Game Staff Restructure: Changing Strategy And Future Content Updates
- Thread starter MonMarty
- Start date
- Status
I agree 100% with the idea that in order to better survival, things should be focused on getting more people in it. After all, things like adding a PvP oriented End world do nothing if there isn't the people to utilize it, and things like forcing everyone on dynmap just drive people away if anything.
Peaceful factions are a good solution in theory, as it would allow newer players to get set up easier, and allow for roleplayers/peaceful builders to have more of a place in Essalonia. But should there not be some sort of benefit to opting out of using the peaceful tag? I understand that making them have a monetary cost would defeat the purpose, since the sorts of players that don't usually play in Essalonia probably won't have money for it. But there probably should be some incentive to not be a peaceful faction, otherwise, who is to say that it won't end up being only 10 or so factions keeping PvP alive in Essalonia?
As examples, what if peaceful factions required twice as much power to claim land? Making them more viable when starting out as a new player, or as a group of roleplayers that just want to build a few things, but more of a pain to maintain if you want to expand into a big city. Disable beacons in peaceful factions? Bar peaceful factions from any sort of influence on political faction events(like Blessed War)? Give small regal bonuses to factions that are willing to risk not being peaceful? Something at the very least.
Just having it as something you can decide on and switch between at will sounds concerning, assuming that's how it would work.
Peaceful factions are a good solution in theory, as it would allow newer players to get set up easier, and allow for roleplayers/peaceful builders to have more of a place in Essalonia. But should there not be some sort of benefit to opting out of using the peaceful tag? I understand that making them have a monetary cost would defeat the purpose, since the sorts of players that don't usually play in Essalonia probably won't have money for it. But there probably should be some incentive to not be a peaceful faction, otherwise, who is to say that it won't end up being only 10 or so factions keeping PvP alive in Essalonia?
As examples, what if peaceful factions required twice as much power to claim land? Making them more viable when starting out as a new player, or as a group of roleplayers that just want to build a few things, but more of a pain to maintain if you want to expand into a big city. Disable beacons in peaceful factions? Bar peaceful factions from any sort of influence on political faction events(like Blessed War)? Give small regal bonuses to factions that are willing to risk not being peaceful? Something at the very least.
Just having it as something you can decide on and switch between at will sounds concerning, assuming that's how it would work.
Brannon
The Apple
I rarely make commentary on this forum, but given that this thread resonates with some of my own views and for the simple fact that leadership is acknowledging their own mistakes and willing to take appropriate action to redirect themselves for the betterment of the community, I want to interject with my own opinion and hopefully you will make of it what you will.
Since 2016, I have continually monitored the state of factions/survival on this server with each new map, new event, and new update that has unfolded since. I did so with full intent and hope to eventually relocate my own factions/gaming group to this server. Albeit, I never did.
The sole reason being due to the passive, rather sleepy factions climate and weak raiding system that this server has implemented for years. The raiding component of gameplay here, in all honesty, is a joke that quite frankly needs substantial restructuring. I can attribute my underlying reason for not moving my team here to the raiding system that is currently implemented, in which pvp is practically the only combative aspect of gameplay, while looting, limited insiding, direct warfare, and true raiding by means of destroying enemy land would rather be set aside and fully banned as a whole. Perhaps, the concept of raiding has been misunderstood by game staff for some time, which in my opinion has made for a very controlling demeanor and rule-demanding environment by game staff with little self-determination for the Survivalists and factions, especially in terms of combat and warfare. To put my observations mildly, it's as if Survival has shifted from a battlefield in its own right to become a cushy playground for children screaming the game isn't fair, leaving behind little room for excitement and incentive for new factions-oriented players to join the community.
Regarding the concept of peaceful factions, I believe it has potential with room for adjustment. There must be some form of gameplay interaction between peaceful factions and hostile factions that draws the two together in some way. If the two remain as independent, with little to no interaction, that can lead to more of the same unhealthy, sleepy factions demeanor we've seen in the past. Survival gameplay is meant to be a continuum of player to player interaction, whether it be peaceful or hostile. That is the quality that attributes the 'alive' factor that the community very much needs. With the current size of the playerbase, I've also noticed each map that has been released is simply too large. Maps, especially those involving combative interaction, should be kept intimate to allow for that interaction between neighboring factions. For a very long time, most factions have chosen their own roomy and independent space, nestled away never to be touched again. There is really no competitiveness whatsoever when it comes to claiming land. There are no special landmarks or resources in the map that give factions a reason to vie against each other for a specific spot. And with factions spread so far from each other throughout the map, interaction rarely occurs unless its between rivalry factions that have a long history. Most wars are attributed to rivalry and history, and although that is interesting to a certain extent, wars should also be attributed to everyday interaction that occurs between hostile factions during present gameplay to make way for new wars and new rivalries, not the same old same old.
If peaceful factions are going to be made a key component in the future gameplay of Survival, then what's to prevent all factions from becoming peaceful, thus putting an end to the combative element of gameplay that has been depleted in recent years and factions experience overall. Players must be given some incentive to remain as a hostile faction, a balance must be found between the two in order to keep it interesting. Since the underlying motivation to bring back peaceful factions is to draw in players to Survival, particularly, those who are roleplayers or may not otherwise find interest in Survival, I believe that hostile factions should have an incentive towards drawing in the more combative, pvp, and factions-oriented part of the playerbase. This is where the rules and gameplay system for hostile factions can be reworked and a balance between peaceful and hostile can be found to provide a more enticing atmosphere, if you're wanting to draw in new players. The way in which raiding, wars, hostile events, and combat operates can be revamped and reapplied to hostile factions, in a way that provides a unique experience more accommodating for the factions-oriented and pvp community, but also in a way that does not directly impact peaceful factions, for those who want to remain as such.
Personally, I feel as though if we're going to have a factions type that is more hostile and competitive in nature to spice things up in Survival, we need to empower them with the ability to do so. Chest looting during wartime should be more permissible for hostile factions, as that is a key component of raiding itself. Also, the ability for enemies to partially destroy one another's property through TNT and fire when a war declaration has been declared should be considered, in part to make gameplay on the combative side more interesting, especially if MassiveCraft is wanting to compete with modern servers at all. The bottomline is, raiding must be reworked and improved to better serve the factions-oriented community. In my opinion, that is what makes it interesting and alive again, or at least gives my team incentive to start playing. Drawing in new players seems to be a focal point here and whether you agree or disagree with my assertion, I'm providing you with what that takes and a perspective that many potential new players share, so agree or disagree, I hope it can be made of use when it comes to determining what may draw in new players.
With all that being said, I'm very optimistic that the gameplay staff have been given incentive to adequately change aspects Survival, I find that very reassuring and healthy for the future state of the server. I know this particular perspective may not be the most like-minded, but I do believe it is a true and honest outsider point of view, and especially one that may need to be taken note of at such a critical moment in the gameplay development of this community.
Since 2016, I have continually monitored the state of factions/survival on this server with each new map, new event, and new update that has unfolded since. I did so with full intent and hope to eventually relocate my own factions/gaming group to this server. Albeit, I never did.
The sole reason being due to the passive, rather sleepy factions climate and weak raiding system that this server has implemented for years. The raiding component of gameplay here, in all honesty, is a joke that quite frankly needs substantial restructuring. I can attribute my underlying reason for not moving my team here to the raiding system that is currently implemented, in which pvp is practically the only combative aspect of gameplay, while looting, limited insiding, direct warfare, and true raiding by means of destroying enemy land would rather be set aside and fully banned as a whole. Perhaps, the concept of raiding has been misunderstood by game staff for some time, which in my opinion has made for a very controlling demeanor and rule-demanding environment by game staff with little self-determination for the Survivalists and factions, especially in terms of combat and warfare. To put my observations mildly, it's as if Survival has shifted from a battlefield in its own right to become a cushy playground for children screaming the game isn't fair, leaving behind little room for excitement and incentive for new factions-oriented players to join the community.
Regarding the concept of peaceful factions, I believe it has potential with room for adjustment. There must be some form of gameplay interaction between peaceful factions and hostile factions that draws the two together in some way. If the two remain as independent, with little to no interaction, that can lead to more of the same unhealthy, sleepy factions demeanor we've seen in the past. Survival gameplay is meant to be a continuum of player to player interaction, whether it be peaceful or hostile. That is the quality that attributes the 'alive' factor that the community very much needs. With the current size of the playerbase, I've also noticed each map that has been released is simply too large. Maps, especially those involving combative interaction, should be kept intimate to allow for that interaction between neighboring factions. For a very long time, most factions have chosen their own roomy and independent space, nestled away never to be touched again. There is really no competitiveness whatsoever when it comes to claiming land. There are no special landmarks or resources in the map that give factions a reason to vie against each other for a specific spot. And with factions spread so far from each other throughout the map, interaction rarely occurs unless its between rivalry factions that have a long history. Most wars are attributed to rivalry and history, and although that is interesting to a certain extent, wars should also be attributed to everyday interaction that occurs between hostile factions during present gameplay to make way for new wars and new rivalries, not the same old same old.
If peaceful factions are going to be made a key component in the future gameplay of Survival, then what's to prevent all factions from becoming peaceful, thus putting an end to the combative element of gameplay that has been depleted in recent years and factions experience overall. Players must be given some incentive to remain as a hostile faction, a balance must be found between the two in order to keep it interesting. Since the underlying motivation to bring back peaceful factions is to draw in players to Survival, particularly, those who are roleplayers or may not otherwise find interest in Survival, I believe that hostile factions should have an incentive towards drawing in the more combative, pvp, and factions-oriented part of the playerbase. This is where the rules and gameplay system for hostile factions can be reworked and a balance between peaceful and hostile can be found to provide a more enticing atmosphere, if you're wanting to draw in new players. The way in which raiding, wars, hostile events, and combat operates can be revamped and reapplied to hostile factions, in a way that provides a unique experience more accommodating for the factions-oriented and pvp community, but also in a way that does not directly impact peaceful factions, for those who want to remain as such.
Personally, I feel as though if we're going to have a factions type that is more hostile and competitive in nature to spice things up in Survival, we need to empower them with the ability to do so. Chest looting during wartime should be more permissible for hostile factions, as that is a key component of raiding itself. Also, the ability for enemies to partially destroy one another's property through TNT and fire when a war declaration has been declared should be considered, in part to make gameplay on the combative side more interesting, especially if MassiveCraft is wanting to compete with modern servers at all. The bottomline is, raiding must be reworked and improved to better serve the factions-oriented community. In my opinion, that is what makes it interesting and alive again, or at least gives my team incentive to start playing. Drawing in new players seems to be a focal point here and whether you agree or disagree with my assertion, I'm providing you with what that takes and a perspective that many potential new players share, so agree or disagree, I hope it can be made of use when it comes to determining what may draw in new players.
With all that being said, I'm very optimistic that the gameplay staff have been given incentive to adequately change aspects Survival, I find that very reassuring and healthy for the future state of the server. I know this particular perspective may not be the most like-minded, but I do believe it is a true and honest outsider point of view, and especially one that may need to be taken note of at such a critical moment in the gameplay development of this community.
Last edited:
This would, overnight, ruin the medieval build style of Massive's faction server and would ensure that every base would be a tower of 300 sand walls and 50 obsidian walls. I don't think it's a good idea personally, and I think that we shouldn't even be trying to compete with servers of that kind tbh
Massive for as long as I've been around at least has been a place for factions that doesn't result in your hard work being destroyed. Regular raiding in any extent would remove that and would honestly give Massive no reason to stand out among other servers that quite honesty do regular factions much better than we ever could.
Furthermore Marty would have no reason to build custom worlds of they're just going to be populated with obsidian blocks covered in water.
- Joined
- Jul 18, 2019
- Messages
- 6
- Reaction score
- 2
- Points
- 0
As mentioned above terain destruction is kind of against the ethos of the server but how would you feel about a mechanic where if you kill someone you gain a "buff" timer which unlocks doors, chests and such in their faction? maybe have it scale with member rank or something like that?
Brannon
The Apple
I like this idea. Perhaps I didn't go into enough detail regarding my statement on looting and such. Obviously, obsidian walls and destruction in large quantities would deteriorate the identity that Survival has established over the years, partly being what makes it unique from other servers. That was never my intention with the suggestion. What I do recommend would be an idea like this, however. The implementation of combative aspects of gameplay such as chest looting, but with well established limitations so that raiding can be taken at least one step farther from basic pvp.
That sort of thing has been discussed.
Personally I'd like a purge meter (like in conan exiles) where mobs attack your base and can destroy doors or whatever.
This was also discussed: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1AxcWPxcxgBF_pH8gLqJCA7buoickvqdk-ajPEANe5WE/edit
- Joined
- Jan 14, 2018
- Messages
- 42
- Reaction score
- 53
- Points
- 0
honestly i go to other servers for that style, i come here to build and/or fund nice-looking, aesthetic+functional facs bases, something more than a glass or obby box with fence gates or no entrance at all, and enjoy other people's base designs.
most of the inability to break inside bases is because backend fixes things like clipping through terrain with pearls.
if you're creative at all you can still get inside bases. invis potions exist. someone somewhere always fucks up portal mechanics and gives you a free gate into a base. people are very open to bribery to open a door for you or get a portal code off their allies on here as well. there are many avenues for the resourceful player. this isnt meant to be hardcore or break-terrain facs.
oh.
people will think this is a great idea until they realize their vaults with their years of gear and whatever nostalgic stuff they brought over from last server would be endangered. not personally taking a stance on it since i'd probably just end up storing all my stuff in my alt fac. i imagine others would quickly follow that stance in step and render the change largely pointless.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jul 18, 2019
- Messages
- 6
- Reaction score
- 2
- Points
- 0
The counter points in the document are actually very valid, the fact that people would just chose to not defend makes alot of potential ideas moot. Now i dont know how possible this is (due to tech requirements) but what about having a custom block that raiders can interact with that has to be placed outdoors in your faction territory. As a raider, interacting with the block would set a timer that would count down and when it hits zero raiders would then get the same "buff" timer equalling the value of defenders that were logged in when the timer started and as a defender you would have to interact with the block to disable the timer, something along the lines of a bomb.
edit:
I just read the rest of the doc and i had a similar idea to cores but with custom beacon that allowed redstone blocks to power them
If people quit after being raided then they are too weak to be playing factions, disabling pvp in the future and then reenabling won't be something these peaceful people will agree with and will just result in delaying their inevitable leaving. Making pvp more noob friendly will help imo
That never ends up working. What makes PVP noob friendly is making it easier for them to fight back. Things that have been used in the past have been Elytras, Flywater, MassiveMagic, all of which have been painfully rejected by the PVP community. They disliked these changes because they weren't killing the noobs like they were before. The noobs could either fight back better or had a better chance at escaping and the PVPers didnt like it so they complained about those until they were removed. MassiveMagic was a different case, it wasnt removed for that reason but it was still complained about.
That's because they were not skill based, keeping pvp skill based but less reliant on pots like strength will help a lot imo. There is barely any pvp regardless so I don't see why this friendly peaceful shit is necessary considering it goes against the very idea of factions.
Not very relevant but making factions free again has done nothing but create loads of 1 chunk factions from bored players that will never log in again. We need to make players more interested in joining an already existing faction and building up their regals to own their own faction because appealing to weak players that don't last a day isn't gonna work.
Those weren't exactly means of making PvP more accessible. Those were just ways of being a nuisance that anybody could use without much effort and very few people had fun playing against. Ridge probably means lowering the grinding and working required for getting involved in PVP, not making new ways of doing it that nobody really likes.
None of these things constituted fighting back, you just made that up
MassiveMagic was downright a troll mechanic, Elytra was a means of kiting and so was FlyWater
These are the same to me. I get that certain things are "annoying" but its a way for people who have no experience to participate in being raided in their own way.
I fought back with Elytra! I flew around and used my bow. The debuffs for that were that I was down a chestplate, meaning I had a LOT less armor, and I couldn't aim well since aiming the bow was the same thing as flying direction.
diCardinale
MassiveCraft's token ethnic
Pilotos wants to know your location.
onearmsquid
Dragon of Semperis
- Joined
- Nov 19, 2015
- Messages
- 290
- Reaction score
- 422
- Points
- 233
- Age
- 27
Make traits class base, meaning you choose which style of pvp you want... make pots like super easy to make... less competitive strategizing and more just having fun
SirePyro
The Definition of Insanity
No. You don't get to call people who dislike being raided into the dirt "weak". The reason people quit the server after being destroyed by another faction who's been around for years is because they have no ties to the server. It would probably help if raiders weren't able to shut down brand new factions so easily, but that really isn't relevant here. The point is, no one is "weak" for handling continual death poorly. In fact, if you need god gear and pots to kill newbies, you are the weak one.
If you quit the server after dying a few times to some guy then you are weak and that's a fact. The strong players are the ones who become better and get god gear. Very few noobs are killed straight off the bat by experienced players so I don't see why people see it as a major epidemic. Besides it's healthy for the server to have noobs die every now and then as only the strong survive.
Never said people shouldn't dislike being raided, but learning to deal with it is what makes you a good player.
Lol. That's like the definition of an opinion.
Ridge he's right. If I get raided and die over and over. I don't quit because I've been on massive for nearly 5 years. A new person who's 2 days old would quit after so little because they don't know anybody, they haven't built anything, they don't have a storage, they don't probably even have a farm, and they definitely don't have weapons to fight back.
Which is why they endure, and get the necessary gear and stats to fight back, or retaliate in other ways like redstone or archery
If this were the real world, yeah. But with so many faction servers to choose from, why would you stay on the one that you can barely even get started on? Especially if you have nothing keeping you here
I see your point, in 2014/15 yea they would have survived and fought back, but times have changed and so has massive, a few weeks grace on noobs would do no harm
True, I wouldn't mind a grace at all but only on noobs with less than a month played
onearmsquid
Dragon of Semperis
- Joined
- Nov 19, 2015
- Messages
- 290
- Reaction score
- 422
- Points
- 233
- Age
- 27
Who actually raids noobs repeatedly, like what do they gain from it? I'll kill a noob to entice their allies to come defend...
If the noob is too new tho, they have no allies. Even if they do have allies, what allies would go fight for one sole noob.
onearmsquid
Dragon of Semperis
- Joined
- Nov 19, 2015
- Messages
- 290
- Reaction score
- 422
- Points
- 233
- Age
- 27
A lot actually, most assume of a noob is being raided then the attacker has barely any gear cause they wouldn't need it. It also would entice more pvp as an ally would come and fight back and so on and so forth
onearmsquid
Dragon of Semperis
- Joined
- Nov 19, 2015
- Messages
- 290
- Reaction score
- 422
- Points
- 233
- Age
- 27
And how hard is it to say, "help I'm being raided".... PVP'ers would jump to their aid cause pvp is scarce
Problem is, since factions became free to make they claim their land, don't set an f home, don't accept any ally requests, then get stuck in the mud when a raid happens and quit
- Joined
- Oct 3, 2017
- Messages
- 197
- Reaction score
- 148
- Points
- 0
Oblivaify, dragonn and such. People who can only use elytra
Oblivaify
Blood and Fire...
- Joined
- Sep 6, 2013
- Messages
- 197
- Reaction score
- 225
- Points
- 463
Lol way to go to namedrop me like that Griz
Seem a bit salty that you've missed me two times in a row when I was at a 'conventional' raid and you turned up five minutes too late. There are no longer daily fights like the ones at deld during my time zone so it's either elytra to factions to start fights or I make portals all around the map to do exactly the same.
Plus, I hardly raid 'noobs' repeatedly, unless you're calling Dauntless, Desolation and your own faction, Wrath, 'noobs'.
idk about that one
Oblivaify
Blood and Fire...
- Joined
- Sep 6, 2013
- Messages
- 197
- Reaction score
- 225
- Points
- 463
If I could pull up my killfeed and paste it in here I would. Literally don't go and kill anyone under a week/two weeks old, and go after the biggest visible players on the map that I see.
SirePyro
The Definition of Insanity
Honestly... who even cares? You do you mate, idc who you kill unless it's me.
@MonMarty so what happens if they leave? We're just shit outta luck?
- Joined
- Jun 29, 2012
- Messages
- 4,429
- Reaction score
- 34,414
- Points
- 663
- Age
- 33
Nay. I have backup plans. Spun has been seeking around, and found some viable alternative(s)
JResurrected
Broken On the Stone
I am very pleased to know that MonMarty has had factions on his mind. I am a roleplayer by nature and not inclined to partake in PVP, but 5-6 years ago Factions had a powerful impact on the roleplay community. Several maps portraying different continents throughout Aloria were available to players to explore and build in. These unique terrains and their relevance to the lore allowed roleplayers such as myself to establish their characters in a landscape and history other than Regalia's, which sparked creativity and encouraged players to develop and conquer the land.
While I believe the Peaceful faction function will inspire roleplayers to engage in survival, I would like to suggest opening up several smaller, but unique, maps in hopes that they would inspire even greater development from roleplayers.
While I believe the Peaceful faction function will inspire roleplayers to engage in survival, I would like to suggest opening up several smaller, but unique, maps in hopes that they would inspire even greater development from roleplayers.
Last edited:
- Status
Similar threads
