/intcraftx/ - New IP: intcraft.eu

tbqh this seems like a good plan

It has quite some variety, and seems like a pretty good time that fits well with the shit that is in minecraft, like armor and shit

>>1729 Making a full size map dedicated to europe would make it so everyone can play their favorite country. Would be ebin to see smaller nations being able to support multiple towns.

If we are just throwing around ideas rn,

I would say to keep the scarcity of iron as it is/was, it fostered some sort of world-wide economy which helps in the quality of the serb imo.

ded thred

omg im so horny for cock ffff

>>1736

ask dave

there is literally nothing wrong with being a horsefucker

>>1727

no 500-800 timeline it creates issues like FUCKING FANTASY SETTING with some people making factions from for example 500 ad, then someone makes faction from 800 ad, both historically doesn't make sense…

are you really that much against RP you can't hold ONE DATE?

I'm for 800

>>1740

>taking ghoul seriously

>>1740

I think having a wide timeline might not be a good idea because ppl can go extremly in the past or extremly towards the future (in 7.0 here the date as 1500s we had nations rping as medieval kingdoms and colonial empires) it would be more reasonable in 500-800 just because there was no drastic change in technology back then.

i sucked two dicks today and i liked it!

>pizzafags

REEEEEEEE NO FUCKING ONE WANTS TO PLAY A SERVER THAT pizza LITERALLY EVERY MONTH AND 10.0 IS THE BEST ITERATION IN A LONG WHILE STOP ASKING FOR pizzaS YOU FUCKING IDIOTS

>>1742

and why not just 800? why not 500? why 500-800 and make it non rp since the very start?

wot i think would be okay:

map: europe + middle east + north africa crop.

time period: 2000 bc.

plugins: towny, whatever else that's needed.

>>1759

>no china

foooook offffff

>>1759

>map: europe + middle east + north africa crop.

No, the current map is more than fine stop trying to improve elements which arleady are very good.

>>1759

>time period: 2000 bc.

Did you think about it? 1000 BC is literally the limit how deep into antiquity we can go without severely restricting gameplay variety. In 2000 BC there were only 5 states existing in the world - Egypt, Minoan, Ur, Indus Valley, Xia. Epic diversity.

>>1764

>In 2000 BC there were only 5 states existing in the world

Yeah, which gives good opportunity for player created states. States that would still be semi RP of course.

also current map is way too small.

>>1766

player created states? is this server historical RP or light fantasy RP?

we need drastical enforcements regarding RP, no more states which didn't exist in the exact time period

also don't make it a timeline - like 500-800, it literally makes the server non RP itself

>>1769

>historical RP

I should clarify; these would have to be historically plausible.

>also don't make it a timeline - like 500-800, it literally makes the server non RP itself

that's sort of why I suggested an early date.

it gives enough leeway for mods not to be super autistic about shit.

>>1771

>I should clarify; these would have to be historically plausible.

"historically plausible"

fake towns and nations will never be historically plausible

then decide if to name the server "quasi-historical" or just "light fantasy"

pretty sad we got to that point where players want to dismiss the very root of /int/craft

>it gives enough leeway for mods not to be super autistic about shit.

n/c

>>1772

wew, i regret mentioning rp tbh.

only mentioned it because I remember mods being super autistic about it.

tbh chiencraft made intcraft not fun.

1.0 was great but after that everything turned slowly to shit.

we should just go back to that.

>>1776

There was a reason 1.0 died too.

800-1k ad

England, Ireland, Frisia, Scandinavia and Franks

1945-1991

Server is going by this meta all the time anyways.

>>1781

>>1779

>800-1k

>1945-1991

whats wrong with you people

why not 800 ad

why not 1000 ad

why 800-1000 and having historically incoherent setting?

>>1783

instead of just posting random numbers, you can pick an era by listing relevant events that happened during history and go from that

>>1782

>Maybe defeated players are given too little time to recover?

recovery or building anything from the start is basically hardcore, norse will just come and say git gud noob X-DDDD :DDDD but they were on X since the start they had the time to slowly gather all necessary things, also not even that, they are here since 3.0 they had time to grow their own community

how other people are supposed to make their own competing factions? of course bronies managed to but they are already established community aswell

look at this, let's say some newfag comes to the server, has 0 social connections, obviously has nothing built up and he wants to build a nice nation potentially relevant in world's politics

not only he has to create a good brand and image of his faction - if he wants to recruit/make diplomacy - like care about good looking base which itself takes fuckton of time

of course he needs to grind as hell aswell, dunno if people realize how much grind it takes to make even 1 fucking set of armor(including making a set of bookshelves etc)

and on top of that there are norse wanting to memeraid everyone into a submission

no one will spend that much effort on this dead server

>>1784

what does this post even mean

>>1766

>the current map is way too small

It's BY FAR too big

And it's the MAIN thing killing the server

Player interaction is being hindr..ed? hindranced? You got me…by the size of the map. Only an intcraft newfag who didn't play the golden age of 1.0 and doesn't know shit of what works and doesn't work for this server would disagree

>>1787

bullshit in 3.0 we had 2x larger map and it was ok

just playercount can't be fucking 6/100

>>1787

I really wish map size was the only problem

I really do

>>1789

map size is fine, the playercount is the problem

>>1789

It's not the only problem but it's a non irrelevant one

>>1788

>be intcraft with a large map

>at first not many care

>days pass, if you are in Europe you see someone maybe once or twice a day

>people get bored of travelling and seeing nothing but their town

>some people leave

>less people = less interaction

>less interaction = less people

>>1794

what a theory…

no, interactions wouldn't exist anyway, what fucking interactions are you talking about?

the most player interactions are happening in the towns/nations themselves, they can't happen if the playercount is so low it can't even support 2,3 large towns

we want to have history simulation here yes? so why make the map even smaller when it's alreadyy pretty small? in italy, japan there will be literally no place to build anything larger than few huts, large towns will be the size of entire irl countries etc… doesn't make any sense RP wise

wars are interactions too, but they simply won't happen if only 2 largest factions(or one faction now…) can afford them

>>1766

Then you're just going back to /int/craft 0.1! That was set in 2000 BC and had 3 admin-created towns: Egypt, Babylon, and Levant. You could choose which town to create.

This was also a complete failure, by the way.

>>1795

Since ever mid 4.0 I've been saying intcraft is not supposed to be a historical RP server, everytime we tried to push for that, the server failed

Intcraft is supposed to be a /int/ community server with a historical flavour

Only my opinion I know, fuck me I guess

>>1797

and how exactly push for historical RP server failed?

yes 2.0 was quite a failure but I think it's more due to inactive administration(ethan_l, auto) and not enough efforts to even advertise the new iteration in the first place

3.0 imo was very succesful and it was quite RP until norsememes happened

>>1798

im not saying that it failed, im saying that we are playing MINECRAFT, with a playerbase from 4CHAN

And you are really trying to make it a historical RP server? It's the wrong concept to start with

>>1800

no it's not the bad concept

the thing is some people need to really think about if they want to play /int/craft(historical RP) or they prefer some other light fantasy server

>>1802

Expecting 4channers to play a historical minecraft server is retarded

>>1804

why… ?

Enforcing a time period sharply limits population, many players would go off looking for an alternative server (which there are plenty of)

>>1782

This.

>>1807

lmao /int/craft is all about enforcing the time period

I dont know what do you want to do, play without time period? everyone just go with whatever faction he wants?

look at the bigger servers and try learn from them why they dont die etc (example: civcraft)

>>1847

>>No activity on this board. I agree having constant threads on /int/ would be better but mods obviously wont allow that so this will have to do as a replacement. Unfortunately no one cares about this and no new players come here

This board can't really bring new players anyway…

But generally I agree with your post lad you are right.

>>1857

I have always liked this conce[t, but I feel it is looked down upon because ">reddit"

>>1860

concept, ree spelling

>>1860

gameplay design has literally nothing to do with reddit

the civcraft itself also seems to be redpilled from communist admin interventionist cancer which most people assume it is expected from reddit servers

there are things that i don't like in civcraft and I don't know how do they relate to the world map we use (i am concerned because most people tend to flock to Europe, and civcraft's procedurally generated vanilla map is neutral in every direction). I will be researching the concept and see what can be applied to /int/craft.

>>1857

the problem with this is that it requires politics.

Thing is, ghoul will just be permapearled, and whoever wins a war will just permapearl the enemy, there is no chance anyone could get free if they are hated by a group who has pearled them.

>>1865

Absolutely, and permapearling is the biggest downside of the whole thing. And yet, somehow, there is no single dominating faction in civcraft and the whole thing is very political with no rules or admin enforcement. I need to understand why.

>>1867

because people who play there know exactly what server they want to play, it's very clear people know what they want to play and they play it, civcraft is pvp focused server and that's all

what is intcraft?

is it historical RP server like we were calling it since 1.0? nope, absolutely not because admins won't even care to remove non appropriate factions

is it pvp server? not at all with all this "war fees" bullshit and especially not with playerbase 3/4 of which DOESN'T WANT ANY WARS

is it building focused server with quasi historical theme? probably that's the closest thing but again even though most of playerbase clearly aren't pvpfags, we hve some who are just bored by the state of the server and meme in the arena out of boredom, also generally building focused server doesn't attract a large playerbase and it's fucking boring atleast for me

>>1782

Every minecraft server has the moment when the playerbase dies off due to boredom. The difference between the successful minecraft servers and us is that our lifespan is 1-2 months while their lifespan is measured in YEARS.

The reason we die off so fast is because we don't have a constant influx of newfags like most successful servers do. The reasons for this is simply that we're picky motherfuckers. We want only /int/ and /vg/ players but we can't reliably attract those players because we keep getting hotpocketed.

This brings me to the conclusion that this cycle of starting versions and dying in 2 months or less will continue in till we start being less picky. For a reliable intake of newfags we need to accept that we'll need to advertise on leddit and put the server up on public server list. Our playerbase has stagnated. Its always the same oldfags that join and play for a few weeks then get bored and leave.

>>2789

I was trying to explain this to people unfortunately int supremacists are too narrow minded

>>1899

this server is still called historical RP server so that's the reason

>>1782

There should be extremely tight CB rules. Land disputes, rebellions, griefing of international lands, and attacking of leaders should be actual CBs. Also, if you purposely go to enemy land, fling shit at their walls to get killed, cry CB, then get your nation involved, it really isn't a great CB.

Chien and Kiri are shit admins. As much as i understand that they want to play themselves with the playerbase, they really have to stay away from joining player made nations. They are clearly Norse/Chinese aligned, because they have a past with them. There are cheated horses with extremely high healths in my stable, at least there is one in my stable. Not possible to get that good of a horse. We just have to stopg etting involved in affairs as an ad hmm in.

War is hell, soldiers know this best if they have been in action. After a war and being decimated, no one wants to rebuild, or have an incentive to rebuild since they are destroyed. Nations that attack a town SHOULD take responsibility, provide aid to the town they attack, and take them into their nation. The town can either stay with them and rebuild and stay in the nation, break off and rebel, or just go nationless and start a guerilla war. The defending towns that btfo usually give up after.

Stop sticking to the /int/ only idea and branch out. Every board can assimilate, so v,vg,his,pol, and r9k can come along with as long as they play by the rules.

There also has to be some type of currency. Taxes to keep the city up, so that rather of making a gorrilion one man towns that end up going dead, you have many big nations/ towns with six people that can sustain itself and keep playing to let its town live on. The tax doesn't have to be too heavy, just have to add it on.

There is way more we can work on too. Nut that's a whole different story.

>>2813

no CB, CB rules allow for 1 man weak towns to exist

we need large communities, we need to force fucking buildfags to join large cities with enough pvpers to protect them

>>2813

but most of this is true

>>2814

but the thing is all the ebin pvpers are in norse memes and they don't really accept newfags.

>>2833

I don't care and no one should care where the pvpers are. It's not the thing you should interfere with.

No nationless towns simulate most realistical scenario - powerful militarily group literally rules on the server and all the other ones either die or get in agreement with them.

Also in my opinion it would just force these cucks to GIT GUD AND GET ENCHANTS, and interact with the rest of the world, not only sitting in their pointless 1 man town and building ugly shit anyway…

>>2839

great respond ghoul

You can say its not the madmins job to interfer, but when everyone leaves after getting memed by a select group of oldfags every iteration don't be surprised. Its one thing if a overbearing huge nation conquered the world and tried to make an actual nation. Norsememes meme a bunch of ppl, shit all over them, then leave. They don't try and colonize new land or expand their empire. Its always the same lads in the same meme facs booling the serb for iron.

>>2842

So what? Let them do whatever they want, they are strong enough to take on the entire world without even thinking about any actual policy? Apparently rest of the world just deserves to die, and the entire server deserves to die, that's who the nature works.

The case with /int/craft and especially the current iteration is the people are just unwilling to play /int/craft. They came here to build their 1 man towns. And then they complain about "memeraiders" when anyone is better than them because of the simple fact they are trying to group up.

Rest of the server is unwilling to do anything with the situation - force them to fucking wake up. They won't do it anyway? So they deserve to die, that's simple. It's not a building server, it's a pvp server.

It's so fucking pathetic I'm really so mad about all of you people. You complain when you got raided lmao. You say "memeraiders". So when the actual raid is not a "memeraid"? When it will be ok to attack you? Never? You fucking came to the wrong server, we want to have a historical RP here, not a buildfag hugbox.

>>1728

>>1729

And where do you plan on getting this map?>>1730

>>4870

sorry that your stuff got shitted up lad. We're pretty autistic about resets and we kind of just do whatever the majority of the regulars want. Hope youll stick around for 11 m8.

>>4872

im fucking hooked