In an effort to provide more transparency to the community at large, the latest news provides a look inside the inner workings of the Army Board. With talk of community stagnation cultivating following the infamous “September Drop,” the Army Board looks to reset and make anew with the current server map.
Club Penguin Armies launched its very own server map on July 17, 2022. Before its launch, the administrators sat down with the Army Board to create guidelines and rules centered around the map. This included the amount of servers on the map, invasion rules, server limits and even treaties. To this day, few rules have changed from that initial meeting. However, the map has always been part of the Army Board’s jurisdiction.
Thus, on October 7, a meeting was called by then Head Representative Sidie9. A few weeks prior, the Army Board presented a few map ideas they’d like to see put forward, including a new map proposal. The meeting’s main agenda was to discuss said proposal and, hopefully, come to an agreement where a vote can take place in some manner.
It’s been over a year since the server map has seen any large updates. While there have been a select amount of resets, the common complaint has been that the server map does not encourage “competition and engagement” between armies. In the spirit of wanting something new, discussion centered around providing the server map with a graphical update. Essentially, recoding and redrawing the entire thing. Some members of the Army Board felt that there needed to be more lore elements like mountains or other forms of scenery.
With various opinions on how to move forward with the map, the following were able to reach majority vote over the course of several meetings:
- The map will be reset after October.
- The server map will have 250 servers in total, but only 80-90 (map creators’ discretion) of these servers servers will be available.
- The introduction of “legacy servers” meaning they will be unable to have their names changed.
- Armies will be able to gain up to, but no more than, six freeland servers through freeland invasions and server transfers.
Club Penguin Armies reached out to Head Judge Mare and representative Sidie9 for their thoughts on the server map meetings.
What are your personal thoughts on the new map proposal?
Mare, Head Judge: I’m excited for the new map proposal. I’m hoping that it’ll get armies more involved. I’m also thrilled to see the new design of how it’ll look.
Sidie9, People’s Imperial Confederation: I’m all for the proposals being put forward thus far. I think most of us can agree that the map is in serious need of innovation that a simple reset won’t fix. We’ll have to see how everything develops in future conversation!
What are your personal thoughts on the outcome of the vote?
Mare, Head Judge: I think that the outcome of the votes were acceptable. Everyone’s trying to create new ways to get armies involved and stay active so I’m hoping that what was voted on will work for the future of armies.
Sidie9, People’s Imperial Confederation: With everyone on seemingly different pages regarding the concept of a new map, I’m disappointed that the server quantity vote didn’t succeed. With that said, however, I’m glad we’ve set a vote set a general timeframe for the reset.
How do you think this vote will impact the future?
Mare, Head Judge: The new voting will probably impact the future by pushing more armies to invade/declare war if they are wanting more servers. Also, this may create new allyships for armies.
Sidie9, People’s Imperial Confederation: I think we’re still very much in the early stages of sorting the map out. Although Dino put forward a comprehensive proposal and numerous individuals had their own thoughts, a consensus has seemingly not been reached. With that said, however, I am optimistic that we’ll come up with a unified vision for the map.
History seems to repeat itself as the community remains hopeful that the new server map will spark new life in the community. The new rules will surely be a welcomed change to combat the map becoming stagnant. Or, potentially, it will be worse. One concern that I brought up during these talks is how the new server map may not bring the results we are exactly looking for.
Force treaties play a role in the continuous cycle of map death. Armies do not see value in the map when victory is not guaranteed, and why would they? Nobody wants to lose in a force treaty. Current meta has people leading longer, creating stronger alliances thus leading to a stagnant map. This is not to say that the current league rules are bad; rather, the topic of the “current meta” deserves its own editorial entirely. Should we continue putting resources into maps?