1.7 should be red text'd in the next update

[joecinq03]

Reasons:

- The gameplay changes are significant enough to warrant it.

- It forces people from 1.5/1.6 to likely at least try it once.

- It's incredibly annoying to have to scan the playerlist and repeatedly communicate with the host and player that they need 1.7 or it's going to revert to 1.6 gameplay.

- Going from that last point, active public beta testing to any extent is severely limited because hosts are just conceding to one or two people having 1.6, thus making it a pointless affair in testing the gameplay changes.

[Pyro]

You already posted about this.

If those hosts you described don't want to get 1.7, making 1.7 not compatible with 1.6 and 1.5.1 won't change that. Because if the hosts don't switch to a 1.7 that is not compatible with other versions, then the players on those games will revert to 1.6/1.5.1 because the host won't go to 1.7.

[GodzFire]

Once 1.7 is released as final I know I won't play with anyone on 1.5.1.

[joecinq03]

reread what i posted:

- It's incredibly annoying to have to scan the playerlist and repeatedly communicate with the host and player that they need 1.7 or it's going to revert to 1.6 gameplay.

Means the host has 1.7, a player doesn't, so you have to communicate with both the host and the player about the gameplay inevitably reverting to 1.6/1.5

& I re-posted it (and expanded upon the idea) because it is a legitimate argument and no one bothered to respond.

[Baak]

I understand what he's saying.

Perhaps it would be a good idea to have the 1.7 betas do this since it's the host who is choosing whether or not to play [test] 1.7?

Then once it goes final, have it revert to the "allow 1.6, etc" stuff.


Or better yet, have a host option whether or not to "allow 1.6, etc". Personally, when I'm hosting 1.6 I don't want anyone playing anything less than the latest build. Otherwise I'd host 1.5.

[Pyro]

So checking if there isn't any compatibility issues with 1.6/1.5.1 isn't considered testing? I imagine the devs made it this way because they were unsure how it would be taken at first. Meaning, they wanted to make sure people wouldn't be forced to download it unless they really want to beta test it. Hosts have control over how can or cannot play in their games. Don't concede and you get 1.7 only. Though a 1.7 only or a "this version only" host option would be ideal.

[joecinq03]

people can just as easily not download it?

Hosts do have control but my point is that they are deferring to just playing 1.6, thus nothing gameplay wise in 1.7 is being tested with any regularity - something which I believe can be improved with 1.7 being incompatible with 1.6/1.5.1 for now.

This would not be such an issue with a community larger than myth's but alas.

[Pyro]

I never said I didn't understand what you were saying. Just throwing ideas as to why it was probably done the way it was. I just try to work with what I have until the next build is out.

[Autumn Demon]

No one likes to be pushed, prodded or shoved. But no one objects to a nudge in the right direction. The idea that people can be nudged into making better choices is the brainchild of Richard Thaler and Cass Sunstein, two whip-smart University of Chicago academics. The two professors see nudging as the ‘real third way’, an alternative to both government regulation and laissez-faire liberalism. The idea is the new big thing; the two politicians of the moment — Barack Obama and David Cameron — are both keen on it.
...
Another kind of nudge is making the default option the more socially desirable option. One example of this advocated by Thaler and Sunstein in their book Nudge — and adopted by the Obama campaign, to which Thaler and Sunstein are informal advisers — is automatically enrolling people in a pension plan. Those who want to can still opt out, but the default position is that you contribute. Such schemes have been proven to raise the savings rate.