argonian

On 3/1/2023 at 3:54 PM, Charles The Bald said:

The forums would have to be manually updated for you to have access to new fonts, you can inspect element, but that's fairly local unless you got access to Lotc servers.

nah the text editor uses html so stuff u do in inspect element stays and shows for everyone

18 minutes ago, Laeonathan said:

Isnt the issue that 1.18 is causing a lot of lag in the newer version for LOTC?

 

Otherwise the 1.18 PvP was obviously more newbie friendly.

If 1.8 would break performance, then yeh we just gotta stick with 1.9--but they should at least fiddle with the damage/regen values so people actually hurry up and die IMO.

7 minutes ago, nottvocal said:

Your avoiding what I'm saying. I'll say it again, 1.9 PVP is much easier to teach then 1.8 PVP. Regardless if the shit PVP player in 1.8 deals damage, they will never be good enough to kill without training, same with 1.9. Correct me if I'm wrong, but are you implying that the shit players are only good for knocking down a couple of hearts before dying? Because if so, thats a terrible mentality.

Uh, no, because those couple hearts could be the last couple hearts just as easily as the first. And getting any couple of hearts is better than none. Again you have this weird idea that teamfights are really just a bunch of 1v1s happening near each other. It's just not the case. Even if I'm up against a guy who's a million times better than me at 1.8, he can't combo-lock me if has other players constantly hitting him. That's how a larger group of worse players can beat a smaller group of good players.

But that doesn't work on LOTC now, because unless the guy steps massively out of position and all your guys actually get all their hits in, he's escaping and he'll be back at full health within 10 seconds.

7 minutes ago, nottvocal said:

Also if you say you want your footman to be able to carry their weight, what PVP version would be easier for them to carry their weight in? Cause its sure as hell not 1.8 pvp where they are practically soaring the skys like a plane when gettting combo'd.

Again, you can't combo people if you're getting knocked around yourself. The concept of a groupfight seems to be totally foreign to you, which is probably why you can go all Hannibal Barca and say you'd slaughter all the enemy at your first ever WC with a straight face. It's honestly embarrassing.

Hint: there's a bit of a difference between a 2v2 on EggWars and a 60v50 raid or a 230 vs 170 warclaim.

5 minutes ago, nottvocal said:

This can also be said about 1.8 pvp too. If you are a novice and just significantly worse then your opponent, even if you get a few hits in, you won't win. And while its true that 1.8 PVP is technically more beginner friendly, to become pro at 1.8 paves a much harder path then becoming pro at 1.9 PVP. I never said 1.9 was beginner friendly, but that its easier to train someone and better for new players to learn.

So the difference is, in both 1.8 and 1.9 pvp the better pvper almost always wins, but in 1.8 pvp the shit pvper can actually do damage so he's not totally worthless in teamfights, whereas he is in 1.9.

idk how you separate more beginner friendly from easier to train anyway. You don't care if your footmen become pro-pvpers who get screenshared 10x a day to see if they aren't hacking because they're just that good. You just want them to be able to carry their weight in teamfights so you don't get crushed by bandits with 1/4 your numbers.

3 minutes ago, nottvocal said:

Yeah I've never been apart of any mass battles, but theres no way it takes that long. If Minecraft wars are anything like other games, it comes down to Wolfpacking and Isolation, killing them one by one is a good strategy. If it was me commanding the battle, I'd have them wiped clean (with a bit of practice of course, im not pro at minecraft war strategies lol)

They literally do.

No, you wouldn't have.

5 minutes ago, Borin said:

Tbf james they seem to have joined in January, so it's understandable, they haven't really been involved in a warclaim, let alone a warclaim with 1.8 pvp last map.

I agree with your point though, I barely went above a 6-7 when it came to cps, I'm not great at 1.8 and I'm terrible at 1.9 pvp, but there wasn't so much of a great divide between pvp ability last map as this one I feel. And the experience was better last map when it came to warclaims or large fights - there was no shouting 'GET IN THE BLOB GET IN THE BLOB, RUN AROUND THE TREE, HEAL IN THE BLOB AAAAAAAAAAA' for example :') .

I think you always got the "STAY IN THE BLOB" stuff tbf but you didn't have to listen to it for 30-60 mins before even a single guy actually died (because his blob-staying skills failed him eventually).

18 minutes ago, nottvocal said:

Plus 1.9 PVP is easier to teach and better for new players. The only people who want 1.8 PVP are those who are already good at it.

This is just totally untrue. Anyone can spam click a mouse, and no matter how bad your aim is, you're gonna get some hits in and do some damage. In 1.9, if you're a novice or just significantly worse than you're opponent, you're not getting a single hit in.

You can also just look at all the actual combat that happens on the server (1v1s and 3v3s on random hub servers are hardly comparable). WCs that go on for like an hour and a half before the first player even dies, raids where no one dies for half an hour and then suddenly one side totally wipes the other without any casualties because they got the first 2 kills, etc. It's a total joke that's awful and mind-numbingly boring for the vast majority of players involved, who're mostly just there to be damage sponges anyway.

2 hours ago, Arafel said:

 

If this is the approach they've taken since I was last around, it would explain so much. This is so backwards, it's borderline comedic.

I mean it's not like official policy, but it's definitely an unacknowledged underlying philosophy. It's all about creating tutorial islands where they can right click NPCs even more condescending than Professor Oak, or CT mentorship programmes, or writing yet another guide, but there's never any discussion about how there's literally nothing a noob can actually do other than AFK at meetings where the important people do all the actual RP'ing.

I mean don't get me wrong, babying actually does work. Ask anyone leading a small community or city guard and they'll tell you that entertaining noobs is a fulltime job for them. If you can find them enough shit to do for the first 2 weeks, then they won't quit the server. But that's (mostly) only necessary because there's nothing they're able to do for themselves anyway. We didn't have lords spamming the Discord DMs of noobs in the past, or even a Community Team, and yet despite the fact that both of those things do help retention, the rates in the past were much, much higher. I have the stats on this but it'll take a while to find--I'll come back to this this evening if I think of it.

"Omae wa mo aaungo."

4 hours ago, VonAulus said:

1. Overworld mining and resource gathering.

How would you propose this be set up exactly? I liked the change from mine-world to node mining this map. The mine-world was anti-rp and node mines could cause conflict. They never really were implemented to a point that it mattered to control mines which is probably a good thing.

I dig into a mountain and mine myself some iron. Like in singleplayer. So long as mine entrances are kept pretty it won't make the world ugly, and it adds actual value to land (the more land I control -> the more potential resources I have access to). Alternatively, if that's not feasible (maybe it hurts performance? idk), you could limit this to regenerating Aegis-style mine areas that you could buy from the staff or something. Kinda like resource pits except much more RP-friendly because they'd look and feel like real mines and be scattered around the map where people place them, rather than weird OOC quarries at CT.

4 hours ago, VonAulus said:

1. More armour tiers. Swap iron with chainmail and make have actual iron armor be made from iron blocks or smth, and then add diamond on top of that.

I don't hate this idea. I think one way that could be good is not to increase performance but increase durability. Also, stone tools should be infinite tools. They should not break. Why do I need an inventory of tools blocking collection of fields. Either that or bring back purchasable golden tools. That was a good minas sink. 

Yeah, I'm not about creating OP gear to turn nolifers into PVP gods and banes of town guards, but just some more ways to spend your money and add a bit of diversity.

4 hours ago, VonAulus said:

1. Remove tiles they literally serve no purpose besides making things worse.

I am not sold on removing tiles. They help with organizing the map for management from the staff perspective. We basically did not have tiles two maps ago and every nation was just limited to city state roleplay. That sucked much worse then Almaris dystopian roleplay. When I joined WT back then we ended up removing 100 charters (remember that word?) that were not registered a single player entering the region over about a month period. There were like 10 active nations and not a single active charter despite the plugin being automated. 

Nations were just city states because that was a literal rule. Nations weren't allowed to buy regions outside their capitals, or build in freebuild. I'm not proposing we bring back that ridiculous rule.

And it's not true that only the nations were active. Belvitz and Curon are 2 examples of active freebuild locations just off the top of my head. Two of the most active places on the map, in fact. idk what the difference between a freebuild build and a charter is, but it's the former I care about.

4 hours ago, VonAulus said:

1. Remove most nation/settlement perks and just make them purchasable etc. This dumbfuckery that you can't get a green pillar because you have 50 too few EU4 bird mana or whatever is just ridiculous. 

I agree pillars should just be purchasable. What other perks do they really have? Subforums?

Ability to purchase tiles (although I'd replace tiles w/ regions as I said), declare war, that sort of thing. idk there's a buncmore but it's hard to think of off the top of my head, but a LOT of LOTC rules and systems implicitly rely on nationhood nowadays, because the staff's answer to everything is "have the NL dude it/let the NL decide".

Soulstones def the most important one though, and there's really no reason to limit it so strictly IMO.

4 hours ago, VonAulus said:

1. Freebuild anywhere that ppl don't pay up (mina-wise ofc!) to region.

I do not support freebuild everywhere but a freebuild area would be fine. If you want freebuild you should apply to staff so you can aid in cleaning that shit up. It is somewhat disingenuous to suggest such if you have never contributed time or effort to policing or repairing freebuild areas.

This is a weird argument. Don't LARP for a second that you'd have accepted a World Team app off me if I sent in one. I don't think the WT even recruited ppl who solely served as grief-janitors anyway; you had to show builds and stuff. Not sure on that second one, but we both #1 is true.

I do clean shit I see sometimes though and I've played like 4 freebuild maps and the benefits always outweighed the negatives. We only had a WT for one of those anyway. Also, I don't get why someone who ran a place like Belvitz would be against freebuild anywhere out of remote "wilds" areas. The biggest advantage of freebuild is that settlements form where they naturally would, creating hyper-active places on important roads like Belvitz, Kramoroe, etc. You don't get that in region maps. Everywhere has to be off the road (although they made one exception with that ranger fort in Oren, dunno what that was about).

4 hours ago, VonAulus said:

1. A general abandonment of the idea that new player retention is fostered by babying them rather than by giving them agency (freebuild, overworld resource gathering, etc. are very much connected here!)

I agree with your sentiments here. Outlets for new player creativity is great. They will eventually migrate to established player groups if they are allowed to fail/succeed on their own in the wilds. I build a house in Aegis in the wild and then figured out no one roleplays there and ended up living in cities.

Same with like Hyspia. They had the freedom to create their own identity in the Wilds and then eventually integrated into the main part of the server. It's Minecraft - a noob's first instinct is to go off, get some iron and build a hut. The only difference between a noob on a survival server and a noob here is that the latter wants to call himself baron of that hut.

It also just gives them something to do if other players aren't online or they haven't found a community they like yet.

4 hours ago, VonAulus said:

I like that characters have to be rooted in the current nations and server lore. We as a server can do a better job handing them the info they need that is readable and digestible to prepare them. It would be even better if that was somehow integrated into in game mechanics during mechanical character creation. Think M&B.

I don't really think it works. They write an app saying they're from Johannesburg, get denied and told Jburg was actually 300 years ago, edit the app to say they're from Vienne, and then log on as a born-and-breed Viennian who... has no idea where the city is, what an "Aaun" is, or any of that. So being able to name it in his app didn't really help him. Meanwhile he doesn't have a clue about basic, unchanging parts of human lore like who Horen is. 

4 hours ago, VonAulus said:

I do not feel most of the map is a demilitarized zone. You have to have some sort of protection around dhubs/portals/CT or people will just camp there to bully people. It is hard for moderators to crack down on horrible villainy roleplay quickly due to how much the community screams when someone is banned for being an ass. 

They're just weird OOC zones and it's weird and annoying to be spammed with OOC messages constantly. And they take up at least 5 large tiles (CT might be multiple tiles not sure) in prime parts of the map, and create really awkward gaps between nations. Need to just get rid of hubs entirely, and CT needs to be as small as possible. idk why this server always has such massive CTs when all anyone ever wants to do there is LEAVE anyway.

14 minutes ago, SaviourMeme said:

Dont know when the last time you looked at the server applications was, but knowing lore hasnt been a requirement for apps for a while now. 

Nope, lore references are still required. 

I'm not here to pick a fight with you personally. I just want the lore noobs get asked to be shit that's (a) relevant and (b) easy and unambiguous to find. Dunno why this should be some kind of Highland Call for the CT.

Edit: also, shit like "this application has been auto denied for being the older of the two" is absurdly dumb. That is how a bot would respond. And rightfully too, because a bot can't use human judgement in filtering spam. But for an actual human player to tell a noob to go **** themselves because they tried applying as two different characters to be more likely to get accepted, when we get **** all applicants as it is, is just pathetic. Hire some more CT if this shit (like 1 app a day) is really so overwhelming that you have to LARP as a robot to cope.

Might also wanna check what "auto" means in the dictionary while you're at it.

5 minutes ago, Elite Snipes said:

All these ideas I support. 1.9 started killing conflict on the server along with a certain moderation admin and I agree with more armor tiers. Only thing I don’t support is frewbuild everywhere, I’d say there should only be a limit to how close a build can be to a nation 

nations are fake though

what is a nation

i believe we should instead just let nations region what is important 2 them. instead of buying tiles, they buy regions of their own specifications. instead of "yes i want my capital here so im buying this whole tile!!!", just let them be like "yeah i wanna buy a region covering the coords x, y and z" (for my capital, farmlands, buffer, etc. or whatever they want rly. buyer's choice!)

you're right tho that some kinda of gap betwen regions would be needed, but i'm also not suggesting letting randos dig 2 blocks outside the walls of the capital of urguan. urguan can just buy a bigger region, as opposed to buying a tile or x-tiles as rn

5 minutes ago, Mannamannaa said:

Agreed, that was mostly a placeholder for when I can stop and actually think about all the different ideas mentioned. XD

👍 lmk

edit: is that broken just for me or are the forum emojis broken in general

14 minutes ago, mkaxeman said:

Idk if it was said yet but the only comment I have is the 1.8 pvp instead of 1.9 pvp. I disagree with it because 1.9 pvp is quite less arthritis inducing than 1.8 pvp. That is all.

1.9 raids and warclaims last like 10x as long, with no one dying for the first half an hour before suddenly one side kills one guy and wipes the other. Objectively more arthritis-inducing.

13 minutes ago, Mannamannaa said:

I have mixed feelings on a lot of these ideas, but everyone who has more playtime than I do feel free to put up your cases and convince me.

No one can read your mind to agree or disagree. Your feedback would be a lot more constructive if you just said "you retard, x, y and z are the dumbest ideas ever cuz..." rather than this.

8 minutes ago, Unwillingly said:

this is so real tho but ppl hate making joining the server easier for noobs bc they're so diehard on their "good rper noobs onlny plz" or whateverthefuck other convoluted reasoning ppl are on a mission to enforce lol

the application form has been made simpler and requirements and restrictions and standards are being made lesser recently and people are actually mad about it

ppl these days moan abt noob rp quality going down, meanwhile they spam every new applicant with 80 PMs begging them to join their nation/settlement/whatever. it's so disingenuous it's painful

also a couple other things, (1) the lore requirements the way they are don't rly separate the wheat from the chaff: sure the chaff are just not gonna bother reading anything and just never reapply, but there are plenty of quality noobs who try to apply with a backstory that actually doesn't work because they read an outdated nation post, and then get denied because "your character is too young to be from vienne!!!" through no fault of their own. the only thing a lore requirement should inspect for is interest in the setting and motivation to learn, so we should make the info we test blindingly obvious to anyone who wants to find it. 

and (2) honestly, the guys who are noobs at RP'ing are often far more compatible with the server than veteran RPers with weird expectations. usually the worst new players we get are guys with 5 years experience of terminal protagonist syndrome on some 20-man comatose server somewhere. i'd much rather an eager illiterate than an arrogant fuckwit, in other words.

2 minutes ago, ReveredOwl said:

Realistic terrain and usable mc head farms!

If by realistic we mean navigable/usable/sensible and not "looks realistic when zoomed out 1000x farther than server render distance ever actually allows" than agreed.

wdym by mc head farms though?

u used to get a 200x200 region in return

this was the minecraft equivalent of having a (pg-13) 200x200 ****

1 hour ago, Priceflash said:

Warclaims on settlements and taking over entire builds / annexation generally kills the settlement and decreases activity. So, you can't just warclaim someone and take over their build. Plain and simple. Conquest as a war goal would be removed in exchange for heist war goals, razing small areas, more raids, and maybe nation leader pks replacing them. This would seemingly encourage more diplomacy RP since you can't just run in and take tiles away from your enemy, you need to work with them if you want access to an area they've already claimed via their occupation. Again more deliberation may be required but this seems much more favorable to whatever convoluted system we have now.

Effectively removing war (heists, razings, etc. are just worthless) isn't more favourable than convoluted war, and honestly the current war system is close to the least convoluted we've ever had. It could do with some streamlining but there aren't that many CBs and the ways you can use them are very transparent.

Further, sure, activity drops a bit when a nation gets annexed, but (1) we already have protections against annexation rn - you gotta vassalise their capital tile for however many months before you can try revoking it, (2) the stagnancy and total stall in story-telling are way worse for the server than a temporary dip in activity, and (3) since you mentioned raids as a compromise--suffering constant raids is way less fun and hurts activity way more than being subjugated by your neighbours (to which, I guess you could say, "then swear fealty to escape the raids!", but countries won't do that, they'll just ***** to GMs until raid rules get changed instead).

Anyway, one thing I really like about this whole idea is it accepts, by forcing all the racial nations into 1 tile, that it's possible to handle land-ownership without doing it on an EU4 province-map basis. And this is the direction we need to go in. We need to move away from systems that rely on arbitrary, (mostly) unchanging tiles drawn onto the map, but a good lot of the server don't even seem to realise that that's possible. Just have your one big "tile" and let people pay for regions within it based on size. Instead of tile improvements just let me pay to add those mines, etc. to my own land. Instead of saying "no your settlement can't be here because some other guy lives 20 miles away but just barely within the same tile, but it can be 20 feet away from that other settlement in a different tile"... just don't do that.

1 minute ago, MisterBlitzkrieg said:

How

 

right click on the text editor, hit inspect element, and **** around in the html. it's crazy the shit u can do

I'd demonstrate rn but I'm on my phone.

do inspect element and change it manually my son

35 minutes ago, Wholesome_Thomas said:

Did you know that year 1 of the First Age would have fallen on the week of July 2, 1986? Now you do!

only the real OGs remember this

what is he saying

3 hours ago, Valannor said:

If you're going to use AI writing then at least make it clear you used AI to begin with. Don't try and pass it off as purely your work, y'know? 

 

As a server we're going to have to tackle the issue of AI writing being used to make entire lore posts, applications, TAs, etc. and how we approach the issue of artistic integrity in that regard. These tools have the potential to do a lot of good, as you've said, but the potential avenues of malicious or simply lazy usage needs to be addressed, accounted for, and safeguards need to be put in place. 

this is such a nonsense concern

"omg you used an AI to write this lore! cheater! cheater!!!"

who gives a **** if it's lazy or lets people sound like better writers than they are? lore isn't meant to be a "test". if people using AI means they produce better lore and content, then everyone wins.

the fact we literally have an ST here worrying that AI will turn lore-writing into less of a ****-measuring contest rly says it all

17 minutes ago, rukio said:

See the edit. 

it's not like they've put mercenary activity on offer either