|
Post by Headhunter09 on Jul 7, 2011 15:59:45 GMT -5
I think most of everyone still playing has agreed: the server is going into a minor decline. Fear not! We are not going to die, we are going to change to fit the times.
I have decided the server will most likely be revamped.
1. More detailed server logs. 2. More structured RP scripts, so that we actually complete storylines. It would be like a TV show. 3. Make it mandatory to join one of two cities.
Please comment and say your own ideas for TJRP 2.0.
|
|
|
Post by ersake on Jul 7, 2011 16:02:04 GMT -5
I believe once again that you should be able to be a part of more than 1 city. What if one city gets way to many people? Then nobody would join that latter.
|
|
|
Post by conzocrafter on Jul 7, 2011 16:05:39 GMT -5
More advertising for one. Videos and forum posts is a way to spread the community. secondly I think we should revamp cities, not build them for no reason, they should have a legit rp reason and backstory, for example, i want to make Seralotta into a technological place and rename it something that begins with a U because im weird like that. Arboris is a city of trees and ataria a floating island, thats pretty themed, and there should be something unique to each town for example you must travel to seralotta to get pistons or redstone and to get wool to a farming city or something. thirdly i believe there should be another topic on the forums to do with Rp events ONLY so when u think you have an idea, we judge, then settle it into our timetable, u can set up rp-dates, (not as sexual as it sounds) with friends to meet up and rp. (I also think the more experience and them more authority you have, the more privelagdes you have, for example, treated with respect in rp, our titled professor, or mayor, the title must be given out of a vote, each vote should be provided with a reason so its fair, not things like spawning or things lol.
|
|
|
Post by Ozzatron on Jul 7, 2011 16:19:04 GMT -5
I don't think we necessarily need more people. We just need to realize that lack of population is a positive feedback cycle. When less people play, the ones that do stop because there aren't that many people playing. So even less people are playing, etc. One of the reasons this started is that both Erik and I are at summer school.
Just tell people to get online and then it'll be cool.
|
|
|
Post by ersake on Jul 7, 2011 16:25:57 GMT -5
We talked about this, and disagreed, Matt can tell you why.
|
|
|
Post by Ozzatron on Jul 7, 2011 17:06:35 GMT -5
Talked about what? The decline? The advertising? The server logs? Hopefully Matt can clarify.
|
|
|
Post by ersake on Jul 7, 2011 19:10:31 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Ozzatron on Jul 7, 2011 19:12:29 GMT -5
He never told me he disagreed. And that link is just right to this topic... you can always use quotes.
I cannot see where in his post he disagrees.
|
|
|
Post by ersake on Jul 7, 2011 19:15:28 GMT -5
When we were talking on the serverrrrrr.
|
|
|
Post by ersake on Jul 7, 2011 19:35:32 GMT -5
Because the server is in decline, can we get another ad on the official minecraft forums? Or a bump on the current topic?
|
|
|
Post by Headhunter09 on Jul 7, 2011 19:59:59 GMT -5
I believe once again that you should be able to be a part of more than 1 city. What if one city gets way to many people? Then nobody would join that latter. No. Then there is no incentive to be loyal to one city, and then there would be no competition. I'm thinking there will be maybe more than 2 communities: 1. A magic community 2. A scholarly community 3. An artisan community 4. A military community Right now, they correspond, sort of: 1. Arboris 2. Seralotta 3. Ataria 4. Elysia
|
|
|
Post by Ozzatron on Jul 7, 2011 20:01:57 GMT -5
Can you explain what Erik says you disagree about?
|
|
|
Post by ersake on Jul 7, 2011 20:06:12 GMT -5
Matt disagrees with this statement. I don't think we necessarily need more people. We just need to realize that lack of population is a positive feedback cycle. When less people play, the ones that do stop because there aren't that many people playing. So even less people are playing,
Which is quoted from you Ser. I spoke w/ matt on the server and that is when I think he disagreed unless I misunderstood. It isnt that hard.
|
|
|
Post by Ozzatron on Jul 7, 2011 20:08:22 GMT -5
If you couldn't tell, I was trying to get Matt to answer, not get you to redundantly post. I want to know why he disagreed. From him.
|
|
|
Post by Headhunter09 on Jul 8, 2011 6:27:49 GMT -5
Matt disagrees with this statement. I don't think we necessarily need more people. We just need to realize that lack of population is a positive feedback cycle. When less people play, the ones that do stop because there aren't that many people playing. So even less people are playing, Which is quoted from you Ser. I spoke w/ matt on the server and that is when I think he disagreed unless I misunderstood. It isnt that hard. Use quotes! Like I'm doing right now! See? It's so much easier! Anyways, what I said was that we need to change and then get more members, not get a critical mass and THEN change. Honestly the second one makes no sense whatsoever to me.
|
|