Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by MasterCommaThe

  1. If it is possible, creating a command for players to opt-in to a language filter would be a fantastic way to implement this. And I think you're right, it would be the only way not to cause an angry (cursing) mob. Seems like we have a fair consensus about the language rating we're comfortable with (M-rated but non-abusive) as a default. As that is fairly unrestricted I see no reason to add anything to the rules related to our decision. Thanks for the discussion, and please feel free to add any more opinions.
  2. Generally foul language (curse words and other explicit remarks) is socially unacceptable in public around children. As such when our players use it, younger players find themselves excluded from our community because it can't be avoided in global chat currently. I would like to propose that we add "Please keep language in global chat PG." I think this will be accommodating to the varied audiences we have on our server, while unrestricted (assuming it is not abusive) speech can still be carried out in clanchat and PM. Admins, please consider the above rule proposal.
  3. Also, if you still have the link. Let's post the example image here so we know what we're trying to do.
  4. So there's been a lot of work done in that first hour. Any plans to finish?
  5. I think at this point we've pretty well identified that my original proposal isn't viable, and have had some good discussion to clarify people's feelings on it. I'm open to carrying the discussion on to any other ideas people have that could make our moderator induction process more effective. While I personally don't support it, it was suggested in another forum that moderator candidates have their chat logs audited to ensure they don't have behavior that might lead to aboos. Staff reprimands, even when private, can be potentially embarrassing for everyone. So I'm open to hearing any suggestions on ways we could avoid it.
  6. I definitely imagined that the position would come with training.
  7. Arg, that dirty word took no time to appear. We're very clearly not going to relate any position to paid ranks. "trial Moderator" just didn't sound right
  8. If course we would emphasize that "Trusted Players" are not above any others. I'm almost exclusively a C moderator, so please forgive any oversights my suggestion has with regard to our other servers. And also please suggest any better ways this idea could be made to fit into all of our servers.
  9. Sometimes I think we pass over certain nominated moderators because we have questions about their character/integrity/whatever. Would we ever consider creating a new classification of player used to trial candidates that have a questionable history by giving them a limited set of Moderator powers (e.g. Region creation, invisibility, chat muting, trace, coal ore, notes)? The intent would be to trial test their ability to act responsibly without the ability to cause serious problems for other players (logblock, ban, lava, water, portals). From the player's perspective we are simply offloading work. From staff perspective we would then informally use these players as a selection pool to consider for moderators.
  10. I'll be on a family vacation July 24th - August 2nd with very limited connectivity.
  11. Did someone say Zombies? Basically anything with the mob disguise plug-in is good in my book!
  12. With the advent of /mode, allowing players that want survival mode to have it anytime anywhere, I'm against spending time trying to implement an "old school" Creative world. I personally wouldn't use it.
  13. Holy bandwagon batman! I too am going to be inactive this week(technically half of last week as well) as I am off in a remote region of the Ozarks.
  14. I think you mean these! I never heard if anyone found the others I placed all over the map with a single diamond ore under each one.
  15. I appreciate your opposing opinion. History proves we can't depend on all players to perform equally (I don't think I have a single kill on record despite many attempts), so some sort of balancing seems to be necessary. Moving players as you mention is a valid option, but I did worry that that itself might be disruptive to them and was trying to avoid it as the solution. Got any other ideas? This was good. I would love to maintain PvP & capture all the time, and if we can I will try to work primarily toward a solution that keeps that given your opinion. I still feel something needs to be done to alter how the game mechanics work when timezones cause one team to have 7 players while the other has 15 (1 v 5 is even worse). This happened to me twice in the last CTF. Ideally teams need balance in numbers and skill, but at least numbers. I think I saw 7 players vs. 2 take out the entire built defenses of red base and score over 30 points in 2 hours. Attempting to defend was a fruitless effort. The tactic of the game in that case becomes simply waiting for the other team to log off. Ideally I'd like it so that it is feasible for 2 players to defend against 10. Maybe a safe protected tower above the flag with an unlimited arrow supply (leaving the tower would clear your inventory?) where a sniper has a chance to defend the flag on their own. Alternatively perhaps uneven numbers should confer a buff to the smaller team, up to the point that a large enough difference in points or players grants invulnerability. Maybe they can't make any progress, but they shouldn't have to eat through the entire teams resources and die constantly in order to mount a valid defense, it's highly demotivational. Alternative ideas (not really good ideas yet) include perhaps we could have dedicated builders, invulnerable but also harmless? Keep the ideas coming please.
  16. New game type ideas: Invade the castle - Both teams join, are supplied with finite amounts of weapons and armor (including buckets of water), and have but one life in Adventure mode (I assume you can place water in adventure mode). Each team gets a castle and attempts to defend from entry to the throne room.
  17. Based on Difficul1's suggestion: Maybe have several planned "build the defenses" time periods where PVP & flags are disabled to prevent "nightcapping". Possibly have admins protect a region with an unbreakable wall between the teams during this time. Another map idea. Most games devolve at some point into skybridge attacks. We either should play to this element or find a way to prevent it as it seems to be a source of early domination by one team. The "Wool Mountains" map in the past was one solution to this issue, obstructing most skybridges while making them necessary in the center of the map. Future maps could either have white wool "clouds" and "fog" across the center of the map, with wool blocks made more difficult to break, to discourage skybridging in favor of tunneling and other land based attacks. An exotic CTF map idea would be to plump the resources for "piston trains/planes", and otherwise make land attack difficult, and have a game where "skyship" attacks are the norm. I imagine this map looking something like the sky levels in Super Mario Bros. 3 in my head. The use of piston sky transport was mentioned by someone else during the CTF, and I unfortunately don't remember who it was to credit them, but I will own up to this only being partly my own idea. Also, I'd be interested if we could possibly use the mob-player plugin to simply make a player appear as a mob of their choice, possibly as a mini-game award or something. This would allow for a certain amount of espionage from players who are not highly functional at PVP itself. "A horse walks into red base..."(great start to a joke btw)"...he eats all the wheat". I noticed that the physical "inner walls" of the base weren't even necessary given the protections within the region. They were elaborate and well constructed for actual PVP defense, but served no practical defense purpose because of their location. A small fully protected defense wall around each flag could have served a really strong purpose to deter easy capture. We decided not to have complete outer walls around the base due to terrain and time constraints, and I feel that was a fine decision. I really liked the earlier idea that teams should be able to place some "defense" blocks that the other team has difficulty breaking (possibly another good minigame reward!). My feelings are that each team needs an area only large enough to store resources (including animals) that are protected from the opposing team so that production cannot be easily disrupted (nerfing an entire team). Allowing all resource production within that area isn't strictly necessary. To that end I would like a much smaller "spawn" with only player starting area with protected chests and rules, and a barn that supplies a modest continual amount of animal resources. One might also consider supplies of modest weapons (arrows!) and armor to further even the playing field between players just joining and ones in full enchanted diamond. Last thought for the moment: It wasn't quite clear in which regions players/blocks were protected from damage. Perhap a greeting message at the gate to the base could say "Blue Team is protected from damage within these walls, Reds beware", or something else with more flavor.
  18. No reason the head admin has to do the complete run-through, but I agree, someone should to ensure consistency. Also, lol:
  19. This is excellent Barlimore! If I can, I'd just like to add a couple ideas: Create build contests (either yourself or delegated to a C mod (I am a C mod, shutup) or admin) on C to outsource some of the building and further make C players feel involved/valued in what are normally variations on PVE/PVP events. With these template instructions let's try to also create a companion Gant Chart template for the timeline in Google Sheets that is easily updateable to show progress. Plan extra time into the timeline for inevitable delays. Create individual polls to ask the community, moderators, admins, and techs respectively what dates out of a range will be attendable by most. (A date where many players but no admins can show up is a poor choice, as is vice versa.) It may also be relevant to ask staff in general if many of them will be around the week before the event to ensure final testing has plenty of hands as well. For PVP events with a score, ensure that games either terminate (and hopefully restart) after a certain point total or spread, or that losing teams automatically get buffed to prevent runaway score games that result in one team simply giving up (or forming another team). I think we all know boredom and hopelessness breeds trouble, even if it only comes from half the players. In general, we should probably plan for multiple rounds, and just appreciate the happy circumstance of not needing them if the game ends up being perfectly balanced and long lasting. Additionally, perhaps rounds could have a set time, possibly to correspond with active time zones.
  20. And of course here are some images from our party at Yellow Team base in the final hour: http://imgur.com/a/h8JzU
  21. Here are my images from the development of the map including some of the primary features I created! http://imgur.com/a/SG5dH I hope you enjoyed them all. My only regret is that the buff towers weren't more difficult!
  22. Great shots! You caught the moment blue surprised me while building red wool defences and I (like a good C player) simply tried to build a wall between me and them. It didn't work and I ended up exploding into a big ball of red wool.
  • Create New...