Expedition 2 - <Name Pending>

Announcements of major changes to Salem.

Re: Expedition 2 - <Name Pending>

Postby insiqmeyer » Mon Dec 19, 2016 12:38 am

I think the new server should be rewarding for all player who put their time in. We should have a point system where anyone who give their mats or participate get point equivalently. When the server end you get those point in prov and they can spend it in a point shop for stuff in prov. This helps getting more people to participate and is rewarding even if their base get rekt. Of course, the real winner can still get more reward so he/she feels fair.
insiqmeyer
 
Posts: 221
Joined: Sat Oct 31, 2015 8:48 pm

Re: Expedition 2 - <Name Pending>

Postby Darwoth » Mon Dec 19, 2016 2:39 am

no idea why this thread was even made since it has and will continue to consist of nothing but those who lost the first time around making suggestions for how they can lose less next time.

since it is such a difficult concept to grasp for the "everyone gets a trophy" generation let me explain what "winning" something means, it means you and a number of other people invested effort into an activity and that the individual that performed the best is recognized and rewarded for it while those who did not perform best are given a "better luck next time" pat on the back and invitation to try again.

it does not mean per goodman that there is a half dozen "winners" so him and his easy mode zerg do not have to argue over who wins or not.

it does not mean per kralith that a winner is "limited" to how much he can win or how many contests he can enter to make room for the lesser players to "win" something.

it does not mean per judaism that winning takes on a vague and laughable definition consisting of how many bodies can claim they have "influence"

it does not mean per insiqmeyer and numerous others that you get rewarded for losing.

it does not mean per tampion and numerous others that the contest is dumbed down so that winning is meaningless.

it does not mean the contest is redefined without pvp consumeables so the inept and lazy do not have to worry about them, it does not mean cannons are removed so that the people who seriously began the last expedition with over 60 active players (what a joke) are immune to being hit, it does not mean the map is shrunk so the zergs can locate everyone in a day nor does it mean that it is enlarged so the gimps can hide out the whole server.

it means that there are a small handful of people that did better at said contest and win something for doing so and that there are a whole lot more people that didn't, therefore lost and get nothing.

pretty much every single retard here has made a suggestion that would make the expedition suck more, not less.
Image
User avatar
Darwoth
 
Posts: 8035
Joined: Sun Aug 12, 2012 5:11 pm
Location: Everywhere

Re: Expedition 2 - <Name Pending>

Postby insiqmeyer » Mon Dec 19, 2016 3:32 am

Darwoth wrote:no idea why this thread was even made since it has and will continue to consist of nothing but those who lost the first time around making suggestions for how they can lose less next time.

since it is such a difficult concept to grasp for the "everyone gets a trophy" generation let me explain what "winning" something means, it means you and a number of other people invested effort into an activity and that the individual that performed the best is recognized and rewarded for it while those who did not perform best are given a "better luck next time" pat on the back and invitation to try again.

it does not mean per goodman that there is a half dozen "winners" so him and his easy mode zerg do not have to argue over who wins or not.

it does not mean per kralith that a winner is "limited" to how much he can win or how many contests he can enter to make room for the lesser players to "win" something.

it does not mean per judaism that winning takes on a vague and laughable definition consisting of how many bodies can claim they have "influence"

it does not mean per insiqmeyer and numerous others that you get rewarded for losing.

it does not mean per tampion and numerous others that the contest is dumbed down so that winning is meaningless.

it does not mean the contest is redefined without pvp consumeables so the inept and lazy do not have to worry about them, it does not mean cannons are removed so that the people who seriously began the last expedition with over 60 active players (what a joke) are immune to being hit, it does not mean the map is shrunk so the zergs can locate everyone in a day nor does it mean that it is enlarged so the gimps can hide out the whole server.

it means that there are a small handful of people that did better at said contest and win something for doing so and that there are a whole lot more people that didn't, therefore lost and get nothing.

pretty much every single retard here has made a suggestion that would make the expedition suck more, not less.


well if it is a one person win all kind of server then i suggest that we don't have anything like the ark, because that take too many people who aren't willing to work together to finish. The server should be all one winner take all just like popham 3rd circle witch minus the ark.
insiqmeyer
 
Posts: 221
Joined: Sat Oct 31, 2015 8:48 pm

Re: Expedition 2 - <Name Pending>

Postby Tulgarath » Mon Dec 19, 2016 4:05 am

insiqmeyer wrote:well if it is a one person win all kind of server then i suggest that we don't have anything like the ark, because that take too many people who aren't willing to work together to finish. The server should be all one winner take all just like popham 3rd circle witch minus the ark.


in my opinion, had the ark been available at launch it would have been completed. Many groups had been wiped or left prior to its introduction. The server was quite active prior to the arks introduction

As for the questions...
*How Long should the next one be ideally. Keeping in my the best we will do is 'influence' how quickly someone can end it not directly end it ourselves. The current time frame was fine, it was the community crying and quitting more than the tasks at hand.

*What should the name of it be? Lift your Spirits!

*What should the name of the server be? Rattle-Skull (colonial era drink)

*Who is going to win? A witch or their town would be great. Encourage a bit of teamwork, but really its not required.

*Should it be harder/easier to win? It was not difficult to win. There were several witches in play, they just didn't execute well.

*Should raiding be harder/easier? I personally think that walls beyond SPLIT RAIL should NOT be possible. It keeps the humors lower for raiding, and once the stone went up the server paused while people built their chars back it. It greatly slowed the fun fast pace of server launch and IMO was a major stalling point of the server. Cannons yes, old claims breakable, it kept the goods changing hands and encouraged exploration and possible interaction.

*Should Witchcraft be "Live" when it launches? Yes all winning conditions and prizes should be in at the onset, the PLAYERS should be allowed to decide when the server ends, not predetermined time lines. Would be nice to find out which prize you want to try for before you top a board and find out you would have rather gone for another.

*Should crimes be active? Yes, its still Salem.

*Should the map size be bigger or small than Popham? The same, it was still fairly easy to find people, yet some were able to hide for a while.

Popham was a great server, great idea. Many were just not open to what it had to offer. They placed their expectations on it, and as a result did not enjoy it. Too busy complaining about what they couldnt get on the forums, when people who joined late came out on top. The server lasted as long as it did, because the rewards were great, and no one pushed for an earlier finish. The players apathy made this run so long.
User avatar
Tulgarath
 
Posts: 1051
Joined: Mon Mar 11, 2013 4:58 am

Re: Expedition 2 - <Name Pending>

Postby Goodman12 » Mon Dec 19, 2016 4:33 am

Darwoth wrote:it does not mean per goodman that there is a half dozen "winners" so him and his easy mode zerg do not have to argue over who wins or not.

I speak for myself and pretty much the other members of KKK when I say that the majority of us wouldn't really care who would take the winning spot if we were to win the server.I do not care whether it's 3 people that claims the winning prize or 1 nor do I care about winning the expedition server(especially if it's inactive). I pretty much went there for the PvP, raiding and having fun as a primary goal and winning the server as a secondary goal which was cut short due to the early failing of the expeditions.
On another note:
You have this mindset of "If I'm willing to do it then everyone else should be willing to do it as well" which is clearly wrong in a situation such as this. I'm all in for a hardcore server but not an inactive hardcore server which is why the majority of my suggestions were aimed at solving why I think the expedition failed in the first place and not just making it "easy" for myself.Whatever you say and whatever your opinions are doesn't change the fact that the majority of players are going to quit because of the grind required to make bases and characters on a temporary server where you could die and lose your bases easier. Maybe you're okay with playing on an inactive server to be the "winner" but that's not my play style. Anyway, at the end of the day I'm going to play on the expedition server whether it's harder than Popham, same as Popham or easier than Popham once the time is available for me to do so. I don't expect you to agree with me because that's the kind of person you are...you are always right and everyone else are wrong.
Riolic wrote:The only reason raids still happen is because Goodman is a stubborn *******.
The rest are just vets pk'ing newbs
User avatar
Goodman12
 
Posts: 762
Joined: Fri Jul 04, 2014 10:12 pm

Re: Expedition 2 - <Name Pending>

Postby Darwoth » Mon Dec 19, 2016 4:47 am

capping walls at split rail is a bad idea, it would nullify the cannon arms race and more importantly it only takes about 2 minutes for a 200ish stat character to get through one which would see 90% of the playerbase get rolled long before the first batches of steel were even done and quit again flooding the forum with boo hoo, i never built anything better than stone personally but i quite enjoyed seeing everyone with their brick walls in the providence mindset knowing that a few cannon shots made it retarded to have built that high :lol:


also:

insiqmeyer wrote:
well if it is a one person win all kind of server then i suggest that we don't have anything like the ark, because that take too many people who aren't willing to work together to finish. The server should be all one winner take all just like popham 3rd circle witch minus the ark.


the ark was put in as an afterthought specifically for what you suggested, allowing people to pool effort and reap a reward, they still didn't do it. i personally looted enough board to have built 50% of the ark during the time i played there so it was not by any stretch a difficult task for even a few people working at it to do.



Goodman12 wrote:you are always right and everyone else are wrong.


well, at least you have just been right for the first time ever.

additionally popham was by no means "inactive" until everyone started getting killed off, i killed more people on popham since playing there than i have on providence and a great many of the active forum personas were on popham as their main server. at several points the population was nearly identical. i realize this is the fabrication you and yours continually try to plug, but it is no more true today than it was any other. also if you do not like being called out for suggesting nonsense zerglord suggestions than simply don't suggest them.
Image
User avatar
Darwoth
 
Posts: 8035
Joined: Sun Aug 12, 2012 5:11 pm
Location: Everywhere

Re: Expedition 2 - <Name Pending>

Postby insiqmeyer » Mon Dec 19, 2016 5:13 am

Well then I just hope the new expedition server will get many return player, and also I think it is best to have an enforce end date this time around. That probably will get more people to stay since they know when the deadline is.
insiqmeyer
 
Posts: 221
Joined: Sat Oct 31, 2015 8:48 pm

Re: Expedition 2 - <Name Pending>

Postby Darwoth » Mon Dec 19, 2016 5:15 am

having a forced end date simply pigeon holes the server and makes it so late game power grabs will not happen and that groups who die out midway do not attempt to regroup.

in reality there was very little wrong with popham, the issue is the pacifist playerbase not the server ruleset.

the only glaring issues i see with popham that was detrimental to its popularity are again....

1> witch riddle trail, i correctly speculated before it launched that most pvp types would not want to go into everquest mode to make a witch and that they would in turn start quitting early on without a clear path to victory.

2> statue locations being a pain in the ass to locate, make them hidden early make them public later. this both allows the early explorers to find/claim then but does not make it so that there is one lost statue in the middle of nowhere again.

3> no ocean/coast, less of an issue but still one i think was detrimental to the server as it made certain staples unreasobaly annoying to get + eliminated the congested hotspot that the beach has always been for weeks on a new server.
Image
User avatar
Darwoth
 
Posts: 8035
Joined: Sun Aug 12, 2012 5:11 pm
Location: Everywhere

Re: Expedition 2 - <Name Pending>

Postby Tulgarath » Mon Dec 19, 2016 5:31 am

I appreciate the lore and time involved in making the witch quest, but I would have rather had a few more sunday events on the expedition and a straight forward acquisition of witch craft.
User avatar
Tulgarath
 
Posts: 1051
Joined: Mon Mar 11, 2013 4:58 am

Re: Expedition 2 - <Name Pending>

Postby Dallane » Mon Dec 19, 2016 5:48 am

Darwoth wrote:in reality there was very little wrong with popham, the issue is the pacifist playerbase not the server ruleset.


A vast majority of the salem community falls into this category. No one wants to lose their precious pixels.
Please click this link for a better salem forum experience

TotalyMeow wrote: Claeyt's perspective of Salem and what it's about is very different from the devs and in many cases is completely the opposite of what we believe.
User avatar
Dallane
Moderator
 
Posts: 15195
Joined: Wed Aug 01, 2012 2:00 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Announcements

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 25 guests