Page 1 of 5

Shrinking the module - removing areas

Posted: Tue Jan 10, 2017 4:52 am
by Zanniej
This topic came up before, so I was wondering if we could perhaps get some sort of consensus on the most redundant areas of the server. Places we could do without, in order to make the module smaller, and enhance the stability.

The first that comes to my mind are the two areas of fugue. We could easily lose one, as it's a pretty OOC area.

Anybody else got good ideas of areas that don't really serve enough purpose, so could be removed?

Re: Shrinking the module - removing areas

Posted: Tue Jan 10, 2017 5:23 am
by Steve
Baldur's Gate? :twisted:

EDIT: alright, in all seriousness—maybe sadness as well—if you added up all the BG Areas, then correlated the RP that happens there compared to the RP that happens at the single FAI map, you'd instantly see that Baldur's Gate takes up far too much space for its actual use.

Though I'd love to see that change—and still diligently work towards bringing RP to the Gate—I'm also painfully aware of the truth of the situation: BG the City is boring for Players, and not used enough as backdrop by DMs.

So maybe what is actually needed is some consensus on what Areas need more focus, to become viable (again).

Re: Shrinking the module - removing areas

Posted: Tue Jan 10, 2017 6:40 am
by Hawke
I woudn't kill the land mass... but I could definitely see re-utilization of the space there.

There are huge amounts of areas that just have nothing on them. Let's put some quests there or something to fill that space.

Re: Shrinking the module - removing areas

Posted: Tue Jan 10, 2017 6:46 am
by Zanniej
Hawke wrote:I woudn't kill the land mass... but I could definitely see re-utilization of the space there.

There are huge amounts of areas that just have nothing on them. Let's put some quests there or something to fill that space.
I think it better to remove said spaces. Better to have a few less areas with enough to do. The aim here is also to remove some areas, as the amount of areas are one of the causes for reduced stability of the module ( correct me if I'm wrong there ).

Thus, I'm trying to see what areas people wouldn't miss, so we could perhaps get a bit more stability, allowing everybody to have more fun playing, even when the server is full.

Re: Shrinking the module - removing areas

Posted: Tue Jan 10, 2017 7:10 am
by Kiran
Get rid of the underdark...?

Re: Shrinking the module - removing areas

Posted: Tue Jan 10, 2017 7:14 am
by =Thunderbolt=
Are there how many DM areas in the module these days and are they all truly needed? Said areas are mostly used in events and see little to no use outside of events. You could bring back spesific areas for events if needed and then delete them again. These usually are quite blank areas so the gain might not be that much after all.

Re: Shrinking the module - removing areas

Posted: Tue Jan 10, 2017 7:48 am
by Randall
Personally I kinda liked the fact that the server used to be a road between Baldur's Gate and the lake Weng.

All those new areas added north are confusing to me. But hey, I'm an old person with old habits. :lol:

Re: Shrinking the module - removing areas

Posted: Tue Jan 10, 2017 7:59 am
by Aspect of Sorrow
One of my tinker projects is introducing existing areas to the live server only when requested/used by a player rather than loaded every time. This was something I was able to successfully merge in and out using NWNX2 Resman in NWN1. In NWN2, I don't have the liberty of removing an area from the live server resource pool, but I shouldn't have trouble with it dynamically being added in just before an AT.

-

Posted: Tue Jan 10, 2017 9:01 am
by Atlas
-

Re: Shrinking the module - removing areas

Posted: Tue Jan 10, 2017 9:04 am
by Rhifox
I agree with going with double servers if at all possible.

If not... for redundant areas I can think of is one or both of the road areas between Triel and Uldoon Trail (the ones that have undead peasants and giant snakes wandering around on them). Get rid of at least one, because both areas look exactly the same... bland, flat, empty areas.

Re: Shrinking the module - removing areas

Posted: Tue Jan 10, 2017 9:06 am
by Glowfire
Its exterior areas that are a problem more so than interior ones.

While the Chionthar river/Uldoon expansion was neat, it has some needless areas. Adding them in gave an idea of longer travelling times but it shouldn't come at cost of server stability. If possible, something might be done so they can be kept as a back route past settlement but that might be luxory at this point.

-Take out all Chionathar maps (add the dungeon to the road between BG and FAI).
-Forest of Wyrms.
-Reaching Woods.
-Triel.
-Road between Triel and Soubar (add the ant burrow elsewhere).
-Road between BG and UB (add the witch to the hill of UB. UB will be accessible by ship only just like Roaringshore).
-Sunset Mountains (the area below DH).
-Area before the white dragon (IIRC there's a very small area before the white dragon that has yetis and elementals. Add the white dragon dungeon to the Cloud Peaks).
-Coast South of Candlekeep (all areas accessed through it can be reached through another point).
-Gullykin (Yes, its a town but what value does it add? Move Kossuth's temple to Greypeaks.)


Also wondering if Rockrun is an exterior map? That map is huge, biggest one in-game perhaps?

Re: Shrinking the module - removing areas

Posted: Tue Jan 10, 2017 9:51 am
by Calodan
Double server it. Will donate more. Freshen up areas that are not used and give them dungeons and treasures to go loot. The HIgh Moors comes to mind here. That area is not used hardly ever.

Re: Shrinking the module - removing areas

Posted: Tue Jan 10, 2017 10:48 am
by dedude
Splitting the server means splitting the areas of the module into two separate modules right? Not having two identical instances of the same module?

Re: Shrinking the module - removing areas

Posted: Tue Jan 10, 2017 10:51 am
by Calodan
dedude wrote:Splitting the server means splitting the areas of the module into two separate modules right? Not having two identical instances of the same module?
Exactly

Re: Shrinking the module - removing areas

Posted: Tue Jan 10, 2017 10:53 am
by Ambaryerno
What about using the overland map, and then cut out a lot of the areas that are primarily filler to pad out travel distances? Minor dungeon areas could instead be entered directly from the map.