I'm a little confused by this but basically this is a thing for everyone. Not just supporters. It really wouldn't be fair to release it then make it supporter only or add something that only supporters get when it's for everyone.
Nothing planned to be for supporters here. This group feature is going to be a major staple to many features to come on EMC, and will be open to everyone. Naming - Not going to happen - there's no purpose for a name, they are only temporary. Multiple groups - not going to happen - defeats the purpose of the system. This is not a "Chat system", its a system that has its own chat channel. Cross Server - Not going to happen - has no place in how groups will be used. If you've played MMO games, Groups are same as Parties in other major MMO games, temporary allegiances to work together to get something done. Just released phase 1 quickly, then the "reasons" for being in a group is coming over the next few days.
I'm sure I'm not alone in strongly disagreeing with this and having some big ideas of my own, but I'll hold them for now and wait for the upcoming features. That's not to say that I don't like these features- they're awesome!
I don't see how name helps improve anything - Only place I can see it being used is in the invite messages... What purpose does that really serve? I don't see how it would help improve the experience a single bit, other than a few people making cutesy names then laughing at them. Then I could only imagine the cases of people writing obscenities or adverts in the name, inviting people, and now we have to either log names or take the feature away.. I can't see any good in names. ---- Multiple groups - again, this isnt a chat system. If your wanting to team with a bunch of people... everyone should simply form into 1 group. Why would you make it more complicated on yourself having to switch? ----- Cross server also just doesn't make sense. Cross server communication will be tackled in a different way in a different update... Groups is not the place for it.
I think I'm starting to see where you're going with this, specifically in the "adventure party" way. But I'll answer your question. Multiple groups would have the benefit of folks assigning residence permissions to certain groups, and no one would be left out by being restricted to a single group. This feature would make residence permissions management a bit simpler, I think. Of course, I have no idea what impact this would have on the servers, checking permissions for every res so many times per second...
I think you can blame the named thing on Factions. I wondered if they were like that and didn't know they were like parties in most games.
The "Group" system implemented are not permanent groups. Something similar to what you are suggesting could be added at a later time; but probably not with this update.
Correct, this is no permanent group affiliation. You will have to restart the group after every reboot and anytime every member logs off. Permanent group associations is something well look at down the road, but we have ideas brewing.
I can't find the news article stating this, but in the future Mojang plans to officially implement Groups/Teams into Minecraft for Multiplayer games.. I will hunt it down this evening. This may all be a memory of a dream I had. I can't be certain and 10 minutes before work is not a good time to try to find out.
I remember sometime during chat about the DT that you must bring members so there are at least 4 players. I'm guessing they need to be in a group to start the DT then right?
There's /scoreboard, which essentially adds teams for redstone minigame purposes. Unfortunately, it's not hugely user friendly or useful.
