Big servers are a BIG mistake

[Keystone]

Ofcourse, rifle is better on long distance provided that smg soldiers are not moving. I'm sure that if there was battle on Kaukasus smg vs rifle, smg would win. To hit moving soldier is not so easy when additionally he is slaloming. And when some smg soldier will near to enemy at 10m, then all rifle soldiers are dead. Besides there is a bug in RO that if FPS is less, smg is not recoling then so is very easy to hit enemy even at 100-200m. And on maps like Berezina all the better smg would win the map beacuse don't forget that there are halftracks, after arriving at capzone is much easier to kill enemy with smg then with rifle. Nobody would be shooting with rifle to enemy from 200m beacuse not only is hard to hit but also is hard to spot the enemy from so long distance.

 

[Jank]

Nobody would be shooting with rifle to enemy from 200m beacuse not only is hard to hit but also is hard to spot the enemy from so long distance.

I have not found that to be true myself. In fact I shoot enemies farther away than that regularly on Berezina. I pick rifle on that map even as Combat Engineer because it's usually a medium or long range engagement except for those rare times you make it to the obj in the HT. And hey, for me that's bayonet time.

 

[Solo4114]

Ofcourse, rifle is better on long distance provided that smg soldiers are not moving. I'm sure that if there was battle on Kaukasus smg vs rifle, smg would win. To hit moving soldier is not so easy when additionally he is slaloming.

Sounds to me like your problem is your aim. I fail to see how that's TWI's fault.

And when some smg soldier will near to enemy at 10m, then all rifle soldiers are dead.

Yes, as they should be. The SMG is designed for close quarters fighting. 10m would be close quarters.

Besides there is a bug in RO that if FPS is less, smg is not recoling then so is very easy to hit enemy even at 100-200m.

I may be wrong on this, but I believe this bug was fixed. Regardless, people would have to somehow dumb down their computers to actually do this. I've not seen someone with an SMG pick off other people at rifle range usually. It happens rarely if at all.

And on maps like Berezina all the better smg would win the map beacuse don't forget that there are halftracks, after arriving at capzone is much easier to kill enemy with smg then with rifle. Nobody would be shooting with rifle to enemy from 200m beacuse not only is hard to hit but also is hard to spot the enemy from so long distance.

It's not hard to spot them from 200m. Nor is it hard to hit them. Nor is it hard to take out an incoming halftrack if your team is working well together. But yes, you're right, when they get in close with SMGs, you're screwed. THAT'S THE POINT OF THE SMG.


It sounds to me like you just hate SMGs and can't deal with them. I don't usually call people out on their own apparent skill, but while I can understand that it's frustrating to deal with when you can't hit at medium range (and yes, 200m is still medium range -- you can use one of the carbines and still hit accurately), but your complaints seem mostly to be based on your own performance with a rifle. You want SMG players to stay still so you can shoot them? Tell me, would YOU stay still if you had a short-range weapon and +200m to cover? Maybe you should just practice a bit more. It's not arcadey for someone to keep moving so they don't get hit, especially if they're using a close quarters weapon and are trying to actually get in close where said weapon is effective. If you're a good rifle shot, you can often take them out before they get close enough. If you can't take them out, that's not TWI's fault.

 

[Keystone]

Sounds to me like your problem is your aim.

No you wrong, I aim very well you don't know how I play, many times I'm on top of the list as a rifleman. But I know how it can be easy to don't being shoot from enemy rifles by doing some tricks with moving.

It sounds to me like you just hate SMGs and can't deal with them.

again no, I love to play smg too, and I'd like to play some late war map with volksgrenadier units (which had whole platoons with mp40) vs russian smgs units. But it really annoy me when historic battles which should have almost only rifles, and it's oppositely, almost nobody is rifleman. I understand 5 smg on maps like Basovka which is unrealistic anyway. But when there are 10 smg and 2-3 riflemans so this is senseless then...

 

[Sabu]

You know there is a fast simple fix for all your complaints Keystone. All you need to do is take the maps adjust the role limit values and try and release them as Keystones Realistic versions, and get them put into rotation on a server either your own or see if you can get someone with a server to run them for you. The tools are out there for you to do that. Who knows maybe you will find some people that also feel the same as you do and you can all have fun.


Sabu

 

[Keystone]

Even if I was be able to run the server, it's too late beacuse too many people already left RO beacuse of that, so nobody would join. In the morning before update I've seen much more full servers then now.

 

[Sabu]

Umm well that is not exactly true you can check gamespy stats and see how many people are currently playing.. here is the site. http://archive.gamespy.com/stats/
currently theres almost 1400 players. this is not peak playtime and is summer so numbers are a little lower but as you can see there are a lot of people still here... I would like to know where your getting it that a lot of players have left? btw during peak us playtimes the number of players is up to 1600 to 1800 on occasion even higher. Our player numbers are actually higher since the patch as well.

Sabu

 

[melipone]

Umm well that is not exactly true you can check gamespy stats and see how many people are currently playing.. here is the site. http://archive.gamespy.com/stats/
currently theres almost 1400 players. this is not peak playtime and is summer so numbers are a little lower but as you can see there are a lot of people still here... I would like to know where your getting it that a lot of players have left? btw during peak us playtimes the number of players is up to 1600 to 1800 on occasion even higher. Our player numbers are actually higher since the patch as well.

Sabu

Sorry but gamespy stats are very wrong..there is a thread here on it:

http://www.redorchestragame.com/forum/showthread.php?t=20543

Just saying its wrong, not that there aren't enough players.

I'd say its more like 200 to 800 max.

 

[Keystone]

heh looks like Sabu is second time wrong

 

[Sabu]

Actually you are both mistaken. While on occasion Gamespy stats has had issues what you posted in that other thread was not correct. The current correct number of players are fairly accurately being posted on Gamespy. In fact Gamespy does not capture all of the servers as it is a server option to turn that off. So we likely have more players than what Gamespy says. Once again please do not post what you think is going on unless you 1. either say "this is what I think is happening" or 2. have real data to back up what you are saying. In that post there was not any real data only screen shots of the site and your server browser which showed absolutely nothing. Gamespy also does not capture those playing RO in Gaming centers.

Sabu

 

[Sabu]

heh looks like Sabu is second time wrong

Keystone If you are only on the forums to flame be aware I am not afraid to dish out infractions.


Sabu

 

[melipone]

Once again please do not post what you think is going on unless you 1. either say "this is what I think is happening" or 2. have real data to back up what you are saying.

I've only ever asked questions in that thread - I didn't say that I was 100% correct but no one has come up with a reason for me not to assume I am right. The only time I've contradicted you was on the class limits, which I was correct on if you look in the thread I linked to, so theres no "once again" about it if you're referring to what I posted. If my server browser is wrong then fine that is the problem, but no matter when I look at it the numbers won't tally with whats on the gamespy website and I have no filters, even include servers with bots, have both ticked and unticked "standard servers only". If someone can confirm they are right then please post a screenie that shows that...If I am wrong then fine I'm just posting what I see. I can't really be ***ed going through and adding them all up again, but anyway I'll do it quickly rounding up a lot:

5x 50 = 250
32x10 = 320
20x11 = 220
8x10 = 80

870 players. I have rounded up immensely and still its way under what you get on the gamespy website of 1492. The gamespy stats update every couple of minutes so its not old data. This time I turned off servers with bots to make it easier. There's no way my browser can have more than that amount since I rounded up so much..if my browser is wrong then fine but otherwise the stats are wrong.

I'm not looking for an argument or to flame anyone, I just like things to be right, and if i'm wrong i'll be happy to admit that.

 

[Sabu]

Melipone I will enter a bug to check into the server browser not showing the accurate information. As for the roles we did apply that formula that Ramm posted and then we made adjustments to not unbalance maps by adding more snipers and LMG's, while still giving the player the choice to choose form the weapons available.

Btw the warning was not for you.

Sabu

 

[melipone]

Melipone I will enter a bug to check into the server browser not showing the accurate information. As for the roles we did apply that formula that Ramm posted and then we made adjustments to not unbalance maps by adding more snipers and LMG's, while still giving the player the choice to choose form the weapons available.

Btw the warning was not for you.

Sabu

OK thanks, thats the first time i've heard the increased limits were as a balance for snipers/mg's, ta for clearing that up. Not going to get into the balance thing atm, but very nice to know the reasoning behind the increased numbers.

When you say you're entering a bug report, is that to gamespy or do you mean some people have incorrect player numbers showing up in their game of RO?

 

[Sabu]

I entered a bug report in our tracking system to look into the server browser to make sure it is functioning correct. That will include the gamespy code.

Sabu

 

[spiricom]

More people = more eye candy, and for RO being a war game, that's exactly what it needs.

Regardless if the server is a 50 player or 20 player, it is still a pub. The game is designed well enough to prevent it from turning into one of those 64 player servers on de_dust2.

 

[melipone]

As for the roles we did apply that formula that Ramm posted and then we made adjustments to not unbalance maps by adding more snipers and LMG's, while still giving the player the choice to choose form the weapons available.

Sabu

Since no one else has asked, guess I will (sad git I know ):

Why does increasing Smg's and Semi's balance increased Snipers/MG's and why is it only now we are told this?

2 months ago we got this:

The ratio of bolts to SMG, MGs, etc is the same as it always was. All we're doing is generally retaining the same ratio of different types of weapons that we had before.

Then a couple pages later quoting this

Hmm well I guess I have to beg to differ. I believe there are higher percentages of semis and automatics now.

Percentages are the same: (see ramm-jaegers post in this thread earlier)...

I don't mean to sound harsh, but please, take more care in your feedback if you want it to be taken seriously. If you want to make a point, make a solid point instead of a wild guess.

Then a couple days later someone posts this:

BINGO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Here is some shots from Stalingrad kessel:

Russian 32 player and 50 player:





Assault Class: From 3 SMGs to 8 SMGs
Semi riflement: 2 semis to 5 semis
Machine Gunner: 1 LMG to 2 LMG
Combat Engineers: 2 to 3 (all have SMGs)
Snipers and Commanders are the same.

PROBLEM: The map got 18 extra players, thats around 38% more people, yet the numbers of Assault troopers have gone up over 150%, and the number of semi riflemen are also up 150%.

Considering the additional 38% of players, that means it is reasonable to increase each class by 33-38% to get a whole number.

3 assault troopers should become 4
2 semis should become 3

As of the moment, there are a total of 12 players that can have SMGs for the russians on this map, 5 with semi's and 2 with MGs. That means 20 players have something other then a bolt action. Just 5 of 25 players on a map have a bolt action, and one of those have a sniper, so the last unlucky 4 players on the Russian side have regular non scoped bolt actions.

If the numbers were to be increase in regards to the 38% increase in server population there would be a total of 7 people with SMGs, 3 with semis, and 2 lmgs. That means there would be13 players would have bolt actions and 12 others with SMGs/Semi's/LMGs on the russian side. If the numbers stayed like the 32 player map, with a total of 5 SMGs, 2 semis, and 1 LMG, then the russians would have 17 players with bolt actions and 8 players with SMGs/Semi's/LMGs.

OKAY:

2 Machine guns are not that bad. Given we are fighting with the equivelent of WWII size squads per side, 2 LMGs is reasonable given that is what 2 squads would have overall.

3 combat engineers are a 33% increase, which is perfect since maps now have 38% more people.

Snipers and commanders have remained the same.


German 32 player and 50 player:





Assault Troopers: 3 SMGs to 8 SMGs
Semi Riflement: 2 semi's to 5 semis

PROBLEM:

Exact same as above. 150% increase in both SMGs and Semi's because of an influx of 38% more players. It just doesnt make any sense!

For the Germans they have 9 SMGs, and 5 semis and 2 MGs. means they have 9 players with bolt actions while 16 have SMGs/Semi's/LMGs.

If the numbers were to be increase in regards to the 38% increase in server population there would be a total of 4 people with SMGs, 3 with semis, and 2 lmgs. That means 16 players would have bolt actions on the German side while 9 would have SMGs/Semi's/LMGs. If the numbers stayed like the 32 player map, with a total of 3 SMGs, 2 semis, and 2 LMG, then the Germans would have 18 players with bolt actions and 7 players with SMGs/Semi's/LMGs.

As you can see, the numbers for many of the classes have more then doubled in many cases and others have stayed the same. Regardless the percentages of the old 32 map are not the same as the percentages of the 50 player.

That right there is what I am angry about. There simply is no reason why the number of SMGs and Semi's should be so high. When I am able I will provide more of these comparisons.

There were no more comments on the number of smg's/semi's answering wokelly's points from what I can tell. Now 2 months later and its "balance" reasons for increased numbers? Why was it flatly denied originally and then no more comment until now? I also don't see how semi's and smg's counter snipers/mg's..they counter other smg's, semis and bolts who get too close. If you want to kill a mg or sniper effectively you either outsnipe em or use a bolt, or get close and use a nade from behind cover (the least viable option).

If it was just not known that the numbers had gone up when Ramm and Sas posted that would make sense, but if it was for balance reasons on maps why was it not mentioned at the time? Thats what people were asking about but it was denied. And only a few days ago ramm's post was quoted again to contradict people saying the ratio's had changed.

I don't know how many maps have had such increases in smgs and semis but from what I could tell there were 4 examples given by WoKelly, but I don't know if thats the full extent. I assume its all maps with increased snipers/mg's though.

Once again, I'm not looking to flame or cause arguments, I just like things honest and open, and if I'm barking up the wrong tree then sorry apologies in advance .

I know you guys are busy and mistakes are made, so no accusations or anything from me - Just wondering if you can clear that up a bit.

TA

edit: also something I just noticed - on the second map in the bit I quoted from WoKelly you can see that infact there are no increases in Snipers or MG's on that map yet there are twice the smg's (100%), more than twice semis's and only 38% more players. If you applied the formula on that map (with no alterations due to increased snipers/mg's) it would be 4 x 1.56 (the value Ramm used in his run-down of Danzig) = 6 and 2 x 1.56 = 3. Yet it is 8 and 5 which means there are 8 fewer bolts in total for that map, 4 per team. I know the figures of 4 and 2 originally were probably arbitrary and could have been something else if the mapper decided that, i'm not commenting on the map and balance - just the fact that the increases seem to me to be incorrect.
​

 

[Sabu]

All I said is we made adjustments to not unbalance the maps by adding more snipers and LMG's. I am not going into detail on the process that we went through anymore than what Ramm said. You will need to get Sas or Ramm to explain it.

Something to keep in mind is that if we notice major balance issues things will be adjusted. Also just because there are more possible Smg slots does not mean there are less bolt slots... We did not take any rifleman(Bolts) away. when you see them listed in the role select screen with a zero that means they are unlimited. =)


Sabu

 

[melipone]

We did not take any rifleman(Bolts) away. when you see them listed in the role select screen with a zero that means they are unlimited. =)

Sabu

Yep but when was the last time you saw a map like Stalingrad Kessel with SMG slots free . Still means there will be fewer bolts per team because people will want to take the easiest slots rather than something challenging like a bolt. Thats why there are class limits in the first place - RO never used to be about everyone having a smg if they wanted one, running around hipping like its deathmatch. Why not have unlimited SMG's in that case? People could still be riflemen if they wanted . Anyway the main point I was trying to make was that the increased limits were denied originally, but that doesn't seem to true now IMO and I haven't seen a comment about it from Ramm or Sas since. They aren't slight increases too in some cases - look at those first couple of screenshots - looks like a bit of overkill for "balancing" 1 extra mg..still only 1 sniper..and I still don't get how smg's and semi's balance snipers/mg's at all.

Cheers

 

[Elwood_Hirsch]

IMO if anything anything is interfering with my enjoyment of this game and it's community, its not the ratio of autos to bolts, it is self centered, selfish WHINERS!