Archived Use Of Literal Bridges And Renewed Claim Restrictions.

[Thorjl]

I'm loving the crackdown on claim abuse. Full stop.

There is a rule against linking claims via very thin bridges. The 6 in 10 rule.

If I have an island claimed and want to link it to the mainland via an actual bridge, would this claim rule still apply?

Keep in mind, I will have no claim or additional structures on the mainland, and the only reason I would seek to claim the bridge build is to stop it from being griefed (materials being looted from it). I will not be linking blobs or trying to extend my claim or deny territory to others.

What would the judgement be, hypothetically?

 

[MonMarty]

Just because you filled the bridge claim with buildings doesn't make it not a bridge claim. That causes a slippery slope where you could argue that snake claims or dither claims should also be legal as long as you build inside them. Even if a bridge claim is literally a bridge claimed, you should still pad the claim.

 

[Thorjl]

Just because you filled the bridge claim with buildings doesn't make it not a bridge claim. That causes a slippery slope where you could argue that snake claims or dither claims should also be legal as long as you build inside them. Even if a bridge claim is literally a bridge claimed, you should still pad the claim.

Click to shrink...

Well, that sucks. But I see the slippery slope and will pad if I have to for the sake of fairness. Thank you for clarifying.