Umm, okay, before I can get into my main points which I wanted to raise initially... I'm going to tackle these new posts at a time...
@Pizza: okay... what you've suggested with the whole centralising portals idea is something I've also had for a long while... and something I've actually made a rough start at. It isn't quite the same, but it's essentially a giant build, called nexus... There is a warp to it if you want to see the (minimal) progress I have made, at /warp nexus... but the idea is generally to have one giant area, which has seperate, equally giant rooms, to represent each world... and within each room would be a portal, linking to the portals that other people have created for those worlds. My problem with this, of course, is that I don't like the idea that the effort I have put into both writing out the signs for the second spawn, and the effort in beginning on nexus will be made redundant... I digress though, that is more and issue of conflicting ideas, than server interests. I was thinking something similar with containing a portal to nexus within the exit of the new spawn, but whichever one works better...
@ Ash: This kinda continues on from what I was thinking about with nexus. Each room could either represent a world, or a type of world; there would be either one, or several portals in each world room, for however many worlds, or however many seperate portals players have made for the different worlds. If all you are trying to do is to give the image of merging them together, into groups rather than physically merging the worlds, then it would be possible to simply contain another portal, in the same portal room to link to the seperate areas. Almost having different gateways, which link to vastly spaced out locations in the same worlds etc. (or at least to give that feel)
This was just the idea with nexus, it could be carried into whatever build, or system is chosen in the end.
Okay... so here are my full thoughts on the matter... or at least as fully as I can write this.
Firstly, I want to know what the overall goal is for this; are we trying to physically merge the maps together? Or is it just to bring everything into an more easily accessible system?
When I first read this, I disagreed since I was under the impression that by "merging", you mean physically merging all of these maps into one. I would just like to say, even with worlds such as PVP and AW, I don't think that should be done. This is since really, it would missmatch... PVP and AW were both introduced to bring in the different map generating changes from two different versions of MC, but also the rules... We would be forfeitting the difference between AW and PVP, which is either "no mobs and grief allowed" - all natural, VS "danger, lots of mobs, pvp, but free to build, with risk of minor theft" - modified natural feel, more safety in building. Players still use both, because of these differences. I personally don't like the idea of merging them.
The question I have is, what are we trying to gain here? I am completely for an idea to make portals centralised, as, like I've said, I've even made a start on a building that would do this. But what is this to achieve? Are we going to start grouping and categorising worlds to make them easier to find? Or are we trying to reduce thenumber of worlds altogether?
One thing I don't agree with is naming Flatlands "art world", even now it has several buildings there which have nothing to do with art... since that wasn't the main idea for flatlands. It was based on having enough flat, empty space with no requirements to clear land, so player could do pixelart... but also so that players could build more easily. The latter is something done less now, but it still is done.
As with grouping, I'm not even sure that the groups suggested would be adequate for some of the worlds. For instance, traditional world... that would include main world, planetoids, tunnels, desert world... maybe flatlands also? I don't disagree with an art world in general, but I don't see that being as flatlands as it is... If anything I would actually only set flatland, and main world as the "Traditional world", have planetoids as a seperate one altogether possibly (not necessary as such, but I'm pretty sure planetoids is still no building allowed for anyone under OP level? in which case, couldn't be counted so much), but the ones I would definitely group seperately from those would be desert world and tunnels... They still have the traditional building rules, but they have damage, and different ways to create zones... (the latter really just being so for flatlands, and also player's aren't allowed to build freely there)
Finally, as for Indrae's concerns, as he has said, City World isn't so much of a general, all purpose, high quality build area, but instead an ongoing project. One which players can of course add to, but one which he wants to oversee very closely. I think his opinion is that grouping this together with other creative worlds would give the wrong impression of what the world is about.
Overall, I have a lot of mixed feelings about this, and I'm not sure I like the direction it could be headed in. It could be used to help the server out a lot, but it could also confuse things... I still feel as if there is more to say, yet these are all the points which come to mind right now. This post is being heavily editted by the way, mainly since I'm still not done having my say, but also becuase really I'm still pretty worn down.
For all the bad points I've raised, I do also see potential. If this is simply used to group worlds of similar types, I have no problems with it. On the other hand if we are trying to eliminate, or force worlds together though, which may not have the same rule sets, I'm not completely for it. I see no problems with grouping creative worlds together, so long as it's only by category, and not by rules... and I also see no problems in having areas dedicated to pixelart, to traditional, legitemate building, redstone, or any other things like that. It would give players a clearer idea on where they can go, to do what; making the worlds more evident is an even better idea, which would help players get the most out of their experience. I just do not like the idea of forcing areas together which don't fit, or... (something else which my mind has melted from before being able to type...)
@Pizza: okay... what you've suggested with the whole centralising portals idea is something I've also had for a long while... and something I've actually made a rough start at. It isn't quite the same, but it's essentially a giant build, called nexus... There is a warp to it if you want to see the (minimal) progress I have made, at /warp nexus... but the idea is generally to have one giant area, which has seperate, equally giant rooms, to represent each world... and within each room would be a portal, linking to the portals that other people have created for those worlds. My problem with this, of course, is that I don't like the idea that the effort I have put into both writing out the signs for the second spawn, and the effort in beginning on nexus will be made redundant... I digress though, that is more and issue of conflicting ideas, than server interests. I was thinking something similar with containing a portal to nexus within the exit of the new spawn, but whichever one works better...
@ Ash: This kinda continues on from what I was thinking about with nexus. Each room could either represent a world, or a type of world; there would be either one, or several portals in each world room, for however many worlds, or however many seperate portals players have made for the different worlds. If all you are trying to do is to give the image of merging them together, into groups rather than physically merging the worlds, then it would be possible to simply contain another portal, in the same portal room to link to the seperate areas. Almost having different gateways, which link to vastly spaced out locations in the same worlds etc. (or at least to give that feel)
This was just the idea with nexus, it could be carried into whatever build, or system is chosen in the end.
Okay... so here are my full thoughts on the matter... or at least as fully as I can write this.
Firstly, I want to know what the overall goal is for this; are we trying to physically merge the maps together? Or is it just to bring everything into an more easily accessible system?
When I first read this, I disagreed since I was under the impression that by "merging", you mean physically merging all of these maps into one. I would just like to say, even with worlds such as PVP and AW, I don't think that should be done. This is since really, it would missmatch... PVP and AW were both introduced to bring in the different map generating changes from two different versions of MC, but also the rules... We would be forfeitting the difference between AW and PVP, which is either "no mobs and grief allowed" - all natural, VS "danger, lots of mobs, pvp, but free to build, with risk of minor theft" - modified natural feel, more safety in building. Players still use both, because of these differences. I personally don't like the idea of merging them.
The question I have is, what are we trying to gain here? I am completely for an idea to make portals centralised, as, like I've said, I've even made a start on a building that would do this. But what is this to achieve? Are we going to start grouping and categorising worlds to make them easier to find? Or are we trying to reduce thenumber of worlds altogether?
One thing I don't agree with is naming Flatlands "art world", even now it has several buildings there which have nothing to do with art... since that wasn't the main idea for flatlands. It was based on having enough flat, empty space with no requirements to clear land, so player could do pixelart... but also so that players could build more easily. The latter is something done less now, but it still is done.
As with grouping, I'm not even sure that the groups suggested would be adequate for some of the worlds. For instance, traditional world... that would include main world, planetoids, tunnels, desert world... maybe flatlands also? I don't disagree with an art world in general, but I don't see that being as flatlands as it is... If anything I would actually only set flatland, and main world as the "Traditional world", have planetoids as a seperate one altogether possibly (not necessary as such, but I'm pretty sure planetoids is still no building allowed for anyone under OP level? in which case, couldn't be counted so much), but the ones I would definitely group seperately from those would be desert world and tunnels... They still have the traditional building rules, but they have damage, and different ways to create zones... (the latter really just being so for flatlands, and also player's aren't allowed to build freely there)
Finally, as for Indrae's concerns, as he has said, City World isn't so much of a general, all purpose, high quality build area, but instead an ongoing project. One which players can of course add to, but one which he wants to oversee very closely. I think his opinion is that grouping this together with other creative worlds would give the wrong impression of what the world is about.
Overall, I have a lot of mixed feelings about this, and I'm not sure I like the direction it could be headed in. It could be used to help the server out a lot, but it could also confuse things... I still feel as if there is more to say, yet these are all the points which come to mind right now. This post is being heavily editted by the way, mainly since I'm still not done having my say, but also becuase really I'm still pretty worn down.
For all the bad points I've raised, I do also see potential. If this is simply used to group worlds of similar types, I have no problems with it. On the other hand if we are trying to eliminate, or force worlds together though, which may not have the same rule sets, I'm not completely for it. I see no problems with grouping creative worlds together, so long as it's only by category, and not by rules... and I also see no problems in having areas dedicated to pixelart, to traditional, legitemate building, redstone, or any other things like that. It would give players a clearer idea on where they can go, to do what; making the worlds more evident is an even better idea, which would help players get the most out of their experience. I just do not like the idea of forcing areas together which don't fit, or... (something else which my mind has melted from before being able to type...)