Multi Map Dayz - linked servers.

[Strategos (DayZ) 190]

I for one would like to see bigger maps with more players on. But while I was pondering the technical problems associated with giant servers (ala Eve Online) i had an idea.

What if the Dayz world was Much bigger but was broken up into manageable chunks. Servers ran different maps, but they were linked.

When you reach the border of one map you get a server browser that presents you with a list of servers hosting the map you are going to that match the timezone and have free slots. Then you cross over onto the new server and continue.

Of course there would still be technical difficulties but much more manageable ones than hosting giant maps with everyone playing on the same server.

There would also be care needed to not create choke points where people could spawn camp, so there are down sides but imagine being able to have a city as one map, or different islands and a huge country to explore.

There's potentially alot of work making the maps obviously but there are allot of Arma II maps out there that could probably be modified reducing the work load.

[Deviant (DayZ) 43]

SO many reposts. Read other posts before you post please.

How would vehicles go from server to server? Could you not just "camp" on the "entry zones" of the servers, and than just shoot anyone loading in? ;\

Resources required to do this would be enormous.

[Strategos (DayZ) 190]

Well of course I did search , but to appease you I searched harder and did find another thread suggesting this idea:

http://dayzmod.com/forum/index.php?/topic/17346-dayz-map-expansion-go-big-and-go-home/page__hl__%2Blinked+%2Bservers

[0only1 4]

Do we really need this ? I don't think that's even possible.

[Strategos (DayZ) 190]

Do we really need games at all ?

Of course it's possible , you can already swap servers at will and servers can run different maps.

And before you ask how I'm sure it's possible I'm a games programmer.

Wouldn't you want to have more places to explore ? More variety? Islands, A massive urban area ?

I know Rocket has said he likes the idea of one giant server like EVE. But under the hood each start system in EVE runs on its own node, as you go through a jump gate you are essentially changing servers. A system like this just distributes the load over many hosted servers.

Might save needing this http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Tranquility

[vier0hr 21]

One word...NO.

It's fine now. I run a good pc I build for programming and gamming and minus tech and bug issues I have no problems whatsoever with loading or anything of the sort.

EDITED BECAUSE i KINDOF LIED: Sometimes loot takes a few secs to spawn, but only in imediate area which is fine because it discourages loot camping.

Edited July 17, 2012 by Viper0hr

[n4ndoz 20]

...But under the hood each start system in EVE runs on its own node, as you go through a JUMP GATEyou are essentially changing servers. A system like this just distributes the load over many hosted servers.

Might save needing this http://wiki.eveonlin...iki/Tranquility

You just stated everything.

Jump gates! You don't actually cross a distance on foot, or, Flying a space ship. You use a mechanic of server transition.

It is not like buffering parts of a huge map as seen on GTA, it is a entire server you will be buffering and loading at real-time.

You would need a Mainframe to do such a thing and the servers would run with a fu**ing NASA Computer. THe processing it demands for this transition for i.e. 30 players at the same time, and at different locations inside the transition zone(that would be like "20km" long on each side of it) is huge!!

I think I got what you are trying to say, but it is just not possible. It's a good idea to make the game a neural net. of maps, but is kinda impossible atm. (never played EVE), But a game a played for a long time, Taikodom, had a similar system, but all the star systems was on the same server, and it perse demanded a huge processing from the server.

I think nor even a cloud solution would be good.

Good idea, but I don't think it is viable.

[Strategos (DayZ) 190]

"It's fine now. I run a good pc I build for programming and gamming and minus tech and bug issues I have no problems whatsoever with loading or anything of the sort."

I dont see the relevance of this in the slightest. *sigh*

"You just stated everything.

Jump gates! You don't actually cross a distance on foot, or, Flying a space ship. You use a mechanic of server transition.

It is not like buffering parts of a huge map as seen on GTA, it is a entire server you will be buffering and loading at real-time."

No your missing the point. The process I am describing is no different to what happens now.

Currently you can quit a server and join another server at will. You would still be able to do that as long as you picked a server running the map you are on. If you reach the edge of the map you get presented with a filtered list of servers. These servers are those running the map next door to yours. HIVE remembers your coordinates as it does now and you leave your sever and load into the next one at the corresponding spot on the border of the next one.

NOTHING has changed except some servers are running different maps and a mechanism for specifying which map you are moving to.

[lightnings0ul 19]

Strategos: Sorry that you had to bother with unwilling forum trolls. Now I am here. I get your point. Makes perfect sense. Hopefully this will be added in the final!

Just go out of a map, tag a new position to your character, autom. connect to another server and spawn at that saved position. Takes NASA computers yeah, but from 1976 that is... -.-

[n4ndoz 20]

"It's fine now. I run a good pc I build for programming and gamming and minus tech and bug issues I have no problems whatsoever with loading or anything of the sort."

I dont see the relevance of this in the slightest. *sigh*

"You just stated everything.

Jump gates! You don't actually cross a distance on foot, or, Flying a space ship. You use a mechanic of server transition.

It is not like buffering parts of a huge map as seen on GTA, it is a entire server you will be buffering and loading at real-time."

No your missing the point. The process I am describing is no different to what happens now.

Currently you can quit a server and join another server at will. You would still be able to do that as long as you picked a server running the map you are on. If you reach the edge of the map you get presented with a filtered list of servers. These servers are those running the map next door to yours. HIVE remembers your coordinates as it does now and you leave your sever and load into the next one at the corresponding spot on the border of the next one.

NOTHING has changed except some servers are running different maps and a mechanism for specifying which map you are moving to.

As said before, man.

Your idea is great.

I got it right, bud.

But, from my experience it isn't that easy to implement such feature, it is even mroe complicated than the actual HIVE method. Basically the server you are trying to connect comunicates it to the HIVE and then "she" gives you data to it, so you can spawnd where you was when you logged out. The problems with the neural net map, the one you suggest are:

1- Servers got player limit, you would need equal numbers of map parts server to run the different parts so if a server is full you can be redirected to another one; What will happen if you have a area that is more popular than the rest? It happen.

2- Even with a stable mechanism to manage it, how will be the transition zones?? just like bridges or tunnels?? certain pre-determined locations, or it would be just the maps ground? If it is a single location, another guy already posted the cons of it.

Im not trying to put you don't, and even trolling you, I am just stating my opinion that if this is possible, it would be hard to make, so hard that if I was DayZ's dev I would just think on that when the game becomes Gold.

Sorry if I was offensive, I didn't meant to be.

[Strategos (DayZ) 190]

Not at all, but your still missing the point :)

There is NO difference between this idea and the current system except specifying which map you are on. Some maps maybe more popular, you either end up with more servers running that map to accommodate or you simply cant get into that one, you stay on your current map or you go a different way.

The transition could be , for instance the entire edge of the map. You walk off the edge of the map on the west of cherno you appear on the east side of the new map at the same Y coordinate.

Obviously there are issues, but relatively minor ones.

Assume we have only one extra map, west Cherno. You walk to 001,020 and enter the transition trigger area. A popup asks "do you want to continue into west cherno" Yes.

Your position is saved and you are disconnected.

You get presented with the Arma II server browser but filtered only to servers running "West Cherno" you pick one, either your favourite the one with your mates, or just the one with free slots.

You log in and appear at your last coordinates but on the east side of west Cherno map. Off you go.

[moofactory 62]

I actually had thoughts about this to myself yesterday,

If it could be done, 4-8 maps would be awesome, you could almost do a whole small country.

You choose a server hosting a location you start.

Each map is 500 square km, they get released as expansions as they are developed,

each map can be crossed into one another via server hop.. but in game, its effectively a border/zone crossing.

Back end is a server hop but on screen its done seamlessly with UI.

Id see It released as episodic content/expansions like wow, Each expansion tells a story with all expansions telling an overarching story.

First map (quarantine EP1) at game release will have a quarantine zone. With military borders stopping anyone. (you break through and pass 500m you get killed)

Once first expansion (outbreak EP2) is released, the borders have updated to all the military dead and gates wide open,

chaos has broken free on the world, the story evolves and you learn more about how and why this all happened.

Look, what everyone fails to see is only as far as what the current mod can do.

OF COURSE multiple maps with a seamless transition is possible..just not on this system.

Its called an MMORPG.

If they can handle thousands of players on a massive world per server.. then something on a similar scale can be done with DayZ.

But OBVIOUSLY not on arma 2 and not on a PVP FPS game model thats only meant for the classic 64 player pvp game.

Its the wrong type of back end setup. The current way you enter into a game, the whole server setup needs to be scrapped for this kind of thing to work.

It seems to me this mod wants to be an MMOFPS Open sandbox.

to do that it needs the right ground work on the back end with the right specialists in those fields.

So the networking and server side of things need to be setup in a similar way that a current MMORPG works.

None of you can sit there and say it CANT be done because its already been done countless times already.

[n4ndoz 20]

@Strategos

Hey, man, now I think I got you.

Really good.

The idea is amazing, but is still too hard to implement and to control.

You will firstly need a team to develop this system, so I think soon enough when Rocket realizes he need a huge team to develop the mod as a game, it maybe become possible. I will draw something and to try to show you how do I figured a really simple server model for this.

Acording to this model to go from a map to another what will happen(Server 1 to 2)?:

1- In-game you will reach the map transition zone(the entire edge of the map but maybe a width of 1km ), your location info will be transfer.'d to the HIVE so it can process and save it, you will keep walking, you can eat, you can even die.

2- Now a option will pop up(Continue to another map?) if you choose Yes, then the client will attempt to connect to server 2 and you will still be on server 1, but on a transition zone, iddle, watinf for it to search for the maps;

3- You choose one and than the HIVE get your info and put you in the same Transition Zone, but on Server 2 now. And you was safely delivered to the other part of the map as soon as you get out of the Map Transition Zone

But, of course, the map transitions zones will become no-mans land very quickly, because even if it would be the entire edge of a map. Now I think I got your idea. Am I right?

[0only1 4]

... W/e

Edited July 17, 2012 by 0only1

[moofactory 62]

I was awake in bed thinking about this last night and it HIT ME LIKE A ROCK...

Ive always wanted to see a story driven experience tied into this as a game.

With that in mind I thought about how transitions from one map load to another could occur.

Why Cant single player story driven experiences happen in the same game as the multiplay side?

My thoughts are this...

Lets use the current map for example.

Each "single player experience area" has NPC's and quest lines that arc over all SPE areas.

However to travel between these areas... is the current map experience we have now.

Kind of like the reverse of what happens in guild wars, for those that have not played guild wars..

In an NPC town you share the area with all the other players... however once you leave this area you are in a single player or "group" experience out in the wild.

So for Dayz... When in the main world.. you share it with all the other players.. however when you enter into a SPE area... you are in a single player experience... in which a typical single player story driven experience can occur.

Such as in game video sequences, NPC voice acting, mission or quest objectives and even a narrative.

These SPE areas could be any a place designated as story driven.

It could be a helli crash in the distance, it could be a farm, it could be part of a city, it could be inside a building or a millitary zone. These are loaded as single player maps once activated and the player is temporally gone from the online map. To combat campers, you would need a green zone around this area that give people a chance to get away from trouble.

My thoughts of this are how to seemlessly merge single player RPG adventure experiences into this kind of online multiplay game. Bioware does this well with the old republic.

Id love to see NPC player interaction/mission/quest giving in the current environment...

but I know it wont work when campers will just shoot anyone going near the NPC's. This is why it needs to be a single player experience that seamlessly transitions with the multiplayer world.

Obviously this has problems in its self.. (people using it as a way to get out of a death).. but at least its a broad base for an idea.

I dont know about you guys but I love Teltale Games "the walking dead" And the TV series.

And id like to see some story driven events and character building experiences tie into what we have.

How this is done.. weather it be how I described above... or its a single player game mode as a prequel to the multiplay experience we have now as ive mentioned in another thread.

On commercial stand alone release or as an arma 3 expansion.. id like to see something more than just a PVP zombie sandbox.

Edited July 17, 2012 by moofactory

[Strategos (DayZ) 190]

"You will firstly need a team to develop this system,"

I do feel like im banging my head against a wall here now :) You don't need a big team its THE SAME system we have now with a couple of minor changes. You dont need a middle zone between servers you just log off one and onto another as we do now. Its just you are loading a different map, which obviously Arma handles already.

@moofactory Im glad you like the sever idea but im afraid Im totally anti NPCs in the game or generated stories, its totally against the core motivation behind Dayz.

[suito 17]

The idea of this is realy not bad, but i think in case of Arma2 Engine and DayZ its impossible to do this.

At first, this makes a lot of more Traffic, cause u have to link the server each other, they have to communicate to each other. The other side is this server jumping, its not so easy as it look like. :-7 dont know if u ever get this in arma2 or arma3 engine, cause is not the mainpart of the engine.

[Strategos (DayZ) 190]

"The idea of this is realy not bad, but i think in case of Arma2 Engine and DayZ its impossible to do this."

You guys really arnt getting this. There is no more trafiic. There is no "link" . There is no communication between servers. It is (almost) EXACTLY how it currently works.

The only difference is a trigger box that when you enter it, it brings up the existing server browser filtered by map type. (ok and flipping your x-coordinates so you appear on the opposite side of the map, hardly a stretch).

​Sure there is a bit of additional scripting required but the whole reason I made this suggestion is that it is achievable with the current technology. If not then with some pretty minor alterations. Especially when you see that BI are adding features for Dayz in their ArmaII Betas.

Edited July 20, 2012 by Strategos

[xximrtwoixx 104]

Basically the transfer zones exist in both servers, so your at X01Y02 this exists in Map1 on the W border, this also exists in Map2 on the E border. A script gives a player/hive acount a token when they go past X01 as they are now in the transition. This token allows them to log into Servers running Map 01 or Map 02, when you leave the X1 or X99 grid you get a different token that only allows you to log into map1 or map2 dependent on what map you are on. This is a very simple system and has been used in privatley funded mods for games, so I think something like this would be well within the scope of DayZ dev team and current technology. This also allows players to handle the security problems with transfering and gives to much area for campers to camp, but would still allow authentic things like watching main roads for traffic.

[wolfstriked 143]

I posted a similar idea but where you can just join a special map loaded to gils with car/heli parts(large junkyard).Bandits can go there to rob and players desperate for a special part to fix their chosen ride could take the chance and visit.You just join this server and when you click back on Chenarus it places you back where you were before leaving the map.

http://dayzmod.com/forum/index.php?/topic/65058-seperate-small-maps-with-specific-items-to-loot/#entry621572

[L0G!N (DayZ) 149]

This exact idea has been lingering in my mind of sometime already... The biggest issues i stumbled across everytime are:

1. Do you give Publicly hosted servers a choice to which map they run?

see, first off all, for some reason players develope a 'like' for a certain map, and given a choice they would prefer to run this map on their server. Second, especially when base building comes along and the stakes increase, it be more strategic to pick the map that most servers run, as people are less likely to cross over into the map you build your base

2. Related to 1. What if servers are constantly full? esp. if certain areas you want to goto are in limited supply ...

3. How about difficulty setting on servers? if DayZ keeps comming with different settings you could go from a recruit to an elite server

could easily be fixed though by having just one difficulty setting, so everybody plays the same game

4. What priviledges do you give admins? If they kick you off of a server of a certain map (you finally managed to get on) and now all servers with that particular map are full, does that mean my play session is over for tonight?

5. If you don't give admins any rights, nor any choice in which map they run, why the heck would you host a server? (other than being a big fan!)

biggest reason to get a server is to have the freedom to choose maps, to kick annoying idiots, or to make room for a clanmate that is also paying for the server (aka. guaranteed playing on a good connection/and not having to suffer admins on other servers..

So the idea is good, but there are some issues with it that are not so easily solved. I would personally LOVE IT though, especially if they would build the whole of Europe, or perhaps even the whole world into DayZ and we could go everywhere!! On the other hand, i know of this game called GuildWars1&2 that has been running an MMORPG without a subscription for years (well 1 has)! And due to that, and the financial reports of certain gaming companies that charge a subscription; It's clear that with a good server structure and netcode, it's well possible to run this whole world by 'yourself' and not have people constantly paying for it ... aka. subscriptions are just moneygrabs with no added value and if you actually pay one you should scratch yourself behind the ears! Can BI do the same as ArenaNet though? well that remains to be seen...

Edited August 10, 2012 by L0G!N

[xximrtwoixx 104]

This exact idea has been lingering in my mind of sometime already... The biggest issues i stumbled across everytime are:

1. Do you give Publicly hosted servers a choice to which map they run?

see, first off all, for some reason players develope a 'like' for a certain map, and given a choice they would prefer to run this map on their server. Second, especially when base building comes along and the stakes increase, it be more strategic to pick the map that most servers run, as people are less likely to cross over into the map you build your base

2. Related to 1. What if servers are constantly full? esp. if certain areas you want to goto are in limited supply ...

3. How about difficulty setting on servers? if DayZ keeps comming with different settings you could go from a recruit to an elite server

could easily be fixed though by having just one difficulty setting, so everybody plays the same game

4. What priviledges do you give admins? If they kick you off of a server of a certain map (you finally managed to get on) and now all servers with that particular map are full, does that mean my play session is over for tonight?

5. If you don't give admins any rights, nor any choice in which map they run, why the heck would you host a server? (other than being a big fan!)

biggest reason to get a server is to have the freedom to choose maps, to kick annoying idiots, or to make room for a clanmate that is also paying for the server (aka. guaranteed playing on a good connection/and not having to suffer admins on other servers..

So the idea is good, but there are some issues with it that are not so easily solved. I would personally LOVE IT though, especially if they would build the whole of Europe, or perhaps even the whole world into DayZ and we could go everywhere!! On the other hand, i know of this game called GuildWars1&2 that has been running an MMORPG without a subscription for years (well 1 has)! And due to that, and the financial reports of certain gaming companies that charge a subscription; It's clear that with a good server structure and netcode, it's well possible to run this whole world by 'yourself' and not have people constantly paying for it ... aka. subscriptions are just moneygrabs with no added value and if you actually pay one you should scratch yourself behind the ears! Can BI do the same as ArenaNet though? well that remains to be seen...

1. In my mind this would be an EVE type of system where there are *NO* public servers, all servers/locations and all worlds (To reduce ping you have a world for US/CHINA/EU) are all owned/operated by BI single settings, non linear difficulty. No jumping between worlds, ie hopping and altf4 solved at once. This is the holy grail and from what rocket has said in his latest interview about stand alone the direction things are going to go in. He has the capital with BI from this mod alone, add in the extra revenue that people will pay for access to an early alpha and he'll be able to support DEV work and server infrastructure.

2. Massive corporate servers would mean large player counts matched to demand your not full but are near capacity. Also this is addressed with map building, servers would most likely not sport OP locations compared to others, this is close to how city/county planning is anyway (ie you have hospitals spread around). A few and dynamic differences like seasons/temperature etc could exist.

3. See 1

4. See 1

5. See 1

[ShaddnArakh 7]

xXI Mr Two IXx & Strategos, you have my beans. I suggested something similar (EVE-like DayZ linked severs).

If anything of sorts gets implemented in DayZ, I'm ready to pay subscription to keep servers running.

Your idea has a little drawback that breaks immersion:

- if two people are standing near the edge of neighbouring maps, they are literally a couple of meters apart in the 'game world', but they cannot see or shoot each other. It is nicely worked around in EVE (gates) or my proposal (islands that are some distance apart).

Imagine chasing someone to the edge of a map just to see him disappear like that. Very disappointing.

[Strategos (DayZ) 190]

Well true, this idea was designed to work with Arma II and to eliminate spawn camping.

People disappearing right in front of you ? Doesnt sound like Dayz at all does it :P

[xximrtwoixx 104]

xXI Mr Two IXx & Strategos, you have my beans. I suggested something similar (EVE-like DayZ linked severs).

If anything of sorts gets implemented in DayZ, I'm ready to pay subscription to keep servers running.

Your idea has a little drawback that breaks immersion:

- if two people are standing near the edge of neighbouring maps, they are literally a couple of meters apart in the 'game world', but they cannot see or shoot each other. It is nicely worked around in EVE (gates) or my proposal (islands that are some distance apart).

Imagine chasing someone to the edge of a map just to see him disappear like that. Very disappointing.

Agreed that would suck, and people would likely abuse this factor, ie sit at edges of the map so they could try to escape between servers. Kind of like criminals crossing state lines back in the day, I still think its better than going to a gate system as that would require NPC's.

I think you could deter the above via conditions to "leave" ie if your in shock or have status as being in combat, recently fired weapon, etc. Also if the transition areas are designed to be forests/mountains and no towns are near to them it would help with immersion because you wouldn't be able to see long distances.

But I think some players would try to exist in the ether rather than join one of the communities that would be likely to form on individual servers.

To me a single server represents one experiance, no escape and that is the only way to deliver a harsh experiance.