• You're viewing the Team9000 Archives. These old threads are closed to new comments, but if something interests you or you have a question, feel free to open a new thread in the main forums.

T9K reunion server

Patchouli said:
No offense, but Maridia was ugly as fuck and there was nothing but complaints from the people living there about town assistants abusing their power (The assistants that were pretty much just randoms, not the well known people from Team9000)
Click to expand...
Not gonna lie, it wasn't Haven quality builds. As far as the complaints go, with a city of that magnitude there is expected to be some complaints about issues (everyone can't be satisfied in a 20+ people town) I mean I've heard of complaints from every giant city we've had on the server. But that's why I fine tuned things in later cities that were built. Maridia was the first city I was ever mayor of and it was decent.

If I was to ever do another large city (and that's a pretty big if) I'd have a similar setup to Lufenia, but would have Towny plots for setup the city grid and have better districts.
 
TheGurw said:
Public. The whole point is to return to the massive population of the golden days of the server.
Click to expand...

I think this is a topic which everyone hasn't fully decided on, and is rather a difficult issue.
Whitelist or Public? Who wants what and for what reason?
I'm 100% cool with either, so I'm indifferent.
 
The problem with closed servers is that they die quickly. This is beyond the days when minecraft servers are few and far between, people don't want to wait to be accepted unless there is a really really good reason (like the VoxBox or similar). If we want to see new people, then open is the way go.
 
moondoggy23 said:
You can DL the world from...somewhere around here...someone has the link, and you can pick up right where you left off in the world. You'd just be by yourself, is all.
Click to expand...

Sure, did that a long time ago, downloaded the 1.0 world and rebuilt the sphinx, rebuilt the Arcata railway station, funnily enough I never got around to rebuilding much of my own town :) Not much fun in single player building a road or a railway nobody's ever going to use, though.

It'd be cool if this "reunion server" was based on one of those old T9K maps (cooler for me if it was 1.0 or 1.5 LTS), but starting from scratch would be fine too, and I'm sure most people would prefer that for the sake of the challenge.

Regarding the suggestions that there should be just one town, or a limited number of towns, or we should all stay near spawn: The 1.0 world was pretty big. For a while, I lived on the edge of this and the Nether travel was broken. That didn't stop me regularly sailing around the world to trade. Now we're going to have horses and it'll be even easier to move around. (Rails will still be a grief problem though.)

I still don't get the problem with Towny. It was complex, but enough of us figured out how to use it and helped others. You can do nasty things with it like claim right next to another town, or eject someone from your town and not let them have their stuff, but you can do nasty things without Towny too. And if you don't like the protections of Towny and want Outlands-style lawlessness, then just don't create a town, nobody will force you to, right? I'd like it to be there so I can control my own stuff without having to join a town I don't trust and the mayor having access to my chests or something (which is more of an issue if we have only one town). Why can't I have what I want and you have what you want? Unless of course what you want is to be able to destroy and steal my stuff :)

Whitelisting the whole server: I agree, please don't, we need players, right? I know some of you used to get annoyed by new players and their typical new player questions, but some of us don't mind it. In the 1.0 world, I gave free plots to new players. It was a win/win - they didn't get griefed, I got to expand my town. If they annoy you, just ignore them, but don't forget some of them might stay and become new community members. I assume those who want the Outlands experience wouldn't want whitelisting either, since part of that experience was the risk of getting griefed?

PvP: I was never interested in this, and StTheo's server reinforced this for me. It sucks if your ping is really bad and you don't have enough time to spend on the server to mine enough diamonds to have all the armor that the powerful players have. In the 1.0 and LTS worlds, I did a lot of trading; if there's PvP everywhere, I pretty much would not trade because how do I know I'm not going to get robbed?

Trading is something that makes us move around, see other people, and for me at least enhances the sense of community - I might have lived in some towns where I was generally by myself, but I spent a lot of my time at spawn and in other towns. I'm not saying make trading compulsory, make plugins that force it to happen, but just let it happen if people want it.

I think a good compromise would be to have one 1.0-like world (Towny and no PvP) and one Outlands-like world. That way we should all be happy right? I don't think that just letting people turn off PvP in their own town would be very helpful, that would still prevent those of us who don't want to get killed from ever going anywhere. Alternatively, perhaps one world, but the eastern half is the Outlands and the western half is 1.0-like?

I'd still see trading as an option if we did this - I'd be happy to travel anywhere in the safe area, and anyone from the Outlands could meet me at spawn - or maybe an intermediary could do the delivery on that side.

I think the 1.0 world, and Outlands too from what I've read, really had a lot of freedom for people to choose their own experience (although of course you needed to mine some diamonds to start a town in 1.0). I think rules like "everyone must live in one town" (sorry if I'm mis-remembering what was suggested here), despite the good intentions to try to solidify the community, probably won't help, because everyone has their own ideas about what will make the game good and if we limit what you're allowed to do on the server, we're going to turn away some of the very community members we're trying to reunite.

[Edit: Also, sorry for wall of text, I tried pretty hard to cut it down, but then I had a week of stuff to reply to :)]
 
DOS622 said:
I still don't get the problem with Towny. It was complex, but enough of us figured out how to use it and helped others. You can do nasty things with it like claim right next to another town, or eject someone from your town and not let them have their stuff, but you can do nasty things without Towny too. And if you don't like the protections of Towny and want Outlands-style lawlessness, then just don't create a town, nobody will force you to, right? I'd like it to be there so I can control my own stuff without having to join a town I don't trust and the mayor having access to my chests or something (which is more of an issue if we have only one town). Why can't I have what I want and you have what you want? Unless of course what you want is to be able to destroy and steal my stuff :)
Click to expand...
I'm pretty sure the complaint about towny isn't to do with it being complex or whatever. I don't think any of us had difficulty using it. The problem with Towny is that you're restricted to one town.

DOS622 said:
Whitelisting the whole server: I agree, please don't, we need players, right? I know some of you used to get annoyed by new players and their typical new player questions, but some of us don't mind it. In the 1.0 world, I gave free plots to new players. It was a win/win - they didn't get griefed, I got to expand my town. If they annoy you, just ignore them, but don't forget some of them might stay and become new community members. I assume those who want the Outlands experience wouldn't want whitelisting either, since part of that experience was the risk of getting griefed?
Click to expand...
Like I said, I have no problem with it being public, but I offered to host expecting it not to be so. I will not be hosting if it is public because I don't want everyone and their grandma connecting to my personal computer.


In regards to the part about the 1.0ishworld, I'm pretty sure what's being discussed here is more of a "Let's go back to the old way", and not starting a server that's basically exactly like how the newer(ish) worlds were like.
 
Patchouli said:
The problem with Towny is that you're restricted to one town.
Click to expand...

Oh yeah, that! Well, nothing stops anyone from being a member of one town, and just physically building in/next to other towns without being members of the town. If I had my own town but you wanted to let me build in your town (as if, my builds aren't good enough! :) ), you could just set aside an area that you don't claim, or you could set the permissions on a plot to allow anyone to build there. Of course, there's the risk of grief, but then if you like the idea of Outlands, that shouldn't concern you.

Or we could have something with a higher administrative burden, but more flexibility, like 1.5 LTS. I was happy enough with the initial arrangement where only my storage area was protected and the rest of my town wasn't, and I was able to add/remove people to the "town" even if they were in other towns. It might be an extreme burden administratively if it were done on a public server, though.

I will not be hosting if it is public because I don't want everyone and their grandma connecting to my personal computer.
Click to expand...

Totally fair! Does anyone have any ideas about what it should cost to rent a decent server? I'd be willing to pay a bit for rental with no expectation of having any control (but of course am not interested in doing so if the server isn't somewhere I'm interested in playing).

In regards to the part about the 1.0ishworld, I'm pretty sure what's being discussed here is more of a "Let's go back to the old way", and not starting a server that's basically exactly like how the newer(ish) worlds were like.
Click to expand...

A server that's half Outlands and half Towny isn't "exactly like [...] the newer(ish) world", only half of it is. If you don't like Towny, can't you just not go to the other half? Why not give players that do want that the choice?

Disclaimer: I'm not aware of technical limitations that might make my requests difficult, like if Towny is hard to set up. I don't mean to ask the impossible of anyone.
 
DOS622 said:
A server that's half Outlands and half Towny isn't "exactly like [...] the newer(ish) world", only half of it is. If you don't like Towny, can't you just not go to the other half? Why not give players that do want that the choice?

Disclaimer: I'm not aware of technical limitations that might make my requests difficult, like if Towny is hard to set up. I don't mean to ask the impossible of anyone.
Click to expand...
I think I was reading that wrong. I somehow was under the impression you were suggesting it be the same world, which if that was the case that would present some problems. But I just re-read and noticed you mentioned two worlds.
 
Well I figured maybe one world split down the middle is another option if the software supports this - maybe one way would be to create a huge town called T9K that takes up half the world and allows anyone to build, allows PvP, etc.? Better than portals because you can actually see what is happening on the other side of the border. I might be enticed to go over there if I can see it looks kind of safe and it's daylight :) Or perhaps since some Outlands settlements would probably be a long way from spawn to avoid grief (if not whitelisted), they might still be near this border, so someone like me could have a town on the other "safe" side of the border, still nearby the Outlands settlement, close enough for easy trading.
 
I'm not saying I have a solution, but we should not split the server up into two experiences unless absolutely necessary. As people have said before, that kind of thing splits up the community. It's not likely someone is going to cross that "border" that separates them, whatever it is, very often.
 
Yes, anything that could potentially split the server I'll be against.
We need to come to a general consensus through talking and compromise on all fronts. I personally don't mind, any minecraft server would do for me right now.. I just lack that sense of commitment, this server will give me that edge needed to stay with it.

So.. have we finalized our choice for Whitelisted, Public?
Taking note that if we do go Public, I'm fairly sure the only person who'd be hosting would be StTheo (I think)
 
Ok, a few things I'd like to add.

I think that a white-listed server would prevent most people of T9K the ability to play on it, there are probably people who visit this site and have done so since OxyTown, yet their posts are so few in number that they would be turned away because of it. I am for a public server, in this respect. My personal opinion, is that a white listed server does limit many people access onto it, and if we are trying to aim for getting the 'golden days' back, white list is not the best option. Public servers, yea, you may have a higher chance of incidents happening, but T9K is for everybody, not exclusively for the old members who want to relive nostalgic moments.

There are a plethora for reasons not to have a public server, but the opposite is also true. If this whole idea is going to work, we need people to play, and many people. The community isn't comprised of a select group of people that control everything, but it is people of all levels of recognition here, from a 'new member' that just joined to a 'well-known member' that has over three years on this site, you can't expect much out of the server if it is white-listed, it will die quickly.

(wow, pretty sure thats the longest post I've made.)
 
I just realized how similar the Outlands setup is to Star Citizen. On that note, should the map become more dangerous the further out one travels? I have heard there might be some "local difficulty" setting in 1.8. Also, I am against map wipes unless there is a strong reason for them such as corrupted chunks. I do not want there to be a world border, but we need to ensure there is always terrain ready to be generated for the next update without traveling absurd distances.

One thing I like about Star Citizen is the presence of Arena Commander, and not just because it is currently the only part of the game that allows players to fly their ships. Having such an in-game experience allows players to improve their combat skills. Being Star Citizen though, it is restrained to predetermined maps.

Because we're dealing with Minecraft, I suggest that for small PVP events we use command blocks to:
  1. Generate a Multiverse World with a random seed.
    Implement a world border.
    Configure everything else such as a scoreboard and combat items.
    Teleport players to the word and scatter them depending on whether the combat is team-based.
    Detect a winning party.
    Teleport everyone back out of the world.
    Delete the world.

How does one get an ordered list to work on here?
 
How could that be your longest post?

ZxZl1jH.png



Anyway, back on topic that's some very good points.
I do think it'll be best if we had the server as public, so instead of being indifferent I'll cast my vote for public.
 
Public

Summary of pages 4 through 11:

Guiding Principles
Below is a list of the core themes that the posters in this thread have mentioned as essential to the T9k Minecrafting experience. The best suggestions for ideas towards the administration and mechanics of this potential server should support these themes to the utmost:
  • Prevent gameplay from becoming too boring too quickly. (thee_pro #76, Ekgladiator #117)
  • Maintain a sense of community. (JerzeyLegend #79, Pyrhos #97, Tsysin #117)
  • Recreate the feel of the "golden" times. (Melexiious #97, Alyyiah #132)
  • Maintain a high level of activity. (Pyrhos #99)

Gameplay Mechanics
  • Periodic Community Games. (StTheo #81, ChibaMasato #98, Alyyiah #132, Highrise #170)
  • World:
    • Open world of virtually unlimited size and limited protection. (TheGurw #107, ChibaMasato #108, DutchCheese #151, Kris19642 #153)
      - No World Border. (Tsysin #181, Highrise #212)
    • Protection areas with limited size.
      • Single, centralized area. (Melexiious #94, Damashki #101, Alyyiah #162, Kris19642 #167)
      • Multiple areas. (Highrise #173, theGurw #177)
      • Portals to protected areas. (theGurw #107, Highrise #159, Kris19642 #153)
        - At least one portal leads to very large protected world. (ChibaMasato #158, DOS622 #206)
    • Option for tiny protected area in open world. (Zennai #193)
  • Rules:
    • Don't be a dick. (Melexiious #94)
    • Unprotected areas have no rules. (theGurw #126)

Administration
  • Access:
    • Whitelist -
    • Public - Highrise #199, theGurw #200, DOS622 #203, Pyrhos #211, Melexiious #213, lacar1601 #214
  • Permissions:
    • Players: Block History Check. (StTheo #102, theGurw #126)
    • Moderators: Player Perms + freeze, mute, jail, kick. (theGurw #126)
    • Administrators: Mod Perms + ban. (theGurw #126)
  • Staff Selection
    • Mods: Figureheads in protected areas only - jurisdiction within own protected area. (theGurw #126)
    • Admins: Server Host and plugin developers only - jurisdiction everywhere. (theGurw #126)
 
Highrise said:
I just realized how similar the Outlands setup is to Star Citizen. On that note, should the map become more dangerous the further out one travels? I have heard there might be some "local difficulty" setting in 1.8.
Click to expand...
There are also some plugins that do this: Increase difficulty the less populated an area is. This also makes "ghost towns" stupidly zombie-movie-esque.

Also, I am against map wipes unless there is a strong reason for them such as corrupted chunks. I do not want there to be a world border, but we need to ensure there is always terrain ready to be generated for the next update without traveling absurd distances.
Click to expand...
I've been thinking about this. Since I'm already working on stitching together the old maps (personal project), why not just do that? Instead of generating a new world, just move the spawn, say, 20,000 blocks East, and continue using the same map? That way nobody has to leave, but if they want to move to new terrain, they can; and all new players have new terrain to play with. It also takes care of the near-spawn-grief-fixing issue.

And in that case, let's have a square WorldGuard region (deny-leave flag, of course) with 10,000 blocks in every direction, because any more than that is just stupid.

I'm sure some industrious players will resurrect the MCC and build rails stretching across the whole world. We could even put up a static Dynmap just after each spawn move, to show what we did and where the new spawn is in relation to the old worlds (without generated terrain between the old section and the new spawn, no spoilers!).

Of course, the OLDEST worlds (from the Official Server) would be greylisted to players who can prove via forum posts or references that they played on them. No retro grief!

How does one get an ordered list to work on here?
Click to expand...
Code: 
[list=1][*]Item 1
[*]Item 4
[*]Item 2[/list]
  1. Item 1
  2. Item 4
  3. Item 2
 
lacar1601 said:
  • Moderators: Player Perms + freeze, mute, ban, jail, kick. (theGurw #126)
Click to expand...
Small correction: I said specifically that they can't ban. To me, Mods aren't staff. They're temporary solutions while the Admins are asleep. Only Admins are permanent solutions.
 
Now then, allow me to organize my thoughts on this and matters into one coherent thought, and not just a bunch of crap posts, as I have been doing:

First of all, let me streamline the idea that I kept hinting at, as well as throwing in a couple of improvements that I've picked up along the way:

As I've kept childishly repeating, I'd like to see one large city, however I think I've come up with a way to make this a more fun reality and less of a chaotic hell-hole.

I'd like to see this metropolis type organization divided into sectors, chiefly a residential sector and a downtown+whatever the heck else. You can start up a sector you like, let's say

Residential section would have no theme no rules, anything goes. You want to live out of a tent? Fine. Do you want your house on top of a large hill where the only way to get up or down is a waterfall? Be my guest. The only rule is you cannot create crap that will lag out the members with less powerful computers. I.E. Extremely complex redstone circuits, lava waterfalls/lava art, etc.

Then perhaps we have a business sector/downtown where there will be highrises, or a Chinatown full of oriental style buildings, maybe a Catholic sector with chapels, or a Muslim sector with intricate mosques. These sectors should not be zoned or protected. Maybe you organized and built 90% of the China town sector, but feel the sudden urge to erect a mosque, sally on down there and build a mosque. Perhaps we could construct military base, for those of you who enjoy building planes, boats, rockets and missiles.

Should you want to live out of a 10-15 chunk massive Gothic castle with a few friends, or in a laboratory type hideout with a bunch of red stone, maybe a mansion from Hell itself, with lava dripping down the sides, you can do this away from the city. Not only will this help keep the city compact and lag free, it'll also give variety to the map. The hermits can do their things, and visit the city on their own terms, not having to bother with the problems that constant contact with other members will certainly create. Note, the further you travel from the city, the more remote things are, and the harder the server difficulty becomes (assuming local difficulty becomes a thing)

I know something like this won't appeal to everyone, this is just my two cents.

(Only downside is we might have a pretty ugly city for quite the while as builds aren't happening)
 
So if we do this I think we should wait for 1.8 to drop since there will be many new features for us to explore. I also like the idea of limited protective areas/ safe zones, I have been wanting to build a damn pirate town for ages but something always stopped me (mainly the amount of work required). I know that for many or the older people that the old 1.8 beta worlds where the way to go and I respect that but at this point the only way you are going to get that new feeling is in a new world :D (also the sea lantern looks amazing). Then again most of you want to live in the old worlds which is fine as well. Either way I personally say go 1.8 butttt that is a community decision.
 
Excellent work guys.

But yes, I agree with Ekgladiator and say that we wait till 1.8
...
Actually, that depends, will there be any world gen changes in 1.8?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top