Too Many Servers

[yorkmorgan 191]

Hi, I know most peoples major complaints are with server hopping and combat logging but mine is with the huge number of servers with 1-10 players in. People just join a server where they can saunter about leisurely through any military area, whistling to themselves, flashlight on, getting the best gear with nothing to fear, because its just them and maybe 4 other guys across 225sq.km. That's 45sq.km each.

 

Its obvious that people do this very deliberately by the long lists of underpopulated servers. In itself this is no problem, if people like playing in very sparsely populated servers that's fine, but I would guess that the vast majority, once they are geared like an SAS paratrooper, switch to full servers and light up the place like they're on a hunting ranch, with little fear of death as they can just join an empty server when they spawn and do it all again. 

 

Personally I think this is the worst gear exploit at the moment, its not exactly server hopping because you can get all your stuff in one server, but at least if people server hop though populated servers they still face an element of danger. The only solutions I can think of are:

1. Lock characters to low population servers if they join one. (So that people that legitimately like playing in low pop servers are not discriminated)

2. Cull back the number of servers so that the ratio of player numbers to servers is reasonable, say ~ 30. ( I don't know how this could be coded for so maybe just stick with the first suggestion)

 

EDIT: I do not mean only have 30 servers, that would be insane, I mean that if there were, say 10000 players in a particular region then there would be (10000/30)=~330 servers, so that (players/servers)=~30, sorry if I didn't make that clear.

 

I'm interested to hear what people think about this; is this even a problem for you? Is it a legitimate way to gear up? Do you have any suggestions for dealing with it?

Cheers.

Edited January 27, 2014 by YorkMorgan

[weedmasta 784]

If you use some paragraphs I may actually bother to read that.

[hefeweizen 254]

I think you bring up a good point.

Of course the next couple posts will be by the normal malformed chuds with their stock response to anything that might make the game harder. "Just let people play the way they want...ehhhhhh(general shrill nasal whines)"

[altosk 8]

 

2. Cull back the number of servers so that the ratio of player numbers to servers is reasonable, say ~ 30. ( I don't know how this could be coded for so maybe just stick with the first suggestion)

 

I'm interested to hear what people think about this; is this even a problem for you? Is it a legitimate way to gear up? Do you have any suggestions for dealing with it?

Cheers.

 

30 Servers for a minimum of 1000000 player that purchased the game?? o.0

[DeatHTaX 1217]

I think you bring up a good point.

Of course the next couple posts will be by the normal malformed chuds with their stock response to anything that might make the game harder. "Just let people play the way they want...ehhhhhh(general shrill nasal whines)"

You do realize that they are running a business too? Why would you want to limit your number of servers in an alpha stage and thus restrict the amount of people that can play right now? Its not always about the gamer, specifically speaking. Theres a rhyme and reason for why a lot of these things are the way they are.

[hefeweizen 254]

30 Servers for a minimum of 1000000 player that purchased the game?? o.0

Okay, not thirty. But maybe limit official hive servers based on need? I don't see why most servers shouldn't be close to full. This map is huge, and even with 40 people you may not run into a single person all day.

[DeatHTaX 1217]

Okay, not thirty. But maybe limit official hive servers based on need? I don't see why most servers shouldn't be close to full. This map is huge, and even with 40 people you may not run into a single person all day.

No. They have no reason to limit servers for any reason right now, and they shouldnt. They have bigger fish to fry.

[byrgesen 1341]

Well if people want a server, they can buy one straight away.
Neither BI nor the server hosters, are putting a cap on anything.
Its called freedom hehe.

​Which is the way it should be tbh.

It isnt the developers responsibility, to asure full servers tbh, they have no chance of ensuring this.

[novogeek 253]

If anyone was to implement this, and I am not saying they should or that I support this idea in anyway, the best solution would be to auto-deploy servers.

 

Now obviously people pay to have a server and this might cut the profit being earned from server rentals, the idea would be to bring a server up when another server in the same region gets up to a certain percentage of players (say 80% or 90%). Where server empties, take the server down. You will get the odd occasion where a player will stay connected for a long time, but if you implement a idle timer and disconnect the player ... this might achieve the results you are looking for.

 

Whether this is a good idea or not ... for various reasons ... is not what I am responding to ... just offering a plausible way of achieving this.

[hefeweizen 254]

You do realize that they are running a business too? Why would you want to limit your number of servers in an alpha stage and thus restrict the amount of people that can play right now? Its not always about the gamer, specifically speaking. Theres a rhyme and reason for why a lot of these things are the way they are.

Why not intelligently limit the amount of servers, so that there aren't dozens and dozens of "dead" servers and yet there is enough room for everyone?

[DeatHTaX 1217]

Why not intelligently limit the amount of servers, so that there aren't dozens and dozens of "dead" servers and yet there is enough room for everyone?

Because right now its an alpha? And dead servers arent hurting anyone. Not to mention it gives the new players room to get their DayZ legs and join and empty server and learn the game. Im sorry there is just no logical argument for justifying them restricting servers right now

[hefeweizen 254]

No. They have no reason to limit servers for any reason right now, and they shouldnt. They have bigger fish to fry.

Yeah, I forgot. Can't talk about anything we'd like to see in the future on DayZ in the DayZ Alpha forums, that'd just be silly.

[hefeweizen 254]

Because right now its an alpha? And dead servers arent hurting anyone. Not to mention it gives the new players room to get their DayZ legs and join and empty server and learn the game. Im sorry there is just no logical argument for justifying them restricting servers right now

Who the hell is talking about right this minute? Why do you keep acting like I'm demanding they change this or I won't play. I'm saying it would be intelligent in the long term to limit the amount of offical hive servers so that there would be a more consistent population and DayZ experience no matter which server you play on, just like pretty much every other gear based MMO ever created.

[FatboyTim 27]

From what I can see, those servers are only almost-empty when they're in darkness / night time.

 

The daylight servers I see are all 30/30 or 40/40.

[DeatHTaX 1217]

Yeah, I forgot. Can't talk about anything we'd like to see in the future on DayZ in the DayZ Alpha forums, that'd just be silly.

Fine let me put it this way...

Name all the MMO games with clients such as this that limit their server numbers. I mean seriously, im talking present and future tense. If people are going to utilize the empty servers, doesnt that mean they want to be on an empty server? So if these empty servers are "thinning about the population" and leaving a bunch of mid to low pop servers, thats whay theyre there for.

I just dont really understand the argument for limiting servers in any way. If people want to go to high pop servers, they will. If they want to go to low pop or empty servers, they will.

The general rule of thumb for business or when dealing with a product lime this is typically about giving your customers more options, which is good. Limiting their options is bad.

Limiting servers creates a scenario where you are forcing a player to potentially pick a server they want to be on. So why do that when you can give them plenty of options.

[hefeweizen 254]

I just dont really understand the argument for limiting servers in any way. If people want to go to high pop servers, they will. If they want to go to low pop or empty servers, they will.

 

 

 

Having an excess of servers allows people to hop to one of the dozens and dozens of servers with 2 - 3 people on it, gear up at absolutely no risk and then jump back to a high pop server to "hunt" taking all of ten minutes to get a complete high end kit. This behavior effects the game in a negative way, just like it did in the mod. Limiting the amount of servers to only what would be necessary would combat this to a degree.

Of course, once private servers are released then this will all be moot, as official hive will die off just like they did in the mod.

But I rather like the idea of hive servers and it would be nice they didn't become extinct like in the mod. However, if it is going to be the same system of people being able to get all their gear without any consequence on a low population server and then switch to a high pop when they are at their most powerful, then I don't see any way that isn't going to be the case.

[DeatHTaX 1217]

Having an excess of servers allows people to hop to one of the dozens and dozens of servers with 2 - 3 people on it, gear up at absolutely no risk and then jump back to a high pop server to "hunt" taking all of ten minutes to get a complete high end kit. This behavior effects the game in a negative way, just like it did in the mod. Limiting the amount of servers to only what would be necessary would combat this to a degree.

 

 

Okay well you're expressing a problem with the ALPHA right now...what's the point? They've already said that they're going to implement some sort of system that limits gear and loot. So i'm still failing to see you're point. Yeah people are going to server hop and gear up, thats what's going on right now. You getting upset about that and demanding them LIMITING SERVERS during the alpha stage is ridiculous. cmon man. See this problem for what it is. Temporary.

 

And let's be honest, people are going to find a way around whatever system they implement and gear up in an otherwise unfair manner. No sense in crying about it xD

[Grimey Rick 3417]

OP has a valid point, stop inserting your opinion for the sake of seeing your avatar in a thread.

 

It's an issue, and will hopefully be eventually addressed. I highly doubt most of the player killers I've taken out (full pristine gear, ridiculous ammo:supplies ratio) achieved their gear through risky gameplay on a decently populated server. You don't get that geared on a normal server. It'd take days. And someone who's spent days gearing up a character is far less likely to run around blasting people like Call of Duty.

 

For the record, I only play on one server (with the odd exception). That way me and my kid can become somewhat friendly with regulars and run less of a risk of being constantly killed-on-sight.

 

EDIT: #justmytwocents

Edited January 27, 2014 by Grimey Rick

[hefeweizen 254]

Okay well you're expressing a problem with the ALPHA right now...what's the point? They've already said that they're going to implement some sort of system that limits gear and loot. So i'm still failing to see you're point. Yeah people are going to server hop and gear up, thats what's going on right now. You getting upset about that and demanding them LIMITING SERVERS during the alpha stage is ridiculous. cmon man. See this problem for what it is. Temporary.

 

And let's be honest, people are going to find a way around whatever system they implement and gear up in an otherwise unfair manner. No sense in crying about it xD

Oh my god.... Can you respond without reminding me its an alpha? Seriously, I'm NOT talking about RIGHT THIS SECOND. How many time can I say that before it clicks with you?

Also two things, first I never got upset with anything aside from how dense you're being about saying its an alpha in every sentence you type and second I never demanded anything, I said it would be a good idea.

Thing is, you say its all temporary but this system was final in the mod. Sure Dean Hall and Co. have said they have a solution for combat logging and server hopping. Great, that is definitely needed, but what is going to stop people from jumping on a 2/100 person server in the final game, clearing out an airfield and then jumping to a 95/100 server? If the answer is "Nothing" then Public Hive is doomed, again.

[DeatHTaX 1217]

OP has a valid point, stop inserting your opinion for the sake of seeing your avatar in a thread.

 

It's an issue, and will hopefully be eventually addressed. I highly doubt most of the player killers I've taken out (full pristine gear, ridiculous ammo:supplies ratio) achieved their gear through risky gameplay on a decently populated server. You don't get that geared on a normal server. It'd take days. And someone who's spent days gearing up a character is far less likely to run around blasting people like Call of Duty.

 

For the record, I only play on one server (with the odd exception). That way me and my kid can become somewhat friendly with regulars and run less of a risk of being constantly killed-on-sight.

 

EDIT: #justmytwocents

 

His point isn't valid when he is complaining about an issue they have already said will be addressed in the future lol. Especially when OP calls for something as drastic and unrealistic as limiting server numbers. I hate to sound mean, but it's just useless speculation on something that's not even finished yet and will be addressed in future updates. THEN we'll have everyone complain about how broken THAT system is xD

 

 

Oh my god.... Can you respond without reminding me its an alpha? Seriously, I'm NOT talking about RIGHT THIS SECOND. How many time can I say that before it clicks with you?

Also two things, first I never got upset with anything aside from how dense you're being about saying its an alpha in every sentence you type and second I never demanded anything, I said it would be a good idea.

Thing is, you say its all temporary but this system was final in the mod. Sure Dean Hall and Co. have said they have a solution for combat logging and server hopping. Great, that is definitely needed, but what is going to stop people from jumping on a 2/100 person server in the final game, clearing out an airfield and then jumping to a 95/100 server? If the answer is "Nothing" then Public Hive is doomed, again.

 

 

And dude, what -I'M- trying to say is that what youre talking about ISN'T EVEN GOING TO BE AN ISSUE when they fix it lol so there is no "talk about it for the future".

 

You're upset about how unfair it is to server hop for gear.

 

they have already said this will be addressed in a regulated loot system

 

There is no justifiable reason to limit servers.

 

xD don't get all bent outta shape because I disagree with you lol

Edited January 27, 2014 by DeatHTaX

[Grimey Rick 3417]

His point isn't valid when he is complaining about an issue they have already said will be addressed in the future lol. Especially when OP calls for something as drastic and unrealistic as limiting server numbers. I hate to sound mean, but it's just useless speculation on something that's not even finished yet and will be addressed in future updates. THEN we'll have everyone complain about how broken THAT system is xD

 

Good to know, I've never seen any mention of this particular issue being addressed in the future, but I tend to play more and read less. Thanks for the heads up!

[DeatHTaX 1217]

Good to know, I've never seen any mention of this particular issue being addressed in the future, but I tend to play more and read less. Thanks for the heads up!

 

It's all good. it was in one of his like 15 minute interview videos where he answered a bunch of questions from some guys on Reddit. I'll try to find the link if I can :P

[hefeweizen 254]

Good to know, I've never seen any mention of this particular issue being addressed in the future, but I tend to play more and read less. Thanks for the heads up!

There hasn't actually been much of any talk about this issue actually. Its confirmed that server hopping and combat logging have a fix in the works. But this sort of "gear tourism" on low pop servers hasn't been mentioned once in any of the dev blogs I've read.

I heard Dean saying they would limit the amount of ultra rare military loot via a regulated economy, but that didn't have anything to do with this issue.

[Subject42 20]

Well i think when server-hopping is getting addressed effectively this problem will also be solved, i can't see how it is considered unfair when ppl get their loot on one server even when this server is almost empty, i mean everyone else can join in at any time. The only problem i see is excessive server-hopping to get past respawn timers and to get really unfair advantages by "ghosting".

 

But i have another problem with those large numbers of servers, because more servers means more admins who can abuse their powers and the more servers/admins there are the more difficult it gets to monitor those servers and enforce the server-rules and lets be honest there are a shitton of servers already where unwelcomed ppl just get instakicked or their char deleted or restarts occur every 5 minutes because some ppl want to gear up or servers that are password protected and on and on and on. I think if this kind of crap don't stop it will at least ruin the clear arrangement of the serverlist entirely and for the life of me it's already very hard to even find one server where i'm "allowed to play".

[DeatHTaX 1217]

There hasn't actually been much of any talk about this issue actually. Its confirmed that server hopping and combat logging have a fix in the works. But this sort of "gear tourism" on low pop servers hasn't been mentioned once in any of the dev blogs I've read.

I heard Dean saying they would limit the amount of ultra rare military loot via a regulated economy, but that didn't have anything to do with this issue.

 

Well I think it's safe to say they are aware of the problem and are working on a solution to drastically alter it and reduce the exploitation of server hopping, but I guarantee it will not involve reducing server numbers EVER. If I end up being wrong about this, you can come back and rub it all in my face. But I'm telling you, no solution to this problem will bear that result no matter how much we discuss it :P