The Spawn City plot limit needs to be reviewed and addressed

[Guest]

I've been playing on C for a majority of Rev 31 now and I have been building extensively in spawn city. You can see the contributions I've made here. CI've used every single plot I've built in and I've furnished each building to the brim with offices, hotel rooms or filming studios. The buildings are all well received by the community and are even going to be used for some of our role playing community events that we're running amongst ourselves. While I can understand why the vast scale of the number of plots I have is unreasonable in the eyes of some, I don't feel it's warranted to remove my claim over plots I previously had based on false statistic numbers and false accusations of abuse. The plots I've been using have been plots that users have given to me as a result of their inactivity in spawn city and have given me full permission to build on their lots. Ask any one of them and they will confirm they were 100% okay with me building there. If possible, I'd like these two plots to be returned to their original owners (DrTim58 and Vikhedgehog).

 

Contributions like this to a city are usually not something that are discouraged and are almost always encouraged by the sitting CAdmin team. I appreciate the work the CAdmins have put into this revision, but the two plot per user rule seriously needs to be reevaluated because given the scale of my activity on C (check the user stats) and given the scale of my activity in Spawn City, I think that the additional two plots I wanted for a mall behind my hotel were 100% warranted in addition to the plots I already own. Mind you, DrTim58 built the large white tower between my two towers, which makes that building HIS creation and therefore HIS plot. Ted50 built the large staggering tower behind the CTC and Dayln58 technically owns one of the CTC main towers because he designed the original layout. It is unfair and unreasonable to claim that I own 14 plots when in reality I only own around five (my own creations alone) not counting the ones I previously owned behind the hotel. The CAdmins refuse to acknowledge that this is an issue because they believe that new players will join and build in Spawn City. This is simply not true based on the fact we currently have two people on C -- at 6 PM EST on a week day night.

 

I don't want to imply that these plots can't be used by other players, but my point can be wrapped up into a few brief points:

• More than two plots was something that previous CAdmins ENCOURAGED in spawn city, especially when they resulted in more contributions for the city! I had five plots during rev 27 and I built an amazing hotel complex and office complex similar to what I have now. IIRC, we had more players back then and fewer plots and they were still mostly unused and were therefore plots I could reasonably claim.
• The two plot per user rule is ridiculous and based on a false standard that C is growing in playerbase and that interest in spawn city is growing. This is false based on my experience of seeing last revision's one person per plot spawn city fall into disrepair and ruin because nobody built there.
• One of the CAdmins (whom I won't name) has THREE plots, which is distinctly over the two plot person rule. Despite the fact the CAdmins have allowed me to keep my existing claims, it is really unfair for a CAdmin to enforce this rule and then give himself three plots when refusing to give users other users more plots.
• There is a huge "events" section of spawn city that can easily be designated for more plots. If we're concerned about plots, then break open the reserved land and stop acting like there's a land issue.
• There's also a huge unused CTA/Spleef plot near my buildings that can be used for more plots if this is truly an issue.

I intend to close this post by outlining a number of key facts:

1. I'm an active player who actively uses spawn city as the place I build. Prior to this weekend, I had no city and I didn't claim a ton of land.
2. I shouldn't be asked by an unnamed CAdmin to "go make my own city if I want more land" because I've contributed too much to the plots I currently have. That assertion is absurd and is completely unfair. If you don't want people to build at spawn then it shouldn't be claimable land.
3. The two plot per user rule needs to be much more flexible and should be adjusted based on how much time the requestee spends building at spawn. If I had no finished spawn plots I would understand you guys asking me to hold off but the fact every plot I've touched I've finished should mean that I can claim plots that are being unused by members of the community or plots that are unclaimed.
4. The assertion that the plots outside of the city that I carved out of surrounding land should be considered part of my city plots is also absurd. I'm only counting plots inside the city. If any new user wanted to do what I did then they have plenty of land to do it in. This shouldn't be counted as part of my total.

I'd like to know what everyone's thoughts on this are. I'm confident that we can work through this issue diplomatically rather than in a passive aggressive fashion and I look forward to hammering out terms. The CAdmin team needs to remain forward thinking and I think this is a great place to start.

 

tl;dr because this is big: the rule about spawn plots needs to be more clear, needs to be more flexible, and I would like these two plots to be restored to Vikhedgehog and DrTim58 because they were illegally taken from them for no justification what-so-ever.

 

Thanks

Edited November 2, 2016 by AvadaKedavra

[Challenger2]

I tend to agree with Avada. The main intent of the /NerdPlot system was 3 fold.

 

1. Allow new uses to _immediately_ get new plots without waiting for /modreq

2. Prevent users from abusing the plot system by automatically claiming a lot of plots (Especially on rev launch.)

3. Provide useful statistics and information

 

On a case by case basis, /nerdplot addowner PLAYER can be used by staff/admins to grant more plots. I believe it is important to ensure we have enough free plots before granting players additional plots. If we are running out of plots, we can create more plots. The plot limit keeps us from automatically running out of plots. That is not an issue when staff manually grant plot requests.

 

Another issue /nerdplot fixes is to prevent players from creating lots of 'derp' builds. If a player has derp plots or 1/2 used plots, I can see why staff wouldn't grant more plots.

 

/nerdplot can list all plots a player has. I feel somewhat inclined to add a /nerdplot tpplot PLOT command to make it easy to check out people's plots.

[DrTim58]

I fully agree with all this. I am glad my plot seems to have been restored, but we have all given permission to Avada. We just left our plots sitting there with either hollow buildings or unfinished shells and he took them (with our permission) and made something beautiful. This whole plot issue needs to be addressed and Ava, as always, has a fantastic idea. He's always doing his best to contribute to the community and attacking him because of a plot limit is just unfair and rude once all things in this debacle are considered. I'd highly recommend listening to him on his suggestions seeing as how he has great ideas for the server that are typically neglected. He's very reasonable and helpful, and in all honesty, he is being treated unfairly with the whole plot issue

[Bardidley]

I appreciate your dedication to the spawn city downtown. The reason we have Nerdplot is to keep track of claims and help prevent players from overtaking the city. Spawn city is not meant to be filled up by one individual but to be a collection of builds from all the players. If we are going to increase the plot limit we will increase the size of spawn city. I thought it was fair to grant you a large piece of land adjacent to spawn downtown.

 

We are looking into the possibility of expanding the downtown, and we will keep players up to date.

 

And for the record the same rules apply to me in spawn city, I have 1 Suburb plot and 2 Downtown plots.

[Hollifer]

Personally, i'd like to give a thank you for posting this issue here. I'll have to say that I am in strong agreement of allowing more plots per person.

 

The idea that someone can be punished for productive behaviors does seem a bit over the edge, and maybe it is a narrow perspective from a cadmin's point of view. When nerdplot was introduced it was rushed in, and there was a lack of discussion about what terms we would agree to allow plots to be used, and sadly ended up very strict.

 

This is where we can aim to fix this. Considering DoctorTim & Challengers feedback, we're already discussing a plot claim increase, and

(hopefully) dropping aggression over the case of productive building.

 

 

If a few more people would like to provide their thoughts/feedback on the subject, that'd be wonderful,

[Guest]

I appreciate your dedication to the spawn city downtown. The reason we have Nerdplot is to keep track of claims and help prevent players from overtaking the city. Spawn city is not meant to be filled up by one individual but to be a collection of builds from all the players. If we are going to increase the plot limit we will increase the size of spawn city. I thought it was fair to grant you a large piece of land adjacent to spawn downtown.

 

 

I appreciate your speedy reply. I understand that you guys are preparing for a mass of players to come and build in spawn, and if this was true I wouldn't have an issue with it, but given the current nature of our player base being really really really small, I think this absolutely needs to be reconsidered. Considering the fact I had permission to build on two plots owned by two different users and that those two plots were taken from me on the basis of me "building too much" is absurd in my eyes. I respectfully disagree with this point and I hope we can come to an agreement that better suites the needs that I'm expressing here.

 

I believe that Spawn City is something that can be expanded and it's also something that is really conveniently set up for what I was intending to accomplish this revision -- building a large office complex in spawn city with a hotel located near by. I respect and appreciate the fact you granted me the land adjacent to spawn to use, and while I plan to use it conservatively once i get to the point of developing it, I would like much more certainty that my plots aren't going to get snatched up everything I make a modreq about them. When the two plots I was referring to above were removed, they were empty, but one had been empty for months and you had specifically given me indication that I would be allowed to keep this plot, and the other was Vikhedgehog's plot, and once I swapped plots with him I intended to build something there that would have benefitted the spawn city area.

 

My overarching point here is not to be a bee in your bonnet to cause an issue. My overarching point here is that regardless of the size of spawn city, that there should be considerations made for players who are using the city more than others. Unless people are contacting you on a daily basis asking why I have so many plots, I don't really see an issue to fix here...

 

The idea that someone can be punished for productive behaviors does seem a bit over the edge, and maybe it is a narrow perspective from a cadmin's point of view. When nerdplot was introduced it was rushed in, and there was a lack of discussion about what terms we would agree to allow plots to be used, and sadly ended up very strict.

 

I personally preferred the system where we modreq'd for a plot directly but that's another story... I felt it gave the mod teams better insight and also made it so policies could be better enforced. Now that NerdPlot is in place I think it's better to work with what we have, but for the record I personally thought the previous system was less messy than this automated system. Unfortunately that's just the consequence of automation though.

 

I appreciate that you guys are willing to discuss this civilly rather than it remain an issue that is outstanding for the rest of the revision, and I hope you'll take into account the fact of what I said where activity should determine the number of plots a user has access to -- not just a unique IP/person behind the account. Many players claimed lots at the beginning of the revision and realized they weren't going to have time to develop them so they were 100% fine to let me use them, and I was 100% fine to develop them to make them nice.

 

Again, I'm not looking to cause any issues here but I'd like to keep the plots I originally had given to me and I'd appreciate it if, as a result of this discussion, that those two plots are returned to me. I don't intend to expand outside my allotted area at this point but removing my plots for the sake of making room for other players (other players who aren't using Spawn City or who leave the second we say welcome to them) is kind of absurd to be honest.

[Hollifer]

I personally preferred the system where we modreq'd for a plot directly but that's another story...

 This is still a possibility. After reaching a limit a moderator or admin can manually give ownership to a player of a plot. Perhaps we could just change the policy around claiming and only allow a base # of automatic claims (to avoid spam-claiming)  and then after said automatic claims are filled we can open that person up to modreq'ing for another. This is similar to the old system, yet still allows for a comfortable way for new players to get started.

 

So would that be something that players would have interest in?

[Guest]

This is still a possibility. After reaching a limit a moderator or admin can manually give ownership to a player of a plot. Perhaps we could just change the policy around claiming and only allow a base # of automatic claims (to avoid spam-claiming)  and then after said automatic claims are filled we can open that person up to modreq'ing for another. This is similar to the old system, yet still allows for a comfortable way for new players to get started.

 

So would that be something that players would have interest in?

I'd be interested in having this kind of thing implemented for the future, but the major issue at hand right now is the fact the admins are removing plots that belonged to others in order to take them away from me. In addition to more flexible policy changes, can I be given these plots back?

[torteela]

Those plots were removed from you because, by your own admission, you have five plots that are "yours," which is three more than allowed by the rules, and three more than any other user has. They were removed from the other users for being inactive for long enough that their claim could be removed per our inactive claim policy. Those players are more than welcome to claim their plots back and build in them but they will not be given to you.

 

The purpose of Spawn City as I understand it is to showcase builds from a variety of players close to spawn. To help ensure that anyone who wants to has a chance to build there we keep the limit low at the start of the rev so one or two people don't take all the plots. Raising the limit is something we can have a conversation about, and is perhaps overdue this far into the rev. However, you went about bringing this up entirely the wrong way.

 

Instead of seeing a rule in place that you wanted to change and making a thread like this to talk about it you took it upon yourself to bypass the rule, only making this thread when you got called out on it. While I agree with your idea that the plot limit should be raised, I take issue with some of the things you said in your post. 

 

The plots I've been using have been plots that users have given to me as a result of their inactivity in spawn city

On September 19th you had a user who doesn't play on our server use an alt account to join for the first time, claim a plot for you, and then leave never to be seen again. I can provide the logs for this if requested. To me this shows that you were just trying to get around the limit however you could and is basically the definition of abuse.

 

The CAdmins refuse to acknowledge that this is an issue because they believe that new players will join and build in Spawn City. This is simply not true based on the fact we currently have two people on C -- at 6 PM EST on a week day night.

I don't see how those two things are related, but regardless that isn't what we think. We're fine with raising the limit, just as far as I know no one's asked. There was one person who asked a month into the rev but we weren't ready to raise it then. If someone had asked since then we probably would have done it.

 

The two plot per user rule is ridiculous and based on a false standard that C is growing in playerbase and that interest in spawn city is growing. This is false based on my experience of seeing last revision's one person per plot spawn city fall into disrepair and ruin because nobody built there.

Like I said earlier, the two per person rule is there for the start of the rev to give everyone who wants to the chance to build, and we're totally fine with raising it after the rev has been around for a while.

 

One of the CAdmins (whom I won't name) has THREE plots, which is distinctly over the two plot person rule. Despite the fact the CAdmins have allowed me to keep my existing claims, it is really unfair for a CAdmin to enforce this rule and then give himself three plots when refusing to give users other users more plots.

No cadmin has more than the allowed number of plots, most of us have less. I'm not really sure why you would said something that just isn't true. I have one suburb plot, Hollifer has one downtown and one suburb, Bard has two downtown and one suburb, Toker has one suburb plot, and even if you include Challenger he has only one suburb plot.

 

I shouldn't be asked by an unnamed CAdmin to "go make my own city if I want more land" because I've contributed too much to the plots I currently have. That assertion is absurd and is completely unfair. If you don't want people to build at spawn then it shouldn't be claimable land.

For the record three cadmins were online at the time that conversation was happening and we all agreed on that. Like I said above a few times, we do want people to build in spawn, which is why we have a limit at the start of the rev to give everyone a chance to build. What you want Spawn City to be and what it is are two different things. If you want it to be a place where anyone can build as much as they want that's a conversation we can have, but that's not how it is now.

 

The assertion that the plots outside of the city that I carved out of surrounding land should be considered part of my city plots is also absurd. I'm only counting plots inside the city. If any new user wanted to do what I did then they have plenty of land to do it in. This shouldn't be counted as part of my total.

They don't count as part of your total. We gave you that land as a way to encourage you to build there instead of bypassing the plot limit, but in a place that was still "in" the Spawn City area. A lot of new users are only used to plotted servers, so having land available for them to claim might make it more likely they'll stay. If its not completely full half way through the rev its not the end of the world.

 

the rule about spawn plots needs to be more clear, needs to be more flexible, and I would like these two plots to be restored to Vikhedgehog and DrTim58 because they were illegally taken from them for no justification what-so-ever.

I think the rule is clear, don't claim more plots then you're allowed to. They perhaps could be more flexible, which is something we can talk about. Those two players are more then welcome to go claim their plots back if they want to build in them.

 

tl;dr If you want a rule to change then ask about it, don't break it then get upset when you get called out.

[Guest]

 I'll dive right into this one -- it seems like you took a while to write this one up since it reads like it was written last night and it reads like you copied random parts from my post and adding the same lines about how I broke the rules and how I need to stop building in spawn city because it's causing our hundreds of new players distress. I'll go in order respectively:

 

 

Those plots were removed from you because, by your own admission, you have five plots that are "yours," which is three more than allowed by the rules, and three more than any other user has. They were removed from the other users for being inactive for long enough that their claim could be removed per our inactive claim policy. Those players are more than welcome to claim their plots back and build in them but they will not be given to you.

 

Man, this is like fighting in Congress or something... That is some of the most legalized language I've ever read on these forums, and I'm not really surprised it came from this thread to be honest. I'll hand it to you, I'm impressed by the language here. Now let's dive into it. The notion that the plot be removed due to the owner not being active at the plot is absurd and is designed to make sure I'm not able to build at spawn city. Plain and simple. It's seems sneaky and passive but it's 100% aggressive on your part and completely contradicts everything else said by every other admin in this thread. This is completely against the notion that Nerd.nu, and specifically C, is trying to be a "community". Do people who live on a neighborhood come up with weirdly worded confusing policies to run people out of the neighborhood? Not if neighbors want people to live there... If you guys want people to play here, then the weirdly worded shadow rules and shadow games need to stop. This isn't an old issue and while it took a very long hiatus, your post just brought it back from the dead. Hopefully you'll continue reading from this point but I'd understand if you started writing your comment already...

 

On September 19th you had a user who doesn't play on our server use an alt account to join for the first time, claim a plot for you, and then leave never to be seen again. I can provide the logs for this if requested. To me this shows that you were just trying to get around the limit however you could and is basically the definition of abuse.

 

I admitted that I did this to a number of admins excluding you, so your logs are just going to attest to something I already said. If it makes you feel any better, I gave this lot to Vikhedgehog so this is irrelevant of course.

 

 

I don't see how those two things are related, but regardless that isn't what we think. We're fine with raising the limit, just as far as I know no one's asked. There was one person who asked a month into the rev but we weren't ready to raise it then. If someone had asked since then we probably would have done it.

 

I've asked multiple times. As DrTim58 said above, the users who gave my their plots, excluding the user who never played, are all active and all give me permission to use them. Your point about my point's irrelevancy is irrelevant in itself.

 

 

Like I said earlier, the two per person rule is there for the start of the rev to give everyone who wants to the chance to build, and we're totally fine with raising it after the rev has been around for a while.

 

You said this but Hollifer said this before:

 

 

The idea that someone can be punished for productive behaviors does seem a bit over the edge, and maybe it is a narrow perspective from a cadmin's point of view. When nerdplot was introduced it was rushed in, and there was a lack of discussion about what terms we would agree to allow plots to be used, and sadly ended up very strict.

 

How come your point contradicts hers? How come you're just writing your own agenda here? The strictness of this two plots per person rule is EXACTLY the thing I'm trying to address. If you want more details on my thoughts here, I'd urge you to read my top posts.

 

 

No cadmin has more than the allowed number of plots, most of us have less. I'm not really sure why you would said something that just isn't true. I have one suburb plot, Hollifer has one downtown and one suburb, Bard has two downtown and one suburb, Toker has one suburb plot, and even if you include Challenger he has only one suburb plot.

 

After checking here I was wrong in this regard because it looked like Bardidley had the plot adjacent to Vikhedgehog's new plot and two plots farther down from spawn but that changed suddenly... I'm not sure what happened there or if is just me going crazy but that was characterized and wrong on my part.

 

 

For the record three cadmins were online at the time that conversation was happening and we all agreed on that. Like I said above a few times, we do want people to build in spawn, which is why we have a limit at the start of the rev to give everyone a chance to build. What you want Spawn City to be and what it is are two different things. If you want it to be a place where anyone can build as much as they want that's a conversation we can have, but that's not how it is now.

 

You didn't read my top comment then. Let me reiterate again: Barely anyone builds in spawn city and barely anyone plays on C anymore. Unless there's a huge list of complaints from new users looking to build there that you're not sharing with me, this just looks like an attempt to make something come true that will not come true. People aren't using spawn city. Chasing me out isn't going to change this fact. If my plots were unbuilt, it would be Tim's build, Bard's builds, a few other towers and mostly unfinished plots. I really don't understand how you'd benefit by chasing me out or by making me carve out an entire city next to spawn city. It's not like you guys would even grant me a warp for anything I build... why should I leave when there's a warp to exactly where I want it right at spawn? And don't try to say "we're not chasing you out"... Passive aggressively removing me from plots that other users gave to me is the defacto of chasing me out.

 

 

They don't count as part of your total. We gave you that land as a way to encourage you to build there instead of bypassing the plot limit, but in a place that was still "in" the Spawn City area. A lot of new users are only used to plotted servers, so having land available for them to claim might make it more likely they'll stay. If its not completely full half way through the rev its not the end of the world.

 

Then make more plots.... I also addressed this above if you had read but based on how many points I'm literally copying and pasting from my top post into this one, it's evident that you didn't... If you need more plots, make more plots. Use the HUGE CTA plot to make more plots... Accept my offer to move the CTC to the empty plot next to spawn and I'll give back all my plots... Ask me to develop the land that you gave to me into usable spawn city land and I'd happily let you give it out to people... Or recognize that this server isn't growing fast enough for more plots. I don't see how this even helps people stay... If people dislike your server then they're going to leave. A spawn plot isn't going to help with this one bit.

 

 

I think the rule is clear, don't claim more plots then you're allowed to. They perhaps could be more flexible, which is something we can talk about. Those two players are more then welcome to go claim their plots back if they want to build in them.

 

And if those two players turn around and give me full permission to build there, then I'm breaking the rule again? Half the time I'm building FOR them, not for myself! DrTim58's building has a ton of awesome offices in it for his company -- not for me... While the two plots I'm referring to were going to be an extension for my hotel, I think if users want to give their only two plots to another user that it shouldn't be something held against me or them. You're kicking the wrong dog, and that only leads to regulars becoming dissatisfied and leaving.

 

 

tl;dr If you want a rule to change then ask about it, don't break it then get upset when you get called out.

 

And I'm not upset, I'm working it out calmly and reasonably. Bardidley and Holli were calm and reasonable with me so that's why I'm awfully confused your post, but what the hey, I wanted a reply so I got one I guess.

[DrTim58]

Those plots were removed from you because, by your own admission, you have five plots that are "yours," which is three more than allowed by the rules, and three more than any other user has. They were removed from the other users for being inactive for long enough that their claim could be removed per our inactive claim policy. Those players are more than welcome to claim their plots back and build in them but they will not be given to you.

Where do I start with this little tidbit of information. The main point I wish to discuss is "They were removed from the other users for being inactive" If you are talking about me being inactive from building in the plot, Ava was building in my tower, why would i want to disturb the process of construction within it? I certainly haven't been inactive gameplay wise. I mean, I'm number four on the usage stats. I see absolutely no reason why I'd be considered inactive. I admit, I perhaps could've done some exterior work, but that is no reason to consider me inactive when I do not wish to disrupt his process of building. I am glad my plot has been returned to me, and Ava and I have plans for it (so yes, any changes made to it by him do have my full consent and I will most likely be aiding him in any changes so I won't be seen as inactive). I hope we can remain civil about this all and stay friendly with each other in game <3

[torteela]

Avada, if you would like to rewrite your post without all of the passive-aggressive jabs I would be more than happy to respond to it, because as you said "I'm confident that we can work through this issue diplomatically rather than in a passive aggressive fashion."

For the record I did read your other replies in this thread.

 

Where do I start with this little tidbit of information. The main point I wish to discuss is "They were removed from the other users for being inactive" If you are talking about me being inactive from building in the plot, Ava was building in my tower, why would i want to disturb the process of construction within it? I certainly haven't been inactive gameplay wise. I mean, I'm number four on the usage stats. I see absolutely no reason why I'd be considered inactive. I admit, I perhaps could've done some exterior work, but that is no reason to consider me inactive when I do not wish to disrupt his process of building. I am glad my plot has been returned to me, and Ava and I have plans for it (so yes, any changes made to it by him do have my full consent and I will most likely be aiding him in any changes so I won't be seen as inactive). I hope we can remain civil about this all and stay friendly with each other in game <3

Inactivity for plots follows the same rules as inactivity for regions. Even if you're active on the server, if you don't build in claimed land for one month it's subject to be removed. At the time we looked at those plots, neither plot had anything built in it. 

[Guest]

Avada, if you would like to rewrite your post without all of the passive-aggressive jabs I would be more than happy to respond to it, because as you said "I'm confident that we can work through this issue diplomatically rather than in a passive aggressive fashion."

 

 

Inactivity for plots follows the same rules as inactivity for regions. Even if you're active on the server, if you don't build in claimed land for one month it's subject to be removed. At the time we looked at those plots, neither plot had anything built in it. 

 

Re-write yours first and I'll re-write mine. Yours is equally passive aggressive. I just followed suit.

 

 

For the record I did read your other replies in this thread.

 

Nice

[DrTim58]

 

Inactivity for plots follows the same rules as inactivity for regions. Even if you're active on the server, if you don't build in claimed land for one month it's subject to be removed. At the time we looked at those plots, neither plot had anything built in it.

The plot in question was empty for an hour. Also, Ava had been building in that plot (with my consent since it was a project we were both working on. With me who built the exterior and he who did the interior quite nicely). I hope you've been using the block log to verify this otherwise you merely assumed it hadn't been built in in over a month. I hope this entire debacle can be resolved and I wish no hard feelings upon you.

[Guest Former Staff]

Maybe it's worth just trying to keep the discussion on-topic. If we perceive another post as passive aggressive, rise above it and be the better person, lead by example.

 

---

 

From what I can see, there are a few points worth discussing in more detail to find out what both the creative admins as a collective and the community would like.

 

• Spawn city plots allowing for more than 2 per person?
  • Which criteria would people need to get additional plots?
    • Nerdplot lets people get a region without moderator intervention which is great. Should moderators be involved to determine increases beyond the nerdplot capacity by assessing whether the existing plots are developed / used?
  • Is the current limit of two per person enough?
    • Making sure that there are plots available for anyone who wants them is important but it's also good to see empty plots being used.
• Ensuring there are enough spawn city plots.
  • Bardidley has mentioned that the creative admins are looking into adding more plots. Maybe this could be something prepared for during the construction of a new revision?
    • This way the city plots can start at their maximum intended size, if we're reaching close to capacity at the (approximate) halfway point of a revision.
  • How many plots are there in total per district, how many are claimed and how many are built upon? I'm merely curious as to how popular the plots are, even if they are only estimates to save time.
    • Bluntly, I am wondering how big an issue plot usage is at spawn city from both the perspective of making sure there are adequate plots available and for people who want to help spawn be a showcase of great builds.
• Sharing spawn city plots.
  • This point is a little more geared towards the creative admins. In my opinion, people should not be restricted from building together, it is multiplayer after all. ;-) Though I do see some concerns about plot collaborations and the consequences of having plots taken away, would someone from the creative admin team be able to share some reassurances, please?
    • Assuming one collaborator has reached their plot limit already and this will mean they are sharing an additional plot.
• Plots taken away.
  • Again this point is probably best answered only by creative admins. When the above points, particularly addressing the plot limit have been addressed, would this change anything in regards to the currently contested plots at spawn city which have culminated in this discussion?

[Hollifer]

 

Maybe it's worth just trying to keep the discussion on-topic. If we perceive another post as passive aggressive, rise above it and be the better person, lead by example.

 

---

 

From what I can see, there are a few points worth discussing in more detail to find out what both the creative admins as a collective and the community would like.

 

• Spawn city plots allowing for more than 2 per person?
  • Which criteria would people need to get additional plots?
    • Nerdplot lets people get a region without moderator intervention which is great. Should moderators be involved to determine increases beyond the nerdplot capacity by assessing whether the existing plots are developed / used?
  • Is the current limit of two per person enough?
    • Making sure that there are plots available for anyone who wants them is important but it's also good to see empty plots being used.
• Ensuring there are enough spawn city plots.
  • Bardidley has mentioned that the creative admins are looking into adding more plots. Maybe this could be something prepared for during the construction of a new revision?
    • This way the city plots can start at their maximum intended size, if we're reaching close to capacity at the (approximate) halfway point of a revision.
  • How many plots are there in total per district, how many are claimed and how many are built upon? I'm merely curious as to how popular the plots are, even if they are only estimates to save time.
    • Bluntly, I am wondering how big an issue plot usage is at spawn city from both the perspective of making sure there are adequate plots available and for people who want to help spawn be a showcase of great builds.
• Sharing spawn city plots.
  • This point is a little more geared towards the creative admins. In my opinion, people should not be restricted from building together, it is multiplayer after all. ;-) Though I do see some concerns about plot collaborations and the consequences of having plots taken away, would someone from the creative admin team be able to share some reassurances, please?
    • Assuming one collaborator has reached their plot limit already and this will mean they are sharing an additional plot.
• Plots taken away.
  • Again this point is probably best answered only by creative admins. When the above points, particularly addressing the plot limit have been addressed, would this change anything in regards to the currently contested plots at spawn city which have culminated in this discussion?

 

 

Allowing more than two per person:

•  Those who have filled up their auto-claimed plots already. would be able to modreq for additional plots.
• Yes, moderators can list the plots owned, and teleport to said plots manually if they suspect someone has not used their current plots.
• The current limit of 2 plots per person is not enough, and i'd like to see it raised to 5 for both downtown and suburbs + allowing plots on modreq once you've reached the limit.
• It's not very difficult to add more plots, and in the case that we do run out of room -- The map is never full, and the possibility for community builds are endless. (spawn city 2? )

Ensuring enough plots:

• If people would like, we would always be open to making spawn city larger at the revision start.
• I actually don't know the # of plots, that's a great question for Bard
• As far as i'm aware of: We have enough space to expand a bit right now, Bard is working on it, and there are still plots that need to be filled. (downtown may be getting a little bit low, but that's where expanding can come in,

Sharing spawn city plots:

• I feel that so long as a plot is being filled, and both players agree, it's perfectly fine.
• If we take the route of changing the claiming policy to allow players to claim more plots with modreqs, this will be irrelevant.

 

Plots that were taken away:

• I believe the best solution here would be to allow these plots to be returned/claimed freely to their owners.

[torteela]

The plot in question was empty for an hour. Also, Ava had been building in that plot (with my consent since it was a project we were both working on. With me who built the exterior and he who did the interior quite nicely). I hope you've been using the block log to verify this otherwise you merely assumed it hadn't been built in in over a month. I hope this entire debacle can be resolved and I wish no hard feelings upon you.

This is one of the two plots in question, which I'm assuming was yours because it's next to your other one. As you can see it has no recorded edits which means it hasn't built in for at least a month. Maybe we're talking about different plots?

[Guest]

 

Allowing more than two per person:

•  Those who have filled up their auto-claimed plots already. would be able to modreq for additional plots.
• Yes, moderators can list the plots owned, and teleport to said plots manually if they suspect someone has not used their current plots.
• The current limit of 2 plots per person is not enough, and i'd like to see it raised to 5 for both downtown and suburbs + allowing plots on modreq once you've reached the limit.
• It's not very difficult to add more plots, and in the case that we do run out of room -- The map is never full, and the possibility for community builds are endless. (spawn city 2? )

Ensuring enough plots:

• If people would like, we would always be open to making spawn city larger at the revision start.
• I actually don't know the # of plots, that's a great question for Bard
• As far as i'm aware of: We have enough space to expand a bit right now, Bard is working on it, and there are still plots that need to be filled. (downtown may be getting a little bit low, but that's where expanding can come in,

Sharing spawn city plots:

• I feel that so long as a plot is being filled, and both players agree, it's perfectly fine.
• If we take the route of changing the claiming policy to allow players to claim more plots with modreqs, this will be irrelevant.

 

Plots that were taken away:

• I believe the best solution here would be to allow these plots to be returned/claimed freely to their owners.

 

 

Thank you for keeping on topic. I'd also like to thank Barlimore for adding these points because they are strong and reasonable. I'm going to ignore all the noise above because this post basically summarizes what actually needs to occur and it outlines it clearly in my mind.

 

If we can progress through the rest of this discussion with the reasonable folks in this thread continuing the discussion forward then I can see an outcome that is amenable for both sides.Multiple people seem to agree that this is something we can address and I would be more than interested in having it addressed.

[Abitcat]

Hi,

 

I would just think making Spawn-City BIGGER, but with higher plot limits. It would be nice to make that limit HIGHER, but then you would need to expand Spawn-City Downtown relatively bigger (possibly add around 5-9 plots?)- but a needed spot would be used. Maybe that blank area in front of the C.T.A. HQ, could be reasonable. I would say this because the following reasons (this is kinda getting passive-aggressive, crap):

• Spawn-City Downtown is really small-should get expansion
• If you higher the limit for plots, more people could build awesome buildings, but as a collaboration sort of thing?
• (Stating that bullet above) there can be plots in that area could only have 2 people own it or MORE, so it stays as a collaboration.
• It would be nice to see people make builds with each other, like how Avada is doing with the office buildings (the CTC).​

But, there can be some downsides that can be apparent:

• Downtown will be a laggy WRECK if there's as many entities as The Plaza Hotel/Casino.
• It WILL fill up VERY quickly, such as Downtown did.

I would green light Holli's idea of a Spawn-City 2:

 

• It's not very difficult to add more plots, and in the case that we do run out of room -- The map is never full, and the possibility for community builds are endless. (spawn city 2? )

If there's an area that can support that such (and a large enough area). I'm agreeing with Avada for the plot limit raise, and Holli's idea of a 2nd Spawn-City.

 

Best Regards,

                  Abitcat

 

(P.S.: sorry if it sounds passive-aggressive. I'm just speaking my mind. Just a thought.)

[ExcessiveToker]

I've read everything and I'm going to make a short and sweet reply since I had a very long conversation about this with Avada in game: 

 

We're always open to suggestions for the server. What we are NOT open to, and what caused all of this in the first place is using exploits to bypass our current system. We're also open for building with players and sharing plots. We realize that you've done that quite a bit, that doesn't concern us. The exploits concern us. Had it been a popular demand or a simple request in the first place we would have had no problem increasing the limit on Spawn City plots for players after waiting for a while. We have already discussed this as a team and we will be increasing the limit on Spawn City plots for everyone. Not sure what the exact numbers will be but we all agree that 2 doesn't seem like enough. We don't like giving special permissions or treatment to individual players (which is practically what we did by letting you keep your 5 plots). I also don't appreciate the direction this thread went, or the direction it started off in. It's very passive aggressive (hardly passive) and not very "civil". This SHOULD have been a discussion thread about Creative policies rather than a "can I please have my plots back" thread. 

 

In the future, if anyone has suggestions/concerns, please contact us before breaking it. We, on a regular basis, add new features and change things based on player request. Your suggestions/concerns will not be ignored by us. 

[Guest Former Staff]

This SHOULD have been a discussion thread about Creative policies rather than a "can I please have my plots back" thread.

 

On that note, in case my attempt thus far at derailing the topic back on track wasn't clear enough. How do you feel about each of the discussion points I've tried to summarise above?

 

It seems to be a consensus that 2 plots are not enough so I gather there is a discussion to be had on another number or even as Hollifer has suggested; Some policy for allowing additional plots to be granted on a case by case basis.

[Silversunset01]

On that note, in case my attempt thus far at derailing the topic back on track wasn't clear enough. How do you feel about each of the discussion points I've tried to summarise above?

It seems to be a consensus that 2 plots are not enough so I gather there is a discussion to be had on another number or even as Hollifer has suggested; Some policy for allowing additional plots to be granted on a case by case basis.

I believe this has been answered already. From what I've read it seems they started with a lower limit to encourage more users to build (which they are happy to revisit once the revision has been up for a bit) but ultimately that additional plots can be requested FROM CADMINS once a user has filled whatever the current system limit is.

[tobylane]

I would like the downtown area to be more linear and less square. It's an fps killer to have everything in view from one point.

 

Not sure on this: Could we limit interior decoration in some way, say only up to y100 or only in 5 floors in total in a plot. CTC3 is something to visit, but you may need to spend lots of time standing still or change your settings.

[Guest]

I would like the downtown area to be more linear and less square. It's an fps killer to have everything in view from one point.

 

Not sure on this: Could we limit interior decoration in some way, say only up to y100 or only in 5 floors in total in a plot. CTC3 is something to visit, but you may need to spend lots of time standing still or change your settings.

 

I was considering changing this a bit (eg. maybe clearing out some floors and just lighting them up so they still look nice from the outside), but a policy is a bit excessive to be honest since I can just do it on my own time as a courtesy because I know a ton of people have trouble traveling through downtown because of the lag from all the decorations. I'll spend some time looking into how to do that this weekend so it's hopefully a bit easier to fly though.

[Guest Former Staff]

I believe this has been answered already. From what I've read it seems they started with a lower limit to encourage more users to build (which they are happy to revisit once the revision has been up for a bit) but ultimately that additional plots can be requested FROM CADMINS once a user has filled whatever the current system limit is.

 

There are certainly elements of consensus on the plot limit but so far only Hollifer has addressed all of the points.