Most of the day the XTA autohosts are never used, there are eight autohost servers and they take up room in the games list. Is there a reason for there being 8 Autohosts? And also the ammount of additional spam you get from maplink and modlink bot commands opening up 8 different windows.
Preferably atleast 1-2 Autohosts of the same MOD should only really be active.
Your thoughts?
Eight XTA Autohosts... Are they nessessary?
Moderator: Moderators
A few autohosts are hardly that hard to scroll past, i manage to filter through enough altored games.
The XTA autohost 1, provided kindly by myg, has 100+ hrs in game. I am one of the only members of RoX who can host, and because of my hilarious router, i can't host for half of RoX, so we use the autohost. In fact, most XTA games are played on that autohost.
Fair craic, 8 is excessive, but imo it would be more constructive to take it up with the people running the bots, not the mods.
The XTA autohost 1, provided kindly by myg, has 100+ hrs in game. I am one of the only members of RoX who can host, and because of my hilarious router, i can't host for half of RoX, so we use the autohost. In fact, most XTA games are played on that autohost.
Fair craic, 8 is excessive, but imo it would be more constructive to take it up with the people running the bots, not the mods.
how about just 2 autohostspintle wrote:A few autohosts are hardly that hard to scroll past, i manage to filter through enough altored games.
The XTA autohost 1, provided kindly by myg, has 100+ hrs in game. I am one of the only members of RoX who can host, and because of my hilarious router, i can't host for half of RoX, so we use the autohost. In fact, most XTA games are played on that autohost.
Fair craic, 8 is excessive, but imo it would be more constructive to take it up with the people running the bots, not the mods.
-
SwiftSpear
- Classic Community Lead
- Posts: 7287
- Joined: 12 Aug 2005, 09:29
I like playing on autohost servers generally... I'm a little confused why the XTA hoster has decided they need 8 autohost servers, I rarely see more then 1 game going on, but it's not like I'm going to ban them for being empty most of the time. As long as it doesn't start getting annoying, IE, I have to scroll down 3 times to view a non autohost server.
I'm not sure who's hosting them, but seriously, you're pushing it with 8, don't try the limits.
I'm not sure who's hosting them, but seriously, you're pushing it with 8, don't try the limits.
-
Complicated
- Posts: 369
- Joined: 06 Jun 2007, 18:51
-
KingRaptor
- Zero-K Developer
- Posts: 838
- Joined: 14 Mar 2007, 03:44
IMO those autohosts should exit if they are not used.
Example, if one autohost has like 4 players, one more autohost will connect to the lobby, and if that second autohost has players in, another autohost will connect, and so on... and when there is many empty autohosts, it would quit all autohosts but one.
So basically there would always be just one waiting for players.
Example, if one autohost has like 4 players, one more autohost will connect to the lobby, and if that second autohost has players in, another autohost will connect, and so on... and when there is many empty autohosts, it would quit all autohosts but one.
So basically there would always be just one waiting for players.
I think you also fail to release that most people who try xta for the first time are unable to host. They have to learn usually that the autohosts are probably going to be more useful to them then actual hosts. As it appears to be 8 autohosts, I notice some numbers inbetween missing. Although if really think scrolling down is so hard and such a damm nuisance, can't you not sort games by the mod?
i think there is no reason to do that. Other multiplayer games like CS also have many empty hosts. but there you have the ability to filter (empy, full, passworded...) I think its a lobby-task to filter unused hosts but not a lobby task to shut them down...IMO those autohosts should exit if they are not used.
