Metazard's Building Recourse.

[Metazard]

Most of the professional builders that build asymmetrically because their build requires it..

[tobiii1004]

Anything dark+light works as well " title="Very Happy">

In terms of wood, if any wood combination is required, I like Birch Planks + Spruce Planks " title="Very Happy"> Or Dark Oak Planks if you wanna venture into 1.7 territory. Also always a fan of iron blocks, they make it look clean, especially when paired with dark blocks, like black wool, obsidian, or even lapis (sometimes).

Circles are my personal favorite shape even though I can't build at all, lol. The complex appearance of a circle gets rid of the whole "simple square" effect.

However, circles and squares together work well sometimes, as long as the square part has sufficient detail.

I like to make a rough sketch of what I want to build before I go and humiliate myself by free-building. So, if you like that, I would highly recommend getting a little sketchbook just to scribble down some ideas and dimensions. It's hard to remember all the dimensions of a build.

That's my two cents, as tiny and inexperienced as it is. xD

[Cori83]

Tobi mentioned circles are nice because they're complex enough that they get rid of the "simple square effect. I'd like to add by saying that with a square or rectangle, you get multiple sides. Which can be decorated individually.

On the topic of viewing three-dimensional objects in two dimensions, yet still comparing circles and squares, looking at the center of a square and walking around it, the shape and size appear to change. With circles, they'll always look like the same shape and size. Does that explanation make any sense to anyone? I don't think so.

[tobiii1004]

Cori83 wrote:Tobi mentioned circles are nice because they're complex enough that they get rid of the "simple square effect. I'd like to add by saying that with a square or rectangle, you get multiple sides. Which can be decorated individually.

On the topic of viewing three-dimensional objects in two dimensions, yet still comparing circles and squares, looking at the center of a square and walking around it, the shape and size appear to change. With circles, they'll always look like the same shape and size. Does that explanation make any sense to anyone? I don't think so.

Yeah, I know what you mean (to a limited extent). I'm just talking structurally, the overall aesthetic appeal of the shape and structure of the build.

[Kalashnikov]

I've been on Minecraft quite a long time, and I've seen a billion types of spawns. Throughout my experiences, I've gathered a few things:

Smaller spawns are liked better. If you can pack together masterful architecture and compactness, your spawn will be, generally, liked. For the gm people it may not matter, but for new people coming on the server, they don't feel like walking 80 meters just to get to the door. Also, this reduces the amount of pointless space you have, which leads to my next point.

Good spawns are efficient. Yeah, you can make a huge frikin awesome castle, but lets be honest, only about three to four rooms will actually be used on a frequent basis. Don't add a bunch of pointless stuff to make things look good, people don't want the feeling of being in a laborynth when they spawn.

Generally the best spawns I've seen have been one main building (one general room) with entrances/exits on all four sides of the center, where you spawn. There's room for boards to have rules/information on, you can have stairs down for a few more rooms, and put more small stuff around the building outside. A one structure build makes things compact, efficient, and if made well, people like them.

Lastly, one thing I thought is important that Meta didn't touch on:
Blocks not to use:
These blocks either make your spawn look dumb and noobish (no matter how homely you may think it looks) or they cause lag. I would definitely not use any of these blocks while making a spawn.

Chests, furnaces, crafting tables, brewing stands, cauldrons, dispenser/droppers, doors, any complex redstone mechanisms, torches, beds, rails, fire, spawners (add much lag to the server and are banned anyway), cake, crops, hoppers, anvils, command blocks, end portals (add substantial framerate and server lag)


Anywho, there are some tips, no matter how much I'm against adding a minigame server. I believe we'll attract the wrong crowd and will lose some of the homely community feel that I'm getting now. Anywho, just my opinion.

[mattjtv]

If you don't like the minigames or creative server, just don't go to them.

[Kalashnikov]

mattjtv wrote:If you don't like the minigames or creative server, just don't go to them.

That's not the problem. The problem is, we'll get a crapton of immature, whiney, and most importantly, hacking children that come to the server. The amount of hackers on minigame servers is insane. Also, I have doubts as to whether Inspi's computer can handle it after the lag following the 1.7 world.

[challenger410]

Kalashnikov wrote:

mattjtv wrote:If you don't like the minigames or creative server, just don't go to them.

That's not the problem. The problem is, we'll get a crapton of immature, whiney, and most importantly, hacking children that come to the server. The amount of hackers on minigame servers is insane. Also, I have doubts as to whether Inspi's computer can handle it after the lag following the 1.7 world.

The lag is not from lack of ram, he has over 32 gigs of it. It's probably something else. not sure what, but is it was the computer not being able to handle 1.7, it wouldn't just lag one world, it would lag them all because of the memory being used.


What it seems like to me is this. We had the temp server. People built on it. We add 1.7 to Original McTopia. None of the world loaded except the spawn chunk, everything else was gone. Inspiron had to go back to a preivious save for the 1.7 world to recover everything that people built on the temp server. It was all new terrain, and it changing made it lag a lot.

This leads me to believe that it has NOTHING to do with the computer, but the world.