[Under Discussion] Removal of Some Minecraft Servers

[Malcovent]

Right I'm not overly sure how independent a feedback we can get on this issue since, as expected a lot of server directors will defend their respective server.

We can however release the criteria for assessment before we undergo it, so that you know what to expect and - possibly - can identify whether you're going to close or not. In short we're assessing the servers by the following

- How popular is the game mode currently: This represent whether the underlying concept is good or whether it hasn't particularly taken off.

- Future plans: High level ideas for where the server will be heading in very early 2015, Does this plan sound like it'll work or does it sound like it'll flop.

- Likelihood of completing future plans: We know that for some reason, some servers can take upto quarter of a year/half a year in development phase - even when the amount of content they have doesn't seem to represent the months spent. We'll be assessing how likely a server is to undertake and complete said plans in a timely manner.

And a final note - it really is nothing personal guys, but we cannot keep servers purely for sentimentality sake ~ especially when its most likely going to be the admins who are taking the brunt of failure to donate. Part of our responsibility is to provide the community with a suite of servers/games to entertain them - if they don't enjoy your game, the argument for not removing the server is pretty thin.

With that said, it doesn't mean we won't be opening new Minecraft servers in future - however I think we need to be willing to float the boat out in future and try new/crazier concepts, as well as having a higher criteria for assessing a servers readiness and, a structure that supports advertising.

 

[Prizyms]

I'd like to see a creative server make it through as a sub-server on SMP at the very least. Creative servers are the backbone of Minecraft and BuildBox is the primary mapmaking server for the community. However, given its low requirements we could easily tack on a creative world to any server we see fit, with PlotMe perhaps also being added.

If we do choose to keep BuildBox as a server, I can promise a wealth of competitions with Steam-based rewards as well as some other slightly different events currently in talks with Nillbugwtw.

 

[RyanDodd]

You already know my plans for AoD 2.0, which we intended to start as soon as Sponge came out. With Mmarz as Developer now, I do believe he will have time to see this project out. The current server is old and outdated though, and as a result of that doesn't have the highest player count at all times so I can understand why it may be removed.

 

[Nillbugwtw]

Wholeheartedly agreeing with Priz here, and I'd like to even more strongly suggest a SMP/CMP single server - I think a joint Creative/Survival server is an option we should definitely look into. As it currently stands, tacking on a survival world to Buildbox and evolving it into a duo server, while needing to work out some logistics, would be a largely easy thing to do - the infrastructure for different gamemodes/plugins/permissions is already there, and I think merging the two staple Minecraft servers under one metaphorical roof just makes sense, giving us the ability to host one of our more unique servers alongside the classics.

 

[Ogarci]

I'd be in support of the combination survival/creative server. It worked for Primorida iirc and I think it would work well again.

I think it would consolidate a ton of things, including staffing, forum aspects, and overall server management. I'm not suggesting to give the axe to any of my current peers, but I think that while we have 4? Directors heading both BB and SMP, a number less could manage the dual purpose server with ease.

BB/creative server definitely not only holds its own popularity in itself, but I sure both Infection/AoD and definitely RoF can speak and say we would not have the quality maps we would today if it weren't for the role that BB plays in allowing creations for sister servers. and I agree with the BB Directors on the fact that whatever happens, a creative server needs to stay.

 

[JtTorso]

I second that, since the end of classic BB has been the main method for the development and creation of maps, lobbies, and so on. And from what I've seen, BB is usually successful with event turnouts. I'd also say the current BB has been our most successful and widely enjoyed creative server out of our previous ones. I personally feel that some iteration similar to our current one should exist in our future lineup for our minecraft servers.

In regards to a creative and SMP merge, I constantly see people saying SMP should stay but the issue with that is that SMP is really always coming and going and while the idea that SMP is permanently in our lineup of servers it's really never permanent, every SMP technically comes to an end and goes down and there's a period of absence until another SMP replaces it. While we have had a SMP and Creative merged, I recall the previous creative closing and becoming its own server when/ around the same time the SMP of that time went down. I'm just wondering what kind of strain we should expect on both the technical side and staffing side when an SMP is going down and a new one is being set up.

 

[Malcovent]

I'm not entirely in favour of merging the build and SMP server ,there's a number of reasons but, these three stick out most to me.

~ Buildbox is inherently unstable, mainly due to fact that the very nature of building plugins makes them a server-crash liability (Anyone whose been blessed with running buildbox or had the chance to manually remove a user-corrupted chunk will agree with me) - as I see it, there'd either have to be a serious nerf of builders plugin accessibility, or we'd have to put up with a higher chance of SMP crashing/going down for periods. Which is the opposite direction we're going to go.

~ It's a plugin nightmare trying to get the two servers to co-operate, if you can imagine the effects of installing any new plugin on the server, and having to try limit all effects to one half.

~ As JtTorso pointed out, SMP is currently running a life cycle of 2-4 months due to inherent issues balancing out gameplay issues.

 

[Nillbugwtw]

I'm not entirely in favour of merging the build and SMP server ,there's a number of reasons but, these three stick out most to me.

~ Buildbox is inherently unstable, mainly due to fact that the very nature of building plugins makes them a server-crash liability (Anyone whose been blessed with running buildbox or had the chance to manually remove a user-corrupted chunk will agree with me) - as I see it, there'd either have to be a serious nerf of builders plugin accessibility, or we'd have to put up with a higher chance of SMP crashing/going down for periods. Which is the opposite direction we're going to go.

~ It's a plugin nightmare trying to get the two servers to co-operate, if you can imagine the effects of installing any new plugin on the server, and having to try limit all effects to one half.

~ As JtTorso pointed out, SMP is currently running a life cycle of 2-4 months due to inherent issues balancing out gameplay issues.

There will be things to work out for sure, but I'm not sure its that bad.

-Buildbox is inherently open to accidental fuckups by... Well, me, mostly, at least recently. We haven't had a major issue created by... Someone other than me (or Priz) in months now, and I feel like if we had something like a corrupted chunk issue, the world could be downloaded and disabled from loading, so the SMP server could still run as it was being fixed.

-Plugins are probably the largest obstacle we have. That being said, it seems like a SMP server running near vanilla would be the best, and while not all plugins have support for multiworld configurations, any perm plugin we would use WOULD, so worst case we could just disable access to those plugins on a per-world basis.

-The rather short lifespan of SMP seems like a positive to me if we had a merge. As it stands right now, a standalone SMP system would have to set up their server from scratch again for a new SMP, whereas a SMP world could simply generate a new world to play on (much like the creative terrains now).

We could toss up a new thread to discuss this if we want, but I definitely feel we should look into this option further.

 

[Malcovent]

Here's the factors im basing current thoughts off

> How popular is the server currently
> If the server is midway through a remake, how good is the remake?
> If the server is midway through a remake, how long has it taken them/how long will it take to finish?
> How stable is the server (Crashes, etc.)
> How much memory the server takes up.
> Cost of rehousing existing servers.
> Expected lifespan of server in current state
> Amount of effort required to add new content to server

running a pm by the admins, will release the plan tomorrow.

 

[superstein]

Still discussing, in usual admin fashion :^)

 

[Malcovent]

Still under discussion, Mostly trying to get a finger on the pulse of some servers.

Currently it's looking at 2-3 servers staying open tops, 2 servers likely to be removed until they've finished undergoing updates/overhauls/changes as planned, at which point they'll be reviewed to see if the server is viable or not.

As per, we'll try be fair in terms of explaining why it's happening, and i expect nothing less than for some people to defend their servers regardless - apologies if anyone takes this badly but, its unavoidable lest I want to keep paying $100 out of my own pocket per month - which as you can imagine - i'm not the best pleased with.

 

[superstein]

Server-Directors

Ok, so here is the deal with server removals (and understandably some of you will not be happy, but we work with those affected to see if we can find them positions / or work something out):

RoF, BB and A&T are going to stay right now (tnmjimbob - I'd love to talk to you sometime about future of the server, how we can make it more popular, fit its role better, etc)

SMP and AoD will go, BUT because both servers are being "redone" in a sense (New SMP and AoD 2.0) these servers will be down and the new forms of the servers will be presented when they are ready and run as event servers - if popular enough they will be permanent servers. I personally would prefer if we had both back at some point.

Infection will go. Reasons for this are mainly lack of players/updates to it.

I understand not everyone will be pleased by this, but hopefully we can accommodate those who will be looking for something to do - PM us admins if interested because we'd love if you stuck around.

If you've got any questions then feel free. We had to bite the bullet and do this, and we'll have to make some tough decisions, so now's a better time than any.

 

[RyanDodd]

superstein

How long do we have to prepare before the servers are shutting down? I'd like to do a few additional things for AoD before it goes down.

 

[superstein]

superstein

How long do we have to prepare before the servers are shutting down? I'd like to do a few additional things for AoD before it goes down.

Probably... A few weeks to a month? Not sure yet, depends when everything else is done, but go for it

 

[JtTorso]

When do we plan on announcing the cuts and would it be alright if I made a thread about it in the Infection staff section regarding the removal of the server?

 

[superstein]

When do we plan on announcing the cuts and would it be alright if I made a thread about it in the Infection staff section regarding the removal of the server?

We will announce it when we announce everything else... that's coming up pretty soon, likely a week or two?

And go for it. Other directors are also free to give the Infection staff a home if they'd like, I'm sure they're competent enough to take on a new position x)

 

[Nillbugwtw]

Priz and I plan to offer Controller to you Infection D/Devs if you would like it, BB operator to Infection's vetops, and a reference to the current Infection ops, if they are serious about wanting to staff for Build.