I suggest the following changes to /world, to help make it into more of what it was intended for

[morl0ck]

Can we agree that the whole point of /world is to encourage pvp between players? Good, because pvp rarely happens there, due to how easy it is to use the convenience of /world as simply a trading hub, or to give equipment to your alt, or whatever. Not that there is anything wrong with trading there, but it's apparent that the original purpose is lost because there's virtually zero risk in going there.

My solutions to the following problems:

1. People dodge /world or avoid it the moment someone other than their trading partner joins, since they're alerted through /pvplist.
My suggested solution: make /pvplist anonymous. Don't list out the names of the players there, just the number of players currently there. Or instead make it a boolean- "There are players currently in /world" or "/world is empty". /pvplist subscribe only tells you when someone joins or leaves, but not who.

Bonus to that point: who you end up encountering would be a fun surprise.

2. The "50 block radius" rule is not an effective mechanism for combat dodging.
My suggested solution: you must stand still for about ~30 seconds and not take damage in order to go home. This is how most MMO games handle the problem and I don't see anything wrong with it.

3. It's hard to find people, especially ones who don't want to be found.
My suggested solution: When you first join /world, your coordinates are announced to anyone who is /pvplist subscribed. So they don't know WHO just warped in at -50, 250, but they know someone just did. This would also allow /world to be a bit bigger in my opinion.

I feel like these 3 suggestions would give /world a bit more of a "hunger games" feeling and would make it actually dangerous and risky again. Also it wouldn't prevent people from trading who still want to trade there, they would just have to be more careful.

[MisterStrawman]

I don't think that these problems are the reason that there's no pvp in /world anymore. I don't think making the /pvplist anonymous will do much, as normally, if you're trading, you and your trading partner are the only ones there. The moment someone sees 3+ people, they'd leave. The only way to make it truly a surprise would be to get rid of the /pvplist altogether, but then you lose out on the opportunity to go there and ambush someone who enters. I guess I don't have a good solution to this problem either way.

As for the 50 block thing, I'm fine with getting rid of it and replacing it with something else perhaps more dangerous. Not totally sure if waiting 30 seconds is the best way, but I'm open to discussing this.

Your third suggestion of announcing the coordinates of someone joining I support entirely. It makes trades easier and pvping/attacking easier as well. I'm not sure if making the world bigger is a good idea however, it would basically make it too easy to hide or escape, and trades more cumbersome.

[Yukar9]

After discussing the first suggestion ingame, we came up with the idea that /pvplist only showed whether somebody is in /world, and /pvplist subscribe only announces it when that state changes. Though I'm still not sure what I think is best.

[morl0ck]

we came up with the idea that /pvplist only showed whether somebody is in /world

Yeah I like this better. It makes encounters in /world more of a surprise as you're not sure who is there, how many are there, and who's hostile or not.

[Yukar9]

So I think we need to discuss these suggestions separately. First off, making /pvplist binary seems to be one suggestion. And coord announcements for /pvplist subscribe is another suggestion.

Then regarding the 50 block radius, clip brought up a good point that it doesn't make sense to change unless we also fix combatlogging, so that should be a combined suggestion. As it's also a somewhat bigger suggestion, I'll open a new thread for that.

So I think we should discuss suggestion 1 and 3 here.

[MisterStrawman]

After discussing it in-game, here's what we're looking at: /pvplist will now only show whether or not somebody is in /world. /pvplist subscribe will now only make an announcement when the /world goes from being empty to not empty, not the other way around. If someone has been in /world for 10 minutes or more, they will be ignored by /pvplist. If someone who is being ignored logs, they will be re-announced when they log back in.

[ostrich1414]

So it will no longer display exact player names, correct? It'll just give vague answers, like "empty" or "not empty"?

[Yukar9]

That's the suggestion, yes.

[indigo011]

sounds interesting :) worth a try for sure..showing cords also seem nice.

I still would love a fixed spawn in world as well .

[Fluz43]

only make an announcement when the /world goes from being empty to not empty, not the other way around. If someone has been in /world for 10 minutes or more, they will be ignored by /pvplist. If someone who is being ignored logs, they will be re-announced when they log back in.

This is retarded why not just say whether or not it's vacant and that's that, no need to waste yukar's time writing code for a simple problem. If this is the case wouldn't people just not go in /world at all as a result of it? Or frankly just wait until people they don't trust aren't online at all? Sure it'd leave pvp-ready players only in in theory but how many people are going into /world to pvp anyways? If people don't want to pvp then they won't go in /world ever unless others who are online are noobs. Think about practical application. This is a small server so you can get a feel of how each individual will probably respond to it, no? Like a quarter of active players have already posted in this forum, I feel.

Otherwise, I think giving a simple "somebody" "nobody" or something like that in /pvplist could work, yet I don't get why yall think it'll actually increase PVP like people hope it will. There shouldn't be some 10 minute thing to then say nobody's in /world again though since it's just stupid imo unless you can give me a very realistic case which will frequently happen as a result of implementation instead of thinking one new condition in the system (which could probably be easily worked around someway somehow, not in coding but in how we adapt to its existance) will provide as revolutionary of a change as you think this will.