Java Longtime Supporter, Lifetime Rank — Why Am I Being Left Out?

[S0UL]

Hey everyone,

I only briefly searched for a thread discussing this, so if I missed something, please let me know.
I’ve been a CubeCraft player for years and purchased the Obsidian Lifetime Rank back when it was advertised as the highest tier with the most benefits. The features that mattered most to me were flying in lobbies and the 3x voting weight on maps and gamemodes.

Recently, I noticed I wasn’t able to vote in the newer Beta Games — specifically Pillars of Fortune (PoF) — even though I had been able to vote on it for several months. I submitted a support ticket and was told this is “intended behavior,” and that Obsidian (and other lifetime ranks) no longer apply to new games going forward.

I’m honestly pretty disappointed. Voting power was one of the main reasons I bought Obsidian, and being excluded from new content means I’m getting less and less value from what was supposed to be a one-time lifetime investment.

I completely understand that the server is moving toward a subscription-based model — and I know that servers need to evolve to stay alive — but removing perks from longtime supporters in order to push subscriptions feels pretty bad. There’s got to be a better way to handle this.

To be clear, I can still vote in the games that were available when I bought the rank — this issue only affects the newer Beta Games. But it’s worrying to see that shift, and it feels like a step toward making lifetime ranks less and less meaningful over time.

Has anyone else run into this or feel the same way? I’d really like to see a solution where those of us who invested in the server early on are grandfathered into Beta Game perks, or at least offered some form of compensation if that’s not possible.

 

[emptypandora]

How much was it ?

 

[S0UL]

How much was it ?

It was years ago, and I worked my way up the ranks because it would discount the price based off the rank you already owned, but I'm almost certain it was like $160 based on the conversion rates back then. Doesn't sound like a lot, and obviously, this isn't a sustainable model for them, but that doesn't really change the fact that I spent what at the time was a lot of money for me for a rank that's having its perks systematically reduced

 

[399k]

I mean I understand them not adding features to 'old' ranks for new games but its a minority its not like old ranks having features would destroy the server or have any real negative impact since 90%+ of old rank holders won't be buying a new rank anyway

 

[Nightmare]

I do not understand this thread, claiming that permanent ranks lost perks is just false, they just dont get any new ones. Maintaining two rank systems at once when one is already deprecated makes no sense for any company

 

[Ruisedeer]

I agree, I have lifetime Iron and voting for Pillars just got taken away from me (A game I have over 13 days of playtime on and I've always been able to vote).

Buying a subscription for even an Iron rank costs per year over 3x what I bought the entirety of Minecraft for, which if you think about it like that is a terrible deal.

claiming that permanent ranks lost perks is just false, they just dont get any new ones.

How is that false? I have always had voting rights on Pillars (which was for me the most important perk), and now I lost them.

 

[399k]

I agree, I have lifetime Iron and voting for Pillars just got taken away from me (A game I have over 13 days of playtime on and I've always been able to vote).

Buying a subscription for even an Iron rank costs per year over 3x what I bought the entirety of Minecraft for, which if you think about it like that is a terrible deal.

How is that false? I have always had voting rights on Pillars (which was for me the most important perk), and now I lost them.

Apparently lifetime ranks were never supposed to have voting on new games, but they did for like months

 

[S0UL]

I do not understand this thread, claiming that permanent ranks lost perks is just false, they just dont get any new ones. Maintaining two rank systems at once when one is already deprecated makes no sense for any company

When I say the perks are being depreciated, I mean that I made a one-time investment years ago into a rank that was explicitly advertised as having voting power in all games. At the time of purchase, there was no indication—no disclaimer—that these perks would be limited only to the existing games or that they wouldn’t carry over to new ones in the future.

Now, with the move to a subscription model, I’m seeing those original perks essentially diminished. Being excluded from voting in new games—something that was part of the rank’s original appeal—feels like a loss of value. Suggesting that legacy benefits no longer apply to new games doesn't feel like a good-faith approach, especially when my purchase was made with the expectation that those perks were server-wide and permanent.

Stripping those features away and locking them behind a recurring subscription strongly incentivizes giving up my legacy rank in favor of something I never agreed to. That shift fundamentally changes the deal I signed up for, and it’s fair to call that a depreciation of my original purchase.

 

[emptypandora]

When I say the perks are being depreciated, I mean that I made a one-time investment years ago into a rank that was explicitly advertised as having voting power in all games. At the time of purchase, there was no indication—no disclaimer—that these perks would be limited only to the existing games or that they wouldn’t carry over to new ones in the future.

Now, with the move to a subscription model, I’m seeing those original perks essentially diminished. Being excluded from voting in new games—something that was part of the rank’s original appeal—feels like a loss of value. Suggesting that legacy benefits no longer apply to new games doesn't feel like a good-faith approach, especially when my purchase was made with the expectation that those perks were server-wide and permanent.

Stripping those features away and locking them behind a recurring subscription strongly incentivizes giving up my legacy rank in favor of something I never agreed to. That shift fundamentally changes the deal I signed up for, and it’s fair to call that a depreciation of my original purchase.

You'd have a legal claim here. Under UK law, sale of good act.....you should try it and go directly for the Company instead of letting these so called staff shout you down

 

[S0UL]

You'd have a legal claim here. Under UK law, sale of good act.....you should try it and go directly for the Company instead of letting these so called staff shout you down

Just to clarify, that’s not really the direction I want to take this. I’m speaking up because, as someone who supported the server early on, I’d simply like to retain the benefits I originally invested in. Right now, it feels like legacy ranks are being quietly pushed out of a system we helped build and support.

I completely understand that the business model needs to evolve to keep the server running—and I support that—but I don’t see why the small number of legacy rank holders who are still active couldn’t be grandfathered in. It wouldn’t take anything away from the new system, and it would go a long way toward showing that early supporters are still valued.

 

[emptypandora]

Lol. The problem you have here is thinking the server owners actually care. Think about it

 

[S0UL]

Lol. The problem you have here is thinking the server owners actually care. Think about it

Well, that's why I'm bringing it up here. People will see this, and the majority of the player base doesn't have rank, and why should they if what they're paying for is at risk of being changed at any point? How can any server expect to attract new customers if they're unable to uphold promises or respect their old ones?

 

[emptypandora]

Well, that's why I'm bringing it up here. People will see this, and the majority of the player base doesn't have rank, and why should they if what they're paying for is at risk of being changed at any point? How can any server expect to attract new customers if they're unable to uphold promises or respect their old ones?

My friend. You are a statistic. There are probably 60k players, maybe more maybe less, the server doesn't promote fairness in anyway. They don't care for rules, they don't moderate consistently, they allow ppl who cheat then bypass to play, known players that is, because they are known to their staff. They target players who's reputation becomes larger than they feel it should be. Do you honestly believe they will read your post and do anything ? My advice; it is what it is, just move on as you'll get nowhere here sadly, they simply don't care.

 

[S0UL]

My friend. You are a statistic. There are probably 60k players, maybe more maybe less, the server doesn't promote fairness in anyway. They don't care for rules, they don't moderate consistently, they allow ppl who cheat then bypass to play, known players that is, because they are known to their staff. They target players who's reputation becomes larger than they feel it should be. Do you honestly believe they will read your post and do anything ? My advice; it is what it is, just move on as you'll get nowhere here sadly, they simply don't care.

This post gives them a dignified out. If they don't care, they'll be demonstrating that to all their members. I spent the money years ago and not as active as I used to be so that doesn't really matter. Lol this is just the most polite way to raise awareness of an issue.

 

[emptypandora]

This post gives them a dignified out. If they don't care, they'll be demonstrating that to all their members. I spent the money years ago and not as active as I used to be so that doesn't really matter. Lol this is just the most polite way to raise awareness of an issue.

Best of luck. For what it's worth, I'm with you.

 

[xHappyMood]

a rank that was explicitly advertised as having voting power in all games. At the time of purchase, there was no indication—no disclaimer—that these perks would be limited only to the existing games or that they wouldn’t carry over to new ones in the future.

I just checked the internet archive, and I am afraid voting perks for ranks were in fact advertised by game, and not as “voting in all games”, although I couldn’t find an archive of the obsidian rank’s perks specifically.

That doesn’t take away, however, from the fact I agree very much with this thread. Although it isn’t technically required it seems like a reasonable thing to do for people who have supported the server for a long time. They aren’t buying a subscription anyways.

I do not understand this thread, claiming that permanent ranks lost perks is just false, they just dont get any new ones. Maintaining two rank systems at once when one is already deprecated makes no sense for any company

I for one do not understand this reply. It comes off as very passive aggressive, and although you are technically right about not losing perks, I am in fact quite sure you understand this thread. You aren’t dumb.