The Potential Problematic Future of DayZ Server Hosting

[Vipeax 318]

As for reserve slots --> Sawyer (profile) and I have been spending some free time lately on a C# library for BattlEye (RCON). In theory it's possible to have a reserve-slot system to some degree (you could make a tool to have it lock when there is 5 slots left and then unlock it on a command, say by in-game (someone already playing) or an IRC channel), but then there is the issue that say the server restarts, 5 to 15 people of a clan join, so there is now a server with 50 slots, of which 45 are actually open and 15 of those are taken by a clan. The next 5 will likely also be clanmembers (or at least 2, maybe 3 people manage to hop in at the exact right time when it unlocks) and then you have 33% of a server being your clan only, while it would have probably been more like <30%.

Hope I somewhat made sense in the post.

[phisher34 12]

They are going about it in a smart way.

If people start shelling out monthly fees, there will be an expectation of product. If it's buggy and unreliable it will turn people away. I don't know how many times I have heard members on our TS quit the game in frustration because they died of a bug or some glitch. If they were paying for it, I don't even want to know how they would react.

What's important to maintain right now is a development path towards a standalone or DLC release. Establish features that will make it into the final product. Get a solid footing for an Alpha or Beta test then go dark for months until a final product can be released. I hope the huge cash infusion for ARMA 2: CO is benefiting the DayZ dev team in some regard (I think having Rocket work full-time on it is).

---

Reserve slots will still only really hurt the 90% of players who aren't playing as a part of clan or who are server admins.

As a server admin, we are paying for a place to call home.

[ZedsDeadBaby 2287]

But the moment you start asking money' date=' you need a stable game where people don't lose their gear half the time, updates are constantly being rolled out etc.[/quote']

That's what kickstarter is for. Nobody expects a working product when they donate to a kickstarter. It's all just promises there anyway. The fact that we have an alpha build to play actually puts you far and away AHEAD of most kickstarter project proposals.

Do this:

• Spend a day on a kick-ass kickstarter pitch. Hand pick the best screenshots & gameplay videos you have on hand and pen the "marketing" copy about some of what's to come.
  
• Schedule some meetings to discuss and plan the kickstarter tiers: start with hats ($5), mugs ($10), t-shirts/signed posters ($25), etc. and work up through rocket autographed paraphenalia ($100), replica military weapons ($500), etc.,etc. Top the tiers with an expense-paid trip to Prague to meet you guys and hang out for the day talking DayZ ($10k+).
  
• Roll it out and start counting the korunas!!
  

Do this in the coming weeks and I guarantee you will have $250,000+ at the very least in the bank within a month or less.

Use that money to set up official servers as reliable testing environments in various geographic locations, and tuck some of it away for future efforts once things become more "stable."

You don't have to support the entire playerbase at this point. Just supplement the existing system with servers of your own. Maybe ~20?

Do it! Do it nao!

[phisher34 12]

Viper has pointed out though that it would cost $66,666.67/month in just overhead costs.

That kickstarter money would get eaten up fast.

The only way to do it reliably right now is to have the cost spread out via server hosts.

If they are using that money to setup official servers then we are getting into the payment/product realm again where most people will have expectations. You and I might not, but thousands of people will.

[Ilumination 0]

To bring kicking and banning back into the conversation:

I do believe there is some sort of automatic siding with Players when it comes to kicking and banning players. Cheating on DayZ is becoming more popular by the day, I could easily link you to another forum's thread of a member selling top of the line DayZ "hacks" for a pretty cheap price, the thread having many vouches of the exploits working without any problem.

Ultimately, what I am suggesting is, is that if server owners are required to provide absolute proof for our actions of banning and kicking, then players should have the equal responsibility and treatment of providing absolute proof should they accuse a server owner of unjustifiable administrative action.

/endthought

[ZedsDeadBaby 2287]

Viper has pointed out though that it would cost $66' date='666.67/month in just overhead costs.

That kickstarter money would get eaten up fast.

[/quote']

That was an estimate to support 100,000 players. We don't need official servers for 100,000 players at this point. Honestly if they could host 1,000 slots that would be a huge step in the right direction and assuming the cost scales, only cost $666 a month so that kickstarter money would pay for that for 31 years or so. Should be plenty. ;)

[WildGunsTomcat 78]

Viper has pointed out though that it would cost $66' date='666.67/month in just overhead costs.

That kickstarter money would get eaten up fast.

The only way to do it reliably right now is to have the cost spread out via server hosts.

If they are using that money to setup official servers then we are getting into the payment/product realm again where most people will have expectations. You and I might not, but thousands of people will.

[/quote']

Okay then, back to that topic.

Since we're relegated to server hosts at the moment....I think...as I have said before...there should be a more open line of communication between devs and hosts. And I also think there should be a more clearly defined system of checks and balances in place.

Because let's face it, it's all well and good to put up a set of static rules for hosts to abide by....but things happen. There are gray areas sometimes. I think this is something we should actively work on implementing.

I also think that players should stop drumming up drama and citing the rules as an excuse for them to be abusive to server admins.

[Vipeax 318]

That was an estimate to support 100' date='000 players. We don't need official servers for 100,000 players at this point. Honestly if they could host 1,000 slots that would be a huge step in the right direction and assuming the cost scales, only cost $666 a month so that kickstarter money would pay for that for 31 years or so. Should be plenty. ;)

[/quote']

1000 doesn't cover even 10% of what's online at the moment, that will cause more complains than it solved.

[knightcat 0]

I think most of the points have already been made but, I just want to lay out a few items in an easy to contemplate way.

1. DayZ is not ready to have to commit to a working product in exchange for charging the player base.

2. Server Owners pay anywhere from 5 to 15 times the amount that a player would be charged to provide a service that they may not even be able to play on in addition to putting in the time to support and update their servers. I would estimate that I spend 4 hours a week in support actions. Taking the Median US salary (although I think we all know that most server owners are more likely to make 5 times this amount) of $26364, they donate a cash value of their time of around $50 a week on top of that.

3. In return for this goodwill, the Server Owner is not necessarily allowed to play on their server and when they attempt to administrate their server they need to be prepared to be attacked by everyone on this forum because the precedent has been set that a server owner is never to be trusted.

4. I would happily pay $50/month to play this un-guaranteed alpha in a centralized server format because I would be saving hundreds of dollars a month even at that price and would no longer be caught in the middle of players who want good administration and players who want to rape a server that is handcuffed by a community that has empowered them to do so.

5. You talk about not wanting to owe the players a functional game because they are paying for it but, what about what is owed to the Server Owners. They put way more on the line, knowing full well that they game is in Alpha. I want a working game as much as the next guy but, I'd settle for a little respect and gratitude for the service I am providing to both DayZ and the community instead of being burned at the stake because one guy who claims that I restarted the server because he stole my car.

[WildGunsTomcat 78]

I think most of the points have already been made but' date=' I just want to lay out a few items in an easy to contemplate way.

1. DayZ is not ready to have to commit to a working product in exchange for charging the player base.

2. Server Owners pay anywhere from 5 to 15 times the amount that a player would be charged to provide a service that they may not even be able to play on in addition to putting in the time to support and update their servers. I would estimate that I spend 4 hours a week in support actions. Taking the Median US salary (although I think we all know that most server owners are more likely to make 5 times this amount) of $26364, they donate a cash value of their time of around $50 a week on top of that.

3. In return for this goodwill, the Server Owner is not necessarily allowed to play on their server and when they attempt to administrate their server they need to be prepared to be attacked by everyone on this forum because the precedent has been set that a server owner is never to be trusted.

4. I would happily pay $50/month to play this un-guaranteed alpha in a centralized server format because I would be saving hundreds of dollars a month even at that price and would no longer be caught in the middle of players who want good administration and players who want to rape a server that is handcuffed by a community that has empowered them to do so.

5. You talk about not wanting to owe the players a functional game because they are paying for it but, what about what is owed to the Server Owners. They put way more on the line, knowing full well that they game is in Alpha. I want a working game as much as the next guy but, I'd settle for a little respect and gratitude for the service I am providing to both DayZ and the community instead of being burned at the stake because one guy who claims that I restarted the server because he stole my car.

[/quote']

Yep. Pretty much my feelings exactly.

I feel like as a server owner I have been handcuffed and am open to attack by a community that is so paranoid about server admins that any time a server is rebooted it is for some nefarious reason.

And the community has set this precedent, so any player with a grief can come to the forum...and shove the server admins around.

And when the server admin defends himself, he has to be absolutely perfect with his responses or he is automatically guilty.

[stice 2]

I like this reserved slot system:

40 slot server, the last 2 slots are reserved for vips.

So if the server is at 38 player, only vips can use those last slots.

No kicking needed and still way faster than normal.

Sure, when 20 vips try to connect at the same time they will have to wait again.. but that shouldnt happen often.

A further great improvement would be a connection queue (you are no. #4 in the queue).

But i don't know if those two systems are even possible with arma 2 as base :/..

[dizzymagoo 19]

I agree with both sides of the argument here. I personally think that there is no way to generate funds. Is this a problem for me? Not at all. The only cost I had with expanding into DayZ servers was the cost of the actual server(Around 500.00). I don't have any monthly bills cause by this. However, even if I did. I still wouldn't mind because i'm on board with supporting this project 110%.

[Vipeax 318]

But i don't know if those two systems are even possible with arma 2 as base :/..

Nope.

[{sas}stalker 108]

I dont think any server host would ever claim they host for the "flowing gratitude of the community". If anything being a server host places you in a position dislike targeted with an endless torrent of derogatory abuse. We've been hosting games for the public for over 10 years and I can count on one hand how many people have popped in to say "thanks" or make a donation, on the other hand I've lost count of how many times some crying child has called me "son".

{SAS} do it because it promotes our group and because we bought our box a couple of years ago and our hosting costs arent that much. Do we mind that we cant kick for members ? a little perhaps but its not a massive biggy because even in other games many of us would join the queue to join just like everyone else.

You build communities not by lording it over your server but by people seeing you in game being a gent and a good group and they want to be part of that, thats how you increase your revenue not from one off donations imho.

All that aside there are improvements in the current dev/host relationship that imho need to be implemented that would without doubt make many people feel far less at the bottom of the pile.

[WildGunsTomcat 78]

I dont think any server host would ever claim they host for the "flowing gratitude of the community". If anything being a server host places you in a position dislike targeted with an endless torrent of derogatory abuse. We've been hosting games for the public for over 10 years and I can count on one hand how many people have popped in to say "thanks" or make a donation' date=' on the other hand I've lost count of how many times some crying child has called me "son".

{SAS} do it because it promotes our group and because we bought our box a couple of years ago and our hosting costs arent that much. Do we mind that we cant kick for members ? a little perhaps but its not a massive biggy because even in other games many of us would join the queue to join just like everyone else.

You build communities not by lording it over your server but by people seeing you in game being a gent and a good group and they want to be part of that, thats how you increase your revenue not from one off donations imho.

All that aside there are improvements in the current dev/host relationship that imho need to be implemented that would without doubt make many people feel far less at the bottom of the pile.

[/quote']

Yes. Exactly.

Knightcat and I host our servers so that we have a home base to call our own, and to have other people that want to play with us....so we have our own little playerbase within the playerbase. It makes the game more fun.

But we don't lord over the servers by any means.

And yes, as I've said before, the current dev/host relationship is very poor in my opinion and could use some bolstering through a clearer path of communication.

[joikd 25]

As someone who had given up on all video games (even though I have access to most for free if I desired), I am willing to shell out the money for a server because DayZ has totally hooked me, and I simply want a server with my desired settings that won't disappear and take my tent with it. I don't need any slots or anything. Just keep DayZ awesome, and I'll keep paying for a server.

[Blasty 0]

For reserve slots.. why don't you just add it on top of the player cap.. for example a 50 slot server has 15 reserve slots, and if all 50 are taken it just allows 15 extra players to join.. might show something like 65/50 in a really rare circumstance.. but who cares? As long as you don't put it above what the server can handle, it isn't going to hurt anything.

[Downside 15]

I emailed the staff to get approved of my new server, I also posted the reserve slot option to them not for friends or clan mates, but for admins who will help run my server correct. If the server slot is 40 but I have 5 admins already picked out for my reserve slots then my server would be and look like 35 slots to the public. So 5 admins could always get in, it wouldn't ever kick anyone because those 5 slots aren't part of the public slots. There are only 5 admins and 5 reserve slots.

Also with global chat now turned off I think players trying to get admins mad at them with trolling or just being rude wont be a problem anymore. I still would like to ability to kick players if they are hacking and not get my server removed from the hive if they come here crying. But mainly I want to run a clean stable server that players can always come to their saved stuff like tents, vehicles and also play with a group of people. As a Admin I plan on playing my own server, its the only way to really see how smooth everything is going.

[dayzdeadmeat 44]

I agree with most of what has been written on behalf of the server owners. I bought one so my friends could have a stable place to call home.

We don't kick to make room for our group.

I don't kick to let myself on.

I'm fairly confident if I need to kick/ban someone and have a reasonable explanation, I'm not going to get kicked to the curb by the Dev team. Lets face it, they need server owners more than individual whiney players.

That being said, I agree that the default assumption of guilty (whether real or perceived) on the forums is pitiful. And the development team confirms it daily by not speaking out against it (even in generalities).

[Ilumination 0]

I appreciate all the in-depth feedback and conversation pertaining to this topic. I think it's put a lot of potential implementable ideas and concepts out into the open for the future of DayZ.

[dunnobe 3]

I also think that the devs should look into some type of server recording system. Nothing fancy...just like an admin action recorder...unless something like that exists already. If it does I am ignorant of it.

There are things we can do. I love this mod' date=' and I'm happy to shell out what I am to keep two servers up so everyone can enjoy it.

But I think that communication between admins and the dev team needs to be made easier.

[/quote']

Well, I know it's possible, as I have seen in other mods, for admins to have a tool that allows them to view, in 3rd or first person, the screen of any player. So the admins can follow every move of a player. (So the admin would see the exact same thing as the player).

That way, you could easily see if players are glitching, duplicating, hacking or whatever.

Downpart is that it gives the admins a major advantage as they know where players are and thus can abuse this.

The topicstarter and the admin who answered to it, both have valid arguments. Think about it, why would you rent a server? It only gives you more work whilest you could just play on someone elses.

[Disgraced 1123]

As a non-hoster, I have to say that I think that the 'reserve slot' system is the best interim fix to give SOMETHING to server admins.

It seems to me that I see people being asses on both sides of this equation (takes one to know one), and sometimes the posts by players seem very suspicious, but sometimes the return posts from the host/admin seems like maybe just based on attitude, the player has a point.

Anyway, I feel like the hosters really do deserve more than the run of the mill player. And to me, until there is a more stable means of funding for this mod overall and server hosting in particular, I would say the best interim solution IS reserved slots. 10 of them per server hosted.

I used to play at a place that hosted TF2 servers (yes, I know, it was already fully developed), but, they had silver and gold subscription rates to support their servers. Gold subscribers had the capability to connect to a full server, and a non-supporter would be notified why and kicked.

Too bad for the non supporter. You want to use the equipment, even in a buggy, ever changing alpha, then pony up. I'm tired of freeloaders expecting 'fair' treatment, when they are shelling out no money for the servers that they use. Entitled brats.

This would most likely clean up the community some, too.

It's interim, though. I think that there should be a $10 monthly fee to play at all. That would REALLY clean up the community.

[christopher.hill449@gmail.com 314]

Well, hosting a server for this mod is a choice, not a right or requirement.

I am sure many will say, if you dont like it, dont do it.

[Ilumination 0]

Well, Curagon, if server owners should follow that logic, then the amount of servers being hosted should surely drop off even faster.

Eventually there is going to be a point in time where server owners become intolerant (or in a phrase similar to your's: cease to like) [to] the idea of running a server out of their pocket with no way to recuperate the cost from the players.

I understand this game is still in the early stages of development, so I'm not saying a change needs to be made today, tomorrow, a week, or even months from now. But eventually, somewhere along the line, if the DayZ team continues to expect us server owners to maintain places for the players to play (as they currently rely on us for this), inevitable revisions to the current hosting restrictions will have to be made.

[Blasty 0]

Reserve slots are great, but kicking to make room is not the answer. See my previous post and go with a system like that or people like me won't be interested in playing on your server where we risk getting kicked for clan members when we are in an important situation.