1.9 Server Announcement

[LunarNyan 28]

Any chance the new survival server can be made as an amplified world? It creates such awesome terrain features.

I doubt it, due to the toll it takes on older or not as powerful computers. Not everyone has a powerful enough computer or a gaming rig for that. The Admins want this to be accessible to almost everyone who wishes to play, and an amplified world wouldn't really help that.

[Flutterbattyyy 330]

Is there a way I can get a map download of the survival server? I built so much in the last two years, and it would be really sad to see it go.

I only learned of this switch today; is there still time to mark my builds to be transferred? 

[Tiberius 92]

Is there a way I can get a map download of the survival server? I built so much in the last two years, and it would be really sad to see it go.

I only learned of this switch today; is there still time to mark my builds to be transferred? 

 

it will be avalible on request, a reminder to take down co-ordinates as /home's and stuff wont work

Is it still too late to mark a build, I have recently just returned and wondered if its possible for me to mark a build

 

 

its not too late yet, we havent started yet.

[Io_Kun 11]

its not too late yet, we havent started yet.

Sweet At least I has time to do this

[Diana05 6]

Is it possible to bring just a chest of certain items you don't want to lose?

[LunarNyan 28]

Is it possible to bring just a chest of certain items you don't want to lose?

They aren't letting anyone do that at all. Check first post.

[Diana05 6]

They aren't letting anyone do that at all. Check first post.

Oh, OK. Thanks. It was kinda long, so I just scanned through the post.

[AppleDashPoni 165]

I doubt it, due to the toll it takes on older or not as powerful computers. Not everyone has a powerful enough computer or a gaming rig for that. The Admins want this to be accessible to almost everyone who wishes to play, and an amplified world wouldn't really help that.

 

For what it's worth, this wouldn't be one of the main reasons we aren't going with this world type. I believe most of the lag of an amplified world is actually on the server side, not the client side. (Clients might lag with it in single player because you are your own server.)

[LunarNyan 28]

For what it's worth, this wouldn't be one of the main reasons we aren't going with this world type. I believe most of the lag of an amplified world is actually on the server side, not the client side. (Clients might lag with it in single player because you are your own server.)

I didn't think of that, but it makes sense.

[DoragonKeiyou 22]

Only problem with amplified (other than generation lag) is that ALL the terrain is that.  If it's not ocean, it's going up to 255.  That means you get to spend hours making an actual flat area, and I know a lot of players like their flat land.

 

***Edit Update***

 

So I was toying around with the suggested idea of am amplified world.  Though a lot of players may complain about the lack of flat land, there is interest in it.  More as an unconfirmed feature, but the map idea may be something we can look into at a future date as something that runs alongside of survival.  For now though, our focus is getting what we already had planned working for you all to enjoy.

 

For what it's worth, this wouldn't be one of the main reasons we aren't going with this world type. I believe most of the lag of an amplified world is actually on the server side, not the client side. (Clients might lag with it in single player because you are your own server.)

 

Mostly true, however there are some toaster / potato computers that simply can't handle the amount of drawing and other functions that clients have to perform in order to render worlds correctly.

[WatermelonOfDestiny 3]

I just think it would be really cool seeing players build towns into the sides of cliffs and skycaves. It would be neat seeing what kind of adjustments people come up with for going about their usual survival building in such a crazy landscape.

[Ga3L 4]

PerishSong, i accept your excuses about the lies, i won't make any reference to it in the future (including this post).

 

 

Well i can give a good read to the transfer rules, even several good read, and think about it (when i am bored, not every-time xD), i still don't understand the sense and the reasons of some of them :

 

For what i have understand, those rules are here to prevent any player from having unfair advantage with the economy on the new map, or messing with the economy.

What i realize is that the current rules fails to guarantee that, but some of the rules hurt a lot the mayors and their towns, which is not the intended objective if i'm right.

I'll explain first how the current rules can be bend to destroy economy but hurt certain type of players and in the second time, i'll give ideas which are more efficient against economy destruction and less destructive to towns and mayors.

 

So the major risk to the economy is the presence of anything rare/valuable inside the ported area, the non-transferred materials rules already lower this risk a lot, the remaining materials are mostly materials constructions, some of them are a bit rare while some others are not.

So the current economic risk is the following :

- Selling remaining rare blocks that were ported over.

- Selling the building itself (or part of it).

 

The one million block rules itself make sense for that purpose as no more than one million blocks (containing possibly rares items) can be 

 

transferred. But i don't understand why we still have the "one build rule" along with the million block rules :

Why would 4 houses (which are 4 buildings) of 10 000 blocks each be more economic-threatening than a big building of one structure ? The big building respect the rule but has way more blocks. This "One building" rule is the first example of a rule that has no effect on the economy protection but has strong effect to towns because it prevent a mayor (or a player) to save a little house district. Regarding server's performance, porting 4 houses of X blocks is the same as porting a big building of the same amount of blocks.

 

For the underground and basement limitation, i also don't understand : because the ores and valuables are removed, it's not possible to sneak valuables to have them ported, so regarding the economic block risk, there is no difference between overground and underground. So this rule don't add any economic protection but is a bit unfair to the players who built underground bases thinking it would be ported. Also the basement limitation is a bit confusing itself, you take the "apparent" level of ground to calculate the 10 blocks limits, except if that level is under the current biome height ? but what if that biome mean level was under and the player actually added the ground around ?

Also yes, there is underground clutter, but i would say it's the player's problem to ruin his own underground, i don't see any problem with that because it's not possible to take profit of it and because it's underground, it's also not visible on the map.

About the "server stress", yes underground has generally more blocks than overground, but it's not always the case : an underground can have cubic form with mostly air inside and a building can be filled with stuff (i even had some staff and players encouraging me to not leave useless gaps inside buildings or under roads to reduce the lag). Regarding the stored game data, air is a block so transferring one million blocks of air is roughly the same as one million of smooth stone.

 

For the stockpiling rule, what is the actual definition of a stockpile ? Something like i did ? Yes my storage house was a stockpile, which was not made to destroy economy as i said in my previous post. But yes i can't prove that before the transfer (but there is solutions to prevent me to make a bad use of it as i'll explain after).

Now let's imagine a player building a tower out of quartz, an actually nice tower, which comply with all the rules (less than one million blocks, not underground, it don't has any stockpile in it, the player own it etc ...). The player ask to transfer that tower, and when it's transferred, he mine it out and start selling quartz to every players, and become rich.

Yes, the tower itself WAS the stockpile, and he just destroyed quartz market while complying all the rules.

If the stuff is easy to get at the new map, just let us be stupid and waste our time mining stockpile instead of the outside ressources ...

 

For the last problematic rule : the forbidden blocks replaced by air instead of wool : Well, stockpiling valuables to get wool is not really useful as wool is obtained faster by shearing sheep than mining wool blocks, so again no economic protection. but replacing forbidden blocks by non-air blocks can be useful for another purpose : If we have a redstone circuitry, the powder will be replaced with wool blocks so we can repair it faster by replacing wool blocks back by powder when we have it. For air, we have to determine where the wire was.

If the problem is the wool itself, it's also possible to replace with cobblestone or dirt, it's still better than air for circuitry purpose.

 

 

So i explained the problems, here's comes some ideas to solve it :

The important point is preventing players to take profit from the transferred building, so here are two extremely simple rules :

- It's forbidden to sell any block that was ported over.

- It's forbidden to sell any location that was ported over (building or room).

 

To enforce the first point, it's simple : if you have doubt with a player about a specific block, let say quartz :

First, gather 3 figures from the server logs (i know it was possible in the past with logblock, it should be even easier now).

- X = the number of quartz blocks that the player mined in total.

- Y = the number of quartz blocks that the player mined inside the ported building.

- Z = the number of quartz block the player sold (or put for sale in any shop).

It's illegal if Z > X-Y, if this equation is true, at least one block sold was ported over before.

 

For the second point, it's just chat log and usage of the building checking.

 

Those rule guarantee that any stockpile won't be used to destroy economy, so with this, it's possible to drop the rules that don't give any economic protection : the strict one building rule, the stockpiling rule, the underground basement and the air replacement one.

 

 

Also the last point, i don't see why talking about this on the server is an offense, we weren't destroying something, we weren't being mean to a player, we just don't agree to staff on the specific reset decision, i and duff got "awared" a warning for discussing the exact points mentioned above. 

Yes i talked a lot about it, and complained about it, but how would you feel if you were told that towns were ported over during resets (the reason why i came to the server in the first place, told by a friend which was misunderstood), after i'm told that the town would be ported if it get a warps (the reason why i continued it, i hoped i would make it good enough to pass the reset without destructions, it was said by a staff which also got misunderstood). After i'm told that in the worst case, i would be able to port over one building unregarding it size and including the chests contents (like the old resets). After that i'm told that for the items, it's a no but my townhall would still be fully saved, including the basement and subway under it (this was also validated by a staff), so i saw it as a way to not suffer too much from the reset with the stockpile used to rebuild lost buildings quicker.

And now there is those rules added at early June which don't change a lot the economic risk, but ruins several months of works for mayors.

I helped the staff's project on Equestria and Canterlot, so the only thing i hoped in return is a bit of compassion and a willing from staff to prevent too much destructions on player's projects which are not nothing, yes we have less responsibilities on the server but the amount of hours spent to build those projects can also be huge ! (900 actual hours for me, if it was an IRL work, it would have taken 6 months).

 

And for those saying i'm returning, it's not true, i just checked the server two times during one month to see if something changed, but that warning will actually prevent me to even come, if we can't say anything there ...

[.Night 78]

 

 

For what i have understand, those rules are here to prevent any player from having unfair advantage with the economy on the new map, or messing with the economy. What i realize is that the current rules fails to guarantee that, but some of the rules hurt a lot the mayors and their towns, which is not the intended objective if i'm right.

Lets start with this. First of all, the point of a "reset" is exactly that, a reset, the fact that we are even considering allowing players to transfer any builds should be seen as a gift. The whole point of the new reset is to make it fair and enjoyable for all the players that will be joining as well as those that have stuck with us through the years.

Even having one build brought over gives that player an unfair advantage right off the bat, so how can you sit there and write a very lengthy post about how allowing you to bring over an entire city would not ruin the economy.

 

I am not familiar with how long you have been a part of this server but I can tell you that from past resets, cities that were far larger than yours were lost and that was with no reasoning whatsoever. However, the players that lost their cities had no complaints aside from the initial "Oh nooooo" yet you have been constantly bickering over this subject since it was announced. This is a very large and very successful server and one reason for that is that we are always willing and attempting to innovate and improve, sort of like being in a "beta" state forever. With that comes the chance (very high chance seeing as how every single version update has come with a server wipe) that things will be lost when improvements are made.

 

 

 

So the major risk to the economy is the presence of anything rare/valuable inside the ported area, the non-transferred materials rules already lower this risk a lot, the remaining materials are mostly materials constructions, some of them are a bit rare while some others are not. So the current economic risk is the following : - Selling remaining rare blocks that were ported over. - Selling the building itself (or part of it).

Reading through this, all I can gather is that you believe us allowing ANY sort of build to be transferred is ruining the economy, which I have to agree with. If we had my way, there would be no builds brought over and this would not even be an issue, however, as stated earlier, we are allowing builds out of the kindness of our heart. You seem to be under the impression that you are better than our rules and that we should allow you to bring whatever you please simply because "I want this".

The rest of your post simply points out rules of transferring builds that have already been solidified and will not be changed no matter how much you scratch at our throats. 

 

And if you say you are not returning unless you get your way, then I hope that you have fun in your future endeavors because this is not your place to throw tantrums until you get your way, we will continue how we have ran the server since it began, and if you are unhappy with that, then there is nothing requiring you to stay.

[DR_DUFF128 5]

I only wanna write these words to this conversation here:

 

What about Ga3l's words about the freedom of speech?

 

And i wanna hear a VALID reason for my last warning.

 

have fun

Edited July 5, 2016 by DR_DUFF128

[Perish Song 45]

I only wanna write these words to this conversation here:

 

What about Ga3l's words about the freedom of speech?

 

And i wanna hear a VALID reason for my last warning.

 

have fun

This is a minecraft server, and does not run based off the constitution.  

 

The reason you both received warnings is because you have been BOTH consistently complaining about this on server, even after being asked multiple times to please keep any questions and debate on the announcement post.

 

Being 'warned' doesn't affect your in-game play.   

 

 

EDIT: As a side note, multiple players have messaged me regarding the constant complaining.  You're welcome to not believe me, but it's true.  

[DR_DUFF128 5]

I've seen lots of different situations/discussions on this server and other servers to say in all honest, that me and ga3l were one of those who got warned as fast as possible after all of that compared with other players who were able to discusss that for even a few hours (without getting a 'warnin'). I am just gettin more this feeling that the staff have been out of arguments and just overreacted (but thats just my viewpoint)

 

And beeing warned drives up the possibility that i get banned so it defenetly affects my in-game play. (even if you just use this page as a 'notepage')

[Perish Song 45]

I've seen lots of different situations/discussions on this server and other servers to say in all honest, that me and ga3l were one of those who got warned as fast as possible after all of that compared with other players who were able to discusss that for even a few hours (without getting a 'warnin'). I am just gettin more this feeling that the staff have been out of arguments and just overreacted (but thats just my viewpoint)

 

And beeing warned drives up the possibility that i get banned so it defenetly affects my in-game play. (even if you just use this page as a 'notepage')

There is a HUGE difference between a player having a polite conversation about the reset/being curious about things/asking an occasional question, and someone borderline insulting staff, carrying on for HOURS at a time about something, and refusing to accept an answer.  

 

Sometimes you get told 'no,' and you need to accept that.  I know for a fact, from both staff and other players, that you BOTH have been asked MANY times to please keep commentary on the announcement post.  The server isn't a message board for you to complain about the reset.  

 

You literally run no risk of being banned, unless you continue to complain and whine on the server.  

 

My staff are not required to sit on server all day and debate with you about the reset, they are there to fix grief, help players and supervise possible situations.

[Nova Wings 84]

Even tough the staff says it will be some time before the reset, I'm still focusing on gathering resources to make building my new base all that much more easier and enjoyable.

[Ga3L 4]

Well it's very hard for me to consider as a gift my own creation, when i go to a birthday party, i don't offer to the host something which already belong to him.

 

For the unfair thing, i don't understand your conception of unfairness, i don't see why having an already built town is an unfair advantage to a player who join the server if the town was built with legit materials and in survival. When i joined the server in September, there was already huge towns here and it didn't prevented me to start my own town. In the real life, when you start a business, you are in competition with older ones which can be extremely big, you won't ask Facebook or Google to close because you want to launch your own thing.

 

Also here i'm not asking to port the full town, i'm just asking the staff to choose rules that don't hurt too much mayors and towns, the first rules were good for me as it was possible to save the biggest builds and store materials to rebuild the smaller ones with help of citizens. But the seconds ones totally ruin this chance while not capable to prevent economy destruction by malicious players (cf : the explantations I made).

 

Yes i saw that players don't complain a lot here (which is not the case on others servers), but saying they all accept reset is false, some of them are afraid to stand up against it, some others think it's pointless to debate with the staff as the decision is already made. When i was playing, i saw several players which were old mayors or big builders who abandoned building because of the reset, some of them just come like once a month to check the server (like i do lately) and directly said the reset was the reason of their leave.

One of the proof of that is the reduction in the number and size of towns, you said there were towns far larger than mine in the past, it's probably no longer the case because mayors who built it left the server or stopped doing town because of resets.

 

For innovation and improvement, i admit that the staff is doing a really great work compared to others server i know. But the problem of creation loss is a really big thing for me, my projects are generally huge and without a determined end, i get happier when town grow, has new possibilities etc ... In a nutshell i don't get bored of my creations after a few month.

One really great improvement would have been to be a "resetless" server, this would surely attract big builders (the reason why i joined this server is because i believed this was the case because of a misunderstanding as explained above).

 

 

 

Talking of "Kindness of your heart" because allowing to transfer one build is a bit strange for me, because the others creations which belong to players are still destroyed without their consent. This is just a reset which is less worse than a full one, but depending on the player's profile, the level of hurt is not the same : A mayor or big builder loose a lot, an underground builder loose all, someone who just made one build don't loose anything, is it really fair ?

 

I don't think i'm better or above the rules, i just pointed problems and flaw that the rules are posing, i just think the rules can be improved to prevent more economy destruction and have less side effect on player's creations.

And i proposed rules that would solve the problems

 

And no i'm not directly linking my return to those decisions, but i just think it's pointless for me to continue to come and build with that reset coming. I will probably return after it, probably using my townhall as a house because doing a town again under those conditions don't seems a good idea for me ... 

 

 

 

About the warning, the thing is that staff and some players used the server a lot to push the reset as being a good thing and unavoidable, so it felt a bit like pro-reseters can use the server as they want to express their opinion but anti-reseters can just stick to the forum (which is way less seen by players).

I understand that the staff has others thing to do than participating a reset debate, but generally when i don't want to participate a debate, i just no longer answer it. Here the staff stepped in any debate about reset (even in private messages which were not addressed to staff !) and after a bit of talking, just started to threat of warning about it ... I never required staff to participate the reset debate !

[Perish Song 45]

I understand that the staff has others thing to do than participating a reset debate, but generally when i don't want to participate a debate, i just no longer answer it. Here the staff stepped in any debate about reset (even in private messages which were not addressed to staff !) and after a bit of talking, just started to threat of warning about it ... I never required staff to participate the reset debate !

 

You're right!  I'm no longer going to indulge this any further, and as an added note, neither will the rest of staff.  We have already said our point on the matter, and there isn't anything further to discuss. 

 

Best of luck on other servers!   

[Nova Wings 84]

As mentioned we won't be keeping out inventory nor anything that 'holds items', so we won't be able to bring tools over that we have?

[Reshiram 2]

No inventories will be saved. This includes chests, minecart chests, picture frames, hoppers, personal inventory, personal ender chest inventory, and whatever else I've missed.

[LunarNyan 28]

Are there any updates on the status of the server update?

[Peeko 0]

1.10 just came out. are we sticking with 1.9 or going to the most recent?

[DR_DUFF128 5]

Excuse, but i cannot resist ;D