TOPIC: Why SSRP?

As it's been repeated a lot on this thread as a "suggestion" (by some in a less respectful way than others) and has already been addressed in the past, I'm just going to say again that our plans do not currently include any of the following:

• An economy reset (this is not going to happen at any point)
• A new server with a fresh database
• Removal of existing items

Resetting the economy is not something that we are able to do for two simple reasons. The first one is that we simply know from experience with Friendly Players that it doesn't work, and is largely based on a nostalgia bias. Even if this were something that could be viable, however, it's not something we can even do to begin with, as people have invested real-life money into ZARP on booster packs in order to obtain money and items.

A new server with a fresh database is also not something we would do firstly for the above reason that we know a fresh database or economy wipe is not something that works, and is largely based in nostalgia bias, however further onto this, due to the way the Garry's Mod server ranking algorithm works, based on our analysis, having more servers within the same gamemode would be detrimental overall without having a strong existing foundation there to begin with, as it would split the playerbase between the servers, and the key form of discovery within Garry's Mod is through the server browser by having a high ranking, one of the leading aspects of which is number of players online.

For the same reason as the second point for why we won't be doing an economy reset, existing items won't be removed from the server. On top of this, the items and content of ZARP are custom-coded and what make ZARP a unique server compared to other drag-and-drop gmodstore servers. That being said, if anyone has suggestions for how any items or weapons could be balanced better in terms of gameplay, we are always open to suggestions on that front.

More importantly, however, is what our plans do entail. One of the key things which seems to be common from people on this thread and from what we've seen in the wider community is related to gangs, gang rivalry and basing. We've spent a lot of time thinking about this and have plans in the Christmas Update and in following updates to make further improvements to the gang system in order to incentivize and encourage more gang wars, rivalries and basing and reduce the risk of one gang crushing every other gang easily. If anyone has any specific suggestions regarding this, do feel free to reach out and let us know or create a suggestion thread.

Feel free to continue giving suggestions and ideas, and if you feel some older suggestions haven't been given due consideration in the past, simply let a Community Team member know and we'll take a look!

TheXnator wrote:
and this is why the server has 8 players at peak

Shae wrote:
Would rather 8 at peak than pleasing ~20 odd people who’ll get bored and drop to 0 let’s be real. A reset is not going to happen, this seems to be a really hard concept for anybody to grasp.

Why not do something more drastic, its stagnent, your little changes serve no purpose to bringing any players to the server. There are new servers which already have lots of players why would they switch to zarp. WOAH A NEW MAP, ok?? that was the biggest thing done in ages and it was something drastically out of proportion with what the community wanted or needed. Must have been the logic "Bigger map means more players" clearly wasnt true.

I get that its not a simple thing to have a seperate db for a new server but it would be one of the best things, if thats not going to happen fair enough. But i dont see any other way of bringing players to the server.

People are scared to say what they really think because of specific LT members will just remove their post or warn/ban them, Dont give me the bs "Create a report" "contact community team" it never changes

Shae wrote:
Hi Shae,

Regarding the map change, a new map was a key thing that many people had been asking for, hence why we made the change, and we have more changes planned for coming updates.

And regarding your last point, if you don't want to create a report or contact a member of the Community Team, could you explain how you expect us to take action or change this? We have processes in place to allow users to report and us to deal with any abuse or misuse of powers, however such things need to be reported in the appropriate manner for us to be able to take action.

Zarp should eventually move away from gmod and include more popular games and invest a little bit to do some advertisements to bring new players because ppl who play gmod may not be interest in x new game..

shmeegle66 wrote: Homeless people should just buy a house

There is so criticism about the new map. If you go back a few years, users actually had a vote in the map change. (Bloc42 and evocity. Which turned out to be a success at the start. Bloc42 just wasnt suitable with the OP guns) It just feels nowadays that the users have little to no saying in future updates. Every decision is been made by the lead team and most of them turn out to be less popular than expected.

rroobbiinn10xx wrote: i mean this is the time to say something but who knows if they would actually consider anything

rroobbiinn10xx wrote:
Bloc42 just wasn't really doable because of the exploits involving the mine that could insta-crash the server. It's just too old at this point, and for it to be brought back it would have to be remade entirely. Evocity honestly had a lot of success on ZARP. I remember even at night it would have 30-50 random new players on at any given time that were mostly American just playing ZARP for the first time.

I see where the community team is coming from by wanting both servers to have the same map for uniformity purposes, but at the same time variety is important too and having 2 different map choices with different basing meta's etc. could be healthy for the servers as a whole.

rroobbiinn10xx wrote: I will say that the Lead Team didn’t pick this new map, we were just asked to help test it, other than maybe Mix3rz, I assume so anyways. The rest of the LT didn’t have a say in what the new map was going to be.

CEO of Business wrote: and wasnt the greatest decision

TheXnator wrote:
then there was no point making this post, lets be honest

CEO of Business wrote: yikes, that doesn't sound right

get rid of jmt ez +20 ppl in the server

rroobbiinn10xx wrote:
Bloc42 didn't work out due to the lagg that the players voting was unaware of.

Guys I don't actually think Chute listens. He's laughing at us as we pour our souls into writing paragraphs. He would have done something long time ago if he actually cared about the longevity of Zarp. 2016 was a major update that he clearly put a lot of love into, but he has been comfortable since.

Oh and btw eco reset doesn't work. Me and Vitx started a darkrp server as an experiment in 2019 that while it was unpolished- mirrored Zarp from 2015 really well with explosives & inventory system and a neat map. Nobody really cared and we got more haters than interest from hard core Zarp believers. Few understand the progressive part I guess when they compared it to Zarp today. Guess what Zarp looked like in 2013? Not very pretty lol.

Aspect wrote: Difference is your server was poorly made

Markus wrote:
You just proved what I stated initially (You clearly didn't even read all of it since you I already acknowledged it being unpolished and only experimental); Zarp is filled with mostly negative people that don't desire change, they just want to see things the way they were. I doubt you could make anything better. We had a working inventory system just to mention one thing. That by itself should take you a year to code (which you probably even can't).

It was unpolished, yes but it had the same foundations as Zarp has. Anyone who's even partially a visionary could see the potential but negative people like yourself only expect top notch from a low budget effort, which is the reason nobody else bothered making old school Zarp.

tldr; Eco reset on Zarp = nostalgia bias. It's nothing that will change the fundamental issues Zarp has, being limited gameplay. I have to agree with Xnator as much as that pains me.

bassboosted oven wrote:
I just want to add that we involved the lead team very early *because* we wanted to make sure the map we found was the right choice. Sure, the final decision was made by the Community Team - but it was based on the reaction of the lead team (which was quite big at the time) as a representation of how the community would react to it. They had a whole week to play around with quite literally every item in the game and were asked to provide feedback. As far as I remember, we didn't have any major negative feedback at the time.