ready room campers?

flainflain Join Date: 2012-11-23 Member: 172970Members
So tonight i spent many hours on some 24 player servers with less than 10 people in game. So left the server and went to another 24 player server (waiting 30 minutes for the map to change and my pc to beat someone else in). This next server we had 11 players out of a 24 player server actually play the game.

Is this happening to other people? Is there anything the devs can do to stop ready room campers? The thing is these guys in the ready room weren't AFK they were just in there chatting about random stuff.

Is there any way to have 2 limits? A max "players on server limit" (aka ppl in ready room + ppl in game) and a seperate "max players in game" limit? To allow actual players to come in a supercede a ready room camper?


One more idea... increase the server limit by 1 or 2 and if someone joins while there is a ready room camper and picks a team within "X" timeframe then kick the other guy

Comments

  • Kouji_SanKouji_San Sr. Hινε Uρкεερεг - EUPT Deputy The Netherlands Join Date: 2003-05-13 Member: 16271Members, NS2 Playtester, Squad Five Blue
    Maybe after 1 minuted in the ready room after a round has started the game forces everyone to "random all" That could solve it and of course we need an AFK kicker...
  • KaptajnKLOKaptajnKLO Join Date: 2012-06-25 Member: 153658Members
    <!--quoteo(post=2032943:date=Nov 23 2012, 05:36 PM:name=Kouji_San)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Kouji_San @ Nov 23 2012, 05:36 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2032943"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Maybe after 1 minuted in the ready room after a round has started the game forces everyone to "random all" That could solve it and of course we need an AFK kicker...<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

    That is a good idea. I like it.
  • flainflain Join Date: 2012-11-23 Member: 172970Members
    <!--quoteo(post=2032961:date=Nov 24 2012, 03:57 AM:name=KaptajnKLO)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (KaptajnKLO @ Nov 24 2012, 03:57 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2032961"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->That is a good idea. I like it.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

    good but i think better would be to give every player a timer when they join a server - if you don't pick a team in X mins (X defined by server admin) then you get KICKED or you don't count to the server player limit and you get banned from joining a game. Kicked is what I'm favouring cause they will get over it if they left for long enough. (my suggestion on timings is how long it takes to go pee)
  • GuspazGuspaz Join Date: 2002-11-01 Member: 2862Members, Constellation
    There are already mods that have AFK kickers like ns2stats and DAK. Also, sometimes you just want to spectate a game, which is similar to sticking in the rr.
  • Kouji_SanKouji_San Sr. Hινε Uρкεερεг - EUPT Deputy The Netherlands Join Date: 2003-05-13 Member: 16271Members, NS2 Playtester, Squad Five Blue
    edited November 2012
    <!--quoteo(post=2032973:date=Nov 23 2012, 05:11 PM:name=Guspaz)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Guspaz @ Nov 23 2012, 05:11 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2032973"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->There are already mods that have AFK kickers like ns2stats and DAK. Also, sometimes you just want to spectate a game, which is similar to sticking in the rr.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
    Yep, that would need to be excluded from the random all thing. However you can't join a team when on spectator anyways (j1/j2), so I think the spectators would be excluded from that
  • flainflain Join Date: 2012-11-23 Member: 172970Members
    <!--quoteo(post=2032973:date=Nov 24 2012, 04:11 AM:name=Guspaz)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Guspaz @ Nov 24 2012, 04:11 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2032973"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->There are already mods that have AFK kickers like ns2stats and DAK. Also, sometimes you just want to spectate a game, which is similar to sticking in the rr.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

    i have no problem with spectating but server slots are limited, a spectator currently takes up a slot and therefore disadvantages a team on a full server
  • TechercizerTechercizer 7th Player Join Date: 2011-06-11 Member: 103832Members
    I like your idea, Kouji, but your first post was atrocious. Did you type it on a phone? =P

    <3
  • NordicNordic Long term camping in Kodiak Join Date: 2012-05-13 Member: 151995Members, NS2 Playtester, NS2 Map Tester, Reinforced - Supporter, Reinforced - Silver, Reinforced - Shadow
    I like that idea. Having more slot available that slots to play in but only for spectating.
  • RadiocageRadiocage Join Date: 2002-09-30 Member: 1381Members
    I agree. I really dislike playing gimped games because people are sitting in the ready room for the entire thing.

    Especially because of team stacking. You'll see a half-dozen people trying to walk in and out of the Marine door when they already have more players. I usually troll those people by joining before they do with a key bind.
  • Soli Deo GloriaSoli Deo Gloria Join Date: 2009-06-25 Member: 67926Members
    <!--quoteo(post=2032978:date=Nov 23 2012, 11:14 AM:name=flain)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (flain @ Nov 23 2012, 11:14 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2032978"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->i have no problem with spectating but server slots are limited, a spectator currently takes up a slot and therefore disadvantages a team on a full server<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

    It would be awesome if at some point we got some kind of HLTV type thing going on. For those that don't know, HLTV was part of the GldSrc/Source dedicated server that allowed "spectating" servers. The main server would have say 16 slots for actual players and then the HLTV server would have say 32 slots that allowed 32 people to spectate the game without being able to interfere with it. These server generally had like a 90 second delay and you couldn't talk to anyone except other spectators.
  • Kouji_SanKouji_San Sr. Hινε Uρкεερεг - EUPT Deputy The Netherlands Join Date: 2003-05-13 Member: 16271Members, NS2 Playtester, Squad Five Blue
    <!--quoteo(post=2032982:date=Nov 23 2012, 05:23 PM:name=Techercizer)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Techercizer @ Nov 23 2012, 05:23 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2032982"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I like your idea, Kouji, but your first post was atrocious. Did you type it on a phone? =P

    <3<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
    Nah, I just didn't bother with proper punctuation and stuff :P
  • GuspazGuspaz Join Date: 2002-11-01 Member: 2862Members, Constellation
    The nice thing about spectating support as a separate network connection is that you don't have to worry about load like you do with player counts. When you're spectating now, you're taking up a player slot, and presumably consuming a bunch of resources as the server tracks stuff that won't apply to spectators. If you just have a generic "expose enough data for spectating" connection type, potentially in a different thread, then it's really not an issue. You could allow multiple spectators without impacting on player count. For really popular matches, a relay like HLTV could take the load off.

    The problem is that while this might be logical, it's a lot of extra work, and UWE doesn't have time for that sort of thing. A more practical short-term solution is probably just to do some player-count related tricks to make spectating less of an issue without taking much dev effort. A cvar to have some spectator slots that don't count towards total player slots, or some sort of team balance thing to ensure a single spectator doesn't case a 1-man difference, that sort of thing.
  • TechercizerTechercizer 7th Player Join Date: 2011-06-11 Member: 103832Members
    edited November 2012
    <!--quoteo(post=2033010:date=Nov 23 2012, 12:05 PM:name=Kouji_San)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Kouji_San @ Nov 23 2012, 12:05 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2033010"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Nah, I just didn't bother with proper punctuation and stuff :P<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
    Heresy! What have you done with the real Kouji‽
  • CrushaKCrushaK Join Date: 2012-11-05 Member: 167195Members, NS2 Playtester
    <!--quoteo(post=2033036:date=Nov 23 2012, 07:48 PM:name=Guspaz)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Guspaz @ Nov 23 2012, 07:48 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2033036"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->The nice thing about spectating support as a separate network connection is that you don't have to worry about load like you do with player counts. When you're spectating now, you're taking up a player slot, and presumably consuming a bunch of resources as the server tracks stuff that won't apply to spectators. If you just have a generic "expose enough data for spectating" connection type, potentially in a different thread, then it's really not an issue. You could allow multiple spectators without impacting on player count. For really popular matches, a relay like HLTV could take the load off.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

    I don't think spectators in their current state are taking as much performance as a "full" slot on a server. Every additional player slot increases the processing requirement on the server exponentially because not only has the server to tell one more player about all the other players but it also needs to tell all other players about one more player.
    Spectators should only have a linear impact on the bandwidth: the server only needs to tell the spectators about other players but other players don't need to know anything about the spectator.
  • VolcanoVolcano Join Date: 2011-07-27 Member: 112496Members, Constellation
    callvote random all both sides vote, majority vote passes. fixed
  • GlissGliss Join Date: 2003-03-23 Member: 14800Members, Constellation, NS2 Map Tester
    edited November 2012
    <!--quoteo(post=2033076:date=Nov 23 2012, 11:40 AM:name=CrushaK)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (CrushaK @ Nov 23 2012, 11:40 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2033076"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I don't think spectators in their current state are taking as much performance as a "full" slot on a server. Every additional player slot increases the processing requirement on the server exponentially because not only has the server to tell one more player about all the other players but it also needs to tell all other players about one more player.
    Spectators should only have a linear impact on the bandwidth: the server only needs to tell the spectators about other players but other players don't need to know anything about the spectator.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
    I think he is simply referring to freeing up the player slot (i.e. letting someone else play while you spectate) as opposed to bandwidth. sometimes players feel like spectating but it's not always in good taste to do so when the teams are uneven and the server is full.

    it is an incredible feature in Quakeworld. you could just type /spec or /join and it would instantly take you out or into the game. SourceTV and HLTV were similar, and having it be this directly accessible was great and allowed the spectators to keep interaction without actually "leaving" the server.
Sign In or Register to comment.