1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Greetings Guest, Welcome to our Medieval Roleplaying Server, HollowWorld! Get Whitelisted Today and join us! Then check out our Starter Guide made just for you.
  3. Keep up-to-date on the Server Campaigns!
  4. Here's a guide to the Prestige plugin! Read it here.
  5. To purchase property at Storm's Landing, Please Click Here!
  6. Hey, Guest! Contribute to the Server to keep us Alive!

/Spawn is on the Move!

Discussion in 'Storm's Landing' started by TheDeester, Oct 11, 2017.


Is this a Dynamic Location?

  1. Yes, Keep it.

  2. No, change it back.

  3. No, change it to a new spot.

  1. TheDeester

    TheDeester I don’t believe it Retired Staff

    [​IMG]It's a minor change, but for this week, the /spawn command ports you further up the dock. If it's disliked, or an issue, it'll obviously be changed back. This is just a test to see if spawn seems more 'organic'. Some of the previous ones had featured this, so it was thought to be an idea worth a shot.
    Feedback is appreciated! Like the old spot? Prefer a different one? Post below.
    (this took 10 minutes to do so do not fear for poor delegation of effort)
    ((Creds to Tiberione for the shot))
    Last edited: Oct 11, 2017
    • Player Love Player Love x 6
    • Like Like x 4
  2. Fronslin

    Fronslin Lord of Altera

    Character Name:
    looks good, maybe we can have some more conversations a bit further from the kraken's culling.
  3. RagingLunacy

    RagingLunacy Loyal Servant of Altera

    Character Name:
    Merle, Linden, Cory, Arisha, Bliss
    Alt Name:
    Hollicynthea, Luminoire
    In-game Town/City:
    Mockingbay/Emyn Arnen
    Feels like at least the tutorial and sorrows port might have to move along with spawn then, since it always felt like the spawn location was there because it was snugly between the sorrows ship, tutorial ship and the path to the main SL area/tavern.
    • Like Like x 5
  4. Wiecz

    Wiecz Villager

    Character Name:
    Legionnare Wiecz
    I think changing the spawn spot is perfectly fine but maybe you should put it somewhere other than the slums, just because . . . you know . . . its the slums . . . and like normally cities don't do that
  5. Smurf

    Smurf Lord of Altera

    I like the new spot, as it provides for more opportunities for RP closer to that entire half of the city and more on the way to the main hub, which seems to be the tavern.

    If anything (because it only took 10 minutes of work) I'd like to see it migrate every week or so around different places in the region to see new bits and experience new RPs!
    • Like Like x 3
  6. pyrocide

    pyrocide The Mogul of Cromarcky

    Character Name:
    Marcelo Scorpetti
    Honestly while I completely get the sentiment of giving players a fresh look at different parts of storm's landing, I think that it is better to have a set location. For brand new players, the moved spawn means they'll see the slums as the defacto rp area, when most people rp at SL do so in or around the tavern. Sure, this may change it (though I doubt it due to the fact very few players play slum peasants), but that just leads to confusion and spread out rp between the tavern group and the slum group. It's better that new players know exactly where the common rp happens. Plus, there's the issue of /spawn being so conveniently located between a number of ports that will now take time to walk to.

    As players get more accustomed to the server, they will naturally spread out and look at the rest of spawn and other player towns. I know there's this idea that we shouldn't just have roleplay at the tavern, and had it been four years ago I'd agree, but these days our numbers are simply too low to attempt to spread rp out any more than it already does. Hell, if I could push for any change, it would be to go to a single city roleplay so that we'd at least have the illusion of a populated server.
    • Like Like x 1
  7. Baron

    Baron Skeletorama Retired Staff

    Character Name:
    Vorar-Elem Polvur (Baron)
    In-game Town/City:
    Vera Vigi
    Single city with politicking could work better than full feudalism with no armies
    • Like Like x 2
  8. TheDeester

    TheDeester I don’t believe it Retired Staff

    Now, I've liked pyrocide's point because I agree with elements of it, but I will have to deconstruct to specify that a big part of this server is the ability for things to exist outside of spawn. Players are encouraged* to build and expand because a single city will not have what it takes to impress everyone. Forcibly condensing players isn't something we want, and at the end of the day we don't want to 'create an illusion of a populated server'. We want to create a hub area at spawn while people are still remotely capable of doing their own thing.

    Onto the slums argument, I do want to specify that the idea was promoted because that's how every past incarnation of spawn (barring the Crossroads Inn being obscenely nonsensical) has been in the past. The introductory area was the slums/docks, because that is where people are expected to arrive in the city from. With that argument in mind, putting /spawn in the Graveyard could have even made sense, seeing as it is on the way into the area, but the edge of the slums are at least a dynamic location. The location of the tavern being a mildly longer walk is inconvenient, but it does promote more in the open areas such as the docks being active now, instead of barren barring a cramped Inn. I don't dislike the old way, this is just an experiment to see if the 'current/new' way is more productive.

    Feel free to shoot a rebuttal, it's staff's job to reply when their actions are questioned.
    • Like Like x 1
  9. Naelwyn

    Naelwyn Non sum qualis eram Retired Staff

    Porque los dos?

    Allow freebuilding inside the city by means of dividing it into some kind of district concept wherein a guild or organization can take a chunk of the city scale. Ex: The Sooleran quarter has a different build style, the tanners guild have a dock and a warehouse, etc etc, and the place organically grows in demand of the people in it. If people don't maintain their rent/maintenance that part of the city could have a fire, or become run-down and overtaken by squatters, or simply torn down and something new build upon the remains.

    *Shrug* Not saying you have to pick either one city or allowing people to freely build, it is indeed possible to have both. I think a well-implemented take on this could do pretty well for HW. Heck my notes on a proposal about it should still be in the staff archives somewhere.
    • Like Like x 1
  10. TheDeester

    TheDeester I don’t believe it Retired Staff

    I’ve read through those notes, along with the original proposal. It’s not that I don’t understand where it’s coming from, but I don’t think it would be beneficial at this state in the server. If we were to do a full reset then I’d be more inclined to consider the point, but as-is, there are three major problems:

    a) The issue of builders. We could feasibly have an application process or something, but there is no way that review for the construction of the city districts would be efficient while also being thorough. These condensed areas are going to be what unfamiliar players see first, and so we try our best to promise spawn can be a good precedent to new while accomodating of the old/current.

    b) Xenophobia is a frequent thing among the races, and there are groups that would not by any means want to be within, especially when there is a situation with a world beyond more suited to variation. A nomadic group like the Soolera woud want different things than an domaining group like Hawklight.

    c) Starting a new group becomes a much more daunting task, not only for players but for staff trying to organize how that city expands without cutting off other areas. Having a fire burn down significant portions of player areas becomes a lot more troublesome under that regulation too, because the registration of activity in a group is vague. A 10 player group could reduce to 3 and it would be a difficult process reducing 70% of their area, or leaving it all.
    • Like Like x 1
  11. Naelwyn

    Naelwyn Non sum qualis eram Retired Staff

    Fair rebuttal. I'll address the points I can though because - wahay, proper debate.

    A) Co-aligns with C) as a sortof design feature. We don't want it to be trivial to start a new group. District stuff should have some kind of fee and some kind of application process, though should ultimately cost less than a region, and give you a pre-defined number of chunks. Part of the application would be in seeing what you were going to build. However, standards don't have to be super high, after all, the city already has certain kinds of slums and whatnot. A true multicultural capital would be a bit of a melange.

    B) Soolerans are probably a bad example given there's been, to my knowledge, a grand total of 5 on the whole server, but, this is a valid reason for people to engage in the spawn political game, which is also elaborated on somewhere.

    The Makani are a stickier wicket, and despite my otherwise liking of the race, if I was in an advisory position I would have strongly argued against making them Xenophobic when the server /already/ suffers from clique problems. Sorry, not much I can suggest here in incorporating that intentional design choice into a single city setup.

    Addendum: This has been a happy moment of actual ordinary debate.
    • Like Like x 1
  12. TheDeester

    TheDeester I don’t believe it Retired Staff

    I'm an advocate of discussion. ;) (Remind me to reply later)
  13. Scardrac

    Scardrac o7 Retired Staff

    I made my point clear long ago that the server has always been fragmented in terms of player groups, or the overrused term “clique”. These arent inherent problems, as when these groups collide, some of the best conflicts in the server are provided solely by players. However, time has passed, and our “for anyone and everyone” gimmick has run dry. Each of these cliques have been bled dry, each group has trickled down to the loyal, diehard lovers of Hollowworld. Each want the place to “be like the old days” where each group had more players to be self sustaining. Now it is is not like that. Now, we have fewer people and an even stronger desire to have the server reformed into their own image. Forcing everyone together would have worked when you had the playerbase, but not anymore. It would be the same: colliding interests and a stalemate between the groups. To identify the groups: those who enjoy conflict, and those who do not. The latter is inherently self sustaining while the other relies on another group. This is why the former group is always called out for being violent and grabbing at straws in terms of trying to cause fights. This is not pointing fingers, it is fact. As people will search for conflict, the other group creates alts and player relationships in attempt to keep it fresh. Were on the same boat here, whether or not we know it.

    My point here is the format you have does not work, and will not work by building on. Minecraft isnt as alive, and other things contributing to activity. We heard it before. I understand that this post isnt about fundamental decisionmaking, but I am afraid you’re not going to fix the issues youre seeking to fix. You don’t polish out dents, you hammer them out. I said it then and say it now: pick one. Don’t call it a “side”, call it your type of server. Every time I brought it up, I am met with “well we dont want to” or “it isnt the right way”. But then these things happen and people argue that it doesn’t work (it probably will not). Then you ask, “how, then?”. That is how! You cannot ride on the popularity of minecraft any longer. You need innovation. Having a “do what you want how you want” format worked when everyone was playing minecraft itself for that satisfaction. Your server needs a niche, and you don’t have it right now.
    • Like Like x 4
  14. TheDeester

    TheDeester I don’t believe it Retired Staff

    There definitely is a hurdle for balancing how much we want new groups made, but I think at the moment the key discouraging factor comes after the conceptual phase, when either not many are interested, or the current climate permits little for them to do. This unfortunately means wasted investments of time and 'money', and I think the Single City wouldn't absolve that, just worsen the amount of places that result in needing to be destroyed. If the application required a base player amount, the players that would like to do their own thing are restricted, in turn. The building application isn't a bad idea, and it's what we do in regards to the spawn team, however being too varied would begin to lose consistency.

    I will defend the Makani players, as they actually more often than not break cliques and interact with other players. The xenophobia creates a more interesting and conflict-driven dynamic too, which is something we're at a lack of. Which leads me to Scardrac next:
    Spawn is an area that is going to have a bit of each of the respective 'conflict' and 'non-conflict' niche at all times, and is supposed to be a climate to allow both. I understand you're trying to make a statement about how the server is divided and how there needs to be intention, but you've made it on a thread about the spawn point being moved up a dock. If you want to make this statement you can go on ahead, but this isn't the intended area to discuss it. If you want me to push further and respond in whole I will, but at the moment, contextually, this was an odd statement.
  15. Naelwyn

    Naelwyn Non sum qualis eram Retired Staff

    Would it be sensible for me to make a thread about the sole topic of server vision/demographic/target goal? I know I've opined on it before. I got the impression folks didn't want to hear it.
    • Like Like x 1
    • Player Love Player Love x 1
  16. TheDeester

    TheDeester I don’t believe it Retired Staff

    I think there are a few it’s applicable to tag onto, and Scardrac was considering it too. I have no problem with it, but I won’t commit the entire team to responding, since I’m just one part. I promise I’ll look, though.
  17. Scardrac

    Scardrac o7 Retired Staff

    I know it seems horribly out of context, but I have a motive and point specifically stating that threads like these are doorways for discussion of fundamental server things and how they’re shoehorned back into oblivion a few months after the annual emotional dramas that include the entire server. I am at work now, will do a post on this once I can.
    • Like Like x 1
  18. SoulSummoner

    SoulSummoner Villager

    Hi I was wondering what is the Ip to the server
    • Like Like x 1
  19. TheDeester

    TheDeester I don’t believe it Retired Staff

    Click here.
  20. BoredBrit

    BoredBrit Lord of Altera

    Character Name:
    Maceo de Courtnay I
    can we change it back now?
    • Like Like x 2

Share This Page