• 0 Players on Java
  • us.mineplex.com
  • 2579 Players Online
  • 2579 Players on Bedrock
  • pe.mineplex.com
Attention Internet Explorer Users
To have the best user experience on our site please consider upgrading to Google Chrome or Mozilla Firefox

In Discussion Player 1 Nano Games Achievement Alteration

Discussion in 'Game Alterations' started by TheScienceSlime, Jan 29, 2020.


Which solution(s) do you like?

  1. Solution 1

    0 vote(s)
  2. Solution 2

    5 vote(s)
  3. Both Solutions Combined

    0 vote(s)
  4. One or the other, doesn't matter which

    1 vote(s)
  5. Neither

    1 vote(s)
  1. Hello,

    I have been playing a lot of Nano Games recently and not only have tried to get this achievement but heard other players talking about this achievement. It seems that the general consensus is that this achievement is too difficult to get due to random factors that influence the game.

    1. Connection - Players with a worse connection can often be disconnected
    2. Dead World - If enough players leave, the server shuts down and you lose your progress towards your achievement
    3. False AFK kicks - Kicks you to hub even if you are playing, sometimes due to lag
    4. GWEN false kicks - Due to lag once again, some games have glitches that also cause this to happen

    While patching these issues would be a good thing in general, I think that there may be an easier solution here. I offer two suggestions and one or both could be implemented to make this achievement less annoying.

    1. Reduce the number of games in a row required to 50 - This would reduce the chance of getting kicked since fewer games are required
    2. Allow a reconnect to server option (like on cake wars) that preserves your game streak. You can rejoin as long as no more than 2 minutes have passed since you played your last Nano Game. Which will allow players who were disconnected to rejoin and continue their progress without much room for an exploit.

    Anyways let me know what you think!
    Posted Jan 29, 2020
  2. For context, @TheScienceSlime is talking about the Player one achievement, which requires you to play 100 nano games in a row.

    This doesn't really solve any of the problems, it just makes the time to get the achievement shorter. So it does solve the problems, but in a not very effective way, and if you added this, it could be unfair to the players who managed to get the achievement, when you had to get 100 games in a row.

    This seems like a lot of work for the developers, and it would take up time we don't have.

    Also, suppose you were kicked from a game of 24 players, bringing the total to 23 players. And while you were trying to re-join, another person joined that game, making the total 24. What would happen if you pressed Rejoin game? This would bring the total up to 25 players.

    But being the 25th player is a reward from the ranks, so implementing this would de-value the ranks we bought in real life. So we need to resolve the issue of re-joining a full game.
    Posted Jan 29, 2020
  3. Hey there!

    I understand that it is quite difficult to achieve the Player one achievement due to all the factors you mentioned. Unfortunately I don't think solution 1 doesn't really resolve the issue. Though these disconnections can happen they are getting more and more rare. The developers are hard at work fixing the dead world error and so hopefully in the future these things won't happen. At the moment, there are still many players who have managed to get this achievement with these complications.

    A reconnect option might be possible but I don't know if we really need it. Once most of the disconnect errors are fixed there really isn't a need for it. The developers are better off working on other projects.

    Just to clarify some things about the total number of players exceeding the limit. It's not an uncommon occurrence. Ranked players can actually join full servers and most games can run normally with a few extra players already.

    Unfortunately, I don't agree to much with the changes as most of these issues will be fixed sometime in the future. -1
    Posted Jan 29, 2020
  4. As annoying as it may be, there really isn't much that can be changed. I totally get your frustration, and I can see people's difficulty from my perspective. Reducing the limit isn't a great compromise in my opinion, as it makes seem a bit too easy? What I'm getting at is that 100 games played isn't easy or hard. It's manageable. 50 is definitely way too low and easy for an achievement. Lots of people did complain because of the dead world issue, and as it seems, there aren't many alternatives without sacrificing a lot. A rejoin command is definitely the best option, but there has to be a way for the achievements to be saved with the progress made so far. For now, I think development should be prioritising the bugs/issues that are needed to be fixed, until something like this is introduced. Maybe if you typed /rewards it saved your progress, and you'd have 1 minute or something to be able to join back? Thanks for your suggestion.
    Posted Jan 29, 2020
  5. All of the reasons you mentioned that someone might get kicked from game are bugs that are currently in the process of or going to be fixed in the near future. That being said, it doesn’t make sense to change the achievement if this issue is going to be fixed. Even temporarily lowering the number then changing it back when the bugs are fixed would create some controversy as some players had it easier than others.

    Additionally, the achievement is hard for a reason: it’s an achievement. Achievements are something that usually take multiple games or sessions to work for and get and with this specific one 100 seems to be the perfect balance between too easy and too hard. In its current state, it definitely is harder to get than it should be. However, it’s a little silly to make decisions off of temporary bugs. As for the Dead world bug which seems to be the most likely reason you’d lose your progress, @Sobki is already trying to figure out the cause so that he can address the issue.

    With the reconnect option, I feel like there are a lot of logistical issues that could potentially be abused. For example, with the Cake Wars command, a message inviting you to rejoin is only sent if you are disconnected from the server, not the lobby. This would account for most of the reasons people get kicked from, however it still wouldn’t cover all of the potential cases. Furthermore, I have a feeling that this feature would inevitably be abused by players for reasons other than to get the achievement. If a game comes up that someone doesn’t want to play and they don’t want to mess up their stats by sitting AFK in it, they might feel inclined to use that button to skip the game entirely.

    Overall, as it is right now there’s not really much we can do. The best thing you can do is just hope for the best and keep trying. You can rest assured that the bugs will be fixed soon and this will no longer be an issue. Thanks for the suggestion though!
    Posted Jan 29, 2020
    xGetRektedx likes this.
  6. A rejoin feature is already present in Bridges and Cake Wars, so this would not take any time at all for the developers, as they'd simply need to paste the code over and perhaps tweak it a bit. Even if they didn't already have the code, a rejoin feature is not something that would take huge lengths of time.

    Saying that being able to potentially rejoin a full lobby in one game after you're kicked for a semi-infrequent bug devalues ranks is a bit of a stretch. It also wouldn't affect the gameplay at all. Every nano game map has enough spawn data-points so that extra players won't break the game. Naturally, the bugs being fixed would be much nicer, but as a solution to this, having a rejoin feature is not at all difficult to implement, nor would it have any negative consequences.

    Being able to skip a game isn't an exploit to the system. People can do that currently, by just leaving the game and rejoining another lobby or once the game is over. It wouldn't let anybody cheat this achievement either, since if they decided to skip it with intent to use the rejoin feature, then obviously that game they skipped wouldn't count to their 100 game total.

    As for OP, I disagree with option 1 as 50 wins changes this achievement from an actual "achievement" to just sitting down and playing some mini-games for an hour or so. Option 2 would be simple to implement and would probably be the most effective solution to this issue whilst the bugs are not yet fixed.
    Posted Jan 29, 2020
    TheScienceSlime and saltyfishhy like this.
  7. I don’t really agree with adding suggestion one. The dead world problem would still be an issue with it. It might make the achievement easier to complete while dead world remains an issue, but it would still pose problems. Also, like mentioned above, 50 games is relatively easy to complete. Especially given how short nano games are. I’d rather have Mineplex focus on patching the glitch or use solution #2.

    I think solution 2 is a pretty good idea, and I can foresee it solving the Player 1 dead world issue, until the bug is actually fixed. Realistically speaking, I don’t foresee it being abused. Nano games are quick, I don’t think people would purposely leave just so they can quickly skip out on a game they don’t like, especially since they’d risk losing their streak. If it’s really that much of an issue, maybe the time could be lowered to one minute or 1.5 minutes since it shouldn’t take that long to re-join.
    Posted Jan 29, 2020
    TheScienceSlime likes this.
  8. I think another solution to this issue is reducing the number of players per lobby. Twenty-four is quite a lot and with the games constantly changing it causes even more lag. My suggestion would be to bring the maximum players per server to around 14-16. I do think the achievement could be brought down to 75, but I feel like 50 is too low.
    Posted Jan 29, 2020
  9. Everything has pretty much been said so I will try to add a little more insight. I had to get Player One twice due to a bug. It basically didn't think you got the achievement when you reached 100 games played, so instead of getting exactly 100, you really needed something like 107 games played. I forget the exact number but it was something like that, so when I left and it reset all my progress the first time, I was pretty annoyed. So like solution 2 says, adding a cake wars/bridges timer to allow you to rejoin would have been extremely nice to have at the time, and still is something that would be nice to have as what would pretty much be a fail safe.
    Just like what 510bike said though, definitely lower the time so the feature couldn't get abused by people trying to skip games.
    Posted Jan 29, 2020
    TheScienceSlime and saltyfishhy like this.
  10. Hey,

    I know playing 100 games in a row may seem like an impossible task, but I feel that's what makes it feel like a true achievement when you do finally get it. Out of all the factors that you've mentioned, I would definitely say that the dead world issue is what has caused my streak to end the most out of all of them, hopefully a fix for the issue is in the works because it is quite a frustrating bug.

    I don't believe the achievement should be lowered to 50 games, as many other people have mentioned, this would be far too easy to get in my opinion and would take away from the challenge of the achievement.

    I quite like the idea of adding a rejoin system to NANO, and believe it would solve some of the complications of disconnections that prevent players from getting the achievement. I do, however, think that the time limit to rejoin should be one minute. This, in my opinion, is plenty of time to rejoin the game and would eliminate any possibility of players exploiting the feature to skip games that they don't like, which people have raised the concern about.
    Posted Jan 29, 2020
    TheScienceSlime likes this.
  11. Hey! Personally, I currently think the 100 games in a row is fine how it is. If this was reduced to 50 people who have already got the achievement would be frustrated because they probably would have been trying for an hour or two to get the achievement and decreasing it would mean that the achievement is easier to get. This would also make it less of an achievement. The "Dead World" may be annoying but that's part of the fun. It makes getting the achievement harder which makes you feel relieved when you do get the achievement. But, I do think the "Dead World" should be fixed and is a big issue.

    However, I like the rejoin system. It would be nice to rejoin NANO especially if I got randomly disconnected or my WiFi turns off (that happens quite often). I don't see many negatives with a rejoin system. The only negative I see is if the player isn't ranked and the game is full so they can't reconnect. Despite all that, I hope that the rejoin system is added in the future.

    Overall, I agree with the rejoin system being added. Also, I don't agree with changing the 100 games in a row to something like 50.
    Posted Jan 29, 2020
    TheScienceSlime likes this.

Share This Page