It is currently Wed 14 Nov, 2018 - 2:14 am

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 16 posts ] 

Server
Poll ended at Thu 04 Dec, 2014 - 2:40 pm
Minecraft 1.8 Vanilla 64%  64%  [ 7 ]
Feed The Beast 1.7.10 DW20 36%  36%  [ 4 ]
Other (write your suggestion as a reply to this post) 0%  0%  [ 0 ]
Total votes : 11
Author Message
PostPosted: Thu 27 Nov, 2014 - 2:40 pm 
Admin
User avatar

Joined: Wed 15 Dec, 2010 - 9:06 am
Posts: 1767
Location: Surrey, England
Due to the recent discussion on the shoutbox, we've been thinking about running a 1.8 vanilla server to try to keep up to date while a version of a bukkit clone is updated and guaranteed to work with the plugins we have.

I come to offer you two options. We can either update to the Mojang's 1.8 Vanilla server. This will come with no plugins, Sops+ will get /op rights (full control over the server), but will not be able to revert or prevent grief outside of the spawn zone, and you will not be able to protect chests.

A second option is running FTB, with the Direwolf20 1.7.10 pack. This pack is the most up to date and looked after. It adds a lot of features and abilities to the game, and it can keep entertainment levels in the community. This server may be able to run some plugins also, so we could add chest protection and so forth. The server will be on the whitelist, and we'll open up the web form some of you may have used in order to access it. Whitelists will need to be manually updated by a Sop+ though before you can access.

If you have any other ideas or suggestions for game servers, choose the Other option and reply below with your suggestion.

Voting will close after a week, and we'll make a decision from there on what to do.


Top
  Offline Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Thu 27 Nov, 2014 - 3:11 pm 
Architect

Joined: Mon 17 Mar, 2014 - 12:27 am
Posts: 15
I don't think FTB is a good idea as not everyone (including me) has the machine to be able to run it. I doubt Stan would either.

So.... 1.8 vanilla until a plugin has been created. 1.8 with the hardmode map :D


Top
  Offline Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Thu 27 Nov, 2014 - 9:42 pm 
Operator
User avatar

Joined: Tue 24 Apr, 2012 - 8:36 pm
Posts: 204
Location: Varlos
I have the same problem, I cant run FTB. Therefore I voted for 1.8 vanilla

_________________
LEADER OF THE MIGHTY CITY OF VARLOS!


Top
  Offline Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Thu 27 Nov, 2014 - 11:07 pm 
Admin
User avatar

Joined: Mon 18 Jul, 2011 - 12:47 pm
Posts: 863
Location: Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
Correct AK. I wouldn't be able to run FTB due to my computer going downhill (It's old and crap) so I'll be voting for vanilla til we can get some plugins. I also vote for a 1.8 hardmode map if/when we get the plugins needed for it.

_________________
Image


Top
  Offline Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Thu 27 Nov, 2014 - 11:37 pm 
Admin
User avatar

Joined: Wed 15 Dec, 2010 - 9:06 am
Posts: 1767
Location: Surrey, England
It's very likely that we'll keep the features of the current 1.7 server (ranks and permissions included) when we update to a plugin version of 1.8, granted that all the features exist and work.


Top
  Offline Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Fri 28 Nov, 2014 - 12:14 am 
Admin
User avatar

Joined: Mon 18 Jul, 2011 - 12:47 pm
Posts: 863
Location: Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
Coolio. Can't wait for the update! (assuming it wins)

_________________
Image


Top
  Offline Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Sat 29 Nov, 2014 - 9:39 pm 
Admin
User avatar

Joined: Thu 12 May, 2011 - 5:54 am
Posts: 604
Location: Over the Rainbow
I'm voting for ftb, there's just so much more to do compared to vanilla. Not sure if I could run it on my old laptop, but I'm building a pretty decent system that will no doubt be able to.

_________________
Image


Top
  Offline Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Sun 30 Nov, 2014 - 5:25 pm 
Admin
User avatar

Joined: Mon 18 Jul, 2011 - 12:47 pm
Posts: 863
Location: Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
I'd love to vote for Hawknet to run FTB but if we give up on vanilla we're basically saying that our users without a decent system shouldn't play with the community, and that's not ok. A lot of our users are kids age 12-16 who most likely can't afford a decent gaming computer and are using their parent's home computer to join us from time to time. If they're not able to run FTB they need a less intense option which would be 1.8 vanilla MC with a couple plugins thrown in. I personally can't run FTB and neither can some of the other Op+ so we'll be throwing away a portion of our moderation team that put work and dedication into being active and helping our community. And people can't just buy a new computer either, that's expensive and I personally work for 11 bucks an hour and pay rent, so I don't have a lot extra and it's safe to assume that other players don't either. So while yes FTB would probably be more fun, we'll need Vanilla MC anyway if we want to keep our (Usually) active players so why not run it vanilla (No plugins) for now and add in what we like later?

_________________
Image


Top
  Offline Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Sun 30 Nov, 2014 - 7:14 pm 
Admin
User avatar

Joined: Wed 15 Dec, 2010 - 9:06 am
Posts: 1767
Location: Surrey, England
We technically have enough RAM to run both an FTB Server and SMP server together, so we can provide for both groups of people who want more with Minecraft, and people who can't run more with Minecraft, but we can't host for three servers. When the "full" release of 1.8 is released, and we can add plugins for it, we can easily host both the 1.8 and FTB servers together, but we can't run 1.7.10, 1.8, and FTB together due to RAM limitations. Hence this vote now, so we can provide for what most of the community wants, and go from there.

In the meantime, if FTB is still wanted, I could run a server instance on my local machine, but it would only be on for as long as I'm on, and as long as I'm playing (I can't run a dedicated server and my own MC on 6GB of RAM, unfortunately).


Top
  Offline Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Sun 30 Nov, 2014 - 7:29 pm 
Admin
User avatar

Joined: Mon 18 Jul, 2011 - 12:47 pm
Posts: 863
Location: Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
Hmmm if that's the case perhaps stick a fork into 1.7.10 since it's not really used frequently (From what I've seen checking the dynmap) and start the other two while adding plugins to 1.8 at a later date?

_________________
Image


Top
  Offline Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Sun 30 Nov, 2014 - 8:58 pm 
Engineer
User avatar

Joined: Thu 08 Sep, 2011 - 11:06 pm
Posts: 93
I've been totally absent for an extensive period of time due to studies, but encouraging a community to congregate in a single map seems like it would be more valuable than hosting two maps in parallel. It's hard not to get invested with a project and stick with a single map, which probably results in community thinning and dissolution if only half of a small group ever visit either map. As everyone is already suggesting, the vanilla server allows the most inclusion and is a good thing to support.


Top
  Offline Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Mon 01 Dec, 2014 - 5:46 am 
Admin
User avatar

Joined: Thu 12 May, 2011 - 5:54 am
Posts: 604
Location: Over the Rainbow
Deaf_Justice wrote:
encouraging a community to congregate in a single map seems like it would be more valuable than hosting two maps in parallel.
Agreed. I can't imagine vanilla keeping my interest for long though, I'll probably stick with watching from dynmap until we get something that supports plugins.

I would still love to see the ftb server return at some point though, and if we put in a little effort with our advertising, we could probably gain at least a few regulars who are only interested in modded servers, and trust me, there are plenty.

_________________
Image


Top
  Offline Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Tue 02 Dec, 2014 - 5:31 pm 
Engineer
User avatar

Joined: Thu 08 Sep, 2011 - 11:06 pm
Posts: 93
I assume there is no way to host it such that the server takes the bulk of the users RAM requirements? My new system could run it without blinking, but it's a work machine, so I wouldn't use it for gaming often. Being able to play from a laptop is a large selling point for me.


Top
  Offline Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Tue 02 Dec, 2014 - 6:38 pm 
Admin
User avatar

Joined: Wed 15 Dec, 2010 - 9:06 am
Posts: 1767
Location: Surrey, England
Clients use RAM to store their inventory, position, action, location and chat history. It also receives all other chat from all other connected clients, controlled by the server, and it also downloads the stream of surrounding chunk data from the server. It communicates with the Minecraft.net skin server to display the correct skin onto any other players within your chunk draw distance, as sent from the server. Additionally, all texture information for all of these chunks need to be loaded into RAM in order for you to see the world around you. The textures are loaded from the disk into RAM, and then accessed from RAM.

The server does all of the above, except for loading texture data and accessing Minecraft skins, however it does this one for every client connected. Fortunately, if all clients are in the same location, memory can be saved by streaming copies of the chunk data to those clients, but for everything else, massive amounts of processing is needed, and then it needs to distribute all of this out one by one to each connected client in order. The server will use around 512MB of RAM per connected client, storing all the information about it, and distributing content to them.

In short, there is no way for servers to process and distribute your RAM requirements. Even if it could, the content would still need to be loaded into your local RAM in order for the processor to access it. The processor can only access things through RAM, because it's extremely quick at doing so.


Top
  Offline Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Wed 03 Dec, 2014 - 10:21 pm 
Engineer
User avatar

Joined: Thu 08 Sep, 2011 - 11:06 pm
Posts: 93
For entertainment's sake, it would be possible to use a sharing program like TeamViewer to enable several portable computers to access the processors of more powerful hardware stored elsewhere. The only thing the player would need is a strong Wi-fi connection, the sharing program, and minimal graphic capability, since they would only be receiving images of the client, and not the client itself. Of course the total RAM required would still be used and become a localized burden, and the lag experienced by each user could become debilitating without a quality connection.

However, under ideal circumstances it could be done, no?

Perhaps in the future, cities will build a massive shared servers with high speed buses to connect every citizen to more computational power than they can possibly use. By paying for time and bandwidth, people could schedule their gaming around peak hours and play remarkably demanding games without investing in a personal machine.

Or perhaps all personal computers could be connected in a giant web and users would sell idle time to others.

[/musings]


Top
  Offline Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Thu 04 Dec, 2014 - 8:08 pm 
Admin
User avatar

Joined: Wed 15 Dec, 2010 - 9:06 am
Posts: 1767
Location: Surrey, England
This system that you mention (cloud gaming) is exactly what XBox One was supposed to do (game is run on their servers, then downloaded to you), and some gaming programs have existed for quite some time, most notably OnLive, the subscription service which can stream game content to any of your devices. I got a chance to use it once (playing GTA IV on a Tegra tablet) as a promo, and it worked quite well.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cloud_gaming#History

Additionally since the poll has ended now, I will look into setting up the 1.8 server and announce that sometime later today.


Top
  Offline Profile Send private message  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 16 posts ] 

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
© 2014 - Hawknet Computing Ltd - Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group