Command and Conquer: Renegade Official Forums - RDF feed
C&C: Renegade --> Dying since 2003™, resurrected in 2024!
How about that? There isn't one, obviously. Is there a reason why there should not be? I could host it, or if, say, Crimson wanted to instead that'd be fine - in fact, probably better - but if I were to host it it wouldn't belong to me, it'd belong to the Renegade Community. This forum, as a community, could decide stuff like the rules by having polls, appoint moderators, etc.
Re: Suggestion: Official Community Server
There are already too many servers, unfortunately.
Do you ever stop to think before you post, Goztow? If the whole community basically runs the server, then wouldn't they be, I don't know, more likely to play on the server?
No point, we all have our Community servers that we play in. Goztow wrote on Tue, 11 September 2007 09:35 There are already too many servers, unfortunately. More servers the better to be honest, it be a sad day if there was only few servers around.
cheesesoda wrote on Tue, 11 September 2007 09:59 Do you ever stop to think before you post, Goztow? +1 agree. OnTopic: If you guys got a TeamSpeak server up, I'd most probably play, Then we all could use this new tactic called "teamwork" ! If not, back to APB for me.
Sorry, but why do we need MORE servers? Eventually we are going to end up having 1 server for every player online at any given time, which is completely pointless...
well as of right now how many servers send their data to bhs rankings page? i mean this could be a way to persuade people to join this server. i for one would prob drop by from time to time, since n00bstories is full most of the time i go to play
I agree that more servers is not needed. Everyone here already plays somewhere or doesn't play. That time and server could be used in better ways.
Yeah but a server run by this community would be interesting and may serve to unite us more. (I know that sounds a little cheesy). Since everyone plays in different servers, the members in this forum rarely run into each other. I don't know about others but to me it will mean a lot if there was a server where everyone from the forums here would join in and play. And I agree completely with Spoony...we can decide on the rules and the mods and so on. It will be really interesting and will bring the community closer.
cheesesoda wrote on Tue, 11 September 2007 16:59 Do you ever stop to think before you post, Goztow? If the whole community basically runs the server, then wouldn't they be, I don't know, more likely to play on the server? All my almost 4.000 posts are all well thought of and there's hardly any spam in it either. But thanks for your concern. We wouldn't play there more, we would just fight more about it. Let's get community based rules: noone will agree. Let's get community based moderators: all who say "aye" can be a moderator. Ow wait, we need an admin to supervise the moderators. Let's all fight about it! If you want a community server, you already have n00bstories. That's the closest to a Renegade community server you'll ever get. And guess what: n00bstories has a 2nd serevr which isn't always full.
Goztow wrote on Tue, 11 September 2007 13:31 cheesesoda wrote on Tue, 11 September 2007 16:59 Do you ever stop to think before you post, Goztow? If the whole community basically runs the server, then wouldn't they be, I don't know, more likely to play on the server? All my almost 4.000 posts are all well thought of and there's hardly any spam in it either. But thanks for your concern. We wouldn't play there more, we would just fight more about it. Let's get community based rules: noone will agree. Let's get community based moderators: all who say "aye" can be a moderator. Ow wait, we need an admin to supervise the moderators. Let's all fight about it! If you want a community server, you already have n00bstories. That's the closest to a Renegade community server you'll ever get. And guess what: n00bstories has a 2nd serevr which isn't always full. See, I have no problem with that opinion. I agree with that, but your original post of saying that we have too many servers doesn't mean shit in this situation.
cheesesoda wrote on Tue, 11 September 2007 19:33 Goztow wrote on Tue, 11 September 2007 13:31 cheesesoda wrote on Tue, 11 September 2007 16:59 Do you ever stop to think before you post, Goztow? If the whole community basically runs the server, then wouldn't they be, I don't know, more likely to play on the server? All my almost 4.000 posts are all well thought of and there's hardly any spam in it either. But thanks for your concern. We wouldn't play there more, we would just fight more about it. Let's get community based rules: noone will agree. Let's get community based moderators: all who say "aye" can be a moderator. Ow wait, we need an admin to supervise the moderators. Let's all fight about it! If you want a community server, you already have n00bstories. That's the closest to a Renegade community server you'll ever get. And guess what: n00bstories has a 2nd serevr which isn't always full. See, I have no problem with that opinion. I agree with that, but your original post of saying that we have too many servers doesn't mean shit in this situation. It's the standard answer to everyone that wants a new server.
Maybe have Spoony and Crimson both be admins, and each of them get to choose something like 3 or 4 trusted moderators? ^That's just an example.. We could have more admins, but those are the two that I'm pretty sure would be admins.
A top a00 nick would ofcourse would be needed nowadays to get anything full, a 30-40 player server called like "Westwood Community Server" Or "C&C Renegade Server" or something simplistic like that seems apropriate, also, as Alex said, a TS serv would be intresting aswell
Quite a few servers already have a Teamspeak server for players, and I am pretty sure n00bstories is one of them...
Isn't there already an official community server? That's what they called it. I swear there was, and the majority of the players were German.
I remember there were a couple of renegade community servers.. lol
Fucking pointless... even if one was set up, no one would really join it, like I'll said eailer, we all have our home servers that we play in. And I'll agree with Goztow, we would end up fighting over everything about the server. Good idea but just not needed.
Brilliant Idea. There should be single player death match maps too!
u guys should close the servers that are ALWAYS empty
how? they (spoony and crimson and ect.) dont control those servers. so how do they close them?
As mentioned before, the community wouldn't agree on the rules. You'll have people arguing for weapon drops, others against. People will be ragging on the maps, etc.
every 1 saying there to many servers, youre wrong if spoony was to get a community server goin. id rather join his server than any other commmunity server because most of those community servers half the teams are full with n00bs who rush start with flamers n shit when its totally unessercary. but i can see decent ppl joinin spoonys server.
SoQReaL wrote on Wed, 12 September 2007 09:16 every 1 saying there to many servers, youre wrong if spoony was to get a community server goin. id rather join his server than any other commmunity server because most of those community servers half the teams are full with n00bs who rush start with flamers n shit when its totally unessercary. but i can see decent ppl joinin spoonys server. There's no reason to think that because Spoony is the admin, there will be less n00bs.
ummmm most cw.cc players would play in his public server than any 1 elses. = less n00bs
would be useful to host community network matches - would also draw in those communities that may not be able to find somewhere to host a community match.
who cares if new players join it? If the site is officially aligned to this community rather than any other (or any person), new players will find out about this forum's existence, for one thing. As for those of you who say there'd be no point - there'd also be no harm, surely? I could set it up in the space of a day or so if I had the blessing of the admins here... and if it ended up being totally unused, we can just get rid of it, who'd care?
It will take up time setting it up and managing it... -Ghost-
it may be worth a shot.... but if it fails miserably, i had nothing to do with it.
nikki6ixx wrote on Tue, 11 September 2007 22:56 As mentioned before, the community wouldn't agree on the rules. You'll have people arguing for weapon drops, others against. People will be ragging on the maps, etc. So? its a game...people won't send bombs to their houses or anything, even if 1 rule or another they don't agree with, we all play on a server, with atleast 1 rule nobody agrees with (well a few are exceptional), but do we still play there? Yes. Disagreeing with the rules would be the least of the worries
trooprm02 wrote on Wed, 12 September 2007 18:16 nikki6ixx wrote on Tue, 11 September 2007 22:56 As mentioned before, the community wouldn't agree on the rules. You'll have people arguing for weapon drops, others against. People will be ragging on the maps, etc. So? its a game...people won't send bombs to their houses or anything, even if 1 rule or another they don't agree with, we all play on a server, with atleast 1 rule nobody agrees with (well a few are exceptional), but do we still play there? Yes. Disagreeing with the rules would be the least of the worries Troop, go back to work and do your homework. Rules are there for a reason, being to increase the joy of everyone. At least, that's what a reason should do, else it's pretty pointless.
trooprm02 wrote on Wed, 12 September 2007 11:16 nikki6ixx wrote on Tue, 11 September 2007 22:56 As mentioned before, the community wouldn't agree on the rules. You'll have people arguing for weapon drops, others against. People will be ragging on the maps, etc. So? its a game...people won't send bombs to their houses or anything, even if 1 rule or another they don't agree with, we all play on a server, with atleast 1 rule nobody agrees with (well a few are exceptional), but do we still play there? Yes. Disagreeing with the rules would be the least of the worries Well yes. But this is a community, and like a workplace, you need a general consensus as to how it is run. Perhaps there will be enough people in the middle who will give and take, and experience has shown there usually is. However, you will get the more dedicated gamers getting into arguments with the more casual ones like me. Maps will likely be a contentious issue. Some people will call for fan-maps, and others will only want the maps that originally came with the game. Every so often I hear people complaining about weapon drops; how will the community decide upon those? You can always do polling, but there's always some dipstick who believes that the poll is bullshit, and will make his points heard every game, and in every thread. I honestly think the current system is fine, and offers a good variety of gameplay.
I can't see this working. This community is just made up of people from various other communities. Most of those people are likely going to still want to play on the same server they've been playing on for years. Either it wouldn't work, or it would just end up damaging the already existing community servers. If someone wanted to try it out, I would support it of course. But that is just my opinion.
I've had this idea for a while now, but lacked the money to implement my plan Goztow wrote on Tue, 11 September 2007 08:35 There are already too many servers, unfortunately. I concur. trooprm02 wrote on Tue, 11 September 2007 13:17 A top a00 nick would ofcourse would be needed nowadays to get anything full, a 30-40 player server called like "Westwood Community Server" Or "C&C Renegade Server" or something simplistic like that seems apropriate, also, as Alex said, a TS serv would be intresting aswell Also, concur with this one. Romaner wrote on Tue, 11 September 2007 10:54 well as of right now how many servers send their data to bhs rankings page? i mean this could be a way to persuade people to join this server. i for one would prob drop by from time to time, since n00bstories is full most of the time i go to play Great idea. This would get people to join the server more IMO. scarabguy wrote on Tue, 11 September 2007 20:38 how? they (spoony and crimson and ect.) dont control those servers. so how do they close them? Offer the communities "peace" agreements to sorta "merge" with the main community. Ghostshaw wrote on Wed, 12 September 2007 06:02 It will take up time setting it up and managing it... -Ghost- All it would take is to set it up (max one hour), get an irc bot, install BIATCH, and run SSGM. -MathK1LL
MathK1LL wrote on Wed, 12 September 2007 12:03 Ghostshaw wrote on Wed, 12 September 2007 06:02 It will take up time setting it up and managing it... -Ghost- All it would take is to set it up (max one hour), get an irc bot, install BIATCH, and run SSGM. and managing it... If a few of the scarcely-populated servers wanted to shut down and help run this project, I might consider supporting the idea.
Or you could take the decent staff from (unfourtunately) failed servers like Xphaze. (:-s) I'd happily help to maintain it, I know what I'm doing both as a moderator and I've used local copies of the FDS before. Learning BIATCH and the differences betweeen 1.52 and 1.43 in Brenbot won't be too hard. Edit @ nightma, I could donate a little, it's easier as you're UK based.
I could host this for free if this goes ahead?
Nightma12 wrote on Wed, 12 September 2007 16:26 I could host this for free if this goes ahead? Average ping? O.o lol (Don't mean to start a flame war, but...) I hear AOHost lags a lot :\ -MathK1LL
It will if you're in the US, just as we UK'ers lag in your servers.
AOhost has bigger SFPS issues in my experience.... -Ghost-
Nightma12 wrote on Thu, 13 September 2007 00:26 I could host this for free if this goes ahead? For the love of god, if we are going to try this, let us at least get us a box that can run it without sfps problems. Also, weirdly enough, it appears that USA players have less lag problems when playing a euro server then when a Euro player plays on a USA server. From what I heard this is because USA datacenters don't have high quality links to Europe, while the Euro datacenters do. It has something to do with peering contracts, and that the European hosting companies are willing to pay a bit more for this peering, resulting in better connections.
Goztow wrote on Tue, 11 September 2007 10:35 There are already too many servers, unfortunately.
Try to get your facts straight... We upgraded our hardware a couple of months ago and havnt had a single lag problem ever since. www.aohost.co.uk/newbox.jpg << heres a screenshot of our new specs.
EvilWhiteDragon wrote on Thu, 13 September 2007 10:27 From what I heard this is because USA datacenters don't have high quality links to Europe, while the Euro datacenters do. It has something to do with peering contracts, and that the European hosting companies are willing to pay a bit more for this peering, resulting in better connections. If a UK server is hosted with a LINX member (highly probable - they handle 95/96% of the UK's traffic), this shouldn't be an issue as they have nice links over to telx in NY. As for the rest of Europe- I have no idea!
I'll don't think lag/ping or anything would be an issue. Just the server itself, what maps/mods/rules/admins/renguard/biatch/everything will the main issues. Again, this is pointless, why should anyone of us leave our active servers and play here? The server would have to offer the player something for them to leave their server and friends for. This is an good idea, but totaly at the wrong stage in Renegade cycle of life, something like this would had been good at the start of Renegade.
server should be pure no shells, should have yellow crates, biatched for the chet?ER?s
I was thinking of simply using Spoonysrv for it, renamed appropriately and with whatever rule/serverside changes ended up coming into effect. Also, I had planned to ask Jelly for the 'a00' name, but that seems a little far fetched.
There are some people who don't really have a home server. Me, for example.
Spoony wrote on Thu, 13 September 2007 16:58 I was thinking of simply using Spoonysrv for it, renamed appropriately and with whatever rule/serverside changes ended up coming into effect. Also, I had planned to ask Jelly for the 'a00' name, but that seems a little far fetched. Server be 100 player slots right? I'll think that would be needed if it goes ahead. If it ever goes online and alot of players from the forum plays there, would join, could be a fun game.
It shouldn't be like spoony serv...it would be more normal aow vs pure aow. Donate, crates, and everything else that makes publcis aow fun, should ofcourse be aloud. It would also be less of a transition for people to swicth servers..
I didn't say it would be "like" spoonysrv, I said I'd use the spoonysrv server for it and make whatever changes are appropriate. That was in response to the "too many servers" comment.
IronWarrior wrote on Thu, 13 September 2007 18:02 Spoony wrote on Thu, 13 September 2007 16:58 I was thinking of simply using Spoonysrv for it, renamed appropriately and with whatever rule/serverside changes ended up coming into effect. Also, I had planned to ask Jelly for the 'a00' name, but that seems a little far fetched. Server be 100 player slots right? I'll think that would be needed if it goes ahead. If it ever goes online and alot of players from the forum plays there, would join, could be a fun game. 100 players? No way. I mean, hello, vehicle limit of 7 (yes it's 8 but that includes the harvester)...
vehicle limit of 100?
Nightma12 wrote on Thu, 13 September 2007 19:31 vehicle limit of 100? That'd be sick. I like it
EvilWhiteDragon wrote on Thu, 13 September 2007 05:27 Also, weirdly enough, it appears that USA players have less lag problems when playing a euro server then when a Euro player plays on a USA server. From what I heard this is because USA datacenters don't have high quality links to Europe, while the Euro datacenters do. It has something to do with peering contracts, and that the European hosting companies are willing to pay a bit more for this peering, resulting in better connections. For Renegade servers this doesn't really seem to be that true.. All of the euro servers I join besides a few(#GW and I didn't even know that Nightma's boxes were actually in Europe) I get 250+ ping, while most Euro players say that they get around 180-190 ping average..
Tunaman wrote on Thu, 13 September 2007 19:34 EvilWhiteDragon wrote on Thu, 13 September 2007 05:27 Also, weirdly enough, it appears that USA players have less lag problems when playing a euro server then when a Euro player plays on a USA server. From what I heard this is because USA datacenters don't have high quality links to Europe, while the Euro datacenters do. It has something to do with peering contracts, and that the European hosting companies are willing to pay a bit more for this peering, resulting in better connections. For Renegade servers this doesn't really seem to be that true.. All of the euro servers I join besides a few(#GW and I didn't even know that Nightma's boxes were actually in Europe) I get 250+ ping, while most Euro players say that they get around 180-190 ping average.. I'm not saying this should be the same for everyone, I mean, everyone has different ISP's etc. Could you check your ping on the BlackIntel server once? We optimized it to give a low as possible ping to anyone. My own ping is around 30-50. I myself had a ping of 200+ on average when I once played the jelly servers. Never played there again because of the lag induced by the ping and the general playing style, but that might've been because of the sick number of players.
EvilWhiteDragon wrote on Thu, 13 September 2007 11:33 Nightma12 wrote on Thu, 13 September 2007 19:31 vehicle limit of 100? That'd be sick. I like it Massive lag tho... Best turn off vehicle shells ~MathK1LL
MathK1LL wrote on Thu, 13 September 2007 19:48 EvilWhiteDragon wrote on Thu, 13 September 2007 11:33 Nightma12 wrote on Thu, 13 September 2007 19:31 vehicle limit of 100? That'd be sick. I like it Massive lag tho... Best turn off vehicle shells ~MathK1LL Depends, if the server is powerfull enough it shouldn't lag. It's more, will the server be powerfull enough?
EvilWhiteDragon wrote on Thu, 13 September 2007 12:22 IronWarrior wrote on Thu, 13 September 2007 18:02 Spoony wrote on Thu, 13 September 2007 16:58 I was thinking of simply using Spoonysrv for it, renamed appropriately and with whatever rule/serverside changes ended up coming into effect. Also, I had planned to ask Jelly for the 'a00' name, but that seems a little far fetched. Server be 100 player slots right? I'll think that would be needed if it goes ahead. If it ever goes online and alot of players from the forum plays there, would join, could be a fun game. 100 players? No way. I mean, hello, vehicle limit of 7 (yes it's 8 but that includes the harvester)... Vehicle limit can be anything you want it to be. But, as that would be modding the server, it would make people cry. Which is an other reason, it's not gonna work. If the server can't hold 100 players, then it wouldn't be much of a community would it, with 32 or so players in there...
IronWarrior wrote on Tue, 11 September 2007 10:59 More servers the better to be honest, it be a sad day if there was only few servers around. There's already something like 84 servers altogether, most of which are empty most of the time.
IronWarrior wrote on Thu, 13 September 2007 14:15 EvilWhiteDragon wrote on Thu, 13 September 2007 12:22 IronWarrior wrote on Thu, 13 September 2007 18:02 Spoony wrote on Thu, 13 September 2007 16:58 I was thinking of simply using Spoonysrv for it, renamed appropriately and with whatever rule/serverside changes ended up coming into effect. Also, I had planned to ask Jelly for the 'a00' name, but that seems a little far fetched. Server be 100 player slots right? I'll think that would be needed if it goes ahead. If it ever goes online and alot of players from the forum plays there, would join, could be a fun game. 100 players? No way. I mean, hello, vehicle limit of 7 (yes it's 8 but that includes the harvester)... Vehicle limit can be anything you want it to be. But, as that would be modding the server, it would make people cry. Which is an other reason, it's not gonna work. If the server can't hold 100 players, then it wouldn't be much of a community would it, with 32 or so players in there... your forgetting one thing. it will never happen. 100 players plus even 20 vehicles = massive lag! that, and no one will ever agree on any rule, any maps, any mods, or anythign else. it would be a nightmare.
Tunaman wrote on Thu, 13 September 2007 12:34 EvilWhiteDragon wrote on Thu, 13 September 2007 05:27 Also, weirdly enough, it appears that USA players have less lag problems when playing a euro server then when a Euro player plays on a USA server. From what I heard this is because USA datacenters don't have high quality links to Europe, while the Euro datacenters do. It has something to do with peering contracts, and that the European hosting companies are willing to pay a bit more for this peering, resulting in better connections. For Renegade servers this doesn't really seem to be that true.. All of the euro servers I join besides a few(#GW and I didn't even know that Nightma's boxes were actually in Europe) I get 250+ ping, while most Euro players say that they get around 180-190 ping average.. In euro serv meh ping is normally between 60+ in usa its 160+ noramally hittin 180's
As good as the idea may sound, this would never work out. Many of us admins and owners of our own communities have our own perspective on how to run and do things in a community. Too many different views would be tossed around and many disagreements will be brought up. It's too hectic. It's already a hard enough job to manage our own seperate communities and servers in this game.