Big servers are a BIG mistake

  • Please make sure you are familiar with the forum rules. You can find them here: https://forums.tripwireinteractive.com/index.php?threads/forum-rules.2334636/
  • Weve updated the Tripwire Privacy Notice under our Policies to be clearer about our use of customer information to come in line with the EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) rules that come into force today (25th May 2018). The following are highlights of our changes:


    We've incorporated the relevant concepts from the GDPR including joining the EU and Swiss Privacy Shield framework. We've added explanations for why and how Tripwire processes customer data and the types of data that we process, as well as information about your data protection rights.



    For more information about our privacy practices, please review the new Privacy Policy found here: https://tripwireinteractive.com/#/privacy-notice

MILK

FNG / Fresh Meat
Nov 22, 2005
880
0
0
Czech
2m.toh.cz
the FLOT 32-man server was recently shut, and one other one that is escaping me right now (apologies). Both cited recent drop offs in players. I will try and find the info on the other.

I like the 50-man servers, personally, for playing on. What I am saying is, they are indeed causing other servers to shut down. that's just that way it is.

it means that all players that ever played on that server play now on 50men server... thats nonsence... 50men servers cannot be the reason why players stop playing on that server. Btw if I looked at these big servers lately I noticed that there are almost only non clan players and thus it is much easier to find <32men servers where is bigger population of clan players thus much bigger possibility of higher cooperation of smaller teams = more fun for many players = all what many people were looking for. This is what I see :)
 

BL4Z3>FAS>

FNG / Fresh Meat
Dec 13, 2005
199
11
0
Well some maps are better with the big counts some are not , there is still choice as the big count servers are not really that many , I had read someone asking why the 50 player servers were never full not long ago
So there is always going to be some that prefer different size player counts & so on,
I dont mind them on some maps but as I have said before the only real issues (other than personal preference on the player count size for certaian maps) would be fps , It affects me to the point where some maps are unplayable ,I'm not complaining about it ,I just dont play those , but rather I have always been confused about it , because it seems it affects such a wide array of rigs I have heard people get all new top of the line hardware configure it all correctly & then complain of unplayable fps meanwhile I will be playing with someone who has much older gear almost down to minimum specs & have great fps numbers
It seems to be the way it goes with this engine , some certain combinations of hardware seem to be able to deal with it much better than others for whatever reason regardless of what's "the Newest " or "The best" either you have the lucky combination , or your machine struggles to be playable .It's weird
Its always gonna be a great game & I think they would have to do something much more drastic than up the player count to hurt it , as long as they can keep it playable for the average machine , people will play it , If ALL servers were 50 player servers I think you might see some drop off as many rigs start to bog ...
but for now there is enough choice so , to each his own,...
 

Cnnbs

FNG / Fresh Meat
Feb 16, 2006
208
0
0
Nades and smgs.
Either got killed by a nade or by a semi-auto or smg %90 of the time in those servers(except kaukausus berezina kyuko) but still they are pretty fun to play in with a MG-42,so i still keep playing up in those servers.
 

monster

FNG / Fresh Meat
Jul 17, 2006
334
10
0
The 50 player servers give a much better immersion feeling.

WW2 combat (for the most part) as depicted in RO was not four or five guys sniping each other. It was a massed conflict with a lot of people and equipment per square km.

A 100 person server may do a better job of depicting what it was really like.
 

EvilHobo

Grizzled Veteran
Dec 22, 2005
2,613
192
63
Germany, NRW
Then I feel that your view of how WWII combat was is terribly skewed. The war was not fought by idiots running senselessly in to enemy fire which clutching or throwing grenades. Furthermore, 50 players depict the rifle as a minority weapon putting greater emphasis on SMGs and Semi-Automatic rifles. Such just simply was not the case in the war.
 

Dwarden

FNG / Fresh Meat
Nov 23, 2005
205
29
0
well ... and now imagine the hell if real number of grenades were issues in ROO :)

now some people claim it's spam fest but in WW2 anytime it was possible nade was used

if whole or most of team applies valid tactic, then any war game with more players feels great

yeah about newbies running blindly around ... imagine they soldiers who lost nerves, wounded (deaf, blinded, shocked etc) ...

war is hell
 

melipone

FNG / Fresh Meat
Mar 22, 2006
1,672
259
0
More realism cherry picking :D .

Its ok to have hundreds of nades flying about (OMG THE REALISM), but no mention of the unrealistic elements such as number of semi's (or smg's) to bolt ratio or anything else that supports your preference in gameplay but is unrealistic. Jeez its a game, stop the realism fantasies and think of the gameplay, and when you do site realism as being the main reason at least try not to be biased and only dwell on certain bits like the numbers. In a war would you know where everyone probably is? Would you lob your last nade without caring because you will respawn soon? Would you whip em out so fast or put em away again like you do? Would you aim them so well? Would they make nearly no sound when they land? Would you cook them so much that they explode on impact or in the air near the enemy (would fuses be identical for each nade, would you risk it blowing up killing your team mates)? Would you run around with them out? Would you drop one right next to you because you will die soon anyway and might as well get a frag? Would you have them instantly in your hands if someone shot your gun away? Would you hurl them without much care as soon as you entered a combat area before you even saw an enemy? I know people want a semi realistic game, but arguing about realism when really you're talking about the realistic bits that support your view of gameplay is annoying and seems to happen in every thread. If it was realism people were worried about I think they would talk about all the above things too, but no its just the numbers because IMO, its the thought of losing the nade kills that makes people want to keep them as they are.

Personally, I don't care about the realism so much as the gameplay, because I know the game isn't trying to be 100% realistic in the first place. PLEASE just talk about the gameplay or don't cherry pick the realistic bits that you like the sound of. I said this before in the nade thread..its not aimed at anyone in particular, just people that always site realism as a reason to have the gameplay the way they want, but only mention the bits that appeal to them, and still only argue about realism and not gameplay :confused: . I think theres that side, and also the belief in some people that TW are perfect and everything in the game must be perfect and realistic because thats how they made it.

Getting back on topic anyway, I think the 50 player servers are fun but it feels like a newbified version of RO sometimes with all the nades flying about and the number of smg/semi's. Doesn't bother me though since I don't play on them much.​
 
Last edited:

causticbeet

FNG / Fresh Meat
May 2, 2007
11
0
0
I think that if the smg to bolt ratio was adjusted a bit so that there were a good deal less smgs, alot of the balance would be restored. You cant really run and gun with a kark
 

monster

FNG / Fresh Meat
Jul 17, 2006
334
10
0
Then I feel that your view of how WWII combat was is terribly skewed. The war was not fought by idiots running senselessly in to enemy fire which clutching or throwing grenades. Furthermore, 50 players depict the rifle as a minority weapon putting greater emphasis on SMGs and Semi-Automatic rifles. Such just simply was not the case in the war.

I did not make one mention of the weapons in the game, nor did I seek to denigrate fellow players.

I am on record as saying that reinforcements should depict realistic weapon mixes in plattoons and battalions. When a certain number of support weapons (read MG, Semis, and SMGs) are depleted, only rifles are left. The argument against was that it would affect gameplay. I didn't see you pitch in on that dialogue. :)

Again, I cannot make it much more clear. WW2 Comabt, especially the romantic type of Eastern Front combat that appeals to *this* gamer, is division level, not half-squad level.

Melipone brings up an excellent point, if I am reading him right. The irony on online "realism FPS" games is that the fire and hit ratios are FAR higher than real life. The SA is also vastly higher. Coupled with memorized maps, the gameplay relative to realism is certain to take a dive.

Now to disagree with him- the number of players does nothing to help these things, but more players certainly makes the arena much more deadly.

Having played online games for more than 15 years, I can tell you I'm looking for challenge in the most deadly environment possible, while feeling immersed in my romantic notion of WW2 combat. RO with 50 (and hopefully more) players pulls it off quite nicely.

I wonder if the folks who are so vehemently against larger servers have found themselves in a brand new challenge that they can't quite figure out? :) Easy to attack "gameplay" when it isn't an environment that lets you succeed. :)

One day, game developers will find a way to represent real life fire and hit ratios. Until then, most talk of realistic gameplay amongst the players is somewhat of a moot point.
 

melipone

FNG / Fresh Meat
Mar 22, 2006
1,672
259
0
Now to disagree with him- the number of players does nothing to help these things, but more players certainly makes the arena much more deadly.

Having played online games for more than 15 years, I can tell you I'm looking for challenge in the most deadly environment possible, while feeling immersed in my romantic notion of WW2 combat. RO with 50 (and hopefully more) players pulls it off quite nicely.

I wonder if the folks who are so vehemently against larger servers have found themselves in a brand new challenge that they can't quite figure out? :) Easy to attack "gameplay" when it isn't an environment that lets you succeed. :)

Challenge is good of course. I think thats why most people play RO. But I don't think more players makes the game more challenging, it just adds to the random factor exponentially - theres way more chance of being hit by a random nade now because theres more of them and more players in each part of the map. I like challenge but not the random kind like you get sometimes. Counter-strike is challenging, even moreso than RO in some ways but the challenge comes from the randomness - no matter what you do in CS there is ALWAYS a random factor that has to be on your side or you lose..thats not the type of challenge that interests me. I like the kind of challenge that you get from having to think about your positioning, stance, cover, aim, how often you can make an accurate shot every second or so, controlling recoil, judging distance, anticipating a persons movements, deciding to stab or hip shoot..thats the sort of thing I enjoy, not getting blown up from some person that pressed 2, left click and hoped for a couple of kills. Getting nade kills yourself are unsatisfying because they are so easy and getting naded doesn't give you the feeling you've been beaten by someone like you do with all the other weapons in the game...you just got unlucky. All you can do to avoid nades is not go to cap zones..you will get naded no matter what. Also the more random the guns are the less fun the game is for me - I'd much rather get shot by a bolt than an smg just because you know the player really had to have some skill to do that..smg and semi's are much easier.

Challenge is only fun if the player 90% of the time has control of his success and failure. Randomness just means you lose but for no reason other than bad luck. Players have to be so much better when they can't relly on their pocket nukes for easy kills - you can see it on Splat now with reduced nades, especially on maps like Lysekrovy.
 
Last edited:

monster

FNG / Fresh Meat
Jul 17, 2006
334
10
0
Well, I think that the added randomness adds a whole new need to be aware of position, SA, etc.

I'm not sure that SMGs and Semis are any easier than any other weapon, they just represent a different envelope of effectiveness. If I have negated the effectiveness of these weapons, then I ahve remained in ym envelope- a very challenging proposition with more people and the added complexity of the raising of the "random factor".

PS- The souvenirs I brought home from military experience have shown me that in real life, the bulk of wounds and deaths in combat are indeed random. :)
 

melipone

FNG / Fresh Meat
Mar 22, 2006
1,672
259
0
I'm not sure that SMGs and Semis are any easier than any other weapon, they just represent a different envelope of effectiveness.

What I really like about RO is way the weapons are quite nicely balanced..unlike some other games the semi's and smg's rate of fire are balanced by the recoil, accuracy and damage while still giving a semblance of realism and are limited in numbers. I still think generally the smg's and semi's are easier to use though than a bolt as long as you use them in their intended way. They are more versatile imo - they work at quite longer ranges as well as being the easiest/best in cqc. No complaints though since they have their own difficulties too because of the recoil/accuracy. You always have to be accurate with a bolt - miss and you're punished..so they are harder overall. Would be nice though if the bolt always killed in 1 shot as a bit of extra balance - sometimes it just wounds if you shoot someone in the side because you are likely to shoot their arm and it just stops..doesn't go straight through and kill..infact it seems to have gotten worse lately since the last patch, unless i'm mistaken
 

Kipper

FNG / Fresh Meat
Mar 25, 2006
707
114
0
Connecticut, United States
There's a large difference between complaints about grenade spam and realism. Yes, we know grenades were used often in combat. However, people did not run, jump, throw a grenade in midair without actually seeing or knowing an enemy soldier was there. Just play Danzig. The opening moves is always "THROW AS MANY GRENADES IN THE GENERAL DIRECTION OF THE ENEMY AS POSSIBLE."
 

Shpax

FNG / Fresh Meat
Jul 23, 2007
6
0
0
40+ and Team play

40+ and Team play

I've played on a few of the super-sized servers and, for me, I can take it or leave it. Being a die-hard tanker, Arad is particularly painful (more than usual!) as there are inevitably dozens of players lolligagging around the motor pool waiting for their special individual tank to re-spawn- with no thought, of course, towards Team Tanking!


Exactly!
But first of all I would like to say that it is on admin's decision set a server with more than 32 players. How many servers do you see which are less than 32 or 24 etc.?

It is just technical question about a server 40+ and lag. I played many times on 40, 44, 50 servers and on my experience it depends on a server abilities(channel?) to keep such numbers with acceptable ping.

Secondly but this should be the major problem in this case is "no team" play at all or bad team play especially on those tank maps - why, because you need set good tank crew. OK it could be a tank without MG but driver-commander is essential and many players would like or even DEMAND give him/her personal tank.
And if we will follow the analogy to infantry based maps it would be the same but let's say crew is bigger, all people in platoon or just a part but not individual shooter. If you play as lonely wolf with a bunch of such players this would be total disaster every time against good team players who give cover fire and do surgical strikes with good support.

So this is even not about lots of players on Arad or such not big map. There is enough room for people there and mostly with bolt action rifles of course. But imagine there is attacking or defending platoon - exactly about 24+ soldiers (from each side) on an area 200x400m

That is my IMHO based on many game sessions on different maps, servers.
And the most exciting thing is not just rating or kill numbers. It is crew work in tank for example of 2-3 people who do not know each other at all and started just now and driver-commander communication and understanding is so perfect that we can stand against tens of enemy tanks and won't be killed at all in one game session. The same to infantry but of course there will be many deaths from our side but much less stupid ones or TK's
 

Sabu

FNG / Fresh Meat
Nov 12, 2006
65
0
0
You guys and your bolt action and smg ratio's lol OK I'm going to say this one more time....

All of our maps have Unlimited Rifleman slots, we limit all other roles. So if you get 50 of your friends you can all choose bolt and be happy if thats what you want to do but what you are seeing is that a lot of people prefer other weapons over the bolt, and that is why you see more smg's on the field. It's not due to some role limit ratio that you are guessing at. Players have the choice in weapon thats the way it is. If you want bolt on bolt action then maybe the bolt only servers are for you, or if you want, the 32 players servers are still there and just as they were before we added the 50 player server support. There is absolutely no reason for anyone to feel they have the right to say what is fun for all but you have to realize that what you enjoy and the things that are fun for you might not be the same for others. You cant actually expect everyone to play when they are not enjoying themselves and having fun. This is one of the reasons that the 50 player servers is an option. We realize that some liked the game as it was before the 50 player servers we also realized that not everyone would like the 50 player servers so its an option. Btw most of the servers out there are still 32 player or less.

Sabu
 

MILK

FNG / Fresh Meat
Nov 22, 2005
880
0
0
Czech
2m.toh.cz
There's a large difference between complaints about grenade spam and realism. Yes, we know grenades were used often in combat. However, people did not run, jump, throw a grenade in midair without actually seeing or knowing an enemy soldier was there. Just play Danzig. The opening moves is always "THROW AS MANY GRENADES IN THE GENERAL DIRECTION OF THE ENEMY AS POSSIBLE."

this will NEVER change until we play same maps again and again. If the map would be randomly generated then yes. Danzig is obvious with this because this nade exchange happens after every respawn but you have absolutely same thing on every infantry map. At least after initial respawn there is exchange of nades to typical places where opponent can run. Tbh I do not see a single problem in this - it is just one of fatcs that you play GAME not SIMULATION. If you do not like this then play strictly only games with realism settings, than you will hardly experience this "issue".
 

Keystone

FNG / Fresh Meat
Feb 25, 2007
293
8
0
If you want bolt on bolt action then maybe the bolt only servers are for you, or if you want, the 32 players servers are still there and just as they were before we added the 50 player server support.

And where are those 32 servers with custom maps like it were so many before update? The onliest is BOH server now but there aren't interesting custom maps so much. Except for BOH, there isn't ANY server!


Before update of 50 servers there weren't any people complaining about too less smg beacuse they searched exactly like this, some finally realistic game, but now after update is everything busted. People just liked that limits of smg and many people already left RO beacuse of that big mistake of big servers.
 

[5thW]Rehakles[TRO]

FNG / Fresh Meat
Mar 19, 2006
382
0
0
www.5thW.org
still, the biggest problem with the bigger servers is the higher ping, coz most admins seems to raise the player limit beyond what their machines can handle. Both WildBunch-servers are still playable with 50 people (ping only increases from ~50 to ~80), but there are some others where my ping increases from ~50 to ~150+ and you get blank shots and a lot of delay (firing at a wall right in front of you but seeing the impact 5 secs later... (warning: exaggeration!)

edit: I know that nobody forces me to play there, and I dont do so as soon as I notice its gonna be a lag-fest :p