Making a town.

[Mtndome]

Okay, I had this on Toi's suggestion and decided to make a separate thread.

I DO NOT like the fact that anyone on the server can make a town. Far too often, what could be a great town falls through the cracks because there is not enough interest/resources/etc. Besides, everyone wants to make a town.

I propose having existing towns sponsor new towns. This can be in effect for only new gens. If folks want to go out and build a town first, then appeal to a town for sponsorship, that's fine. This may even draw members to join towns first, then make their own with approval from their home city.

The existing town can provide (or make the new town farm mats for) a gen. The existing town can set up some form of agreement between new and old, allowing new town alliances to be made. For example:

Say I want to make a town, called Town Loka. It is to be a town in the mountains, focusing on lore. However, I need more folks interested in it to make it viable. I would go to spawn and decide I want Cryptite's town, Asgard, to sponsor me. I would approach Asgard and say, "Yo dawg. I leik yur town. Can you sponsor me?" Crypt, after much deliberation, agrees under conditions.

Conditions could be something like:

You must have 4 active members willing to participate.
Any books that are written or acquired will be shared between us mutually to further lore on Loka.
You are to remain a neutral city.
Asgard members should have perms in Town Loka.
etc etc etc.
(This could vary with each Town type: Power, Outlaws, Beauty, and Wealth)

Once I find four members, and agree to his terms, Asgard would officially sponsor Town Loka. A gen, under Asgard, can be made with a restricted radius. Lets say radius of no more than 100. This will provide protection for the new town, and give Asgardians a side project. Once Town Loka is built, or agreed by the sponsor it can provide for itself, Town Loka can make its own gen.

I believe this is a solid idea, because it can bring like individuals together to make nicer towns. Everyone and their mother have ideas for towns. But if you can get folks to agree on a town, it has a much better chance of succeeding. More towns=more draw to the server and an all around better Loka. It also lets towns that don't have much to do, such as Asgard, a side project.
Any agreement, or modification to this, would be greatly appreciated.

 

[Zor95]

Problem is... people like me who strongly disagree with this sort of system would just sponsor every town that asks.

 

[Mtndome]

Then towns could have a restriction as to how many towns they could sponsor.

What don't you like about it Zor?

 

[Zor95]

Though it can be argued that we are no longer vanilla, we are still vanilla based. That is, we aren't a faction server or tekkit, we're not creative or hardcore PvP. Since we are vanilla based people join us looking for the classic elements of vanilla Minecraft. One of those aspects is the freedom of creativity. When I join I want to have the ability to build what I want, where I want (providing it doesn't impede another player), with whom I want, and I want to protect what I build from griefers and thieves.

I've heard the argument that you can just go out several thousand blocks to build and no one will find you. Well as of late nearly every new city is at least 15k blocks away which leaves about 5k blocks for our current building limit of towns. Also, you only need to be discovered by a single player to attract all the thieves on the server. If you are not allowed to have a generator you will very quickly lose all of your building supplies. Additionally, without a town you do not have access to a change in spawn point. There are no town portals and there are no beds.

I've got a few more arguments but gotta run for ~40 minutes.

 

[Mtndome]

What I am suggesting doesn't restrict newer players. You can still build what you want, when you want it, with whom you want. My Idea is simply to connect newer players with older players, and allow more towns to flourish. Our description, while may not be accurate any longer, says that you can survive or die. Will you join a town or become a hermit in the wilderness? If you want to make your own functional town, you should go through the motions. Join an existing town, see how they work. If you want to strike out on your own, that's fine. But if you have the people interested, then it shouldn't matter. A town should sponsor you if you have the resources/member necessity. It's beneficial for existing towns as well, creating alliances, helping newer players, and changing things up.

 

[Psychedelic98]

It's a good idea, but it' gives too much power to the existing members. If anything we need to make things easier for our new players. Also, how would the agreements be enforced?

 

[Zor95]

What I am suggesting doesn't restrict newer players. You can still build what you want, when you want it, with whom you want. My Idea is simply to connect newer players with older players, and allow more towns to flourish. Our description, while may not be accurate any longer, says that you can survive or die. Will you join a town or become a hermit in the wilderness? If you want to make your own functional town, you should go through the motions. Join an existing town, see how they work. If you want to strike out on your own, that's fine. But if you have the people interested, then it shouldn't matter. A town should sponsor you if you have the resources/member necessity. It's beneficial for existing towns as well, creating alliances, helping newer players, and changing things up.

It does restrict them because as I said, the alternative is to allow thieves to walk in and take everything you own. Then how are you supposed to build?

Also, why would a town willingly give up a town they sponsor? That's giving up power. If those in the sponsored town choose to rebel then you can simply remove your sponsorship and let them die. It also means that those in the sponsored town must conform to the ideas of the parent town if the parent town so chooses to enforce them.

Restricting the radius of a town is a bad idea for a few reasons. First of all it would mean completely reconstructing your walls for expansion (unless ofc you're a fan of several walls). Secondly, those of us who plan towns out ahead of time would probably not stick a wall on our blueprints only 100 blocks out. That severely restricts room in the main area of the town.

Since this is a global server we have players on at all times of the day. Many of our American players have only met a few of our Aussies. Point being, players won't be able to strike up a deal with several towns because they never even see their active members. You'd actually only have a few choices for sponsorship and there is a good chance that none of those few will agree.

How about raiding/PvP towns? No one would support them besides other raiders and we know how little trust there is between members of that party. Sponsored towns would die very quickly.

When is a town able to provide by itself? Why can't towns built by players already able to provide for themselves skip all of this?

Has the ability for anyone to make a town ever even been abused so that we need a new system?

 

[Mtndome]

Psych, That would be for the towns in question to discuss.

And new players have it about as easy as it gets. Step by step instructions at spawn make it about as idiot proof as it gets.

Zor-


It will make them choose to join/be sponsored or try and do it on their own. As for the towns retaining sponsorship, there could be a time limit. You have so long to make your town viable and then you are on your own or something.

And the 100 radius protection is merely meant to protect what they have. E.G. Make an underground storage facility that can later be taken down. It will allow them to build with protection of their supplies.

As for being a global server, yeah I agree they may not see them often but we do have the /mail command for situations like these.

Raiding/PvP towns as those under power should want a sponsored town. It gives them new bodies and alliances to strengthen their position. If they don't trust anyone, then they won't sponsor anyone.

And a town should be viable when it has a good portion or all of its town built, can provide for its own security, or something along those lines. And if a town is already built, then it wouldnt apply I suppose. This would come into play for newer members to Loka.

I'm not claiming it's been abused. I'm suggesting change so every tom, dick, and magpie dont all start up towns and we end up with more towns than town members.

 

[Mtndome]

It can also allow towns to have side-projects.

 

[Zor95]

It will make them choose to join/be sponsored or try and do it on their own. As for the towns retaining sponsorship, there could be a time limit. You have so long to make your town viable and then you are on your own or something.

If this is optional then sure, I'm all for it, but don't force everyone to do this.

And the 100 radius protection is merely meant to protect what they have. E.G. Make an underground storage facility that can later be taken down. It will allow them to build with protection of their supplies.

This is what we do not want people doing with their protection. Our concern from the beginning has been people making generators just to protect their items. Fortunately I can only remember this happening once or twice.

As for being a global server, yeah I agree they may not see them often but we do have the /mail command for situations like these.

It's quite difficult to get to know someone using /mail. It is possible but would take a few weeks.

Raiding/PvP towns as those under power should want a sponsored town. It gives them new bodies and alliances to strengthen their position. If they don't trust anyone, then they won't sponsor anyone.

Thieves don't really do alliances.

And a town should be viable when it has a good portion or all of its town built, can provide for its own security, or something along those lines. And if a town is already built, then it wouldnt apply I suppose. This would come into play for newer members to Loka.

Even the best towns can't completely secure themselves. Some aren't even built for security.

How can a good portion of a town be built when they have a restricted radius? That doesn't make sense.

Old members build new towns.

I'm not claiming it's been abused. I'm suggesting change so every tom, dick, and magpie dont all start up towns and we end up with more towns than town members.

Don't fix what isn't broken.

 

[Zor95]

It can also allow towns to have side-projects.

Already plans for this.

 

[Magpieman]

I like the concept, im not entirely sure on the detail and how it would work as of yet. My initial concern would be that it over complicates things.

But the issue you bring up does need to be addressed. Builds tend not to get anywhere on the server because everyone is trying to build their own town and no one has any members because they are all working on their own project and not together. We need to have players pledge their loyalties to one town, and for it to be a legitimate town it would need a certain number of player loyal to it. After all the definition of a town is a densely populated area with fixed boundaries. We need to work on town mechanics so they have to be populated to be regarded as a town and to have the perks that come with that.

 

[Cryptite]

We need to work on town mechanics so they have to be populated to be regarded as a town and to have the perks that come with that.

And this is why I previously brought forward the idea of guild perks (to the admins, anyway) as a means to have members be loyal and want to stay with their towns. Presently everybody just jumps around to the town(s) with the most exciting thing going on at the moment. We have very few truly loyal members to towns that aren't just the owners.

 

[Zor95]

We need to work on town mechanics so they have to be populated to be regarded as a town and to have the perks that come with that.

And this is why I previously brought forward the idea of guild perks (to the admins, anyway) as a means to have members be loyal and want to stay with their towns. Presently everybody just jumps around to the town(s) with the most exciting thing going on at the moment. We have very few truly loyal members to towns that aren't just the owners.

I think it would be perfectly fair to reward towns for keeping loyal members. But again, I really think it is a bad idea to block certain people from making generators.

 

[Cryptite]

I really think it is a bad idea to block certain people from making generators.

I agree as well.

 

[andrekeroxd]

I really think it is a bad idea to block certain people from making generators.

I agree as well.

 

[KenuDragonfire]

Okay, just, at the moment, let's look at the list of towns:

Asgard: Ran by a co-owner of the server, involved in lore a lot

Hyrule: Ran by an admin as a private base and sculpture thing

Pallet: Ran by a guy who shows up every like once a month

Cathedral: Doesn't-even-have-dirt-poor.

Stalingrad: Ran by Psy, who is hated by the server, no offense

Paradisio: Just returned and had their island lightning bolted back into existence

Memrme: More of a private base for friends than a town

Helrune: Not much going on there (correct me if I'm wrong)

Tyndall: Ran by Opyc who is a Canadian, so might actually be able to interact with other towns in a friendly manner

HC: Essentially an asylum ran by the detainees.

So, before we do any sort of guilds or sponsorship or anything that requires towns to rely on one another, just think of the towns we have at this very moment.

 

[Cryptite]

Tyndall: Ran by Opyc who is a Canadian, so might actually be able to interact with other towns in a friendly manner

I lol'd

 

[mopb3]

HC: Essentially an asylum ran by the detainees.

Heheheh *dons wardens cap*

Oh and Stalingrad now belongs to Epicbacon, completing the Cathedralian rule over pretty much everything south.

 

[Zor95]

Oh and Stalingrad now belongs to Epicbacon, completing the Cathedralian rule over pretty much everything south.

That's uh.... not something to boast about.