Flumper Posted February 7, 2015 Report Share Posted February 7, 2015 (edited) I don't think we need less plumping or a smaller map. Both of those ideas are a fantastic way to reduce late rev server population, not maintain it.. Last rev a big complaint by new players was that there wasn't enough space inbetween builds late rev to found a city and one of my biggest complaints when I started playing on P (before ore plumping) was that the ores were almost all but gone by the time I started playing. I couldn't get a meaningful amount of gold or dia etc because I was constantly finding large branch mines that were picked clean, no matter where I dug. New, late rev players simply won't stick around if they feel like they're left with scraps. I think the more events idea is a good one. If/when people run out of things to work on, it gives them a reason to log on. Edited February 7, 2015 by Flumper 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
d3north Posted February 7, 2015 Report Share Posted February 7, 2015 As I stated before, and some people are alluding to, a defined end of rev is necessary. I put forward a fifteen week plan, about three and a half months. This is a nice round number, and can be extended another five weeks if player interest in the map and revision is high. With the fifteen weeks, you can split them into five week sections, and review and plan around each one. It makes deadlines easier, and not having a month-based system offers up a rotationary system for revisions (i.e. preventing things like Christmas occurs end of rev, or summer break is beginning of rev). The five week extension is a non-repeatable item, and will be voted on by the players and staff via the forum polls, with publicly viewable votes. This prevents ballot stuffing, and opens up discussion for and against the extension. Any ideas that could improve this? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ultrahub Posted February 8, 2015 Report Share Posted February 8, 2015 As I stated before, and some people are alluding to, a defined end of rev is necessary. I put forward a fifteen week plan, about three and a half months. This is a nice round number, and can be extended another five weeks if player interest in the map and revision is high. Your idea seems like a very reasonable solution, I would be in favor of such a system. My only extra thought is what happens when we actually get down to voting. What if we are split very evenly, or if there is demand for more options to vote on? I'm sure other issues may arise, but for this idea to work we would need a solid mindset on going in. Do we want to say the vote is final? While I don't know, I could see potential backlash and "drama" (god I hate that word) if a vocal group doesn't agree with the vote. Just some thoughts. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
d3north Posted February 8, 2015 Report Share Posted February 8, 2015 What if we are split very evenly demand for more options to vote on we would need a solid mindset on going in. Do we want to say the vote is final? A two-thirds vote or thirty people is required to stay. If neither are reached then the revision will end. No other options will be added. More moving parts means more things break. Keep it solid and final, and little-to-no trouble will be had. Fifteen week revisions, split into three parts of five weeks each. The vote for another five weeks begins with the last five weeks of the official revision, and lasts until the final week, with results announced across the board the following day. Should the extension vote pass, a five week period will be appended to the current revision, with no possibility of extension for any reason. Make this a Public, Visible vote, and allow comments and discussion in it's thread. A vote for extending requires a reason to be posted in the thread, be it more building time or simply enjoyment of local terrain etc. A vote for extension without a reason is removed, and fraudulent votes are removed as well. This system gives a reasonably long amount of time to build, and the extension for those who wish to complete their build. I believe that this would work great, as it gives everyone a specific date instead of realizing interest has vanished and then a few weeks to prepare a new revision. It gives even periods of five weeks for review of server statistics and a proper deadline for admins to prepare new revisions, and techs to update plugins. Im just looking for ways to improve the system, to make it more concrete and actually possible. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jllmprrt Posted February 8, 2015 Report Share Posted February 8, 2015 I feel like a set date would be awesome but I see why people wouldn't want that. I'd say like 4 months solid, and then vote on some extra time. I feel like the faster we build up towns and get an end grinder going, the slower that end-rev seems to go. This rev, the end grinder was up in like the second week, so it made getting what we needed rather easy. Didn't seem like a problem then, of course. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
d3north Posted February 8, 2015 Report Share Posted February 8, 2015 A request to Padmins, could such a system be put in place for this coming rev? There are twelve days to figure this out, but I believe it is solid enough for implementation. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pyr0mrcow Posted February 8, 2015 Report Share Posted February 8, 2015 (edited) I'm going to have to agree with Ultra on this one. While I'm usually all for more openness and community input/control, there are so many ways that a rev-ending vote could go sour. For an issue such as that, people may create extra accounts over time to control the vote. You could bring in a group of friends who've never played the server to turn it in your favor. Players from other servers or who've had a bad experience might vote to end the rev just to spite people and stir up trouble. Ect, ect.That's not even addressing what happens after the vote. There's likely to be at least some resentment for the winning party from the losing party. People will complain that the vote was unfair. If it's on here and not the Reddit, people might complain about being excluded due to not having a forum account. They might try to claim that something from the first paragraph happened, influencing the vote. I'm talking about way overblown scenarios, sure...but that's what you have to be prepared for. Looking at that option, comparing it to what we have now, it's not preferable. I think it's fine if the staff estimate when the best time for an ending should be. With a little warning, of course. There are twelve days to figure this out Also, I feel like I missed something. Was there an announcement on the rev end? Edited February 8, 2015 by Pyr0mrcow Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flumper Posted February 8, 2015 Report Share Posted February 8, 2015 Also, I feel like I missed something. Was there an announcement on the rev end? http://www.reddit.com/r/mcpublic/comments/2v5q6l/a_new_rev_approaches/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pyr0mrcow Posted February 8, 2015 Report Share Posted February 8, 2015 http://www.reddit.com/r/mcpublic/comments/2v5q6l/a_new_rev_approaches/ Yyyyyeeaaaaa that would be exactly what I missed. How'd I ignore that post... Welp, time to rush the Dog Works. And maybe visit the End. I haven't even done that yet. Pretty much what I meant though, the staff seem to do a fine job picking a time for the rev's end. Lot of people have been asking for the end of the rev, builds have slowed down, and for the most part the only people still working on major projects started really late, like me. Good time for a fresh start, I think. That and 1.8 BY THE MIGHTY DOG HORDE DO I WANT THOSE SEXY DOORS and you know plugin updates and whatnot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StatelyFandango Posted February 8, 2015 Report Share Posted February 8, 2015 One thing that immediately springs to mind as a way to retain players or keep new players who join late interested would be an expanding map. You could start with a 4x4 map, for example, and expand it by 1k every month throughout the rev. That would give people something new to explore and new places to build and have the added benefit of potentially drawing players back in a couple times throughout the rev. It would also give the habitual infrastructure builders something new to work on. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpiderMan Posted February 9, 2015 Report Share Posted February 9, 2015 How are you to get out of the End? And what about the End grinder? The problem with end grinders is that they let everyone reach the endgame very very fast. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pyr0mrcow Posted February 9, 2015 Report Share Posted February 9, 2015 (edited) Supposedly, in the far future, the console version of the Ender Dragon with the acid spilling attack and whatnot will be imported into the PC game, along with a method of rebirth. Though, that has no relevance here and now, I guess.There are other forms of efficient grinders for XP in the overworld, more made practical in 1.8, which are incredibly underrated, it's just obtaining the pearls that would become problematic without an End Grinder...it's a matter of convenience. Teleporting vs getting stuck in a gap and waiting for someone with permission or staff to come get you out, going all the way around the giant inconvenient wall instead of over it, ect. Edited February 9, 2015 by Pyr0mrcow Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Narissis Posted February 9, 2015 Report Share Posted February 9, 2015 Yeah, there will always be ways to get XP. If not an end grinder, then some other sort of mob grinder. Besides, there are plenty of people on the server with limited time to invest in levelling / enchanting. Having a faster route to accomplish these things frees up more of their time to invest in building. So I don't really see it as a bad thing. Using myself as an example, if I didn't have an end grinder to use for enchanting and repairing tools, I'm not sure I would have had the time to build noRTh to the extent that I have. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Difficult1 Posted February 14, 2015 Report Share Posted February 14, 2015 I think player retention has to do with long term goals and events. After the first month, everything is built up, the terrain is conquered with roads, and the rev ultimately slows down. I think in future, have a map thats big enough and detailed enough so exploring and developing takes longer, but not a HUGE map where everything is spread out and it becomes way too much repetitive work. Another thing that could help would be the encouragement of community based events. The staff run events are always fun and bring people back, but the community events also bring in extra creativity and different perspectives and angles. Building an event takes devotion (that keeping players in alone) and the fact that there will always be something new to do always helps. Shorter revs are good too, not short as in 2-3 months but shorter then 7-8. Long revs get very repetitive as people start to trickle out. So short to keep the attention span but not long enough to make it feel old and endless. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tobylane Posted February 14, 2015 Report Share Posted February 14, 2015 I think in future, have a map thats big enough and detailed enough so exploring and developing takes longer, but not a HUGE map where everything is spread out and it becomes way too much repetitive work. I heard some complaints from the people building links between cities this rev that it was too far and too repetitive. Do you have a number on what is big enough? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Difficult1 Posted February 14, 2015 Report Share Posted February 14, 2015 I heard some complaints from the people building links between cities this rev that it was too far and too repetitive. Do you have a number on what is big enough? I would say personally between 4k to 6k but of course it all depends on opinion on what is big enough Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.