31
I think it's put best by steam user TimblackFTZB; "in its current state, the game is less of building a kingdom than it is building a few medium-sized clans, because there's no way a server could handle an actual large kingdom of people and still have space for other players to interact with
this problem also makes warring really ♥♥♥♥♥♥ in this game because, on top of lags and crashes, there's no way to bring in all of the fighters on both sides of a war because the server will fill up, which makes for a ♥♥♥♥♥♥ experience for everyone
its just not fun because, with only 64 people, eventually the two or three 'kingdoms' fight, make peace, and there's nothing left to do but start fighting again, building, or just quit
i mean, if you think about it, the very best a server could have in terms of kingdoms would be 4 kingdoms of 16 people (north, east, south, west), but even then you don't have very large kingdoms, and there'd be 0 hermits, bandits, mercenaries, and other sorts of middle-of-the-road players"
Upon me making this topic, dev Saxxon said that there was a modded server which had a playercount of 100. User alakar said; "It didn't work because the game doesn't allow more than 64 player objects to be created even though it will allow more client connections =\"
Other users asked for a change like this, and one asked saxxon about the possibility of the max players changing but he never seemed to reply.
Please, developers. I really want to get into this game but with the current playercount there's really no hope of advancing your character because 1: The good servers are always full and 2: It's one extreme or the other. Always full or always empty.
Most of my gametime so far is just Connect, server full, rinse, repeat.
Like Timblack put it, you just can't have a "kingdom" and it's too hard to get started because too much of your time is spent trying to get inside the server.
this problem also makes warring really ♥♥♥♥♥♥ in this game because, on top of lags and crashes, there's no way to bring in all of the fighters on both sides of a war because the server will fill up, which makes for a ♥♥♥♥♥♥ experience for everyone
its just not fun because, with only 64 people, eventually the two or three 'kingdoms' fight, make peace, and there's nothing left to do but start fighting again, building, or just quit
i mean, if you think about it, the very best a server could have in terms of kingdoms would be 4 kingdoms of 16 people (north, east, south, west), but even then you don't have very large kingdoms, and there'd be 0 hermits, bandits, mercenaries, and other sorts of middle-of-the-road players"
Upon me making this topic, dev Saxxon said that there was a modded server which had a playercount of 100. User alakar said; "It didn't work because the game doesn't allow more than 64 player objects to be created even though it will allow more client connections =\"
Other users asked for a change like this, and one asked saxxon about the possibility of the max players changing but he never seemed to reply.
Please, developers. I really want to get into this game but with the current playercount there's really no hope of advancing your character because 1: The good servers are always full and 2: It's one extreme or the other. Always full or always empty.
Most of my gametime so far is just Connect, server full, rinse, repeat.
Like Timblack put it, you just can't have a "kingdom" and it's too hard to get started because too much of your time is spent trying to get inside the server.
Should the playercap be raised?
-
46 votes
-
0 votes
Like
nomeatloaf, TonyThaKIlla, Gimhof and 14 others likes this post.
Comments (9)
-
Accepted Answer
0Well this is true I even think this might be the biggest problem with the game right now. Of course there is problem with the crashes but that is something you can learn to live with as long you can get on to a server with out fighting for a spot. I said in my really bad written post about the same problem that the Player cap should be defined by how good a server is... not by a limited one. -
Accepted Answer
-
Accepted Answer
0For the longest time I was recommending this game on steam, but not anymore. This cap is just a low blow. I'm tired of not being able to connect because servers are full and I'm tired of not finding people to trade with so I could get the resources that I need. I just visited 3 villages with nobody in them. These roadblocks are not allowing me to play, so why did I pay for a game that I can't play? Ridiculous, feel like I was stolen from by purchasing this game. Last I remember, the cap was 100 now it shot down to 64. Are we moving forward or backwards?Like TonyThaKIlla likes this post. -
Accepted Answer
-
Accepted Answer
1The entire reason the dev team opted to create the initial "YO" version and push back the MMO many years was the difficulty of supporting many connected players at once. You'll notice the gameplay between the two is almost exactly the same - the main difference is each tile server's ability to support 200 people (7x7x200 = 9800). So asking for 256 people per "YO" server is like asking them to do a BETTER job of managing connections and server architecture for "YO" than the MMO.
The 64 player cap isn't some random number they pulled out of their butts to make "YO" less playable, it's there because this is a physics-based game with a lot of collision logic and thus some serious network overhead. Try playing Space Engineers with more than 20 people and see what happens - this dev team has actually done an amazing job of networking, given the complexity of their game. -
Accepted Answer
0Life has some feudal over the parties it used to get data among the polices that have to know n these partitions. I need to get data on this so I have to mypaperwriter among the perspective that has to put on these aspects that used to get on it.
