Notifications
Clear all

[Closed] Recommendations for Eldin

Page 1 / 2

Broken_King
(@broken_king)
Active Member
Joined: 9 months ago
Posts: 6
Topic starter  

Hey everyone!

I really value your opinions so please read through my message and let me know what you think of each recommendation. If you don't remember my name I have changed it many times over the years and I have played on and off since the Second original map of Eldin. With that being said, when I quit in previous years I have always had the same reason as to why I quit and in order to prevent that issue from becoming a reason to quit for other players on the server I think these changes would help out a lot.

Before I get into my recommendation I would like to point out where I think the biggest issues with Eldin exist.

1. Maintaining an active player-base on the server.

2. Managing the economy on the server to be balanced and fair.

3. Creating incentives for players to live in towns rather than buying Wild land and not interacting with other players.

Now in a perfect world, you could solve most of these problems by just having a constant stream of new dedicated players on the server, but I do not think that should be the solution to rely on but an area for us all to strive to improve on.

The more realistic and controllable solutions would be as follows:

1. Change the Price of Wild Land to 100 tbs per (or a much higher price then 30 tbs per) Maybe 60?

  • This change would adjust for the natural inflation in the amount of tbs players already have on the server. Moreover, this would compensate for the more efficient tactics of making money faster, more efficiently, while not requiring a money wipe. This would also reduce the total number of tiles on Eldin creating incentives for Emperors, Kings, and other players of that nature to come back and enjoy the grind of Eldin once again. In the older maps, it would take months just to get enough money to make a Baron size town. However, in today's economy I have made 4x times that within a week of playing. Obviously, there is a learning curve to making money; yet with all of the minecraft updates speeding the process of making money up I do not think it is enjoyable for players to make a town that no one ever visits. 

2. Change the Limit of how much wild land can be purchased at once (maybe it has to be a 50x50 for wild land initially) (It can be smaller amounts once you already own the initial 50x50)

  • Reason: The goal of this change is for players to have incentives to live in cities prior to venturing out in the wild. Currently players only buy city land to get unique perks and players who are new just buy a 10x10 in the wild near a city with a server shop they like and start making another Baron size city.

3. Change the Titles for city and land requirements to be:

Earl: 10,000 Tiles

Duke: 25,000 Tiles

Prince: 50,000 Tiles

King: 75,000 Tiles

Imperatore, 100,000 Tiles

(Baron would be an existing title but look to change 4)

  • Reason: This change is coupled with the change to Wild Land Price and Limit to how much land can be purchased at once. This would make the progression for each rank feel a lot more natural. I also do not think these ranks are 

4. Create new incentives to co-own towns and better incentives for helper ranks (Baron would also be available by requiring 2,500 Wild tiles by co-owning a town with one or more people who reach 10,000 tiles)

  • Reason: This change is aimed at players losing interest after they create a Baron town with little to no traffic. Some of the incentives to co-owning a town could be like more items in server shops, more build slots, etc.

5. Create in town buffs to players who live in a town. (This could be an increased sell price at that specific server shop, free DT and PA from that town, etc.

  • Reason: The key would be the need for people to live and be an active resident of the town. They could not just buy a single plot and then make their own town. They would need the town rank and this would help new players generate enough income to co-own or create a new town in the future. 

Finally and most importantly, I think that the server resets should be on a 6 month interval (unless a patch delays vital plugins) and not a year interval. I know the pandemic brought a lot of players back recently; however, I find that 95% of the cities on the map are unoccupied and the players have not been active for months. I have reached out to friends who used to play on the server even at the beginning of the year and they are not interested in returning because they are 'done' with their town. I checked the active plugins and it looks like all of the plugins are updated to 1.16. I know many players are excited for the Nether update and I would extremely interested to see if the date could be moved up. I know there would have to be a gap in time to allow players to see notifications about it. My idea was for it to be 8/15; however, if it was sooner or a bit later I do not think it would be a big deal. I know when maps last too long people end up quitting permanently or for years at a time (like I have in my past) and I do not want to see the remains of the active players die out. For almost an entire weekend there was nothing but a few players and I think this has a lot to do with players not having as much interest since they are done with their town with no one-living in it.

 

Let me know what you think. I am here to answer any questions and make sure to keep an open mind :D! I know it sounds like people will be loosing out with some of these changes but being around active players living in a town together was the most enjoyable time I had on Eldin. It is difficult to understand till you experience it yourself and if I could live in a town with 3 to 4 players walking around it everyday I would give up all my money just to live there.

 

Thanks for reading this long winded message. I know a lot of people asked what I thought of the server from coming back and feel free to ask me any question you have.

 

Broken_King


Azher liked
Azher
(@azher)
Admin / Senior Dingus Khan Admin
Joined: 2 years ago
Posts: 16
 

We will 100% talk about this at this next staff meeting, but I just wanna get my point out on a few of these.

Posted by: @broken_king

Before I get into my recommendation I would like to point out where I think the biggest issues with Eldin exist.

1. Maintaining an active player-base on the server.

2. Managing the economy on the server to be balanced and fair.

3. Creating incentives for players to live in towns rather than buying Wild land and not interacting with other players.

What a true statement... 

Posted by: @broken_king

Limit to how much land can be purchased at once.

We have had some players slowly do this naturally by buying land in small bits one by one. From the side of staff this is kinda annoying as it means more tickets and more land to keep track of for us.

I don't want to discourage players from doing this as it makes sense, but I don't want to encourage it either.

Posted by: @broken_king

I think that the server resets should be on a 6 month interval

Map resets take a LOOOONG time to do. It's not just plumbing a new map on and paying people back for their land. 

With the current staff group, we have made fixed times for when a map reset happens and with that, we use it to pump out new game content that would not be able to be added mid map.

With a map reset taking a long time to do, I wouldn't want us to do that 2 times a year and thereby not prioritize some of the other work we do.

Posted by: @broken_king

friends who used to play on the server even at the beginning of the year and they are not interested in returning because they are 'done' with their town.

We have a lot of content on the server related to towns, hopefully, some of the other content could interest them.

Clearly that is not the case as they no longer play on the server. I'm very curious about what areas they would like to see us expand on to improve.

Posted by: @broken_king

I checked the active plugins and it looks like all of the plugins are updated to 1.16. I know many players are excited for the Nether update and I would extremely interested to see if the date could be moved up.

I just wanna make it clear that there is no date on when we will update to 1.16, what so ever!!!!

Having the plugins updated is one thing and it is actually not what is holding us back at the moment. For us to update to 1.16 we need the version to be stable and not have further performance issues than we already have.

This is not currently the case, but we are CONSTANTLY keeping an eye on it.

 

 

As I mentioned, we will talk about this post among the staff and see what we can take from it.

Thanks for the well-written post and for the feedback. This is a prime example of what I like to see on the forums as feedback for the server - Not matter if I agree with it or not.


Awesomebrendan
(@awesomebrendan)
Moderator Moderator
Joined: 2 years ago
Posts: 38
 

These are just my opinions, but I will add my input onto any points I have ideas on.

Posted by: @broken_king

1. Change the Price of Wild Land to 100 tbs per (or a much higher price then 30 tbs per) Maybe 60?

  • This change would adjust for the natural inflation in the amount of tbs players already have on the server. Moreover, this would compensate for the more efficient tactics of making money faster, more efficiently, while not requiring a money wipe. This would also reduce the total number of tiles on Eldin creating incentives for Emperors, Kings, and other players of that nature to come back and enjoy the grind of Eldin once again. In the older maps, it would take months just to get enough money to make a Baron size town. However, in today's economy I have made 4x times that within a week of playing. Obviously, there is a learning curve to making money; yet with all of the minecraft updates speeding the process of making money up I do not think it is enjoyable for players to make a town that no one ever visits. 

2. Change the Limit of how much wild land can be purchased at once (maybe it has to be a 50x50 for wild land initially) (It can be smaller amounts once you already own the initial 50x50)

I disagree, increasing the price of wild land may have an opposite effect in terms of player retention, especially a drastic increase such as 100tb per tile, it taking months to make a baron town would cause established players to burn out due to the grind, and if you think about this from the perspective of a new player, at 100tb a tile it would take 10000tb to buy a basic 10 x 10 which would cause many players to just leave the server, assuming it is just a grind-fest, even 60tb per seems excessive to me due to these reasons, if the tile price should be raised i believe it should be a minor increase such as 40tb per tile, our economy is not in a bad spot and i do not believe we need to do anything as drastic as 100 per tile. 

Posted by: @broken_king

. Change the Limit of how much wild land can be purchased at once (maybe it has to be a 50x50 for wild land initially) (It can be smaller amounts once you already own the initial 50x50)

  • Reason: The goal of this change is for players to have incentives to live in cities prior to venturing out in the wild. Currently players only buy city land to get unique perks and players who are new just buy a 10x10 in the wild near a city with a server shop they like and start making another Baron size city.

Again I believe this change has some issues, firstly, at the beginning of a map no cities exist, limiting how much land can be purchased at once would mean major cities would be unable to exist for possibly a couple of months, this would cause the opposite effect, where players do not buy city land due to no major cities being on the map. another issue i find is that town expansions would be very difficult to do with these limits, say you have a square kingdom sized city with dimensions of 283 x 283, you want to do a 20 block expansion on a side of the city, this is 5660 tiles, under a tile limit this expansion would likely be denied despite being only 20 blocks.

Posted by: @broken_king

Create new incentives to co-own towns and better incentives for helper ranks (Baron would also be available by requiring 2,500 Wild tiles by co-owning a town with one or more people who reach 10,000 tiles)

I partially agree with this statement, players need more incentives to co-own a city, when it comes to helper, i believe there is enough incentive to become a city helper.

Posted by: @broken_king

I think that the server resets should be on a 6 month interval

 @Azher has already discussed the staff end of this, however, I just want to add some player side input, I played during Braavos and Eden, when maps reset at a 6 month interval, I believe this actually negatively impacted the server, many towns were unable to be completed due to the 6 month timer, the maps were so short that limited development could occur compared to more recent maps, the number of towns a map was about 20 and stayed that way until maps were made a year long, this resulted in last map having 45 cities (last map did also have other factors going for it), having more time in a map allows people to also make multiple cities, the year long maps have in my opinion made Eldin a more fun enjoyable server and filled out our maps and worlds.   

Regardless of these points you brought up, I believe the three core issues of maintaining an active player-base, managing the economy on the server and creating incentives for players to live in towns are very true issues that affect the server and any change to them needs to be carefully considered.

 

Broken_King
(@broken_king)
Active Member
Joined: 9 months ago
Posts: 6
Topic starter  

Hey! Thanks for replying! I liked reading through your opinions and I definitely wanted to clarify a couple of issues up based on your response and maybe provide a little bit more information for where I am coming from.

 

This first area goes over @Awesomebrendan's response I wanted to respond too.

 

First off, I totally get the issue of needing to deal with the technical issues with resetting a map and I understand how a sixth month interval sounds like a developmental hassle more. My concern is I have found since playing on the server and been told by 6 or 7 players at the moment that many are not interested in building on their massive plots because: no one even visits these massive towns, no one has the time to develop these massive plots of lands, there is no incentive for them to grind the farms, fishing, and mining (because there is no rank beyond where they are at or at least a rank they desire). This has undoubtedly a problem and I think probably everyone on the staff team can see that players seem to play a lot less on Eldin once they hit that max rank. Obviously some like Awesomebrendan get staff and stick with the server but I think always having a rank in site is important to incentivize people to 'want' play. Maybe with some of the changes I recommended more players would remain active after map resets for longer and a year wouldn't seem like an excessive time; however, I still believe that a year is a bit too long and maybe an 8 to 9 month window would be more practical (unless their or plugin or technical issues delaying it). That's just my thoughts and multiple other players I have talked too opinions about the year interval. I totally respect your response Azher and I did not consider the technical difficulties of having it changed every 6 months.

Posted by: @awesomebrendan

I just want to add some player side input, I played during Braavos and Eden, when maps reset at a 6 month interval, I believe this actually negatively impacted the server, many towns were unable to be completed due to the 6 month timer, the maps were so short that limited development could occur compared to more recent maps, the number of towns a map was about 20 and stayed that way until maps were made a year long, this resulted in last map having 45 cities (last map did also have other factors going for it), having more time in a map allows people to also make multiple cities, the year long maps have in my opinion made Eldin a more fun enjoyable server and filled out our maps and worlds.

I really like your input here but I think with every map comes more existing money on the server. This means less time is spent grinding and more time is spent entirely on building. This may come as a shock but the 45 cities from last map has turned into 65 cities with more then 90% of them being 1. inactive 2. without ways to even travel to them 3. and an average size of current cities (excluding co-owned cities) just around 14,550 which is just above earl size. On top of that 25 of those cities are Baron size cities and on the server 52 players have already claimed baron sized plots meaning if these players finished building cities in the end that would leave us with 92 cities. Now, even if you assume that not everyone wants a city, I still think 65 cities is an absurd amount that leaves majority of players finding out the hard way that no one is going to visit your city unless you have a t3 server shop or your insane at building. This again goes back to another core issue which is that on Eldin currently you can make an absurd more amount of money faster because of: less people grieving massive unprotected farms, more massive unprotected farms on the server, new (and albeit enjoyable) ways to make money more efficiently. If the change I recommended for 1 and 2 went through that would leave thirteen cities to be able to be made (not including money that people have not used towards their land aka. a lot) I'd estimate the total amount of cities would be around 20 to 25 and I think that's a solid amount of cities to have areas for people to buy land, live in cities. Note: I do not think city land price should change or if it was decided it needed to be adjusted maybe it could be something like 25 per tile. If it became too excessively high I think it would be a deterrence for people buying city land over wild land which I think should be the opposite goal. Link to land table in excel to do your own calcs https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/e/2PACX-1vS4frzJiF5KWdckJBOsZXJUriWOeRQIHHSMXddQZpACbAJ-gY2d2SCW_ya5npqBtFYWFLdXkmTk0sLR/pubhtml .

 

Posted by: @awesomebrendan

i believe there is enough incentive to become a city helper.

I just have to say I do not agree at all. What incentives are there to be a city helper? I mean just look at the number of helpers active and the number of helpers in total. I find that most people who would have been helper just join the city or make their own city which makes less people interact and enjoy one of the most enjoyable parts of eldin ~ working together.

Posted by: @awesomebrendan

this would cause the opposite effect, where players do not buy city land due to no major cities being on the map. another issue i find is that town expansions would be very difficult to do with these limits, say you have a square kingdom sized city with dimensions of 283 x 283, you want to do a 20 block expansion on a side of the city, this is 5660 tiles, under a tile limit this expansion would likely be denied despite being only 20 blocks.

I think this misses the vital and I mean vital point of my reasoning which includes the line "It can be smaller amounts once you already own the initial 50x50". Now that means, if you already own a city you can by a 10x10 expansion a 20x20 expansion. However, what this prevents is everyone living in the wild at the start of a map because they are off to start a new Baron city. I do not think there would be some lack of land to buy. Obtaining lord may be more difficult, but I do not think that players who actually want to live in towns will not have land active and ready to buy. 25 cities is still a massive amount and considering the large number of people that would have Prince sized towns from the very beginning I do not see that as a massive issue.

Posted by: @awesomebrendan

it taking months to make a baron town would cause established players to burn out due to the grind

I just don't agree. Majority of established players already have a large amount of money to spend on cities and I do not think it is reasonable to make the goal for everyone to own their own city. I have made over 300k in the past week and I actually like making new players having to spend at least a month before they can be a city owner. In fact, when I first started playing without enchantments, Minecraft updates, it took me four months to reach Baron rank. Those months of living in a town playing with other people were my most enjoyable months on Eldin. Now the grind is all separated by thousands of blocks. Its not about helping a city you like grow or playing with friends in a city you like. However, it is about building your own massive city with no one to visit it. Eldin has always differentiated itself from other servers by being focused on its economics and difficulty rather than its "city making experience" as many people just quit after they make their city.

Posted by: @awesomebrendan

10000tb to buy a basic 10 x 10 which would cause many players to just leave the server,

Or they could just buy a city plot. If it was easier to generate money for citizens (all city ranks) of a city then coupled with the second change they could eventually move out on their own. Starting in the wild is a problem because you are alone in the wild. Not the same in a city. 

 

This second area goes over the couple of points of @Azher's response I wanted to clarify.

Posted by: @azher

We have had some players slowly do this naturally by buying land in small bits one by one. From the side of staff this is kinda annoying as it means more tickets and more land to keep track of for us.

 

I want to clarify as Brendan misunderstood my initial point here too. I do not think people should be unable to expand by smaller amounts. I just think an initial purchase of Wild land has to be limited to at least a 50x50. It is so much more effective to live just outside of a city for 3,000 tb which you can make in less than an hour. Expansions in such could be limited to avoid annoyance (maybe a 20x20 unless it is connecting existing land aka filling in the gaps.)

 

Other than that I pretty much agree with your entire response. I understand the technical issues of resetting the map every six months and maybe that was too short of a time frame. However, I do still believe a year is a bit too long considering most people have made emperor and King sized towns within the first 6 months (at least) and maybe adjusting it to a 9 month interval plus adding some of the changes I recommended would help out a lot.

 

I think its hard to say hey lets devalue everyone's money and it can be scary for someone; however, at the end of the day there still will be a large amount of towns with plenty of land for people to buy.

 

Thanks again! Let me know if you have any questions.

 

Quick edit: because i forgot to respond to one point.

Posted by: @azher

We have a lot of content on the server related to towns, hopefully, some of the other content could interest them.

Clearly that is not the case as they no longer play on the server. I'm very curious about what areas they would like to see us expand on to improve.

I think adding new content is not the solution to retaining players from leaving once they finish their towns. Most people I have talked too have quit in the past and present because of 1. Not having anyone in their town for weeks at a time (not Baron sized towns without PA or DT) 2. Reaching a rank like Prince, King, or Emperor and losing all interest in the Eldin grind because there is no more goal past that point. 3. No helpers in their town to give them new ideas and really have someone else dedicated to the town. 

This post was modified 9 months ago 2 times by Broken_King

Azher
(@azher)
Admin / Senior Dingus Khan Admin
Joined: 2 years ago
Posts: 16
 
Posted by: @broken_king

My concern is I have found since playing on the server and been told by 6 or 7 players at the moment that many are not interested in building on their massive plots because: no one even visits these massive towns, no one has the time to develop these massive plots of lands, there is no incentive for them to grind the farms, fishing, and mining (because there is no rank beyond where they are at or at least a rank they desire). This has undoubtedly a problem and I think probably everyone on the staff team can see that players seem to play a lot less on Eldin once they hit that max rank.

While I agree that this is a problem I do not see it as being a huge issue.

Eldin's main content has for a while been the city system, and while I think we pretty much have perfected that aspect, other areas are lacking. The city system is great but I personally don't want it to be the main content of Eldin but just one of the things to do.

  • We introduced guilds to the server and kinda let it be as it is, for now, to see what players turned it into, as it is very much a community thing. 
  • We reintroduced dungeons to the server which are in my opinion better than ever! and future dungeons will be far better as we have learned a lot since.
  • We have publicly talked about maybe bringing gods back to the server, and we have publicly talked about bringing quests back to the server.

Some of these are not something that can be introduced mid map as it changes some aspects of the game that players are already using on the server. Some of this content as well as other things in the works, hopefully gets improved or sees the light of day.

So again, I agree that the grind can get boring and I assume parts of it is right for us to still have players from 10 years ago and the system staying almost the same. But hopefully Eldin being more than just that in the future will give you the incentive to spend your time on other things / keep it interesting.

Posted by: @broken_king

many people just quit after they make their city.

This is kinda related to what I said before. Hopefully, we can improve so people realize that Eldin is and will be more than a city builder.

Posted by: @broken_king

I do not think it is reasonable to make the goal for everyone to own their own city.

This is something we have battled with a fair bit. One of the problems being the lack of ideas for rank benefits for citizens in a city.

Posted by: @broken_king

I have made over 300k in the past week

If the focus is to earn money, then yes. There are many other things to do.

The first thing the came to mind was events like Fishapalooza.

To be honest tho, we have been lacking quite a bit on that part due to other things taking our time, so we could definitely improve on that (Thanks Minecraft performance issues).

 

You've made many points on how we could improve the city owner count and while I somewhat agree on some of it.

I don't wanna go into my opinion on it as personally don't know what we are gonna do in those areas, as I'm focusing more on future content.

So whatever I may say about it might be taken as a definite answer as to what direction we are going which is very much not the case, at least on my part.

This post was modified 9 months ago by Azher

Broken_King
(@broken_king)
Active Member
Joined: 9 months ago
Posts: 6
Topic starter  

Ill keep this last post short to get some other peoples views on the topics discussed but I do want to point out that:

Posted by: @azher

This is kinda related to what I said before. Hopefully, we can improve so people realize that Eldin is and will be more than a city builder.

I find a small minority of people believe that enjoy Eldin being focused on city building and being able to grow cities at a rapid pace. Honestly, I think that is when Eldin is at its worst. Whereas, I find that a large majority of people like when Eldin becomes harder and more about building a city for people to live in and enjoy. The 1st and 2nd recommendation would make it a lot more difficult for people to live outside of cities and I also think that citizens and citizen ranks could even get more buffs to selling in server shops. AKA (not people who own cities or wild land who buy 1 city plot) but people who choose to hold a city rank and live in a city. This could make it easier for new players to progress while also not making it just another buff for city owners.


Zephyna
(@zephyna)
Member Moderator
Joined: 2 years ago
Posts: 13
 

I'm not good at writing but ill try my best by making it short. You have to remember that Minecraft isnt jsut mining people wanna build and create there stuff. By stopping people from buying wild land, making it 50x50 minimum for first wild land, will stop epople from trying to create there own stuff. Atm yes there a lot of town but even if there was less it wont make people live in town more...99% of the toen have pre-build house mean people can build what they want. 

Best exemple is me...i do enjoy mining to grind  but only sometime... i jsut wanna have land to build on...i ALWAYS mek pre-build house...i did tought about making a small town and let people build but as for my main town think of it as a big project and i want all to fit.

If people wanna build tehy will buy land in cities but wont live in it....they will buy there own land somewhere to create waht ever tehy want...or see a city and be like i wanna try it! i wanna make a masterpiece!

There wont be any real solution to have people actually live in a city...if you want traffic well make a nice looking city with special stuff, have item in ur server shop taht people might want. 

With that said with tons of error ( i know) i actually think its great to have that many cities...make a lot of place to visit and see waht people make!

 


NeoTokyoNora
(@neotokyonora)
Active Member
Joined: 2 years ago
Posts: 14
 

Wow, this was a lot to read through. I'm not going to lie. We definitely share the sentiment of wanting players on the server for longer than what it takes for them to build their town and then move on to other things. That's why, as Azher has said, we are working on world building components of the server. Things that involve stories, adventure, LORE and various other points of interest to keep this server as engaging as we can possibly make it. Truth be told, due to the nature of the pandemic and everyone's work schedules and life being turned completely upside down, we haven't had a chance to do the spring/summer festival like we did last year, which was a great success and focus point of friendly gatherings and shenanigans and furthered the bonds of our tight knit community. This is yet another example of things we do to help encourage fun, healthy player longevity. 

You talk about cities being dead, and requiring folks to live in them until they can afford an initial 50x50. That's so terribly oppressive and stifling to not only new players but returning players who may have chosen to spend some of their cost elsewhere and need to play a little catch up when map starts back.

I had a town last map, before I was mod, before I was anything other than a regular player, called Abita Cove and it was constantly full to the brim with players and people passing through. Folks used their houses, even if it wasn't their main home, and there was always some form of gathering. There was a time that we had PVP bar fights in the basement of my tavern because why not, Fishapalooza, Cerb's birthday surprises... etc. etc. Not to mention I had fast travel and roads to spawn. There was nothing special about my town. Heck, I even had some falling outs with residents, resulting in a few evictions... It wasn't a perfect town by any means, but it was still absolutely alive. All I sold was FISH, no diamonds or iron or gold, just fish because I was a little fishing village. I did not hold the best prices for anything other than cod. No joke. It was a themed town, and a fun town.

A town's success is not because of its size or even its active living citizens... Its success comes from owners taking a communal interest in their town being a point of interest. Some things you can do for this are inviting folks to join you in your town's Mob Arena, encouraging community driven events (which is what Fishapalooza originally was), make a horse track and race and level horses for fun, have a guild hall with dungeon access and invite folks for that as well. There are so many ways to make a town interesting without forcing people to live there.

Despite you stating that you don't want to force anyone to do anything, the things you originally proposed do, in fact, pigeon hole people into a kind of forced path in the game which is something I'm very strongly against. 

A part of what  has discouraged me from continuing with the vigor I had last map this map, is the gap that now stands between Duchess and Princess... which has been adjusted since last map to account for new titles like Earl/Jarl. I understood that it was part of the adjustments necessary to keep the game mechanics going, but it was frustrating all the same to have been so close to Princess last map and to have still not reached it yet this map either due to obligations, moderator duties, life and my full-time job. You proposing increased cost of land would undoubtedly discourage any existing player from wanting to progress further than their means. I speak as a player here, not as a member of staff. 

Naturally I don't speak for everyone, but I do agree with the majority of the others who have replied to you stating that there are better/ other ways to retain players that isn't involved to the adjustment or obstruction of a players ability to progress amongst the ranks. 

I have walked through many of Eldin's maps and ages. I have seen maps last over a year, maps last only a few months, and maps last what you proposed... 6 months. Nothing gets done. Brendan is right. There were less cities sure in Eden... but you seem to constantly talk like less cities is a good thing... Less cities historically speaking mean a slow, inactive map. You complain that this map has 65 cities or so this map; you complain that a lot are inactive, but I do see those players come and go throughout the months... We saw far more dead cities last map, ironically... than we see this map. Perfect examples of old maps with a TON of cities are Haleys and Ishtar, which are maps most veteran players hail from. They were, in a lot of respects, Eldin's most successful age. When Minecraft and Eldin were fairly new and gaining popularity. 

Having a lot of cities, even inactive cities isn't inherently a bad thing. Eldin's dynamic has evolved, instead of folks just wanting to build a house with the perks of a city, folks now want to build their own cities and build all the structures within it. Only a few cities this map allow folks to build on their plot, and Thebes II is one of those that I think have pulled it off very successfully this map. But that's not always what folks want. Some folks just want to build a city to a certain theme... 

Overall I pretty much disagree with everything you've proposed so far, I standby and support the folks that have already replied before me. I'm not trying to shut you down, I think its great that you're communicating ideas... I'm just providing experiences that I've personally witnessed in the pass that contradict the effectiveness of what you've proposed so far. 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~=

tl;dr-You should be looking to ideas that would increase world-buildability if you want to extend player longevity. Festivals, Contests, Mob Arena, Dungeons, Guilds... things along those lines.  Personally, I want to see those Eldin Gods of old come back, and how cool would it be if there were quests along with them? Then building would take a primary focus, but there would be other things to do if you got tired of it. Increasing the cost of tiles, restricting what you can initially purchase, and limiting the time of a map aren't going to be the answer imo.

 

. . 

Synthwave is best genre, don't @ me.


Moonson_
(@moonson_)
Active Member
Joined: 2 years ago
Posts: 5
 

@broken_kin

So much to discuss! Here are my opinions and ideas to throw a wrench in the wheel. Also, I do not have the experience of most people in this conversation. I’m a dreamer. I like to come up with ideas and see what comes of it.

I. Increasing City Dwelling. I very much like the idea of increasing city populations and activities. I think many will enjoy playing as a community and not always the individual in the wild. Especially for the newest players. Living in the cities could help build those relationships with other people that will keep them logging on to Eldin. How do we do bring people to the cities? 

    • I think taking away or minimizing benefits for wild tiles could be a first step instead of increasing the price of wild tiles or size plot requirements. There could be one rank or a lot less ranks for those that choose to live only in the wild. The ability to build their own house/compound on protected land could be the main benefit for being a wild rank. Wild tiles would still be needed in order to build a city. And cities are not going to have enough cash crop land to put all their citizens to work. Players will still likely want a wild plot to protect a cash crop farm. 
    • Now more on the rank benefits. If we have enticing benefits for city ranks and town owner ranks, the newer players and the more veteran players will both benefit. It will help to encourage many players to live in cities while they raise the money to EVENTUALLY build a city if they want to. It’s been mentioned before that we need to find the benefits I know. Just throwing the main ideas out. And I will be trying to come up with rank benefit ideas at some point.
    • I like the idea of city buffs.
    • To encourage community, we could have group quests that can be found in cities. Rewards could range from currency to rare items. Quests do not have to be limited to citizens of that city.
    • I like the quest ideas from the Gods that Nora brought up.
  1. City Ownership:
    • Very much like the idea of promoting co-ownership, but I think there needs to be a safety measure for those co-owners whose partner(s) has gone inactive. That could be a major loss of motivation if you have a half built city and there is nothing you can do about it. Citizens could leave if the promised PA doesn’t get built because the active co-owner doesn’t control that land. Perhaps, the active partner gains control over the land of the inactive partner. The inactive partner would still own the city tiles (for map reset count), but the active partner would be able to build and sell land to players without the permission of the inactive partner. Land sale profits would go to the active partner.
    • City Sizes: I could see a benefit in raising the tile requirement of the first city size to like 5k especially if more people are co-owning, but not more than that. People want to build cities and we don’t want to make it so hard that they quit before they get the money for their first city. Raising it to 5k would slow the city building a little, but not making it quit worthy.
    • Map Length: I think one year is still a good length of time for a map. Not everyone is a fast builder. And if it's too short, I'm not going to be interested in building much of anything if it's going to be gone so soon. With increased non-building activities, players can slow down and enjoy the ride.
  1. Endgame: As Azher asked before: what do emperors want to do after they have built their magnificent empires? 
    • I’m not even close to being emperor so I can’t say for sure, but I had one thought. Siege battles! They can turn their cities on for a war. At a price of course. Giving emperors a reason to get back to the grind of making money. Anyone who wants to join the war can pick defense or offense until a set limit (equally divided). Then, let the war commence! There can be a reward system for the wars. And only emperors can start a war against their own city. All property of course will be safe. Citizens’ belongings will be safe. But war players (only) will be on for pvp, there can be a temporary war graveyard, and war towers that will be the main goal for victory. There should probably be a limit of how many wars an emperor can start/length of time. Maybe the non-participating citizens will get irritated with constant war. Or maybe a different world is setup for the war. Emperors can start them and lead them or designate a leader. Factions would be loose and not set in stone. Just decided for that one battle. Not like guilds. Faction wars could have different sizes like 10v10 or scaled up higher if needed. Of course, I have no idea if this is technically possible, just throwing out ideas!
    • If you are asking what's in it for the emperor, keeping the city buzzing. I'm looking at the angle that a city owner has to work to keep the city alive.
    • I think we should get a hold of inactive veteran players and ask them what would bring them back to Eldin.

 

This post was modified 9 months ago 2 times by Moonson_

KomradeKrunch
(@komradekrunch)
New Member
Joined: 2 years ago
Posts: 3
 

Very interest thoughts in this thread.

I will say I feel directly affected by what it brings up. I own Spring Island, a earl size town. It was made in February, but only started to spring up in May.

 

Every house I sell I have to ask someone if they want to buy it.

I have made Spring Island's server shop purposely entice people to come by buying 3 ores that all can't be upgraded. Instead of going to 3 towns, you go to one.

I have had to beg people to buy my player shops. 

I built roads connecting Spring Island to major towns.

A guild hall for sale, no one interested because guilds at this point are only for their dungeons and are town building for a dungeon with extra steps. 

I'm even in the works of a mob arena to further entice people to come to my town, and a ticket is made for my tavern.

 

My town is dead, except for the occasional person from Heastone who comes to sell their ores. Which makes no sense to me, you'd think people would come to Spring Island to sell their ores, its fast, I have DT...

I guess, even then lapus, redstone, and coal are so irrelevant to this economy because everyone just farms honey. 

 

So then, my town is dead because I don't care for it? It is ugly? I think not, to be polite I'll just say I put more effort into my town then some large more successful towns on Eldin...

Why is my town dead then. One thing is time.

 

Look at any big city, Whitehold, Paragon Falls, etc. Go to their markets, their huge markets which players come to see. Half the stalls are empty, have prices on items from 4 months ago, or have items that no longer need to be sold in this late stage item economy.

A large portion of players play the server for the initial boom, then become inactive. So this leaves my town with a small player base to buy things.  Ok. So people don't stay long enough.

 

But what hurts more is the fact that everyone already owns their own town. Almost all our active players own enough wild land and in combination with tb worth own enough to create a town. This creates alot of towns. So when you do get someone looking to live in a city house, you have to compete with other town owners. Who will win? As a developing town owner I have had to create my town to be competitive as I can. But I still I fail. So, we have too many towns, another problem, (and people make too much as our economy is unbalanced right now).

 

The final nail in the coffin as to why my town is dead is because there are no low level players. Villagers, Commoners, the people that live in the first city tiles they buy. Why is that? Because no new players join. Everyone grinds to get higher ranks and live on eldin's promise of Make your own Town! 

 

In my opinion, this is the most crucial issue as to why my town is dead. 

 

You can add changes and plugins to get existing players to stay longer, and to reduce the amount of towns that exist and increase prices forcing people to live together in towns. But eventually, people grind and rankup and make their own town and everyone lives by themselves.

These things stop eldin's bleeding as to why people leave, but they dont replace the lost blood.

You need to increase the new player count, to have more people be villagers so towns can have a community before they rankup.

 

 

Eldin grew because of a youtuber named Mike7493 in the early 2010s. If this youtuber had not shown Eldin, I am not sure this server would exist today.

We need another Mike7493, a youtuber or influencer who actually plays world of Eldin to push the server, as the same thing that happens to other servers like 2b2t.

 

 

One last thing.

Mining should always be the fastest way to make money, also remove elytras.

 

Thanks.

 


Broken_King
(@broken_king)
Active Member
Joined: 9 months ago
Posts: 6
Topic starter  

Thanks again everyone for replying. I just want to say that I am no way trying to target any one person and I respect your opinions and reasoning behind why you like or do not some or all of my ideas.

I think everyone can agree if majority of the players are unhappy with something on the server then it is a good idea to not let that issue get to a boiling point where people are quitting from the server.

I bring this up because even now I am being told by active players literally today that they will not play on Eldin if Eldin counties to become a "city building simulator" with almost no activity in towns.

Posted by: @neotokyonora

Its success comes from owners taking a communal interest in their town being a point of interest. Some things you can do for this are inviting folks to join you in your town's Mob Arena, encouraging community driven events (which is what Fishapalooza originally was), make a horse track and race and level horses for fun, have a guild hall with dungeon access and invite folks for that as well. There are so many ways to make a town interesting without forcing people to live there.

I do enjoy events and I agree they are great to add, but at the end of the day events don't last months. They do not keep players interested and they are some of the only times players interact in person on the server now. (excluding co-owned towns)

 

I find that this is not just an issue with older players but an issue with newer players alike. People play multiplayer to chat, show off, and accomplish goals together. With that being said I think majority of players disagree with the sentiment that is expressed a couple of times that:

Posted by: @zephyna

If people wanna build tehy will buy land in cities but wont live in it....they will buy there own land somewhere to create waht ever tehy want...or see a city and be like i wanna try it! i wanna make a masterpiece!

There wont be any real solution to have people actually live in a city...if you want traffic well make a nice looking city with special stuff, have item in ur server shop taht people might want. 

Posted by: @neotokyonora

Then building would take a primary focus, but there would be other things to do if you got tired of it.

The rational that Eldin should be a city building server I do not think majority of players agree with. Of the twelve active players who I have asked two believe that "city building" is the main reason they play Eldin. Another couple said that they enjoy city building when they have people to show off their creations too but have seen almost no traffic in their towns. The rest all said something about what has become problems for them on Eldin that all sounded similar to: A. The number of cities on the map (especially so many inactive). B. People living in the Wild as soon as they join the server. C. The progression of new players joining the server. If you believe I am the only one I think you should ask around. I think you would be surprised with the answers you get. 

 

Now that being said, these recommendations are not perfect and ready to go out the door. The goal of these recommendations are to improve the Eldin experience by providing older players with new milestones to reach for, reduce the total amount of towns on the server to have players be closer together to build, create and enjoy, and to create more reasons and incentives for players to live in cities compared to a small plot isolated in the wild. It is a problem where people live in the wild, save up enough money to become a Baron, finally make their city quit because no one shows up to their town.   

 

I also think its important to recognize that changes to the economy do not force anyone to do anything they do not want.

Posted by: @neotokyonora

requiring folks to live in them until they can afford an initial 50x50. That's so terribly oppressive and stifling to not only new players but returning players who may have chosen to spend some of their cost elsewhere and need to play a little catch up when map starts back.

In this quote you talk about oppression and stifling out players but this rhetoric completely misrepresents the goals of the change. This change was targeted at new players not self isolating themselves from the wonderful community of Eldin because their only goal is to make a town. That just causes the same issue where new players make a Baron town- notice no one has come to even see what they did and quit within the same month. 

This is not about preventing people who have not grinded as much as others from getting cities, but rather created new opportunities for older players to enjoy the game again while not drastically hurting newer players (see example solution below).

Under the principle you present any change to the economy that makes one action less profitable would be 'forcing' the players to do something. Forcing the players to do something is like saying their town is shutdown if three active players are not online once a week.

A great example was the price nerf to honey. It was not done to stop Bee farms or force players to not have Bees. It was done to address a large issue of server performance because of the large number of Bees spawning in. Yes, did people stop farming Bees because of it: of course. Was the change necessary to improve the entire Eldin server: 100%. 

Now I do have to agree that the numbers I used in my examples were aggressive at resolving the problems I mentioned. However, the solutions and logic behind the recommendations still is based on multiple players opinions and discussions I had with active players, players who quit this map, players who quit Eldin entirely, and players who are looking forward to the map reset. 

With that being said: What if Wild Land was valued at 50 per tile and 25 per city tiles. What if instead of a 50x50 requirement being the first initial purchase of land. Wild land would require an initial 25x25 area to be purchased before smaller expansions could be made. I still think a 50x50 is just not enough land for a player to make a city on and the limit should be at Earl rank. I do still think people should be able to be Baron's like I explained but with the choice to be a Baron if they co-owned a city. They could still work their way to Earl and that would be their choice. Maybe for co-owned cities they could have each player counted to their total living population allowing for them to compete with other cities with T3 server shops, or maybe they could have another build slot (up to two total) for every two additional owners of a town. Also if your afraid newer and older players may have issue with progression, the benefit for a player being an active resident and having their main rank be a town rank could mean that they can sell their items to server shops at a 10% premium, or maybe if someone has a city rank and does not own any wild land they could have free dragon travel and then free PA once they reach lord rank (as an exclusive title).

Again the numbers are not set in stone, but I think the logic behind the recommendations is solid. I would not come on here and post this if this is not what 10 out of 12 different players I have talked too were telling me and with every person I ask about their opinion I truly believe that majority of players see this as a significant reason as to why they have quit, may quit, or leave maps after they build their city. 

Finally, I wanted to address the notion of events whether they be server run or player run. I personally love events.

Posted by: @neotokyonora

Some things you can do for this are inviting folks to join you in your town's Mob Arena, encouraging community driven events (which is what Fishapalooza originally was), make a horse track and race and level horses for fun, have a guild hall with dungeon access and invite folks for that as well. There are so many ways to make a town interesting without forcing people to live there.

Posted by: @azher

The first thing the came to mind was events like Fishapalooza.

 

However, events are not a solution. Events are not new to Eldin. Even when events happen at best it brings players back to attend and then leave again within the week. Maybe some remind players why they enjoy playing on Eldin and make them more active, yet I do not think for one second that long term player retention can be resolved without increased in game player interaction whenever they log on. Even if events were held every week they could easily become repetitive like Mob Arena, the single dungeon, and unique events take lots and lots of time to setup. 

 

This does not mean I think events are bad as I really enjoy them. However, it does not resolve the core issues that so many people have expressed to me and maybe a form of poll could demonstrate that sentiment. Obviously wording would be important and I would be glad to make one of sorts and we could discuss how to ask the people Eldin about how they feel about city building, player grinding, events, land costs, and so much more.

 

Thanks again for taking the time to read my post. I enjoy discussing ways to improve Eldin as it was a big part of growing up and the work ethic I developed here has definitely helped me out in the long run.

Broken_king!


Zephyna
(@zephyna)
Member Moderator
Joined: 2 years ago
Posts: 13
 
Posted by: @komradekrunch

Eldin grew because of a youtuber named Mike7493 in the early 2010s. If this youtuber had not shown Eldin, I am not sure this server would exist today.

We need another Mike7493, a youtuber or influencer who actually plays world of Eldin to push the server, as the same thing that happens to other servers like 2b2t.

First of that is not true, the server would still be alive and working, We have lots of people every start of map and its not cause of a youtuber. You guys have to think that atm first there a pandemic, 2 people have life. I work a full time job taking care of 2 store and also i wanna play other game. The reason the server is still alive its cause of people keeping it alive by bringing new stuff not cause of a youtuber and i see that saying that is kinda of an insult of the work that has been put into the server over the years.

 

As for people living in cities it wont happen. That you force people to go grind they wont be in the cities other then droping item, once they ahve enought money they will go buy wild land and build there own thing. Sakuira has no traffic either people come to sell item or come visit or buy a house and leave and guess what it doesnt bother me im happy to show what i did since last time they visit. You CANNOT force poeple to live in a city not a lot of player just wanna stay in city and jump around all day doing nothing, so there is no real solution to that. Even if we were to find new perk people will still buy city land to get the perk but wont live in the city. Minecraft is mainly to BUILD and CREATE so that is why people enjoy making there own city. I mean let me return the question why did you guys make a city instead of going to living  in it? Probably to create. So yeah let people create and enjoy.

This post was modified 9 months ago by Zephyna

cerberus402
(@cerberus402)
Member Admin
Joined: 2 years ago
Posts: 213
 

Whew, this is gonna be a big post. Finally got the time to respond to this thread...

Posted by: @broken_king

1. Change the Price of Wild Land to 100 tbs per (or a much higher price then 30 tbs per) Maybe 60?

  • This change would adjust for the natural inflation in the amount of tbs players already have on the server. Moreover, this would compensate for the more efficient tactics of making money faster, more efficiently, while not requiring a money wipe. This would also reduce the total number of tiles on Eldin creating incentives for Emperors, Kings, and other players of that nature to come back and enjoy the grind of Eldin once again. In the older maps, it would take months just to get enough money to make a Baron size town. However, in today's economy I have made 4x times that within a week of playing. Obviously, there is a learning curve to making money; yet with all of the minecraft updates speeding the process of making money up I do not think it is enjoyable for players to make a town that no one ever visits. 

This will not solve the issue the way you hope it will.

You have a couple of key points in this quote that shoulda been multiple bullet points, I'll break it out for you so we can discuss each point individually:

  • Adjust for inflation
  • Raise the price instead of a money wipe
  • People come back to grind again
  • Historically, it took longer to get a baron size city
  • Your claim of making 4x the money 

 

First point, adjusting for inflation. Well, this is a game my guy; and to remain fun as a game often times we compromise on real world scenarios. People that have played for a long time, naturally, have a lot of money. Does that mean that we should then specifically punish those players for playing all this time? I don't think so. Likewise, I think you are confusing inflation with the concept of wealth. People are wealthy, but the price for wild land is still the same (inflation would mean cost of goods going up, which it hasn't. People just have more wealth).

Second point, do this instead of a money wipe. Not sure where this talk of a money wipe is coming from again. We've taken significant strides in balancing the inflow and the outflow of money, and it's at a place that I am mostly happy with. Of course there is always room for improvement! Within the first two years of Eldin though, there were multiple money wipes (some intentional some not). I suppose the one you are referring to is the one I did back in 2013. That was seven years ago... If we wanted to do another money wipe we would have. Progress is progress on Eldin, we won't be willingly resetting it.

Third point, people coming back to grind back up to where they were. Personally, I think this point is just a straight up falsehood. A lot of people left the server due to the 2013 wipe. People log back in next map and suddenly find their money is now worth 3-4 times less then it was 2 days earlier? Nawh dude, I would quit. Grinding for months and finally achieve duke, or prince, or king, or emperor and then just.. because.. your money and hard work is now worth less. Sorry but no man, I don't agree with that at all and I have to real world experience that says otherwise. 

Fourth point, in the past it took longer to make money. This is also a straight up falsehood. In the past money making was broken beyond belief. Does anyone remember when bread prices were 10 trade bars+? How about when iron was like 16 trade bars? It took a while, the first year or two of the server, to get prices down to reasonable levels. Beyond just the prices of things, back then, the server allowed automatic farms and underground farms (with no growth restrictions like just recently). You could make thousands a day just by sitting in your 10x10 house you bought for cheap in a city with your massive autofarm that autoharvests at the click of a button, and people did that. Also, Eldin has had some form of double drops (fortune) for mostly ALL of its history. We had a plugin called LevelCraft, similar to McMMO, that would increase your chance of double drops the higher your level of a certain skill. Unlike fortune, this double drop chance applied to everything; iron, gold, etc. Aside from the plugin, fortune (and enchanting) was released in 2011. 9 years ago, of a server thats been around for 10 years. Enchants / Fortune have always been around.

Fifth point, making 4 times the money than you used to. Did you care about different aspects of the server in the past? Did you understand the shop system in the past? How much time did you play in the past? In what ways did you mine in the past? Did you play solo or with friends in the past? Were you active in the chat in the past, asking questions and such? What years did you play? What were the shop prices like? Did you spend a lot of your tb on useless things or save it? There are so many variables in that statement that it is just hyperbole.  

Posted by: @broken_king

2. Change the Limit of how much wild land can be purchased at once (maybe it has to be a 50x50 for wild land initially) (It can be smaller amounts once you already own the initial 50x50)

  • Reason: The goal of this change is for players to have incentives to live in cities prior to venturing out in the wild. Currently players only buy city land to get unique perks and players who are new just buy a 10x10 in the wild near a city with a server shop they like and start making another Baron size city.

Just want to preface by saying that I understand this point and that you mean for the FIRST plot it has to be minimum 50x50. Now that that's out of the way:

This is another change that wont have the impact that you think it will. Your point is that currently, players only buy city land to get a perk and then they make their own city. All this idea accomplishes is moving the goalpost. People will either:

  1. Live in unprotected peasant holes for a longer amount of time
  2. Buy a city plot to have access to /home and safe storage while they are not in the city, because they are out mining or farming to get money to move out

 

This does nothing to increase the traffic in a city, which I think is what you actually want (not 'living' in a city). People don't just sit inside a city, the server is structured so that they have to go out into the wild to make money (at least at first). Just because someone owns a house in a city does not mean that you will see them more often. People will still be out doing their own things, just like they did back in the day. Again I feel like this has too much of an expectation of real life. In life, we spend most of our time at our homes or at work, going to the grocery store etc.. staying nearby where we live. That is definitely not the case with a video game, especially when the point of the video game is exploring, mining, venturing out into the wild to gather resources. You can't stop people from leaving the city to go do these activities, and when those activities are the majority of the game, that means the majority of the time is outside of a city.

Posted by: @broken_king

3. Change the Titles for city and land requirements to be:

Earl: 10,000 Tiles

Duke: 25,000 Tiles

Prince: 50,000 Tiles

King: 75,000 Tiles

Imperatore, 100,000 Tiles

(Baron would be an existing title but look to change 4)

  • Reason: This change is coupled with the change to Wild Land Price and Limit to how much land can be purchased at once. This would make the progression for each rank feel a lot more natural. I also do not think these ranks are 
image

Why? Youre making things cost 3-4 times as much, but also adjusting the rank requirements... why not keep the rank requirements the same and just adjust the price with more finesse? I also disagree that a straight line feels any less natural than a (mostly) exponential function. Not sure what you got against curves, but most games make use of log functions or exponential functions instead of straight lines.. you have more mathematical control over those functions than just lines man.

Attached a picture of the rank progression with your proposed progression as the bottom right graph.

Posted by: @broken_king

4. Create new incentives to co-own towns and better incentives for helper ranks (Baron would also be available by requiring 2,500 Wild tiles by co-owning a town with one or more people who reach 10,000 tiles)

  • Reason: This change is aimed at players losing interest after they create a Baron town with little to no traffic. Some of the incentives to co-owning a town could be like more items in server shops, more build slots, etc.

Is unlocking build slots, market slots, more space to sell land faster than you could alone not incentive enough? Is working together to achieve more than you can on your own not enough? I don't think we should specifically incentivize only co-owning towns while not adding anything to the overall nature of owning cities. This whole thought process seems backwards to me. If you add incentives for owning a city in general, you add incentive to co-own by natural proxy since you can progress through the tiers of city owning faster. Again, this idea seems only to exist to try to force less cities. It doesn't add anything particularly fun to the game and only adds to the complexity of it.

I just want to say I am not opposed to adding incentives to own a city and make it successful, I am opposed to only adding incentives for co-owners. Not everyone wants to co-own, and not everyone plays the game with friends.

Posted by: @broken_king

5. Create in town buffs to players who live in a town. (This could be an increased sell price at that specific server shop, free DT and PA from that town, etc.

  • Reason: The key would be the need for people to live and be an active resident of the town. They could not just buy a single plot and then make their own town. They would need the town rank and this would help new players generate enough income to co-own or create a new town in the future. 

Again, I really don't think that this has been fully thought through on how people will use it. Say we do add free ports or DT's in a city you own land in, instead of tying it to an overall rank. Why wouldn't I just then own land in every city then? Even cities I have no interest in living in? Do you not see how that is going to create even bigger ghost towns, because not its tied to a specific city instead of a rank which allows people to buy where they have interest? If I get better prices just by owning a house in a city, I'm gonna buy the house and never live there, even though I port there occasionally to use the shop.

It's just not going to work the way you envision it to work dude. People cut corners, people do what they want, people play the game the way they want to. All we can do is facilitate the way people play, instead of forcing our own notions of how it should be.

Posted by: @broken_king

Finally and most importantly, I think that the server resets should be on a 6 month interval (unless a patch delays vital plugins) and not a year interval.

Others have already address this opinion and you have already backtracked on this, but I wanted to add my perspective.

Straight up a bad idea. I don't even know where to start there are so many counter points to this argument, and they aren't even staff logistics related.

  1. How many times have you seen people log in, asking how long is left of the map and if they have time to make the city they wanted? I see it a lot man. People join when its two months to map reset? They will wait for the reset. Still have half a year? Then they have time to make the city they want.
  2. It will get into this god awful loop of people waiting for the next map because they don't think they have time to accomplish their goals.
  3. The slower builders and people without a lot of game time will be left in the dust. Finally have a weekend to sit down and work on some key buildings for your city? Tough luck, we reset and you have to start back at square one again.
  4. The maps wont be mature, they will be under developed and half baked. Six months is not enough time for a rich history or for a diverse cast of builds and hidden gems to be made throughout the world. Coachmac spent the better part of last map just placing little hidden campsites around the map. We lose things like that the shorter we make maps.
  5. To get into staff side of it, holy hell. We started talking about next maps spawn, last month. A full 6 months away from map change. So we would have to be doing that as well as taking care of the volume of tickets that a new map brings. We're all volunteers, most with full time jobs and kids / responsibilities. That's just not feasible for us. 
  6. We've already basically hit 3,000 tickets for just this map, and it's only 2/3 of the way done. Want to know what that says to me? We're doing something right, because it was no where near that volume in the past. That is a straight up absurd amount of just tickets that we do. 3,000 tickets divided by a total of roughly 213 days the map has been live.. on average that is 14 tickets a day. I'm not complaining about it, I am trying to give you context that just because you may not see a lot of players on at certain times, we certainly do. I hope sharing that bit of data changes your perspective.
  7. Six month clock means we don't get as much accomplished as we want to. Projects take time, time to do them right, time to build them, time to develop mechanics, mobs, items, bosses, website information, forum posts, update posts, meetings upon meetings (we do one every Saturday), tracking progress on Trello (yes we actively use productivity aides, unlike before), and so many more behind the scenes topics. All of that takes a massive amount of effort and time commitment, and all of that gets pushed to the back burner when we have to have a new spawn and map ready every six months. Are we perfect? Nah, life comes up for most of us at the most inopportune times and slaps us across the face. Do we still implement cool ideas and add value? I think so, for being less than ten people and with whats going on in the world right now.. 
  8. It took Azher and I a solid amount of time just to change servers. If that is the only key event to happen during a map, that is one extremely sad map.

 

Final Thoughts

I just don't think any of these points are going to accomplish what you hope to accomplish. There are certainly ways to increase traffic to cities, and we already have ideas of how to do that internally, but literally none of these are the right approach. You can't force people to stay in cities the way you seem to think you can, it's just not the nature of the game. What you can do is to increase the use of cities. Which I don't see any points (except 5, even though it's not going to work at least its on the same track) about in your post and is actually crazy to me. The ideas need to be out of the box, not just tweaking values that already exist. New buildings, new mechanics, new reasons to go to a city or travel around, more social activities, a wider diversity of the ways cities can be put together (making cities more unique), new gameplay reasons (quests?), etc...

 

Also, why is it that you come back and immediately co-own with someone? Why not take your own advice and live in a city if that's what you want people to start doing? Be the change that you want to see happen instead of just expecting other people to fill a void you want filled.

 

I'll end this post here, certainly a long enough post by now 😛 

This post was modified 9 months ago 2 times by cerberus402

cerberus402
(@cerberus402)
Member Admin
Joined: 2 years ago
Posts: 213
 

Man, I really didn't want to make two text walls.. but I feel like I should probably engage your points as well, Komrade.

Posted by: @komradekrunch

but only started to spring up in May.

Nice pun!

Posted by: @komradekrunch

My town is dead, except for the occasional person from Heastone who comes to sell their ores. Which makes no sense to me, you'd think people would come to Spring Island to sell their ores, its fast, I have DT...

I guess, even then lapus, redstone, and coal are so irrelevant to this economy because everyone just farms honey. 

Most people actually just straight up skip mining lapis, redstone, or coal (or hoard it as it as other uses IE enchanting, mechanisms, and furnace fuel). One of the ways we could remedy this is to bring back boost buildings for these items (coal used to have a building called a coal furnace or something) to boost the prices and make your city appealing as it truly would have the best prices. Side note, your mass mail out to people was extremely odd, seeing as how everywhere has the best prices for those items as theres... only one price. Seemed strange on the wording.

Posted by: @komradekrunch

So then, my town is dead because I don't care for it? It is ugly? I think not, to be polite I'll just say I put more effort into my town then some large more successful towns on Eldin...

And who are you to judge effort put in by individuals? Don't see why you have to bring others down to try to bring yourself up? Even if you don't name names youre still coming across the wrong way dude.

Posted by: @komradekrunch

The final nail in the coffin as to why my town is dead is because there are no low level players. Villagers, Commoners, the people that live in the first city tiles they buy. Why is that? Because no new players join. Everyone grinds to get higher ranks and live on eldin's promise of Make your own Town! 

 

In my opinion, this is the most crucial issue as to why my town is dead. 

 

You can add changes and plugins to get existing players to stay longer, and to reduce the amount of towns that exist and increase prices forcing people to live together in towns. But eventually, people grind and rankup and make their own town and everyone lives by themselves.

You need to do both, it's not one or the other. 

Posted by: @komradekrunch

Eldin grew because of a youtuber named Mike7493 in the early 2010s. If this youtuber had not shown Eldin, I am not sure this server would exist today.

We need another Mike7493, a youtuber or influencer who actually plays world of Eldin to push the server, as the same thing that happens to other servers like 2b2t.

Whew, that's a loaded statement. Did mikes vids help? I guess, there are certainly people still around today that joined because of his videos. Most of those players left when he left to start his own server (which is dead now). So I think that's a pretty false statement as well, and you really don't have the insight or knowledge of the server at the time to make such statements. 

In fact, A LOT of Eldin's previous player count came from an email script that OmegaMan had made. It would send out invites to the server based on like youtube stuff you watched, if you had minecraft forum accounts etc. That accounted for a LARGE number of players, including Zephyna. There were even youtubers before mike, OmegaMan and Ragemore both made videos, not to mention Mike's audience was a bit different than what our server was about. His fans would always join expecting tornados or some other weird mod and we would have to tell them that no, we don't have tornados. 

Would Eldin benefit from streamers and youtubers? Absolutely. Is Eldin's success attributed to any specific youtuber? Hell no, and it's disingenuous to say that. Are we fostering new videos to be made? Absolutely. 

 

People always love to point to a singular reason as to success / failure. Well, if you think it was that important to Eldins success, why don't you make trailers or videos? If living in cities is critical.. then live in a city? Be the change you want guys, things don't just happened on their own..


NeoTokyoNora
(@neotokyonora)
Active Member
Joined: 2 years ago
Posts: 14
 
Posted by: @broken_king

Thanks again everyone for replying. I just want to say that I am no way trying to target any one person and I respect your opinions and reasoning behind why you like or do not some or all of my ideas.

I think everyone can agree if majority of the players are unhappy with something on the server then it is a good idea to not let that issue get to a boiling point where people are quitting from the server.

I bring this up because even now I am being told by active players literally today that they will not play on Eldin if Eldin counties to become a "city building simulator" with almost no activity in towns.

I'm going to @ you here, fam. Where are these people you keep talking about? 

A long time ago, I spoke for a group of people on behalf of something that I felt the server needed to address. Those people though, did back me up and follow up in commentary when it was addressed by staff... I have seen like, one person admit that there's a problem, but not necessarily agree with you. If these people are truly as upset about the status quo, then I would really encourage them to actively comment and speak their minds. You keep talking about numbers of people, but I'm just not seeing the results line up with the claim. I want people to comment how they feel, not because we want to shut them down, but because we legitimately want the feedback-- and if you're just going to be vague with vague numbers and hearsay then your argument will never hold water. Instead of proposing an anonymous poll for people to click on(which we've already said that we aren't going to do for this reason specifically), you should tell them to speak on what they think the server needs in order to be more successful than it already is (sorry, but a 10 year Minecraft server is in of itself a success). Seeing as your cavalry hasn't come in, I'm just left here wondering what's an inflated value, what's the truth, and what's a bluff. If these people cared enough about the problems you're claiming to be so apparent and rampant, then they would speak their mind publicly too, No? I want to hear from the people who say that they speak to you and their points they would like to discuss.

Cerb handled the technicality of your points... As all of us have before him in prior posts, so I'm not going to go back and forth with you. I've made my opinions as clear as I can possibly make them.

 

To the Player/Lurker population: 

I will simply remind everyone that we, as staff, DO want to know how you feel about all this. I want to know if you're in favor to any of Broken's ideas, or if you think that it might hurt us overall. Just because I have disagreed with Broken's suggestions does not mean a suggestion brought up by any other player may not have validity. I look forward to hearing from anyone who feels this is their platform to speak their mind. 

Synthwave is best genre, don't @ me.


Page 1 / 2
Share: