Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Irisy_

Railway System

Recommended Posts

Hello peeps, Iris here with another idea. first of all I would like to ask if there is a railway system in the server, if there is this post is irrelevant. 

Now my idea:

If iI get whitelisted, I would like to introduce a paid railway system for which you'll pay tickets to travel in. There would also be subscriptions. The railway system would go throughout the whole map (if possible) which will make travelling in the server much easier. I am always open for feedback so dont hesitate on replying to this!

Iris out ~:greetings-waveyellow:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Heyo, Kordon here! We don't have a railway yet. I say yet because I also had ideas of a rail connecting bases that sign up to the nearest station. Two problems though, we already have a nether tunnel system so if someone really wants to get somewhere fast, that's the way to go. And if i actually followed through with it, I would make it free to ride because then less possible riders would use it.

Don't get your hopes up though, I had a place for the main station in mind and I haven't gone over it with Kathi yet Kathi don't hurt me ;-;

Edited by Kordon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On top of the nether paths, as Kordon said, you also can just skip the nether entirely and elytra/firework rocket your way to bases that are relatively close.

If those two options were gone, instead of a railway system I would really love to see everywhere being horse compatible. Clear, three-wide paths with stables at each base and an immersive journey through the natural and terraformed landscape in between bases would be sick nasty.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

if i get a fairly negative response on rails, horse paths will definitely be something i'll do instead

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rails with active red stone leads connected to them can cause some forms of TPS/Frame Drops. 

I like the "Horse Path" idea a lot, I would recommend that you do the horse trails idea first and then see the communities outreach to the build.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A railway system is always a good idea that comes with tons upon tons of issues. First of all it would need to be finished wich is always an issue, especially when building it alone. 

Another problem would be coordinating with everyone who's land the rails go through to make sure that everyone is fine with it and there's not just suddenly a railway line going through someone's backyard. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/3/2019 at 4:21 AM, Kaddaschatzi said:

A railway system is always a good idea that comes with tons upon tons of issues. First of all it would need to be finished wich is always an issue, especially when building it alone. 

Another problem would be coordinating with everyone who's land the rails go through to make sure that everyone is fine with it and there's not just suddenly a railway line going through someone's backyard. 

Simple solution: Nether rails. Makes the difficulty of finishing it much less, and people are far less likely to be building anything that matters to them in the nether. I actually plan on doing this, making a hub at my nether portal location when I begin working on my base. I'll connect it to each willing participants base, as well as directly to a (I am assuming this exists) main nether portal near spawn. This will not only be beneficial for my new location, but hopefully prosperous for your communities as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Before building any additions to our main hub please refer to the hub rules here

We are trying to keep the nether as organised as possible to make sure that everyone can connect their base to the hub. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Kaddaschatzi said:

We are trying to keep the nether as organised as possible to make sure that everyone can connect their base to the hub. 

Have you considered sub-hubs? Kind of like a distributed hub system, localized to clusters of player bases?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, Zinc said:

Have you considered sub-hubs? Kind of like a distributed hub system, localized to clusters of player bases?

But why?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Zinc said:

Have you considered sub-hubs? Kind of like a distributed hub system, localized to clusters of player bases?

The only sub-hub we have allowed so far was a seperate RP hub. In the end it never got built. Other hubs would just make the nether even more unorganised and cluttered than it already is and quite frankly I don't see a real use for it. It's just gonna end with someone having issues connecting their base up to the main hub because there is some sub-hub in the way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

9 hours ago, Kaddaschatzi said:

The only sub-hub we have allowed so far was a seperate RP hub. In the end it never got built. Other hubs would just make the nether even more unorganised and cluttered than it already is and quite frankly I don't see a real use for it. It's just gonna end with someone having issues connecting their base up to the main hub because there is some sub-hub in the way.

 

15 hours ago, Pandeoo said:

But why?

That's the point of the sub-hubs - you connect to them instead of the main hub, and the sub-hubs themselves are connected to the main hub. Limits number of connections to the main hub while providing a distributed and organized connection system, with the side benefit of being able to theme the sub-hubs to the local player bases that are connected to them. This concept isn't all that new - it's actually used commonly in communications networks and networking infrastructure. Software implementations include standards such as IRC. The reason this method is used is because it plain just works better. Distributed load across multiple systems is a good solution to problems such as this, and has the nice benefit of allowing a lot more player customizability in minecraft just because there is less physical space needed and used.

If you want to make the system even more cohesive and reusable/sustainable you can chain the sub-hubs together in a loop and avoid a central nether hub all together, which allows for even more benefits and a immersive network to be explored by players.

The reason for doing this is simple: Prevention of cluttering and unusability of nether space and hub space, while providing an opportunity to act as a blank canvas for players to demonstrate their creative side. 

Of course it would be a large undertaking to convert a preexisting system and the unfortunate situation is that most players do not tend to clump their base locations often, so there may be a few sub-hubs required, but if players are able to cohesively and properly add their own sub-hubs to the sub-hub loop then the system is infinitely expandable while maintaining effectiveness.

Of course the preferred method of sub-hub connection would be rail systems powered by rail pressure plates as to prevent lag. This also allows for the opportunity to allow the players that are interested (most certainly myself) to build a train network. 

Edited by Zinc

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Zinc said:

 

 

That's the point of the sub-hubs - you connect to them instead of the main hub, and the sub-hubs themselves are connected to the main hub. Limits number of connections to the main hub while providing a distributed and organized connection system, with the side benefit of being able to theme the sub-hubs to the local player bases that are connected to them. This concept isn't all that new - it's actually used commonly in communications networks and networking infrastructure. Software implementations include standards such as IRC. The reason this method is used is because it plain just works better. Distributed load across multiple systems is a good solution to problems such as this, and has the nice benefit of allowing a lot more player customizability in minecraft just because there is less physical space needed and used.

If you want to make the system even more cohesive and reusable/sustainable you can chain the sub-hubs together in a loop and avoid a central nether hub all together, which allows for even more benefits and a immersive network to be explored by players.

The reason for doing this is simple: Prevention of cluttering and unusability of nether space and hub space, while providing an opportunity to act as a blank canvas for players to demonstrate their creative side. 

Of course it would be a large undertaking to convert a preexisting system and the unfortunate situation is that most players do not tend to clump their base locations often, so there may be a few sub-hubs required, but if players are able to cohesively and properly add their own sub-hubs to the sub-hub loop then the system is infinitely expandable while maintaining effectiveness.

Of course the preferred method of sub-hub connection would be rail systems powered by rail pressure plates as to prevent lag. This also allows for the opportunity to allow the players that are interested (most certainly myself) to build a train network. 

This all sounds good on paper but the reality of things is that most players aren't that interested in decorating the nether. The hub is used for convenience and convenience only. Most tunnels we have on the server right now aren't dedcorated at all so I wouldnt count on players building their own sub hubs themselves. It may create less cluttering if executed well but that would require everyone to connect their base to the correct sub hub. We are already running into issues with people not knowing which tunnel spaces to use and thus crossing their tunnels. Sub hubs dont solve this problem they would only increase it.

Additionally we would need to create loads more rules for our nether tunnel system. There's already enough tunnels that break the rules and to be honest I don't think our current approach is too complicated. It would need a lot more moderating than the current hub.

Basically I think the idea is pretty neat but the actual advantages we'd get from implementing it half way through a season are minuscule and the effort it would take to convert it outweights the use of it dramatically.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

×