Jump to content

Creative revision lengths


SkrapssparkS
 Share

Recommended Posts

If you take a look at the wiki page for our past creative revisions we have dramatically increased the lengths of our revisions.http://redditpublic.com/wiki/Creative revisions from around revision 11 up to revision 22 where around 1 to 2 months in length, Then we went up to 3 months and then had a huge jump and went up to 6 months for each revision. I'd really like to see much smaller maps with a lot shorter revisions 3 months sounds ok for a revision but the old 1-2 month revisions were great fun, it's fun to have variation and logging into the same place for half a year gets old quickly. There are a few advantages to having shorter revisions with smaller maps, variation on the server, if there are updates with new biomes ect we can get a map up using them a lot quicker, smaller maps encourage players to build together instead of flying off to some random location and never interacting with anyone else on the server again. People get more chances on the fresh start side of creative which is always quite fun.

 

I don't know about anyone else but I am not a huge fan of joining a server that has already got it's community set, It's a lot more fun starting a project at the same time as everyone else, you can review progress on each other's builds and see how people's projects are doing in comparison to your own. Again a lot of other players might enjoy these long revisions but I start to get bored of the same map after a while, I'd really like to hear some thoughts on this and hopefully have the server lengths go down a bit at least.

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Former Staff

Personally, I would like to see quality revisions with planned and executed ideas that work, even if that does take a little longer to create.

 

Committing to a shorter period would be more fun to play on however it does mean that this puts more pressure on the creative admins to meet revision targets / dates, potentially rushing or disappointing people. While in the past, there have been longer periods between revisions, this may be down to how much time the creative admin team have been able to dedicate. We're fortunate to have the recent addition of Jchance alongside LetsBFehr and Marting11 and I think we'll have to wait and see what they come up with.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That is true, I think we should try and look into ways to ease the load on the cadmins this could give them more time for revisions and setting out revisions. If the cadmins start each map saying Ok this map shall go down on this date x months away this will give us this time to enhance the current rev as much as possible and this much time to set up the next revision. Having a set date would prevent players from going oh I don't know how much time there is left in this rev so I better not start my project until next rev incase the map changes halfway through only to then wait a couple of months before the next rev comes up.

 

An approach we could possibly take is very dodgy and would have to be discussed greatly would be to allow moderators to use world edit on creative and set warps ect. Dodgy as that opens up abuse greatly. However if we limit it and monitor it closely it would take off the stress of completing a lot of modreqs for the cadmins allowing them more time to approach other matters such as the next rev, new potential plugins and new spawns. I am not 100% on this as it's very risky but it's an idea to ease the load on cadmins which could make it easier to create more structured creative revisions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Personally, I would like to see quality revisions with planned and executed ideas that work, even if that does take a little longer to create.

 

Committing to a shorter period would be more fun to play on however it does mean that this puts more pressure on the creative admins to meet revision targets / dates, potentially rushing or disappointing people. While in the past, there have been longer periods between revisions, this may be down to how much time the creative admin team have been able to dedicate. We're fortunate to have the recent addition of Jchance alongside LetsBFehr and Marting11 and I think we'll have to wait and see what they come up with.

I think quality revisions are a worthwhile risk to take, we won't have much vibe in the community during the later stages of long revisions, whereas the starts of revisions are always a great thing to attend and whilst it does put stress on admins, we won't get anywhere without someone being pressured. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I do agree with Barlimore on this matter, lengthy revisions give time for things to happen. Notice eehee, when we visit old revisions, many things look derpy. The only thing that has a full presence is the cta, and that is mostly because cardinal roads made it easy to design and the abundance of users makes it a speedy build. When we look at Rev 24,25,26 everything had a bit more creativity to it. But I do agree to an extent that we are letting our revisions last a bit too long... we were dying for Rev 24 to end, and once again this is happening with revision 26. But the delay for a new map lay on the fact that we've made it more and more complex to make maps for c since then... world painting, extremely intricate spawns, a planned spawn region, several planned sub-areas. Maybe we should do a map with a very minimal spawn, and minimal sub areas, and no spawn city for tests with a shorter revision? It would make the Cadmins less stressed for it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I do agree with Barlimore on this matter, lengthy revisions give time for things to happen. Notice eehee, when we visit old revisions, many things look derpy. The only thing that has a full presence is the cta, and that is mostly because cardinal roads made it easy to design and the abundance of users makes it a speedy build. When we look at Rev 24,25,26 everything had a bit more creativity to it. But I do agree to an extent that we are letting our revisions last a bit too long... we were dying for Rev 24 to end, and once again this is happening with revision 26. But the delay for a new map lay on the fact that we've made it more and more complex to make maps for c since then... world painting, extremely intricate spawns, a planned spawn region, several planned sub-areas. Maybe we should do a map with a very minimal spawn, and minimal sub areas, and no spawn city for tests with a shorter revision? It would make the Cadmins less stressed for it.

I agree we might over complicate things now. We could try and make slightly more minimalistic spawns. However I'd actually say I prefer the older revisions, everything is closer together which granted may look derpy however it has a much better feel of a community than the revisions we have now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree we might over complicate things now. We could try and make slightly more minimalistic spawns. However I'd actually say I prefer the older revisions, everything is closer together which granted may look derpy however it has a much better feel of a community than the revisions we have now.

 

Ehh. I, personally, have a thing about being near people's builds. I had my first build get crowded when people built things around me too close for comfort.Though they were far enough away from my build to be a respectable amount of space, it still bugged me so I moved out quite a bit. I do like the empty area around it currently because I use the environment around me as part of my build. What you guys would consider as just "space", I'd consider it a part of my build. 

And it's not that I hate how certain people build or anything, it's just an irk when I see a build too close for comfort.

I remember talking to Dumbo about it. I wanted to protect my build and everything out 50 - 60 blocks or something like that because I incorporated the forest around as part of the build. He said the most he could do was 10 blocks, because you couldn't "waste land" by not building on it. But I used the land around me as part of it, so I can only hope no one builds too close for comfort.

 

I do get what you're saying, but I also feel like part of the reason there's as much space as there is for a lot of builds is because they included part of the surrounding land as their build.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good quality revisions are a great thing to have, but personally i think that the revs are a tad too long. Now, for people building projects they need the time sure, but i have seen people do multiple large scale projects within the newer revs. Expanding the map is OK, but i would rather see a new map then adding to an old one. Lets not forget it cleans those pesky half build/ugly structures and probably will keep people interested in the revs not just staying for a week.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lenghty revisions give some time for big projects. Though I agree that 6 months can feel a tad too long. We could aim for 4-5 months revisions. In the past revisions were shorter I think mainly because there was more players, most of them newbies. So the map filled up very fast. The crowd now has less players and more regulars.


Oh and by the way, we are working on a new map now :) We will pick a date for the reset soon, but I can tell you it will be maximum in a month.

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...