Creative 2.0: A Proposal

Discussion in 'Digiex Minecraft Server' started by Strategia, Sep 18, 2011.

  1. Strategia

    Strategia Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2011
    Messages:
    45
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    In your worst nightmares
    As we all know by now, Creative will be like Freebuild, only more so. The problem is that Freebuild is a mess. It's not just the area around the warp zone that's crammed with constructions, there's a huge sprawl extending in all directions up to and often over the borders of the Freebuild zone. When 1.9/2.0 comes, if the Creative world retains the anarchic nature of Freebuild, the situation will be much worse. The current state of Freebuild is the result of months of building, by almost every player at one point or another. In Creative, since blocks are infinite, there is no barrier to putting up huge buildings, statues, pixel art, anything, to any player, even if they have been whitelisted only seconds ago. The chaos and sprawl of Freebuild today will be reached in mere weeks, if that. Given that we'll have some players who'll be very active, building constantly, and some who will build structures only to completely vanish later on, this will mean that a large number of occasional - and regular - players will be alienated, finding that all good building space has already been claimed, or a good-looking landscape obscured by a huge castle wall or a Link sprite overnight.

    I will note here that I am not suggesting heavy restrictions to Creative; it is still, after all, Creative, and it should be fairly easy to express your creativity. What I am suggesting is a certain level of regulation and organisation, keeping things clear from a player's perspective, and allowing (mostly) everyone to build what they want without unexpected interference. Please keep this in mind at all times when reading and considering this suggestion, and read the entire thread before posting.

    Snook had the idea of having two "keepers" per world, when I discussed this idea with him (which was before he posted the alternative migration plan, which has since met with much approval). These keepers would have the responsibility of checking out grief reports and enforcing world-specific rules. This is a fairly solid idea; however, I believe that this would heap too much work on these two players, similar to the admins in the past months. They would have much less ability to simply play the game, especially on Creative where griefing and disputes will be more common, and it would not solve the problem of the anarchic sprawl. For Survival, it would probably work, although perhaps the reduced load on the admins would mean they'd be online more often to play the game (I haven't seen Alle on much in ages, and Jesse and King mostly when testing plugins), so they'd be more readily available to deal with minor stuff, which would (most likely, or at least hopefully) occur much less frequently than the constant "how do I chest shop" and such they're pestered with on the current map, while still allowing them to play.

    For Creative, it's a whole 'nother story. The idea I had is somewhat reminiscent of Snook's, and might appear as a further development of it, although I assure you I came up with it independently. The idea is to divide Creative up in a number of variable, amorphous zones, some with a particular purpose (a large flat plain for pixel art, a medieval-themed zone for castles and such, several zones for preserving the natural beauty of the landscape, building with the terrain rather than on it, perhaps one mega-city zone, and so on), however most would be simply general-purpose, purely administrative in scope. There would be clearly-marked footpaths/railroads (and maybe warps from a central hub to outlying regions) to guide people where they need/want to go. There'd probably also be several zones designated for village/town construction, with more than one village per zone - this would allow and encourage the formation of villages, yet also encourage people to build onto existing villages rather than starting a new one, avoiding the messy sprawl currently going on in Freebuild.

    These zones would be headed by regular players, the known-and-trusted semi-elite of the current map, somewhat narrower than the fairly broad Oldie tag. The players who've been with the server for months, who play pretty much every day, the names we instantly recognise in the chat. They'd get "control" over a certain zone, gaining the power of checking LogBlock logs and flying. In particularly busy areas, they could appoint assistants, who would get similar abilities, perhaps minus flight - these would ideally be selected from players who are active in their zone, rather than appointed from outside. They would be responsible for checking for griefs in their area, and keeping track of who builds what where - for players, this means simply placing a sign near or on their structure with the name(S) of the builder(S)/owner(S), and perhaps the name of the construction. The zone leaders would note this down, preferably in an administrative sign room and/or a .txt file (the latter being griefer-proof), with names and coordinates. This shouldn't take that much work, especially with their flight abilities, leaving them plenty of time for simply playing, especially given the fact that each would only administer a fairly limited zone.

    They would not receive any new "concrete" powers (e.g. kicking, worldedit, etc.), but they would have an administrative responsibility. If someone builds an "inappropriate" structure (say, pixel art in a castle zone), they would talk to the player and suggest having it moved to the pixel art gallery zone. (Actually doing this would require admin intervention, unless the work is in its initial stages, and tearing it down and starting over would be little trouble.) If there are disputes between players in their zone ("you're blocking my view!" or "I claimed that area!", stuff like that), they'd arbitrate. If players are being (unintentionally) disruptive, they'd try to get them to stop, hopefully avoiding admin intervention, ugly arguments and kicks/bans.

    The zones and their administrators would be in turn overseen and administrated by one centralised overseer, probably also with a number of assistants (which would be especially beneficial if the overseer disappears for a while, avoiding gaps in the leadership). Again, this position is almost entirely administrative; keeping record of the zone administrators and residents, regularly exchanging information to maintain up-to-date records. This would allow us (as Digiex) to keep track of constructions - I again emphasise not with the intention to restrict them - and identify e.g. prolific builders, or structures of players who have been banned (hopefully this will be rare to non-existent), so the latter can be removed. Also, if structures are selected to be moved, the overseer would be in the best position to (help) decide where to. The central overseer (and assistants) would have the same actual powers as the zone administrators; LogBlock and flight. The administrative responsibilities would also be largely the same, with the difference of being a virtual authority figure, hopefully carrying more weight than zone administrators. The overseer would answer directly to the admins, only calling upon them if truly necessary, allowing them to simply play the game without having to worry about the day-to-day running of Creative.

    This idea has potential for abuse, to be sure; zone administrators could let the power go to their head and overstep their boundaries. However, if this happens, the central overseer can simply remove them from their position and promote an assistant (if any) or another player to that position. (This would be much easier if LogBlock and flight were universal, as the admins would not have to bother with privilege changes.) Again, the admins would only have to get involved if absolutely necessary. Furthermore, the fact that the zone administrators would have no actual powers beyond LogBlock and flight would limit the potential scope of abuse, and the fact that they would be hand-picked by the overseer and the admins would mean that only trustworthy players would be promoted in the first place.

    From the perspective of the admins, this system would allow them to play the game normally, delegating the otherwise potentially intense day-to-day administration of Creative to a number of trusted players under the oversight of a central overseer. Their involvement in Creative in their role as admins would be limited, only when called upon. Also, this would probably not require messing about with usergroups and the like, provided LogBlock and flight are awarded to every player. If they aren't, it would be at most one group, as the overseer would have no more powers than the zone administrators
    From the perspective of the regular players, the regular players would be rewarded with responsibility, being a part of the day-to-day administration of the server, without gaining any game-breaking powers. They are given positions of limited authority as a reward for being active, trustworthy and responsible.
    From the perspective of casual players, they would know their constructions are being protected, and they would have one or a few dedicated person(S) who they can go to with problems/questions/etc. They might also become more regular players, enticed by the prospect of one day perhaps being promoted to a position of responsibility. They'd also have an easier time finding an area to build, which is a major problem with the current Freebuild.
    From the perspective of new players, it would be easier to find their way on the server, and they would see that we have an organised, active system of management and player rewards in place, which paints a good picture. It should be possible to put a simple, yet accurate explanation of the system in the newbie zone. If it's too confusing, they could be enlightened in chat, and the explanation could be revised. If they're too thick-headed or dumb to understand it even after it's been explained to them, we don't want them on the server anyway.

    One final aspect I saved for last - to avoid painting an inaccurate picture and raising Unfortunate Implications - is that the system would also have some roleplay aspects. Digiex is not a hardcore RP community, but the system would allow some players to engage in minor roleplaying if they so desire - especially in some of the village zones, designated as such - which could in turn lead to more player interaction and events. Organised PvP contests or "wars", build-offs, rough-terrain footraces, mining competitions in Minetopia, and so on, could flow from this system; village vs. village, or zone vs. zone. You see, this idea stems from when I claimed a particularly beautiful - and remote - area on the temporary Creative map as Strattopia, declared myself Emperor, and started appointing random people as nobles. Later on, as I was considering it, I realised that a system like this might work to keep Creative organised, yet free. The system would take on the outward appearance of a medieval-style feudal system, with a central Emperor (or Tsar) as the overseer (and an Imperial Court of the aforementioned assistants), with each zone getting a name, and the administrator getting a noble title, his/her assistants being knights. In most zones, this wouldn't mean much apart from the rights and responsibilities outlined above, but in RP zones, it could be taken (a bit) more seriously, with the various RP villages owing fealty to a certain lord (who would of course live in a castle/palace), this being where zone vs. zone competitions would come from. The Imperial Court could be housed in a palace, perhaps containing the warps to outlying zones, and be at the centre of the megacity region, which would fall directly under the Tsar - which could in turn be a catalyst for roleplay.

    I emphasise again that the whole "noble" aspect would only be of much importance in RP fiefs, in most zones it would mainly be a cosmetic title. Also, the fief system would start out with a somewhat limited scope, only a handful of regions with more being added as - and if - needed, so we don't get a top-heavy glut of nobles. Also, being a noble does not preclude you from playing as normal; anyone can build anything pretty much anywhere.

    I know this is a fairly radical idea, but I have given it a few days of thought, and I have given it a fairly thorough treatment in this post. Again, I say that this is not a restrictive system, rather, that it would be conducive to creativity and fun; and I urge you to read the entire thread, so you can take further responses - and possible modifications - into account when forming an opinion on this idea. Also, I would appreciate it if you'd give it some serious thought, and give reasons for your choice, which parts you like, which parts worry you, so I can respond as thoroughly as possible. If this idea gets rejected, I would also implore you to consider which aspects could be adapted for use anyway, as I seriously feel that treating Creative as we have treated Freebuild would lead to many things, but nothing good.

    Thank you for your time and consideration in reading this wall of text (more than two thousand words, 17 paragraphs, 163 lines and 4 pages in Word).

    Tl;dr, splitting Creative up into several zones, each led by a noble, to avoid anarchic sprawl and disputes. Nobles would be under the leadership of a central emperor. Now take the time to read the post to get more details.
     
    Last edited: Sep 18, 2011
  2. nitvit610

    nitvit610 Resident

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2011
    Messages:
    102
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    Somewhere you don't want to go.
    Great idea. Although i skipped most of this post i think i read the most important parts. Again great idea and should be put to use.
     
  3. Skeven

    Skeven Elite Member

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2008
    Messages:
    71
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    NJ
    I rather like the part of keeping track of who builds what so if we do perma-ban someone, the space they've occupied can be either claimed or freed for someone else to use.

    Though I don't totally trust certain people to be running a bunch of other players, I'm rather sure of a handful that are already capable of it and the organization of villages is a must.

    I'd hate to see a bunch of great areas taken up by a bunch of players forming a new village when they already have a perfectly good village that'll be completely abandoned and taking up space.
     
  4. Strategia

    Strategia Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2011
    Messages:
    45
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    In your worst nightmares
    That's why there'd only be as many as strictly necessary, hand-picked for trustworthiness and organisational skills. I won't just promote any random schmuck to noble.

    That's why I'll also try to get people to build onto existing villages, to create larger towns.
     
  5. punkymunky

    punkymunky Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2011
    Messages:
    31
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Wouldn't you like to know?
    why not giant "plots" that are protected or something?
    btw i skipped 99% of the post mostly because it was wayy too long :)
     
  6. Strategia

    Strategia Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2011
    Messages:
    45
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    In your worst nightmares
    Because then an admin would have to create a plot for everything that people want to build, which would lead to a huge demand of admin time, leading to admins not playing and a handful of plots being protected while most of them aren't. Starting a protected plot system would be completely counterproductive, merging the worst parts of Freebuild with (some of) the worst parts of Cityworld.

    Also, if you're talking about the zones, the same problem would apply: the admins would have to create regions for every fief created, and they'd have rigid, square boundaries. By keeping them freeform and amorphous, it'd be easier to manage them and expand if necessary. Also, they could conform to natural boundaries, such as oceans or mountain ranges.
     
  7. Nimrod

    Nimrod Exotic Vendor

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2007
    Messages:
    1,990
    Likes Received:
    527
    Location:
    London, United Kingdom
    I haven't digested an opinion yet to give, but I will most likely come back after a think about it. But it really is a shame users commenting on the length, then wasting time to reply as such. Strategia is giving a serious idea forward, and the least people owe him is to give him a chance. However may I suggest perhaps adding a summary paragraph at the end, just to keep those sorta people at least a basic understanding (not that you should have to)
     
  8. Skeven

    Skeven Elite Member

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2008
    Messages:
    71
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    NJ
    I'd be largely against a plot/regioning idea anyhow. It's a waste of server resources, needs constant maintainence, and is often disregarded.

    However, if players were to build a village within a definite area and only want to build inward, I don't have so much of a problem creating a region for such an instance. Then by that, I can give them configuration to add other players as members to that region. The problem is getting other ops/players to agree and also training players on how to use WorldGuard.

    Also there's a polygon selection tool to create regions of different shapes (with possibly infinite points), we just refrain from using it for the sake of simplicity.
     
  9. Nimrod

    Nimrod Exotic Vendor

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2007
    Messages:
    1,990
    Likes Received:
    527
    Location:
    London, United Kingdom
    There's one slight problem of a lack of WorldGuard lol
     
  10. Skeven

    Skeven Elite Member

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2008
    Messages:
    71
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    NJ
    When did we say WorldGuard was being dropped? :S
    I must have missed that.
     
  11. jessenic

    jessenic Minecraft Guy

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2008
    Messages:
    276
    Likes Received:
    77
    Location:
    Finland
    We are dropping WorldEdit and WorldGuard, we don't need WorldGuard as I and king can do everything we need that it did.
     
  12. Strategia

    Strategia Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2011
    Messages:
    45
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    In your worst nightmares
    Which is kind of a moot point, since this system would preclude the use of regions, and like you said, the other functions we need can be developed in-house.
     
  13. Strategia

    Strategia Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2011
    Messages:
    45
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    In your worst nightmares
    Anyone else want to share their thoughts on this?
     
  14. dionvc

    dionvc Member

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2011
    Messages:
    9
    Likes Received:
    2
    But Will it Blend?
     
    Skeven likes this.
  15. Strategia

    Strategia Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2011
    Messages:
    45
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    In your worst nightmares
    Given the recent update to 1.8, I'd like to perform this shameless bump in order to try and get some more input on this. Because this
    is not input.
     

Share This Page