Silversunset01

I am not silly >.>

I have some thoughts on some of the topics posted so far, but doing quotes on the mobile interface is horrible - look for silverthinks later tonight when I get home if you're interested. That being said, keep it coming!! I am personally loving all this feedback (even though apparently everyone thinks I'm silly!) and it seems so far people are relatively happy with things. /me waits for more feedback like a greedy weirdo

Nobody has requested a sign so they have not been added. If you'd like a sign or banner outside the door just ask and I'll add them for you (you'll need to provide your own banners)

I do really like some of the features it has, switch and I fiddled about with it last night for a bit. You can color staff groups, set individual player volumes client side, the chat interface is *much* easier than mumble (more like an IRC client). It's got @ pings as well, and you can join chat rooms or voice chat at the same time or seperate. It would allow more control over somethings that everyone seems to like. However I think the biggest stumbling block is that mumble is something we run. It's not hosted by some online untested company, we can handle it on our own server-wise. Discord is dependent on the company hosting/building it being active. Really I think that's my main concern, Otherwise i like it. But if we are keeping mumble I don't see the purpose is having multiple chat programs. People are used to mumble and IRC being there. If we swap it would have to be a wholesale swap, which means whatever we swap to needs to be as stable as we can make it.

You missed the fun with old carbon. No one is more excited about the new rail system than myself or troop I'm sure ;)

Honestly I think additional metrics may be needed to make sure people aren't overworking or pointing out areas where additional training may be needed. It doesn't sound like the intent is to use them as part of a blind wiping-of-permissions, but more to make sure everyone is contributing as they are able and not letting things sit until a handful of more experienced people are online.

Some sort of "currently online" indicator may be interesting, but I agree with tobylane adding those sorts of metrics to the staff page may make it more stressful than it already is for staff.

I am loathe to set any sort of hard modreq cap, however it may be worth it to come up with *some* sort of req metric to use. either some sort of average, or something based on play time / req count. Granted modreqs are not *the only* thing that people do, so i wouldn't use that has the only metric before moving a mod to inactive especially if they are playing. But perhaps it would give a better picture of activity and allow for some additional conversation from the heads to see if there is additional training required.

Robr I think that is essentially how it's worded now. Apparently that is not clear enough for some players which leads to situations like this where people begin to demand percentages and ratios baked into their rules. And then we get flack for being too strict.

If you are ignoring a player so often that you need it to persist you should be contacting staff for assistance.

Huh did not know that. Brb poking a tech to see how complicated it is.

I am not sure we maintain lwc, but if the plugin supports it I don't see why this would be disallowed.

/me gets out devils advocate hat That essentially forces people to hide their grinders if they don't want to share at all. No grinder access = no questions asked. Thoughts?

the challenge I am seeing with imposing set percentage splits is enforcement. I don't know of a good way to measure this, short of being required to inspect every grinder on the map.

I agree with Sapphric - the special spawners should be available to everyone but common ones really don't make much difference since they're almost everywhere. And I know (mostly) how many temples there are this rev, honestly I'm not worried. If you find one grinder that isn't producing move to another - there is always someone who enjoys creating public-access builds to make up for those who are stingy. It may be worth it to clarify the rule a bit if people find they are confused by it. Also now I am feeling the urge to zip through the special spawners and make sure they are being used...

THE CRYSTALINE ENTITY!!!! /me cowers in fear

I think geb is away a bit, so i unbanned you :)

I don't see why not. Totally cool.

Yeah the character limit and chunky don't are not easy to read or prepare for long text. Short text though.... :) veeerrryy useful.

I had intended to use /book for the journals but they're turning out to be far too much to comfortably fit into a vanilla book (i really dont like the in-game books in general, they're quite bulky). That doesn't mean that it wont be used, oh no. I have spent a good bit of time fiddling with it, and am planning to use it for parts of the story, just not the big bulky main section :) I didn't know you wrote it! Congrats, it is really neat, i loooooooooove some of the features in it. SO much easier than the alternative :/

If we did something like this it would be the same as water flow, i.e. "You break it you fix it" - it comes down to allowing more options at the expense of safety, with all of the regions going on for protections adding more for fire spread would add a ton to the server. It's not really up to us to decide what "legitimate usage" is.

I think the only part that really irritates me is the limit on anvil uses/# of repairs. Pls to fix Mojang.

We are attempting something similar with watwr this rev. Depending on how it goes, fire could be an option. If we did it similar to how water works it would take a region owner, and it would have to fall under the "you break it you fix it" rule - it could very easily be "accidentally" abused, but with some work it's possible.

Honestly I am unsure how I feel about this. I have never defeated a temple so it would be neat to have one to fight, however I also don't like reserving things on the map outside of spawn. This is something that I think could easily be done by players if someone wanted to, without any staff intervention. You could build up around the temple, and leave it intact enough to keep spawning. Then it wouldn't be up to staff to maintain, whoever "owns" it could make whatever repairs were needed - sounds like a fun project for a town to take on as an attraction :)