roastnewt Posted September 20, 2014 Report Share Posted September 20, 2014 (edited) Hey guys, thanks for the feedback. I know you three are really passionate about playing a style of survival that's different from what we've traditionally done, and what my brief description of the next rev sounds to be like, and I'm very happy you guys share that passion and make sure we know how you feel. I know that citadel and prisonpearl introduced elements which are really appealing to you, and there are undoubtedly those who aren't as vocal who share that appreciation. I also know that this revision died down much more rapidly than any other in the past (from what I understand) despite having very high turnout at launch time, and that many people have come to me asking sadmins to fixitfixitfixit asap. Believe me, I want to experiment and have fun new features as much as anyone, and I also want to have something players can enjoy in the meantime more than a relatively empty server. I also know that an overwhelming majority of respondents to the feedback polls and discussion threads were unhappy with prisonpearl and citadel. (personal bias admission: I have been opposed to using prisonpearl from the beginning and somewhat hesitant about citadel as well). I also know that the server looks griefed to hell, there have been some really shitty people abusing prisonpearl to prevent others from enjoying the game, citadel is not noob-friendly, and there was way too much xraying going on that takes advantage of the weaknesses in citadel and a lack of griefing rules. I think all of these issues have solutions, but most of them require time and effort on the part of the admins. I'm absolutely thrilled to have you back, S needs present, thoughtful and communicative staff, and you've been all three over the last couple weeks. Now, I don't intend on having a huge argument over why we're removing the plugins, the merits of them, etc. We can do that another time but I just don't have the energy to contend against the combined passion you three have for the subject. I'm sure that there are strong and valid reasons to keep things as they are, but I'd like to ask the three of you and everyone else if you'd be willing to bear with us, enjoy this 'throwback' revision for what it is (which will hopefully be more than the brief rundown I have presented above), and we'll get on to trying more novel and experimental things shortly. Hey, we're not trying to start an argument. We all want S to succeed. I certainly enjoyed the playstyle we tried last revision, and I'm sure I'll enjoy going back to this "plain vanilla" playstyle as well. But in order for S to succeed, it needs to offer something that can't be gotten on PvE or Creative, or people will just play there, where the community is bigger. Survival doesn't have to be a hardcore-pvp-raiding server, but I do hope that it doesn't just end up being a clone of PvE with the worldguard pvp flag set to deny allow. If it doesn't differentiate itself from PvE, people will just play on the one with the larger community. Edited September 20, 2014 by roastnewt 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gizzletinks Posted September 20, 2014 Report Share Posted September 20, 2014 Alright, I'd like to offer an update on the plans for revision 27. Beastbruiser, Redwall, Mrloud, and I have talked a fair bit and here's how things will likely go: We know that you guys are tired of rev 26 and want something better quickly. So we've got a relatively simple plan for rev 27 drawn from the poll results and discussions in the feedback thread, and intend on launching as soon as possible, which is as soon as we get everything ready. The map will be generated by the end of tomorrow, we'll have it up on a dev server where admins can paste in spawn, roads, arenas, build portals, and set up protections. We've got a kotv and punt/koth/kotv-mix-thingy arena, and we're looking to get a spawn, regular arena, and some road designs. I believe several have been submitted in the past so we've got to find them and select one, or if anyone has any designs laying around they feel like sharing then that's welcome also - but we'd need it relatively quickly. Some details: no citadel. No prison pearl. Old rules reinstated (eg. no griefing). LWC lockable chests. enchantism is back. xp plumped at 3x. ore will be plumped across the map, except redstone because who needs more of that? glowstone and quartz will generate in the overworld as well. Simpleclans will be active. Pearlnerf will be active. Many PvP enchants will be removed. PvP potions will be nerfed. More details will be in an announcement post later. As always when changes happen, there will be controversy and drama. Take care to refrain from personal attacks if you find yourself in disagreement with someone else regarding the merits of the announced changes, and remember it's a game and there's a real human being on the other end of those internet tubes. Since it seems quite urgent to get a new rev out we're going with what I've described. Regarding non-staff helping to plan revisions, I'm looking at rev 28. I'm personally hoping we can get a tentative public end date set for rev 27 barring overwhelming support for extending it at that time. In that time I'm hoping that anyone who feels like sharing their ideas, or helping to sift through the countless brainstorming and feedback threads and discussions and sorting all of that out into a workable plan will be able to do so. Stay tuned, and thank you for being patient. edit: also, I'm still attempting to keep this development log updated: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1e5b6oLYH79VyvnelZvd496Qf3mrcdJoCyv1J8EHsIp4/edit Sometimes it's tricky knowing what to put in there. please forgive any derpiness. Whenever you have time, I would love to talk to you in mumble about the balance of PVP enchants/potions since it would be a lot to type out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tobylane Posted September 22, 2014 Report Share Posted September 22, 2014 (edited) Survival doesn't have to be a hardcore-pvp-raiding server, but I do hope that it doesn't just end up being a clone of PvE with the worldguard pvp flag set to deny allow. If it doesn't differentiate itself from PvE, people will just play on the one with the larger community. If that is the most appealing (doesn't necessarily mean considerably appealing), new player generating form of PVP then it might be chosen/preferred by many who didn't love the Citidel rev as much as you did. Judging by what I see, of how far from vanilla other successful PVP servers are, and how successful PVE is, it sounds like a reasonable test for a revision. PVErs aren't going to PVP arenas, but you Survival players want to fight. That's the differentiation. Edited September 22, 2014 by tobylane Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roastnewt Posted September 22, 2014 Report Share Posted September 22, 2014 If that is the most appealing, new player generating form of PVP . . . I mean, we've tried the "Survival-mode building with pvp enabled" for 25 revisions. The reason they tried something new for Rev 26 was because that gameplay was clearly not appealing anymore. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JackTheLumberr Posted September 23, 2014 Report Share Posted September 23, 2014 Its like kind of CTF... But its not!!! Basicly you have a number of Kingdom you chose one at the begining of each rev. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mumberthrax Posted September 23, 2014 Report Share Posted September 23, 2014 So currently for advertising we have this: http://minecraftservers.org/search/MCPublic which players can vote on once per day. We have an account on Project Wunderfal, and have done some adverts on minecraftservers.net, but it costs money. From what I'm told, about $15 will get you 2-3 days of ads, but it's kind of weird in that if someone outbids you then you don't get to advertise. While we do have funds in our account, none of it is explicitly set aside for advertising in a budget. I will speak further on this with head admins and see what options we have available to us, and how much we could hypothetically budget for advertising. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mumberthrax Posted September 23, 2014 Report Share Posted September 23, 2014 Whenever you have time, I would love to talk to you in mumble about the balance of PVP enchants/potions since it would be a lot to type out. sure. I'll try to hang out on there, and you can message me when you're around. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
barneygale Posted September 23, 2014 Report Share Posted September 23, 2014 I think we need promotion more than advertising. Social media presence, regular small-scale events, collaborations with other communities. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slide Posted September 24, 2014 Report Share Posted September 24, 2014 I think one of the biggest turn offs most people had to Citadel was griefing. If we can come up with a solution that allows the plugin to do what it does, but doesn't destroy peoples work, could the plugin stay? My idea is essentially a 'timed automatic rollback' of all grief. Essentially, any protected block (even smoothstone) can not be permanently destroyed1. If someone comes along and wants to raid/kill the person inside, they are able to mine through the protection and do so. However, after a set amount of time, the protected blocks would re-appear. So maybe 8 hours or 30 minutes after the person who mined the block leaves the area, something like that. There is also a patch that slows down water if it is running over lava, this would limit cobble mountain grief. 1: You could still use the 'acid block' to remove the protections allowing you to remove the block permanently. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mumberthrax Posted September 24, 2014 Report Share Posted September 24, 2014 I think one of the biggest turn offs most people had to Citadel was griefing. If we can come up with a solution that allows the plugin to do what it does, but doesn't destroy peoples work, could the plugin stay? My idea is essentially a 'timed automatic rollback' of all grief. Essentially, any protected block (even smoothstone) can not be permanently destroyed1. If someone comes along and wants to raid/kill the person inside, they are able to mine through the protection and do so. However, after a set amount of time, the protected blocks would re-appear. So maybe 8 hours or 30 minutes after the person who mined the block leaves the area, something like that. There is also a patch that slows down water if it is running over lava, this would limit cobble mountain grief. 1: You could still use the 'acid block' to remove the protections allowing you to remove the block permanently. Slide, if we had something like that I'd be down for trying it out. I've long felt S needs delayed automatic rollbacks, and it seems like it could work alright with a citadel style gameplay. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dizney07 Posted September 24, 2014 Report Share Posted September 24, 2014 I think one of the biggest turn offs most people had to Citadel was griefing. If we can come up with a solution that allows the plugin to do what it does, but doesn't destroy peoples work, could the plugin stay? My idea is essentially a 'timed automatic rollback' of all grief. Essentially, any protected block (even smoothstone) can not be permanently destroyed1. If someone comes along and wants to raid/kill the person inside, they are able to mine through the protection and do so. However, after a set amount of time, the protected blocks would re-appear. So maybe 8 hours or 30 minutes after the person who mined the block leaves the area, something like that. There is also a patch that slows down water if it is running over lava, this would limit cobble mountain grief. 1: You could still use the 'acid block' to remove the protections allowing you to remove the block permanently. Slide, if we had something like that I'd be down for trying it out. I've long felt S needs delayed automatic rollbacks, and it seems like it could work alright with a citadel style gameplay. I actually like this idea, but not with Citadel on blocks. It would take away any point to protect builds that isn't an obsidian bunker. Would chests/furnaces be rolled back if broken (if implemented with citadel)? In my opinion the best part of citadel was breaking into other bases and taking their loot. Without that, citadel is just more of a hassle. Also I feel like players could take advantage of this by duplicating ores, for example placing diamond blocks and having someone else break them as they respawn. I think it would have to be closer to 8 hours for it to work, as players break into bases, it wouldn't be fair for them to be trapped inside by diamond reinforced obsidian. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mumberthrax Posted September 24, 2014 Report Share Posted September 24, 2014 Also I feel like players could take advantage of this by duplicating ores, for example placing diamond blocks and having someone else break them as they respawn. I imagine any sort of auto-rollback thing would be configured to not drop the blocks if it were used in the context of a server using citadel, to prevent duplication of any kind. In the context of our traditional setup, where griefing is not allowed and players normally must replace blocks after breaking in, it might be set up so the blocks don't drop as items, or it might be done such that the blocks drop as items, and if the player hasn't replaced them after x period of time then an automatic notification is sent to moderators, and it might have a blacklist of items that won't be restored automatically (like ores, diamond blocks, etc.). In the past when this sort of thing has been discussed, the issue some folks had with it was that it would encourage a culture of griefing and not giving a crap. That's one reason why i like the idea of still requiring players replace the broken blocks (thus requiring the blocks to have dropped as items), especially in cases where a build isn't protected and it gets griefed - I would not want us to get to a point where people who forget to or don't protect their builds get left in the dust after getting griefed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
barneygale Posted September 24, 2014 Report Share Posted September 24, 2014 Sounds like a pretty interesting idea actually mumber! However - It sounds like sending a notification to moderators when a player hasn't replaced would be too great a burden on mods - If you're blacklisting blocks for auto-replacement with the intention of preventing/reducing duping, where do you draw the line? There are only a few blocks players would consider almost completely worthless (dirt springs to mind), but everything has some value. I'd be up for the idea tho - sounds more arcade-y and chilled which is more up my street. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gizzletinks Posted September 24, 2014 Report Share Posted September 24, 2014 (edited) I'd like to suggest a couple potion/armor limit combinations that work very well and make pvp worthwhile, that will also be good for noobs and experienced pvpers. another option would be Prot 2/Sharp 3 Fire aspect 2 Knockback enabled but unabled to be put on same sword with sharpness 1.7 potions Health 2 Fire res 8:00 Speed 2 Speed 8:00 (this kit setup has been used on lots of other servers and it works really good, probably the best out there) Power 5 punch 2 flame 1 infinity Poison 0:33 Slowness 1:07 No regen, strength, or weakness Protection 3 Unbreaking 3 Feather Falling 4 . Sword/Bow Sharpness 3 Fire Aspect 2 Power 5 Punch 1 Infinity 1 * Knockback can't be coupled with sharpness . Potions(Buffs) * Instant Health 2 * [1.5 reverted] Strength 8:00 * Fire resistance 8:00 * Speed 2 1:30 * No Regen . Potions(De-buffs) * Poison 0:33 * Slowness 1:07 * Weakness 1:07 * No Instant Damage Sorry for the shitty format took some of this from old reddit post and another from a forum post. One of these would definitely be the best potion/armor setup for pvp With both of these kits fights are a bit shorter than vannila 1.5, but a lot longer than vannila w/ 1.7 potions. A normal vannila 1.5 match without any running would last 5 minutes, a 1.7 without running maybe a little over 1 minute. With both of these kits fights last between 2-4 minutes if nobody runs away. The kits are also tanky enough that a noob has a chance to get away from a fight, but isn't invincible until his armor breaks like in vannila 1.5 (whereas in vannila 1.7 running is not an option since you can die in a couple of hits) Edited September 24, 2014 by Gizzletinks 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rcub3161 Posted October 14, 2014 Report Share Posted October 14, 2014 Its like kind of CTF... But its not!!! Basicly you have a number of Kingdom you chose one at the begining of each rev. What makes each kingdom different from each other? Should there be some kingdoms as a democracy/dictatorship? If you kill the kingdoms leader is there a bonus or something? There should be some sort of objective for the kingdoms. Alliances? Wars? This seems like it could be an interesting game mode/server if we expanded upon the idea a little bit. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpiderMan Posted October 16, 2014 Report Share Posted October 16, 2014 (edited) https://www.reddit.com/r/mcpublic/comments/2je5q0/announcing_survival_revision_27/ -gsand ;D Edited October 16, 2014 by gsand Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts