[PMC] Survival Features Survey

[TheAcademician]

Hello everyone!

We S Admins are continuing to work on the new revision plans. To further that goal I've come up with a form with many of the options we're considering. We've been passing the form around the admin team and some mods that have already seen the pertinent documentation about these features. Now we're opening it up for any staff to provide us some feedback on these proposed features.

Many of the options on the form require some basic explanation. The original documentation we compiled from all the suggestions is a bit wordy and so I will provide a brief summary of some of the more non-intuitive options.

The Server
Cauldron-based Modded Server - Uses Forge mods to add custom items, biomes, realms, etc. This would greatly increase the freedom we would have in building a server with the options on this form such as adding custom NPCs, ores, furniture, and other cool stuff. The downside is that players would need to have the mods the server is running to log in. Using an existing modpack or rolling our own and making available are viable options here, and there are a few avenues of making that easy to use for the playerbase.

The Map
Persistent World - Provide a static and unified experience for players. Many areas of the map would be off limits for modification by players. Lots of pre-built structures and landscape. Revisions would be longer, and new content and areas would be added on.

Dungeons - Not just spawners in a room. These would be custom made (probably by many members of staff) large areas that players would need to group up to clear for rewards.

Raids - Dungeons on steroids, need more people, get more loot.

Instancing - Areas (Dungeons) are private to a player or group of players. This prevents outside interference when clearing a dungeon or raid.

Non-Vanilla Mob Spawning - Spawn mobs based on locations or other circumstances, not on light levels.

Custom Generation
Custom Nether - A Nether that is more custom built like the overworld and isn't just a place to quickly travel between portal locations.

RPG-Design - The world would be custom made and designed into continents, island, zones, biomes, etc to fullfill a narrative purpose for the world. This option works way better with persistent worlds as we don't have to redesign a custom map every time.

Ores only available in certain parts of the map - Possible only in mines/quarries, but also possible to have specific areas rich in certain ores. This depends heavily on other options.

Ores regenerate - Mostly relevant to mines/quarries, but this option mostly prevents strip mining the entire map by allowing people to acquire new ores by re-mining the same areas on a timed basis.

Designated Areas - We have some ideas that revolve around varying areas of PVP, which ones would you like to see?

Gameplay
Partying System - Allow people to group up and take on PVP and PVE objectives together.

Custom Abilities - Instead of just swinging swords and shooting bows, players would have additional abilities that would allow them to do more damage or place effects on their opponents.

NPC Clone At All Logoff For 15 Seconds - Policing combat logging is a problem, to resolve it, an NPC clone would spawn any time you logged off for 15 seconds (or more) regardless of combat status.

PVE/PVP Specific Gear - Much like now, some enchants are better against players than mobs, this could be expanded to have armor and weapons of many types that are good against mobs but not players, and vice-versa.

Disable Minecarts/Track For Players - This is mostly relevant for a persistent world setup as it would be difficult/impossible to build cross-world tracks. There would be exceptions for people building inside their own areas.

Hearthstones - An item that attempts to return the player to a set location. Would have a "cast" time and cooldown period, and be interruptable by combat.

Classes - We're considering adding classes to balance the mechanics of PVP and allow for more interesting gameplay in general. These would likely be stuff like knight, rogue, hunter, etc.

Class-restricted Potions - Only certain classes can use some potions, ie: rogue uses invisibility as part of their abilities.

Guilds - Clans by another name. Formed by 3 or more players to unite against their foes.

Factions - Non-player run factions (think fighter's guild, thieve's guild, etc) that the players can join.

Professions/Crafting
Remove/Replace Vanilla Crafting - To facilitate a lot of the other options on the form, most vanilla crafting recipes would need to be removed. Some of the more simple crafts could be kept in some form (think torches) but most item/armor crafting would be replaced.

Meta Materials - These would be crafting materials made up of combinations of other ores/items. ie: 3 diamonds and 2 iron produces Cut Diamonds.

Economy
Players Can Make/Purchase Locks/Lockpicks - Non-bank chests would need to be locked, people would be able to pick those locks. Players could purchase varying toughness of locks, thieving players could buy varying levels of picks. If we use NPC factions, possibility of unpickable locks/skeleton key rewards.

PVP
PVP Toggling - Players would be able to "flag" themselves for PVP or turn it off. Players not flagged for PVP could still be killed in any non-PVE area but there would be consequences.

Karma - A punitive system for players who kill people who are not flagged for PVP. Players with karma would be able to be attacked at will, even in PVE zones. Attacking a player with karma would not flag anyone that is not flagged for PVP.

If you have further questions feel free to ask them below and I will try to clarify as best I can. Please keep in mind that this form is not definitive for the future S revision plan, and any and all features are still on the table :]

Here is the form!

 

Please do not distribute this link to anyone not on staff at this time, thanks!

[TornadoHorse]

The intention is to go ahead and close survival and open this new server in it's place?

[CROCKODUCK]

I'm also just a tad confused. Are we completely changing survival now? I have heard no plans up until now so just want to make sure I understand correctly. Is this the intention to change from vanilla into something else entirely?

[TheAcademician]

Fundamentally, S in the future will be as far from vanilla as feels necessary to be fun. The gameplay that is provided by vanilla MC pvp, in the way we currently run it, is pretty much past it's life point. We've tried all the small fixes that the community has suggested over the years to revive the gameplay, and some not so simple, and it's pretty clear to me and the other S admins that those bandages aren't working. To that end there have been several ideas brought forth to us to try and deliver a more fulfilling experience. This survey is a mostly unfiltered list of those ideas on their basic levels, and, while there are plenty of options that we are excited about, none of the items on this survey are "guaranteed" especially because no details of any mechanics have been fleshed out. There is no plan at this stage except that S will be receiving a much needed overhaul, and that's why this form exists. We wanted to gather opinions on these features and weigh the results. At the end of the day S will still be about PVP, and this survey is just a stepping stone to make the server better.

[TornadoHorse]

Fundamentally, S in the future will be as far from vanilla as feels necessary to be fun. The gameplay that is provided by vanilla MC pvp, in the way we currently run it, is pretty much past it's life point. We've tried all the small fixes that the community has suggested over the years to revive the gameplay, and some not so simple, and it's pretty clear to me and the other S admins that those bandages aren't working. To that end there have been several ideas brought forth to us to try and deliver a more fulfilling experience. This survey is a mostly unfiltered list of those ideas on their basic levels, and, while there are plenty of options that we are excited about, none of the items on this survey are "guaranteed" especially because no details of any mechanics have been fleshed out. There is no plan at this stage except that S will be receiving a much needed overhaul, and that's why this form exists. We wanted to gather opinions on these features and weigh the results. At the end of the day S will still be about PVP, and this survey is just a stepping stone to make the server better.

 

We've all known this for months and months and I guess I'm glad the sadmins have realised it too, but this doesn't really answer my question. Are we going to be closing down survival and opening a completely new server starting fresh or will we carry on marketing it as 'survival', despite it not being anything like survival from your description?

[jchance]

We've all known this for months and months and I guess I'm glad the sadmins have realised it too, but this doesn't really answer my question. Are we going to be closing down survival and opening a completely new server starting fresh or will we carry on marketing it as 'survival', despite it not being anything like survival from your description?

 

 

The server (however it ends up) will still be s.nerd.nu and will replace what is currently there.   It will still be the nerd.nu Survival (PVP) server.  

 

Help me understand exactly where you're going here as this thread is about possible changes and your comments have focused 100% on the name. I'm honestly a little confused about this line of questioning- are you proposing we leave boring broken s.nerd.nu up as it is now and open up a new server?  All I have ever heard out of the vocal S players is that S sucks and needs to change, but now that they've done the research and are looking to make some major changes you're focusing on the name?  

[TornadoHorse]

Help me understand exactly where you're going here as this thread is about possible changes and your comments have focused 100% on the name.

 

Sure. My comments were about the name as this was the only part that I was curious about. Generally I ask questions to further my knowledge on a subject, and now having had that question answered I am more informed about the subject. I'm not sure if you have a problem with me asking that, not sure why there would be either. My 'focus' isn't on the name, that's just part of what I wanted to know more about, however my other concerns for survival aren't relevant for this thread so I'll keep them out.

 

I'm honestly a little confused about this line of questioning- are you proposing we leave boring broken s.nerd.nu up as it is now and open up a new server?

 

Definitely not. I would like whatever type of server we create to be called a relevant name to the game type so that new players can know what kind of server they are joining. I asked this as, from TheAcademician's list, not many of the options look like ones for a survival-type server (on most servers out there, 'survival' generally means PvE servers). If we end up being an RPG server with quests we shouldn't be called 'survival' just to stick with tradition - that would make no sense at all. I'm very happy that we're finally moving on from trying to patch up the broken server we have, but I would like it to be done right, not marketing it as something it isn't as we did in R26 with civcraft.

 

All I have ever heard out of the vocal S players is that S sucks and needs to change, but now that they've done the research and are looking to make some major changes you're focusing on the name?  

 

As I've basically covered already, we can have more than 1 focus, in fact we probably should have more than 1 focus. I'm sorry that my question seems to have angered you, I'm really not sure what was wrong with it. On the other topics of this thread, I don't think there is much up for discussion right now. Currently Aca is just gathering opinions and votes through the survey, the discussion will come after the results have been gathered I would assume.

[dizney07]

I'm actually curious as well and have the same question Torn has. I'm not against changes, I'm a heavy advocate of change and moving on from what seems to not be working anymore. However I believe if we do change, it would be better for our server to advertise said changes straight from the title. Saying that this is Rev 28 of Survival is odd because in my opinion it won't so much be survival anymore. We all knew S was fun for its time, but now that's grown stale, I think a rename or starting back at Rev 1 and letting people remember S for its good things is a better way to go. Everyone who was here would know that S is different, and new players would jump at the chance to start from scratch and build a new community with us. Of course this is all just my opinion.

[BeastBruiser]

I find it odd that we are spending most of the time arguing over what to call a server, when we haven't even decided what direction to take it. 
 

Perhaps we can stop arguing over the minute details and come together towards a productive discussion of what direction to take the server.

The time for a discussion about what to call a server would be better served once we know more about what the server will look like.

[TornadoHorse]

I find it odd that we are spending most of the time arguing over what to call a server, when we haven't even decided what direction to take it.

 

I don't think anyone is arguing about this. A discussion, maybe, thinking for the future, sure. The time it has taken everyone to write out comments here in response to what I said here will have taken no more than 30 minutes, and this isn't stopping anyone from discussing anything else about the server. If you read my above post, I think the idea for the survey is to gather results then discuss, rather than do it all at simultaneously. 

 

Perhaps we can stop arguing over the minute details and come together towards a productive discussion of what direction to take the server.

The time for a discussion about what to call a server would be better served once we know more about what the server will look like.

 

It's not really that minute, it goes hand in hand with what the server is going to be like. I'm genuinely surprised at the amount of negative reactions there've been to me asking such an innocent and relevant question like this.

[dizney07]

I find it odd that we are spending most of the time arguing over what to call a server, when we haven't even decided what direction to take it. 

 

Perhaps we can stop arguing over the minute details and come together towards a productive discussion of what direction to take the server.

The time for a discussion about what to call a server would be better served once we know more about what the server will look like.

 

Arguing? I'm purely curious. From the above form it clearly shows we're moving in a direction of change. I am happy. I want change. I'm not upset, concerned, angry or any other emotion that would push me to argue something. Though I do agree, it's something to discuss later.

 

Moving on, I didn't realize this was a place for said discussions? I would love to be apart of any discussions extended towards S as you and the other sadmins probably know all too well, though I didn't think this was the place. Maybe we could start a genuine discussion thread in the private mod chat discussing some of the ideas that are voted on heavily and how to make them work? 

[Deaygo]

The downside is that players would need to have the mods the server is running to log in.

 

Personally, I think that this is a horrible idea.  I think that any modifications should remain server side only.  You can still do a lot of changes server side while maintaining a vanilla client.

[TheRandomnatrix]

I find it odd that we are spending most of the time arguing over what to call a server, when we haven't even decided what direction to take it. 

 

Perhaps we can stop arguing over the minute details and come together towards a productive discussion of what direction to take the server.

The time for a discussion about what to call a server would be better served once we know more about what the server will look like.

I'm going to have to agree with Torn on this one. Calling it S/Survival even after radical change is going to weigh us down. I get what you're saying about focusing on the concept itself first, but we can't let the old S identity(which is clearly a lost cause at this point) hurt efforts for an essentially new style of gameplay. I would be satisfied if we actually killed S and replaced it with a new server starting at rev 1 as was proposed. 

[dizney07]

Personally, I think that this is a horrible idea.  I think that any modifications should remain server side only.  You can still do a lot of changes server side while maintaining a vanilla client.

 

I don't lean either way of this, but I'm curious as to why you think it's a horrible idea? I assume we'd have the modpack available somewhere on our forums, which could easily be accompanied by a step by step walk through video of how to install the mods. I get that some feel we should always be vanilla, but I also understand there are some things that plug ins can't do compared to mods. 

[djt832]

Could we throw a time frame on this survey? Say keep it open for a few more days or so? I'd hate to see it slip by the wayside.

[TheAcademician]

The survey hasn't received any new responses in the past couple of days so I think it would be prudent to close it on Wednesday (1/7). Thanks for all the input so far, everyone :D Spread the word around to any mods you feel may have input :]

 

I hope to have a post up in a few weeks at most to have people comment on the features we have decided to go with.

[XkinOEC]

Personally I like the idea of moving to a modpack, I think it would really draw people back into survival, adding features like guns, and perhaps other military items like tanks, or mods could very well be just what we need to bring our player base back. But this change would almost require a new name. the few stragglers remaining on the current s.nerd.nu that will attempt to join the new S and not realize they need a modpack, or from other places on the internet. We need to properly make it known of these changes so the right players will take advantage of it. 

 

I guess what I am getting at is 'if we had a skywars server, we wouldn't simply call it s.nerd.nu, it is a survival based server, sure... but it's simply not nerdnu's pvp survival with an environment'

[djt832]

Personally I like the idea of moving to a modpack, I think it would really draw people back into survival, adding features like guns, and perhaps other military items like tanks, or mods could very well be just what we need to bring our player base back. But this change would almost require a new name. the few stragglers remaining on the current s.nerd.nu that will attempt to join the new S and not realize they need a modpack, or from other places on the internet. We need to properly make it known of these changes so the right players will take advantage of it. 

 

I guess what I am getting at is 'if we had a skywars server, we wouldn't simply call it s.nerd.nu, it is a survival based server, sure... but it's simply not nerdnu's pvp survival with an environment'

 

It might just be me, but adding guns and tanks...just sounds too extreme.

[XkinOEC]

It might just be me, but adding guns and tanks...just sounds too extreme.

It was an example. But I wouldn't put it as an unquestionable addition if we move to modpacks... There are weapons outside of swords that could be added, created, and enhance the gameplay of S. 

[Deaygo]

I don't lean either way of this, but I'm curious as to why you think it's a horrible idea? I assume we'd have the modpack available somewhere on our forums, which could easily be accompanied by a step by step walk through video of how to install the mods. I get that some feel we should always be vanilla, but I also understand there are some things that plug ins can't do compared to mods. 

 

Because we're either A) relying on an external modpack to not have a backdoor in it and B) if we do one ourselves then we have to deal with people saying that we have a backdoor in it, blah blah.   And if something doesn't work, then who is going to diagnose it?  If someone can't install it properly, or something like that, then what?  We are also forcing someone who may have heard about the server from someone else in passing to not be able to just connect off the bat, they would be kicked with "Outdated client" or similar, and not know what's going on.

[XkinOEC]

Daeaygo, we have a lobby to handle that improper client issue. TBH we shouldn't have direct connect links anymore. Few servers do. But that's besides the point...

 

"I heard of this server via a friend, I want to join" *puts s.nerd.nu into addressbar in browser* "ok, how do I join?" "ooh, look it says Minecraft servers! What's a minecraft server?" *types minecraft into address bar and gets Bing search results* "so you're telling me I have to pay money and download something from this very sketchy looking minecraft.net?" 

 

Point being, if they can download minecraft, they can download a modpack. Sure, installation may be a different story, then again how many people who join the server actually store minecraft in their /program files/ directory?

[TheAcademician]

I have closed the survey and will be closing this thread shortly. I'd like to thank everyone for providing their feedback on these features :]

[Mrloud15]

Closing and moving to the archives.