8 players to 16 players limit (and back)

8 players to 16 players limit (and back)

Post just about everything that isn't directly related to Spring here!

Moderator: Moderators

Post Reply
User avatar
ThinkSome
Posts: 276
Joined: 14 Jun 2015, 13:36

8 players to 16 players limit (and back)

Post by ThinkSome » 20 Apr 2019, 15:10

I propose a change to make everyone happy:

Forb said this in viewtopic.php?p=590812#p590812: "Moreover, hosting restrictions have always existed. At some point, the player limit was lifted to either 16 or 32 players from 8. At the time, this change was widely credited with killing off the majority of the community."

I also got feedback from certain warzone2100 dev that they regret enabling 5v5 (up from 4v4 limit).

So... why not revert the limit back to 8 players for all games, irrespective of bot flags? Then, when a particular version of a particular game can have 3 simultaneous running public matches, we can talk about lifting the limit for a short period of time (say, on sundays).

We should also talk about spectators. I believe spectators in their current form are extremely harmful and should be disabled entirely (warzone2100 has no spectator support at all).
1 x

User avatar
Silentwings
Moderator
Posts: 3579
Joined: 25 Oct 2008, 00:23

Re: 8 players to 16 players limit (and back)

Post by Silentwings » 20 Apr 2019, 16:23

This gets a no from me.

Many maps and game modes were designed based on having 16 players, this would waste alot of past work. Many people enjoy spectating and won't play more if the option is removed (this was tested multiple times in the past, including by me). Being able to run large games is also one of the engines best selling points.

If an individual game wanted these kind of restrictions, but felt unable to impose them itself for whatever reason, then it's basically a server side feature request and would be considered.

(Also, the engines current client limit is 255, iirc.)
4 x

User avatar
ThinkSome
Posts: 276
Joined: 14 Jun 2015, 13:36

Re: 8 players to 16 players limit (and back)

Post by ThinkSome » 20 Apr 2019, 17:11

What good is this past work if there are no players to enjoy it?

I can understand that you enjoy spectating and I can understand that a lot of people enjoy playing 8v8 games, but this is simply unsustainable and killing this community in the long run.

I am not suggesting this to be implemented overnight like the BA disaster, I am suggesting that the changes be gradual, first 20 spectator limit that reduces by 1 every month and first 14 player limit that reduces by 2 every 2-3 months. When you introduce gradual changes, the revolts will be minimal if at all.

In warzone2100, there is only an IRC chatroom for which you need an external client. As already put, there are no spectators and a 5v5 limit for games, which are de-listed from lobby as soon as they start. There is also no trueskill for balancing (and whining/teamkilling) and ranks are meaningless. In wz, newbies have no problem with finding a game for themselves immidiately after they connect and from my observations, most of the games hosted are 3v3.

In wz, noone complains about lack of spectating and noone complains about the 5v5 limit. And there are always other hosts, so there is no need to join toxic ones if you want to play a match.
0 x

Flash
Posts: 32
Joined: 12 Dec 2010, 18:03

Re: 8 players to 16 players limit (and back)

Post by Flash » 20 Apr 2019, 18:20

ThinkSome wrote:
20 Apr 2019, 17:11

I can understand that you enjoy spectating and I can understand that a lot of people enjoy playing 8v8 games, but this is simply unsustainable and killing this community in the long run.
So you really think restricting players options would make players choose the option you prefer? (watch official server and you will have the answer)
How is having an active 8vs8 community unsustainable and "killing the community"?
Only thing i see is some devs having a real pleasure killing the community while telling them its all in the interest of the players...
0 x

User avatar
ThinkSome
Posts: 276
Joined: 14 Jun 2015, 13:36

Re: 8 players to 16 players limit (and back)

Post by ThinkSome » 20 Apr 2019, 18:39

Flash wrote:
20 Apr 2019, 18:20
How come I never saw BA 10v10 or 16v16? Do you miss playing BA 10v10+? How come I never saw complaints about there never being BA 10v10+ rooms?

Here is a snapshot into warzone right now:

18:28:22 wzbot | 6 games: Wolles _Spiel (Sk-Pyramidal-T1 by Wolfgang) [4/4] (v: master 3279398), Asbo (Sk-BeggarsKanyon-T1 by Asbot) [8/8] (v: 3.3.0-beta1), KOMU LIuLEI_ (C-Clamp2x2DR-T1 by Luka) [3/4] (v: 3.3.0-beta1), Torzhestvo demokratii (NTW_3v3wBases-T1 by tomato_Cat) [3/6] (v: 3.3.0-beta1), classic low oil map (Fantastic-T1 by vaut SA [GN]) [4/4] (v: 3.3.0-beta1), Khopat (Sk-Rush by Khopat) [1/2]

Wz has 6 game rooms with 23 players while spring lobby has one game room with 23 people in it. Which one do you think is more fun? And which one is better for newbies and regulars alike?

Warzone players are not complaining, they are having fun.
0 x

Flash
Posts: 32
Joined: 12 Dec 2010, 18:03

Re: 8 players to 16 players limit (and back)

Post by Flash » 20 Apr 2019, 18:44

Ok
So there are devs that even care less for the wishes of their users. Nice argument
0 x

User avatar
very_bad_soldier
Posts: 1371
Joined: 20 Feb 2007, 01:10

Re: 8 players to 16 players limit (and back)

Post by very_bad_soldier » 20 Apr 2019, 18:49

Warzone is a different game. Why would you assume that everything that works for them will also be good for every other RTS out there? Also you did not explain a tiny bit what the problem is with 8v8.
Players playing 8v8 were also having fun and not complaining about 8v8 being bad. So I don't really see your point, sorry.
0 x

malric
Posts: 515
Joined: 30 Dec 2005, 22:22

Re: 8 players to 16 players limit (and back)

Post by malric » 20 Apr 2019, 18:52

ThinkSome wrote:
20 Apr 2019, 15:10
We should also talk about spectators. I believe spectators in their current form are extremely harmful and should be disabled entirely (warzone2100 has no spectator support at all).
Why do you believe that? What are the current problems with spectators around here? Having muted spectators could already help with many annoying problems that I can imagine... (spectators could still chat between themselves but not with others).
0 x

hokomoko
Spring Developer
Posts: 575
Joined: 02 Jun 2014, 00:46

Re: 8 players to 16 players limit (and back)

Post by hokomoko » 21 Apr 2019, 00:14

Being able to support games with many players and with spectators is a selling point of spring. I can see no situation in which it is imposed in a wide manner.
However, if there is a requirement to allow gamedevs to impose player-count limits or to disable spectating, it might be considered.
Note that lobby support will also be needed so you don't find yourself starting a game just to get an error message (or worse, timeout).
1 x

User avatar
Forboding Angel
Evolution RTS Developer
Posts: 14571
Joined: 17 Nov 2005, 02:43

Re: 8 players to 16 players limit (and back)

Post by Forboding Angel » 21 Apr 2019, 01:21

Edit: I don't think my post helped anything.

Edit2: I actually kind of like/support what thinksome is going for here.

Here is the problem that we run into...

Small communities like Evo only see games once in a while. Sometimes we will get together and play non-stop for 6 or 8 hours and then not play for days. A lot of times there are small games that happen.

I just had a thought. What if autohosts did not allow specs, but self hosting did? There are a lot of community benefits to having self hosted games be the norm. Self hosts games are the primary reason that spring grew so large back in AA's heyday.

Edit3: in case it isn't obvious, the above are rules that would have to be enforced by the various autohosts as it makes no sense to try to enforce it via the lobbyserver.
0 x

User avatar
FLOZi
MC: Legacy & Spring 1944 Developer
Posts: 6100
Joined: 29 Apr 2005, 01:14

Re: 8 players to 16 players limit (and back)

Post by FLOZi » 21 Apr 2019, 11:38

1 x

User avatar
Jools
XTA Developer
Posts: 2804
Joined: 23 Feb 2009, 16:29

Re: 8 players to 16 players limit (and back)

Post by Jools » 21 Apr 2019, 18:14

What's the problem? Autohosts can restrict games to a certain number of players.
1 x

User avatar
Forboding Angel
Evolution RTS Developer
Posts: 14571
Joined: 17 Nov 2005, 02:43

Re: 8 players to 16 players limit (and back)

Post by Forboding Angel » 21 Apr 2019, 22:18

Yeah, the problem with an endeavour like this is that it would require the support of all autohost owners to enforce, and then another one would just crop up and the whole thing falls apart.

I could see it potentially working if there were a way to enforce it.
0 x

User avatar
flop
Posts: 335
Joined: 22 Nov 2006, 05:44

Re: 8 players to 16 players limit (and back)

Post by flop » 29 Apr 2019, 02:37

it was 5v5 max back in the day to be clear, not 4v4
0 x

User avatar
Forboding Angel
Evolution RTS Developer
Posts: 14571
Joined: 17 Nov 2005, 02:43

Re: 8 players to 16 players limit (and back)

Post by Forboding Angel » 29 Apr 2019, 02:55

Unless I'm mistaken, it started out at 4v4(2005-2006ish?) and was increased at some point to 5v5.
0 x

User avatar
flop
Posts: 335
Joined: 22 Nov 2006, 05:44

Re: 8 players to 16 players limit (and back)

Post by flop » 29 Apr 2019, 04:40

it was 5v5 when i started in 2005. either way, you're saying it may have been 4v4 for the FIRST year of spring. it was 5v5 for MANY years
0 x

User avatar
PicassoCT
Journeywar Developer & Mapper
Posts: 10200
Joined: 24 Jan 2006, 21:12

Re: 8 players to 16 players limit (and back)

Post by PicassoCT » 29 Apr 2019, 07:28

Specs should get a delayed replay
0 x

User avatar
PicassoCT
Journeywar Developer & Mapper
Posts: 10200
Joined: 24 Jan 2006, 21:12

Re: 8 players to 16 players limit (and back)

Post by PicassoCT » 29 Apr 2019, 07:31

FLOZi wrote:
21 Apr 2019, 11:38
I can predict the future.

viewtopic.php?f=12&t=31006&p=548532&hil ... st#p548532
The wheel of dev turns without a end nor a beginning, but there is a end, and there is a beginning
0 x

Post Reply

Return to “Off Topic Discussion”