Danny

23 minutes ago, Kaiser said:

 

4. Map. I know this is being fixed, but for fucks sake this map is horrible. Horribly made, no perms anywhere. it's stupid. Players want to build a house in the woods, tell them they can't and they'll hate you. Who cares if it's ugly, Aegis was a lot of ugly, but it was also fun... I feel like the argument of 'Cosmetic appeal vs Practicality' is the same as people who said 'Zelda: Windwaker looks bad and thus is a bad game'. Something can look like ass but be practical and fun, and vice versa. Make a beautiful city, yeah, but it could suck ass in RPing.

0

 

Preach it. Plus, implement it correctly and not like its been done in the past and the amount of 'ass'-builds are minimal. Practicality and roleplay value > aesthetically perfect world. Roleplay is enhanced by a dynamic environment, not by a white-glove, no-touch one. No news yet on what the 6.0 'region team' has invented for the coming map but unless it recognises the necessity of a free-build world (done with reasonable and constructive measures) we can already kiss the map, and a chunk of the playerbase (incoming and current), goodbye. 

What's wrong?

• Continuous and repetitive mistakes and failure to recognise these mistakes (or recognition of them with a subsequent failure to act in any meaningful way) - see freebuild, Nexus crafting, professions for key examples.
• Failure to implement a good map change for the past five years, continuing to attempt to put in place systems we know will fail i.e. limited freebuild, partial regioning, wholly regioned. Hopefully 6.0 will see an end to this and a system of freebuild which actually works.
• The fact Nexus remains on the server in any shape whatsoever when it's conceded fairly widely that its contribution to roleplay is massively outweighed by its harm to roleplay, get rid of it.
• The fact we continue to restrict roleplay via professions and crafting plugins, effectively forcing people to grind and to focus on these systems rather than roleplay - introduce a system based on benefits which has no restrictions and revert to vanilla crafting rather than the ridiculously crap system in place right now.
• The playerbase right now is about 40% made up of meme'ing dicks. Sort it out, start actually encouraging (and making) people act in a manner which does LotC proud rather than embarrasses it. You come in the forum and see constant trolling, ofc you're not gonna apply. PS. Playerbase, you're chasing players away, get a grip and start acting like a community.
• The complete decentralisation of roleplay as a result of a thousand cities and nations and a map the size of America. Take drastic action to reduce nation sizes down to one official per nation and ensure 6.0 is small enough and nations are centralised enough that travel between them takes 10-15mins max. People won't like it but if you don't have the playerbase to sustain your sprawling cities (with five active players) then OOC action is required for server success.
• Skype being used as an IC tool must be dealt with via metagaming rules and not allowed in any shape whatsoever.
• Our external penetration to the wider Minecraft community is currently non-existent. The server has a reputation for being full of trolls and for not providing the roleplay experience it promises. Re-invigorate our marketing strategies and bring them in line with what the server will provide when it finally gets a grip.

What's right?

• We have a dedicated staff team spending hours on the server, from admins down. They get a lot of grief, and frankly there have been many shocking decisions, but the screams of staff bias are complete bs. These teams are a credit to the server, they spend hours (unpaid) on the community seeking to improve it, and they simply need to work out a plan of action to fix the server.
• We have many good, active and committed players who want to see LotC succeed (some of those even being you meme'ing idiots) and this is the only reason LotC hasn't fallen in on itself yet. This is the community which needs to become more vocal and act as a welcoming party for new players and set examples of the behaviour required by the server.

tl;dr: see the numerous threads written a month ago which have again (unsurprisingly) been ignored.

On 13/07/2017 at 2:49 AM, Dry Crackers said:

Have the people who want freebuild seen what it does?

 

It's not pretty, ok?

0

 

Well it's obviously not gonna be pretty when it's implemented craply, which is why nobody is suggesting that but rather a controlled system to enable the obvious benefits of freebuild over regioning but without the damage of previous systems. "Ugly" isn't an issue. 

On 7/12/2017 at 2:53 PM, Dry Crackers said:

 

No please.  Iterative improvements are the way to go. 

 

Let's not ditch all the super cool nexus items that makes this server unique and interesting just because of the grinding issues. 

 

Besides, I really don't want all the work I put into a custom item pack to go to waste :)

 

Basically don't throw the baby out with the bathwater.

0

 

Absolutely the way forward. No need to remove the items themselves but to move away from the grotesque crafting system to make them and the professions system behind that. Normal items should be craftable as per vanilla Minecraft for ease of use and intuitiveness (as well as being necessitated by the server's own goals), should be able to be made unique and named via our own (simple) mechanics and the professions system must be replaced by a non-restrictive and rather benefit based system. 

On the topic of the OP, good to see some clarity from the team on what's being worked on and what's to come. Major concerns still lie with regards to 6.0 and how that will be taken forward but I'm sure some doubts have been quelled by a clear message that player concerns are being acknowledged and carefully thought about.

test

Regarding these arguments about organic antagonist-esque rp > failed antagonist. That is very much true. A failed antagonist, like what the server keeps making itself, is something that organic evil and dark roleplay does function better than BUT that does not mean we must adopt a defeatist attitude and accept that every antagonist LotC creates now is going to fail. Rather, on the contrary we should be seeking to sit down, look at our previous antagonists and identifying both their faults but also their successes. Via doing this we can then build a picture as to what kind of antagonist we actually need on the server and how we can introduce it in a way that doesn't result in the roleplay and atmosphere around it stagnating and dwindling away.

Antagonists are something that are entirely necessary. They act as a tool for uniting the playerbase against a common enemy, enabling much better world-inclusive roleplay events as opposed to localised nation or race specific ones. Moreover however, they function as a solution to the current issue of player dispersion when introduced in the correct way. If you have an antagonist that does function as a fear-creator, that people do look out for in the wilderness and fear attacks from and one that a player can't singlehandedly defeat themselves (as it should be) then you'll find much fewer people taking the risks of roaming in far-flung places and many more will be found enjoying the safety and security of the central map zone.

This isn't just beneficial for current players to find roleplay, it also provides us with a very clear server storyline to communicate to new players so that they immediately understand the importance of remaining near others and also the importance of cooperating with the server on the wider scale rather than restricting themselves to a non-inclusive clique. Antagonists, when introduced well, offer a solution to perhaps one of LotC's most serious problems and that's exactly why one needs to exist and that players or local solutions do not work well for the community as a whole. It may well be true that having localised antagonist events for each nation does provide good roleplay for that nation, but it fails to offer it for the community on the macrolevel and it fails to provide the benefits an actual antagonist can bring.

There's nothing wrong with small-scale events within nations that aren't revolving around the server-wide antagonist: staff or player guided organic storylines are something we should never frown on or dismiss so easily, but they must not be viewed as a substitute for a functioning antagonist that can act not only as a good source of roleplay but that also act as a solution to one of LotC's most serious and pressing issues.

I can't help but feel that the restrictions that used to exist on dark / evil roleplay were truly beneficial to both the antagonist experience and also the wider roleplay experience. Whilst the lessening of villainy rules has benefited the server greatly the increasing flexibility with which players can employ truly evil, previously antagonist-exclusive, roleplay techniques has hampered any ability of an antagonist to be successful. As painful as it may be for some player's characters, the boundaries need reintroduced to ensure that there is one, distinct antagonist against which the playerbase can unite and see as such.

The entire point in an antagonist is to present itself as a unique, distinct threat to everyone on the server and to employ this threat to create roleplay that can't be found elsewhere. Beyond the nostalgia, the Undead achieved this via their unique status on the server and the fact that they had powers which were beyond that of any player and that they were incredibly difficult to defeat. The idea of an antagonist that makes a player physically **** it both IC and OOC is something that lies at the heart of a successful attempt and it's something we simply aren't providing.

I far from advocate the return of the Undead as they were, but bring back some form of Iblees-based / Iblees-following group ran by a staff-player coalition that exclusively exercise antagonist rights - normal players shouldn't have such a status as it is detrimental to the antagonist itself. Ensure that they're very OP so they can't simply be PVP'd, they have lightning and fireball powers along with mob-spawning and destructive ones. Enable them to engage in 1v1 roleplay throughout the world, but at the same time also involve them in server-defining events where players must achieve particular objectives to defeat them. 

The reason an antagonist fails is because of a) those behind it and b) the idea behind it. An antagonist needs to relish in its over-powering ability to defeat the playerbase and to instill fear into them. If it lacks these features, it's a failed antagonist. Bring back an antagonist that actually achieves the purpose it exits for, that centralises the community into the center of the map for fear of being fried; that makes people run away for fear of being shredded and killed. Employ the antagonist not solely for roleplay purposes but as the solution for our increasingly dispersed community, as a tool for roleplay consolidation.

And for the love of God, don't screw it up and have the world "turning on the players" or a "plague killing the players". That's not an antagonist, that's simply a storyline feature. An antagonist must be what is described above or you're simply not offering one. 

EDIT: In my excitement to rant I realised I forgot to address your point re lore Matt. Whilst I don't think lore need necessarily be reset to provide an effective antagonist, it most definitely needs to be shelved to lesser importance and the lore re this antagonist brought to the forefront. This needs done in unison with this enhancement of uniqueness of an antagonist and removal of the playerbase from being able to provide the antagonist experience. Put previous antagonist lore behind us (keep it there but it needn't be central to the current situation) and develop something believable and terrifying for our new 6.0 one.

Guys, he has a real Bic lighter. We're screwed.

20 minutes ago, Hedgehug said:

Your arguments are solid and acknowledged, the only counterarguments I present are as follows:

 

- right now, with the nexus region system, for the common player 80-90% of the world is see-don't touch. I don't see why we should just even the field and let building be completely done by designated staff and some appointed builders. With WE and Creative to their disposal in order to ensure quality of builds. Remove the week-long dirt pits that are under construction and keep an even level of build styles and build quality.

 

- "the whitelist system works" *pulls up statistics* - *shows an indication of decline* tadaaaaaaa. Making the application system faster and easier, and through the game might be less human to human, but it will bring more people on the server. More people = more potential players that will stay and rp on a regular basis. More players = more donations. More donations = the server lives.

 

 

0

 

I shall keep funky communist gif in the above quote despite it not being part of your response to me, if only to jazz this drunken thread even more.

My views on the current systems are well known now. The server right now is in a horrific state but to completely restrict builds is to kill it more. If you head over to the Regions 2.0 Your View thread you'll see my argument for a 'Controlled Freebuild' that ensures high standards of build quality and also provides a solution to the currently terribly dispersed status of roleplay. Building is a central part of Minecraft and we must ensure people remain able to do it.

I understand the argument about whitelist = declining population but to put it simply, correlation =/= causation. The old application formats used to be ten times more inconvenient and the server still had ten times more applicants and active players. The issue isn't the whitelist which is an effective way to filter in only the players the server desires rather than just everyone, rather the issue the server has is its appeal to new players and the experience it offers to current ones.

From the outside the server looks absolutely crap. It's filled with constant complaining threads, it's filled with bickering and arguments, meme'ing and trolling and it's external presence to the wider Minecraft community is non-existent. 

Then, when we do somehow manage to attract someone, they're thrown into a world where they can't play Minecraft, they've got no idea where to find roleplay because it's so dispersed and even when they do they're then restricted and forced to grind thanks to Nexus. No wonder everybody leaves. 

The server needs to boost its external presence via communication with YouTubers, actively marketing itself in the wider Minecraft community and exploring 6.0 to reengage its lost and disillusioned playerbase via a marketing email campaign pre and post launch.

But before that, we need to refind ourselves and provide what made LOTC successful rather than the crap we offer now. The world needs to be dynamic and interactive, roleplay needs to improve in quality and nation leaders need to be forced to ensure new players are welcomed and embraced, Nexus needs to be taken off immediately and replaced by a benefits-based non-restriction skills system and 6.0 needs to be shrunk in size so that capitals (one of which for each race) are accessible in short distances.

Then we can begin to scale ourselves up, introducing and allowing more nations and enjoying that growing playerbase because we actually provide what LOTC grew known for and what people sought from it. Until then, we're still sailing down **** creek without a paddle.

Apologies for any errors, mobile site is not too friendly for writing big posts. 

Oh good god, I feel sick. 

If the server was to adopt this approach then you can wave goodbye to LotC. Anyone who's been around for more than four years has seen first hand the completely destructive impact that implementing restrictive measures and moving towards hard-roleplay has had on the server and it's exactly what we need to not do. Let's just remember what LotC actually is: that it's not a hard-roleplay server. Never has, and never will, LotC aim to be a DnD replica in Minecraft. Rather, LotC's original aim and continued aim is to provide a 'Minecraft-Roleplay' experience whereby its players are able to enjoy the features of Minecraft whilst also enjoying the ability to roleplay. The server's mechanics must be designed accordingly to fit that experience, thereby creating a dynamic, immersive world where players have the freedom to experience both of these things. That's what LotC is. Attempting to turn it into an aesthetically beautiful but no-touch world where players have little to no impact is something that is simply ludicrous. If that's what you want from your roleplay server, then frankly you need to go elsewhere, because that is not what LotC exists to offer. LotC's success lay in its recognition that it wasn't DnD-in-Minecraft, but also that it wasn't an MMO. Rather it is a server where you play Minecraft and enjoy only limited restrictions on vanilla Minecraft but where you also enjoy mechanics designed to enhance your ability to create, develop and play a character of your choosing.

I happen to agree with you with regards to staff needing to exercise more control over the playerbase - that's what they exist to do, to guide the server and roleplay in a way that's to the benefit of everyone. As such, I still believe that staff need to force the consolidation of the playerbase into a smaller set of nations so that roleplay can be centralised and not as widely dispersed as it is at present. They also need to start to actually control the way that players conduct themselves on our mediums to actually return LotC to a place where it has a decent reputation rather than being known for its trolls and idiotic meme'ing. The excessive meme'ing and inclusion of OOC jokes in roleplay need to be eradicated and the use of Skype as an extension of the in-character world needs eliminated. These are all actions that do need taken to enhance the roleplay experience of our members.

The one thing that absolutely does not need done and must not be done is to repeat the same playerbase-killing and experience-destroying mistake of turning our world into a look-don't-touch static world. There's a reason why LotC's playerbase is so minute now, why people have left and grown so dissatisfied. It's because of map-after-map of failing to provide what we promise to offer - that 'Minecraft-Roleplay' world people can interact with but also roleplay in. What 6.0 requires isn't a no-touch policy but instead a completely hands-on freebuild policy to be enacted, and that's exactly what I, and other's, am arguing for passionately to be brought to the server again - we need to realise where we've gone wrong and take corrective action, and by implementing a system of 'Controlled Freebuild' where we enable the playerbase to interact with the world but put measures into place which ensure they do so in a way that keeps with our roleplay ideals, that enhances their roleplay experience and that protects us from people's crappy building skills and griefing, we can actually make LotC a decent place to play on again. The implementation of this in a way that pushes and pulls people to the centre, which is what I've outlined elsewhere, is how we can centralise roleplay effectively and do so in a way that does not hamper people's experience like your proposed system does.

100% agree with you on the removal of fast-travels. These are the symptom of poorly designed maps that do not recognise the Minecraft-caused need for capital cities to be located close to one-another. If we have a map that recognises the faults of previous one's, capitals will be located within easy access of each other ensuring that these capital cities and the road that connects them grow to become roleplay hubs. The introduction of exclusive mechanics to these cities and the provision of services only available in them only furthers this and provides players with a guarantee of where they can find roleplay.

I also can't fathom your proposed system of in-game whitelisting which removes the entire point of the application process. The current system enables human-on-human contact in an effective way that tests both people's knowledge of the server and their ability to create a believable and workable character. It ensures that the players that we get on the server are those that can engage with our current community in a way that benefits everyone and protects us against people that do not understand that it's a 'Minecraft-Roleplay' server rather than an MMO. The whitelist system exists for a reason, it's always worked well and will continue to do so.

Whilst it is always good to see people passionately arguing what they wish to see from the server and how they feel it should be saved, the reason for dwindling player numbers isn't the application process but is the result of the constant repetition of mistakes for the past five years that have taken the server down the route that you are now advocating we return to. You suggest these things need to be done to make LotC not die, I suggest that what you're proposing effectively shoots a bullet into the server's head. LotC needs to re-engage a disillusioned playerbase and recreate the appeal which saw its peak. The only way it can do that is by re-finding it's 'Minecraft-Roleplay' roots and move away from both the MMO-driven approach it now finds itself following and ignoring the hard-roleplay DnD-esque ideas that turn it into a niche.

6.0 indeed offers a great opportunity for the server, but only if it learns from the past rather than repeats it.

As a player who never involves himself in PVP but did experience a number back in the day as a GM / Admin overseeing, the real-world real-impact approach seems far more immersive and appropriate for LOTC than pushing it into a war-world. Whilst issues with lag do exist, surely we can find a method of resolving this without completely eliminating roleplay from it.

I'll be honest, when I found out upon my return that wars had been moved to these secondary worlds I have never been so mortified. For a roleplay server to do so is absolutely ludicrous. Our battles should be carried out on the same world we roleplay in; be shaped by the terrain, landscape and other factors that are in play there; and be able to directly shape that world during the battle. To remove them to some battlefield world is not only ludicrous, it is another step in the LOTC-movement-away-from-roleplay process.

We need to reengage the community in what roleplay is supposed to be and surely one of the first steps we must take is to ensure the staff are leading from the front, enacting a roleplay-driven system that encourages and fosters what we're on LOTC for rather than moving important events such as battles to a secondary plain. Identify another solution for the lag, return to the main world. 

Nexus has always been a dreadful thing for the server. The ideas behind it sound good but they simply don't work for a roleplay server. As someone mentioned above, the most beneficial system would be to reintroduce a mcMmo-esque plugin solely based on the benefits of higher skills without resulting in too much of an rpg system (e.g. higher drop rates would work) and removing all restrictions placed altogether. It's simply ridiculously detrimental to roleplay to restrict things and require grinding.

Grinding shouldn't be something any player feels like they have to do but rather people should be able to develop skills for the benefits they bring if they choose to. Rp shouldn't be guided by your plugin profession, it's ludicrous to do it that way.

Nexus has always needed, and still does need, to go BEFORE 6.0 launches so we can tailor a functional and beneficial plugin to perfection before it flops. Get rid of it and get a simple benefit-driven system in its place without any of this crappy PVP-altering, mechanic-altering bs that's plagued the server for too long.

16 hours ago, drfate786 said:

 

The trick is to have all nations centralized and allow communities such as Norland to construct their towns and cities in the wilderness wherever they please at the expense of being under constant threat from the antagonist. If Oren wants to warclaim them, they won't be able to take the land from them or expand into the wilderness/free build areas since the antagonist will actively contest it. Oren should serve as a "sanctuary" for human role players that acts as a stronghold against the antagonist, not a conquering empire that shits on people's roleplay and steamrolls over half the server's active playerbase with their army of screeching twelve year olds. 

0

 

I didn't see this post until now but yes, yes, yes. That's exactly the kind of centralisation the server requires with the current size of the playerbase - a clear guidance for new and current players to capital hubs where roleplay is concentrated rather than the cluster**** of places with little rp right now. Keep the capitals regioned and safe havens and make the wilderness a bad place to be with a crazy-ass antagonist doing its job correctly.

Wullah - a dynamic and interactive world that actively encourages areas of high roleplay densities whilst still allowing for, yet discouraging, those who seek to play outwith.

And then we have a recognition of past errors but also past successes. An acceptance that neither freebuild areas or full regioning have any benefit to the server or are systems that bear any merit at all but also a realisation that just lumping freebuild on the server fails too. Rather, freebuild with regioned capitals, spawn and roads implemented in unison with a series of mechanics and processes to protect our world and to ensure roleplay does not stagnate is the solution that LOTC requires urgently. Let's not screw it up again, viva la freebuild. 

10 hours ago, Malimom said:

I didn't think much of it at first, but yeah I guess it is vague. Partial freebuild would be something like large parts of the map should be free build, others should be regioned, for example the areas furthest away from CT would become wilderness. I noticed now that it can be seen as nation capitals are regioned, everywhere else is not. I see that it really isn't clear and we'll revote on that on the next Your View thread once the team comes up with . Once we go over it and make a plan for 6.0, I'll make a new poll explaining what a partial freebuild system would look like, because whether it's partial or full on freebuild, the majority of the votes went to some sort of system that includes freebuilding. 

0

 

Would it be possible to have the system of 'controlled freebuild' that I and others are suggesting included in said poll, whereby measures are put into place to centralise roleplay and make wilderness areas difficult to survive in, benefits are granted to central capitals yet freebuild exists in almost all areas? I'm unsure as to what system you intend on proposing but I don't expect it to be that.

On 21/06/2017 at 1:58 PM, Rissing said:

Well, I've never replied to this sort of thing. But lol, let's go.

Scotland, the Devil's staircase.

  Hide contents

 

Scotland (Again), before the conic hill. It was rainy..
And I actually put my backpack down to take a rest near the top of the hill.. Only to realise that evening that all my stuff had gotten wett. Q_Q
 

  Hide contents

 

My regular self when I'm not backpacking..
1

  Reveal hidden contents

 

 

1

 

abcabcabcabcabcabcabcabcabcabcabcabcabcabcabcabcabcabcabcabcabcabcabcabcabcabcabcabcabcabcabcabcabcabcabcabcabcabcabcabcabcabcabcabcabcabcabcabcabcabcabcabcabcabc

The Devil's Staircase is sick. I still remember it coming into sight when doing the West Highland Way and my heart breaking as my legs were already falling off. 

@Malimom Might I suggest a further poll following this, unless there is a shift in numbers, to ascertain what players understand / suggest by "partial freebuild"? Whether that means a system of freebuild with capitals, etc regioned; freebuild as above with high population settlements regioned as they develop; or particular areas freebuild with the rest regioned. I can't  help but feel the response is slightly tinged by the ambiguity between the two freebuild options with the first maybe being understood as solely freebuild also? Worth a thought. 

Currently the poll is suggesting the highest number of votes goes to 'partial freebuild'. To those voting for this option on the idea of particular freebuild regions, please remember this has failed in the past and to repeat it is to ignore the lessons we need to learn. Total freebuild, with minimal regions on capitals, spawn and the road, implemented correctly eliminates these issues and make an for a system that works best for the community as a whole.

The notion of one nation per race is an ideal that, if could be achieved, would be the best solution for the server as a whole despite the damage it may well do to particular player's egos. It may well not be possible to achieve in a way that truly works and is undamaging to roleplay and if the that's so, one staff-sponsored nation needs to be picked and be the only one entitled to regioning initially. As difficult as this may be for some to accept, it's the only solution to enable a consolidation of a very widely dispersed playerbase.

If the other nations prove themselves capable of sustaining an active playerbase without being to the detriment of the rest of the server's figures and are located within the central belt of the map, then regioning should be permitted for the them. This should not be done via a charter system because this actively encourages a dispersion of players to these wilderness areas but rather via discussion with the staff team. This enables us to ensure we have a constantly active set of capital cities that act as rp hubs but that we also enable organic and dynamic settlement growth for the playerbase. 

Allow me to elaborate on how a minimal-nation and freebuild map would function for those concerned.

Freebuild would be in place across the entire map with the exceptions of the regioned spawn, capital cities and main roads. This (along with the other mechanics I mentioned in other posts) ensures roleplay is consolidated into these key areas but still enables the freedom for people to engage with a dynamic roleplay world. Roleplay is centralised into cities via push and pull factors implemented by the mechanics I mentioned in my last reply to this thread. Thereby we have a situation where players can still enjoy the familiarity of Minecraft but can do it in a way that ensures roleplay is not dispersed and we can protect against ****builders. 

An active and effective GM team and our whitelist then ensure there is no ****builds or land-scarring, along with the improved new player support I mentioned in my first post. 

We also need to ensure the only staff-supported nations (and thereby the only regioned ones) are one for each nation. Having more, currently, stifles roleplay because it ensures that there is constantly an insufficient concentration of players in a single area and fails to encourage players to travel to capitals for their benefits. If we introduce what I proposed in my last post we then have nation capitals familiar to the playerbase with guaranteed roleplay and effective benefits to draw people in. You've also still got the ability for towns to organically grow in the freebuild world we inhabit and for nations to take these under their wing, if they wish too.

As a successful 6.0 and successful marketing campaign to new and old players increases our playerbase we are then able to look at allowing nations to gain region status but still at a lesser level and rank than the capitals. You need to have a system that enables organic growth based on playercount rather one that is based on people wanting to be kings and lords and the consequential thinning of the playerbase. It may well be an unpopular stance but sadly you must accept reality and learn from the server's mistakes. 

4 minutes ago, Malimom said:

 

What could we do as GMs and as the region team to discourage external roleplay?

0

 

I point you back to my original post. A systems introduced whereby the further you delve out of the central area the higher spawning and stronger mobs get, the more relaxed villainy and theft rules get and the higher chance of antagonist attack is. Make it almost unbearable to live on the outer areas of the map, but still possible. The outcome of this is a centralisation of players in the areas where they are safer and in less danger, the capital cities. Also increase some form of benefit in the centre of the map, based on the blessing of the monks, along the lines of a health buff, idk. Make the most appealing place to be the capitals via providing them with exclusive benefits for their status and ensuring particular mechanics are only available there e.g. shops etc. 

What this means is that the most appealing place to be is in the capital cities but that players are still provided with the familiarity and freedom of Minecraft itself. Affordable housing and nation-based roleplay in the capitals with guards, traders and bullders etc enables roleplay there to be the most active and through exclusively providing nation status to these capitals there is no wide spread across the map until there's a community large enough to sustain that. 

Resistance to server-sponsored nations is inevitable but frankly it's the only feasible way to consolidate a dwindling player-base into nations sizable enough to enable them to thrive. Once player-count increases thanks to a successful 6.0 you can then begin to spread to other nations but only when the players exist to sustain that. Having multiple nations per race rn is one of the most moronic things I've ever heard. Yes it might be nice for rp politics, etc but for current and new players alike all it does is ensure rp is too widely dispersed to be successful. Learn from our mistakes and realise we can't handle a thousand bloody nations.

21 minutes ago, Fyrste said:

Things that should be regioned:

 

Capital cities (Human, Elf, Dwarf, Orc, and Halfling)

The main road (but the region should end close enough so that people can still build by the road)

Major towns that grow naturally through freebuild and earn the right to a region

 

Freebuild:

 

Everything else

Pls. Again I repeat, learn from our mistakes. Those opposing freebuild fail to realise that it is of course going to fail when implemented in isolation but rather that it needs to be implemented in unison with mechanisms that discourages external roleplay and centralies the playerbase.

1 minute ago, Malimom said:

There is also something I wanted to bring up, and that's general regions. Should charters be able to go out and make a region if they have enough players (somewhat how it currently is)? And how about making regions in major cities/capitals to encourage people to live in it, without the fear of their homes being broken into as easily.

0

 

Capital cities must be regioned, without a doubt. Also so should the main road and a radius around it, ideally 10 blocks or so. The main nations should have the option, once a short while into 6.0, to introduce regions to one or two of their other towns / settlements when the playerbase exists to sustain that, such places must be smaller than capitals and lack to appeal. Other than that, unless a player group has a very high headcount and is distinct enough to justify it, no regions should be granted to anyone else. That's the only way to secure centralised roleplay and sustain a functional approach to freebuild.

Just now, Aelsioln said:

When it comes to nation numbers we really don't need more than 1 nation for each race (one human, one dwarven, one orc, etc) and then 1 nation of mixed races for those that didn't quite fit in elsewhere such as mixed race families. 

 

If we do continue to just let anyone make their own nation though then please for the love of all that is good and holy do activity checks somehow on every nation. If they fail perhaps do an eventline to turn the place into ruins for a time before allowing people to try and obtain the land again later if they manage to get people and supplies.

 

Highly against freebuild myself because not only does that mean we'd have to watch out for people just randomly destroying another's work without rp behind it but also allows for people to get scattered all over the place. We'll end up with the same situation we have now of people just running off to a small corner of the map and everyone wondering where the rp is since nations are empty. 

I actually liked the system from Athera where we had certain areas that people could claim.

0

 

Agree on nation numbers - multiple per nation is just ridiculous when we have the playerbase we do.

Freebuild wouldn't have the issues you mention if we actually did it correctly. It's not about wholly freebuild with no measures in place but rather having system that makes fringe areas of the map almost impossible to live in and provides blessings for being in central areas means that people don't end up in outer areas of the map. We enable freedom for the familiarity and Minecraft-esque experience it provides but we do it in a way that still encourages roleplay to be constantly centralised. Likewise, the issue with people randomly destroying people's work is the reason we have a whitelist in place and is protected against on the basis only players interested enough to roleplay get through, we can fully expect the majority of those players to be trustworthy and we do have staff in place if they aren't.

Just now, Malimom said:

 

 

So do you think that we should make the perks that nations get (Such as green SS pillars, subforums ect.) be made more accessible to player groups rather than nations? Or should those be reserved and have us come up with a different way to get those?

0

 

They should be exclusive to capital nations and no player-based group should have access. We need to centralise roleplay into the capital cities until we have a playerbase capable of sustaining larger groups or more nations. That grows organically and naturally but right now is too widely dispersed. Encourage new players to instantly move towards the official capitals rather than unofficial ones and then as these places grow roleplay dense then enable further dispersion when it doesn't hamper roleplay.

As an extra note, previous experiences of freebuild do not justify opposition to a functioning system. Limited freebuild is gonna be bad because you're squishing people too tightly. Separate freebuld islands are gonna fail as they disperse roleplay. A system with measures in place to discourage living in outer areas whilst still allowing freedom has not been attempted and will work - it's what the server needs and must have.

For those with concerns about freebuild please read below and this post here to be assured as to how an effective system could be implemented and the benefits it brings.

Woo, it's fun time.

I think my views on freebuild are fairly well known now so I'll be brief and outline why I feel that it is the only reasonable approach to 6.0 we can have.

Freebuild:

My firm belief in a freebuild system comes from two reasons: one, an appeal to the heart and mission of LotC - 'Minecraft Roleplay' and two, it's benefit to centralising and encouraging a thriving roleplay community. I'll quote from my thread to save repetition. Thread here.

Quote

This is without doubt a contentious matter but one that I feel we need to accept as a matter of reality. The fact is that repeatedly, our attempts to protect our beautiful worlds that we play on through the use of regions have failed. Whilst the intention is good, what we actually end up with is a system that is detrimental to LotC’s central ambitions and that damages the roleplay experience we offer to players.
At the end of the day the server seeks to provide ‘Minecraft-Roleplay’. It’s a type of Minecraft via which you still get to play the game, but that you play it in-character in our own world. By regioning the world, you’re failing to offer that. One of the basic functions of Minecraft is the ability, funnily enough, to build structures and create things. We need that to be a key aspect of LotC again.

Attempts to achieve this via free-build areas have failed and it’s blatantly obvious why. By enabling free-build areas all you achieve is a concentration of the playerbase into these small regions and a consequential influx of ****builds. Effective GM moderation could tackle this but in each case the GM team has failed, or has not been instructed correctly, on how to tackle these issues.

A freebuild world removes these issues. What it enables is an entire world that players can engage with: a dynamic and immersive experience where if somebody does want to build, they can; if somebody does want to cut down a tree, they can; where if somebody does want to start a settlement, they can. That’s what we want to provide. 

Two key issues with this at face-value are a) that people spread out across the map and b) that people make ****-builds and landscar. Neither of these issues exist if freebuild is introduced correctly and in cohesion with other systems.

Firstly, the dispersion of roleplay that occurs is tackled via a couple of simple systems. The further out of the centre of the map you go, the higher mob-spawning and mob difficulty is – think a levelled approach where there’s tank-ass zombies at the edge of the 6.0 island but in the centre much weaker ones. In addition to this, the lack of protection for buildings in these outer areas means that they are much more open to villainy and combined with a relaxation of villainy rules and increased loot from lockpicking, living in such areas is very risky business. We then bring in an effective antagonist (a la undead, but not undead, but just as scary and spontaneous and destructive) that randomly roams these areas causing death and destruction, and wullah, the fact of the matter is you’ll see roleplay centralised in a central sphere of the map (amusingly enough where the capital cities and CT need be placed) due to the safety, security and roleplay opportunity these areas provide. Further centralisation could be potentially aided if we introduce a system of ‘Monks’ Blessing’ where the closer to the CT you are the more buffed your health is or something, although I am somewhat sceptical of such a system.

The second issue is with those people who do dare to live in the wilderness building badly, land-scarring, griefing and/or leaving abandoned structures. This is an issue that only arises due to poor staffing. An effective staff team will have policies and procedures in place whereby they regularly travel the world identifying anything that doesn’t fit into LotC and they will rectify the issue via destroying it or working with the player. Similarly, land-scarring and griefing are issues dissuaded via strict penalties and that can quickly be repaired in a matter of minutes. Abandoned structures need not be an issue because if a structure is abandoned, GMs exist for the very purpose of turning these into ruins or taking action to remove them. The simple solution here is something we already have – it’s what the GM team exist for, we just need to make them do it. 

Therefore what we end up with is a two-pronged fix for our server’s issues. We provide that ‘Minecraft Roleplay’ experience in its entirety, without missing out the first bit, and moreover we ensure that our world is dynamic and interactive but that it is protected from damage and/or destruction.

I would go further and advocate a simple plugin being introduced that guides new players on such issues. When they place their first block in-game, a message appears in the chat window:

”Congratulations, you’ve placed your first block! Remember, anything you build must be built in-line with our server build guidelines that can be found HERE. Your buildings will only remain for as long as you are active on the server so don’t leave them for to long!”

Or when they cut their first tree:

”Congratulations, you’ve started felling your first tree! Remember, you must act as your character when doing such tasks and as such you’ll have to take the leaves down as well. Don’t leave them floating!”
Or when they mine their first stone / ore:

”Congratulations, you’ve started mining! Remember, you must ensure that your mine is believable and fits into roleplay – you can’t strip-mine! Find our guide on how to mine in-character on the forums or click HERE to see it.”

Following on from that, when a player enters each ‘level’ of wilderness, they should receive warnings to ensure they are aware of the threats in these areas, again discouraging anyone venturing too far but still enabling the freedom to do so.

What this provides is an experience whereby players can still play Minecraft, but in a way they can still roleplay and engage with our unique world. It provides exactly what LotC promises to offer in a way that does not damage our world.

Fast-Travels:

Removal in their entirety should be possible. They are a symptom of poor map design that fails to recognise the size of our community. Capitals must be located close enough for centralised travel and roleplay, removing need for fast travels.

Nation Status & Charters:

In all honesty, should be impossible to get unless you have a huge playerbase. We don't have the community to sustain many nations so make only one per race and the rest unofficial and unregioned. Too many people have their own protected areas, it's simply unworkable. People won't like it but it just needs done - only regioned or protected places should be capital cities. 

3 hours ago, Lotoke said:

Both the world 'turning against the players' and a 'plague' wouldn't work well as the actual antagonist, there's nothing really for the players to fight against or side with, there is very little that the decedents can do to try and stop these forces. Instead these could be effects of the antagonist. In short, the antagonist causes a plague/the world to turn against the players.

0

 

Correct. In theory they sound nifty and appealing but in practice they both entirely fail to provide the requirements of an antagonist, and accordingly neither can act as an antagonist.

The threat of plague-bringing or world-shifting powers in an evil group of supernatural figures with the capacity to spawn mobs, fry you with lightning, set you alight, raze your one or to simply anhialate you is what is necessitated by a functioning antagonist and as such we need to provide that, not simply some story of the world turning against us.

10 minutes ago, drfate786 said:

 

This^

 

I also agree with this, the issue with making antagonists that aren't undead is that MC has no other mobs other then zombies and skeletons. Sure we have endermen, but would that really be a proper type of mob to spawn?

0

 

I think spawning all mobs is appropriate tbf. The antagonist should, without a doubt, during large scale events be showering mobs onto players and hammering them with lightning whilst those players have to achieve an objective which grows clear during the event. In more intimate situations where it is on the road, etc the antagonist should deal with players via a mix of both roleplay and their crazy-ass lightning or fire powers and should not be restricted to the defender default rule, rather roleplay defeat being the way forward for such cases (because you shouldn't be able to PVP and beat the antagonist, defeats the idea of them being so terribly invincible).