Lets talk about maps.

[Nebulousity]

Sorry for responding kinda late. I wanted to cover the issue on the thread first :3 This idea has been discussed in a meeting before. I do like the idea of it, the only issue with it is that more servers would have to be bought. With the servers, we'd need to attract enough people to donate to cover the costs so that it doesn't cause MCGamer to continuously lose money so that it'd have to close some of them.
Nonetheless it is a good idea, it's something we've discussed and still plan on discussing to work out the details.

I don't really mind about the late response.. I'm thankful for a response either way...
Moving on from that, I'd also suggest that instead of running the server through MCSG it could just be a completely different server possibly ran from a computer.. doesn't need to be over complicated just a simple way for players to give their opinions on maps. Heck, it wouldn't even be necessary to have the MCSG plugin on it, you could just use the plugins that most servers use as long as you can still get a feel of the gameplay without having too bad lag..... Great that you're considering this though as I do think it is quite a good idea..

 

[EvermoreHD]

I've seen you respond to similar threads in which I've already explained reasoning for a few of those. It doesn't really seem that you remember.... Nonetheless, I'll go over it again.

Vida Cova- Attempt to bring back the survival aspect of MCSG. There were threads made with petitions to bring back the survival aspect. So, excuse us for attempting to please everyone.

Remnant- This one added mainly because of it's looks to be honest. Also, it was built by FyreUK who, as everyone knows, are very beneficial to these servers.

Origins- It's actually quite popular. It may not be the most voted but it's definitely one of the favored ones so I don't see where you're coming from there.

Lobby Games- "Voted pretty often, but not incredibly popular" .....uh, so what you're saying is that a map that is voted often (Usually people vote for maps because they want to play them) isn't liked.... I'll leave that at that since I believe it's self-explanatory.

Fallen Haven- There's an issue with the map that causes it to crash in pre-game. People don't vote it because they literally cannot play it if it's over 18 players (It does't crash if it's in the narrow range of 12-18 players). Most players don't know that it doesn't crash with under 19 players though so they automatically assume that it crashed all the time. We're currently working on fixing the crashing issue.

Boombeard's Battle- Same as Lobby Games, your argument is not valid.

Vida Cova- Fair enough, though not a very good attempt, considering there's an abundance of chests that will provide a player with a surplus amount of food.

Remnant- I actually don't know how FyreUK is beneficial to the servers. Could you please explain for me?

Orgins- Obviously experiences won't be spot on, but they should be similar. In my experiences, Origins is not voted that much, but your experiences may vary slightly.

Lobby Games- Perhaps my wording didn't make sense if interpreted in a specific way, and I apologize for the miscommunication it caused. I meant to say that how often it is voted is dependent on the other map choices. It won't beat SG4, Valleyside, Avaricia, Holiday, Breeze, TSG2, etc, but if more popular maps aren't a choice, it will get voted.

Fallen Haven- I see. I wouldn't know as I've never actually been in a game where it was voted.

Boombeard's Battle - Same as lobby games.

 

[chockadlad]

It's all about that personal preference basically so I will admit that it may have been a bit biased for me to list that as a bad map so excuse me for that..

No no, I'm just curious. I'm forever biased towards Teweran so even if they would build something average, I'd love it with all my heart. I'm just interested to see what people like and dislike about mcgamer maps

Vida Cova- Fair enough, though not a very good attempt, considering there's an abundance of chests that will provide a player with a surplus amount of food.

Remnant- I actually don't know how FyreUK is beneficial to the servers. Could you please explain for me? FyreUK is a very big build team with lots of following and many members, which is good for mcsg. Traffic = Good

Orgins- Obviously experiences won't be spot on, but they should be similar. In my experiences, Origins is not voted that much, but your experiences may vary slightly. I find that origins is not often voted since I always see it together with most people "must votes" such as HR

Lobby Games- Perhaps my wording didn't make sense if interpreted in a specific way, and I apologize for the miscommunication it caused. I meant to say that how often it is voted is dependent on the other map choices. It won't beat SG4, Valleyside, Avaricia, Holiday, Breeze, TSG2, etc, but if more popular maps aren't a choice, it will get voted. Can't disagree, fairly popular. Much more so than Remnant or TSG3

Fallen Haven- I see. I wouldn't know as I've never actually been in a game where it was voted. I think due to the glitch with it crashing with more than 18 players, people learn not to vote for it.

Boombeard's Battle - Same as lobby games.

 

[Tree_TheBigKind]

This could just be nostalgia, but I remember the PMC servers having more players online then other less visited areas (CA/others I think?). Also couldn't you do a poll asking if people would like this. There are a lot of locations with empty servers in them (I think), so couldn't you just use these servers to test out if people like it and if those fill up, actually buy servers for this?

We could see how many servers we could spare from other regions to allow us to run test ones but it will take a lot of discussion over details such as a counter to count how many times a map is played (so we can truly gauge if it's popular) and all sorts of stuff like that. We will discuss it though :3

I don't really mind about the late response.. I'm thankful for a response either way...
Moving on from that, I'd also suggest that instead of running the server through MCSG it could just be a completely different server possibly ran from a computer.. doesn't need to be over complicated just a simple way for players to give their opinions on maps. Heck, it wouldn't even be necessary to have the MCSG plugin on it, you could just use the plugins that most servers use as long as you can still get a feel of the gameplay without having too bad lag..... Great that you're considering this though as I do think it is quite a good idea..

If we were to do it, we'd like it to be set up exactly like MCSG so that players can see how it would be in-game :3

Vida Cova- Fair enough, though not a very good attempt, considering there's an abundance of chests that will provide a player with a surplus amount of food.

Remnant- I actually don't know how FyreUK is beneficial to the servers. Could you please explain for me?

Orgins- Obviously experiences won't be spot on, but they should be similar. In my experiences, Origins is not voted that much, but your experiences may vary slightly.

Lobby Games- Perhaps my wording didn't make sense if interpreted in a specific way, and I apologize for the miscommunication it caused. I meant to say that how often it is voted is dependent on the other map choices. It won't beat SG4, Valleyside, Avaricia, Holiday, Breeze, TSG2, etc, but if more popular maps aren't a choice, it will get voted.

Fallen Haven- I see. I wouldn't know as I've never actually been in a game where it was voted.

Boombeard's Battle - Same as lobby games.

Vida Cova- We don't really control chest placement on maps unless it's extremely out of order. We should have tweaked it but it would take extremely long to replace all chests on a map. Also, since we didn't know the map inside out when adding it, chests should be left to the map maker :3

Remnant- As for FyreUK, they are arguably one of the biggest build teams in all of Minecraft (obviously there are some bigger but FyreUK is way up there). They do bring some traffic to MCGamer and contribute to projects on the servers (i.e. they made a lobby once- the castle one).

Origins- It actually does seem to be popular :3 Obviously not as popular as SG4 and a few others but it does seem to be favored over at least half the maps.

Lobby Games- I do agree that it's not as popular as SG4, ValleySide, Avaricia, Holidy, Breeze, TSG2, and a few others. Even with this said, it is more popular than a significant amount of others.

Fallen Haven- Yeah, the crashing issue made everyone avoid it from the beginning. It's similar to the way Lost Ridge was a while back. Everyone tried voting for a new map but it just crashed every time. It was at that time that everyone realized "Why vote for it if you can't play it". It'll be fixed soon hopefully.

Boombeard's Battle- Same as Lobby Games :3

 

[Jon | Lqzer]

Even though I've been away from MCSG for more than a month, I've been keeping track of things and in my opinion, the map committee has done a GREAT job with their map selection.

The problem is both the forum poll and the misleading in-game poll didn't have neither options. These polls essentially picked two extremely popular maps on the server and asked the community to get rid of one. It's like asking the community to remove SG4 or Teweran SG2 and then saying the community wanted that map removed.

On the subject of how well the Map Committee is doing: let's take a look at the maps the committee has chosen:

Vida Cova: Rarely voted
Remnant: Rarely voted
Origins: Sometimes voted
Lobby Games: Voted pretty often, but not incredibly popular
Fallen Haven: Rarely voted
Boombeard's Battle: Voted pretty often, but not incredibly popular

From this, I can say the Map Committee hasn't done that bad of a job, but not that good of one either. They haven't added an incredibly popular map, but some of the maps are voted if the other map choices aren't popular.

Seeing this bothers me SO much. If you don't like a map, you don't have to play on it! How does it hurt you if you don't like those maps? It doesn't!
Also, you have to think about the very few people who do enjoy a map. If say a group of friends are on a server and really enjoy Vida Cova, they can all vote for it and can play it.

If there is a specific map people really enjoy and it's on MCSG, they'll be extremely happy. Take it away from them, and they'll be sad. They possibly might switch to another server just to play it! I know that's taking it to a bit of an extreme, but you've got to think of other people besides yourself.

Does having those maps hurt you?: No.
Do others (even just a few) enjoy them?: Yes.

Why take joy away from others when it doesn't hurt you? :/

I've seen you respond to similar threads in which I've already explained reasoning for a few of those. It doesn't really seem that you remember.... Nonetheless, I'll go over it again.

Vida Cova- Attempt to bring back the survival aspect of MCSG. There were threads made with petitions to bring back the survival aspect. So, excuse us for attempting to please everyone.

Remnant- This one added mainly because of it's looks to be honest. Also, it was built by FyreUK who, as everyone knows, are very beneficial to these servers.

Origins- It's actually quite popular. It may not be the most voted but it's definitely one of the favored ones so I don't see where you're coming from there.

Lobby Games- "Voted pretty often, but not incredibly popular" .....uh, so what you're saying is that a map that is voted often (Usually people vote for maps because they want to play them) isn't liked.... I'll leave that at that since I believe it's self-explanatory.

Fallen Haven- There's an issue with the map that causes it to crash in pre-game. People don't vote it because they literally cannot play it if it's over 18 players (It does't crash if it's in the narrow range of 12-18 players). Most players don't know that it doesn't crash with under 19 players though so they automatically assume that it crashed all the time. We're currently working on fixing the crashing issue.

Boombeard's Battle- Same as Lobby Games, your argument is not valid.

I understand your point, and I agree with it. However, the map committee itself and having those maps should not be questioned in the first place because they all have been recommended by the community! You shouldn't be having to defend the choices in the first place.

TL;DR: If a map was added in the first place, it should not be removed because there are still others that enjoy it, and it doesn't hurt you having it! The only reason a map should be removed is if the map is glitched or has OP items and needs to be removed OR the map committee comes to a unanimous decision that it should be removed for a good reason.

After all, that's why we have a committee in the first place, isn't it?

 

[Giggity69Goo]

It's a great idea DQ ....that's all I have to say XD <3

 

[Jon | Lqzer]

It's a great idea DQ ....that's all I have to say XD <3

Fanboy, much? :/
Which part is the good idea: the part about adding/removing maps or the part where he suggests that the community decides on the maps? Because both of them are bad ideas and not necessary. The map committee already takes the general consensus from the community into account when adding maps. Again, if a map was added, it should not be removed unless it is extremely harmful.

Say we did have the community vote on new maps. We could put a vote on the server with say about 5 maps and leave links to them for people to vote. The problem with that is that many people would not take any time to really look over the maps or would bote randomly.

There really is no perfect method for deciding on maps, but what we have right now works pretty darn well...

 

[EvermoreHD]

Tree_TheBigKind How does FyreUK bring traffic to these servers if the only map made by them is rarely voted and was barely advertised at all?

Even though I've been away from MCSG for more than a month, I've been keeping track of things and in my opinion, the map committee has done a GREAT job with their map selection.


Seeing this bothers me SO much. If you don't like a map, you don't have to play on it! How does it hurt you if you don't like those maps? It doesn't!
Also, you have to think about the very few people who do enjoy a map. If say a group of friends are on a server and really enjoy Vida Cova, they can all vote for it and can play it.

If there is a specific map people really enjoy and it's on MCSG, they'll be extremely happy. Take it away from them, and they'll be sad. They possibly might switch to another server just to play it! I know that's taking it to a bit of an extreme, but you've got to think of other people besides yourself.

Does having those maps hurt you?: No.
Do others (even just a few) enjoy them?: Yes.

Why take joy away from others when it doesn't hurt you? :/



I understand your point, and I agree with it. However, the map committee itself and having those maps should not be questioned in the first place because they all have been recommended by the community! You shouldn't be having to defend the choices in the first place.

TL;DR: If a map was added in the first place, it should not be removed because there are still others that enjoy it, and it doesn't hurt you having it! The only reason a map should be removed is if the map is glitched or has OP items and needs to be removed OR the map committee comes to a unanimous decision that it should be removed for a good reason.

After all, that's why we have a committee in the first place, isn't it?

List of maps removed due to being unpopular:
-Moonlight Lake
-Destiny's Shiver
-Fallen Colossi
-Yellowstone
-Insanity Cause
-MCSG Ruins
-Asia Games
-Skylands
-Overgrown Arena

It would be highly illogical to keep these maps around, as only a select few actually want to play these maps. And those few members would have to get into the same lobby and all vote for it in order to play it. 99% of the time, the map just sits on the voting list, without a single vote.

 

[Jon | Lqzer]

Tree_TheBigKind How does FyreUK bring traffic to these servers if the only map made by them is rarely voted and was barely advertised at all?

List of maps removed due to being unpopular:
-Moonlight Lake
-Destiny's Shiver
-Fallen Colossi
-Yellowstone
-Insanity Cause
-MCSG Ruins
-Asia Games
-Skylands
-Overgrown Arena

It would be highly illogical to keep these maps around, as only a select few actually want to play these maps. And those few members would have to get into the same lobby and all vote for it in order to play it. 99% of the time, the map just sits on the voting list, without a single vote.

Ok. I loved Moonlight Lake and am sad to hear that it was removed. :/
Also, how would it be illogical? It doesn't cost any money to keep them around, and it doesn't harm you having them as an option. You say it's illogical yet you really don't make a very good point on how it is...

 

[Tree_TheBigKind]

Tree_TheBigKind How does FyreUK bring traffic to these servers if the only map made by them is rarely voted and was barely advertised at all?

List of maps removed due to being unpopular:
-Moonlight Lake
-Destiny's Shiver
-Fallen Colossi
-Yellowstone
-Insanity Cause
-MCSG Ruins
-Asia Games
-Skylands
-Overgrown Arena

It would be highly illogical to keep these maps around, as only a select few actually want to play these maps. And those few members would have to get into the same lobby and all vote for it in order to play it. 99% of the time, the map just sits on the voting list, without a single vote.

FyreUK has quite a large following. They are affiliated with MCGamer. It shows quite plainly that some fans of FyreUK might notice the MCGamer network because of FyreUK. For example, FyreUK had a minecon booth and there they showed off three new survival games maps. One of those was Remnant which is now linked with MCGamer. I've even heard people came to MCGamer because of FyreUK.

Also, please read Captain's whole statement. If you had, you'd have noticed this-

TL;DR: If a map was added in the first place, it should not be removed because there are still others that enjoy it, and it doesn't hurt you having it! The only reason a map should be removed is if the map is glitched or has OP items and needs to be removed OR the map committee comes to a unanimous decision that it should be removed for a good reason.

OR the map committee comes to a unanimous decision that it should be removed for a good reason.

 

[CharlesTheMelon]

Personally, I feel as if the map comitee are doing a good job. Yes, the maps added of late, maybe in many peoples opinions haven't been as good as SG4, Vallyside University and Moonbase, but firstly stop comparing all of the new maps to the older, more original maps that have been around longer. Maybe if you played a map more, you would learn to enjoy it??!! And secondly, I don't think the problem lays within the map comitee's choices of maps. They are selecting, mostly the best maps being submitted and this is where the problems lays. I feel that the quality of maps being submitted in the past month or two has dropped (with certain exceptions). I mean, when was th last time we saw a map as popular asSG4 get submitted?...
However, I do feel that the map comitee should decide a certain number of maps that are good, if they aren good enough they should just be rejected and not added for the sake of it. After all we want to please the community, not cause flame and trash talk on the maps - e.g 4/10 maps chosen, these 4 out of 10 will then be put into a server and the community can go on the server, play the maps and vote like a poll, in game, on which they prefer. This would then obtain good looking maps, as well as maps that play well.
Alongside this, I feel maps should be put in trial - if they aren't played enough then they fail the trial and therefore are not added.
MCSG doesn't need huge amounts of maps as it causes them to be played less and I feel that the least played maps, should be removed by the map comitee, basically on how much they are played, this in itself is a community vote.
All in all the map comitee is doing a great job, my only criticisms being, perhaps taking on board one or two more 'builders' or 'PvPers' to have a few more views, as well as potentially looking into removing some maps and re-tiering (but not completely destroying old chest routes) maps.

Edit: I would like to see more older maps added to SGC, for example SG3 (a common one asked for), TSG1 and Overgrown Arena. (I remember the days when these maps, plus the original 2 were the only ones!)

Thanks for letting me voice my opinions and ideas!
-Charlie

 

[Jon | Lqzer]

MCSG has maps for everyone. Any problems with that? I don't think so...