starting to prefer medium sized servers

amoralamoral Join Date: 2013-01-03 Member: 177250Members
edited March 2013 in NS2 General Discussion
started out liking 20+ servers, but as I play more and more, I've started to gravitate toward 16 to 18, is this just me? 24 man servers are just too hectic, and you'll often times be overwhelmed by 5 enemies out of nowhere. also, egglock.
«134

Comments

  • BestProfileNameBestProfileName Join Date: 2013-01-03 Member: 177320Members
  • GrizeenGrizeen Join Date: 2013-03-17 Member: 184036Members
    I like 20+.... a lot more for the commander to do... makes the commander worthwhile. but yea, need larger maps that... look different from docking and descent...
  • WheeeeWheeee Join Date: 2003-02-18 Member: 13713Members, Reinforced - Shadow
    yeah i find 16-18 the sweet spot for pubs.
  • GadxGadx Join Date: 2003-03-22 Member: 14788Members, Constellation, NS2 Map Tester, Reinforced - Shadow
    Maximum player count for a public game is 20 for sure. Anything more the game falls apart.. quickly.
  • CyberKunCyberKun Join Date: 2013-02-02 Member: 182733Members, Reinforced - Shadow
    This is why there needs to be a server min and max player count settings when you search for servers.
  • Blarney_StoneBlarney_Stone Join Date: 2013-03-08 Member: 183808Members, Reinforced - Shadow
    24 players is not good. Egglocking alone makes them virtually unplayable. 16-18 is the best size
  • |strofix||strofix| Join Date: 2012-11-01 Member: 165453Members
    24 could give a good next level combat experience, if opposite spawns were ensured and there was just more distance between each team. Currently, marines just mess aliens up too badly if they get anywhere close to anything meaningful.
  • draktokdraktok Join Date: 2013-02-18 Member: 183156Members
    When i'm drunk, I love 24p servers. Everything else - 16-18. Even 20 is pushing it for me.
  • AsranielAsraniel Join Date: 2002-06-03 Member: 724Members, Playtest Lead, Forum Moderators, NS2 Playtester, Squad Five Blue, Reinforced - Shadow, WC 2013 - Shadow, Subnautica Playtester, Retired Community Developer
    I think 24 players is really something for new players. They are attracted by those servers. When you learn to play you will soon discover that 16-18 player servers are much more fun, the game is also more balanced.
  • NordicNordic Long term camping in Kodiak Join Date: 2012-05-13 Member: 151995Members, NS2 Playtester, NS2 Map Tester, Reinforced - Supporter, Reinforced - Silver, Reinforced - Shadow
    CyberKun wrote: »
    This is why there needs to be a server min and max player count settings when you search for servers.
    This is needed. Sadly, if I said 18 or less I would often not find any servers. Some nights I can not find a server with less than 20 people. I try to seed a new server but nobody ever shows.
  • RoobubbaRoobubba Who you gonna call? Join Date: 2003-01-06 Member: 11930Members, Reinforced - Shadow, WC 2013 - Shadow
    In b4 the vehement 24p defense crowd :-)
  • casan0vaxcasan0vax Cloverfield, USA Join Date: 2012-11-04 Member: 166663Members, WC 2013 - Shadow
    Although I do prefer 16p/18p servers, I don't mind either--like others have said, 24p is for people who like hectic fragfests. It's also appealing because there's more room for error comparably to smaller population servers, so the onus of responsibility weighs less heavily upon you individually. You really gotta work as a team more on 16p/18p servers.
  • RippsyRippsy Join Date: 2013-01-16 Member: 179921Members
    If I am in the mood for a game where tactics actually matter, 14-18 player servers, if I want a fragfest 20-24 player.

    Saw some absolutely stunning bluffs recently on 20 player servers though, Aliens build up a forward base, deliberately defend it really hard, then just leave one gorge and a fade there to try to pretend to be a whole team as the rest of the team goes around to Marines other base and just annihilates it :D
  • amoralamoral Join Date: 2013-01-03 Member: 177250Members
    so, not just me then. I think it was mostly because there's less pressure to be amazing on a larger server.
  • randomroperandomrope Join Date: 2013-01-16 Member: 180026Members
    That makes sense. Official UWE servers are 16 man
  • RobotixRobotix Join Date: 2013-02-20 Member: 183222Members
    I prefer 24 player servers because the games are more strategic and there is more action. Also, everything is useful on 24 player servers (except Camo, but that has nothing to do with player count).
  • Ghosthree3Ghosthree3 Join Date: 2010-02-13 Member: 70557Members, Reinforced - Supporter
    Robotix wrote: »
    I prefer 24 player servers because the games are more strategic and there is more action. Also, everything is useful on 24 player servers (except Camo, but that has nothing to do with player count).

    24p is much MUCH less strategic, not more...
  • amoralamoral Join Date: 2013-01-03 Member: 177250Members
    Roobubba wrote: »
    In b4 the vehement 24p defense crowd :-)

    In after the 6v6 elitist circle jerk. I swear, you people remind of god awful beer snobs. Just let people do what they want FFS.

    wow, what an ass... i don't think a single person has advocated 12 man servers yet, think everybody agrees that that's a Comp scene thing. think the lowest anybody mentioned is 14 man. please don't be that guy.

  • SixtyWattManSixtyWattMan Join Date: 2004-09-05 Member: 31404Members
    Asraniel wrote: »
    I think 24 players is really something for new players. They are attracted by those servers. When you learn to play you will soon discover that 16-18 player servers are much more fun, the game is also more balanced.

    It's almost like people who pub want to play in those servers. It's just that UWE doesn't give a shit about them and some simple scaling for things like egg spawning would fix a lot of problems.
  • RobotixRobotix Join Date: 2013-02-20 Member: 183222Members
    Ghosthree3 wrote: »
    Robotix wrote: »
    I prefer 24 player servers because the games are more strategic and there is more action. Also, everything is useful on 24 player servers (except Camo, but that has nothing to do with player count).

    24p is much MUCH less strategic, not more...

    I knew this would be the first response I'd get.

    24p is definitely more strategic. 16p games rely more upon the FPS portion of the game where a single player can have a big impact. 24p games rely more upon coordination and teamwork or you won't accomplish anything.
  • amoralamoral Join Date: 2013-01-03 Member: 177250Members
    Asraniel wrote: »
    I think 24 players is really something for new players. They are attracted by those servers. When you learn to play you will soon discover that 16-18 player servers are much more fun, the game is also more balanced.

    It's almost like people who pub want to play in those servers. It's just that UWE doesn't give a shit about them and some simple scaling for things like egg spawning would fix a lot of problems.

    i'll have to agree with someone above, if the maps were bigger, made differently, then 24 man might be less... chaotic to me. the issue right now is, every battle becomes a 3v3, ambushing is more difficult, running away is more difficult, ninja-ing is more difficult, taking down rts is more difficult... simply because there are more people running around, and sometimes not where they should be.
  • RoobubbaRoobubba Who you gonna call? Join Date: 2003-01-06 Member: 11930Members, Reinforced - Shadow, WC 2013 - Shadow
    Roobubba wrote: »
    In b4 the vehement 24p defense crowd :-)

    In after the 6v6 elitist circle jerk. I swear, you people remind of god awful beer snobs. Just let people do what they want FFS.

    @SixtyWattMan: Where have I ever said they SHOULDN'T have their 24p experience?

    Here's the answer for you: I haven't.

    I personally like 6v6 ENSL pugs, and public servers at 7v7 up to 10v10 max.

    So take your 'jerkusations' elsewhere; that was entirely uncalled for.
  • RippsyRippsy Join Date: 2013-01-16 Member: 179921Members
    Robotix, I think you and Ghostree3's are using different definitions of strategic.

    In a lower player server, a single player sneaking behind enemy lines setting up a phasegate can enable large shifts in game play. In larger servers you tend to get a more meat-grinder approach to stragegies "Keep hitting that to distract them, if they back off to try and hit somewhere else we'll punch through" while you do get these in smaller servers, they are more surgical.

    Send 2 players to Hive A to get upgrades, Send 4 players to hive B to setup a phasegate once aliens go to defend hive A.

    Both are strategic, some are just more hammer vs scapel ;)
  • Ghosthree3Ghosthree3 Join Date: 2010-02-13 Member: 70557Members, Reinforced - Supporter
    24p pub strats = cannon fodder.
  • xen32xen32 Join Date: 2012-10-18 Member: 162676Members, Reinforced - Supporter
    I will probably never go to 6v6, maps feel to empty, too much responsibility for each player on the field. 7v7 are somewhat okay and 8v8 are totally fine. 10v10 is still acceptable, anything higher is meh.
  • RoobubbaRoobubba Who you gonna call? Join Date: 2003-01-06 Member: 11930Members, Reinforced - Shadow, WC 2013 - Shadow
    xen32 wrote: »
    I will probably never go to 6v6, maps feel to empty, too much responsibility for each player on the field. 7v7 are somewhat okay and 8v8 are totally fine. 10v10 is still acceptable, anything higher is meh.

    I'd really recommend trying some public gathers on ENSL at least once or twice! You might think 6v6 would be empty and boring, but it really isn't - it's tense, you get great communication and teamwork, and get to see a different side to NS2. It might not be your cup of tea - that's fine - but give it a shot, you might actually like it!

  • YoungTrotskyYoungTrotsky Join Date: 2007-03-09 Member: 60307Members
    xen32 wrote: »
    I will probably never go to 6v6, maps feel to empty, too much responsibility for each player on the field. 7v7 are somewhat okay and 8v8 are totally fine. 10v10 is still acceptable, anything higher is meh.
    It's just a different type of NS2, there is no reason the whole map should be a battleground all the time. One of the things I like the most about small games is that the action shifts from place to place across the map as the round progresses rather than there being battles going on everywhere all the time, that feels more like deathmatch to me. It does also feel like everything gets diluted the larger the player count gets - tactics, individual skill, decision making, game sense, etc.

    Don't think there is any right or wrong answer. Larger servers for people who like the more deathmatch, nonstop action feel and small servers for slower, more deliberate, less shoot 'em up feel.

    And yes, there is definitely a problem with balance in larger servers, which has been acknowledged by UWE, be interesting to see what/if they try to fix that.
  • bongofishbongofish Join Date: 2003-08-17 Member: 19893Members
    UWE has certainly designed the game to work in the 12-16 player range. 24 player servers are a compromise and don't work as well. This isn't opinion, it's a result of UWE's vision.

    There's nothing wrong with prefering larger servers, but that wasn't how the game was designed.

    I'd like to see them fix some of the scaling issues but I still doubt I would play in anything larger than 9v9.
Sign In or Register to comment.