greybeardralph

Mission size changes

FK mission change   156 members have voted

This poll is closed for new votes
  1. 1. What option do you prefer?

    • Option 1
      37
    • Option 2
      96
    • Leave it as is
      22

Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

43 posts in this topic

Hello everybody!

 

After having a look at recent mission formats of both official and local/externally hosted missions, we wanted to try a change in how daily missions are run. Before we do that though, we want YOUR thoughts! In the poll above, we've got two options available:

 

  1. The main server keeps being used for the big (~70) person OPS, with the second server being restricted to ~30 people. Each day, one of the two servers will get priority for regulars and above. There will still be a few slots for FNGs, but those will be one per squad. The "restricted" server will rotate daily. One day the 2nd server will be on regular+ priority, the other day the main server.
  2. The main server and 2nd server both get set up for ~40-50 people games, with the four HC's being split between the two to ensure equal performance. As with above, one of them would be regular+ priority.

 

Thoughts? Emotions? As long as it's not shit flinging, leave it below!

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Supporter of option two. 70 people is to much to effiiently handle for zeus/cm/server/platoon. The fact we manage to do this (albeit slowly) is a small miracle. Two 45'ish slot server seems perfect. You could even differentiate in gameplay if needed (casual vs casual milsim). ArmA is also build for +-50 people max so added benefit.

i also think when you start doing 30man missions there will be too much 'fighting' going on because I think a lot of people prefer 'smaller' missions towards the big ones we have. 45 people servers provide a very nice middleground. You can have a platoon of three/four extended squads and an asset. That's a perfect size to handle as Zeus/Platoon.

Edited by Lenny
3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

I'd love a mixture of 70 people missions AND 30 people ops, one not excluding the other. Although I do feel that 70 man ops every single day is getting a little less enjoyable.

Option 1 also means that server 2 will also be 'official' and will allow a Zeus to proper missions instead of server 2 just being a backup one? How do you decide on which day which server gets the regulars+ priority?

 

I vote slightly in favor of option 1, if the second server will indeed be 'official' (aka people not fucking about), because then we have more flexibility in terms of mission ideads (70 people missions and 30 people missions)

Edited by Chuck Yeager
spelling
4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

I love the idea of having both servers being utilized for main missions for a few reasons:

  1. More chances for people to Zeus (and allows more variety) 
  2. As @Lenny stated, you choose between 2 different playstyles: casual milsim (like we have now) & milsim (more serious)
  3. We'd be getting the money's worth of the second server rather than it sitting there as a backup

I think on both servers, Regs+ should have the priority they do now and everyone can access either. However, the more serious milsim server should have a bit stricte rules where if you ruin the whole experience or whatever, you'll be blacklisted from the serious milsim server for a time depending on the offense. This way, the more learning/casual/non-serious players will either learn and become serious or just stick to server 1. However, this doesn't mean we should punish/blacklist/prevent those new players who are still learning the mechanics if they are listening to orders and playing serious while learning.

Edited by Silver Snow
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I really like option two. I think it will allow for more focused missions with more action and a less stressful experience for the zues. I also however think the giant 70+ guy missions should be around every once and awhile if possible. Again with the support of option two it will allow for more fng's getting to experience the missions now we wont have to exclude as many of them. A perfect 50/50 split between servers I think is the best option but that's just my opinion. 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Chuck Yeager said:

I'd love a mixture of 70 people missions AND 30 people ops, one not excluding the other. Although I do feel that 70 man ops every single day is getting a little less enjoyable.

Option 1 also means that server 2 will also be 'official' and will allow a Zeus to proper missions instead of server 2 just being a backup one? How do you decide on which day which server gets the regulars+ priority?

 

I vote slightly in favor of option 1, if the second server will indeed be 'official' (aka people not fucking about), because then we have more flexibility in terms of mission ideads (70 people missions and 30 people missions)

Just an FYI: the idea with option two is that both servers will be official and that 70man missions are possible, but they need to be scheduled.
So no fucking about.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

my preferred option is 2, for reasons everyone basically knows. 

however Lenny raises a good point, we could do an even split but make it clear when is going to be more milsimy the other so people end up going to the right server for what they want that night. 

im kinda annoyed i didn't actually think of this. however, i support the reduction in server sizes :).  

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My primary question is, what will happen to the test server?

 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Cavalierr second server IS the current test server. When mod testing periods arrive, there might be some interruption to regular missions on that, but this has not been discussed yet.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I liked the smaller missions. Having 70 people in the same mission really does require a very good organisational and command structure, which is often either average at best or gets broken down once pressure of six squads and a few assets racks up. Fewer people per mission means a couple of missions at the same time which even gives a choice to choose between the types of missions people want to play also increasing competitiveness between the Zeus'.

I'd proposed something similar back then mainly because sometimes Zeus' can't handle there being six squads and what usually happens is there are 3, 4 or even more squads per objective which is too many. Anything above 2 squads is too many on a decently sized town imo. As a result of so many squads, we see a few recurring problems such as people not getting much to shoot at leading to complaining also leading to trigger-happy people team killing.

Option 2 seems a pretty good idea overall I think.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bravo cm/admin-team, this is a step to the correct direction in several ways. Thank you, for making this into an open poll!

3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd say a 50/30 would be among the best, rotating priority, just like number 1.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

I dont see why we should limit ourselves to only one of these options. On some days we could go with option 1 and on another days we go with option 2. As there are people who like to play big missions with lots of people and people that like more focused smaller or medium missions I feel like the community should cater to all of these demographics.

Also zeus could have influence over how many players he wants on his mission.

Edited by sumsum
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Option two seems to be the best middle ground, with max of around 45 people in each. Anything over that and Zeus would have a hard time managing everything. As other people have said, It makes good use of the second server since right now it's just sitting there, and allows for one server to be casual and the other to be more milsim based.

Edited by JacobyWitness
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2x50

 

The main server crashes way too often and managing 70 people is a drag. And use of the 2nd server is too low for both a community this size and the server max capacity.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've voted for option 2. It's more manageable and for the milsim side will make a lot of sense since typically NATO platoons are about 40 men plus assets so there's a bit more immersion.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's still going to be awesome to have the server to support 70 player pvp scenarios, those are awesome. 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am okay with option 2 but if there still be some big missions sometimes, like 70 players PVP or scripted missions.

3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Would advice to bump the 30 up to 35 for three squads + PLTHQ + assets, and implementing a system to add a third FTL to each squad for the 45er and 70er in case few asset slots are used. Fourth/seventh squad being the odd man out could become odd.

Too tired to understand the server rotation thing, will vote after a good night's sleep (or vehemently oppose the entire idea if awake me finds the rotation system to be stupid)

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Option 2 seems more fair TBH.  Like most people are saying, more manageable and possibly smoother performance.  I'm down for it. 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

I think a 4 squad layout would a more dynamic playstyle although I wouldn't mind the occasional 70+ clusterfuck.

Edited by BonSie
1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I feel like the second server is never used. Also the first option doesn't seem as fair as the second option. Also with the second option less people for more performance. 

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Vericht said:

I am okay with option 2 but if there still be some big missions sometimes, like 70 players PVP or scripted missions.

Those will always be supported, albeit they have to be planned so we can prepare the HC's and templates if needed.

I think 70 slot missions should be the exception, they should be something people look forward to again because they don't happen to often.

3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Option 2

 

I like the option of two servers running. As long as there is a good mix between FNG's and Regs + 

Edited by Bule_G
1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.