Jump to content





Photo

Status of SixtyGig; and Minecraft 1.8. What to do?


  • Please log in to reply
126 replies to this topic

#41 Rosleen

Rosleen
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Veteran
  • Application Manager

  • 2,622 posts
  • LocationCopenhagen, Denmark
  • Nationality:Danish/Iranien

Posted 03 May 2015 - 03:37 AM

BD will get fat from all the cookies we give him ^^


  • 0
Fueled by Tea and Chocolate


#42 IryshWhiskey

IryshWhiskey
  • PipPipPipPip
  • Established
  • Stick

  • 450 posts
  • LocationGeorgia, US
  • Nationality:Irish-American

Posted 03 May 2015 - 10:37 AM

BD will get fat from all the cookies we give him ^^

 

Look who's talking you cookie hoarder!!! <3


  • 0

It's dangerous to go alone! Take this.

Posted Image



#43 renic_ixillon

renic_ixillon
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Veteran
  • Wooden Axe

  • 565 posts

Posted 03 May 2015 - 08:26 PM

Options that keep people far away from my lawn and with no map to find it?

 

Is this one of those belated Garrik April Fool's jokes again?

 

And Torc, no butt is more ubiquitous than mine!


  • 1


#44 IryshWhiskey

IryshWhiskey
  • PipPipPipPip
  • Established
  • Stick

  • 450 posts
  • LocationGeorgia, US
  • Nationality:Irish-American

Posted 03 May 2015 - 09:18 PM

I have an interesting thought! WW got SG5 up and running today with Spigot (I believe) and it sounded like making new worlds was pretty simple. 

 

WHAT IF: We did whatever WW did to get SG6 on 1.8 and made a portal to a smaller map (say 5000X5000 again) so those of us who kind of just want to start fresh can do that? Or maybe do the opposite? Put SG6 in its own portal and have the main map be fresh? I few of us seem keen on a fresh start and the idea of a smaller map was bounced around as being a positive. I think we all agree (besides RENIC) that it's nice to be close-ish to people -- portals or not.

 

(Though you can have some really nifty portals so we should totally have portals! ALL KINDS OF PORTALS!!!)

 

Spoiler

  • 0

It's dangerous to go alone! Take this.

Posted Image



#45 Blue_Dragon360

Blue_Dragon360
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Seasoned
  • Stone Pickaxe

  • 1,028 posts
  • LocationValhalla
  • Nationality:American

Posted 03 May 2015 - 09:28 PM

I have an interesting thought! WW got SG5 up and running today with Spigot (I believe) and it sounded like making new worlds was pretty simple. 

 

WHAT IF: We did whatever WW did to get SG6 on 1.8 and made a portal to a smaller map (say 5000X5000 again) so those of us who kind of just want to start fresh can do that? Or maybe do the opposite? Put SG6 in its own portal and have the main map be fresh? I few of us seem keen on a fresh start and the idea of a smaller map was bounced around as being a positive. I think we all agree (besides RENIC) that it's nice to be close-ish to people -- portals or not.

 

(Though you can have some really nifty portals so we should totally have portals! ALL KINDS OF PORTALS!!!)

 

Spoiler

That could be interesting! I'm not sure what effect having many worlds running simultaneously would have on the server's performance, though.

 

Are you proposing we have different inventories per world, or able to bring stuff over? I'd personally be in to having a choice, with separate inventories/stats (if people do want to start fresh, that is). :) But I'd enjoy having a separate space to build with my existing mats as well!


  • 0
There used to be something here..


#46 Elly_Roo

Elly_Roo
  • Established
  • Tree Puncher

  • 38 posts
  • LocationGulf Breeze, Florida
  • Nationality:American

Posted 04 May 2015 - 07:52 AM

It will be interesting to see what you all choose to do. I'm good with any of the options and will be available to help if any infrastructure needs to be rebuilt.   :)


  • 0
Minecraft: Like Legos but with death.


#47 EZWoodworker

EZWoodworker
  • Established
  • Tree Puncher

  • 88 posts
  • LocationGeorgia, USA
  • Nationality:American

Posted 04 May 2015 - 08:08 AM

It will be interesting to see how what you all choose to do. I'm good with any of the options and will be available to help if any infrastructure needs to be rebuilt.   :)

Ditto...


  • 0


#48 IryshWhiskey

IryshWhiskey
  • PipPipPipPip
  • Established
  • Stick

  • 450 posts
  • LocationGeorgia, US
  • Nationality:Irish-American

Posted 04 May 2015 - 10:47 AM

 

 

That could be interesting! I'm not sure what effect having many worlds running simultaneously would have on the server's performance, though.

 

Are you proposing we have different inventories per world, or able to bring stuff over? I'd personally be in to having a choice, with separate inventories/stats (if people do want to start fresh, that is). :) But I'd enjoy having a separate space to build with my existing mats as well!

 

I would assume we'd share inventory. I considered the load it might put on the servers but we used to run a unique Wilds, Nether and Overworld at our peak of sometimes 30+ people online and it worked. I'm sure there would be a way to make it work so it didn't cause too much trouble. We already do things to prevent lag like not running crazy redstone contraptions constantly and using signs instead of item frames to mark our chest rooms. 

 

I believe we'd just have to ask those people who wanted to start over to possibly murder all their livestock and stop their redstone on SG6 so that only the few people who wanted to stay on SG6 were keeping sections of it active.


  • 0

It's dangerous to go alone! Take this.

Posted Image



#49 Blue_Dragon360

Blue_Dragon360
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Seasoned
  • Stone Pickaxe

  • 1,028 posts
  • LocationValhalla
  • Nationality:American

Posted 04 May 2015 - 11:08 AM

I believe we'd just have to ask those people who wanted to start over to possibly murder all their livestock and stop their redstone on SG6 so that only the few people who wanted to stay on SG6 were keeping sections of it active.


Well, since redstone and mobs only lag when the chunk is loaded, that's probably not necessary. Only if it's in a commonly visited area does it matter :)
  • 0
There used to be something here..


#50 Pheonyxe5

Pheonyxe5
  • PipPip
  • Inactive
  • Plank

  • 219 posts
  • LocationCarmel, CA

Posted 04 May 2015 - 11:22 AM

So I started writing an essay and decided that more of a list format makes sense to me on this, hope you all don’t mind ;)

 

Reasons why a new map may be a good idea (reset or additional):

 

 

1.      The current map has grown stagnant between the massive undertaking of building the rail system, the subsequent drop off in members, and just staring at the same things for a year and a halfish..

 

2.      The current map is so large that many people have “neighbors” that are still a significant journey away from them, so it makes running into one another less likely, and makes it more of a hassle to just pop on by your neighbor’s home to see what they are up to.

 

As for how that new map is integrated however, I personally feel that it should be a reset as opposed to an additional map:

 

 

1.      Adding another map in my mind is only like adding another 5000 blocks to the perimeter of our map.  Yes there are new spaces to build in and enjoy, but it creates even more distance between players when more blocks are added rather than removed.

 

2.      I see this going down two ways: The majority move over to the new and shiny map, making the current map even more desolate than it is now and thus bringing up the question of why we didn’t just reset it anyways.  Or the majority remains on the old map while a few move over to the new map.. Which I see akin to community projects like SixtyGig city or The Ham where initially it takes off, but then everyone kind of meanders back home to their areas once again after they complete whatever project they contributed to that space.

 

3.      The community would be divided between those who remain in the current world and those who go to the new world, even if we don’t acknowledge the division.  Yes, we can still chat with each other, but its only natural to bond with those that we have more of an interaction with by building close to one another and working together.  Old worlders would miss out on that, and while it is their choice, it doesn’t bring the community together as a whole, which is what we are trying to achieve with these changes.

 

 

As it is, I do love change and would welcome a reset to a new and smaller map, that way we can get on with interacting, visiting, and just plain enjoying the company of the rest of the community.  However if not everyone agrees on a full reset, then we should work on building the community on the map that we currently have, which still has lots of unclaimed space in a variety of biomes for members to work on.  Maybe to continue encouraging that new and exciting feeling of starting out something, we just plan regular community builds in different areas, and once its tired out we plan and start something new once again till we really do fill this current map up.  With the implementation of the new portal system, it does make that easier, and if we can upgrade the current map to 1.8 I’m sure that will draw enough interest and activity back in to make these community plans work better together.   We should at least give that option a try to see if it works before we jump to creating an additional world, or even a reset.

 

Now on a similar note, if we were to do a reset, couldn’t we work out a way that those who don’t want to lose their builds would be able to transfer those builds to a new map?  I’ve seen it done on other servers before, but I don’t really know what goes into making that happen so I wouldn’t know if that would be far too much of a hassle to do…  But it would be a good way to find a middle ground between those who want to start fresh, and those who don’t want to lose their hard work.


  • 4

:red_rose_32px: "We can complain because rose bushes have thorns, or rejoice because thorn bushes have roses" :red_rose_32px:



#51 Blue_Dragon360

Blue_Dragon360
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Seasoned
  • Stone Pickaxe

  • 1,028 posts
  • LocationValhalla
  • Nationality:American

Posted 04 May 2015 - 12:42 PM

Snip

Some great points!

 

Personally, I would not like to do a reset of our main map, if possible. I think that the portals are making people run into each other much more, despite the decrease in players. Your reasoning behind having an additional smaller map makes sense, too, and I agree that it might become another gap between people meeting. :)

 

RE. build transfers: Honestly, I think that would be more trouble than it's worth. I'm not sure how that would be easily implemented without massive landscaping, worldedit or otherwise.


  • 0
There used to be something here..


#52 IryshWhiskey

IryshWhiskey
  • PipPipPipPip
  • Established
  • Stick

  • 450 posts
  • LocationGeorgia, US
  • Nationality:Irish-American

Posted 04 May 2015 - 03:24 PM

Well by now I think we have a pretty clear idea of what everyone would want, and if it came down to it, I'm pretty sure that along with the current vote of how we move forward (which seems strongly swinging towards Spigot/new host), we can easily tack on the options of:

 

1. Creating an entirely new map (with the various options of size and portal structure).

2. Keeping our current map but moving it to Spigot. (Hopefully with some talk about maybe implementing SG5's more easily accessible portals?)

3. Running both a new and old map (again, with lots of lil' addendums). 

 

I think we have possibly reached the point where some might consider this horse beaten. Hopefully we are able to see some forward movement on this soon.


  • 0

It's dangerous to go alone! Take this.

Posted Image



#53 Rosleen

Rosleen
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Veteran
  • Application Manager

  • 2,622 posts
  • LocationCopenhagen, Denmark
  • Nationality:Danish/Iranien

Posted 04 May 2015 - 03:25 PM

Everything Red and Blue just said!


  • 0
Fueled by Tea and Chocolate


#54 Blue_Dragon360

Blue_Dragon360
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Seasoned
  • Stone Pickaxe

  • 1,028 posts
  • LocationValhalla
  • Nationality:American

Posted 04 May 2015 - 03:44 PM

2. Keeping our current map but moving it to Spigot. (Hopefully with some talk about maybe implementing SG5's more easily accessible portals?)

What exactly do you mean by this? :) I was only on SG5 for a little while before the Great Reset of 2013, and didn't get to play with those portals that much. However, I did just connect the old portals together while testing Spigot the other day, and it seems to be pretty much the same as our current system (just smaller maps, and fewer of them).


  • 0
There used to be something here..


#55 Rosleen

Rosleen
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Veteran
  • Application Manager

  • 2,622 posts
  • LocationCopenhagen, Denmark
  • Nationality:Danish/Iranien

Posted 04 May 2015 - 03:48 PM

The SG5 portals are no different from the transport portals we've got on SG6 atm really.


  • 0
Fueled by Tea and Chocolate


#56 Schematix

Schematix
  • PipPip
  • Established
  • Plank

  • 241 posts
  • LocationGeorgia, USA
  • Nationality:American

Posted 04 May 2015 - 04:15 PM

I'm going to describe the server that Moardawts had hosted. The world had 7 different overworlds on it, (Going to rename the worlds because they're inapproriate) Old Potato, New Potato, Pirate World, Sand World, Jimmy's Hideout, Creative World, The Wilds (Inspired by 60Gig). All of the worlds except new Potato were from the Old Potato map, which was split up into smaller segments because people explored it too much and the game file was just huge. People didn't want to lose their builds so they just made a bunch of localized world-border'd builds.
 
New Potato was the latest map and it was fresh off the press. The Wilds was also in the same vein. We had portals that took us between each map, including the nether and End. They were bedrock portals without any purple swishy swishy inside. You could still make nether portals I believe, and they would function like normal? I think? I may be mistaken. The Creative World had its own inventory that stayed seperate from all the other worlds. Every other world had a shared inventory. 
 
There was a bug in the world creation process at some point, so a Dummy world had to be made and that was considered the 'Original' world. This is where a brand new player popped up and Moardawts just decided to make it a flatland with nothing in it. There wasn't a portal to it either as far as I'm aware. This solved the bug that screwed up the inventories. 
 
I don't know if we had block logging or rollback. We did not.

  • 0
Smile! :)


#57 Pheonyxe5

Pheonyxe5
  • PipPip
  • Inactive
  • Plank

  • 219 posts
  • LocationCarmel, CA

Posted 04 May 2015 - 07:21 PM

 

Snip

Some great points!

 

Personally, I would not like to do a reset of our main map, if possible. I think that the portals are making people run into each other much more, despite the decrease in players. Your reasoning behind having an additional smaller map makes sense, too, and I agree that it might become another gap between people meeting. :)

 

RE. build transfers: Honestly, I think that would be more trouble than it's worth. I'm not sure how that would be easily implemented without massive landscaping, worldedit or otherwise.

 

 

I totally understand that, and honestly I'm perfectly happy continuing on this map as well since there is still a great amount to be done.  And with the portals now in place, and everyone needing to go to central again for the wilds and nether, it makes sense to at least continue giving SG 6 a shot after we switch to 1.8 if only to see how well this kickstarts the community once again.

 

And that makes sense with the build transfers, I do think there had to be massive landscaping done by those getting their builds transferred on those other inferior servers.. And by the time that's done, you'd probably be over your old build anyways, or imagining something new there..

 

 

Everything Red and Blue just said!

 

^Ha, colors are amusing.  Red is neighbors with both Blu(e)'s as well, even more amusement...

 

 

 

2. Keeping our current map but moving it to Spigot. (Hopefully with some talk about maybe implementing SG5's more easily accessible portals?)

What exactly do you mean by this? :) I was only on SG5 for a little while before the Great Reset of 2013, and didn't get to play with those portals that much. However, I did just connect the old portals together while testing Spigot the other day, and it seems to be pretty much the same as our current system (just smaller maps, and fewer of them).

 

 

Maybe Iry hasn't discovered the portals yet?  If you haven't yet, check out this thread for details on which stations they are located in: http://sixtygig.com/...th-get-crackin/  we switched in the last few months as rail travel got tedious when visiting others.  Always looking for ways to bring us all back together!


  • 0

:red_rose_32px: "We can complain because rose bushes have thorns, or rejoice because thorn bushes have roses" :red_rose_32px:



#58 Rijjick

Rijjick
  • Pip
  • Established
  • Log

  • 122 posts

Posted 04 May 2015 - 07:35 PM

I'm all for option three, if Ray is willing to put in the work.

 

Barring that, option one is also workable IMO.


  • 0


#59 IryshWhiskey

IryshWhiskey
  • PipPipPipPip
  • Established
  • Stick

  • 450 posts
  • LocationGeorgia, US
  • Nationality:Irish-American

Posted 04 May 2015 - 08:28 PM

 

2. Keeping our current map but moving it to Spigot. (Hopefully with some talk about maybe implementing SG5's more easily accessible portals?)

What exactly do you mean by this? :) I was only on SG5 for a little while before the Great Reset of 2013, and didn't get to play with those portals that much. However, I did just connect the old portals together while testing Spigot the other day, and it seems to be pretty much the same as our current system (just smaller maps, and fewer of them).

 

To be fair I haven't taken a lot of time to see it in game, I've only read the forums and there were many posts and lots of talking about portals so I'm sure I missed something. But when I was at base, I don't recall seeing a bunch of portals - though having re-read that portal post, I guess there must be and I'm just blind.

 

I wonder why SG6 feels so much bigger and more barren than SG5. (Despite the fact that it's obviously bigger.) I played on SG5 many a night all by myself because there are few of us Americans, but I always enjoyed myself. SG6 feels less warm and inviting. But maybe that's just because it's currently unoccupied most of the time (unlike SG5 where people were guaranteed to log on at some point).


  • 0

It's dangerous to go alone! Take this.

Posted Image



#60 Blue_Dragon360

Blue_Dragon360
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Seasoned
  • Stone Pickaxe

  • 1,028 posts
  • LocationValhalla
  • Nationality:American

Posted 04 May 2015 - 08:33 PM

To be fair I haven't taken a lot of time to see it in game, I've only read the forums and there were many posts and lots of talking about portals so I'm sure I missed something. But when I was at base, I don't recall seeing a bunch of portals which means it's different than SG5 where the base held individual portals to something like 8 train stations as well as portals to the Wilds and the Nether. So everyone had to run in to each other on their way to and from home, which happened quite a bit. I enjoyed having a central portal hub.
 
AND! The map being much smaller meant that you were never a 1 minute minecart ride away from your nearest station.

Ah, that makes sense. :) Portals are pretty new, but at 0, 0 there are 12 portals placed in a checkerboard pattern around the map. This ensures that any given station is only 1 rail ride away, worst case scenario. :D
  • 0
There used to be something here..





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users