• 1889 Players on Java
  • us.mineplex.com
  • 10327 Players Online
  • 8438 Players on Bedrock
  • eu.mineplex.com
Attention Internet Explorer Users
To have the best user experience on our site please consider upgrading to Google Chrome or Mozilla Firefox

Map Size - Poll

Discussion in 'Clans' started by Xion, Aug 21, 2019.


Smaller Map Clans Poll!!

  1. Reduce the map size by 33% [to Alpha size] (64x64 chunks)

    20 vote(s)
  2. Keep the current map size (96x96 chunks) (explain why)

    7 vote(s)
  1. Hello Clans Community,

    Here is another poll for you! You may have already seen this poll in the CCD, but we want to gather as many opinions on these topics as we can.
    I encourage everyone to read this document (https://docs.google.com/document/d/1R4RDKzvCXrg6wEQgFw2tfwWvIquyBhbp09wMK_5TVLg/edit) before making your decision.

    We are looking to decrease the map size back to how it was in Alpha, 64 by 64 chunks. This will reduce the current map size by 33%. There are many benefits for this including
    the removal of dead space, reduced travel time, visible borderlands on the map, narrowing the mobility gap between heavity kits and assassin, and more that you can find out by reading the document made by Veans.

    If you chose to keep the current size, please say why you did!
    Posted Aug 21, 2019
    Border, Adrianna, matrixyst and 4 others like this.
  2. I chose the Alpha size. My reason is that currently, most players center around shops and fields. This leaves the majority of the map unused. A smaller map would also make it easier to move around.
    Posted Aug 22, 2019
    _xXMareXx_ and Xion like this.
  3. there is literally no justifiable reason to keep the maps as large as they are. the story told by these 2 pictures is incredible

    Posted Aug 22, 2019
    Meme™, Veans, Xukuri and 2 others like this.
  4. Yes good change I like, also very spicy doc there ((((no bias))))

    On a serious note. To those who voted no on this idea, I strongly suggest you voice your counterarguments. Bringing light to any flaws and drawbacks is valuable, gives us a chance to explain and discuss it out, or perhaps finding alternative solutions while maintaining this change
    Posted Aug 22, 2019
    Meme™ and Xion like this.
  5. Only possible argument against this is it would push people who like to hide out in the far reaches away from the pvp towards the active area, however a counter argument is that they could just play on a less active server.
    Posted Aug 22, 2019
    Yato likes this.
  6. I can sort of see this be a possible issue during the SOTw hype time, but if you look at the photos @matrixyst posted, you will see that a very large portion of the map is completely untouched. Heck, I could've put a dub of legends on the bottom left corner of the map during the most active time, and nobody would've found it.

    The proposed change is to decrease the map size by 33 percent. Currently, hot even half of the map is fully covered in claims, and after this change, we will still have 67% of the current map size.

    Not only this, as you can see in the pictures, the claims revolve around a certain area. This will always be a thing, even when the map size shrinks. If you want to be isolated, simply notice the area and go far away from it. I'm sure there will still be space for the people that want to live far away from action.

    I still encourage anyone here that voted no to voice why they did so.
    OP OP
    OP OP Posted Aug 22, 2019
    Yato and Veans like this.
  7. Not many people play clans so I say smaller map. This would make pvp much easier where as with the current map you have to run around for ages just to be ganked by 3 sins. If the servers fill up just add more clan servers.
    Posted Aug 24, 2019
    Yato likes this.
  8. If you're thinking about changing the map size, would the events would moved in closer? Since borderlands would start sooner, it'd be a 600 or so walk from the beginning of borderlands to the event. Just a thought xd
    Posted Aug 24, 2019
    Yato likes this.
  9. Events would have to be moved inward ~200 blocks to remain roughly the same distance they are now from the edge
    Posted Aug 24, 2019
    Yato and Xion like this.
  10. it would almost be better if you could maybe see them on the map. Now, i know that might be a bit closer than usual but, it would help clans communicate better since they would maybe see what side of the event their clanmates are on without using chat
    Posted Aug 24, 2019
  11. Borderlands on the map with event markers is a planned re-implemented feature with this possible change

    Edit: changed "added" to "re-implemented"
    OP OP
    OP OP Posted Aug 24, 2019,
    Last edited Aug 24, 2019
    Yato likes this.
  12. lol, I just thought borderlands not being on the map was to make going to events harder :)
    I would be very happy to see a marker
    Posted Aug 24, 2019
    Xion likes this.
  13. Amazing idea to keep fights all close! Love it!!
    Posted Aug 26, 2019
    Xion likes this.
  14. I have some rebuttals to some points brought up, and possible concerns you might have.

    1, Good for aspect of travel
    Well, this is simple. Clans is based off of Champions, and there's a reason the large maps never take off in that game-mode either. It's a close-quarters game meant to encourage PvP, not stifle it, which is exactly what a large map entails. Looking for a fight in a war based game shouldn't be your main concern, but it IS in Clans. Ideally, bases should have a 2 chunk buffer from each other so that they aren't crammed, but the most map space is used (also prevents Ranger Towers by keeping the illusion of density but increasing playing field for other classes)

    2, Having crammed bases mean low fps torture and I don’t think new players like that at all
    Well, I don't have to mention that new players are responsible for their own PC specs, but that aside, you are completely correct. However, I feel like this is being blown out of proportion. The size of one hot spot at west or east shops is nowhere near the whole map, players can choose to stay out of it. Or, alternatively, the chunk buffer between bases can be increased to two chunks, and ALSO the map reduced, allowing for MORE available space to be used without cramming, and fixing FPS drops, while keeping our now "medium density" areas. That's the sort of compromise I think would work to satisfy both those.

    3, New players when they look at their environment and what surrounds them it can have an impact on their first look impression of the game, having bases clunked without a good proportion wilderness wouldn’t be appealing. Having to start a new clan right next to someone who’s been there for a longer time with the map already griefed to hell is not appealing. Sadly, this is a reality of the game. There's a very good reason why HCF servers have to reset every two weeks, and this is it. Now, it is not as if the entire map is going to be gone, there will still be (in a perfect world) 4-5 areas with very low base density, i.e resources untapped. Whereas currently they do not get used, with a smaller map, hopefully they WILL get used over time, as players move into those ungriefed areas. This is good. We want this. In fact, them being untouched at EOTW is proof the map is too large.

    4, Natural resources, Natural resources like stone and wood will be heavily reduced. It was already a struggle for the SOTW servers and reducing it is only going to make it worse, which heads back to the map griefing point, all the cobble stone mined will be closer just leading to more massive holes everywhere.(edited)

    Needed to fact check this, and after doing so, neither wood nor stone is a problem. All the maps in-game still have THOUSANDS of trees, and I'd venture to say 30-40 chunks where they are almost completely forest. And under them, completely ore. Now, cobblestone tunnels & holes are a problem that need to be fixed (some sort of underground regeneration replacing air blocks with stone below Y = 50 or something), but those problems CURRENTLY happen and yeah, will still happen in high density areas with a smaller map, but again, you will still have large, but not AS LARGE parts of the map where the stone is mostly untouched, making this irrelevant.

    These are my opinions, feel free to disagree.
    I do, and here we are. I'm talking to myself. My god.

    Hippity hoppity bye,
    - Fallen
    Posted Aug 27, 2019
    Xion and Yato like this.
  15. I would love to have the map smaller because it will be easier to get places necessary and won't be a hassle to get from place to place. Especially if you are trying to run to an event at the opposite side of the map, it will take a while and decreasing the map size will make it much easier. For example, your clanmate is dying at east shops while you are at fields, it would be faster to get to him/her if the map was smaller since it would be more close to each other. Plus, there is no point of having such a huge map if there aren't very much claims in it. I understand some servers have a ton of claims, but I assure you that most likely all the claims will be fit into the map since Clans doesn't get as many players as it used too. As long as there isn't many lakes taking up a big amount of the map, there isn't anything to worry about. I really like this idea!
    Posted Sep 10, 2019 at 10:52 PM
    Meme™, Vraz, Yato and 1 other person like this.

Share This Page