PDA

View Full Version : TFC HC Teleports



Commiellama2
21st December 2015, 20:02
So... the thing that sets hardcore apart from the regular server is that there are no teleports. What if we gave it teleports?

Currently the regular server has a spawn command, town spawn, multiple personal home teleports and several town outposts. People can teleport out of danger, teleport directly to their mine, pick up barrels and teleport directly to their home storage without taking a step.

What I propose for HC will be nothing like that.

I'm a fan of hub based teleports, and my suggestion is that players can construct a harbour of sufficient quality and their investment in time, materials and tech will earn them a portal to another harbour on the same body of water, eliminating "wasted time" of the boat journey that is not difficult or dangerous - it's just a boring period where we hold W for 10, 20, 30 minutes... All land journeys should be done manually since there is a risk involved and obstacles to navigate around.

This way the players travel from their home to the harbour, skip the tedious boat journey and then continue the rest of the way from the harbour to the mine/destination. Still stays hardcore, no commands that the players can type, no home town spawns, just the ability to cross oceans once they've earned it by contributing infrastructure (which brings people together and makes the place look nicer) and also the fact that they've made this journey at least once before in order to build the destination harbour.

Points:

Each harbour must be of sufficient quality - bricks or logs&planks with roofs and floor being a different material to the walls so effort has been made, no mudhuts! (Judgement should be flexible, we're not all Tenterro :( )
Each harbour will have... 3 slots for a command block, thus up to 3 destinations.
Harbours must have a jetty or docking area where players would believably exit the boat
Destinations must be a harbour (more specifically the jetty or docking area)
Each destination should ideally be 1000-10000 blocks away. It could be less, but we don't want too many harbours in the world, for one it takes admin's time to validate and secondly the point is that we should still travel a fair bit ourselves and not rely on teleports.
Once approved the harbour will have a command block & button placed in it to teleport nearest player (ie who activated it) to the appropriate destination
Chains may develop: A to B, B to C, C to D so players can travel huge distances in a few journeys
Animals cannot travel this way (it only teleports the player)
This will allow people to live in a warm climate and have access to arctic food storage bases
Harbours cannot cross any land, each journey must be possible on a boat. This means canals are possible, if you can build something a boat should (yeah Mojang: should - enough of your exploding boats) be able to traverse
Harbours do not need to be connected to towns, spawn or other networks, they can be a simple A-to-B to cross a huge lake if it's appropriate for the area and would get used enough


Things to debate:

Should there be an appeasement cost (Praise be unto Jiro) such as red steel cladding on the command block, or red steel carpet on the teleport area? Maybe just gold?
All harbours will be built and funded by players, however they will be available publicly to all players, even those who did not contribute
Should players pay a fee-per-use? Is this even feasible, something along the lines of those rock-to-food converters, checking to see if a container has an ingot or gem inside as payment. Would this require a standard-sized basedment for redstone admin witchcraft?
Harbours should be protected outposts, either by an admin to claim as server land, or by the creator to prevent griefing (no build or destroy, but okay to use items and buttons)
Harbours need to be identifiable. How do we know where we're going? (well except it could say "north" on a sign) Maybe clad part of the building in a metal so we have the copper dock, the sterling silver dock etc?


What do people think? Did I miss something that needs discussing?

MC boats are stupid anyway.

Jiro_89
22nd December 2015, 03:44
2496

I'll sit on this a bit and think about it. Anybody else have any opinions on this? (TFC HC players especially)

LarsonPacific
22nd December 2015, 04:29
Interesting idea.

I also don't enjoy the long boat journeys, insomuch as I built a massive 20,000 block long railroad to be able to largely afk navigate from my home town up north to the spawn mainland. Personally, I don't think much would be lost from the hardcore feel by having hardcore teleport harbors as defined by Heptagon_ru, since afk railways can be constructed to perform largely the same function.

If they are implemented, I also think the harbors should be limited in use to a person who has made the journey once by boat already, or has contributed at least one port to the infrastructure, or something. Since journey validation may be difficult to accomplish, maybe the harbor station has a room, protected by a locketted door accessible to a group of contributors? Maybe a set of unused color steel armor could buy the player a "ticket" to use the system? I support the idea, though I think it should be limited to those who have put in the time and have escalated through the tech levels, so it doesn't affect the new players hardcore feel. Everyone needs to know the pain of boating in MC1.7 before being allowed to avoid it. :P The most difficult part will probably be finding a good cost/reward ratio and a feasible method of implementation that doesn't burden the admins.

Benanov
22nd December 2015, 04:40
I'm going to apply to HC post-reset, because the no-teleports thing excites me. The idea of actually having a working server economy is fun. I like barter. Wasn't any good at it in most other MMOs...but I'm decent at it here.

Plus the idea of transforming the server to facilitate travel is a nice idea.

I don't care for hub tp's.

Seeding the world? I guess.

LarsonPacific
22nd December 2015, 05:51
Apply pre-reset Benanov :) Having the ark makes it so you can retain your tech progress, so time spent escalating pre-reset is not lost...

chongshaohong
22nd December 2015, 07:16
This idea probably would encourage trade.

The way I see it, it's sort of a sliding scale. With no teleports, travel, and thus becomes difficult, slow and requires significant infrastructure and time spent.(Example: Railway networks) This is the situation on TFCHC now. However, with too much teleportation, such as on the regular server, there is no need for trade. With multiple teleports that are easy to set up and instant, a player can easily access all the resources needed, without having the need for trade. Thus, I think that the ideal situation lies somewhere in the middle. With limited number of teleport(harbors) locations, each requiring significant resources and time to construct, but with instant travel, trade is now easy and actually useful for players.

Of course, the requirements for the harbors should be significant but not too large as to make it ridiculous. I propose a size requirement, as well as materials used(multiple types of wood, stone, maybe expensive metal?), and that it must be connected to town or someplace significant, not in the middle of nowhere.

TheForestHermit
22nd December 2015, 09:25
I am... cautiously in favor. I think Harbors only, and perhaps limiting it to five or so with teleports only between those five to limit admin/server burden.

I would love to see 5 neutral locations chosen arbitrarily on the new map before any town is claimed/set/chosen with a good geographic spread, and the rest of us choose town sites and spread our railways to those harbors. In theory giving people ongoing projects instead of hitting endgame boredom.
Late to the server development? It will encourage players to join existing towns or place new towns somewhere along existing trade routes, much like RL.

InsaneJ
22nd December 2015, 11:08
Just a thought. We could make travel very expensive by introducing a server economy just for travel. A player can then sell expensive items like metal ingots to a server trader which will yield credits. Teleportation from one hub to the next will then be calculated based on distance.

So going from the tropics to your arctic storage would maybe cost a red steel ingot or two. That should effectively prevent people from jumping all over the place like they do on the regular TFC server. If you wish to fast-travel you would have to weigh the costs versus the gains carefully.

TheForestHermit
22nd December 2015, 11:38
Nrrgg. Then it becomes a grind with no incentive to build imo. It's expensive ports, but it's still instant travel. So the 'rich' flit about ( relatively) and those in early progression choose between walking and joining an established town.
Not to mention all the incoming fights when the younger and less thrifty members of the town sell the town's entire stash of red ingots because "im 2 laZy 2 walk tht far lol" or " pmg my stuff was going 2 despawn". And lets not forget the begging: " Can someone lend me 2 ingots so I can join my friend I'm new".
( >.> I'm not jaded. really. )

TheRealPoker
22nd December 2015, 13:50
Great idea, no more tedious boat journeys, the map is opened up, an additional late-game feature and the essence of hardcore is maintained.

A few suggestions for these SeaGates:



Difficult/expensive to construct (obsidian/gold/pumpkins/coloursteel etc. required).
Must have an easily recognisable, perhaps somewhat standardised design.
No other SeaGate or Spawn within x thousand blocks (otherwise the wormholes might cross).
Built next to the sea (as they are powered by large amounts of saltwater).
Simple two-way travel (easy to use, easy to admin).
Free to all to use once completed (a convenience for the constructor, a public service, no arguments).
Cannot be near an existing town, nor have a town built nearby.

Commiellama2
22nd December 2015, 14:20
As long as it's not overdone it should help trade, but as chong said it's a sliding scale. If it takes an hour to reach someone, I could spend that hour or less prospecting so the time traveling is offputting. Also having a popular area such as a harbour will be an incentive for people to build railways and roads to this point as it may be 1000 blocks away instead of 8000. Larson is an exception to both of those points though :p

Server currency just for travel is a good idea, that way it won't unbalance the rest of the game if you only gain tickets but red steel ingots might be a bit much, especially in the scenario for heading to a polar region to pick up a sandwich.

Not sure whether a harbour should be in/next to a town, or whether they should be in the middle of nowhere so people travel from their town to the harbour and it's not too convenient for the host town. If the server claimed each harbour as a town, that would prevent towns from popping up next to it for a free ride, ensuring it's spaced out nicely.

InsaneJ
22nd December 2015, 16:45
Keep in mind that I don't actually play TFC so I don't know which items are worth how much exactly. The cost of fast-traveling should be equal to the effort, time and risk involved in traveling normally. How much that is exactly I'll gladly leave up to more knowledgeable people :)

I think fast-travel harbors should be incorporated into towns. It'll give towns a goal to work towards. Since they will be really expensive to make it's more than a single person can do in a reasonable amount of time, right? And it will make for some nice looking towns. A town with a harbor > a town without a harbor.

Also I'd like to expand the minimum distance between towns. I'm not sure what the exact value will be, but I'm thinking 1000 or maybe even 2000 blocks. Having fast-travel stations in towns would then start to make a lot more sense.

In that train of thought we might even consider having two kinds of fast-travel stations. One sea based and one land based. The land based should be proportionally more expensive to build since the effort and risk involved in land travel is much higher than that of sea travel. It should be an end-game kind of thing if we would consider doing it. It'll probably cost the town all of it's wealth just to build one. But once it's build, the two (!) towns that are connected can then profit from it immeasurably.

Just think about it. We will have limits on the amount of adult animals, but I'm thinking about letting go X of each kind. So one town could specialize in breeding horses while another one creates a huge pig farm. Or perhaps we could take it even further and assign "tickets" to resources. For example 1 adult animal equals 1 ticket, one fruit tree equals 1 ticket, etc. We could get towns that specialize on making certain produce on the server where trade then makes a ton of sense to do.

Just to be sure, these are just some thoughts. Feel free to agree, disagree and discuss :)

LarsonPacific
22nd December 2015, 20:12
I like TheForestHermit's idea of having teleport points chosen before any towns are set up, and are free for all to travel through. With an 80k x 80k map, it will definitely serve to open the map up.

Since TFC maps always seem to be island groups, taking Hermits idea into account I would like to see the following:

* Four routes chosen from the shortest distance between the spawn mainland, and the next landmass of significant size, one per direction, north, south, east and west.
* Extend those routes from the other end of their landmass to the next landmass, if the distance is > 1,000-2,000 blocks over water from their closest points, all the way to the edge of the map.
* No teleport points for land masses closer than 1k from their closest points
* Teleport with animals (since you can painfully drag them in a boat anyways)
* Leave land route construction (road/rail construction) up to the players.
* Almost free to use; Cost of travel: 1 boat. :)

This way, I feel the hardcore way of doing things would be maintained. Nobody would use the routes unless they were going to travel the route by boat anyways, and the price is the same as if it were done with a AA battery on the "W" key... or using a macro if you're high tech like Poker XD I like the boat as being the cost of the route, since that's what it would cost anyways. If someone wants to leave a chest of boats by the terminal for public use so noobs without a saw can travel, who cares, because we already do that anyways; the only thing lost is wasted time watching your screen for when chunks stop loading and you gotta relog, exit your boat and relog again... everyone knows the drill XD

The only issue that really detracts from the HC feel is the time saved. If you have a town which is say, close to a N-S route station, still in the tropics or warm area good for growing crops, with the next station 8k away, tons of teleporting will occur between the town and it's fridge since there would be a large temp difference between the two points, in addition to the benefit I see of having the food in unloaded chunks (which undeniably extends shelf life, even though the wiki says it shouldn't). It would then be dumb for anyone not to build their town not next to these ports. To compensate for this, maybe the routes could be timed... so a player inserts a boat, presses a button, then a timer starts which is equal to the time it takes to travel the route at 8 blocks/sec, after which, the player is teleported. That way, the player can go full afk and make a sandwich or do some dishes or laundry, without worry of falling off the map. :P

LarsonPacific
22nd December 2015, 20:51
On the topic of animal limits, I think animal limits should be different based on the type of animal and population of the town. Cows serve one purpose: dairy. Towns only need so much dairy/person. Horses serve one purpose: Travel. Each player needs a horse, though you need to have breeding stock regardless of town size, since horses have a tendency of drowning themselves and falling into ravines. Thus once cannot really apply one set limit to all species without penalizing towns with larger populations.

Maybe something like the following:
Cows: 4 (After a population of 4 people, +1 per additional town member) (All cows individually penned)
Horses: 4 (+1 per additional town member) (All horses individually penned)
Sheep: 4 (+1 per additional town member) (All sheep individually penned)
Mules: Same as Horses
Donkeys: 4 (All donkeys must be individually penned)
Pigs: 4 (All pigs individually penned. Additionally, breeding pens should be built, one per pregnant female, and have minimum size to deal with the unavoidable pigsplosions when breeding)
Chickens/Pheasants: 16 (Minimum chicken pen size)
Deer: 4 (Individually penned)
Bear (For those who live dangerously): 4
Wolves: As many as one can tame, while retaining their sanity from the incessant barking :P

Individually penning larger animals should help with server load caused by animal bumping, making larger animal populations in more populated towns easier on the server. Minimum pen sizes for chickens and pigsplosions should serve the same purpose.

I like the idea of having towns which specialize in an animal type. Maybe allow each town to choose one type of animal they may be be a breeder of (posted in the towns board msg in towny), which allows the town double the limit of that animal type. All animals must still be individually penned if the animal type requires it, and pen size must double in each direction, or quadruple area size, if the animal type has a minimum pen size.

This will make sure larger towns with several members aren't penalized for having more members, and can provide each of their members with their own horse for travel, and if a larger town has remote outposts, cows can be put there to help distribute the dairy.

Please feel free to move this to a new thread if you feel it warranted :)

TheRealPoker
22nd December 2015, 20:57
Routes over greater distances, or over N-S trips (to the freezer), could require a more expensive initial construction or higher ticket price perhaps.

LarsonPacific
22nd December 2015, 22:07
Since TFC gets exponentially easier the longer you play, having an expensive ticket system is kinda unfair to new players. I feel the reason for teleports on hardcore should be to compensate for MC 1.7's massively buggy boating implementation, not give the rich a cushy way to travel (although since I'm rich in resources, I initially thought this acceptable XD ). It also would give advantage to a town who spends all their time making the resource required for travel over a town who is putting their time into sculpting or other creative endeavors...

Jiro_89
22nd December 2015, 22:21
Thank you for all the input so far guys. Based on what I'm reading I'm inclined to give this a try, but to stick with the hardcore difficulty I've made a few modifications.

When we first started the B79 Regular TFC (Before HC TFC was made), InsaneJ had an idea for teleportation to make it more integrated with TFC tier progression. He wanted to have a single town made obelisk per town that would allow for Towny teleportation commands. This didn't pan out because of some limitations and support that was lost during the construction and we ended up opting for the typical town teleportation setups with Towny.

I'd like to reintroduce this concept with the HC teleportation. I've designed a teleportation obelisk that, when built, will allow a person to have a teleport device in their town (admin placed). I'm not a fan of having command blocks anywhere but in server owned towns even if they're locked away so more than likely the portal option will be used since it is much easier to work with and can transport animals with the player.

This is by no means a final product, but it is the general direction I would like to take teleportation. There will be 3 progression tiers, all based on different levels of endgame. There are 3 tiers to the obelisk. Depending on the teleportation method chosen, there will be portals or portal spots chosen by the town's mayor as to where they are located and where the teleportation location will be. The portals and obelisk don't have to be connected. All portals will have a distance limit of 15k which is fair considering the requirements and the size of the map.

Tier 1 requirements:
Full design as described and shown in the first spoiler
Both colored steel chests complete with the appropriate items (shown further down)
A complete Oil Lamp chest (shown further down)

Tier 1 rewards:
A single one way portal
An iron block center indicator with a beacon to light the obelisk

Tier 2 requirements:
All Tier 1 requirements
The gem chest filled with the appropriate gems except for the diamond gem

Tier 2 rewards:
Two one way portals
A gold block center along with a beacon to light the obelisk

Tier 3 requirements:
All Tier 1 and Tier 2 requirements
The exquisite diamond gem

Tier 3 rewards:
Three one way portals
A diamond block center with a beacon to light the obelisk

The basic design will be an obelisk platform with 4 chests of any type, both colored steel anvils, 25 gold sheets, 32 lead sheets, 2 protection meters, and the basic structure made out of a stone of your choice.


2497
2498



Tier 1 requirement

The chest under the red steel anvil will have the following items inside:
Red Steel Shovel Head
Red Steel Hoe Head
Red Steel Axe Head
Red Steel Hammer Head
Red Steel Chisel Head
Red Steel Sword Blade
Red Steel Mace Head
Red Steel Saw Blade
Red Steel Pickaxe Head
Red Steel Prospector's Pick Head
Red Steel Scythe Blade
Red Steel Knife Blade
Red Steel Javelin Head
Red Steel Tuyere
Red Steel Boots (Complete and undamaged)
Red Steel Greaves (Complete and undamaged)
Red Steel Chestplate (Complete and undamaged)
Red Steel Helmet (Complete and undamaged)
2499


Tier 1 requirement
The chest under the bluesteel anvil will have the same items but with bluesteel types instead.

2500


Tier 2 requirement

One chest will contain all the exquisite gems in the game (with some conditions):
Exquisite Ruby
Exquisite Sapphire
Exquisite Emerald
Exquisite Topaz
Exquisite Tourmaline
Exquisite Amethyst
Exquisite Jade
Exquisite Beryl
Exquisite Agate
Exquisite Opal
Exquisite Jasper
Exquisite Garnet
Tier 3
Exquisite Diamond (Required for Tier 3 only)
2501


Tier 1 requirement

The final chest will contain every single kind of lamp:
Blue Steel Oil Lamp
Gold Oil Lamp
Platinum Oil Lamp
Rose Gold Oil Lamp
Silver Oil Lamp
Sterling Silver Oil Lamp
2502


Final versions (activated by an admin)

Tier 1
2505
Tier 2
2504
Tier 3
2503


Seems like a lot huh? Well Hardcore was designed and made solely for no teleportation along with a few other difficulty adjustments. So adding in teleports will cost you :cool:

Towns may only have 1 obelisk, so if you want to have more portals you have to upgrade your own. Another thing to point out is the teleportation will be one way, so if you want to teleport back you'll need the support of another town's obelisk. Portals will not have an entrance fee considering the requirements for them. They can be open to the public or closed off depending on how the town chooses to enforce their portal(s).

Keep in mind this is endgame progression. It is meant to add higher difficulty goals with a much greater reward.
Tier 1 can be fully achieved by a dedicated town as the requirements are all manageable with endgame items.
Tier 2 was designed for the long term players as they are the ones that will be grinding away at getting those exquisite gems.
Tier 3 is for the hardcore players that want to have it all.

Commiellama2
22nd December 2015, 23:19
Sounds like we've got some goals! Good idea with lead sheets, since nobody has lead. Magic portals are less immersive than harbours but gameplay is the most important thing, after all we are fighting animated skeletons and sad exploding green rectangles.

Don't forget firebricks could be an additional way to torment us :)

Heptagon_ru
23rd December 2015, 10:39
So in general about 100 color steel ingots per beacon. Sounds reasonably expensive. And a good goal, nearly made me think about starting on HC and teaming with people. Beacon race expected? :)))

grizzle
29th December 2015, 04:49
So I'm late to this discussion, obviously (I'm Franz, btw). Thanks Christmas! Even if it's too late to change, I thought I'd drop in some thoughts.

I very much like the idea of giving people more leeway in the animals and crops. I don't know how the various server loads compare, but I would much rather just say "24 adult animals of any mixture, penned separately", vs this per-type limit thing. I never understood why that was necessary.
Furthermore I think it would be good to allow people to trade in a crop chunk for a few extra trees maybe, depending on how the sever loads compare. Some of us may not want or need all those crops, but want more fruit trees. Or vice versa for that matter.
I think the idea of teleports that require work is good. I think that one thing people like, is for other players to see their hard work. But the HC server, already suffering from very low population relative to regular, has the added problem of hard travel. So the further you are from spawn, the more likely you'll have few visitors to appreciate your work. This addresses that.

I don't really see it as a trade facilitator I guess. People can already get all they need kind of easily.

As for the beacon structure, is this a structure that you've come up with for code reasons Jiro? Or is it a manual thing where you inspect it, see it's in order, and place the teleport and beacon yourself? Because one of the things I like about the original proposal of ships is that it would increase the immersion and scenic-ness of towns. This beacon won't really do that. So is this stuff a hard requirement? Or could we, for instance, have the armor displayed on armor stands, and the weapons displayed on racks? Personally if I'm going to put in all that effort, I would rather have the stuff on display for visitors vs hidden in a chest. Furthermore, can we arrange the sheets however we like, perhaps incorporated into a structure? And what about something more showy than lead? Like platinum, which is harder to work anyway? And the gems, could we have them in picture frames? I just feel like it'd be better if people had more freedom in how the items were used, preferably on display. Now, if this is a code thing where it's going to search for that exact configuration before teleporting people, in order to make sure people don't place all that stuff and then take it back after you've placed the teleport, I understand, but I just wanted to suggest more freedom of creativity if possible.

Furthermore, I think it would be good if there were a way for people to get a portal by having an epic construction project instead of colored steel. Something huge and amazing, to increase the prestige of hardcore. A colossus of Rhodes, a grand pyramid, or just the most amazing castle. I realize that would put the admins in the uncomfortable position of being the arbiters of what qualifies as an 'epic construction'. But again, I think the prestige of hardcore would be better enhanced via something visible from dynmap - a 200 square pyramid with sphynxes and epic interior, for instance - vs a few chests of colored steel.

I remember when I was first preparing to join happydiggers, scouring the dynmap, marveling at some of the plans I saw, and being excited to visit them in person, and see the full grandeur. I never got that feel from HC. It was just a bunch of towns really. So, I think it would be good to either allow epic monuments as an alternate (or only) route, or perhaps a route for additional portals after the first 3, or something.

Right now it seems like the only benefits of hardcore are more outposts, and looser animal limits. Well, and the statue, and unspecified 'cosmetic/fun' stuff. I do look forward to knowing more about the cosmetic stuff, as I'd definitely be supportive of decorative things that only HC gets, in order to try to attract more people to HC. So, I just feel like encouraging epic stuff would be good for the server.

InsaneJ
29th December 2015, 11:42
I very much like the idea of giving people more leeway in the animals and crops. I don't know how the various server loads compare, but I would much rather just say "24 adult animals of any mixture, penned separately", vs this per-type limit thing. I never understood why that was necessary.
That right there is why it was necessary. We get a lot of players who have no idea what's involved in running a large non-whitelisted public server. And that's ok :)
The limitations on animals/trees/tiled soil/anvils/etc were set to make sure the server load doesn't exceed the available hardware resources. Without these rules people just build whatever they liked without any regard for themselves or other players. Towns had more resources than they knew what to do with. Every town member had their own set of anvils, animals, trees, etc. So basically they were wasting in-game and server resources.

After we set the limits and started enforcing them server load came down to more acceptable levels. Because of that the server has been almost entirely lag free ever since. The only situations in which people experience lag nowadays is if someone has a poor connection to the server, if someone has a slow computer, or if someone breaks the rules.

I almost sound like a parent saying this... The rules are for your own good ;)

As for your suggestion about players building "world wonders" to gain access to a teleporter. I think it's a nice idea, but like you said it would put us in an uncomfortable position. One that is also going to take up quite a bit of our time. Judging, giving feedback, dealing with disappointment, judging again, etc.
Perhaps is we could find someone dedicated to this task who would stick around with us for a long time it would be feasible. Please continue the discussion :)

grizzle
29th December 2015, 18:20
The limitations on animals/trees/tiled soil/anvils/etc were set to make sure the server load doesn't exceed the available hardware resources.

It was mainly the animal thing. The general idea of load I understood, after i saw it mentioned somewhere. But I didn't understand why we got to mix-and-match fruit trees and crops, but had specific per-type limits on animals.

On both HC and regular, I had access to a one or two animal types, with the rest being farther than I wanted to mess with. I would have liked to have been able to raise more of those animals I had access to, in lieu of the other animal types. It sounds like the new system may possibly be more liberal as far as animal mix-match, but beyond that, could a town not 'exchange' part of their animal limit for fruit trees, or crops, and vice-versa, as long as the relative loads are balanced? I might gladly exchange animals for fruit trees, depending on the ratio.

As far as wonders, I think the initial precedent would probably be helpful. After one qualifying wonder is built, other players could examine it to get a better idea of the scope they'll need to meet. And perhaps a sort of pre-judging could be done by other HC players? So if you get enough recommendations from players you take a look? These would need to be private, clearly, so as to avoid inter-player hurt feelings. And admins would still have the final say. Some general guidelines would help.
Perhaps for instance, make it clear that simply being large of scope does not qualify (i.e. 14k railroads (sorry Larson) or 1k of simple walls around a town). The project needs to be detailed and well designed. Not Tenterro level necessarily, but more than just slapping together tons and tons of blocks. A grand wall could well be a component, in combination will a very well designed castle and in-theme town. But just by itself would not be enough.
And yet conversely, having a well done in-theme town is not in itself enough. There has to be something epic in scope.

Maybe this could be revisited later, after an idea is gotten of how HC will shake out - if there will be more players than before. If may be that it would take too much time if HC turns out pretty popular. Though with the pay-wall, and hardcore-ness, I think after the initial rush it probably will taper off a lot, and I'll bet relatively few towns would pursue an epic project. If treasure pile and monument are both routes to portals, then it gives people choices - some people just don't enjoy grinding out metal.

Jiro_89
29th December 2015, 19:53
As for the beacon structure, is this a structure that you've come up with for code reasons Jiro? Or is it a manual thing where you inspect it, see it's in order, and place the teleport and beacon yourself? Because one of the things I like about the original proposal of ships is that it would increase the immersion and scenic-ness of towns. This beacon won't really do that. So is this stuff a hard requirement? Or could we, for instance, have the armor displayed on armor stands, and the weapons displayed on racks? Personally if I'm going to put in all that effort, I would rather have the stuff on display for visitors vs hidden in a chest. Furthermore, can we arrange the sheets however we like, perhaps incorporated into a structure? And what about something more showy than lead? Like platinum, which is harder to work anyway? And the gems, could we have them in picture frames? I just feel like it'd be better if people had more freedom in how the items were used, preferably on display. Now, if this is a code thing where it's going to search for that exact configuration before teleporting people, in order to make sure people don't place all that stuff and then take it back after you've placed the teleport, I understand, but I just wanted to suggest more freedom of creativity if possible.

Furthermore, I think it would be good if there were a way for people to get a portal by having an epic construction project instead of colored steel. Something huge and amazing, to increase the prestige of hardcore. A colossus of Rhodes, a grand pyramid, or just the most amazing castle. I realize that would put the admins in the uncomfortable position of being the arbiters of what qualifies as an 'epic construction'. But again, I think the prestige of hardcore would be better enhanced via something visible from dynmap - a 200 square pyramid with sphynxes and epic interior, for instance - vs a few chests of colored steel.


The beacon was made in a way that would facilitate easy inspection and would require the usage of high end / end tier items. I'm open to suggestions about different ways to implement it, but the requirements need to be similar. Another reason for the way it's setup is so I can lockette correctly filled chests. If people put armor on the stands, jems in frames, etc then people can just as easily remove them after I've set the portals.

The reason I chose Lead sheets over Platinum is because it's a completely unused item. Platinum on the otherhand is used in the creation of lamps which is a requirement in the obelisk build.

I like the idea of a superbuild for a portal, but I really don't think it can compare to the time and knowledge requirement for the high end / top tier items required. Sure getting all the colored steel items isn't too hard in the scheme of things, but how many people obtained all type exquisite grade gems? I don't think a superbuild can compare to the time requirement for obtaining those gems. I've made multiple superbuilds myself in TFC and they didn't take anywhere near as long as it took to obtain all the exquisite grade gems (and I was still missing one).



On both HC and regular, I had access to a one or two animal types, with the rest being farther than I wanted to mess with. I would have liked to have been able to raise more of those animals I had access to, in lieu of the other animal types. It sounds like the new system may possibly be more liberal as far as animal mix-match, but beyond that, could a town not 'exchange' part of their animal limit for fruit trees, or crops, and vice-versa, as long as the relative loads are balanced? I might gladly exchange animals for fruit trees, depending on the ratio.


Fruit trees are actually the biggest offenders to server load.

This is how it goes: People break the rules and plant more fruit trees than the allotted amount. -> The server starts to cycle timeouts multiple times a day (where it kicks everyone from the server). -> People start complaining and blame the server for lag, staff for not being on top of stuff, you name it. -> I chastise the offenders with an appropriate warning/ban. -> Server runs smooth and a week later everyone forgets and starts complaining about the limits again.

We didn't arbitrarily choose the the limits if that's what people think. Besides the two months of just getting the tfc server on its feet, we also spent around 3 weeks of studying and testing the amount of tile entities that cause timeouts. Tile entities are basically everything, in TFC anyway, so it makes it difficult to limit since we don't want to limit people's chests, items, etc.

grizzle
30th December 2015, 08:39
Ok, so fruit trees are the worst, fair enough. I'd probably still exchange animals for more berry bushes (though maybe they're just as bad), but I get it, it's easier to just have uniform limits, rather than have to calculate exchange ratios, keep track of who is prioritizing what.

Sounds like the beacon requirements are also kind of what I suspected - requiring the stuff to stay there and not be taken back. I guess at least it's not a strict code thing. With that in mind, I still don't see the harm in an option for different metal sheets. What if the requirement were more like a *minimum* of X sheets gold and Y sheets lead, but either of the sheet types can be upgraded to silver, nickel, platinum, or (black?)steel and above? I think all those metals are less common/more expensive than gold and definitely lead. I mean I get the idea behind involving all metals, but lead is found in more than half the stone types. If someone wants to jazz up their portal area with better metals, that are harder to find, why not allow it? If they want to plate the room in sheets of red and blue steel to show off, why not? The requirement could further be that every sheet and chest must be visible from sitting atop the spawn meters. So that might allow a bit more variety of configuration, while still making it easy enough to inspect? I don't know, maybe I'm the only guy who cares about this. But I always figure it's better to give more creative freedom where possible.

I would think that a set of mega-build guidelines could fairly easily be come up with that would be roughly equivalent to top tier steel items for tier 1.
The gem stuff I have no idea though as far as time those would take - I've not been playing THAT long. The gem requirements will definitely make the upper tiers hard to obtain, and give value to gems, which is great. But it's just rng grinding really. It doesn't take any skill or knowledge. It won't enhance the server the way a truly mega project would, imho.
But in any case, I realize it'd put a lot on your guys' shoulders, and risk creating hard feelings due to the judgy nature of it. I'd volunteer to be 'that guy', but I'm sure I have nowhere near the clout for that. I do appreciate you guys taking the time to respond to my late-in-the-game posts.

Heptagon_ru
30th December 2015, 12:07
If someone wants to jazz up their portal area with better metals, that are harder to find, why not allow it? If they want to plate the room in sheets of red and blue steel to show off, why not?

Don't underestimate lead sheets, they are not easy to make. I tried lead hatches as decorative gun slots for a castle - since lead melts at low temperature, you can't just place ingots/double ingots/sheets into the forge and forget. You need to keep track on the temp and therefore make them one by one. At least it is as I remember my experience.

Also - when someone wants to show off, they can add anything they desire around the basic structure. The Jiro's core will be easy to check for staff, and the magnificent shiny additions around it can serve as city's wealth display.
I.e. as soon as the purpose of the shiny additions/replacements becomes "to show off", it can be done separately from the teleport core.

grizzle
30th December 2015, 19:00
That's true on the lead sheets, but by the time you're doing all the colored steel stuff, it feels to me like a sideshow, really. Sheets are the easiest thing once you get the formula, because they're used so much. Finding the formula is the hard part, but after that it's not an issue.

And ya, people can do everything however they want surrounding but...I mean praise Jiro and all, but personally I find it not very attractive, to the point it would *detract* from the aesthetic I would want to go with. It's not so much about the setting, as the *detraction* from the setting for me. And I mean, in the end it's minor, I'll roll with whatever. I just wanted to get the suggestion out there, in case it wasn't a big deal to accommodate.

Although now that I think about it...the portals must be entirely separate things from the beacon, like nether portals right, since the one beacon contains all the requirements for all 3 portals? I guess if the portals are separate and can be placed wherever (not necessarily in sight of the beacon), I can just hide the beacon somewhere, although there's still that light shaft. Can the beacon light part be placed somewhere separate from all the other stuff? If the light and portals are all flexible in placement then nevermind my quibbles, the rest can be hidden.

Commiellama2
31st December 2015, 01:45
One pro to lead or platinum sheets is that no sane people will have mined it yet so nobody has a head start on that material and people will trot off to prospect it.

Jiro_89
31st December 2015, 04:43
Although now that I think about it...the portals must be entirely separate things from the beacon, like nether portals right, since the one beacon contains all the requirements for all 3 portals? I guess if the portals are separate and can be placed wherever (not necessarily in sight of the beacon), I can just hide the beacon somewhere, although there's still that light shaft. Can the beacon light part be placed somewhere separate from all the other stuff? If the light and portals are all flexible in placement then nevermind my quibbles, the rest can be hidden.

I'd prefer to keep the whole obelisk as one complete setup. The beacon was more of a show off feature along with the iron/gold/diamond blocks and isn't really factored into the obelisk for any other reason since it's admin placed. I could just scrap the whole beacon and fancy block portions since that would require trust on the town's part not to break it and do mischievous things.

And you are correct, the portals can be placed away from the obelisk structure. Currently I'm considering a requirement of the beacon being placed within the main town area plots (non outpost), and the portals being placed no further than 3 plots from the town's home plots.

Also, if you have design ideas that incorporate everything I'd like in the obelisk feel free to show them. None of this will be implemented until the new server is ready for use so we have a lot of time to improve.

grizzle
31st December 2015, 20:00
I know for a fact that at least one person will roll into HC with their lead sheets made. I think we all know who :-) I'd guess more than that by the time the move actually happens. 32 sheets is just a single four vessels of regular ore. But it's fine, as long as portals can be elsewhere, I'll happily deal with whatever.

Will non-town members be able to use the portals if they're within the town's area? Or do they have to be outside a claim for outsiders to use them? I think everyone would definitely love the showoff blocks. But honestly if we stick with lead and gold sheets, why not just allow them to also be kept in a chest with the other stuff, if desired? That's even more secure, as they can be locketted in. Not that there's much else to do with lead. Six chests and two anvils, easy to hide, beacon with extra blocks can be placed wherever? I do like the beacon. The shaft of light is a nice extra bit of prestige, plus a good guide. I mean I can hide the whole obelisk too, it's just easier to hide six chests and two anvils. I don't really have a design for an obelisk in mind per se. But I'd guess I'd go for a larger more open area, with plated walls and/or ceilings. It'll really depend on how my town design is. I'm not even 100% sure I'll start my own HC town honestly. But assuming I do, I think my personal preference at this point goes like this:

1 everything in chests (except anvils) beacon and prestige blocks, and portals, can be placed elsewhere.
2 Obelisk as shown, except that beacon, prestige, and portals can be elsewhere.
3 obelisk as shown, portals elsewhere.

As long as the obelisk is allowed to be hidden out of sight of the portals, I'll probably be a pretty happy camper.

TheRealPoker
1st January 2016, 17:14
Is the portal destination fixed forever or are there circumstances in which it can be relocated?

LarsonPacific
2nd January 2016, 00:11
Given the insanely high cost of the obelisk and tiers, may we make it two one way portals per tier, or make the one bidirectional?

grizzle
21st January 2016, 18:49
Having found a kimberlite deposit on current HC and left with 3 exquisite diamonds, I'm wondering if maybe the diamond portal should come before the other gem one? It seems much more attainable, given I think I only have 4 other exquisite gems. though maybe I was just lucky with the diamonds. Or maybe make it more flexible, whichever the player achieves first - exquisite diamond, or the other exquisite group? Or maybe the second portal is 6 different exquisite gems, while third is six different exquisite gems plus an exquisite diamond? Just a thought, as there's going to be several exquisite diamonds on the ark (not just mine), but no complete exquisite groups afaik.

Jiro_89
31st January 2016, 22:42
A recent thread has reminded me of the reason I created the Hard Core play style in HappyDiggers. The original point for HC was that it would not have any teleporting to make the game more realistic and add a level of difficulty. Adding in a teleporter, even if limited and expensive, goes against the whole point of HC. If monotonous walking and boating are that big of a deal people can play on the regular server. The HC server has been up for around a year now and people have been thriving in it the entire time.

latyper
1st April 2016, 01:24
A recent thread has reminded me of the reason I created the Hard Core play style in HappyDiggers. The original point for HC was that it would not have any teleporting to make the game more realistic and add a level of difficulty. Adding in a teleporter, even if limited and expensive, goes against the whole point of HC. If monotonous walking and boating are that big of a deal people can play on the regular server. The HC server has been up for around a year now and people have been thriving in it the entire time.

So are TFCHC teleportation monuments still a thing?