Namalsk

[Roland]

Sumrak, project lead of DayZ has announced release date of Namalsk - 3rd December.

Namalsk is an old ArmA2 map that was very popular in DayZ Mod days and it has now been ported and enhanced to work in new DayZ Standalone engine. Namalsk is an island less than half the size of Chernarus and offers tundra like biome with winter covered peaks, coast, bridges, tunnels and chokepoints. Here is the map of the island, plus the island superimposed over Chernarus, for size reference (ArmA2 versions since I couldn't find the new one).

Spoiler

My suggestion today is to switch to Namalsk map and run it exclusively for the duration of our regular "winter map" rotation (1st December - 1st February) and at the end of January vote and decide whether to keep it or not.

The big issue here will of course be leaving behind all the groups and characters already established in Chernarus and things that are planned lore wise for season 2 in Chernarus. It would be an easier transition if we allow travel of characters and groups to the island, under some lore excuse that made Chernarus became uninhabitable during winter, however that will take some of the uniqueness and originality away from the map.

We could also of course keep Chernarus and simply add Namalsk as a second server side-by-side Chernarus, but I believe it won't gain the traction, playerbase or focus that it deserves from the staff team, especially with current population. So I would prefer for Namalsk to completely replace Chernarus for those 2 months instead. I feel like this would be a great pace changer and allow us to create new unique experiences and stories similarly how Livonia did so over a year ago.

Let me know what you think!

[AndreyQ]

With the amazing 20 people average playing on the server on a map as big as Chernarus, changing it to a smaller map is a good choice. I personally would prefer new groups and characters as bumping into the same old, same old but it's just colder would be lame. I doubt most people will want this tho so, as long as we get a new, smaller map I'm happy.

Edited November 5, 2020 by AndreyQ

[Nyx]

+1 to map change for sure, I think it would be cool.
+1 to new characters, groups for said map.

[Aron73]

YES plz make this happen! I never playd on this map but I have heard a lot of good things about it from fellow streamers who have been apart of the Beta test of this map.

It is a really diffrent map for sure and I have no doubt it will help to improve the puppulation of this server/comunity.

[Burak]

i put +1 both of them , but i made second +1 about characters groups wrong, can you please mark me as -1 to characters and groups , we need new ones for this new map.

[Stagsview]

Im going to be honest with ya all here.

Sure it puts stories on hold that are being progressed/written. But honestly id rather have a booming playerbase/map rather than a 20 pop server. Been nagging every day about my concerna for the pop for a while.

 

Im pro namalsk if we have no character hopping. Lore can be written in 2 weeks if pushed and luckily i have the week off. We could even have it an alt timeline for the time being of the experiment.

So yea +1 on map -1 on allowing chernarussian players on map.

[K2U]

While the map looks very interesting I don't think forcing people away from their established characters and storylines for several months is a good idea. If anything, it discourages players who have stuck it out through the slumps, and who have managed to continue to find and create roleplay around the server even outside of peak hours. Forcing me to abandon half a dozen simultaneous stories (including those that are tied into the preparations for winter) does nothing to improve the server's general roleplay experience, but it does make things much less enjoyable for dozens of other people tied up in those stories, and for countless more who my character encounters in passing  - often in the form of medical roleplay. 

+1 to adding it as a second server option, like Livonia.

-1 To making it the only map.

-1 To making it the only map, and not allowing the transfer of characters.

(Note: I may have voted incorrectly in the poll, having now re-read the wording of question two.)

Edited November 5, 2020 by K2U

[Player 1]

-1, I like bigger maps and I have characters and story on Chernarus. The Lore is well made and Chernarus is actually a completed and tested map that has mods that work on it. I do not want to abandon what I have put effort into just to see a map be used for a few months and people lose interest like on Livonia or Deer Isle. 

-1, I don't support bringing over old characters and groups because it might spark the revival of old grudges and conflicts. If we are to change maps, then we need new everything. Otherwise, what's the point in having a new map if all we will do is preserve old problems or groups? There are story lines and groups unique only to Chernarus so why port them over? The story wouldn't make much sense. Since everyone will have a new character and such, then emersion is damaged when you go from being geared and ready for travel and suddenly appear somewhere else with barely anything. 

I think a second server should be opened for people to try out and play on it and see if it's stable and actually well made and completed. I don't want to have to be forced to stop my character stories because we want a new map. 

Not to mention, server population is going to suffer even more now that we have this poll up. People may not feel obligated to play anymore if we are going to end their stories soon. 

Edited November 5, 2020 by KOT

[Stagsview]

You also need to think about it like this. 90% of the rp community hubs arw chernarus. A couple like bastion have an alt map. Being one of the first rp servers + expansion would do our server a good pop boost with the right advertising.

 

Yes, chernarus will be put on hold. But we are discussing a months period later.  Lore+outcomes can be explained when+if chernarus returns. For those loyal who played? We all thank u... But we do need to come up with a solution to encourage players.

 

I would even support having basebuilding active on namalsk as a test run. People be monkeys? Removed them and say: we gave u ur toy... But u monkeyed so back to the locker it goes

[Elmo]

58 minutes ago, Roland said:

We could also of course keep Chernarus and simply add Namalsk as a second server side-by-side Chernarus, but I believe it won't gain the traction, playerbase or focus that it deserves from the staff team, especially with current population.

You're right. This more than anything would kill the project before it takes off properly. As long as nobody in the community can be locked out of the project by anything more than their own willingness to engage in it, a single-map is what we should have.

A trial run for winter seems more than fair, especially since the alternative would be Chernarus White.

[DrBrain]

1 minute ago, Stagsview said:

Yes, chernarus will be put on hold. But we are discussing a months period later.  Lore+outcomes can be explained when+if chernarus returns. For those loyal who played? We all thank u... But we do need to come up with a solution to encourage players.

I must say, it does open up the possibility of a time jump forward in Chernarus, which has been requested a good amount of times before this lore reset.

I pray it does not become a successor of Livonia or Deer Isle 

[Stagsview]

1 minute ago, DrBrain said:

I must say, it does open up the possibility of a time jump forward in Chernarus, which has been requested a good amount of times before this lore reset.

I pray it does not become a successor of Livonia or Deer Isle 

We could even state that time stops in chernarus as nalamask goes live. Or do a timejump and build an new scenerio for the players when/if they return. The posbilities are endless. However i would want to "check out" nalmask and see how it is built prior to diving in.

[Dingus Kahn]

It makes no sense forcing players into a different map. Like It feels like people haven't gotten use to the map with roleplay going on this lore. Like this lore has only been up for six months and it already has a hiatus for 3 months. So no one will really get to develop there character they have been making for six months in a harsh condition like winter but they get to develop a side character that will only matter for 3 months??? If you want fast development then there must a crap ton of events going on for that to happen. This discourages new players like me to play since my progression is on a halt because I'm being forced to make a new character and lose the story I have made with myself and others. It just doesn't seem fair :).

[Acoloferz]

Biggest question I have for this map addition...Would we be getting the bloodsuckers that were in the original Namalsk map? 

[K2U]

5 minutes ago, Stagsview said:

Yes, chernarus will be put on hold. But we are discussing a months period later.  Lore+outcomes can be explained when+if chernarus returns. For those loyal who played? We all thank u... But we do need to come up with a solution to encourage players.

I agree that something has to be done to encourage the return of old players and draw new members into the community, but doing it at the cost of the people who have remained active throughout the new lore doesn't feel like the right thing - and yes, I admit that I'm speaking from a personal perspective here, as someone with a very well established character (and who doesn't have a large variety of alternates). As Rolle suggested, allowing players to move their established characters would greatly ease the transition. I would even get behind having some sort of process in which characters must explain how they managed to find out about this new island, how they prepared to get there, how they managed to get there safely, and what made them to want to do this in the first place - some sort of mini-whitelist process that is entirely voluntary and only required for people who want to move existing characters. Just like the whitelist, anyone who doesn't pass muster doesn't get approved, and is "stuck behind" in Cherno for the winter.  I understand that would make more work for the staff who would have to process these things along side the normal whitelists, which will hopefully be going up in number as new people come to the community to check out the map, but it might strike a balance between people who are sincerely interested in progressing existing characters vs those who are just "well, all my friends went to Livonia, I guess I'm going too ". 

[Dren]

+1 for Namalsk, it I would be very exicted for the new group ideas and refreshing things to come out of this!

[G_DateSB]

+ 1 loved namalsk on the mod and for me one of the best maps out there 100% will love to see this no cap.

Edited November 5, 2020 by G_DateLR

[DerrickStorm]

Livonia had no problem winning over server population, while acting as a second server around november last year. Leave both servers. Maybe you'll get your brief population boost with Namalsk, sure, but other maps work only for a brief moment. I really doubt it's the map that pushes peopel away from playing.

[Acoloferz]

In my own personal opinion, I do not think that Namalsk would bring the desired result. A new map, while yeah may spice things up a little bit for the community, will only have population on it for maybe a week or two max. Deer Isle was a new map that was brought out and it ended up failing. Don't get me wrong, Namalsk is a great map, I loved it on DayZ Mod, but newer doesn't always mean better. I was personally looking forward to Winter Chernarus, the RP my group and I have been doing the last couple days has all been about getting ready for winter, and it's just incredibly disheartening all the work and character progression I, and many others have made in the last 6-7 months. Especially if you guys completely remove the Chernarus map all together like what was talked about earlier in the thread. All together, I feel it's a bad idea and it won't make the server more popular in the long run. 

[Stagsview]

22 minutes ago, K2U said:

I agree that something has to be done to encourage the return of old players and draw new members into the community, but doing it at the cost of the people who have remained active throughout the new lore doesn't feel like the right thing - and yes, I admit that I'm speaking from a personal perspective here, as someone with a very well established character (and who doesn't have a large variety of alternates). As Rolle suggested, allowing players to move their established characters would greatly ease the transition. I would even get behind having some sort of process in which characters must explain how they managed to find out about this new island, how they prepared to get there, how they managed to get there safely, and what made them to want to do this in the first place - some sort of mini-whitelist process that is entirely voluntary and only required for people who want to move existing characters. Just like the whitelist, anyone who doesn't pass muster doesn't get approved, and is "stuck behind" in Cherno for the winter.  I understand that would make more work for the staff who would have to process these things along side the normal whitelists, which will hopefully be going up in number as new people come to the community to check out the map, but it might strike a balance between people who are sincerely interested in progressing existing characters vs those who are just "well, all my friends went to Livonia, I guess I'm going too ". 

Dont get me wrong K2U. I get that mindset and perspective. But i am trying to see it a more commercial mindset for the server.
If we have 30 players adverage every night for example. This playerbase from the admin map POV is spilt mainly between 2 main regions in the map. The rest of the map is utterly empty. How do i know this? Admin map. Every time i stream and do events I see the playerbase. Some nights its really spread out. But 80% of the time...its concentrated in 2 sectors.

Now, i dont have a well established character. I dont play. I do community work and do events for you chaps. However I get how you feel. The lore we put into chernarus could just go "puff" so work we volunteered into the map is "on the line" because peeps are bored. So i get that you are gonna loose your characters story/progression. But if we switch, not to sound selfish but the LMs loose far more time and resorces because of that.

And that honestly doesnt bother me. I want the server to thrive and i want the server to keep booming. Would i rather have a 60 player average over a 30 with the sacrifice of my work and effort? Well yes honestly. But I want a majority going: yes we want this before actually doing this. Because the Loremasters do not want to waste our time again like Deer island. 

Now regarding players, and stories. 

I "get" why. But i can tell you exactly what will happen if we do this. People will just bring their groups over. Be lazy and do exactly what they are doing on chernarus in Namalsk, and then complain they are bored there. Sometimes to build a story you need to have boundries. The boundries need to be clear from the start, unlike livonia what was a clusterfuck and when finally the boundries where set...people got upset because the server pop flowed over. 

This is why i am suggestion a "time jump" currently for Namalsk. Chernarus will still be there and still be a thing. But the time we play in namalsk serves as a "mini break" from the main story. A side campaign that could result in a 1 month, 2 month or 3 month lore jump...giving the lms time to build a new scenario for the return of chernarus.  This is my opinion on the matter and out of all of the peeps here, we are the ones whom are gonna have to put the time into it. 

[Player 1]

49 minutes ago, Stagsview said:

This is why i am suggestion a "time jump" currently for Namalsk.

If we do a this "time jump" I'd like it to be years. Not months, YEARS! Even at the very least, 1 or 2 years. Besides, where is Namalsk anyway? Can it be another country instead of Czech? No offense to the Czechs, but I'd kill to be in a country with a language I can somewhat understand. Feel me? 

Edited November 5, 2020 by KOT

[Fae]

I like exploring new maps but I dont think deer isle livonia Namalsk is going to "fix" anything that is currently wrong with RP in the server. Neither is a time skip.
Which, if im reading it right, would only get confusing...

Focus on the current lore on the current map before we go jumping around time-wise and moving to new places again..

 

[DrBrain]

17 minutes ago, KOT said:

If we do a this "time jump" I'd like it to be years. Not months, YEARS! Even at the very least, 1 or 2 years. Besides, where is Namalsk anyway? Can it be another country instead of Czech? No offense to the Czechs, but I'd kill to be in a country with a language I can somewhat understand. Feel me? 

Going by the names on the map and Vorkuta being an actual place in Russia, I think Slavic is the least you can expect. But afaiw we get artistic freedom

[Idle]

I would be up for moving over for the winter on new characters and start new stories with new groups. It would be a nice change from what is currently going on where every character knows every other character (or nearly all of them). Starting something new would be great especially if there is a good storyline for Namalsk.

[Misho]

The map is a new landscape, the assets are the same as we have in Chernarus/Livonia with some custom ones added in to the mix and since it's a remake of A2 one, people who player A2 will know it pretty well here as well, it's not a huge "OH NEW MAP" moment. There are some mechanics that will make the surviving a bit more difficult, such as weather and temperature control, I don't think there will be bloodsuckers but if there are they will probably be reskinned Zombies like we have sprinters and tanks etc on DayZRP.

All in all, worth a try, probably looks better than "Winter Chernarus" but I can understand people who have invested in their characters and stories to be reluctant, lore wise no idea how you'd explain it but that's not my department anyway.

Doubt it would have any big positive impact on server population, possibly even negative as with previous map attempts.