Page 21 of 45
Re: Multiworld
Posted: Sun Mar 11, 2012 11:32 pm
by FoSchnizzle
IF they have reason. Smarten up.
Re: Multiworld
Posted: Sun Mar 11, 2012 11:33 pm
by joseph3114
Assuming your reasons supersede others.
Basically nether pvp failed so you want to make another world of smaller size to try again.
Re: Multiworld
Posted: Sun Mar 11, 2012 11:55 pm
by RevStoningpot
Wow you played in 1.8 what a regular. So as i understand it the only objection you have is command portal instead of physical portal. This is an aspect that could be voted for change once it's implimented. if you have no reason for the actual existance of a pvp world don't vote against it. Now as i've already stated i would contribute topvp in this world where as currently, due to the limit, i am unable to pvp at all. The only argument that limit supporters have ever had was to increase pvp. This idea would increase pvp way more than alienating half the server ever could. How could you deny that? Would no one else pvp more with this in place?
Re: Multiworld
Posted: Sun Mar 11, 2012 11:58 pm
by joseph3114
Those details need to be specified BEFORE a vote then.
Otherwise when people don't like it, or have a problem with it, you end up with "this isn't what I voted for..." and that will be the same nightmare this thread is.
Re: Multiworld
Posted: Mon Mar 12, 2012 12:00 am
by FoSchnizzle
Nether pvp? Nether pvp was never a choice. You can't really have pvp in the nether well. It is still an infinite world, so less random encounters, it has shitloads of ghasts, fucking your day up, and zombie pigmen. Yay. The nether also requires a portal, as well as the same walking, albeit less, to fight. Also, the nether has screwed up terrain for fighting: it can have multiple layers, and the huge walls stretching to the floor and ceiling of the world. And the nether now has the glitch of spawning you on the ceiling. Have fun with that. In a world with a 1k limit, there is one ground, especially if we make it a flatland world, and your portal can't be destroyed, stranding you in the world. Also, the world isn't going to be infinite, and the world will only be for pvp, not travel, or farming warts, or such things. Smarten up. Regarding the whole it not being what you voted for, it can be changed, and/or argued. Once made certain, it will not be put in for a short while if it passes, giving time to argue specifics. Without voting for it, it won't be put in. Period.
Re: Multiworld
Posted: Mon Mar 12, 2012 12:06 am
by joseph3114
We will let this vote decide that then.
Re: Multiworld
Posted: Mon Mar 12, 2012 12:08 am
by RevStoningpot
joseph3114 wrote:Those details need to be specified BEFORE a vote then.,.
They were and it was 10 to 0 in favor of this design. Maybe if you noobs actualy cared about this server you would have given your opinion in that matter BEFORE the official vote
Re: Multiworld
Posted: Mon Mar 12, 2012 12:13 am
by mitte90
some question joseph, is joseph3114 ur minecraft name? when was the last time u was active on the server(playing occasionally dont count)? how did u hear about this poll?
Re: Multiworld
Posted: Mon Mar 12, 2012 12:13 am
by Gnatogryz
So people who actually play on the server on a regular basis are about to lose to people who are just voting no because there is a "no" option available? This is bullshit. There have been no sensible arguments against.
Teleportation? Nope, multiworld ain't teleportation. Split? Nope, it ain't splitting since the pvp world is no place to have a base in. Complexity? Nope, this brings absolutely no change to the vanilla gamestyle, apart from removing a non-vanilla limit.
Re: Multiworld
Posted: Mon Mar 12, 2012 12:15 am
by joseph3114
Coming up with reasons to discredit and exclude opposing viewpoints is really getting old.
Also, why is there a vote if everyone whose vote matters already has voted yes?
My minecraft name is joseph3114.