Curious 28

[Madkill40]

I was playing Renegade-X yesterday before the stream of players began to inhabit the server filling it to the max and we were having a really good time to say there was between 10-14 players on each side for the majority of the game, it was actually possible to coordinate and maintain a decent length of play without one side feeling like it was over-encumbered with succeeding and sore soloists.

So I was thinking about a 28 slot server. Thoughts?

[Fffreak9999]

At this time @Madkill40, I feel this will be more detrimental, since it fragments the community much quicker, and if people see that server filled, many would keep trying to join that one rather than a new server, therefore reducing the number of active players.

This may change if the community picks up some, and we have enough to regularly fill 2 servers on weekdays, then this would be more relevant, but definately at this time I would say this is pre-mature.

[Madkill40]

At best I've seen a second server fill up with 12 people when the 40/40 server was full. 

Doing nothing and hoping the community picks up some doesn't help, doing something a little different, a little out of the ordinary, that engages a community pick up. 

This is the smallest, most insignificant change anyone could make to RenX right now which has no loss if it fails but could on the off-chance provide some benefits. 

[KrypTheBear]

Oy, two three four (I give up) people who aren't me have voted on option three D: 

Well, on some Saturdays I see during PUGs that both the PUG server and at least one public server is decently filled. So having player amounts available shouldn't really be an issue, I mean, of course it would split the players between servers. But having less player slots in a popular server will obviously increase the amount of players waiting for a slot, so instead of waiting they can go like "huh that other server is interesting too, I could hop on that" and thus fill up another server. Repeat ad infinitum. 

28 slot servers sound interesting, as we've seen with Sunday PUGs that slightly decreased playercounts work for the current set of maps definetly better. I catch myself often running out of options on 20vs20, while 14vs14 gives me opportunities I'd usually miss due to people being >>everywhere<<.

Honestly, if we'd adjust the maps a little bit in size and dynamics (I really really like Arctic Stronghold in that regard), we could even make 20vs20 more interesting. But while maps as Eyes are way too big (actually this is unique to Eyes) and open with whatever slotsize you have, maps like Under feel extremely stuffed in 20vs20 situations, while being surprisingly interesting with, for instance, 14vs14. 

So yeah, why not, host one Madkill. 

Edited November 15, 2016 by KrypTheBear

[Fffreak9999]

My concern wasn't based on Weekend amounts, since Weekends we often have about 75-80 people online.

However the concern is with the Weekday totals since if the resticted player count server fills first and people wanting to play a game without waiting for a server to build, I feel we would fragment the community more by doing this.

There is a scope for this style of gameplay, but realistically I feel there isn't much of a community base at this time (on Weekdays) at least.

Weekends are ideal for the smaller games, since it allows a bit more of the continuation of the PUG style of game-play, and gives people a window into how they work, without the strict necessity of having Teamspeak, but in the Weekday, I feel this is more detrimental, now I may end up being incorrect, but this is how I see the situation at the moment.

[Agent]

2 hours ago, KrypTheBear said:

Oy, two people who aren't me have voted on option three D: 

Hi <3

 

Also, I would actually love to see lower population servers. I would also love to see more players to fill lower population servers.

[boxes]

4 minutes ago, Agent said:

Also, I would actually love to see lower population servers. I would also love to see more players to fill lower population servers.

Still think the best way for this is to integrate some sort of chat system/lobby in the launcher

[Madkill40]

@Fffreak9999: Is your concern a; should the 28 slot be maxed out nobody will join the 40 slot server? Because that's ridiculous, players will still want that 20v20 combat whereas others may just want to be limited to 14v14. If players actually preferred a maximum of 14v14 then you just change another server count to max 28 and players might be more encouraged to join a 28 slot server realizing it will fill easier than 40 slot servers. Could then have two servers of 14v14 actively going. All the while you always keep the 40 slot server(s) but I'd like to think players will find filling a 28 slot server easier than 40. (In-Theory)

 

1 hour ago, CampinJeff said:

Still think the best way for this is to integrate some sort of chat system/lobby in the launcher

Integrate IRC chatbox lobby into Launcher for players to get their shiz together?

 

 

Edited November 15, 2016 by Madkill40

[Handepsilon]

16 hours ago, KrypTheBear said:

Oy, two three four (I give up) people who aren't me have voted on option three D: 
 

6 now.

Are you Yuri? Being able to clone yourself like that?

12 hours ago, Madkill40 said:

Integrate IRC chatbox lobby into Launcher for players to get their shiz together?

Something like the CnCNet5 client's chatroom lobby would be good as well, if that's doable