cRPG

cRPG => General Discussion => Topic started by: Riddaren on August 25, 2012, 07:42:19 pm

Title: Lack of low populated battle servers
Post by: Riddaren on August 25, 2012, 07:42:19 pm
There used to be pecores, nordmen, eu4 and the melee server.

Now it's just EU1 and night time only EU4 (which is not fun to play on).
Is it just me or is anyone else missing the old times when there where more servers people played on?
Title: Re: Lack of low populated battle servers
Post by: Piok on August 25, 2012, 07:49:51 pm
Nerf ranged and people will return.
Title: Re: Lack of low populated battle servers
Post by: CrazyCracka420 on August 25, 2012, 07:50:59 pm
I'd rather there was only one NA and one EU battle server.  I'd like to see more 70 v 70 battles, and 100 vs 100 battles.

To me, it's just not nearly as fun when it's 20v20 or 10v10. 
Title: Re: Lack of low populated battle servers
Post by: Lt_Anders on August 25, 2012, 07:52:21 pm
Quote from: CrazyCracka420 on August 25, 2012, 07:50:59 pm
I'd rather there was only one NA and one EU battle server.  I'd like to see more 70 v 70 battles, and 100 vs 100 battles.

To me, it's just not nearly as fun when it's 20v20 or 10v10.

Not everyone likes large clusters.

I like 40 and 60 player max servers(save siege which i don't care the numbers unless defender).
Title: Re: Lack of low populated battle servers
Post by: CrazyCracka420 on August 25, 2012, 07:53:39 pm
And I don't know why, if the servers and our computers could handle it, I'd love to see 200 vs 200 battles, or even 500 vs 500 on open fields.
Title: Re: Lack of low populated battle servers
Post by: Kuyamzoleta on August 25, 2012, 08:00:14 pm
I can understand why people like low populated servers because the battles tend to be more intimate. The lower the population, the more epic fights get because you can actually focus on 1 or two people and not have to worry about anything else. Whereas in a higher population, you can roleplay as a lawn mower and cut people down left and right, the only distraction being the mass amount of chaos around you.

In NA I remember having servers like Tunatown or haven, which I do indeed miss, but don't really need right now. As far as new player/peasant integration goes, I'd rather have everyone condensed in the few servers we have available now so the new guys can see how a multitude of good guys play.
Title: Re: Lack of low populated battle servers
Post by: Horst_Kurmoottaja on August 26, 2012, 11:38:59 am
Siege seems more fun right now. EU1 is usually too crowded with ranged and cav. It gets so frustrating at times.
Title: Re: Lack of low populated battle servers
Post by: Nessaj on August 26, 2012, 11:49:38 am
Need some nice maps made especially for ~30 people, instead of the "usual random big location with X areas of interest" - EU4 have some OK maps but personally I'm really missing some specific maps that's made for minor skirmishes. Sort of similar to the CTF maps that once were, e.g. 2 pretty much equal bases relatively close to each other with a main area in-between for the clashes. I'd say the size of the native arenas is appropriate (as on the melee server, if they're still there) - but with objects on etc.

If anyone know of some please post though. We would like to populate the Nordmen server with better suited maps.
Title: Re: Lack of low populated battle servers
Post by: Miwiw on August 26, 2012, 12:04:33 pm
I still remember some nice maps on pecores Server half a year ago. I enjoyed most of them (I dont know more however :p).
Title: Re: Lack of low populated battle servers
Post by: Rebelyell on August 26, 2012, 12:28:29 pm
Quote from: Riddaren on August 25, 2012, 07:42:19 pm
There used to be pecores, nordmen, eu4 and the melee server.

Now it's just EU1 and night time only EU4 (which is not fun to play on).
Is it just me or is anyone else missing the old times when there where more servers people played on?
what is wrong with EU4?
Title: Re: Lack of low populated battle servers
Post by: Byrdi on August 26, 2012, 12:32:25 pm
Quote from: Rebelyell on August 26, 2012, 12:28:29 pm
what is wrong with EU4?

EU_4 is almost always populated, I never play on EU_1, because I dont have to. Pecores is populated once in a while as well.

I think people stopped playing on Nordmen because the server was not updated and they had removed banner balance; thereby making it a shitty version of EU_4.
Title: Re: Lack of low populated battle servers
Post by: Kafein on August 26, 2012, 01:20:34 pm
The game tends to be sluggish everywhere except on pecores for me, but there are players there once in a blue moon.
Title: Re: Lack of low populated battle servers
Post by: Riddaren on August 26, 2012, 03:36:08 pm
I suggest people join Pecores instead of EU4 (unless you like night time and no banner balance).
Title: Re: Lack of low populated battle servers
Post by: Leshma on August 26, 2012, 04:33:26 pm
Quote from: Rebelyell on August 26, 2012, 12:28:29 pm
what is wrong with EU4?

visitors can't see pics , please register or login
Title: Re: Lack of low populated battle servers
Post by: Zlisch_The_Butcher on August 26, 2012, 04:49:31 pm
Quote from: Riddaren on August 26, 2012, 03:36:08 pm
I suggest people join Pecores instead of EU4 (unless you like night time and no banner balance).
Autobalance is fucked up, whoever is on the pecores team gets a constant 1x on EU_Pecores.
Title: Re: Lack of low populated battle servers
Post by: WITCHCRAFT on August 26, 2012, 09:20:54 pm
NA_Community_1 has 10-40 people on during the "NA time" when NA_1 and NA_2 are at their highest population.
Title: Re: Lack of low populated battle servers
Post by: Shemaforash on August 27, 2012, 12:25:07 pm
Best is 10v10 or 15v15
Title: Re: Lack of low populated battle servers
Post by: dodnet on August 27, 2012, 12:28:42 pm
Quote from: Shemaforash on August 27, 2012, 12:25:07 pm
Best is 100v100 or to 150v150

fixed
Title: Re: Lack of low populated battle servers
Post by: Hunter_the_Honourable on August 27, 2012, 12:32:59 pm
Reason I don't go on EU_1 during the day is its to laggy and the range and cav spam is just frustrating, so I bugger off to EU_2 or 4 EU_4 is nice because you don't get 5-7 arrows in you in the space of 3 seconds and EU_2 well....Its fun when the greys don't clan stack.

EU_1 is boring and if you die early in the round well you might be waiting a good 10 minutes if the archers decide to show off their kiting skills EU_4 the fights can last a while but their good interesting fights normally not 12 archers running from 5 inf or 7 cav bumping some guy to death, the rounds can be long and interesting or nice and quick so everyones back in the fight.

100vs100 battles are ok but laggy and when I die I normally just alt+tab when I die because I know the round will take a good while before I spawn again.

(I should visit nordmen server, totally forgot you guys had a server :( )
Title: Re: Lack of low populated battle servers
Post by: Vibe on August 27, 2012, 12:35:12 pm
EU_4 is the trash player server, filled with ranged and griefers like the Forlorn clan
Title: Re: Lack of low populated battle servers
Post by: Aderyn on August 27, 2012, 01:28:03 pm
just play on NA, usually low pop.
Title: Re: Lack of low populated battle servers
Post by: Rebelyell on August 27, 2012, 06:19:53 pm
lol what are you talking about... I miss so much eu1 with over 200 players on
:(

Quote from: Vibe on August 27, 2012, 12:35:12 pm
EU_4 is the trash player server, filled with ranged and griefers like the Forlorn clan

I have been dicked by them soo many times.....

and I am getting sick when I see robin kiting around.
Title: Re: Lack of low populated battle servers
Post by: BASNAK on August 27, 2012, 06:40:16 pm
Needs Melee server rite nao
Title: Re: Lack of low populated battle servers
Post by: Riddaren on August 27, 2012, 06:54:09 pm
Quote from: Shemaforash on August 27, 2012, 12:25:07 pm
Best is 10v10 or 15v15

Yeah, that's fun.

Nordmen was my favourite server until it was abandoned.
Would be nice if you could bring it back to life again.
Title: Re: Lack of low populated battle servers
Post by: Hunter_the_Honourable on August 28, 2012, 04:04:00 am
Quote from: Rebelyell on August 27, 2012, 06:19:53 pm
lol what are you talking about... I miss so much eu1 with over 200 players on
:(

I have been dicked by them soo many times.....

and I am getting sick when I see robin kiting around.

If Robin and tutari... or what ever his dam name is (not that any one cares) got banned from EU_4 *cough* hopefully cRPG for auto blocking again *cough* then EU_4 Would be an O-k place atleast there would be less ranged then EU_1....thats a win...Right? RIGHT?!
Title: Re: Lack of low populated battle servers
Post by: MB passionately on August 28, 2012, 05:28:21 pm
(click to show/hide)

will it ever be again like that?? long time addicts, please give your assessment!
Title: Re: Lack of low populated battle servers
Post by: Son Of Odin on August 29, 2012, 04:03:29 pm
Yeah it's hilarious to dominate some low pop servers. Especially with horse, like Riddaren wants to do I suspect :D. I can't deny it. It feels good to rape the whole enemy team with my lance. The best thing about small servers.

5 vs 5 peasant (peasant = nab) fights are especially fun to join. It felt good to be called "too good" after I decimated and decapitated the whole enemy team with a long spiked club and in peasant clothes couple times :mrgreen:
Title: Re: Lack of low populated battle servers
Post by: darmaster on August 29, 2012, 04:32:36 pm
Quote from: Riddaren on August 26, 2012, 03:36:08 pm
I suggest people join Pecores instead of EU4 (unless you like night time and no banner balance).


jef. i like these servers, max 50 people imo. but please as riddaren said, join pecores, not eu4. and guys update them, i mean: why not putting the dead body thing (that you can still hit it) or removing polestun? and NERF ARCHERS always
Title: Re: Lack of low populated battle servers
Post by: Riddaren on September 01, 2012, 10:09:54 pm
(click to show/hide)

Hehe, yeah :wink:

Anyway, I suggest people join Pecores instead of EU_4.
Banner balance and no nighttime.
Title: Re: Lack of low populated battle servers
Post by: Araxiel on September 02, 2012, 02:37:08 am
Quote from: Leshma on August 26, 2012, 04:33:26 pm
visitors can't see pics , please register or login

Can't see the picture. Upload it again.
Title: Re: Lack of low populated battle servers
Post by: Riddaren on October 25, 2012, 02:22:15 pm
There are no low populated battle servers but the 24/7 nighttime EU_4.
Can this be fixed already? It's killing the mod.
Title: Re: Lack of low populated battle servers
Post by: Thomek on October 25, 2012, 03:30:22 pm
Quote from: Riddaren on October 25, 2012, 02:22:15 pm
There are no low populated battle servers but the 24/7 nighttime EU_4.
Can this be fixed already? It's killing the mod.

Shit! Cav and ranged is running out of targets.. what to do now???

I wonder why..
Title: Re: Lack of low populated battle servers
Post by: Riddaren on October 25, 2012, 03:51:11 pm
Thomek, Ill give you 100.000 gold if you make EU_4 24/7 day light.
Title: Re: Lack of low populated battle servers
Post by: Mizuk on October 25, 2012, 04:06:28 pm
When there's over 50vs50 shit starts to lag, so they need better server which isn't going to happen, therefore it's best about 40vs40.
Title: Re: Lack of low populated battle servers
Post by: Kafein on October 25, 2012, 04:07:51 pm
A 40 player new siege server would be a good place to put all the maps deemed too hard to attack on EU_2.
Title: Re: Lack of low populated battle servers
Post by: Rebelyell on October 25, 2012, 04:27:35 pm
Quote from: Mizuk on October 25, 2012, 04:06:28 pm
When there's over 50vs50 shit starts to lag, so they need better server which isn't going to happen, therefore it's best about 40vs40.
its laggy because your pc is shit
(click to show/hide)

use windows xp for warband for better fps
Title: Re: Lack of low populated battle servers
Post by: Kafein on October 25, 2012, 06:03:10 pm
Quote from: Rebelyell on October 25, 2012, 04:27:35 pm
use windows xp for warband for better fps

You tested windows 7 ? XP is probably the worst OS ever for running warband.
Title: Re: Lack of low populated battle servers
Post by: Digglez on October 25, 2012, 06:16:03 pm
Quote from: CrazyCracka420 on August 25, 2012, 07:50:59 pm
I'd rather there was only one NA and one EU battle server.  I'd like to see more 70 v 70 battles, and 100 vs 100 battles.

To me, it's just not nearly as fun when it's 20v20 or 10v10.

the reason people dont want this is because you have to deal with the inevitable delayer/leechers when admins arent there or impotent.  And the fact that devs see nothing wrong with 50+ people having to wait 2 minutes for 1 mother fucking HA to lose impossible odds.
Title: Re: Lack of low populated battle servers
Post by: CrazyCracka420 on October 27, 2012, 12:57:20 am
Quote from: Thomek on October 25, 2012, 03:30:22 pm
Shit! Cav and ranged is running out of targets.. what to do now???

I wonder why..

Easy solution, remove cav and ranged from the game, it's not like people fought with horses or ranged weapons in the middle ages...that's just a myth, like girls on the internet.
Title: Re: Lack of low populated battle servers
Post by: Artyem on October 27, 2012, 01:02:59 am
NA Community usually has 0 - 25 people, it's fun unless you're trying to populate it and lose money because you can't get a multi with 4 people, or it's you and six other footmen with one horse xbow.  Even worse is when it's you and six horse xbows...
Title: Re: Lack of low populated battle servers
Post by: Ad1no on October 27, 2012, 01:09:08 am
Quote from: Piok on August 25, 2012, 07:49:51 pm
Nerf ranged and people will return.

this

save crpg
Title: Re: Lack of low populated battle servers
Post by: Tears of Destiny on October 27, 2012, 01:13:36 am
Title: Re: Lack of low populated battle servers
Post by: Thovex on October 27, 2012, 01:25:18 am
I will look in putting EU Melee up again.
Title: Re: Lack of low populated battle servers
Post by: Teeth on October 27, 2012, 01:28:57 am
In about half a year there will always be a low populated server called EU_1, don't worry.
Title: Re: Lack of low populated battle servers
Post by: Rebelyell on October 27, 2012, 01:45:56 am
Quote from: Teeth on October 27, 2012, 01:28:57 am
In about half a year there will always be a low populated server called EU_1, don't worry.
why do you think so?
Title: Re: Lack of low populated battle servers
Post by: Riddaren on October 27, 2012, 02:25:31 am
What Teeth says will probably become true. Maybe not within 6 months but certainly within a year.
If I were in charge of this mod I wouldn't just watch it die without trying to prevent it.

It's pretty clear what pisses people off:

- Too much ranged and cavalry
- The fact that the dev team has still not implemented team balancing by class, which leads to ranged/cav teams vs melee inf.

The solution is not to nerf cav and ranged. The solution is to force a limitation of them.
You can easily do this by not letting people spawn with bow, xbow, horse etc if there are no "slots" left on your team.
Title: Re: Lack of low populated battle servers
Post by: Armpit_Sweat on October 27, 2012, 03:11:29 am
hmm
Title: Re: Lack of low populated battle servers
Post by: Fips on October 27, 2012, 03:36:52 am
God, screw those little servers. We got a bigass battle server with 200 slots, allowing us to have awesome 100vs100 battles, and yet it never happened after the x2-exp event. Maybe there should be more events like these, maybe not x2 gold and xp, let it just be gold or xp doubled, or even x1,5, or half the repairs (Making it easier for inf to go tincan and surviving more ranged shots) or ANYTHING. Just to get it to 100vs100 again, because those 2 or 3 days were one hell of an experience, i never enjoyed battle that much again!
Yes, more players might cause more ranged/cav and increase the chance of getting pwned in the first seconds of the round, but srsly, why would you care?!; there was an actual battle to watch, not just 40 players scattering all over the place and trying to fight in a pew-pew fashion. And by pew-pew i am not just talking about ranged, because honestly, right now infantry fights are basically trying to stab someone in the face and backing up afterwards, looking out for someone to backstab, backstab and then fall back again and so on...not much fun actually. On those days fighting so many players you could just jump into the fight, cause chaos and go beserk (or get pwned if you face intelligent opponents), pushing forward and backwards as a group mattered so much more than the 1v1 pewpewing, archer-squads became more powerful especially against other ranged but yet they were much more vulnerable because the high amount of cav could just run over them if they don't watch out.

No idea why cRPG rarely does such events, it is well known that it keeps the players hooked and entertained. Makes me sad that after the initial test it never came to this again.
Title: Re: Lack of low populated battle servers
Post by: Rebelyell on October 27, 2012, 03:44:32 am
maybe we need modifiter

over 100 players on 1,5 multi
over 150 upkeep 1% less chance(or anything balanced)
over 200 players
exp and gold x2
max population -10 first tick 500 gold bonus

Its just sugestion, but that event wast the most epick time in crpg pls bring it back.
Title: Re: Lack of low populated battle servers
Post by: Fips on October 27, 2012, 03:54:07 am
Yeh, or something like that. I wouldn't suggest such a high modification of the xp and gold, let's say max it at 1.5 or even just 1.25 (Because otherwise there will be noone playing any other modes again ^^) , but other than that, that would do, too.
Although i never see that happen, tbh. cRPG feels like a dead mod right now, if it weren't for the latest strat-update i would have expected the developers to do exactly nothing about anything concerning the cRPG-problems. Some kind of update on progresses or at least an information that everybody is busy with something else (Which is fine, ofc) is very very long overdue.
Title: Re: Lack of low populated battle servers
Post by: justme on October 27, 2012, 09:10:57 am
soon eu1 will become one of those servers...
Title: Re: Lack of low populated battle servers
Post by: Riddaren on October 27, 2012, 11:25:48 am
Quote from: Fips on October 27, 2012, 03:36:52 am
God, screw those little servers. We got a bigass battle server with 200 slots, allowing us to have awesome 100vs100 battles

100 vs 100 battles requires open flat maps with few obstacles for best possible performance.
Right now people have lots of lag and low fps on many maps in rotation. Many of these players play on the smaller servers for that reason.

The solution is simple and it is what I've been suggesting many times already. Make EU_1 have only open flat maps in rotation.
That will solve it.

Together with a limitation of ranged and cavalry it will be epic and fun.
Title: Re: Lack of low populated battle servers
Post by: Osiris on October 27, 2012, 01:17:59 pm
Quote
Make EU_1 have only open flat maps in rotation.


that will just kill the mod totally
Title: Re: Lack of low populated battle servers
Post by: Riddaren on October 27, 2012, 02:24:14 pm
Quote from: Osiris on October 27, 2012, 01:17:59 pm

that will just kill the mod totally

Well, atleast remove the siege and forest like maps causing low fps for many players.