Land Allocation (Freebuild vs Charter) [Your View]

[Chimp 528]

1 hour ago, welshnutter said:

A more relaxed charted system 

 

Have it so the amount of land is dependent on the amount of people, a single person wont need the same amount of space as 10. 

 

Example:

1 person can claim 32X 32 

5 people can claim 64X 64

Ect 

Basicaly enought room for a farm and a house that can sustain the population and maybe we could see formings of new nations that way as more and more people band together to get more and more land. Maybe even seeing the groth of cities like irl 

theres not enough players to emulate something like that, in the end unless u forced everyone to play in the same few towns you would never reach the amount required for it to feel like an actual city growing.

[drfate786 1690]

2 hours ago, Chimp said:

theres not enough players to emulate something like that, in the end unless u forced everyone to play in the same few towns you would never reach the amount required for it to feel like an actual city growing.

 

Again, an application system in a “wilderness” freebuild area would be ideal. You’d need to be a good builder and have a reason to be building as well as the ability to maintain the build and it can be rejected at any time if the team responsible for it chooses to reject it. Basically, Freebuild with strict regulations and specific rules. If I were asked, I’d make a draft of how this system would work, but it’d be like this:

 

A part of the map is designated as a wilderness, this area is used for events and can have parts of it allocated to player groups. An oppressed or otherwise villainous group would apply on the forums for land and the application team would take a week to look at the application. If the application has enough RP reasoning and the group (even if it’s only five people) are active enough they’ll be given a region in that area to build in. An ET builder and or World Dev will check on it every once in a while and if it’s deemed inactive by them they’ll be allowed to destroy parts of the build by having nature or the terrain reclaim parts of the land.

 

What makes this different is that ANY nation or opposing group can raid these wilds at any time and RP burning them down or collapsing sections of it (faction server raid) with an ET or WD present. This means that an oppressed group or villainous group can be hunted down over and over again and forced to relocate or rebuild over and over again, making charters more valuable. It’s a temporary shelter until the group can obtain enough people to merit a charter.

[Chimp 528]

29 minutes ago, drfate786 said:

 

Again, an application system in a “wilderness” freebuild area would be ideal. You’d need to be a good builder and have a reason to be building as well as the ability to maintain the build and it can be rejected at any time if the team responsible for it chooses to reject it. Basically, Freebuild with strict regulations and specific rules. If I were asked, I’d make a draft of how this system would work, but it’d be like this:

 

A part of the map is designated as a wilderness, this area is used for events and can have parts of it allocated to player groups. An oppressed or otherwise villainous group would apply on the forums for land and the application team would take a week to look at the application. If the application has enough RP reasoning and the group (even if it’s only five people) are active enough they’ll be given a region in that area to build in. An ET builder and or World Dev will check on it every once in a while and if it’s deemed inactive by them they’ll be allowed to destroy parts of the build by having nature or the terrain reclaim parts of the land.

 

What makes this different is that ANY nation or opposing group can raid these wilds at any time and RP burning them down or collapsing sections of it (faction server raid) with an ET or WD present. This means that an oppressed group or villainous group can be hunted down over and over again and forced to relocate or rebuild over and over again, making charters more valuable. It’s a temporary shelter until the group can obtain enough people to merit a charter.

nah kill freebuild

[camocat9 1024]

I just feel like trying to get space to build something small like a homestead or camp would be impossible. The hybrid thing sounds interesting, but I think the ‘wild’ ring would be too far away to actually do anything worthwhile if you wanted to go between a homestead and a nation.

[Chimp 528]

? FREEBUILD IS DEAD ?

[Bananasaurus 64]

4 hours ago, Chimp said:

? FREEBUILD IS DEAD ?

You are contributing nothing to this discourse other than re-stating “kill freebuild, freebuild is dead, I hate freebuild, blah blah blah.” Maybe instead of posting single-line reactionary posts for every post you disagree with, think up a counter-argument like others in this thread are doing.

 

13 hours ago, Master Baiter said:

 

This is not the pillar system I was talking about... I meant the activity pillar, you needed a number of people based off of your regions size, and if that many people weren’t active for like 24 hours a week, then it would remove everyone's perms to the land, and allow someone else to snipe the plot from you because you weren’t allowed to place another activity pillar. it was also cancer because it kept getting changed all the time, I remember that we had a 2 person plot, and then it got messed with and it became a 50 person plot, and eventually after like a few weeks it settled to a 5 person plot.

 

Frankly I think the idea of having a plugin do activity checking is incredibly stupid, historically I’ve never seen this go well before. just see how many people live in each city, and see how much time they play.

 

Oh, I see. Yes that does sound rather silly. I’m not sure calling anything “cancer” is necessary, but you provide some good points. I’m also not SUPER fond of plugin activity checks because not everyone in an active community RPs constantly in that one area. It pressures people to RP in one area to keep it “alive.”

 

[Chimp 528]

pure charter baby

[monkeypoacher 8055]

On 10/30/2018 at 1:53 PM, Unwillingly said:

Charters ensure the build will actually be used

no they don’t

On 10/30/2018 at 1:53 PM, Unwillingly said:

Charters ensure the build NOT look like ****.

no they don’t

 

you guys obviously weren’t around for early vailor where absolute garbage charters signed by like 100 people in a skype group dotted the map and there were massive cobblestone spires (whatever the alchemist city was) and straight-up landscars (salvus) that got deserted after a week because the playerbase who supposedly signed the charter was completely fictional

 

build quality shouldn’t be the metric by which people should receive land though, it should be realism, activity, and quality of rp should decide. with the system being proposed it’s almost certain that a bunch of inactive ooc powermongers are going to get a bunch of land that they really don’t deserve. this is bad for you, unwillingly, because you have an actual playerbase and in any sort of free-for-all situation you would get your first choice of land 

[Alana (Previously Latsi) 136]

Heya,

 

This is a topic that I’ve always felt passionate about in the past, and wanted to chime in with my 2 cents. 

 

When this server originally opened, and we were in the world of Aegis, it was a Hybrid system, through-and-through. The 4 major capitols of the 4 main races all how protections (world-guard), with player managed permissions, starting with the faction leaders having access to adding / removing sub plots to their entire nation plot, and delegating leaders of those smaller plots from there. 

 

Everywhere that was not a ‘Main Nation’ fell under the rules of the land. Griefing was heavily enforced with a minimal tolerance policy, so it wasn’t too much of a problem. In all that open land, mainly on the roads connecting the major cities, it allowed the server to constantly feel alive. Slowly more and more buildings popped up, more and more guilds.

 

When a guild, or small city project, grew large enough, it was possible for them to gain protection. It was based on a double system of, VIP members (depending on rank) were allowed a certain amount of land from their donation, which was method one. The second was if the area became an important place of RP content, it would be allowed to be inducted as a ‘mini-nation’ to keep the idea of it simple.

 

This allowed an ever changing world, and to allow reasons to stay within the cities, but also to move out. You were never confined if you did not want to be, but moving up within ranks and guilds to gain more access to more places to have your items protected was extremely important to keeping the game fresh and alive, not needing the constant change for maps. It allowed places like Alras to be created over time, and become the main RP hub of the world.

 

Overall, just the freedom a Hybrid server brings allows for much more interesting RP, because rather than RPing in a stagnant world, you are able to RP the building of the world around you, and can even change the ebb and flow of how the world goes.


Then to talk about the negatives, the main one being that yes, it did lead to some messes. Some people would build crappy structures around, and leave them, and then stop playing, and they just sat. Silly things that negatively effected the ‘immersion’. Having some GMs clean up these places in their free time, prevented the problem for the most part. It wasn’t possible to get everything, but it allowed the game to be a game, and getting rid of some of the ultra-immersion for all the benefits was extremely beneficial to the health of the server.

 

So that’s just my fairly simplistic views, as I don’t play really at all anymore, I might be blind to the benefits of not having Hybrid, but I did want to talk about what the server was like in it’s Prime! ? 

[Hobbs_Burrows 497]

12 hours ago, Alana (Previously Latsi) said:

-

 

Very well said. There is no credible argument for the entire world being regioned, and not having a hybrid system. Take this thread for example, there is no evidence and no argument put forward by the regions supporters. 

 

A more hybrid system with freedom just works, and we have shown why it works time and time again. Important places can get protected by regions, but people also have the freedom to interact with the world which is an essential, non-negotiable, ingredient for a good roleplay world. 

[Bananasaurus 64]

On 11/2/2018 at 10:01 PM, Alana (Previously Latsi) said:

Heya,

 

This is a topic that I’ve always felt passionate about in the past, and wanted to chime in with my 2 cents. 

(snipped)

On 11/2/2018 at 10:01 PM, Alana (Previously Latsi) said:

 

So that’s just my fairly simplistic views, as I don’t play really at all anymore, I might be blind to the benefits of not having Hybrid, but I did want to talk about what the server was like in it’s Prime! ? 

 

Wow, that sounds awesome, wish I’d been around for that!

 

But on the subject, it seems like while there is a SLIGHT lead for “pure charter” (by only 11) at 123, 112 people voted for pure freebuild or hybrid as well. It seems like we’re pretty evenly divided and despite the slight majority, the rest of those who voted should be taken into account.

Those who voted hybrid or pure freebuild are by no means a small amount of people and shouldn’t be disregarded, in my honest opinion, by the developers/staff over-seeing this poll. How that might be solved is beyond me, but I believe that the “pure freebuild” people would rather have hybrid than no freebuild at all.

 

In closing: The deciding factor in such a huge part of gameplay for an entire map should not be outweighed by 11 votes out of so many. All, including those who voted pure charter of course, should be taken into account. I don’t envy the staff, regardless of their decision.

[Hobbs_Burrows 497]

1 hour ago, Bananasaurus said:

 

 

Exactly, and it is much easier moving from a freebuild/hybrid style map to a charter map (if freebuild/hybrid goes so wrong it needs to be changed). However, if we made a completely regioned map and had a charter system it is almost impossible to change it once it (inevitably, as history and precedent shows) it goes wrong.

[J33xt101 316]

See the problem with removing all freebuild, is that people like me cannot enjoy building something to live in. I have never liked the idea of joining a nation, and then someone gives me a home to live in. I want to work for my home, and build more and more. When I built Mynebor, I made it so that anyone who joins the city would have places to build their own homes inside of the city, not just make it so they can join and then afk.  I think using this method, it promotes activity within the city/nation what-have you. I cannot support all charter either, simply because its boring, RP is good, but when you get tired of rp, you just go offline. I want the system to support have something to do after you are tired of RP. For instance, anyone who played games back on Ps2 or N64 would know that the mini-games are a good break from the main story-line. This post may be a little late, but this is my 2-cents. 

P.S. I mean no disrespect to anyone who thinks freebuilds or charters are cancer and trash, but calling them that does not promote improvement, it just causes division. 

[Prosper 5]

Charter system, accept no substitutes. It can only make things better.

[jetboydan 85]

It’s funny how all the people supporting charters are the big established nations who already have the established manpower and resources to get a piece of land easily.