Moving the spawn

[Xestia]

500 would be pretty pointless. If it moves it should be at least 5k.

I still think a starter world would be a better idea, though.

[A. Pippenger]

A starter world is totally unvanilla though. The reason I decided to stick with this server because it was literally the only one I found where it felt like I was playing the same game as singleplayer. Making such a big change to the basic vanilla aspects kind of ruins the server in my opinion.

[A. Pippenger]

I've always been opposed to a spawn reset, because it removes so much history. Also, I've personally spent a ton of time around spawn and built some giant stuff there. I have a giant castle less than 500 blocks away, a giant pyramid only about 200 away, plus a lot of little towns and smaller forts. Xestia and Mr Hole have also built a lot of cool stuff at close distances. There might not be any truly great builds you'd show off in a youtube video, but me and a lot of other people have put work into that area, and it's part of the server's history.

However, I am pretty disappointed by the summer rush this year. In 2013 we had many more people on and it started earlier. By May we'd always have several noobs hanging around at spawn, and during July I could find a team of six people in a day. The server just felt entirely different, and I liked it more.

The desperation of this has convinced me that a spawn reset might be worth it, especially if we go with Fo's idea of copy-pasting the old spawn somewhere else to preserve it. I still think moving the spawn preserves the history more, is more vanilla, and has the potential to create more long term growth, but I think either idea is ok. We need to do something.

What I wonder is, should we be arguing about which method to use when a good number of people are opposed to both? It seems like a lot of suggestions die when a million people come in offering small variations on the suggestion and the whole thing loses steam.

For now I guess I'd consider myself in favor of both Fo's idea and Matt's. If either went to a vote vs doing nothing, I'd vote for them. It's really just a question of which, if either, can get enough support to actually pass.

[Mattias480]

I think we should have a vote next week. What does the staff think? It has been discussed almost 1 week by now.

[Xestia]

Most efficient way? What does that even mean?

It's the most unvanilla way, that's for sure. Destroying things people have put many hours into using admin commands.

[LoneSoldier55]

this idea is dumb and isn't going to do anything for the server population.

and if it does it will be because it's a summer rush and all the autists finally have more time to play pixel simulator.

[Mattias480]

Stop that shitposting please. This topic is for regular players. Fuckin forum hero..

[hugobros3]

I'm for doing something, and IMO moving the spawn to like 10k blocks from where it is now could be an appropriate solution.

But if people want this server to grow again then there is no other way than advertising it, and I think a good and well-made video trailer showing what playing seriously on the server is like ( serious fights, finding bases, griefing, farming using mob towers, cities ) might appeal relativly serious and mature players.

Lone's right, Minecraft IS decaying, the real question is "Do you have enought motivation to fight against it ?".

[LoneSoldier55]

Stop that shitposting please. This topic is for regular players. Fuckin forum hero..

It doesn't mean the point isn't valid, mister high and mighty that I play on a server with less than 10 people.

[Mattias480]

The point is, you don't know for sure, that it doesn't make a change, mister all-knowing. And these posts like "this idea is dumb". Idk really , are you 12 year old? Be more constructive. If you don't like to play in this server, shut the hell up.