Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - Bla

Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 »
The Battleground / Re: Battle and Base Planning
« on: 2014 06 24, 00:30:20 »
Please confirm if you accept the dates or propose some different ones. :l

Land Division / Re: Zaelyr [Voting]
« on: 2014 06 23, 21:24:13 »
Yellow since I like sea dungeons after the update you can claim more=]
Currently we're voting for or against the yellow area with the green addition, do you vote yes or no?

Blacraft General / Re: Problem Solving Requests
« on: 2014 06 23, 11:12:26 »
eff 4 unbr 3 diamond pick
eff 5 unbr 3 diamond shovel
eff 4 unbr 3 fortune 3 diamond pick
unbr 3 silk touch iron pick (idk why I enchanted an iron pick but I did from when I was in Wyverncliff and found it)
sharp 5 fire 2 loot 3 unbreak 3 diamond sword (named moose tipper-idk if you can do anything about that....I'll do it myself)
3 stacks iron ore
23 gold ore
10 diamond ore
40 lapis ore
Refunded in chest at (1049 , 65 , -2228).

Land Division / Re: Moltinian Alps [Voting]
« on: 2014 06 23, 00:05:22 »

Land Division / Re: Asovel [Voting]
« on: 2014 06 22, 19:09:21 »
Annexation approved

Blacraft General / Re: Dynmap
« on: 2014 06 21, 23:22:26 »
The Dynmap plans for the Battleground are now completed (except the fact that one zone is missing from it, I'll need Kip to get the coordinates on there).

I've set it to automatically show the zones if you zoom in 2 times, it can be changed based on preferences, or I can disable it entirely. This just seemed most reasonable to me.

The start zone is accidentally colored red below, I have fixed this.

bla can i have a portal thing on dynmap? ****atar coords are -50, -150

Yes, I don't currently know when I'll add it though

Land Division / Re: Dimwood [VOTING]
« on: 2014 06 21, 23:20:34 »
I vote yes. I assume we're voting for the red border since that was the main proposal.

Land Division / Re: Moltinian Alps [Rejected]
« on: 2014 06 21, 21:04:51 »
This proposal has been rejected. You can post if you want to start a poll about it another time.

Land Division / Re: Kålauk-Kareng [Voting]
« on: 2014 06 21, 21:03:28 »
The version without the hat is officially approved.

Land Division / Re: [VOTING] Transderemic
« on: 2014 06 21, 21:02:08 »

Land Division / Re: Dimwood
« on: 2014 06 21, 21:00:45 »
There's this place in World of Warcraft called Duskwood :P

The Battleground / Re: Battle and Base Planning
« on: 2014 06 21, 20:01:22 »
I'll assume The Moose Front still wants to attack at the previously planned time, so ok. I suggest:

Battle for Zone 26: Moose Front attacks Red Front at Friday 27, 22:10 UTC

Battle for Zone 27: Revolutean Front attacks Red Front at Saturday 28, 22:10 UTC


The Battleground / Re: Revolutean Front
« on: 2014 06 21, 19:57:42 »
Light gray?

Land Division / Re: Dimwood
« on: 2014 06 21, 19:56:54 »
Looks cool. I can vote yes to either border.

Land Division / Re: [VOTING] Compliancea
« on: 2014 06 21, 19:55:47 »
Why New Portugal City? In my opinion the name sounds a bit out of place on Blacraft, as we never had a Portugal or Portugal City on there in the first place. :P I'd suggest renaming it.

The region looks fine though. I vote yes.

The Battleground / Re: Battle and Base Planning
« on: 2014 06 20, 21:08:08 »
Ok, I suggest we fight the first battle on Friday 27 at 22:10 UTC, and the second one at 23:10 UTC.

(There's scheduled restart at 22:00 UTC)

Land Division / Re: Zaelyr [Voting]
« on: 2014 06 20, 21:05:13 »
Ok, since you added voting to the topic before and it's now clear what we're voting for, I'll assume we can start voting, so I vote yes. :b

Land Division / Re: Zaelyr
« on: 2014 06 20, 12:51:00 »
We need to define which area we're going to vote for before we start voting.

As Smj said, when 1.8 comes out, we'll probably crop the world, we'll definitely preserve what you've built in, but the orange area might be worth considering cropping. I'd suggest that we just vote for the yellow area and wait with the orange one, so you can decide if you'd prefer it to be cropped or would rather develop it. If you already know you'd rather keep it, I suggest we vote for the union of the yellow and orange areas.

In any case I can vote for either, so just post when you've decided which of the two areas you'd like to start voting for.

I'd also suggest including these three areas in green under the yellow plan, in order to make the borders more simple, if you want that:

The Battleground / Re: Red Front
« on: 2014 06 20, 05:10:54 »
Yes Smj, you can ask to join as a permanent member if you want, but Fiah, Tuto, Matty and many others have fought on the Red Front side in many battles, but sometimes join the opposite side. I, Kip and Naru are the only actual members currently, which means we're loyal to the Red Front in all battles. :P

Front membership is something that you must request, but it's also good to have some users who haven't joined fronts to help even out teams when there are battles.

The Battleground / Re: Red Front
« on: 2014 06 19, 18:30:23 »
People who aren't a member of Red Front don't get permission. :P

Also, I replied to your kippy kipzitating kipzative komments

Blacraft General / Re: World Editing
« on: 2014 06 19, 18:29:15 »
Yes, we'll probably crop when the update happens, I'll consider how when we get closer to the release so we have a better idea of what areas are developed by then.

The Battleground / Re: Red Front
« on: 2014 06 18, 05:02:17 »

The Battleground / Re: Battle and Base Planning
« on: 2014 06 17, 19:15:28 »
I think Kip has time from June 25+.

I have time from June 21+, but on June 23 only UTC evening/night.

The Battleground / Re: Revolutean Front
« on: 2014 06 17, 19:11:37 »
Hmm, currently the white flat was reserved for unclaimed/abandoned zones

The Battleground / Re: more bg ideas
« on: 2014 06 17, 05:51:59 »
I also like the fact that the terrain gets worn down over time, but I hope it won't be simply shrinking down towards bedrock and end up in a fashion like the Nether terrain with ghasts around.
And all those water and lava defenses... I suspect they contribute quite a bit of lag to the battles.

Everything Else / Re: name change
« on: 2014 06 17, 05:48:51 »
Your name already is Darvince, silly.

Land Division / Re: Quontia [Approved]
« on: 2014 06 16, 14:19:09 »
Yes, it's approved because it was a transfer between Lumaea and Quontia, which doesn't need a voting process, only the approval of both regional governments according to the rules. I've merged the thread into Quontia, as every region is intended to have one thread.

The Battleground / Re: MOOse Front
« on: 2014 06 16, 14:12:47 »
I disagree that it would be more fun. With two people you can be coordinated and precise, add more people and it gets more complicated. Take for example the most recent battle where the teams were so confusing that smj and soccer killed each other.
It was Soccer's first battle and Smj had pretty much forgotten the objectives etc. too, plus Smj swapped team and Soccer quit the game a bit before the battle started, so this confusion seems understandable to me. I haven't experienced one other battle where people haven't been aware who was on their teams, not the 3v3 ones either, and with a little briefing before the battle begins, this should easily be avoidable, so I don't think that's a very convincing argument.

We might have some 3v3's with atomic and quontex occasionally, but atomic doesn't want to be in every battle and quontex has scheduling/ping problems. Also I have noticed my ping in particular exponentially increases when more people are on, up to the point where last battle I had 800 ms ping. So both me and yqt agree that 2v2's would be most beneficial. It does not say in any of the rules that we cannot restrict to only 2v2, so either change the rules or accept it.
Is that a challenge lol? ;D Be careful with such rhetoric.
Well, the rules don't say you can dictate it to be 2v2 either
All battles will be 2v2 in MOOse Front.
Technically Red Front could for the sake of argument with the current rules dictate it to be 1v1, because every team has to accept every member. But 1v1 battles would simply be exponentially more boring than 2v2, so I'll be kind enough to avoid that. Pretty much all other battles we've been trying to get as many people as possible to join and that goes in line with the intention of the BG being a place for everyone and for casuals, so I hadn't really imagined this situation, so maybe changing the rules would be worth considering. Anyway, I can see the ping argument, hopefully those could be lowered by upgrading the server.

Sat or Sun works fine I think. I will post in the battle planning when it comes closer to that date.

The Battleground / Re: more bg ideas
« on: 2014 06 16, 11:06:35 »
ok then how will the current bg work when red front takes over the whole thing?
New teams can form by conquering a zone from the Start zone, or by receiving zones as gifts from other teams.

The Battleground / Re: more bg ideas
« on: 2014 06 15, 17:18:03 »
there should be no unlegit reward for completely finishing off the battleground, it should just be "refreshed" if anyone manages to claim the entire thing. like, bases removed, damage repaired, and all zones are without an owner.
There aren't any unlegit rewards currently either. But I agree with Kip, there's no point in punishing anyone who manages to take over the entire BG by simply removing all their progress. The rules still describe how other teams can form and conquer zones.

As for the fist-snowball idea, it doesn't sound that interesting to me, not in the BG, maybe for another pvp region. I don't see a point in making completely new combat rules from scratch, the current ones are plenty of fun even though they can probably be improved.

I think when death means no more participation in the battle, you have a tendency to avoid combat, which makes the battles less intense and exciting.

Land Division / Re: Lumaea [Approved]
« on: 2014 06 15, 17:10:10 »
vote no. there is no discernable shortage of land in lumaea and open land so close to spawntown is rather too valuable to be trivially allocated.
Swonx has already developed a lot of Lumaea, so I think it's fair to give it to him, considering Swonx's region isn't that big.

Swonx, do you have any plans for the area and the rest of Lumaea? What will you use the land for if you annex it?

The Battleground / Re: MOOse Front
« on: 2014 06 15, 10:20:32 »
Welcome to the BG. Please post battle requests here:
I can't on Friday 20 sorry. I can on Saturday or Sunday if you can?

Why should all battles be 2v2? The more people, the more fun. I really think you should open the battles to more people... Demanding all battles to be 2v2 really goes against the 'spirit' of the battleground imo.

The Battleground / Re: more bg ideas
« on: 2014 06 15, 10:18:21 »
Why? :P Sounds unneccesarily complicated, and then we need to announce that moment, I'll need to keep a lot of attention to the clock. Would be simpler to just say during the entire battle.

Land Division / Re: Onyix Transfer
« on: 2014 06 15, 10:16:40 »
Ok, this is approved.

Land Division / Re: Asovel [Approved]
« on: 2014 06 15, 10:14:57 »
I vote yes

Land Division / Re: Lumaean Annexation of Thomasland
« on: 2014 06 15, 10:12:40 »
We can vote for it. The territory is currently considered unclaimed.

I can't vote because of my partial ownership of the region.

Land Division / Re: Transderemic
« on: 2014 06 14, 21:28:02 »
I vote yes.

Throwing this out there... Bmwsu said in chat that Interserver is now actually using DigitalOcean, which has VPS instead of many different instances running on the same server which causes lag.
Their pricing seems comparable to our current server if we look at the RAM, but I don't actually know how much bandwidth we're using or about the other things. It doesn't look like it has a Minecraft server control panel either but has a control panel that's more general for pretty much anything, so it might make it harder to manage the server.
I'd probably stick with the brick upgrade for a year and see how it goes.

Blacraft General / Re: Problem Solving Requests
« on: 2014 06 14, 18:03:04 »
Lag - I was on a ravine ledge, fell off, I look around and see frozen zombies in front of me when suddenly they teleport infront of me and I'm dead.

110 lapis items
diamond sword (sharp 3, fire 2, loot 2, unb 3, knock 2) around 1460 uses
diamond pick (unb 3, eff 5) around (600?) uses- idk it doesn't matter as much
diamond pick (unb 3, fortune 3) at ~1170 uses
~57 torches
~73 baked potatos
basic iron armor (no boots)
This has been put in a chest at (-996 , 68 , 480).

The Battleground / Re: more bg ideas
« on: 2014 06 14, 13:32:29 »
Interesting ideas.

The first one I think should just end when either of the zones is taken over. When you've taken over the enemy zone they're attacking from, I don't think they should continue to attack the other zone from it. Also, on the map, if the two zones swap owners, it's likely they'd become detached from their fronts, and that'd trigger the mechanism saying you lose the zones detached from your front. I think it'd become a bit messy.
However, it's an interesting idea to let two zones try to take each other's flags instead of playing just the roles of attacker and defender. As it is now the attackers don't have much to lose, only the defenders, so that seems more fair. Maybe we should try and see how that works, timed like regular battles.

Progressive battles:
I don't think I'm completely sure about this, but I think that'd be better to have in another war region, having both flags and that would make stuff more complicated and I think the flag concept seems more intuitive and probably more fun.

The Battleground / Re: Battleground Log
« on: 2014 06 13, 22:45:08 »
Battle 12: Red Front (Blanoxium, Mudkipz, Soccerboy, Smjjames) from Zone 38 attacked Zone 41, defended by The Blue Front (Lotzubutt, TheMooCows, Yqt1001). The Blue Front successfully defended the zone.

The Battleground / Re: Battle and Base Planning
« on: 2014 06 13, 19:05:25 »
I propose this attack today at 21:00 UTC or alternatively tomorrow, what do you think, Blotz?

Land Division / Re: Kålauk-Kareng
« on: 2014 06 13, 12:53:49 »
I vote yes.

Land Division / Re: Asovel [Approved]
« on: 2014 06 13, 12:52:46 »
I'd recommend freehand over drawing boxes, anyway, this area correct? You can say if you want to start voting to annex this unclaimed area marked in green.

Land Division / Re: Novascotchara
« on: 2014 06 12, 22:15:13 »
Proposal for Soccerboy's region (Freezeezy, green), where Darvwnse-a gets the cyan part and Novascotchara's border is moved up to the red line.

Atomic and Darvince approve?

Land Division / Re: Asovel [Approved]
« on: 2014 06 12, 21:37:00 »
With natural borders or borders exactly like that?
I'd suggest just claiming all of the unclaimed jungle that's left there, or at least let it be borders following the natural terrain

Land Division / Re: Kålauk-Kareng
« on: 2014 06 12, 21:35:25 »
The voting hasn't started officially yet, do you want to start it?

Land Division / Re: Kålauk-Kareng
« on: 2014 06 11, 22:12:09 »
I think it looks nicest to include the land up to the river but I can vote for either, so you can propose whichever you prefer.

Land Division / Re: Novascotchara
« on: 2014 06 11, 20:30:38 »
Ok, I suggest Darvwnse-a gets the peninsula then, and the rest gets merged into Novascotchara. I might give the southern part to soccerboy since he settled just north of Fykisel.

Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 »