Server proximity

[Ronan]

I want the best server proposals to win, the best teams, the best plans, why everyone is voting No is because a proximity clause appears to be something that could be used to exclude servers even if their plans were superior on other merits. To me it's better for proximity to be a dead issue here and now, than for it to potential be used later in events that would stir up drama.

Fair enough, I just think of everything in terms of weights, not absolutes. To me saying "No" is akin to saying a server in Kara-Tur would be equally considered with an otherwise totally equal server right next to your current proposals, even if it didn't have any sort of magic portal leading to and from it.

[Rick7475]

wow 58 people, that's all we have left ...

[Killthorne]

I posted no. I really think we have enough limitations by how well we stick to our guns in roleplaying in travel. I think diversity is grand too.

~Killthorne~

[NESchampion]

wow 58 people, that's all we have left ...

Because as we all know, everyone in ALFA checks the forums on this very day...

[Vixisyn]

Now I don't know if this has ever been considered/suggested/what have you, but here it goes...

Faerun is a High Magic setting. In bustling places like Waterdeep, Calimshan, and Thay, there are absolutely portals that go from one place to another. Why not have it that every Red Wizard Conclave has a gate to Thay, and they charge an arm and a leg to use them? This way, you could have server areas all over, and still have the accessability to get where you want to go.

Alternatively or additionally, The Underdark server can span a HUGE area (Even if that's not literally, but for story purposes). Place enterances to other servers in various locations in the wilds of the Underdark and let the bold and the brave battle their way through to get to other areas of Faerun quicker. You know, a great shortcut with a lot of risk.

Personally, I like the freedom of being able to move about servers, which was one of the original selling points of this project from the very beginning.

We are a brilliant and creative group, and I am sure some sort of compromise could be achieved without ruining the setting, story, etc.

[coach]

NO!

so what this proposal means if passed if i read all of it right is this:

Example: clearly the best server app is SERVER A. it is located in SE Faerun. unanimous approval from the selection team, has all the elements of a great server yada yada yada

the next best server apps are SERVERS B, C, D, E, and F ... all located in Western Faerun

so the starting 5 servers awarded would be B, C, D, E, and F???

A is punished by its location?

makes absolutely no sense and is most assuredly unfair, some teams have spent months in planning now to have to worry about if they are clustered around other servers or not

we've been portalling 1000 miles at a pop for four years now anyways

[coach]

Fair enough, I just think of everything in terms of weights, not absolutes. To me saying "No" is akin to saying a server in Kara-Tur would be equally considered with an otherwise totally equal server right next to your current proposals, even if it didn't have any sort of magic portal leading to and from it.

that is an extreme example

Kara-Tur is not in Faerun and probably won't have in-the-box support for oriental graphics

not sure if we are even considering areas outside of faerun, but in alfa's history so far, we havent

not that i wouldnt mind a nicely built shining south or old empires etc if it's app was one of the best

[Grand Fromage]

not sure if we are even considering areas outside of faerun, but in alfa's history so far, we havent

not that i wouldnt mind a nicely built shining south or old empires etc if it's app was one of the best

Fortunately those areas are part of Faerun. Non-Faerun would be Kara-Tur/Hordelands, Zakhara, and Maztica.

[coach]

right, i guess i'm thinking "heartlands" like the initial Admin

[Ronan]

It was ment to be an extreme example, but take a less extreme one if you want. Three servers, all with exactly the same merit, diversity, etc. Do you choose a pair near each other, or farther from each other? Thats all the poll was about. Nothing about unfairly pwning someone who planned a server who was too far away from everyone else. I don't know where people get this stuff

Its not like the current diversity guidelines can't discriminate against a server which has many other servers of its "type" (say, if we have 4 proposals for urban servers, or underdark servers). Same effect, the merit of a server can, in some cases, not be the sole deciding factor in its selection. I think this has always been a part of the NWN2 guidelines since the beginning. The purpose is really the same, we want the best selection of ALFA servers, not the best individual ones. Whether we decide we want lots of near servers, or far ones, or 1 underdark per every 3 surface, or whatever, the selection of the parts is always compromised somewhat for the design of the whole. It happens to be in this case that most people don't consider distance to be a factor worth considering, but you'd be kidding yourself if you read the NWN2 guidelines and thought only the best individual servers were selected.

Hell, if it was up to me, I wouldn't put a limit on the number of starting servers ALFA approved anyway, and most of this crap would be moot.

So for the people who don't mind having servers any distance away, how would you deal with server outages, and PCs wanting to get validated on an adjacent server? Would you just allow it, regardless of the IC distance? Fortunately with the more stable vault nowdays, its less an issue. I've typically validated people on BG, as long as their home server very distant.

"Do you RP travel?" hmm...that would seem to be the crux of it, wouldn't it?
Myself, my PCs have traveled relatively little. Do I RP it? That question isn't the relevant one...its *how* I RP the travel. Its usually as simple as "I came from X" if someone asks and leave the inconvenient details out. But this isn't really about how I do it, is it? It seems about some unspoken expectation about exactly how travel should be RPd. More than that, there seems an unspoken pessimism that travel between regions that aren't next to each-other can be RPd at all adequately. So why don't we just come out and address this directly instead of mandating proximity to avoid the issue altogether?

Not sure how to address this? Some people adamantly refuse to do anything they think their PC wouldn't do. So if they (as in, the player) want to travel, but the PC wouldn't because the next closest server is farther than the PC is willing to go, they won't. Naturally there are many degrees of this, and some players slide to one extreme or another.

To me its less about adjacent regions in travel, and more about being able to represent an entire geo-politial region. We won't be able to do that in many cases with one server in NWN2 like we can in NWN1. I'm sure you can understand the benifits and drawbacks of having many small isolated servers vs. larger groups which could represent entire areas. The whole drow plot in SD is a great example of this. Things would be a ton nicer there if we had Cormanthor to use, but instead the server just ends a bit into the woods.

[Wild Wombat]

I'm for fewer, more densely populated servers. If PCs can traverse unbuilt areas as if they aren't there (they aren't, you know) then proximity doesn't matter.

But hasn't having gaps lead to problems in ALFA1? If servers are adjacent on the map would the term "server hopping" mean the same thing as it does now? If stepping from one server to another was actually one step for your PC, would people still complain if you did it? (Rhetorical question... you know "they" would.)

[coach]

Three servers, all with exactly the same merit, diversity, etc. Do you choose a pair near each other, or farther from each other?

i am talking about just disregarding a server app just due to its location away from the others, or at the very least, making that 'distant' server app have to stand way out over its peers just to be considered

i dont know if shining south has a proposal but using them for an example, why would they even try to make one, knowing that proximity has them behind the eight-ball before anything has even been looked at

[Killthorne]

And as for server hopping. There is a HUGE difference between travelling to a server and bouncing back and forth and back and forth like thousands of miles ain't no thing but a chicken wing on a string.

Besides, PC's have teleport and word of recall, so distances and server hopping can't even be measured.

~Killthorne~

[Ronan]

i am talking about just disregarding a server app just due to its location away from the others, or at the very least, making that 'distant' server app have to stand way out over its peers just to be considered

i dont know if shining south has a proposal but using them for an example, why would they even try to make one, knowing that proximity has them behind the eight-ball before anything has even been looked at

Well, thats not what this poll was about, but I understand where your coming from. Thats what Inny's idea seemed to be to me as well. It does seem overly harsh. To me a server's location is just another variable which effects how people will play on it, and no variable should be dismissed entirely, but that doesn't mean it should be a significant factor, either. Since we can't really predict which proposal teams will burn out and which will make it to live, I don't know that we could really create an adjacent string of servers if we wanted to.

[Dorn]

we've been portalling 1000 miles at a pop for four years now anyways

Which if you ask me is sh!t and we should stop now that we have a chance.

Hardcore? or harcore where it suites?


(ok, thats me being extremist, but you know what i mean)