Jed1314

hmm you want some wild unshaven (probably hasn't washed himself in weeks) guy, with a bear's fur on his head... you sick bastard xP

No, no, no ! I only want the bears fur, I can supply the unwashed beardy wildman myself ¬.¬ .. I have a friend .. Who isn't me ... At all ...

anyway, you could use bear furs as an equivalent to leather armor, it would just look a lot more badass xP

I don't actually support it's implementation into the game. If I wanted bearskin armour, I would just re-skin the leather armour to be bear skin

well yes, but then we're held more solidly to our word. In programming, it's better if you leave as little evidence as possible about what you promise as features.

Like some kind of promise ninja ?

Yes, Notch and Jeb have made that mistake too many times. If you look at the "upcoming features" section of the minecraft wiki, it practically reads like their "man, I wish I hadn't said that online" list. I would bet 3/4 of those "features" will never be implemented

you guys.. want to kill a bear... and stick it's head on your head?

What can I say ? Without invoking too much of the oft dreaded personal politics, I am definitely not anti fur and to be honest, fancy getting myself one of these:

http://qph.cf.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-b22a857b9a2dc95c50bb9364049f0169

Errr... Did we get banned from posting images ? :S Did I get banned from posting images ? :S :S

I have no opinion at this time.

I won't labor it then, for fear of turning you against the idea simply because you were pestered about it :L

Its about time for thirst and temperature influence and what i mean by that is that if you are in a high temperature area you will lose more thirst than a normal or cold temperature and if you are wearing leather armor it would be bigger if you wear metal armor you get hurt from time to time because of the hot metal and if its cold you start to freeze making movement and all actions slower so you need to have leather armor to keep you warm but metal armor doesnt keep you warm and in cold temperature you lose liquid slower.

This has all been suggested before

And add a way to gather more rock in stone-age some of us want to build castles without picks.

I don't understand the need for this ?

If you want to build a castle legitimately, just get a metal pick. If you just want to build a castle, use creative mode.

Another thing would be an update on fishing you can get larger and smaller fish and upgrade your fishing rod larger fish cook longer but give more health because as we all know the Ocean is one of our main food sources.

P.S. Add bear head hats

I believe fishing is being overhauled, and the bear head hats sound cool and all ... But why ?

just because it's suggested doesn't mean it will be implemented.

that said, Bioxx and I have absolutely no comment on this one way or the other.

Well, I could think of a few arguments for and against this, if you're interested:

For:

Could make SMP combat a lot more interesting, especially attacking other towns

Should add realism (I know this is a non factor for you guys, but it is worth stating nonetheless) if paired with stronger user placed blocks as destroying towns would be more difficult and would require specialized equipment

Might make griefing harder, as specialized equipment would be required to do an effective job

Against:

Would give griefers a tool capable of mass block devastation

Could be abused to destroy landscapes, which would have a negative effect of aesthetic focused servers

Could be argued that it is outside of the mods scope, as it is intended to be a general overhaul, not a combat mod

Ultimately, I would love to see this implemented, but then, I am naturally biased towards it because my vision for my server would be greatly complemented by the addition of features like this. For many people it would have no effect on the gameplay at all as they use TFC as a more challenging building/creative community focused game. It would be interesting to see what some of the more building orientated players would have to say about this

I was planning to run it as a whitelist. I have the same concerns as you guys do though. I worry that as a whitelist, we may not get the numbers for the server to really be enjoyable, BUT, if it is not whitelisted, we will doubtless have issues with griefers :s

What do you guys think ? Is a decent population more important, or security ?

The rules are quite specific to be fair, so it will be easy to eliminate the less intelligent griefers. For example, as unsolicited killing is a bannable offence, so many griefers would probably be easily banned, as they tend to ignore all of the rules on servers.

I never knew that was possible .. Fruit salad trees

Maybe it could also be used to accelerate the growth of trees like hickory, by grafting them onto a pre-existing stump ?

I like, no, love, the idea of siege weapons in game. I do think that the implementation of them would need to be paired with stronger "wall" blocks or something similar though, as right now it would be easier to simply mine through the wall. +1 for the concept though

And they can always refuse the duel, too. That would be fair, so the faction doesn't keep grinding away at him till he finally dies.

The other thing is that factions could send assassins if they really wanted the loner dead, although it would be a strange thing to attack a loner with assassins for a faction :S

Holy crap, man... That's the exact thing I've been trying to find how to say!!! I'm so happy, I could hug you... In fact... *Internet hugs* >.> <.<...

Anyway, that dynamic would add a more competitive edge to town and faction recruitment. Which town or faction gives the best "migrant resettlement package" will get more players to settle there, or allign with them. Jed, you're a genius!

Awesome, hugs ! :L

I wouldn't say genius

We'll see what everyone else thinks, but that seems like a good solution to me

And on the subject of wars against lone players, couldn't that fall under the " duel " category, where the faction could send people to duel the player. It would effectively be the same thing (Basically a mob boss calling a hit on someone or a guild leader offering a bounty on someone) as a war on a player.

That seems like a good solution. That way, it doesn't force the lone players into factions out of fear, merely encourages them

So, I guess we're scrapping the "Lives" idea?

How's this... When you die, the town you're inhabiting, or the faction you are allinged with, will take control of your house and belongings therein, to use for the benifit of the town or alliance. Town leaders or alliance heads can choose to give your new character some or all of your old character's items, as they see fit.

Just an idea... don't know if it'll work in practice

I like that, but it can't be disproportionate. I think when talking about starter bonuses there is a simple solution, let the towns decide. If they want to make people start again from the stone age, let them. But they risk losing "reincarnated" members to more generous factions who may offer them metal tools etc.

I understand why you don't want people starting again from scratch.

Shall we try that and see if it works on the server ? If it doesn't. we will simply change it over to a system that does

no, you can't, so it would have to allow your character to stay logged in while your client disconnected. Your inventory and spawn location would be updated when you log in next.

Would that be in every case or just certain cases. For example, I wouldn't want to leave my character logged on, standing around like a total burk if I went to the gym

Especially not on deathban/permadeath RP servers :L

well, not exactly. tundra often has shrubby grass in it with grazing herds like caribou or musk oxen, but less precisely, it is a bit of a desert., but without the sand and cacti.

Thanks for the correction, I wasn't sure and I'm feeling too lazy today to lift a finger and use google

(My understanding may be wrong)

Is tundra not just the equivalent of a snowy desert ? (aka empty and shit ?)

It would serve as much purpose as the desert biome

I'm with Eternal .. I like the Lament (I wonder why ¬.¬ )

Guys, serious question here. Dragging is all well and good, what happens if they log off mid drag ?

You can't really lock people into the game either because stopping folk from quitting their own game is hardly fair

I like the idea, but I don't think it's very feasible as a game concept. I don't know how many computers would be able to handle it (other than eternal's) so I don't think it's going to happen. Sorry

Maybe mine

Ok guys,

I have recovered from my celebrations and have a few updates:

There will be a teamspeak server, don't worry about that

I have put some of the generally agreed rules up on the OP, as well as listing some of the issues we still have that need resolving.

I am still looking for the best host possible. I will probably get an 80 slot server even if we don't need it, purely because it will improve performance for all of you. Danny has already helped with this, but if any of you find a decent host for a good price, just send me a message. The most important thing is that it is possible to load your own .jar's so we can get a TFC server.

Also, I have decided to name the server "Terra" to reflect 1) The use of TFC and 2) It's aim of reflecting life in the past, here on earth

P.S.

If someone manages to make a trailer for the war features using either of these songs, I will love them forever.

Sorry guys, it is my birthday so I have been away from the pc for some time

I will return tomorrow

I've only been on this forum for about 7 days, and known you for about 5... But I need to agree with Eternal, I love you, man... Still on the fence about the homo...

Agree'd. Dunk is just great

"Good news, everyone! You just read this in my voice!"

Back on the subject of permadieing, to me it's unfair to start from scratch after all the hard work you went through with your previous character. I think we should allow them to fill their hot bar with whatever they want from their previous character, then the rest of thier stuff would be distributed as the town leader sees fit. Again, I point you to classic table tops. New characters are scaled to fit in with the party.

Hmm .. On this I won't be changing my mind, but fear not ! We will put it to a vote and see what everyone else thinks Does that seem like a reasonable solution ?

I will probably put this server up as soon as the agriculture update comes (or in 2 weeks if it comes before then). Which means the earliest date you can expect this has come down from the 21st of September to the 31st of August

Well this could again go back to what I had mentioned before. Specifically a server config option to enable or disable city safety options.

I know you had said you want no city to be "safe." However, what if I have a server where I want it safe? An option to enable city controls or disable them server side lets you set up cities with our without PvP.

And again, it doesn't mean you HAVE to beat anyone who comes into your city. It's an option to imprison an opposing citizen. This happens all the time in real life when people are unjustly imprisoned while in a foreign country. If you enter an opposing city you do so at your own risk. It would also force cities to meet at neutral points to facilitate trade.

You are arguing on an outdated opinion. After talking with Cevkiv, I have come to agree with him.

Expecting me to turn off block protection to play the server as a political, war enabled server is unfair for one simple reason. War isn't the same as griefing. By disabling all block protection, I leave the users possessions vulnerable to pointless and grief motivated destruction.

I am a proponent of Cevkiv's system of block protection. I will not re-quote it, as it has been stated many times in the previous pages, but I advise you take a look.

I want something which is quite a duality. I want every city to be safe, apart from when the time comes for it not to be. I don't want towns getting leveled randomly by individual players, but large organised groups should be able to destroy towns. This goes some way to reflecting how difficult it is to actually rip apart a town.

For another example (and I suspect the basis of Cevkiv's suggestion) check out civcrafts block protection method. To me, it is spot on.

Yes, but it still leaves far too much room for abuse. It's not about needing to beat people who come into your city, it's about being able to do it to people for no reason. I certainly wouldn't be happy allowing it on a server I ran. It may be realistic, but it is not conductive to fun servers. Perhaps it could be a configurable option, but not a mandatory one.

Also, it is really necessary to add a "no pvp" configuration ? If Pvp is banned on the server, just ban/jail people for doing it. No need to code extra things in.

Well here's the thing - mojang code =! notchcode

Jed's implementation may be a bit easier or even harder to salvage. We won't know until Dunk sees it

Hmmm .. True. As a non-programmer, I had presumed that "notch code" was used to refer to all of mojangs code.. I guess we will just have to wait and see

Oh, and it's Jeb, not Jed