If some knucklehead builds walkways across navigable waterways, is it considered griefing to destroy said walkways? In my humble [but correct] opinion, the griefer is the one building these ridiculous walkways that make it nearly impossible to navigate a harbor without wrecking your boat. If we had a proper Coast Guard or Navy keeping the waterways free, they would gladly torpedo every last cobble that pollutes the sea. As soon as I have the go ahead, I may decide to invest in some of that sweet, sweet Diamond TNT and send these accursed mines to the Nether.
Basically, its not grief unless its a building or a chest, anything else is fair unless it's a landmark or piece of art
If someone needs a bridge, maybe THEY should build their bridge higher. I'm going to have my work cut out for me destroying their "bridge," the last thing I want is to have to waste my time building someone else a proper bridge (at least not without some serious Rupee compensation). Here's a little challenge for everyone: find me one example of a bridge in the real world that completely obstructs a navigable waterway. These so-called "bridges" in the game are not bridges, they are breakwalls or breakwaters. In the real world, breakwalls serve the purpose of protecting harbors from high waves and strong seas. In MC, there are no high waves or strong seas, so the only thing breakwalls break are boats.
I seriously doubt that it was a navigable waterway before the construction of the dam/bridge. The Hoover Dam outside of Vegas is technically also a bridge, but the Colorado River was hardly navigable before its construction. Now Lake Mead is navigable by recreational craft, but Lake Mead didn't exist before the Boulder/Hoover Dam.
I say go ahead. You provide a very articulate and valid argument in my opinion. These "bridges" should be above the water. It should not impede the movement of boaters to benefit walkers when the alternative is appeasing both types of travel instead. It is not on the boater to fix this issue. It should never have existed in the first place. To build a proper bridge would take very little additional resources to create... 2 blocks higher than the water is all it takes... Not resource heavy, AT ALL!
Quote this thread, not just me. Haha, no worries. I feel strongly about this subject myself. I call it balancing the playing field, not griefing. I do not feel this falls on just you to fix the issue. Break em down, then leave a not to rebuild in a fair manner for others. Basically, Boaters deserve free travel the same as Walkers.
For "Coast Guard" i believe it's you, for "navigate" i believe it's get into a boat and just press arrows, and for "torpedo" you should get some creepers to follow you and then just stand in front of them just enough time to save your live and "kill" those "polluters"
I hope they update the curse of all boaters, the organic mine or otherwise known as the lily pad. I don't know how many boats I have lost to these.
On utopia, around the north outpost (which is a little island outpost) there's a cobblestone "bridge" all the way around the safe zone, so like 1 block beyond it is cobblestone. You have to swim to this bridge to place the boat and sail away. I'm not sure what purpose it serves, other than as a marker where the safe zone finishes - I don't usually do laps around safe zones. It doesn't bother me enough to do anything about it, and I imagine once the safe zones reset weekly here, it will go away. However, on some SMP servers, those bridges lead from the safe zone to nearby land, and are very useful to walkers. Sure, it wasn't very thoughtful of them not to build a bit higher for boaters, but who ever did it, I believe did it with good intentions. I think, if this bridge is a bother, why not instead of smash it down, just build a little bridgeway through it, it wont require any extra cobble than what you smash down - just place them diagonally upward and then downward on the other side. Whilst it bothers you, and it seems you have permission to destroy it, I don't think that the little extra effort required to make a compromise that would suit both parties is wasted.
By destroying any "Walking path" that does not meet the 2 block high criteria as well as posting a sign with the reason of the removal. And by destroying, I mean the whole thing, not part (would hate to see bits of old bridges littering the waterways) Eventually the users of said walking paths will start questioning why they were destroyed and get with the program..... or spam greif threads...... Either way, somehow they will get the point. There is no real way to just mass inform everyone because it seems alot of people don't care to read the forums so really can't think of another way then just brute force. JMHO I hate that stinking cobble barrier. There is a gap through on the north side but i always forget and slam into the corner, /home, make another boat, /wild, port, and go north.
I don't understand why it's so easy to smash down, but so difficult and taxing to put it back up again two blocks high? Surely, if you took it upon yourself to do this, those people would get the point much quicker than just getting annoyed that their bridge got smashed.
When it comes to removing structures that are impeding you or obstructing some grand design or plan, I approach it like this: Has any thought, consideration, care or effort been put into the object I wish to remove? If the answer is 'Nay', then goodbye random structure. Anything that looks like it's had effort, you don't touch - Even the most poorly constructed house. Anything that's a single block walkway is going, in my eyes. If you want a bridge, make a bridge, not a line of dirt scarring the landscape.
Anyone ever played a game called Wurm? It's quite old, like Minecraft, but infinitely more hardcore and time consuming. One of the biggest achievements the Community ever made was to dig through a massive tract of land to connect two rivers. This meant that you could now sail from one side of the world to the other. Took hundreds of hours of manpower, but a great feat. I'd love to make some huge canals in MC to help you get around the world nice and safely, but we all know what'd happen to them.
I think because you are trying to change a set behavior you have to be somewhat drastic in the approach.Those bridges are used to run from one place to another in an faster manner than walking around a body of water and are not a priority of the user. I dont think half the people would even notice that thier bridges were altered in the first place let alone to stop and ponder why someone did it. If thats the case, you are not influencing thier mindset or future building habits. The point is to change the culture so that everyone knows that if you are going to build these walking paths, to be mindfull of boat users and build them higher in the first place. If you are to make the statement that it isnt fair for a boaters flow of movement to be impeaded by the bridges then how is it fair to say that the responibility for keeping the water ways clear is on the boaters themselves by removing AND rebuilding the bridges.
these canals sound like they would get in the way of my walking. I could build a bridge over them... or perhaps just fill in these ugly water filled ditches...
No you're not. Your smashing down something that's in your way. You can justify it how ever you want, but it's not the reason you're doing it. More than likely, the person who thought to build a bridge to make getting to land easier is not going to bother attempting anything to benefit the community again. It just gets smashed down. My statement is that this is a community of people who approach the game from many different points of view. Put up a sign an say why you modified it if you're so concerned about people fixing their ways. I am saying, forget what's most convenient to you and your notion of fairness and use that smashing energy to do something constructive.
Trust me, Wurm is.... Wow...... Imagine a single tree taking a minute and a half to cut down. Do you mean you'd like to see the Wurm canal Or are you talking about a canal in EMC?
