Discussion forum > Server News

Proposed smp changes

<< < (26/34) > >>

VoreReznor:
I want to go over my reasons for a server wipe.
 Lots of people are talking about needing more area.  I am feeling that our problem in this matter isn't lack of land it is that we have too much land.  Adding new Worlds without destroying old ones will just make it worse.  When we have new players join they have the choice of 4 huge worlds where they can possible build, 2 if they don't become members.  This is really overwhelming.  I think to grow members we really need to catch attention in the first few moments of playing.

It would be nice if new players joined and they were forced into a couple different options where they can start off. 

As I am typing this I am thinking maybe this is an issue we can solve without wiping, maybe we can implement a couple server run "Villages" where new players can join.  I would really like to see more communities with multi players.  Maybe someone has a better idea on how to achieve that?

Nick3306:

--- Quote from: UnknownHedgehog on March 24, 2016, 04:23:11 pm ---
--- End quote ---
Removal of the current economy system does not necessarily equate with no economy at all. I think that was the confusion. I am for a change to the economy, but not there being no economy at all.
[/quote]Well that's what a survival server is. There could be an economy, it would just have to be created and maintained by the players themselves. That was the reason why the trading system would be there.

OzzyKP:

--- Quote from: UnknownHedgehog on March 24, 2016, 04:23:11 pm ---
--- Quote from: Nick3306 on March 24, 2016, 04:15:03 pm ---
--- Quote from: UnknownHedgehog on March 24, 2016, 04:09:10 pm ---
If this is what's seriously being considered then I am opposed to this particular proposal concerning the economy.

--- End quote ---
Care to elaborate? I thought it was pretty clear from the start that we wanted to do away with the entire current economy.

--- End quote ---
Removal of the current economy system does not necessarily equate with no economy at all. I think that was the confusion. I am for a change to the economy, but not there being no economy at all.

--- End quote ---

Agreed.  What I was expecting (and a few other people mentioned here in the thread) was replacing the current market (which creates blocks out of thin air for fixed prices) with a totally player-run economy, where we have chest shops of some kind (or an in-game GUI or something) that lets us buy and sell goods with other players.  This has been discussed on the forum many times before and it always seemed to be a popular idea.   I, like Hedgehog, was in favor of this (strongly!). But very much against what you are proposing now.  Getting rid of it all seems like a rather drastic option.

UnknownHedgehog:

--- Quote from: Nick3306 on March 24, 2016, 04:36:20 pm ---
--- Quote from: UnknownHedgehog on March 24, 2016, 04:23:11 pm ---
--- End quote ---
Removal of the current economy system does not necessarily equate with no economy at all. I think that was the confusion. I am for a change to the economy, but not there being no economy at all.

--- End quote ---
Well that's what a survival server is. There could be an economy, it would just have to be created and maintained by the players themselves. That was the reason why the trading system would be there.
[/quote]I don't see how money is a problem in a player maintained economy.

TheWholeLoaf:

--- Quote from: Lando_V on March 24, 2016, 01:23:13 pm ---
--- Quote from: TheWholeLoaf on March 24, 2016, 02:38:50 am ---The main reason I am for a server wipe, as I briefly mentioned above, is to pretty much level the playing field again. Adding new worlds doesn’t work very well when old players that have vast amounts of resources such as armor, weapons, pearls for travel, and food can quickly run through the worlds, claim their lands, usually larger than they need, and quickly develop a build while newer players have to take their time to get settled in. The most recent case is the new end world. I would be willing to bet every castle was raided, claimed or deconstructed for materials within the first day or two.
This is why I believe the server should be wiped and the worlds put up for downloads. A fresh start would be a nice chance of pace.

--- End quote ---
So you have a problem with the differences in wealth. Contrary to real life where wealth is obtained over the backs of others, in Minecraft everyone could be equally wealthy. All one has to do is put some effort into it.
If there would be a wipe, how long do you think it would take before there would be large differences again? I'd say just a day or two. That makes the "wipe to establish a level playing field"-argument void.
Your example of the so called End Cities is false too. The End has no border, it has an unlimited amount of End Cities. If players have raided the ones closest to the portal, you just have to travel a bit further to find untouched End Cities.

A wipe is a short term solution that would only make a small group of players "happy" for a short period of time. It would be devastating for the rest of the players and for the server as a whole.

The only reason for a wipe would be that the server cannot handle our worlds. In that case we have a much bigger problem than anyone has realised so far.


--- Quote from: TheWholeLoaf on March 24, 2016, 02:38:50 am ---but the people that are saying it are saying it for themselves, not others

--- End quote ---
Them saying they already reached their endgame is one thing. I doubt anyone has a problem with them saying that. But asking for a wipe is something completely different.
A wipe would not only mean a wipe for themselves, but also for others.
Let them find a solution for themselves, not one that is a disaster for others.

I understand very well that some players already have reached their limit in MC, their endgame. But does that mean they should ruïn it for others by asking the server to be wiped? They can simply start over for themselves. Just toss your crap into lava.
Does the fact that others are wealthier influence players that are making a new start? It doesn't have to at all. There is plenty of unused land, there is plenty of unmined area (eg below the sea) and there are plenty of ways to get good stuff (eg the new end world). If players aren't lazy they shouldn't have any problem developing themselves!


--- End quote ---

My argument to wipe the server to level the playing field is not a void point. I am mainly speaking of the newer players vs older players, where as the older players have had more time to play, the newer players would not be able to ever catch up in terms of wealth. And when I say wealth, I am in no means only referring to money, but supplies in general.

You say that if a server wipe were to happen, the division of wealth would be pretty noticeable within the first few days. I disagree, mainly because the players that have overwhelming supplies will no longer have these, there will be no easy way to get back to where they once were. I am also in favor of the economic changes, to get rid of money all together and make the only opportunity to get resources that players have is to either get it themselves or work with others in order to get it. If farms still arise after that, I am perfectly fine with it, but players will not have such things as the market to help them get there, things like the price of melons helping them get all the money they would ever need to help support their later farms.

You are correct in calling me out on end cities, I was not aware that the end was now infinite, however, I assume there is still a boarder on it as there is with the main worlds and nether worlds, so there is still a finite supply of these cities.


"A wipe is a short term solution that would only make a small group of players "happy" for a short period of time. It would be devastating for the rest of the players and for the server as a whole."
How is adding new worlds also not a sort term solution? As I have said before, I can't see this going on forever, at some point, the worlds will have to go, but certainly not be erased. As for you saying that it would make a "small group of players "happy"" and a wipe being devastating to the rest of the players, I believe there are currently more votes yes than no in the poll, and were so even before the wipe was off the table.


"I understand very well that some players already have reached their limit in MC, their endgame. But does that mean they should ruïn it for others by asking the server to be wiped? They can simply start over for themselves. Just toss your crap into lava."
I suppose you could say that denying a server wipe would also ruin the game for the players that are for it. Obviously the concept of starting over on your own has been brought up before, even before this discussion occurred, yet people are still in favor of a wipe.

At this point, there's two majorities, ones for a wipe and ones against it. One side is most likely going to lose, I can't see any middle ground other that what has been posted which hasn't received much attention other than "No". Perhaps another way to go about this is to stop trying to defend our own sides and keep pitching ideas that encompass both out comes. I have said I can't see any way that can happen, and you can say that too, but we will never find out unless we focus on those particular discussions rather then our individual sides.



--- Quote from: DeeKay on March 24, 2016, 12:37:24 pm ---
--- Quote from: 100penguin. on March 24, 2016, 08:26:30 am ---The one I've failed to put there in the 'against' column however is the one that I believe in - it goes against what Opticraft was always meant to be like.

...

They should be kept on the principal that that's what opticraft's about.

...

Penguin is against world wipes because it goes against the theme of opticraft

--- End quote ---
I'm going to have to kindly disagree with these points you make. I don't think a theme was ever established, maybe in your eyes, but not as a whole. The the only theme I can see Opticraft having adopted is being set too much in stone to have a fresh start. We've come accustomed to simply adding a new world every time things get messy, and it's become an unfortunate knee-jerk reaction that's caused more problems than it solved. Instead of 1 world lasting one year, we've added more and more worlds which meant more and more segregation of our players. This should also answer your question about adding worlds.

--- End quote ---

I also have to disagree with this. To me, Opticraft has always been about change, some embraced it and others hated it. I wasn't really around for this, but the shift from classic to smp, some players hated it, others from classic were all for it. There are also things changes from the additions and reductions to the market, to trying new things like the pvp system, the creative server, and now Optiquest, to the changes in player counts, to the changes in people themselves, leaving and joining, gaining rank and becoming staff. Each new person also has need ideas and each new staff member has new ways of doing things and ideas to contribute. The only thing that doesn't change on Opticraft is what we do with our worlds which I have said many times already, can not go on. At some point, worlds will have to be taken down, but certainly not erased, they will still exist in some fashion.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page