Where we're at

[GhostMjr]

So we have around 2 weeks to go to trial decision time and its been a journey of highs and lows.

We have done very well we have a server populated regularly but usually just need to get it going which is something we can work on.

Acid and I are going to be working extensively with a new admin tool found by magnus which we will migrate to however this will take around 2-3 weeks maybe longer to be ready with guardian being used in the meantime.

Overall we are all doing well we have succeeded in many areas we just need to make sure we keep working hard and keeping our server alive and keeping it in the public eye.

Guardian is about to be hosted on a dedicated box so this will be a great way to further advertise us.

I am going to allocate tasks to you guys to do this week none too long or scary and if you have any problems let me know and i'll try to jump in and help where i can.

Cheers and keep smiling!



Ghosty

[TeaLeaf]

Guardian is already up and running on BA4.  Went live this morning.

[TeaLeaf]

Council's Perspective:

We've been keeping up to speed with BC2 in Council and watching the discussions going on along with the ongoing community response to the game.  As you pointed out the renewal on the server rental is due shortly and we have a couple of options:  cancel the server or renew it for another 3 months.

In our view the game itself does encourage a lot of solo die:respawn frag hunting- type of play and that's a basic problem which is compounded by a total lack of workable in-game voice comms.   These problems seriously restrict the ability of even dMw members to play in a fashion which we would like to support and it almost bars members of the public from finding out about the dMw way!

In addition and contrary to your above indications we do not currently believe that the BC2 server is populated regularly.  The Clanforge stats seem to show that in the last 7 days we have had 4 days with zero or negligible population during our peak gaming hours.  Indeed only 2 nights in the last 7 look like that had 32 players online for more than a short period, the best being this past Sunday.

Given this intermittent population, the die:respawn nature of the game itself and the ongoing non-existent in-game voice comms we are struggling to justify renewing the BC2 server for a further 3 months.  

One alternative would be for us to renew the server for a shorter period, say a month, to see if anything changes from the Dice end.  Should that happen then we might look more favourably upon a further renewal but whilst these basic problems remain reported within the community we struggle to balance the cost:benefit equation.

So that's where Council feels BC2 is at the moment and we'd like your own views (not just GM, the other admins too) on our summary.  Have we got it wrong?  In your opinion, how should we proceed?  We really want to grow the community and we're sure that there will be many more opportunities and games that come up. Let's not flog the dead horse if that's what it is....over to you.

[GhostMjr]

Realistically its been tough.

All of the team were in the deep end from the start we struggled on and we have made progress.

My gut feeling is with this type of game servers need help to populate and RIP and DEARWANDY.COM both have the same issues until the magic "8" join and then they're sent publics like us.

Your view is fair and i really appreciate the council's judgement on the matter. We need games like this to practice on but we need to think have we got a big enough community to support a game like this unfortunately i think we haven't

A devil's advocate approach is to say we really would prefer if theres budget for it for a further 3 months the games settled down immensely and the community is seeing the server populated on a regular basis and we still have some more ideas to try with little games coming out this summer its something to bide us over at least.

Lots have bought the game on recommendations such as Butta, Serial and Ranger all with late purchases so we can't just pull the game as it could cause bad rapport.

Ã,£30 is alot to invest in a game and I honestly think that the council should either consider we share a server in an alliance with another community (dearwandy.com could be an idea as i know the owner well who is the hardware editor at pczone) or maybe think about sponsorship or a cheaper server host.

All these are just ideas i have been thinking about running up to the end of the trial.

As i say the team have performed well and i look forward to hearing their feedback to your and my post.

[lionheart]

I do agree with most of what has been said, but , I think a lot of the problems we have had have been exasperated by the bugginess and frequent server "fixes" employed by EA.

I have read on the EA forums that a patch is due any day now, whether that fixes the probs remains to be seen and until we have the in-game comms working we cannot really demonstrate to the publics the DMW way.

I dont think the fact that its a bit "run and gun" should make any difference to our decision, it didnt seem to matter with COD4 (yea I know we dont have to pay for that), and also this server is probably populated more frequently  then other FPS's  we suppoort.

I like the idea of co-hosting but wonder how we will be able to spam much DMW stuff as Im sure the co-hosts would want to recruit from there as well.

I really like this game and will continue to play it whatever, I would just rather it was with my mates on a DMW server.

So what Im saying is Lets give a bit longer, see if this patch helps, see if the admin tool is usable and take it from there

[T-Bag]

Hmmm, I thought I'd posted this earlier but I guess my internet died mid-post.

My view on this is rather than a dead horse BC2 is a life raft. It might not be the passenger liner we were hoping for in terms of huge numbers of new members coming in and throwing their money into the supporting members pot, but people are playing on there. In terms of other FPS games we have at the moment, there's Arma II, which I don't own, but I don't think there are too many people playing that anyway, L4D 1&2 which are rarely played, and if you have everyone on your steam friends list it makes owning a dedicated server irrelevant, CoD 4 which has seen diminishing numbers in recent months (most noticeably since the steam overlay bug, it's harder to get a game together).
I don't play racing games and I don't play WoW.
This means without BC2 the lure of contributing to the supporting members fund for me lies solely on the shoulders of CoD 4 which is, as I said previously, dwindling and the larger number of PMs I can store. I'm not sure how many members would be lost if a new FPS isn't introduced soon. It may well be few enough that the money saved by not renting a server makes up for it, but it does seem like the FPS section of the community would all be die off.

[Blunt]

Well T-Bag, CoD4 is limping along as you say, but Arma2 has a fair few devotees (and I am starting to get an interest)
BFBC2 on the otherhand is a dead duck most nights on our server. yet there are members online and in-game.
This, IMHO, is down to the fact that no-one seeds our server to start with.
Each and every time I've been on at the start of an evening, we've sent out some invites, got about 6-8 of us on there, and it fills up.
It's exactly the same in every other game that we play.
No-one joins an empty server.
You have to be prepared to start a game off by joining, inviting, etc.
If the BC2 admins and regulars are keen to see it supported by dMw, then they'll have to make more of an effort to fill the server IMHO

It may be worthwhile having a look at the server seeding thread
I know that this is pretty successful for 141 who seem to have a full server most times I check.
It does however need to have someone to be active, and that is the problem at the moment.

[Tutonic]

First off..

In our view the game itself does encourage a lot of solo die:respawn  frag hunting- type of play and that's a basic problem which is  compounded by a total lack of workable in-game voice comms.   These  problems seriously restrict the ability of even dMw members to play in a  fashion which we would like to support and it almost bars members of  the public from finding out about the dMw way!

I really do hate to do this, but both of your points here TL could easily be applied to COD4. In my opinion, COD4 is even more of a frag-monkey style shooter than BC2 and its in-game voice comms are next to useless. I enjoy COD4 and I do not wish to see it disappear from DMW, but I detect a note of hypocrisy here.

I'm not trying to belittle another DMW game, but I don't think BC2 is being given a fair shout.

BC2 is a great team game, but you have to make an effort to support your squad mates. It's only deathmatch-y if you choose to play it that way - just like any other shooter we've ever played as DMW (with the exception of, perhaps, ARMA).

The same goes for seeding the server, we have to pro-actively do this. Too many times I see 3 or 4 DMW members on Steam, all playing in different servers. When we seed our server it fills up, and people have a good time - surely this is what it's all about?

BC2 is going to be one of the biggest online FPS games for some time to come, there is nothing on the horizon that will challenge it for popularity imo. Before EA/DICE starting moving the bloody goalposts on us, we had regulars visiting our server and we had a real chance to recruit some new faces - it wont take much for this to start happening again now that the server config has been straightened out.

To pull our server now would be premature, and a mistake.

[TeaLeaf]

I think that's a fair accusation to make Tut, but the biggest difference I see between COD4 and BC2 is that we had the comms to discuss what we were doing.  The lack of working in-game voice-comms is a woeful omission and by default pushes people to frag-hunting.  If you added the voice comms then you might have a situation like CS or COD4 where people speak up and announce which site they are heading to or which objective and have the opportunity to play as a team.  That's a big problem at the moment for us getting the whole server operating as a team.  That's really why we're asking the question, is this right for us?

[Tutonic]

I think that's a fair accusation to make Tut, but the biggest difference I see between COD4 and BC2 is that we had the comms to discuss what we were doing.  The lack of working in-game voice-comms is a woeful omission and by default pushes people to frag-hunting.  If you added the voice comms then you might have a situation like CS or COD4 where people speak up and announce which site they are heading to or which objective and have the opportunity to play as a team.  That's a big problem at the moment for us getting the whole server operating as a team.  That's really why we're asking the question, is this right for us?

I don't think the BC2 in-game comms are quite as bad as you think they are. It's true that they do have problems with certain hardware configurations, but this is nothing new. CS, COD, ARMA - all these games suffer, or have suffered in the past, from exactly the same problems.

Hopefully the issues will be fixed in a future patch, and given DICE's commitment to continue to patch and develop the game I'm optimistic that this will happen.

You have to bare in mind that BC2 is designed slightly differently to the other shooters we've played. It is focused on squad level tactics, small groups of players working together to achieve goals for the whole team - that's why the voice comms are contained to squad members.

I do agree that getting an entire team to play the 'right' way can be tricky, but if you can get people working together properly at a squad level then the mechanics of the game make it work. So often, we've seen a single squad of 4 organised players win a mission almost single handedly.

[Penfold]

I don't think the BC2 in-game comms are quite as bad as you think they are.

Do you use in-game comms and not TS?

The same goes for seeding the server, we have to pro-actively do this.  Too many times I see 3 or 4 DMW members on Steam, all playing in  different servers. When we seed our server it fills up, and people have a  good time - surely this is what it's all about?

that's the crux of it. If the Game Admins are not prepared to try and get games going on our own server but wander off to play elsewhere what chance does it have.

We all say we need to seed our server but NO ONE - including the game admins does this.

When it was suggested that Game Admins could have a rota for helping to seed the server it was met with a massive negative with no one saying there were willing to do that.

we're all on the same side here but for this to work we need action not rhetoric. We can debate it forever but unless things actually happen then it's pointless.

I can pretty much guarantee that pretty much sod all has happened since the meeting at the LAN almost a month ago.

Whenever I've looked online at server activity people are playing BC2 - just not at dMw.

[TeaLeaf]

Last time I said I thought they were ok I was deluged with people telling me they were still unusable and choppy as heck? So I'm going on what people fed back to me last time I banged the 'in-game comms are better than TS' drum.  If the comms are workable why are we using TS?  The public do not hear about dMw and the way we can work as a team when we're isolated on a TS server.

The wierd thing is I'd actually like the game to be a success, I'm not trying to bring it down, just to add my own personal realism mod.

[GhostMjr]

We all say we need to seed our server but NO ONE - including the game admins does this.

Its difficult to force people to stick to dmw servers and i have said this publically said this before. If they enjoy a quick game somewhere else then thats what they're after. All the servers are in the same boat as us and are empty at some point in the day some even days in advance, take the bod clan's now "talking games.com" server for instance.

When it was suggested that Game Admins could have a rota for helping to seed the server it was met with a massive negative with no one saying there were willing to do that.

We are all volunteers. Its a great idea but we aren't a business. I can't ask my troops or anyone to devote x number hours a week they might not be able to. Volunteer work is adhoc and done when people are free and are willing to do the tasks.

we're all on the same side here but for this to work we need action not rhetoric. We can debate it forever but unless things actually happen then it's pointless.

There has been alot of change and yes we could of done more but we have had several problems and factors that have held us back. I could witch hunt but i won't certain deadlines haven't been met and we have all mucked in and got things going. Server tools have taken time to learn and to be honest i think we have all done a superb effort and i am proud of everyone.

I can pretty much guarantee that pretty much sod all has happened since the meeting at the LAN almost a month ago.

I can honestly say that at the LAN i was pretty shocked to have the admin section moved. It took time to come back online and i am unsure whether all my admins can still see the topic as not all of them have replied despite me emailing them all. Now things are live we can move forward. I would have preferred to have the previous section kept running and the new section set up as a test. Yes it was better for the longterm and now the new forum is live and everything is working which is superb .

The community night is being tweaked and the server admin file is now on the box which is great aswell as our readiness to get stuck in with the new admin tool once we have a bit more time as Acid is currently doing exams, t-bag is deep in studies and i am beginning to learn how the tool works.

Whenever I've looked online at server activity people are playing BC2 - just not at dMw

Alot of players including the BIG guys are now playing elsewhere this is due to hostility from ninja, kreg and others in early posts and critical posts early on and i have got them back a couple of times but they don't really want to commit time to the community anymore because of the above. Its a shame to loose them but it would seem. After a long talk with a couple of other section admins, community leaders and my game admins i decided to reduce collateral damage and prevented Ninja from causing other upsets by removing his admin status. This cost me my friendship but at the end of the day it was the best move for the community and for the greater good as Paddy, Magnus, Dewey and Snokio have since all come back to the server.

Channel Talk is improving and community night are both enjoyable and highly sought after.

[TeaLeaf]

There was a very short break in service on accessing the BC2 admin section GM.  It's not a good thing to wheel out as an excuse.  Perhaps, as I have mentioned already, the fact that you have not badged some of your admins might explain why they cannot see this section?  That's not a forum problem, that's down to you as Penfold explained in a PM to you.  Anyway, getting back to the question I asked - are comms usable now then?  Is there anything else we can do to make it better?  If we know there are hardwareissues, have we done a Sound FAQ to explain the quick fixes others have already found?  Etc.

[Benny]

Here's my sixpenth. The game is enjoyable enough but every time I've played it's been a bit farcical, I've had some fun and tactics, suprisingly enough more often than not with one or two dMw'rs that aren't party to this section of the forum. I've had to encourage people into the separate channels, which TL renamed there and then. A two second job which could have been done on any night previously.

There are a number of references, and rightly so to other games, but what had happened is that people have made a concerted effort to drive those games, Arma is a bug ridden hell ride of a game to get right but in no small measure thanks to those initially involved we've stuck at it and are now slowly reaping rewards. My advice would be this. There is extremely limited time until renewal. Nothing is concrete..yet.

Stop discussing the minutiae and start getting bodies on the server, encouraging the teams, getting rotations working and getting the forum section alive. Guides, tips, tweaks, active posting. Discussing the finer points ad infinitum doesn't solve the issue. We do not have a server that is any different to every other public server. Why not go en masse to any other server and play together there? We want to support this game but see no real differentiator here that justifies spending community funds on something that is just a.n.other internet server.