Max players

[Stryker]

At this time has the max players IE spawn points been sorted out on all the popular maps?  does the new version of CS cater for spawn point collitions?

If so then why not make meathook a 20 player server?

Discuss......

[Dr Sadako]

I think we should keep 16 players and get people to use Baldric. 8 vs 8 is more than enough when playing TCS/PCS. We had 20 before and it was more DM mode on homer then. If I dont recall wrong I think it was you that suggested that we reduce the slots to 16 after a bad experience on dust2.  

[Stryker]

true, then again I do prefer larger games...... looking forward to a 16v16 on the LAN Oktober fest  

[TeaLeaf]

OB and I were recently discussing adding spawn points to some maps...........but I also think that we should remember that we restricted the numbers to keep it TCS.

The real problem is getting people to use Baldric.

TL.

[Dr Sadako]

Originally posted by TeaLeaf@Oct 2 2003, 02:04 PM
The real problem is getting people to use Baldric.

TL.

I agree and I think that we (the members of dMw) need to take more responsibility to actually get games going. I have been thinking of a way to get this to work smoothly.

One idea was that we could have ghosts on homer and zombies on baldric. That way we would have both admins and hopefully even numbers on the servers of dMw peeps. This should only be for a short period of time (say a week) but it could be the start to get people used to using Baldric. What do you think?

Another idea is that the people who have match get a game going on baldric that night.

I was also wondering if it is possible to have a third server for matches only that we only brought online when it was match? Do we have the bandwidth? This way people wouldn't have to leave baldric for the match. Could that be one reason for the reluctance of using Baldric?

What do you think?

[Stryker]

I dont agree with the ghosts and zombies server.........

however I agree that using baldric for matches will disrupt games on there which is a shame when we'd worked so hard to get peeps on there.

we had two games server back when we hardly filled one.  Now we are regularly filing one so I'm thinking your idea of raising a third server for match play is a good idea.  I feel blackadder can easily cater for an extra server esp as most of the time it will lie idle.  On the clan hosting services they'd have 6 games running on that hardware.

It makes no diff to crosswired as no matter how many servers we have were not filling them to capacity, not that it would matter too much if we did.  We have a leech buffer remember.  If it became an issue we'd just have to cut back on leeching.

Anyone disagree with sadako/me on this?

[Dr Sadako]

Originally posted by Stryker@Oct 2 2003, 02:51 PM
I dont agree with the ghosts and zombies server.........

however I agree that using baldric for matches will disrupt games on there which is a shame when we'd worked so hard to get peeps on there.

we had two games server back when we hardly filled one.  Now we are regularly filing one so I'm thinking your idea of raising a third server for match play is a good idea.  I feel blackadder can easily cater for an extra server esp as most of the time it will lie idle.  On the clan hosting services they'd have 6 games running on that hardware.

It makes no diff to crosswired as no matter how many servers we have were not filling them to capacity, not that it would matter too much if we did.  We have a leech buffer remember.  If it became an issue we'd just have to cut back on leeching.

Anyone disagree with sadako/me on this?

Sounds good. If all agree we should start up a third server dedicated for matches only, to avoid disruptions on Baldric. Name for this baby?

The zoombie/ghost server idea was just ... an idea. Nothing else and I thought that if we tried it out we could do it for maximum a week.

[Stryker]

hhhm server names.  well originally we were on a simpsons theme.... then team-dogmeat decided it was to be blackadder.  (either way we be stuck with meathook, unless anyone dares a rename of an existing server).

How about "percy".

I take it the url we bandy about for the server (not the games) is:

black-adder.deadmen.co.uk

[Dr Sadako]

Originally posted by Stryker@Oct 2 2003, 03:51 PM
hhhm server names.  well originally we were on a simpsons theme.... then team-dogmeat decided it was to be blackadder.  (either way we be stuck with meathook, unless anyone dares a rename of an existing server).

How about "percy".

I take it the url we bandy about for the server (not the games) is:

black-adder.deadmen.co.uk

Isn't it

homer.deadmen.co.uk:27015
baldric.deadmen.co.uk:27016

right now?

percy.deadmen.co.uk:27017  ... works fine.

[albert]

I think that getting people on Baldric will be tricky unless dMw members make a move more often onto the server or perhaps we play on each server alternately e.g. Mon- MH, Tue- Bald.... so people get the idea of two servers being available for normal gameplay.

Or another idea is making Baldric a custom maps server with say 4 or 5 good maps to sort of get  people trying it out. Then if we generate enough interest a 3rd server would be viable for matches and hopefully Balders and MH woul dcontinue to be popular.

[Stryker]

Can I have some concencous on Sadako's 3rd server idea.  The one where we have two full time tcs servers and a third for just matches.

If I get the go ahead the third "percy"? could be up within the hour.  Obviously their server names will dipict their function as it does now.

[Gandalf]

that would make sense. remember I did offer red as a match server only so the two main could be used for CS 24/7

[Dr Sadako]

Originally posted by Stryker@Oct 6 2003, 11:26 AM
Can I have some concencous on Sadako's 3rd server idea.  The one where we have two full time tcs servers and a third for just matches.

If I get the go ahead the third "percy"? could be up within the hour.  Obviously their server names will dipict their function as it does now.

Go Go Go!  

[OldBloke]

Aye.  

[DogMeat]

:thumbsup: