Opticraft Community

Quote from: OzzyKP on March 24, 2016, 03:36:55 PM

Quote from: Nick3306 on March 24, 2016, 03:05:46 PM

Quote from: OzzyKP on March 24, 2016, 01:44:30 PM

Quote from: DeeKay on March 24, 2016, 12:37:24 PM

Quote from: OzzyKP on March 24, 2016, 10:51:43 AM
If there is no currency of any kind, then how would players buy/sell items?

They wouldn't, that's the point.

The first post by Nick said a proposed change was "- Addition of a player trading system"  That is extremely difficult without some medium of exchange (i.e. money/points/seashells/something).  Forcing everyone to simply barter would be an incredibly bad idea and effectively destroy a lot of the cooperation & resource trading that exists.  Plus it misses out on great opportunities that could come from a player-run economy. 

The creation of currency is one of the most important human inventions.  There is a reason every nation on Earth uses currency instead of barter (and no it isn't because of evil bankers).  It is a fundamental part of economics.  See this basic presentation on the matter.

Basically, in a world you may envision where we've gotten rid of the server-run market and all the players just have to swap items, this is how it would work.  I have a lot of stone (from all my excavating in my city).  I'd like to trade it for diamonds, glowstone, iron, etc.  Let's say Lando has a lot of diamonds he'd like to give me, but none of his builds use stone, so he isn't interested in trading with me.  Let's say penguin wants lots of stone, but doesn't have any glowstone, so doesn't have anything I want.  Then what?  Then we don't trade and the whole system breaks down. 

If we had some kind of sign/chest shop, can you imagine how messy it would be?  Let's say, again, that I want to trade stone for different items.  Just to sell this one item I'd have to create 20 different shops/signs.  64 stone for 12 glowstone, 32 stone for 10 iron, 40 stone for 1 diamond, 5 stone for 10 sand, 10 stone for 1 porkchop, 20 stone for 30 glass, e tc.  Imagine if I wanted to sell more than just stone?  Imagine if other people wanted to sell things?  We'd have hundreds and hundreds of different combinations of various goods.  Matching them all up would be very difficult and time consuming.

Money is just a middle-man that makes everything easier.  If I wanted Lando's diamonds, I wouldn't have to trade him my stone, I could sell my stone to penguin for money, and then take that money to buy the diamonds from Lando.  Everyone wins and it is soooo much simpler and easier a transaction.  This is why money exists in both real and virtual worlds.  No MMO or other video game that has some way to exchange goods uses a barter system, because they are absolutely impractical.  No country or society uses it either.

Your points would all be valid if this was not a survival server, which it is. The server was never supposed to run on the economy, it just turned out that way.

If your vision for a survival server is that everyone is on their own and doesn't cooperate or share resources, then yes, eliminating the economy would achieve that.  I think that is a very big change, and a bad one.  I think the ability to easily share, trade and cooperate is an important part of this server, and was certainly a perk when I first got here.  Shutting that all down by removing money would, I feel, make it harder for new members to join and stay.

But I don't understand why you listed "addition of a player trading system" as a new proposal if you intend to eliminate player trading/exchange.

How would this reduce player cooperation at all? I honestly don't see how having money increases peoples willingness to work together. In fact, I would argue that it would increase cooperation because instead of being able to buy all the blocks and stuff that you want, you're more likely to team up with others to survive and build.

The player trading system would be block for block, it creates more of a fail safe so someone doesn't take your stuff then not give you theirs. If players wanted, they could create a currency in game by using gold or something but having an overall currency for the server is something we want to get rid of. It turns the survival server into an economy server where its all about getting money.

Oh, I didn't mean a 'theme' as such dk, but more how I saw it as being. It's one of the few servers where wipes don't occur, and I'm aware this is one of Optical's principals. It is definitely a personal opinion though, and a circumstantial matter.

Quote from: Nick3306 on March 24, 2016, 03:53:07 PM

Quote from: OzzyKP on March 24, 2016, 03:36:55 PM

Quote from: Nick3306 on March 24, 2016, 03:05:46 PM

Quote from: OzzyKP on March 24, 2016, 01:44:30 PM

Quote from: DeeKay on March 24, 2016, 12:37:24 PM

Quote from: OzzyKP on March 24, 2016, 10:51:43 AM
If there is no currency of any kind, then how would players buy/sell items?

They wouldn't, that's the point.

The first post by Nick said a proposed change was "- Addition of a player trading system"  That is extremely difficult without some medium of exchange (i.e. money/points/seashells/something).  Forcing everyone to simply barter would be an incredibly bad idea and effectively destroy a lot of the cooperation & resource trading that exists.  Plus it misses out on great opportunities that could come from a player-run economy. 

The creation of currency is one of the most important human inventions.  There is a reason every nation on Earth uses currency instead of barter (and no it isn't because of evil bankers).  It is a fundamental part of economics.  See this basic presentation on the matter.

Basically, in a world you may envision where we've gotten rid of the server-run market and all the players just have to swap items, this is how it would work.  I have a lot of stone (from all my excavating in my city).  I'd like to trade it for diamonds, glowstone, iron, etc.  Let's say Lando has a lot of diamonds he'd like to give me, but none of his builds use stone, so he isn't interested in trading with me.  Let's say penguin wants lots of stone, but doesn't have any glowstone, so doesn't have anything I want.  Then what?  Then we don't trade and the whole system breaks down. 

If we had some kind of sign/chest shop, can you imagine how messy it would be?  Let's say, again, that I want to trade stone for different items.  Just to sell this one item I'd have to create 20 different shops/signs.  64 stone for 12 glowstone, 32 stone for 10 iron, 40 stone for 1 diamond, 5 stone for 10 sand, 10 stone for 1 porkchop, 20 stone for 30 glass, e tc.  Imagine if I wanted to sell more than just stone?  Imagine if other people wanted to sell things?  We'd have hundreds and hundreds of different combinations of various goods.  Matching them all up would be very difficult and time consuming.

Money is just a middle-man that makes everything easier.  If I wanted Lando's diamonds, I wouldn't have to trade him my stone, I could sell my stone to penguin for money, and then take that money to buy the diamonds from Lando.  Everyone wins and it is soooo much simpler and easier a transaction.  This is why money exists in both real and virtual worlds.  No MMO or other video game that has some way to exchange goods uses a barter system, because they are absolutely impractical.  No country or society uses it either.

Your points would all be valid if this was not a survival server, which it is. The server was never supposed to run on the economy, it just turned out that way.

If your vision for a survival server is that everyone is on their own and doesn't cooperate or share resources, then yes, eliminating the economy would achieve that.  I think that is a very big change, and a bad one.  I think the ability to easily share, trade and cooperate is an important part of this server, and was certainly a perk when I first got here.  Shutting that all down by removing money would, I feel, make it harder for new members to join and stay.

But I don't understand why you listed "addition of a player trading system" as a new proposal if you intend to eliminate player trading/exchange.

If players wanted, they could create a currency in game by using gold or something but having an overall currency for the server is something we want to get rid of. It turns the survival server into an economy server where its all about getting money.

If this is what's seriously being considered then I am opposed to this particular proposal concerning the economy.

Quote from: UnknownHedgehog on March 24, 2016, 04:09:10 PM

Quote from: Nick3306 on March 24, 2016, 03:53:07 PM

Quote from: OzzyKP on March 24, 2016, 03:36:55 PM

Quote from: Nick3306 on March 24, 2016, 03:05:46 PM

Quote from: OzzyKP on March 24, 2016, 01:44:30 PM

Quote from: DeeKay on March 24, 2016, 12:37:24 PM

Quote from: OzzyKP on March 24, 2016, 10:51:43 AM
If there is no currency of any kind, then how would players buy/sell items?

They wouldn't, that's the point.

The first post by Nick said a proposed change was "- Addition of a player trading system"  That is extremely difficult without some medium of exchange (i.e. money/points/seashells/something).  Forcing everyone to simply barter would be an incredibly bad idea and effectively destroy a lot of the cooperation & resource trading that exists.  Plus it misses out on great opportunities that could come from a player-run economy. 

The creation of currency is one of the most important human inventions.  There is a reason every nation on Earth uses currency instead of barter (and no it isn't because of evil bankers).  It is a fundamental part of economics.  See this basic presentation on the matter.

Basically, in a world you may envision where we've gotten rid of the server-run market and all the players just have to swap items, this is how it would work.  I have a lot of stone (from all my excavating in my city).  I'd like to trade it for diamonds, glowstone, iron, etc.  Let's say Lando has a lot of diamonds he'd like to give me, but none of his builds use stone, so he isn't interested in trading with me.  Let's say penguin wants lots of stone, but doesn't have any glowstone, so doesn't have anything I want.  Then what?  Then we don't trade and the whole system breaks down. 

If we had some kind of sign/chest shop, can you imagine how messy it would be?  Let's say, again, that I want to trade stone for different items.  Just to sell this one item I'd have to create 20 different shops/signs.  64 stone for 12 glowstone, 32 stone for 10 iron, 40 stone for 1 diamond, 5 stone for 10 sand, 10 stone for 1 porkchop, 20 stone for 30 glass, e tc.  Imagine if I wanted to sell more than just stone?  Imagine if other people wanted to sell things?  We'd have hundreds and hundreds of different combinations of various goods.  Matching them all up would be very difficult and time consuming.

Money is just a middle-man that makes everything easier.  If I wanted Lando's diamonds, I wouldn't have to trade him my stone, I could sell my stone to penguin for money, and then take that money to buy the diamonds from Lando.  Everyone wins and it is soooo much simpler and easier a transaction.  This is why money exists in both real and virtual worlds.  No MMO or other video game that has some way to exchange goods uses a barter system, because they are absolutely impractical.  No country or society uses it either.

Your points would all be valid if this was not a survival server, which it is. The server was never supposed to run on the economy, it just turned out that way.

If your vision for a survival server is that everyone is on their own and doesn't cooperate or share resources, then yes, eliminating the economy would achieve that.  I think that is a very big change, and a bad one.  I think the ability to easily share, trade and cooperate is an important part of this server, and was certainly a perk when I first got here.  Shutting that all down by removing money would, I feel, make it harder for new members to join and stay.

But I don't understand why you listed "addition of a player trading system" as a new proposal if you intend to eliminate player trading/exchange.

If players wanted, they could create a currency in game by using gold or something but having an overall currency for the server is something we want to get rid of. It turns the survival server into an economy server where its all about getting money.

If this is what's seriously being considered then I am opposed to this particular proposal concerning the economy.

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

Quote from: Nick3306 on March 24, 2016, 04:15:03 PM

Quote from: UnknownHedgehog on March 24, 2016, 04:09:10 PM

Quote from: Nick3306 on March 24, 2016, 03:53:07 PM

Quote from: OzzyKP on March 24, 2016, 03:36:55 PM

Quote from: Nick3306 on March 24, 2016, 03:05:46 PM

Quote from: OzzyKP on March 24, 2016, 01:44:30 PM

Quote from: DeeKay on March 24, 2016, 12:37:24 PM

Quote from: OzzyKP on March 24, 2016, 10:51:43 AM
If there is no currency of any kind, then how would players buy/sell items?

They wouldn't, that's the point.

The first post by Nick said a proposed change was "- Addition of a player trading system"  That is extremely difficult without some medium of exchange (i.e. money/points/seashells/something).  Forcing everyone to simply barter would be an incredibly bad idea and effectively destroy a lot of the cooperation & resource trading that exists.  Plus it misses out on great opportunities that could come from a player-run economy. 

The creation of currency is one of the most important human inventions.  There is a reason every nation on Earth uses currency instead of barter (and no it isn't because of evil bankers).  It is a fundamental part of economics.  See this basic presentation on the matter.

Basically, in a world you may envision where we've gotten rid of the server-run market and all the players just have to swap items, this is how it would work.  I have a lot of stone (from all my excavating in my city).  I'd like to trade it for diamonds, glowstone, iron, etc.  Let's say Lando has a lot of diamonds he'd like to give me, but none of his builds use stone, so he isn't interested in trading with me.  Let's say penguin wants lots of stone, but doesn't have any glowstone, so doesn't have anything I want.  Then what?  Then we don't trade and the whole system breaks down. 

If we had some kind of sign/chest shop, can you imagine how messy it would be?  Let's say, again, that I want to trade stone for different items.  Just to sell this one item I'd have to create 20 different shops/signs.  64 stone for 12 glowstone, 32 stone for 10 iron, 40 stone for 1 diamond, 5 stone for 10 sand, 10 stone for 1 porkchop, 20 stone for 30 glass, e tc.  Imagine if I wanted to sell more than just stone?  Imagine if other people wanted to sell things?  We'd have hundreds and hundreds of different combinations of various goods.  Matching them all up would be very difficult and time consuming.

Money is just a middle-man that makes everything easier.  If I wanted Lando's diamonds, I wouldn't have to trade him my stone, I could sell my stone to penguin for money, and then take that money to buy the diamonds from Lando.  Everyone wins and it is soooo much simpler and easier a transaction.  This is why money exists in both real and virtual worlds.  No MMO or other video game that has some way to exchange goods uses a barter system, because they are absolutely impractical.  No country or society uses it either.

Your points would all be valid if this was not a survival server, which it is. The server was never supposed to run on the economy, it just turned out that way.

If your vision for a survival server is that everyone is on their own and doesn't cooperate or share resources, then yes, eliminating the economy would achieve that.  I think that is a very big change, and a bad one.  I think the ability to easily share, trade and cooperate is an important part of this server, and was certainly a perk when I first got here.  Shutting that all down by removing money would, I feel, make it harder for new members to join and stay.

But I don't understand why you listed "addition of a player trading system" as a new proposal if you intend to eliminate player trading/exchange.

If players wanted, they could create a currency in game by using gold or something but having an overall currency for the server is something we want to get rid of. It turns the survival server into an economy server where its all about getting money.

If this is what's seriously being considered then I am opposed to this particular proposal concerning the economy.

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

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.

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?

Quote from: UnknownHedgehog on March 24, 2016, 04:23:11 PM

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.

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.

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

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.

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.

Quote from: Nick3306 on March 24, 2016, 04:36:20 PM

Quote from: UnknownHedgehog on March 24, 2016, 04:23:11 PM

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.

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.

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.

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

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!

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

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.

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.

first a complete wipe is off the table and discussing it further creates division among players, so lets move on to the economy

I believe that having a player based economy will not equalize the playing field, those who are adapt at redstone afk massive farms will still prevail and set the rates, usually beyond what regular players can afford and it will do nothing to eliminate or control these massive builds.  It was pointed out to me that my public guardian farm has generally provided a limitless supply of these blocks for the entire server, and that guardian farms are massive and ugly.  I built the farm and my private one because I wanted to build an ocean monument, and I personally felt the market price of the blocks was to high as well as the price set by other players.  If we were points driven (as I understand the proposed change, although my view point may be incorrect), and player trade driven I would still have made the farms, maybe taken a little longer but I would have made them all the same.

I would like to see a market economy, I chose this server not just because of who played on it but because it offered the best of both worlds, survival and economy combined to leave the choice up to the individual player as to how they want to play the game.  Yes some people went farm crazy and built massive redstone run farms, others ignore the market and play on survivor basis only, and some do a combination of those choices.  I believe that a points system will not change this except to limit the players ability to obtain blocks previously purchased at market.  The point is, this system allows players to decide how they want to play the game and that its their own choices that make the game fun or boring.

someone asked what it is that I as player who voted no to the complete wipe do to keep from getting bored, its simple, I look at interior design magazines, and wonder if I could possible do that in minecraft, or I watch a rerun of an old favorite movie (now you know where Astoria came from) and I think, that would be fun, after google searches to see if it was already done on mc, I discovered really not so great attempts, so I made my own attempt.  Now I am trying to build as many farms in one place redstone free.  they are all manual, except the iron farm that I bought and built around
and at the same time make it appealing to look around the entire place.  When I take a walk or a drive and I see some really interesting building, or maybe just one aspect of that building, I keep it in mind in case I can use that feature in a build.  sometimes they work out great and others fail miserable, but I keep trying because I like it.

I also like to play here because I feel safe playing this game with my grandchildren on this server.  We live far apart and this server and game has made it possible to be involved in their lives.  Opticalza has made a terrific server and there have been many staff over the years who have helped along the way, some ideas were successful and some not so much.  I believe all have added value to the community and made it the server I enjoy now, so thank you all.

On a final note: Before you vote for change, we must ask ourselves what is the purpose of this change and will it be effective in accomplishing our goal?  So I ask you, what is the purpose of changing to a  point system, what are the specific new rules and regulations to accompany it, and why do you think it will achieve your goal?

Quote from: Roza on March 25, 2016, 02:35:56 AM
first a complete wipe is off the table and discussing it further creates division among players, so lets move on to the economy.

This is a discussion, nothing is set in stone therefore it can still be discussed and there are plenty of people willing to support it that didn't get a chance to before it was taken off the list. Obviously if players are still talking about it and supporting it, it may have been taken off the table prematurely and there was never really a reason provided as to why it was taken off, especially when there are several votes for it. If players want to support it, they may do so, if they wish to oppose it, they may do so.

Quote from: TheWholeLoaf on March 24, 2016, 08:22:33 PM
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.

But it is a void point! After a whipe the current situation would appear again, farms would be built again and large differences will be noticeable within a few days.
You speak of the use of the market to build farms. I didn't use the market at all for my farms. When I joined I began at zero and there were players with millions. That didn't hinder me in any way to build and develop myself and look where I am now. New players wouldn't be able to catch up? I did!

Regarding the new end world, yes you are right, there could be a border (the  borders are  somewhere but it is unlikely because I'm already 30.000 blocks out and the cities keep coming. (And that's just in one straight direction.) So the amount of cities is overwhelming and more than enough for hundreds possibly thousands of players.




Your idea of this server is wipe after wipe after wipe. Because that is what you will need to level the playing field. Differences will occur in no time at all so you would need another wipe. And you will have to repeat that  because else the current situation will appear again and again. Huge farms will be built without the use of a market and we will be back where we are now.

That's not how I would like to see this server. I like the developement, the history, the differences.
My idea is "Live and let live". I'm not in any way hindering you from playing the game, developing yourself, building, etc. But you are hindering me when you ask for a wipe. My developement would be gone, my builds would be gone, etc.

Quote from: Lando_V on March 25, 2016, 12:50:30 PM
Your idea of this server is wipe after wipe after wipe. Because that is what you will need to level the playing field. Differences will occur in no time at all so you would need another wipe. And you will have to repeat that  because else the current situation will appear again and again. Huge farms will be built without the use of a market and we will be back where we are now.

That's not how I would like to see this server. I like the development, the history, the differences.
My idea is "Live and let live". I'm not in any way hindering you from playing the game, developing yourself, building, etc. But you are hindering me when you ask for a wipe. My development would be gone, my builds would be gone, etc.

I couldn't agree more! 

Quote from: Roza on March 25, 2016, 02:35:56 AM
I believe that having a player based economy will not equalize the playing field, those who are adapt at redstone afk massive farms will still prevail and set the rates, usually beyond what regular players can afford and it will do nothing to eliminate or control these massive builds.  It was pointed out to me that my public guardian farm has generally provided a limitless supply of these blocks for the entire server, and that guardian farms are massive and ugly.  I built the farm and my private one because I wanted to build an ocean monument, and I personally felt the market price of the blocks was to high as well as the price set by other players.  If we were points driven (as I understand the proposed change, although my view point may be incorrect), and player trade driven I would still have made the farms, maybe taken a little longer but I would have made them all the same.

I would like to see a market economy, I chose this server not just because of who played on it but because it offered the best of both worlds, survival and economy combined to leave the choice up to the individual player as to how they want to play the game.  Yes some people went farm crazy and built massive redstone run farms, others ignore the market and play on survivor basis only, and some do a combination of those choices.  I believe that a points system will not change this except to limit the players ability to obtain blocks previously purchased at market.  The point is, this system allows players to decide how they want to play the game and that its their own choices that make the game fun or boring.

It looks like there is a lot of confusion over what is being proposed.  I was very confused as well.  I'll try to break it down:

Our Current Economic System
Our current economy contains three main elements.  I think folks who identify bad results are blaming the wrong element, and want to throw the whole thing out the window.  What our current economy has is:

Currency - A virtual currency (money) that players can exchange and accumulate.  They can use the money to buy protection stones, blocks (from other players, or the server-run market), pay each other for doing jobs/helping out, buy builds/property from others, and give away as gifts.  This currency could be called dollars, or money, or points, or any other term, but its purpose remains the same, to be a 'medium of exchange' and make it much easier to exchange goods and services.  Currency is merely a symbol that represents the value of an item. 

Player Trading - We are currently able to give, sell, buy or trade goods and services with each other.  We can set whatever price (even free!) we want.  This is (with an important caveat) set by supply and demand.  A few years ago it was very hard to get a dragon egg, they were very rare, so people were successfully selling them for $50,000 or more.  Now they are much more common so the price has dropped.  This is what happens when players are free to trade things with each other. 

Server-run Market - This, we are all familiar with, is a market owned and operated by the server itself.  Prices are fixed and never/rarely change.  The blocks sold at the market are conjured out of thin air.  They are not harvested within the game (like goods players trade).  Having an infinite supply of blocks (and an infinite demand for blocks) makes it very easy to build up lots of money and avoid harvesting things yourself.  This does, as some point out, remove some of the survival aspect of the server.  All the big issues we've had with the economy in the past (melons, iron, gold) have been driven by this infinite, artificial, server-run market that will buy something forever.  Removing melons from the market killed the incentive to make melon farms.  Removing iron & gold from the market has greatly reduced the incentive to make iron & gold farms, but not completely destroyed it, because those blocks are still useful for players.

Nick's Proposed Economic System

No Currency - Nick proposes eliminating currency.  We will no longer be able to buy blocks from each other.  We will no longer be able to pay someone $1,000 to help us dig out a hole.  We will no longer be able to buy a mansion or castle from another player.  We will no longer be able to sell access to an iron farm or enderman farm.  He doesn't just want to create a "points system" in place of a "money system".  Points will be separate.  He wants to get rid of currency altogether.

Player Trading - Nick intends to keep player trading, but without currency it will become extremely difficult.  So difficult, in my view, that no one will do it.  We will be left with nothing but primitive barter.  We can give our blocks for someone else's blocks directly.  If I have stone and you have iron, I better hope you want stone in exchange or we won't be interested in trading.   It will be a very cumbersome, inefficient & time-consuming way of trading. 

No Server-run Market - This will be gone (and good riddance).  But Nick did mention being able to buy protection & rare items with "points".  That's fine, since we would need some way to get those items.  It is just a question of what is considered a rare item.

A Player-Run Proposed Economic System
This is what I (and many others here) would like to see. 

Currency - We'd keep a currency (call it points or money, I don't care).  I'm fine with zeroing out everyone's balances so we can start from scratch (or reducing everyone to a few thousand bucks).  As in any other economic model we'd have to tweak the money supply, but overall having currency is hugely helpful.  There are just too many things that can't be bartered for.

Player Trading - This would exist, largely as it does now, with players able to buy/sell things to other players at whatever price they agree to.  They can sell access to their farm, or sell their entire build, or trade blocks/items, etc.  It'd be a free market and the fairest, most open system we could have.  The only change is that there would be some new mechanism (sign shops, auction system, or GUI trading platform) that facilitates the buying & selling of blocks between players.

No Server-run Market - This would be gone.  No more infinite supply of blocks.  The only way to get something is to dig it out of the ground or grow it.  This would eliminate all the price distortion that exists because of the server-run market.  Items that people produce will be items that others need.  No more giant melon farms or other silly ways to exploit the system. 

I contend that the problem with our current economy isn't the fact that we have money.  The problem is that there is a server-run market that buys & sells infinite amounts of items.  Get rid of the server-run market, make it easier for players to buy & sell with each other, and we'll be set.

Quote from: Roza on March 25, 2016, 02:35:56 AM
On a final note: Before you vote for change, we must ask ourselves what is the purpose of this change and will it be effective in accomplishing our goal?  So I ask you, what is the purpose of changing to a  point system, what are the specific new rules and regulations to accompany it, and why do you think it will achieve your goal?

I agree this is something we should discuss (I did my best to lay it all out above). What do people feel is the current problem with the economy (my simple answer is the server-run market)?  And how would you propose fixing it? 

My proposed system is to turn this into an actual survival server, the points are only there so players can buy protection for their builds.
When we were first launching this server, optical, relkeb and I discussed player shops, we came to the conclusion that it was too messy and too hard to maintain which is why we went with the server market. I'm not sure if anything has changed since then to prevent it from being a total mess.