Which servers should we shut down and why?

[RallyReaper]

The arma 3 server probably don't really get any players. I'd say ditching that may be a good idea. Idk about rust.

But I think if you plan on keeping arma 3's server or rusts, you should get someone who know's how it runs. But don't actually own the game or something so there's no chance of it being ruined.

I'm going to put this bluntly, but you clearly have no clue what you're talking about. The ArmA 3 server isn't even released yet so how you have an opinion on that is beyond me. As for the Rust server which is currently being managed by Izzdaer, still gets a few players and it's fairly new to the community. Lastly, to your point about getting someone to run the server but doesn't own the game is the same as having someone run the server with less than 100 hours on the game. They will have no clue what they're doing and how it impacts the players or server. So, I highly recommend you rethink what you just said as it's completely false and irrational.

I'm just saying having someone who knows how to run a server, but won't use things unfairly is important for survival based games. and there'd have to be log checks, and a rule about use of tools. Such as no groups, no favoritism etc.

No one wants a server with bad management.

[BattleAxium]

The arma 3 server probably don't really get any players. I'd say ditching that may be a good idea. Idk about rust.

But I think if you plan on keeping arma 3's server or rusts, you should get someone who know's how it runs. But don't actually own the game or something so there's no chance of it being ruined.

I'm going to put this bluntly, but you clearly have no clue what you're talking about. The ArmA 3 server isn't even released yet so how you have an opinion on that is beyond me. As for the Rust server which is currently being managed by Izzdaer, still gets a few players and it's fairly new to the community. Lastly, to your point about getting someone to run the server but doesn't own the game is the same as having someone run the server with less than 100 hours on the game. They will have no clue what they're doing and how it impacts the players or server. So, I highly recommend you rethink what you just said as it's completely false and irrational.

I'm just saying having someone who knows how to run a server, but won't use things unfairly is important for survival based games. and there'd have to be log checks, and a rule about use of tools. Such as no groups, no favoritism etc.

No one wants a server with bad management.

I know you haven't play Altis Life much, but it's not like DayZ or the ArmA 2 servers we've had in the past. There will be no item spawning, active admining, or whatever on the server I plan to make. The staff team will be decided later down the road but they won't be chosen by favoritism or groups. And, they will not have any additional powers besides kicking unruly players. Essentially, they will be chat moderators who will ensure that the quality of RP on the server is maintained and not like a subpar Wasteland server. As for Rust, there's been lots of issues with admin abuse lately, but according to Towelie the person in question has been given an ultimatum and if it happens again they will be replaced.

[RallyReaper]

The arma 3 server probably don't really get any players. I'd say ditching that may be a good idea. Idk about rust.

But I think if you plan on keeping arma 3's server or rusts, you should get someone who know's how it runs. But don't actually own the game or something so there's no chance of it being ruined.

I'm going to put this bluntly, but you clearly have no clue what you're talking about. The ArmA 3 server isn't even released yet so how you have an opinion on that is beyond me. As for the Rust server which is currently being managed by Izzdaer, still gets a few players and it's fairly new to the community. Lastly, to your point about getting someone to run the server but doesn't own the game is the same as having someone run the server with less than 100 hours on the game. They will have no clue what they're doing and how it impacts the players or server. So, I highly recommend you rethink what you just said as it's completely false and irrational.

I'm just saying having someone who knows how to run a server, but won't use things unfairly is important for survival based games. and there'd have to be log checks, and a rule about use of tools. Such as no groups, no favoritism etc.

No one wants a server with bad management.

I know you haven't play Altis Life much, but it's not like DayZ or the ArmA 2 servers we've had in the past. There will be no item spawning, active admining, or whatever on the server I plan to make. The staff team will be decided later down the road but they won't be chosen by favoritism or groups. And, they will not have any additional powers besides kicking unruly players. Essentially, they will be chat moderators who will ensure that the quality of RP on the server is maintained and not like a subpar Wasteland server. As for Rust, there's been lots of issues with admin abuse already, but according to Towelie the person in question has been given an ultimatum and if it happens again they will be replaced.

No active admining then? Well RIP. And plan to make? Idk if it's set in stone yet. Either way i seriously don't think it'll go anywhere due to past experiences of issues. But yeah, I'd wait to say things til it's set in stone.

[BattleAxium]

The arma 3 server probably don't really get any players. I'd say ditching that may be a good idea. Idk about rust.

But I think if you plan on keeping arma 3's server or rusts, you should get someone who know's how it runs. But don't actually own the game or something so there's no chance of it being ruined.

I'm going to put this bluntly, but you clearly have no clue what you're talking about. The ArmA 3 server isn't even released yet so how you have an opinion on that is beyond me. As for the Rust server which is currently being managed by Izzdaer, still gets a few players and it's fairly new to the community. Lastly, to your point about getting someone to run the server but doesn't own the game is the same as having someone run the server with less than 100 hours on the game. They will have no clue what they're doing and how it impacts the players or server. So, I highly recommend you rethink what you just said as it's completely false and irrational.

I'm just saying having someone who knows how to run a server, but won't use things unfairly is important for survival based games. and there'd have to be log checks, and a rule about use of tools. Such as no groups, no favoritism etc.

No one wants a server with bad management.

I know you haven't play Altis Life much, but it's not like DayZ or the ArmA 2 servers we've had in the past. There will be no item spawning, active admining, or whatever on the server I plan to make. The staff team will be decided later down the road but they won't be chosen by favoritism or groups. And, they will not have any additional powers besides kicking unruly players. Essentially, they will be chat moderators who will ensure that the quality of RP on the server is maintained and not like a subpar Wasteland server. As for Rust, there's been lots of issues with admin abuse already, but according to Towelie the person in question has been given an ultimatum and if it happens again they will be replaced.

No active admining then? Well RIP. And plan to make? Idk if it's set in stone yet. Either way i seriously don't think it'll go anywhere due to past experiences of issues. But yeah, I'd wait to say things til it's set in stone.

I say no 'active admining' loosely since I've had poor experiences on servers where admins choose to use/abuse their powers to influence RP. And, I can tell you firsthand that it sucks. Of course, Admins will be able to spectate players through RCon and report anything necessary. But, I'm trying to keep away from the whole let's ban first, and ask questions later mentality.

At any rate, you're entitled to your opinion that the server won't go anywhere but you're still more than welcome to play once it's released.

[RallyReaper]

The arma 3 server probably don't really get any players. I'd say ditching that may be a good idea. Idk about rust.

But I think if you plan on keeping arma 3's server or rusts, you should get someone who know's how it runs. But don't actually own the game or something so there's no chance of it being ruined.

I'm going to put this bluntly, but you clearly have no clue what you're talking about. The ArmA 3 server isn't even released yet so how you have an opinion on that is beyond me. As for the Rust server which is currently being managed by Izzdaer, still gets a few players and it's fairly new to the community. Lastly, to your point about getting someone to run the server but doesn't own the game is the same as having someone run the server with less than 100 hours on the game. They will have no clue what they're doing and how it impacts the players or server. So, I highly recommend you rethink what you just said as it's completely false and irrational.

I'm just saying having someone who knows how to run a server, but won't use things unfairly is important for survival based games. and there'd have to be log checks, and a rule about use of tools. Such as no groups, no favoritism etc.

No one wants a server with bad management.

I know you haven't play Altis Life much, but it's not like DayZ or the ArmA 2 servers we've had in the past. There will be no item spawning, active admining, or whatever on the server I plan to make. The staff team will be decided later down the road but they won't be chosen by favoritism or groups. And, they will not have any additional powers besides kicking unruly players. Essentially, they will be chat moderators who will ensure that the quality of RP on the server is maintained and not like a subpar Wasteland server. As for Rust, there's been lots of issues with admin abuse already, but according to Towelie the person in question has been given an ultimatum and if it happens again they will be replaced.

No active admining then? Well RIP. And plan to make? Idk if it's set in stone yet. Either way i seriously don't think it'll go anywhere due to past experiences of issues. But yeah, I'd wait to say things til it's set in stone.

I say no 'active admining' loosely since I've had poor experiences on servers where admins choose to use/abuse their powers to influence RP. And, I can tell you firsthand that it sucks. Of course, Admins will be able to spectate players through RCon and report anything necessary. But, I'm trying to keep away from the whole let's ban first, and ask questions later mentality.

At any rate, you're entitled to your opinion that the server won't go anywhere but you're still more than welcome to play once it's released.

Once again, set in stone. Secondly, I like that i got invited but eh i'm good. And as for the "poor experiences on servers where admins choose to use/abuse their powers to influence RP. And, I can tell you firsthand that it sucks." I can agree. I've experienced enough of it. As for spectating that's expected. and the ban first thing i have never seen that happen. EVER on here.

[IPwnCreeps]

-snip-

If you've never seen it happen, then what Battle is suggesting will ensure that it will stay that way. I really don't think you understand what "active admining" means or even what Battle is capable of doing for the server. Active admining basically means if someone who has the ability to kick or ban gets RDM'd, fail RP'd, etc, can't just ban on the spot. This prevents clouded judgement from emotions.

Also, your suggestion to have someone in charge that doesn't even own the game is absolutely ridiculous. They wouldn't make any logical decisions and the server would be absolutely shit.

[Towelie]

This is a cancelled project we're talking about.
No matter how bad it turns out it's still better than not happening at all. So I'm gonna give this a chance

[RallyReaper]

This is a cancelled project we're talking about.
No matter how bad it turns out it's still better than not happening at all. So I'm gonna give this a chance

Alright.

[blalp]

About Lost...

We're shutting it down because nobody wants to take care of it and leaving it abandoned makes us look bad

I agree that leaving it abandoned makes SFT look bad, but on the other hand, I would love to take care of it. I have detected most of the problems and thought of some possible solutions.

[Towelie]

About Lost...

We're shutting it down because nobody wants to take care of it and leaving it abandoned makes us look bad

I agree that leaving it abandoned makes SFT look bad, but on the other hand, I would love to take care of it. I have detected most of the problems and thought of some possible solutions.

Make a list we'll talk and so on

[TheStarNomad✯]

For the people saying we should remove Altis Life: It hasn't even been released or even given a proper chance in this community. Not only that, but removing all of the Minecraft servers suggested here won't really change the cost per month since most of them are run on the same box.

But, in order to focus on the more popular Minecraft servers and other gameservers in general. These servers should be removed.



Reason: I've never seen any of them reach their max slots and probably never will.

I like playing wildwest though I haven't been on it as much recently, and I do like creative too, plus I'd expect you'd make @Dreamξηder ღ cry if you took away creative

I understand what you mean, but removing Creative would be like when Factions was removed, people would stop playing. Creative has never been super popular, but sometimes it goes up to 10 people. It's a place people can go to escape irl, and a home for those who can't run modpacks and find survival boring. Wouldn't exactly be a good idea to remove it.

[RallyReaper]

I wish that america was great again

[ceddy24]

In my opinion, lost islands could actually stay. I mean, of course there are many problems, but doesn't everything have a problem in it, and plently of people still play on this server too. The last thing I would like to add, that I'd hate it, when such a server, where I have a special place in my heart for would be gone. I really love Lost Islands.

[Terror134]

Mineqwest: If I could, I'd take back my donation I made and put it towards Survival which is a more deserving server. It's a dead server, and I doubt a "big update" will change much. Even if an update made it active again, it wouldn't remain active for long. It has stolen builds which can ruin SFT's image and I literally have no idea where I'm going and could not find where the hell to go so I just gave up.

Wild West: I haven't really played here much to give an honest opinion, but it seems to be currently as dead as Qwest.

Parkour and Hunger Games: Can be moved into World 3. Parkour can use command blocks, which I'd happily help Green_Giant with if allowed. Hunger Games I understand would either need a shit ton more command blocks than Parkour or more plugins so it'd probably have to be a staff-ran event.

Atlis Life: Would love to see Battle given a chance at taking care of it.

Lost Islands: I tried it but couldn't get into it. Haven't played it enough to give an honest opinion.

[DeltaCosmic]

With finals and such, I would wait till The whole player-base returns, Lost islands gets donations, players and votes, Not sure fully about the others, But give lost time and fixing some issues, it should return back to normal and should be able to hold itself.

[Dpa1991]

In my opinion, lost islands could actually stay. I mean, of course there are many problems, but doesn't everything have a problem in it, and plently of people still play on this server too. The last thing I would like to add, that I'd hate it, when such a server, where I have a special place in my heart for would be gone. I really love Lost Islands.

Lost Islands is our most problematic server. I can actually say without a doubt, lost has more issues than all the other servers put together.

By problematic I mean it always crashes And needs something.

[blalp]

I think that if we fix the root of the problems, the issues should lessen significantly.

[TheStarNomad✯]

In my opinion, lost islands could actually stay. I mean, of course there are many problems, but doesn't everything have a problem in it, and plently of people still play on this server too. The last thing I would like to add, that I'd hate it, when such a server, where I have a special place in my heart for would be gone. I really love Lost Islands.

Lost Islands is our most problematic server. I can actually say without a doubt, lost has more issues than all the other servers put together.

By problematic I mean it always crashes And needs something.

Well I mean B-Team crashes too, has extreme lag sometimes and a few items are glitchy; but that's normal for modpacks. I've never played Lost Islands before, but if it's a less played server that requires more care than it benefits for us, then I'd say shut it down.

[Lucy_23x]

Wild West: I haven't really played here much to give an honest opinion, but it seems to be currently as dead as Qwest.

I saw a fairly good number of people on Wild West the other day, including a good balance of staff and players. If this is given "careful nurturing" then maybe this could improve the community on Wild West.
Another thing, this problem is probably already pointed out but, there is sometimes extreme lag/long lasting lag spikes on Wild West, and for some people it takes a while to log in and I think those factors put people off. I asked someone to come to Wild West with me (cough @Dreamξηder ღ cough cough meanie) and they said it took too long to log in and they couldn't be bothered to wait that long.

[SuperJK]

Remove parkour it's too boring but if SFT RBX would be popular and HG is also very not used very much so i think to remove both

1. Don't advertise. -I didn't RBX is a game

2. A lot of people play on Parkour. <-- Lel most of the Parkour is zero I have joined it alot of times and yes not much players on Parkour -SuperJK

3. Just because you don't like a server doesn't mean it has to shut down. <-- I DIDN'T say I didn't like a server SuperJK

Roblox isn't a server

[SuperJK]

I have been on parkour recently, with @Dreamξηder ღ @MasterX70 @MightyMinerMines and some others and we do have quite a lot of fun, I would be sad to see the parkour server go because on there it is just with the people playing it too so you're all in it together. Moving it to survival may be a good option but sometimes people to there, or to creative, not just to do the things the server offers, but to also get away from the larger community of survival, one being myself.
I don't think people would appreciate others raging about falling to their deaths on parkour as they do on the parkour server, as well as the fact on survival there is the possibility you can die and lose your stuff and all that.
I never see anyone on hg though when factions was up people did used to go on there if there was some type of fight on there. But that's not now.
I rarely see anyone on qwest or wildwest, though sometimes I do. It's disappointing how everyone was excited for it, but then barely anyone really plays on it now. Kinda sucks.

Actually that is a good Idea

[Lucy_23x]

I have been on parkour recently, with @Dreamξηder ღ @MasterX70 @MightyMinerMines and some others and we do have quite a lot of fun, I would be sad to see the parkour server go because on there it is just with the people playing it too so you're all in it together. Moving it to survival may be a good option but sometimes people to there, or to creative, not just to do the things the server offers, but to also get away from the larger community of survival, one being myself.
I don't think people would appreciate others raging about falling to their deaths on parkour as they do on the parkour server, as well as the fact on survival there is the possibility you can die and lose your stuff and all that.
I never see anyone on hg though when factions was up people did used to go on there if there was some type of fight on there. But that's not now.
I rarely see anyone on qwest or wildwest, though sometimes I do. It's disappointing how everyone was excited for it, but then barely anyone really plays on it now. Kinda sucks.

Actually that is a good Idea

Why thank you.

Which part of it? XD

[calfrokrill]

Remove parkour it's too boring but if SFT RBX would be popular and HG is also very not used very much so i think to remove both

1. Don't advertise. -I didn't RBX is a game

2. A lot of people play on Parkour. <-- Lel most of the Parkour is zero I have joined it alot of times and yes not much players on Parkour -SuperJK

3. Just because you don't like a server doesn't mean it has to shut down. <-- I DIDN'T say I didn't like a server SuperJK

Roblox isn't a server

No, but it's another game which people would be driven towards due to its ease of access, turning people away from SFT. And, you said that Parkour is boring, labelling that you don't like it.

[Green_Giant]

Remove parkour it's too boring but if SFT RBX would be popular and HG is also very not used very much so i think to remove both

1. Don't advertise. -I didn't RBX is a game

2. A lot of people play on Parkour. <-- Lel most of the Parkour is zero I have joined it alot of times and yes not much players on Parkour -SuperJK

3. Just because you don't like a server doesn't mean it has to shut down. <-- I DIDN'T say I didn't like a server SuperJK

Roblox isn't a server

No, but it's another game which people would be driven towards due to its ease of access, turning people away from SFT. And, you said that Parkour is boring, labelling that you don't like it.

What. So you're saying we're not allowed to talk about other games? What about all this talk about Altis life, DayZ and other things that SFT doesn't currently have a server on, are we not allowed to talk about that? Are we not allowed to even suggest SFT could have a server for it like SuperJK did?

It's perfectly fine to mention another game.

[Lucy_23x]

Remove parkour it's too boring but if SFT RBX would be popular and HG is also very not used very much so i think to remove both

1. Don't advertise. -I didn't RBX is a game

2. A lot of people play on Parkour. <-- Lel most of the Parkour is zero I have joined it alot of times and yes not much players on Parkour -SuperJK

3. Just because you don't like a server doesn't mean it has to shut down. <-- I DIDN'T say I didn't like a server SuperJK

Roblox isn't a server

No, but it's another game which people would be driven towards due to its ease of access, turning people away from SFT. And, you said that Parkour is boring, labelling that you don't like it.

What. So you're saying we're not allowed to talk about other games? What about all this talk about Altis life, DayZ and other things that SFT doesn't currently have a server on, are we not allowed to talk about that? Are we not allowed to even suggest SFT could have a server for it like SuperJK did?

It's perfectly fine to mention another game.

Shots fired!!!!!!!