Player Limit and Server Suggestion

[ExEric3]

3 hours ago, LolOm said:

Back to topic:

When i got forwarded to another server it was either MPF or the Timed aow RC server. The timed aow RC server had different Playerranks than OG RC. I dont really care about statistiks and kd and all of that but the rank is a "represantation of of myself?" and all the time and effort i put into this server. Playing on the timed AOW always feels like i play for a worthless shizuphrenic other copy of myself. I prefer to play for my real self so i try to get to the full server after few rounds.

Have there been tests where the rank would count on two servers?

 

if i had 2 identical servers, with the same rank i wouldnt mind playing on the lower pop one


 

u cannot have same ranks since every map is limited by time and score is also counted into rank points. Since nobody play it I dont think ranks databases are maintaned but not sure.

[Xylaquin]

On 7/28/2025 at 1:25 PM, Xylaquin said:

Auto-forward doesn't work if you get put into a server with like 4 other people. The reason 99% people join a server is because of player count. Nobody wants to wait in an 2 v 3 server.

How about this idea:

• Make the server have a 64 player limit.
• Then once it's full, immediately shift half of the players onto a second server.
• Then immediately change both servers to have a player limit of 40

By doing the above, you'll have two servers each with ~32 players + space for more to join.
And crucially, you'll avoid the problem of people leaving to rejoin the main server, because the second server they are on is already populated. They won't need to wait to play a normal game.

 

[ExEric3]

8 hours ago, Xylaquin said:

 

And what will be key which players should be forwarded? Look how people bitch when game is paused with forced poll. Plus diffrent map, everything starts from zero. But it can be done.

As idea its nice. U need bitch shaitan to do that he is doing this forwarding feauture magic.

[BiLLaBoNg]

17 hours ago, Xylaquin said:

 

i actually like this tbh

[Goztow]

I like the idea if it is done at map change. So not when it reaches full cause then u interrupt a game. But if you have like more than 50 players at map change. It probably should be a command and not automatic so mods can judge if it's a good moment to do it. 

[WNxH3adSh00t]

Bad idea to forcefully move half a server to another server when they're already engaged in a good match. Most will leave.

The game is at its peak when it has 40-50 players and sfps drops a lot after that. If the server is full people can either join another server or wait until a spot is opened. No need to ruin some people's game cause some noob wants to join and split the server.

[Assault]

On 8/19/2025 at 10:32 AM, WNxH3adSh00t said:

Mauvaise idée de déplacer de force la moitié d’un serveur vers un autre serveur alors qu’ils sont déjà engagés dans un bon match. La plupart partiront.

Le jeu est à son apogée lorsqu’il compte 40-50 joueurs et les sfps baissent beaucoup par la suite. Si le serveur est plein, les gens peuvent soit rejoindre un autre serveur, soit attendre qu’une place se libère. Pas besoin de ruiner le jeu de certaines personnes parce qu’un noob veut rejoindre et diviser le serveur.

What wnxheadshoot says is true. The fact of stopping a game when we are potentially in a good fight, stopping to separate players and starting a new game to change the flow would likely cause players to stop playing or break the atmosphere. Already, the polls sometimes break the game. It's a somewhat perplexing subject because most of the time the server is hardly ever at its 60 players. On the other hand, it is understandable from another perspective; you start the game Renegade, you want to have fun, and when the server is full and you have to wait for a player to finish or leave for other reasons, it breaks the desire to stay.

[Xylaquin]

Goztow's amendment solves all the problems you guys have posted: Implement the shift at map change.
Then immediately set the original server's max player count from 64 to 40.

• Two servers exist, the main one has a max of 64 players, the second one remains at 40.
• It's a weekend night, peak time for Renegade.
• Everyone goes to the main one as usual (a crowd attracts a crowd) and the server becomes full.
• The game ends.
• The script detects over 60 players at game end so activates. Half the players are shifted onto second server
• Both servers now have 32 players
• Original server's max player count is also immediately reduced to 40.

As a result you've now got two servers with 32/40 players in them.

As to HOW the server chooses which players get shifted... random? or every second player?

[WNxH3adSh00t]

Yeah turn some nice 30vs30 games into 16vs16 because reasons. Then you factor in whatever map is being played as well. If it's a server killing map then people will leave, not to mention the ones that would leave anyway because their experience is ruined. Extremely bad idea that won't lead to anything good besides complaints from people that want to play games together instead of being forced to play in different servers.

If you can't join the server because it's full then either wait or ask a mod to increase it to 66 players and join if it bothers you that much.

[MarcPoulet]

lmao no one will code that splitter thing. What about the game is going in 2nd server and suddently receive a shitton of players . Best way to make both crash I guess

Edited August 22 by MarcPoulet

[Xylaquin]

12 minutes ago, WNxH3adSh00t said:

Yeah turn some nice 30vs30 games into 16vs16 because reasons.

It would only activate when the server is over 60 players, not continually lol

But whatever, was just a suggestion. People will complain no matter what the admins decide.

If someone were to ask me whether I'd rather pay a programmer to code a player-count solution, or improve the in-game communication feed, I'd pick the latter.