[TERA] Autohosts info - Page 2

[TERA] Autohosts info

Classic game design, maintained to please you...

Moderator: Content Developer

User avatar
albator
Posts: 866
Joined: 14 Jan 2009, 14:20

Re: [TERA] Autohosts info

Post by albator »

FabriceFABS wrote:albator, 7 specs is really enough on a 1V1. As far as I'm concerned, I never saw 16 specs on a 1V1.
This demonstrate you are not really aware of what is going on

Every single night, there are more than 7 specs on 1v1 host, as far it is not noob playing

On nice team game 2v2-like ccr game with good player attract easily 20 spec

last tourney 1v1 was 25++ spec

...

Once again, it is good for noob to spec and learn and to lets them watch some gg
FabriceFABS wrote: It's time to apply on all autohosts this «7 specs project» on all autohosts and stopping about discuss it.
Forcing people not to discuss because they counter your argumentation is not the way to go


[LOeT]Brenner wrote:I'm not sure if everyone knows it, but the idea with maxspec 7 was from beginning only for hosts with min. 6v6.
bibim wanted more spectators in small games (like 1v1 or 2v2) because he thinks that people who spectate there really dont want to play. They only want to spectate.
+1
User avatar
FabriceFABS
Posts: 351
Joined: 28 Jul 2010, 16:20

Re: [TERA] Autohosts info

Post by FabriceFABS »

albator Are you blind ? Did I forced some1 since october 2011 ?
Seems that you really want to annoy me. Stop sending me some attacks, and leave me alone, thx.
User avatar
knorke
Posts: 7971
Joined: 22 Feb 2006, 01:02

Re: [TERA] Autohosts info

Post by knorke »

moved to BA forum because badsd is not a "general" spring thing.
muckl
Posts: 151
Joined: 30 Aug 2010, 07:18

Re: [TERA] Autohosts info

Post by muckl »

sorry knorke
its not badsd - its ba
DSD is just an oldschool name of the server- we have different maps on it
klapmongool
Posts: 843
Joined: 13 Aug 2007, 13:19

Re: [TERA] Autohosts info

Post by klapmongool »

Wow guys. Lets appreciate what is going on here. Autohost owners got together and came to an agreement to improve the situation for players. That alone is huge. But there is more.

These are great decisions. Limiting the clients per host to 24 is awesome. Limiting the madness on dsdhosts is great. This will reduce playerhogging. We might actually see more games played simultaneously.





All that said. Yes, if someone wants to do a Koom-valley-only-autohost he should definitely be allowed to make it 14v14.
User avatar
Cheesecan
Posts: 1571
Joined: 07 Feb 2005, 21:30

Re: [TERA] Autohosts info

Post by Cheesecan »

Large amount of specs and players is is the reason why everything is dying. Why the f*** do people spec so much? Never seen this is any other game. Things have never been this bad before.

How about having a 1v1 day every week where the max number of players allowed in any game is 2, and max number of specs is 3.

Waiting times have gone up to ~1 hour if you don't play ZK or BADSD. The only other game I can recall having such waiting times was Civ3 and that's because nobody played it plus it was turn-based and took forever.

The failure of BA is 100% on the autohost owners for allowing this crap.
Manmax
Posts: 76
Joined: 19 May 2011, 13:57

Re: [TERA] Autohosts info

Post by Manmax »

I had a friend who loved Starcraft 1vs1 Lost Temple. He ended up speccing only, it was less stressful!

If I can allow myself a comment, I side with Alba. If the goal is to limit speccers actually simply waiting to join, then don't apply it to smaller games.

As for the player limit to create more simultaneous games, then it's always the same dilemma: is it possible to force people to do what you want...? Especially if they came for large games...? Maybe it's worth a try...
[LOeT]Brenner
Posts: 25
Joined: 19 Oct 2011, 01:33

Re: [TERA] Autohosts info

Post by [LOeT]Brenner »

For everyone who didnt notice the update:
There is a 24-clients-rule and 8v8 max now.

That means that max. allowed game now is 8v8 with 8 spectators. Or 7v7 with 10 spectatots. Or 6v6 with 12 spectators etc.
User avatar
very_bad_soldier
Posts: 1387
Joined: 20 Feb 2007, 01:10

Re: [TERA] Autohosts info

Post by very_bad_soldier »

Its more a like gentlemen's agreement rather than a strict rule in my opinion.
[LOeT]Brenner
Posts: 25
Joined: 19 Oct 2011, 01:33

Re: [TERA] Autohosts info

Post by [LOeT]Brenner »

Sure. Because strikt rules are not even possible. "allowed" might be a unfortunate word choice from me.
User avatar
marciolino
Posts: 268
Joined: 06 Sep 2010, 22:59

Re: [TERA] Autohosts info

Post by marciolino »

Thanks guys! I really appreciate these decisions.
User avatar
Silentwings
Moderator
Posts: 3668
Joined: 25 Oct 2008, 00:23

Re: [TERA] Autohosts info

Post by Silentwings »

+1 to this spirit of cooperation :)
User avatar
[LOeT]Zinn
Posts: 33
Joined: 19 Oct 2009, 01:27

Re: [TERA] Autohosts info

Post by [LOeT]Zinn »

Jazcash wrote:Finally. Glad somebody's at least making a bit of effort to prevent massive games on stupid maps.
The best thing to avoid stupid maps with stupid settings is not taking part in the actual games and go elsewhere:

http://i141.photobucket.com/albums/r51/ ... ed-1-5.jpg

I really wonder why you are playing "this shit" and at the same time you are raging about it. See http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/integrity

"Ofc I hate the government I recently voted for."
User avatar
Jazcash
Posts: 5302
Joined: 08 Dec 2007, 17:39

Re: [TERA] Autohosts info

Post by Jazcash »

[LOeT]Zinn wrote: The best thing to avoid stupid maps with stupid settings is not taking part in the actual games and go elsewhere:

http://i141.photobucket.com/albums/r51/ ... ed-1-5.jpg

I really wonder why you are playing "this shit" and at the same time you are raging about it.
Since I've been back I've played about 2 or 3 DSD games out of say, 70-90 odd games. Trust me, I avoid it like the plague. The reason it annoys me is because all the players it keeps churning out are terrible on anything but 16+ DSD, even with over 300 hours ingame time. It used to be the case that a player with that kind of rank was at the top, now I rarely see good rank 6 players or even Veteran players tbh.

It steals all the players, and is horrifying to actually play. This is why it bugs me.

[LOeT]Zinn wrote:"Ofc I hate the government I recently voted for."
At this point you might as well argue with yourself because this situation is nothing like that.
zerver
Spring Developer
Posts: 1358
Joined: 16 Dec 2006, 20:59

Re: [TERA] Autohosts info

Post by zerver »

[LOeT]Brenner wrote:For everyone who didnt notice the update:
There is a 24-clients-rule and 8v8 max now.

That means that max. allowed game now is 8v8 with 8 spectators. Or 7v7 with 10 spectatots. Or 6v6 with 12 spectators etc.
Nice. Now maybe we can have 2 or more big games running simultaneously every night.
Pako
Posts: 174
Joined: 12 Jul 2009, 18:57

Re: [TERA] Autohosts info

Post by Pako »

OK, this spectator limiting nonsense again. I thought I tried to explain the last time how it is a bad idea but let's try again.

Remember about 6 months ago about the same group of people tried it:
FabriceFABS, 29 Oct 2011 wrote:To this, I added 7 max specs on each host instead of 12.
This is enough.
I encourage all other autohosts owners to do the same.
very_bad_soldier, 29 Oct 2011 wrote:I did that too some days ago at x-host... 8 specs though.
dansan, 29 Oct 2011 wrote: Thank you Fabrice and vbs for trying out different settings, and reporting relevant information here. Some knowledge through empiric research could really help this discussion (analysis?).

@muckl - could you also try lowering the specs-limit (not the player-limit) of the TERRA servers for a week or so? If we could convince the admin of Galdos to also do that (at the same time), we could finally gather some information if spec-limit is relevant to player-host-distribution or not.

--> One "BA-dying-theory" proved right/wrong --> community can move on --> use its time to improve other things --> community has worked together for a common goal --> good community
muckl, 29 Oct 2011 wrote:i changed maxspec to 10 on both hosts
Did anyone check how it succeeded? Luckily there are player stats which update hourly so the checking is easier than easy.

BA events:
23.04.2011 Controversial new gameplay changes for BA
29.10.2011 Authost admins decided to limit spectator count
Image
Looks like that the spectator community took a huge hit but next to none influence on player count at least no upwards. Also this and some other graphs could succest that the downhill of BA was just to an end a month before this spectator limiting took effect so the limiting might have introduced a new downhill for BA?

There was also a few high newb influx spikes at the winter (engine updates?) but either they joined ZK or mostly left. Probably because the noobs can't even spectate they are more likely to quit when get kicked by speclimit. Looking the TERA host logs reveals there are over 2000 player kicks by a spectator limit. Why not just lock the host when it is full, instead of kick?

Other ways of figuring out what this spectator limiting and kicking affects are, would be just to ask people. Sending a PM to about 100 BA players would take only maybe 5 minutes and collecting the answers a hour later maybe 10 minutes. But of course it is more funny to just invent rules to control how people should enjoy their game.
FabriceFABS wrote:Time to apply changes and see how it reacts.More action and less thinking !
lol

So this spec limiting was meant to solve many problems? Increase player count, faster game starting, "forcing specs to play" etc.? Is there any factual proof that any of that happend and not just alienating a certain spectator group? I don't think so, there seems to be still the same 1-3 big battles and even the FFA is gone.

I think BA is very enjoyable "spectator sport" even without an active competitive scene and it should not be limited ever!

I am not saying all changes are necessarily horribly bad, still forcing people by your rules is nearly always bad IMO. Well as dead BA is, 3 autohost owners and their man love gangs are actually big amount of the playerbase so it's not that bad to make rules for themselves but don't forget the new players or casual players either.

What might been happening here is that often dying communities effectively kill themselves by wondering something is wrong and rather than fixing the real problems they make up new problems with badly panicked changes. It is intriguing to try easy brainless fixes, when fixing the real problems is still a hard work.

IMO other easy fixes which would have been a lot better:
-make the map rotation after 3 in a row with same map
-only good maps in map rotation (there are only couple of good BA maps around)
-ban cheaters and griefers (there have been huge lack of effectivity for banning the harmful players, probably the most usual reason for a ban was insulting a moderator/admin)
-don't let experienced players rage against new players too much

There are positively revarding ways to control how people play and what games they join, limiting and controlling is a negative way of achieving things. Still the problems of dimishing playerbase is probably elsewhere and autohost owners won't do much about it.
muckl wrote:so for me its OK as long as all other important most played autohosts (BA) follow the rule.
In many other games admins unite too, though their first goal is not to make 'rules' for other hosts and all players like here, but to have united banning policies for abuse and shared ban databases.

The other TERA rules looks perfect though.

The other recently hasty change to control how people should enjoy their BA is removing DSD from most popular autohosts. Well most experienced players hate DSD but most casual and new players like it and what is not to like: all tech levels in use, the game duration is ok and the strategies are straightforward.

IMO removing DSD is very bad, it just moves the casual BA DSD style game to other map and kills FFA when players who dislike DSD gameplay are tricked to the fake BADSD in other map.
Attachments
graph_56_5_aa.png
(117.67 KiB) Downloaded 2 times
klapmongool
Posts: 843
Joined: 13 Aug 2007, 13:19

Re: [TERA] Autohosts info

Post by klapmongool »

The changes that I did see since the changes described above is that there are more smaller (6v6 and less) battles running instead of 1 insanely large one. I also see occasional occurrences of a number of specs deciding to go to another host to start a game there. Good change in my book.

The gibberish at the bottom of your post about DSD... What? Less overcrowded DSD = better. And there is a TON of great maps for BA. I think it is more fun to play a wide variety of maps than just 2 or 3 maps.
SteveT
Posts: 2
Joined: 09 Sep 2012, 02:23

Re: [TERA] Autohosts info

Post by SteveT »

forget it the retarded TERA DSD is back ... people should stop joining this shit host to avoid giving the retarded admins like [LOeT]Brenner such a dictatorship power.

@ [LOeT]Brenner if you would kickban all people who said "fucktard" in a game (like me) i would start be your fan!
you would kickban 95% of TERA player in one day than and they start to join another host ....everybody should thx you if you would do that.....but no this is guy is a retarded german admin which just kickban people if somebody said something to his new retarded [AOE] clan members ....gfus [AOE]Stalin aka brenner!!!

User has been warned for this post. Felony 1/2
User avatar
MiNiMi
Posts: 39
Joined: 05 Oct 2010, 18:38

Re: [TERA] Autohosts info

Post by MiNiMi »

lol really? you banned me 3 days just for quitting a game? Maybe i should rename myself to Floris and SelfD every 2nd Game ...that must avoid bans.
Good job Brenner you are Amesome as Watchdog. You and your Friend Emission will managed to make other Host more Popular. Keep it up ;)

And plz make the 3 day ban to a perm ban on your hosts. thx
User avatar
[LOeT]Zinn
Posts: 33
Joined: 19 Oct 2009, 01:27

Re: [TERA] Autohosts info

Post by [LOeT]Zinn »

Glad your snooping led to some results :-)
Pako wrote:OK, this spectator limiting nonsense again. I thought I tried to explain the last time how it is a bad idea but let's try again.
I am with you. IIRC the whole idea started with some aggressive mates making the TERA-admins responsible for the decline of the number of players. I would be happy to throw that rule over board.

Pako wrote:There was also a few high newb influx spikes at the winter (engine updates?) but either they joined ZK or mostly left. Probably because the noobs can't even spectate they are more likely to quit when get kicked by speclimit. Looking the TERA host logs reveals there are over 2000 player kicks by a spectator limit. Why not just lock the host when it is full, instead of kick?
A full autohost _is_ locked. Consider the following scenario:
15 players, 9 specs -> autohost open -> mate joins (no matter if a noob who sees the high ranking players or a player who just wants to watch) and specs -> spec limit kicks in and him -> mate can't read and tries again.
Now you tell me why we dont "just lock the host when it is full, instead of kick" and why it happens 2000 times.
Pako wrote:Other ways of figuring out what this spectator limiting and kicking affects are, would be just to ask people. Sending a PM to about 100 BA players would take only maybe 5 minutes and collecting the answers a hour later maybe 10 minutes. But of course it is more funny to just invent rules to control how people should enjoy their game.
Regarding the rules: see above; a survey would be a great idea and i would be glad to help constructing and doing one.
Pako wrote:I think BA is very enjoyable "spectator sport" even without an active competitive scene and it should not be limited ever!
I second that! I hate it when the host i want to join is full and locked. And i got some unfair bonus as admins do not get kicked because of max. spec limit :( I think it's really disappointing to normal specs to get kicked out of nowhere...
Pako wrote:...3 autohost owners and their man love gangs are actually big amount of the playerbase...
The remaining one is playing gay secret police... ;)

Pako wrote:IMO other easy fixes which would have been a lot better:
-make the map rotation after 3 in a row with same map
-only good maps in map rotation (there are only couple of good BA maps around)
I am all with you. My vision for the TERA hosts is:
- about 200 maps
- some map sets (hot-rotation (top5), rotation (top20), new, fun)
- autorotation within the current set
- votes for map-set changes
sadly the current SPADS still does not work how the documentation suggests. I will soon start a third try...
Pako wrote:-ban cheaters and griefers (there have been huge lack of effectivity for banning the harmful players, probably the most usual reason for a ban was insulting a moderator/admin)
-don't let experienced players rage against new players too much
Really hard without real identities. In Spring identities need to have some kind value. Pay-games got money. We got nothing. A second identity-provider utilizing a web of thrust to make identities have some worth would be great. That identity could be used to map to player-accounts, forum and stuff.
Currently new players and trolling smurfs are hard to tell apart. And its a thin line between being hard on trolls and nice and forgiving to new players.
Pako wrote:There are positively revarding ways to control how people play and what games they join, limiting and controlling is a negative way of achieving things. Still the problems of dimishing playerbase is probably elsewhere and autohost owners won't do much about it.
I guess its about 50% SC2 and the fact that BA is not made for the casual player while free casual games get more and more. I think we could get more players joining by advertising on chess sites than we could get by advertising on a flash-games site.
Pako wrote:The other TERA rules looks perfect though.
.We..have....rules?!? O_O ;)
Pako wrote:The other recently hasty change to control how people should enjoy their BA is removing DSD from most popular autohosts. Well most experienced players hate DSD but most casual and new players like it and what is not to like: all tech levels in use, the game duration is ok and the strategies are straightforward.
I said it once and i will repeat it here: DSD is the new SM. Back then it was SM killing spring but it did not succeed so DSD jumped in. :-)
Pako wrote:IMO removing DSD is very bad, it just moves the casual BA DSD style game to other map and kills FFA when players who dislike DSD gameplay are tricked to the fake BADSD in other map.
I think there is no harm in removing DSD from time to time. It opens the stirred eyed mates for new maps and shuffles otherwise separated groups of players. Good chaos. And for the disappointed FFA-guys: LOL
Post Reply

Return to “Balanced Annihilation”