know a thread is really bad when PengBunny posts on it.


My daddy is Air

air when the fuck did you do this ^^^

Offline Saxturian

  • Staff Member
  • Cheese
  • *****
  • Posts: 700
  • Llamas: 0
  • This post is most likely useless.
    • View profile
Re: MP Motion to Start a Vote: DISCUSSION of Farm Regulation
« Reply #17 on: 17 April 2020, 09:53:24 PM »
Nobody is regulating for the sake of regulation. Respectfully, you haven't played enough to experience the nearly unplayable lag spikes during peak times lately, and the widespread frustration that led to this long, painful discussion and now to this.

Completely in favour of this rule as is written in the OP, but with the stipulation of a review upon update to 1.16

I second this
third this, but agree with what ako and luis are saying - we need more defined guidelines for this.
Quote
If you smoke my stash I will cut your dick off and feed it to my hounds so they get a good taste for your flesh. I will then set you free in the forest and give you a one day head start so my hounds get nice and hungry, then I will unleash them and they will hunt you and devour your flesh. hoe
-Airbongus

Quote
I don't see why a little porn is dark but ok.

Quote
Also, if you do choose to hack VC in whatever method, I can get your IPs from the server log, and with more coding knowledge than most people here, I could easily and more importantly legally hack you back. And if you hack VC, I'll be cross. Don't try it.

That is all
Luis, in all his badassery

I love the yearly reminders that Jan has much bigger balls than I do.

Offline Akomine

  • Staff Member | Administrator
  • Cheese
  • *****
  • Posts: 2827
  • Llamas: 19
  • Meep Meep
    • View profile
Re: MP Motion to Start a Vote: DISCUSSION of Farm Regulation
« Reply #18 on: 18 April 2020, 01:19:07 AM »
I propose the following features to this rule, tho I haven't written them up nicely:

- Industrialized automatic farms must be not be operating while 10 or more players are online.

- For the purpose of this rule, industrialized automatic farms means any farm or spawner mechanism that occupies more than 256 blocks, per player (example: this is 16 x 16 in a flat plane, please discuss if this is good, we don't want to punish little lever-operated food farms that use some redstone).

- Farms have 5 minutes to comply once 10 or more players are online. Staff may give:
Immediately: a notice to disable,
After 5 minutes: a warning and kick if AFK,
After 10 minutes: a second warning and a kick,
After 15 minutes: a final warning, a kick, and may disable the farm themselves,
After 30 minutes: proceed to regular punishments, and any other necessary intervention to stop the farm.

- For farms that are intentionally restarted, the above timer carries on where it left off (if the farm ceased at 12 minutes after 2 warnings, if restarted it continues at 12 minutes).

- For farms that are hard to stop, players must work with Staff to find a solution, and shall be given leniency on their first attempts to comply.

- This rule expires 15 days after VC updates to Minecraft 1.16.


---

Let me know what yalls think
« Last Edit: 18 April 2020, 01:22:34 AM by Akomine »

Ako is gay and has superaids - Air

Offline OctoGamer

  • Member of Parliament
  • Cheese
  • *****
  • Posts: 1092
  • Llamas: 10
  • fuck you all I hate everyone
    • View profile
Re: MP Motion to Start a Vote: DISCUSSION of Farm Regulation
« Reply #19 on: 18 April 2020, 01:38:51 AM »
I propose the following features to this rule, tho I haven't written them up nicely:

- Industrialized automatic farms must be not be operating while 10 or more players are online.

- For the purpose of this rule, industrialized automatic farms means any farm or spawner mechanism that occupies more than 256 blocks, per player (example: this is 16 x 16 in a flat plane, please discuss if this is good, we don't want to punish little lever-operated food farms that use some redstone).

- Farms have 5 minutes to comply once 10 or more players are online. Staff may give:
Immediately: a notice to disable,
After 5 minutes: a warning and kick if AFK,
After 10 minutes: a second warning and a kick,
After 15 minutes: a final warning, a kick, and may disable the farm themselves,
After 30 minutes: proceed to regular punishments, and any other necessary intervention to stop the farm.

- For farms that are intentionally restarted, the above timer carries on where it left off (if the farm ceased at 12 minutes after 2 warnings, if restarted it continues at 12 minutes).

- For farms that are hard to stop, players must work with Staff to find a solution, and shall be given leniency on their first attempts to comply.

- This rule expires 15 days after VC updates to Minecraft 1.16.


---

Let me know what yalls think
sounds fair to me. 10 is more reasonable than five, and the rule expiring is good too. can we describe what "industrialized" is clearer though?


Is this industrial? Its fully automatic. but look at the size of it.

also still wondering where I can go when farms are shut down as all my items are still gonna be located at my farm

FUCK ME, IM ALL OUT OF ENEMIES, FUCK ME, IM ALL OUT OF ENEMIES, FUCK ME, IM ALL OUT OF ENEMIES


Offline CyphurTheFox

  • Staff Member
  • Villager
  • *****
  • Posts: 49
  • Llamas: 1
    • View profile
Re: MP Motion to Start a Vote: DISCUSSION of Farm Regulation
« Reply #20 on: 18 April 2020, 06:07:47 AM »
- For the purpose of this rule, industrialized automatic farms means any farm or spawner mechanism that occupies more than 256 blocks, per player (example: this is 16 x 16 in a flat plane, please discuss if this is good, we don't want to punish little lever-operated food farms that use some redstone).

256 blocks is a little small, imo. 16x16 is a pretty large flat area, but farms are rarely, if ever, flat. The big issue here is varying types of farms create varying amounts of lag

My proposal would be the following:

Volume > 4096 (16^3) for a random-tick based farm.
Random Tick based farms include virtually any farm that involves some form of plant growing, so cacti, netherwart, pumpkins, etc.
These also include Portal-based pigman gold farms, which are EXTREMELY laggy when they get quite big, though rare. I recall a recent incident where a large one of these I owned was disabled (at my request and with assistance of staff) and the server tps immediately improved threefold. Also imo, you shouldn't be building them anyway, as for what it's worth, they're really slow for the effort you put in.


Entity Count > 256 for a spawner based farm
The lag issue with a spawner based farm is not the physical size, but the fact that if you afk one to gather some mobs for some time, large amounts of mobs can accumulate. This can cause lag if it gets fairly high. Thus a limit on how many mobs/entities you can have in the area should be imposed here. You can easily count entites nearby using the F3 menu.


Volume > 32768 (32^3) for mob spawning based farm
These farms consist of any farm of a mob that does not rely on a spawner of said mob. These too can be very lag efficient, with one exception:

Any Farm that involves sending entites (items or mobs) through nether portals(with a special clause limiting this class to only 5 people on)

Comparing farms of this caliber to more traditional farms is like comparing a server to a home PC. One is usually much more powerful than the other (though not always).

Sending mobs through nether portals is well known for being a good way to quickly allow more mobs to spawn, however it can be extremely problematic. Whenever an entity is sent through a nether portal, the game searches a 128 block radius around the destination point to find a portal to place them in. This search is Very Very Very laggy. Luckily the game caches found destinations for 15 seconds, meaning that if you have a consistent flow of mobs into the portal, The cache never expires and the lag is fairly low. The key here is the consistent flow, which is the reason I propose a clause limiting this class of farm to 5 people. If there are other people on, it can reduce spawn rates at farms of this caliber, which runs the risk of allowing the 15 second cache to expire very often, causing the laggy 128 block search to happen very often, causing extremely bad lag, hence limiting use of this class to 5 players is important. Luckily this class of farm is very rare, and the only known one I know of on server is mine.

I am open to adjusting the numbers on most of these clauses, hold for the last one regarding nether portal farms, as until the 1.16 optimizations, these are very, very, very laggy if done wrong.


Also maybe a special clause allowing staff to grant exceptions for using a given farm if its in the public interest? I know certain farms are good public tools, and are not particularly laggy at all. The first coming to mind being the public guardian xp farm I set up at /warp v-tgf  I recently disabled the storage system there so any loot from the guardians goes to the player using the farm; it's a public utility instead of a way for me to make bank.
« Last Edit: 18 April 2020, 06:19:16 AM by CyphurTheFox »
Lol next time don't go places you shouldn't be.
BULLSHIEET, KEEP BEING ADVENTUROUS PAL. I COMMEND THIS MAN

Offline luisc99

  • Staff Member | Administrator
  • Cheese
  • *****
  • Posts: 1279
  • Llamas: 44
    • View profile
Re: MP Motion to Start a Vote: DISCUSSION of Farm Regulation
« Reply #21 on: 18 April 2020, 08:09:48 AM »
Whenever an entity is sent through a nether portal, the game searches a 128 block radius around the destination point to find a portal to place them in. This search is Very Very Very laggy.
This radius is adjustable. It might be worth lowering it tbf, as it would have the added effect of being able to have portals closer together in the nether without them linking to the wrong ones (it's hard to explain what I mean by that, but if you've ever tried to link portals together near others you'll know what I mean)
"Damn Luis is fuckin good" ~ airborne101st45 - 2018-02-12

"You are god. Or Lucifer, your choice" ~ Akomine - 2017-09-06

"if people were making gay lists then you'd be the first one up there, followed by a black drag queen called queen sheniqua" ~ Lividup64 - 2017-07-08

"Luis da man, confirmed." ~ Akomine - 2017-04-21

"ta" ~ Lividup64 - 2017-03-11

"Hi, we still trust and love luisc99, he is a good pal and I'd let him take my girlfriend out to a romantic dinner" ~ airborne101st45 - 2017-03-04

"We aren't no one. We are gods" ~ Akomine - 2016-08-13

"Shut up you self-interested, entitled chode, criticizing luis's scheduling. He tries to accommodate people. Fuck your optional saturday lunch you fat fuck. fuck you" ~ Akomine - 2016-02-13

"THAT'S RIGHT! I GOT IT! I'LL HACK THE OZONE LAYER!" ~ Lividup64 - 2015-10-26

"THAT'S RIGHT! I GOT IT! I'LL HACK GREENHOUSES!" ~ catty610 - 2015-10-23

"It's an electric field" ~ ChaosMushrooms - 2015-06-29

"A blade of grass is a commonplace on Earth; it would be a miracle on Mars. Our descendants on Mars will know the value of a patch of green. And if a blade of grass is priceless, what is the value of a human being?" ~ Carl Sagan - 1994

Offline OctoGamer

  • Member of Parliament
  • Cheese
  • *****
  • Posts: 1092
  • Llamas: 10
  • fuck you all I hate everyone
    • View profile
Re: MP Motion to Start a Vote: DISCUSSION of Farm Regulation
« Reply #22 on: 18 April 2020, 12:23:18 PM »

also still wondering where I can go when farms are shut down as all my items are still gonna be located at my farm

FUCK ME, IM ALL OUT OF ENEMIES, FUCK ME, IM ALL OUT OF ENEMIES, FUCK ME, IM ALL OUT OF ENEMIES


Offline Yvette

  • Staff Member | Administrator
  • Cheese
  • *****
  • Posts: 302
  • Llamas: 1
    • View profile
Re: MP Motion to Start a Vote: DISCUSSION of Farm Regulation
« Reply #23 on: 18 April 2020, 12:25:55 PM »
Does your farm have an "off" functionality built into it?
VC always has been like this. It has ebbs and flows, just like my menstrual periods

<[VIP] ~VieuxRiche> get with your reading skills and dont piss off powerful elite

How the fuck is @Jakrelia staff, shes probably r/againsthatesubreddits or some gay shit. 0/10 review on yelp.

Offline Saxturian

  • Staff Member
  • Cheese
  • *****
  • Posts: 700
  • Llamas: 0
  • This post is most likely useless.
    • View profile
Re: MP Motion to Start a Vote: DISCUSSION of Farm Regulation
« Reply #24 on: 18 April 2020, 12:40:31 PM »
Does your farm have an "off" functionality built into it?
if it doesnt have an off functionality just disable it by severing the redstone connection where it can be easily replaced when you wanna use it
Quote
If you smoke my stash I will cut your dick off and feed it to my hounds so they get a good taste for your flesh. I will then set you free in the forest and give you a one day head start so my hounds get nice and hungry, then I will unleash them and they will hunt you and devour your flesh. hoe
-Airbongus

Quote
I don't see why a little porn is dark but ok.

Quote
Also, if you do choose to hack VC in whatever method, I can get your IPs from the server log, and with more coding knowledge than most people here, I could easily and more importantly legally hack you back. And if you hack VC, I'll be cross. Don't try it.

That is all
Luis, in all his badassery

I love the yearly reminders that Jan has much bigger balls than I do.

Offline OctoGamer

  • Member of Parliament
  • Cheese
  • *****
  • Posts: 1092
  • Llamas: 10
  • fuck you all I hate everyone
    • View profile
Re: MP Motion to Start a Vote: DISCUSSION of Farm Regulation
« Reply #25 on: 18 April 2020, 12:52:18 PM »
Does your farm have an "off" functionality built into it?
if it doesn't have an off functionality just disable it by severing the red stone connection where it can be easily replaced when you wanna use it
I'm not "severing" my red stone, because I'm not even the one who does it. and no, guardian farms don't really have a way to disable. you can disable the collection. have fun with all the mobs and items sitting on the floor though.

FUCK ME, IM ALL OUT OF ENEMIES, FUCK ME, IM ALL OUT OF ENEMIES, FUCK ME, IM ALL OUT OF ENEMIES


Offline Saxturian

  • Staff Member
  • Cheese
  • *****
  • Posts: 700
  • Llamas: 0
  • This post is most likely useless.
    • View profile
Re: MP Motion to Start a Vote: DISCUSSION of Farm Regulation
« Reply #26 on: 18 April 2020, 01:24:20 PM »
Does your farm have an "off" functionality built into it?
if it doesn't have an off functionality just disable it by severing the red stone connection where it can be easily replaced when you wanna use it
I'm not "severing" my red stone, because I'm not even the one who does it. and no, guardian farms don't really have a way to disable. you can disable the collection. have fun with all the mobs and items sitting on the floor though.
so you can't break a single piece of redstone or block off a path to prevent it from running if 10+ people are online?
Quote
If you smoke my stash I will cut your dick off and feed it to my hounds so they get a good taste for your flesh. I will then set you free in the forest and give you a one day head start so my hounds get nice and hungry, then I will unleash them and they will hunt you and devour your flesh. hoe
-Airbongus

Quote
I don't see why a little porn is dark but ok.

Quote
Also, if you do choose to hack VC in whatever method, I can get your IPs from the server log, and with more coding knowledge than most people here, I could easily and more importantly legally hack you back. And if you hack VC, I'll be cross. Don't try it.

That is all
Luis, in all his badassery

I love the yearly reminders that Jan has much bigger balls than I do.

Offline OctoGamer

  • Member of Parliament
  • Cheese
  • *****
  • Posts: 1092
  • Llamas: 10
  • fuck you all I hate everyone
    • View profile
Re: MP Motion to Start a Vote: DISCUSSION of Farm Regulation
« Reply #27 on: 18 April 2020, 01:53:48 PM »
Does your farm have an "off" functionality built into it?
if it doesn't have an off functionality just disable it by severing the red stone connection where it can be easily replaced when you wanna use it
I'm not "severing" my red stone, because I'm not even the one who does it. and no, guardian farms don't really have a way to disable. you can disable the collection. have fun with all the mobs and items sitting on the floor though.
so you can't break a single piece of redstone or block off a path to prevent it from running if 10+ people are online?
Sorry, no. I don't see "break to fix" as being a proper solution, because it's not.

FUCK ME, IM ALL OUT OF ENEMIES, FUCK ME, IM ALL OUT OF ENEMIES, FUCK ME, IM ALL OUT OF ENEMIES


Offline Akomine

  • Staff Member | Administrator
  • Cheese
  • *****
  • Posts: 2827
  • Llamas: 19
  • Meep Meep
    • View profile
Re: MP Motion to Start a Vote: DISCUSSION of Farm Regulation
« Reply #28 on: 18 April 2020, 02:39:09 PM »
- For the purpose of this rule, industrialized automatic farms means any farm or spawner mechanism that occupies more than 256 blocks, per player (example: this is 16 x 16 in a flat plane, please discuss if this is good, we don't want to punish little lever-operated food farms that use some redstone).

256 blocks is a little small, imo. 16x16 is a pretty large flat area, but farms are rarely, if ever, flat. The big issue here is varying types of farms create varying amounts of lag

My proposal would be the following:

Volume > 4096 (16^3) for a random-tick based farm.
Random Tick based farms include virtually any farm that involves some form of plant growing, so cacti, netherwart, pumpkins, etc.
These also include Portal-based pigman gold farms, which are EXTREMELY laggy when they get quite big, though rare. I recall a recent incident where a large one of these I owned was disabled (at my request and with assistance of staff) and the server tps immediately improved threefold. Also imo, you shouldn't be building them anyway, as for what it's worth, they're really slow for the effort you put in.


Entity Count > 256 for a spawner based farm
The lag issue with a spawner based farm is not the physical size, but the fact that if you afk one to gather some mobs for some time, large amounts of mobs can accumulate. This can cause lag if it gets fairly high. Thus a limit on how many mobs/entities you can have in the area should be imposed here. You can easily count entites nearby using the F3 menu.


Volume > 32768 (32^3) for mob spawning based farm
These farms consist of any farm of a mob that does not rely on a spawner of said mob. These too can be very lag efficient, with one exception:

Any Farm that involves sending entites (items or mobs) through nether portals(with a special clause limiting this class to only 5 people on)

Comparing farms of this caliber to more traditional farms is like comparing a server to a home PC. One is usually much more powerful than the other (though not always).

Sending mobs through nether portals is well known for being a good way to quickly allow more mobs to spawn, however it can be extremely problematic. Whenever an entity is sent through a nether portal, the game searches a 128 block radius around the destination point to find a portal to place them in. This search is Very Very Very laggy. Luckily the game caches found destinations for 15 seconds, meaning that if you have a consistent flow of mobs into the portal, The cache never expires and the lag is fairly low. The key here is the consistent flow, which is the reason I propose a clause limiting this class of farm to 5 people. If there are other people on, it can reduce spawn rates at farms of this caliber, which runs the risk of allowing the 15 second cache to expire very often, causing the laggy 128 block search to happen very often, causing extremely bad lag, hence limiting use of this class to 5 players is important. Luckily this class of farm is very rare, and the only known one I know of on server is mine.

I am open to adjusting the numbers on most of these clauses, hold for the last one regarding nether portal farms, as until the 1.16 optimizations, these are very, very, very laggy if done wrong.


Also maybe a special clause allowing staff to grant exceptions for using a given farm if its in the public interest? I know certain farms are good public tools, and are not particularly laggy at all. The first coming to mind being the public guardian xp farm I set up at /warp v-tgf  I recently disabled the storage system there so any loot from the guardians goes to the player using the farm; it's a public utility instead of a way for me to make bank.

Thanks for making much more reasonable suggestions. This baseline seems better.


Whenever an entity is sent through a nether portal, the game searches a 128 block radius around the destination point to find a portal to place them in. This search is Very Very Very laggy.
This radius is adjustable. It might be worth lowering it tbf, as it would have the added effect of being able to have portals closer together in the nether without them linking to the wrong ones (it's hard to explain what I mean by that, but if you've ever tried to link portals together near others you'll know what I mean)

Worth experimenting with


Does your farm have an "off" functionality built into it?
if it doesn't have an off functionality just disable it by severing the red stone connection where it can be easily replaced when you wanna use it
I'm not "severing" my red stone, because I'm not even the one who does it. and no, guardian farms don't really have a way to disable. you can disable the collection. have fun with all the mobs and items sitting on the floor though.
so you can't break a single piece of redstone or block off a path to prevent it from running if 10+ people are online?
Sorry, no. I don't see "break to fix" as being a proper solution, because it's not.

Can't you just add a lever shutoff then?
« Last Edit: 18 April 2020, 02:41:39 PM by Akomine »

Ako is gay and has superaids - Air

Offline CyphurTheFox

  • Staff Member
  • Villager
  • *****
  • Posts: 49
  • Llamas: 1
    • View profile
Re: MP Motion to Start a Vote: DISCUSSION of Farm Regulation
« Reply #29 on: 18 April 2020, 03:46:24 PM »
Does your farm have an "off" functionality built into it?
if it doesn't have an off functionality just disable it by severing the red stone connection where it can be easily replaced when you wanna use it
I'm not "severing" my red stone, because I'm not even the one who does it. and no, guardian farms don't really have a way to disable. you can disable the collection. have fun with all the mobs and items sitting on the floor though.
so you can't break a single piece of redstone or block off a path to prevent it from running if 10+ people are online?
Sorry, no. I don't see "break to fix" as being a proper solution, because it's not.

Can't you just add a lever shutoff then?

The issue with adding a lever shutoff is guardians don't just lever-shutoff spawning. just like you cant turn off a cactus farm, they don't stop growing. I think the solution for a mob farm would be adding the "mob-spawning:deny" flag to a rg. Basically mob prot. This does raise the issue of giving out mob prot to people who build massive farms, however 1: it would break basically any mob farm, so you probably don't want to keep it on; and 2: if you're building massive farms, you probably already have mob prot.

Specific farms also have specific methods of shutoff. In Octo's guardian farm case, the solution is to remove the water, usually with dispensers, however octo's farm doesn't have the infrastructure to do this easily so an alternative solution (like the one I just described) is necessary.



Also Side note: I just talked to Hobbes about disabling my large guardian farm, a measure which I will leave in place until 1.16. It should be off now so y'all can play villagecraft assured that I'm not going to be causing lag with that farm.(not to imply that I was trying to cause lag before with it)
Lol next time don't go places you shouldn't be.
BULLSHIEET, KEEP BEING ADVENTUROUS PAL. I COMMEND THIS MAN

Offline OctoGamer

  • Member of Parliament
  • Cheese
  • *****
  • Posts: 1092
  • Llamas: 10
  • fuck you all I hate everyone
    • View profile
Re: MP Motion to Start a Vote: DISCUSSION of Farm Regulation
« Reply #30 on: 18 April 2020, 04:28:19 PM »
so, I have to either run commands to disable, or do a lot more work to a farm thats been completed for years. I don't really think either of that is fair especially where I can only run commands to disable my farm because i'm staff. but I'll do what I have to.


I'd really like a solution other than modify it or run commands to disable it..

 also I would like to point out, adding this rule essentially adds a "farm policing" rule to village craft,

i felt this way about the Iron Golem farm ban too, which was undone.

"We're here to help you; not to police you." is one of the signs in the spawn tunnel.

FUCK ME, IM ALL OUT OF ENEMIES, FUCK ME, IM ALL OUT OF ENEMIES, FUCK ME, IM ALL OUT OF ENEMIES