Platinum (or gold)
#1. It has the best servers, currently it only has "Graal Kingdoms" but if another playerworld with amazing graphics, levels, scripts, and everything like that were to be made, such as Zone or something, it would go here. The best.

Gold (or silver)
#2. All the most popular servers. They need to have decent levels, scripts, and things that players will like. It needs to have an average of 8-10 players. Servers such as Era, Unholy Nation, Graal the Adventure, Graal2001 would be on it, due to there high popularity.

Silver (or bronze)
#3. All the servers which are UC, or very unpopular would go here. They most likely will not be very fun.


(What do you think of this idea? I mean "Gold" and "Classic" don't match, and since the main website and everything graal is now centered around Graal Kingdoms, i think the current money system on GK would be neat to use as the servers. I think of Graal Kingdoms as graal, and then all the other servers the past graals, and just servers that players have hosted on it.)

Again, I must note that by listing all servers there you would be defeating the purpose of the hosted tab. It is there to showcase good examples of Graalonline development, not so every two-bit playerworld violating the rules is allowed 'additional exposure'.

(Besides, it makes the transition of servers to the Classic tab that much simpler - the pool from which you choose is somewhat of a cleaner one with the hosted tab the way it is.)

::agrees with Lance::
Took me a second to realize what you were asking. Normally we refer to them as Dev worlds, and you go and change it up and confuse me ;) But yeah, it should only be a few to show them off I guess. I would never want one put on this list, why not save and then BAM release all the godly stuff at once :)
-Projectshifter

Are you retarded? 8-10 players should be a UC thing. More like 40+ -_-;

I think that's a good idea.

For the reasons I already stated and also for the reasons Lance stated , No it is not a good idea. I agree with him and those who do not think this will benefit Graal to do this.

Another tab would probably fix the clutter. At least some way to browse servers without having to type them in.

Like a UC tab or something.

Gold, Classic, Hosted, UC?

What about servers that just suck spheres but are finished? Where do they fit?

Servers are never finished.

Trash can.. Hey a thought make a "Trash Can tab" .... :p

Noo we dont need more tab. I miss the 1 tab we used to have. Then came 2 tabs then 3. We dont need 4 ;-;!

Well I am not going to read the entire post but if this was made possible and all the worlds are made into the hosted tab...instead of the Playerworlds going up and down the list by playercount make it so only the best of the hosted show up on top and and it just goes down from best to no where in development. It would make the hosted tab still usable where you would have to earn your right to be at the top of the list.

I was just making a joke, of course we don't need another tab. ;)

But some poeple think we do :whatever:

True , true and they are entitled to that opinion BUT not everything suggested is prudent or wise to do is it?

Then why should we read yours? :)

Some special people already have 4 tabs.

Personally I don't get what the Hosted tab is for. Because, private servers often have a hard job recruiting good staff, and therefore don't make it to the hosted tab. Its sort of irony, in that the only way to get exposure, is to have exposure before hand. I dont think all server should be on hosted, but there are some serious developments going on privately which are not necessarily going to get the recognition they need.

On a side note, what are ther current targets a PW has to meet before it can make the hosted tab? I'm sure they were posted before, but I lost the thread x_x.

There are no set "targets" to be on the Hosted Tab, right now it is basicly on the opinion of the PWA Members if they should or should not be.

Therefore, they must have targets by which they decide wther a PW is worthy or not.

Within reason there are loose knit objectives they need to fulfill. I mean you can't put up one level and call it a server.

Nope, I don't support it at all... I haven't read any posts so don't flame me if I'm just repeating but there'd be too many inactive servers and too many servers that are garbage like some **** buys an account and first day gets a server too... it'd be like accepting every server and saying theyre all as good as one like Zenkou or something..