NS:C

Grendel · September 2003

<div class="IPBDescription">Your intentions...</div> Just curious as to the initial feelings of our server op community. <3

<span style='font-size:14pt;line-height:100%'>By the way, if you don't run a server currently, don't vote. Thanks.</span>

In the absence of evidence either way (i.e. if NS:C is map dependant or would be an entirely seperate client/server) vote both if you would have both.

G_I_Joehosaphat · September 2003

I will run both.

Keeping the regular NS at 20 players, and run a NS:C at 10 players for goofing around. If there was ever a CPU or bandwidth issue I'd axe NS:C in a second.

G.I.

NurEinMensch · September 2003

If it was map dependent I'd run the "C" maps, too, so I voted "both". But if it's a new server/client thing I'd not run it on my server, that's for sure!

Hypergrip · September 2003

Since I (my clan) have to pay for the slots, we will not be able to run two servers.
I HOPE I can convice other-thinking clanmates to stay at the "real" NS.
I might run co_ maps when the server is rather empty, but I would not want them in the regular map-cycle.

The problem with that is NOT, that I don't really like NS:C, but it's the very different team-sizes both modes are concipated for... it's the choice to rather have "overrun" co_ maps (staying at 16 slots) or having too few players to get a good "real" NS game going (goind down to 10 slots maybe or even less).
And I would simply not risk having to few players for "real" NS, just so that a mode can be played good.

-my2cents-

Hyper

EvilGrin · September 2003

Currently I run 2x Vanilla NS 2.00 servers and 1x NS 2.01e (might be steam soon aswell)

I'd probably switch one of my Vanilla servers to NS:C and label it as a 'newbie' server.

DEADscott · September 2003

Both on the same rental server.

Shockeh · September 2003

****, it felt <b>GOOD</b> selecting B.

<img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif'>

EvilGrin · September 2003

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Shockwave @ Sep 18 2003, 10:07 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> ****, it felt <b>GOOD</b> selecting B.
 </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> 
newbie, I've been selecting B for over 5 years <img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/nerd.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='nerd.gif'>

Anyways, yeah the mapcycle point is a good one. I'd probably have the NS:C maps voteable on the other servers.

Shockeh · September 2003

For BYGames the whole time?

EvilGrin · September 2003

Very OT, but anyway. Changed names as follows

Telewest Lanched their ISP in '96 as Cableinet.
Changed name in '99 to Blueyonder and Lanched Cablemodem service.
In late '00 added the multiplayer gaming service Blueyonder Gaming
Gaming Service changed name to bygames.com in '02

I have been running/helping run gameservers on Telewests network since late '97

(If anyones still reading '89 - '96 I was a BBS SysOp, Anyone remeber L.O.R.D?)

Vadakill · September 2003

Oh, so we have to choose whether to run a NS:C server or a regular NS server? I thought the map would tell the game what set of rules to use. I was thinking that we could just integrate the co_ maps into our mapcycle and it would change based on what map loads. My thinking was like how CS handles the different scenarios, assassination, bomb and old school escape games based on which map loads.

Wither · September 2003

Both. I'd either add one or switch Union.

NS for life.

TUNA_Anomay · September 2003

Right now I'd not run Combat, but I think we'll have to wait and see how the format comes out to really know for sure...

Xzilen · September 2003

I said just old school, because the answer I wished for wasn't on there.

I plan to run both, switching to and from periodically based on demand.

I would love to test this new version if you want a test server for it...

NS:C

Comments