• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

548 Excellent

About schererererer

  • Rank
  • Birthday

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location

Recent Profile Visitors

250 profile views
  1. Sure thing torteela, note removed.
  2. This brings to mind the similar situation of beach evisceration that was brought up in yesteryear: The consistent consensus on this sort of thing in the past was that it was impolite and would be socially discouraged, but not a rule violation in any sense. If someone were to painstakingly fill the beach/tree/what-have-you back in, it would then count as a build and be protectable. I am of the opinion that natural surroundings can be an integral part of a build and should be given more leeway in protection, depending on the regional demand for territory. We protect builds, not effort expended per se. This is a sort of regulation that works best with subjective interpretation imo, liberally applied. +1 for move to public discussion
  3. I will be unavailable in-game for the next week or so.
  4. Perhaps some kind of tower defense, or a cooperative gameplay involving combat against waves of mobs of increasing difficulty (e.g. firefight from the halo franchise).
  5. Will be unavailable in-game until after Nov 27th.
  6. @Nilate:
  7. Perhaps for rev 19 and the future, nominations can be explicitly open the whole rev, with a final call for submissions a bit before rev end (around the time when you usually ask for entries). Could get more participation from people who drop off the face of the earth late-rev.
  8. The paypal fee for debit and credit cards is 2.9% plus $0.30 per transaction. Setting aside rounding questions, going from an annual payment to equivalent monthly donation increases the donor's cost by $3.30. Most of our funding historically comes from large donors of ~$100 or more. For them, the the difference in cost between annual and monthly donations is small, though on the same order of magnitude as the original fee. Even one more person making a donation on this scale on the monthly scheme is enough to offset the total loss to fees, and a small monthly payment is more feasible/appetizing to many people. I'd say it's worth it. As for a minimum monthly donation, $1 has a fee of 33%, $5 has a fee of 9%, $10 has a fee of 6% - I think $5 is a good enough point to balance appealing monthly values with transaction fee costs.
  9. I expect discord voice chat will significantly increase the number of people talkig vs the current numbers in mumble. I also share the perception that slack general channel is kind of a "special secret staff clubroom", which doesn't mesh all that well with the idea that staff is not a promotion.
  10. One thing that I've seen a few people mention was a desire for a little more advance notice / publicity of the event. Maybe have an announcement pinned on the forums and subreddit a couple of weeks ahead, perhaps even an email blast to everyone registered on the forums?
  11. Casual suggestion for spawn city: have only half the side of spawn be plotted out, and keep the other half as free land to demonstrate that most of the map is free-to-build.
  12. I'd prefer thorough distinguishing from the overworld status quo on the subject of mob spawns. No default zombies, skellies, creepers, spiders, etc, but nether-focused and nether-unique mobs would be nice. Glowstone trees were a neat idea but fairly unsightly - a different aesthetic would be good.
  13. Iron Grinders: I think they worked out fine - the trading of obscene effort for diamond resource input was a little weird but I think it balances well enough. Nether: I'll be honest, I didn't spend much time in the nether this rev. I liked the plethora of quartz, but glowstone/obsidian trees were kind of ugly. Custom Flora: Very much enjoyed. Obvious issue of leaf decay - suggest making sure any forested area one would expect to be clear-cut at some point (i.e. not singularly gigantic trees) follow the "4 blocks max away from logs" rule to allow for proper leaf decay. I also suggest using trees with roots in the schematic/bo2 to look better on slopes. Tree contest is a great move. Portals: Don't feel strongly about this either way. Ore distributions: Seem fine, don't feel strongly about this either. MapWorld: Fantastic addition. If feasible, allow for more plots per person to allow for larger (>128x128) works more easily. Terrain: More desert please. Custom mountains/volcanoes are lovely. I really want to see a giant natural bridge/arch. Fine amount of ocean this rev. Spawn: Nice spawn - maybe have a waterdrop exit rather than a tp sign if possible? Custom mobs: I have issues with Dr. Cuddles being too OP and *never* a fun mob to fight, but I liked the others - would love to see some more, assuming not too many are added in thereby making the game unfriendly to more casual players. /help: Very much preferred to rulebooks. Also sets a better tone to have "help" rather than "rules" as the name, haha.
  14. Narissis post pictures pls. As for me, board games are my jam.
  15. Honestly, I think some percentage value needs to be placed on things that do require some public split. Otherwise, you're just asking for brinkmanship over what is permitted. A maximal 50/50 split is easy to setup and reasonable, considering the builder is likely to be on site more often to pull drops out of the public chest - thus it's a 50% minimum take for the builder in this case, even when other people are putting in all the afk time. Also, if iron grinders require a public portion, guardian grinders certainly should. I'm not so sure how many ocean monuments are still out in the wild, but from the live map it seems like most of them are claimed. There's an active disincentive to sharing, so what is likely to end up happening is a number of maximally private guardian grinders and a mere one or two public grinders for the entire rest of the server to share. The scarcity is still an issue. They're perhaps not as limited as a unique spawner, but at a certain not-too-distant point, they become impossible to circumvent by building a new grinder, just like the unique spawners. Additionally, I'm going to expand on buzzie's mention of "social uneasiness". Would padmins allow denunciations with any level of hostility toward those with less-public grinders? This happened in the past, and things got pretty heated over it. Blacklisting of less-public grinder builders is one way that non-staff can voice disapproval, but it could start a spiral of disgruntlement contrary to the nature of the pve server.