Hey guys, we've got a few decisions ahead to make with Minetown. These are decisions that are not taken lightly, and we believe that every user in this community should have a say of opinion on how things go.

As our older veteran players are familiar with from Classic, aging maps tend to cause a few issues for Minecraft servers. Among these issues are a few that are of our concern right now. Agharta is now older than Classic was when it was discontinued, and it's age is starting to show in server performance issues. Along with that, there's a lack of newer terrain generation because Agharta itself is so large and there's no room for us to expand it more without impacting server performance. The size of the map is also the major cause of the load times involved with the online world maps. The solution to fixing these issues with Classic was to bring in a new map, Agharta, which you're currently playing on.

After staff discussion, we've decided to propose the following plan for a new world to you all for your input and opinions on this, as it's a very critical decision. A decision that all community members should have a say in.

New World Proposed Advantages:
1) 10,000 Blocks in Diameter (As opposed to Agharta's roughly 45,000 block diameter) This not only increases the server's performance, but also increases the online world map's performance and gives room for expansion for future terrain gen with new versions. 2) Far smaller spawn, with no "9k" or "18k" warps (Using a rail system instead) The spawn area would be much smaller, allowing regular members to build near spawn, much like Classic. It would also utilize a "SpawnRail" type system for quick transportation outside of spawn. In addition to this, the world gen surrounding spawn would not be 80% uninhabitable ocean. 3) Fresh economy, new features and plugins. At this point we're holding off on introducing more features, etc. until we get community input on the new world idea. Should it be well accepted and greenlighted by senior staff, these ideas and features will be focused on the new server/world.
Should this plan be put into action, we would continue to run Agharta in tandem with the new world for roughly a year, after which it would be phased out and into a museum state, then taken offline and eventually made available for download like Classic. Builds and items would not be transferred to the new world.

Given that we have the Classic to Agharta transition under our belts, we now have a little more experience with world transitioning and can better plan for the future, making things as smooth as possible, while the last one was made without prior experience on such a large issue.

We realize this is a major decision, and as I've stated multiple times, we want your input and opinions on this, so leave your comments below.

Thank you in advance, MT Administration

I feel like 10k in diameter is a bit too big for the starting size, starting off around 7k or 8k would be better in my opinion. Otherwise everything else sounds good.

Additionally, how do yous feel about using the amplified world modifier and upping the server render distance?

The amplified world would be more trouble to traverse, generally being an inconvenience, although we are looking into realistic terrain generation.

Wouldn't an amplified world limit the players that can join? My laptop cant run an amplified world and I'm sure most players wouldn't be able to either. So I don't think an amplified world is a good idea.

Instead of making a fresh economy, you could perhaps apply a tax to players, similarly to the transition from Classic to Agharta. But overall I'm in favor of a new world.

I feel if we go to a new map we should go big so that nothing like east9k happens and we are all very spread out giving more opportunities to expand our land. I also agree with the rail system meaning you will see players more and everyone will be constantly on the move if they need something. last add /back to normal players <object class="emojione" data="https://resources.enjin.com/1489581540/themes/core/images/emojione/svg/1f61b.svg?0" type="image/svg+xml" standby=":p">:p</object>

I'm not for starting fresh, but if so I would say no to anything like amplified that would keep people without brand new pc's from playing.

I oppose the idea of having a smaller world because people would be living a lot closer together . To add , I think many people on the server have built masterpieces or creations and communities and wouldn't like it if they were gone , I think a possible world download could be nice if possible.

The amplified world, while different and new, would definitely limit player's ability to play comfortably so that won't be happening.

On the smaller world, the smaller world would serve us fine for the time being on space, and would be expanded in the future when new versions of Minecraft are released. It's more so "future-proofing" the map so that there will be new terrain and ores/blocks from new versions on the map. The smaller map itself eliminates the crowding around the 9k warps on Agharta, and would make it easier to spread yourself out from one centralized place.

II feel the best way to put this would be a Pro's and Con's list:

Pro: Definitely a fresh experience.

Pro: The plans above could bring people closer together.

Pro: Economy reset would balance the shop program, and be more reliant on mid range shops.

Pro: Reduced server lag

Pro: No broken terrain generation

---

Con: Builds being lost... (but not really) Everyone's current projects would be gone, but yet, just like classic, would still be there, and a world download would be given after quite a long time of it still being up

Con: Lots of history would be unseen (again, not necessarily, as Agharta would still be up for quite a while.)

Overall, I think it's in everyone's best interest for a fresh world, with 1.9 coming out and all, A server dragon fighting experience would be pretty dang cool if you ask me.