Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
TheLastAlive105
ROGUE SPADES EoN.
1
|
Posted - 2013.07.17 23:27:00 -
[1] - Quote
Battlefield 3 has these player owned servers where the owner can set his own rules and he has admins to over look the match. CCP you have to think about that, that would solve so MANY problems. Servers can have it display, when someone is hovering over their server that displays "NO TANKS or "NO Flaylocks" or "NO Logi LAVS" that CCP is your answer to a lot of problems. P.S if that works you should give the credit to me in the patchs notes "players owned servers concept by TheLastAlive105" lol |
S3dINS Destiva
Third Rock From The Sun
24
|
Posted - 2013.07.17 23:45:00 -
[2] - Quote
This is a singular world. It's EVE not WoW. |
BatKing Deltor
Granite Mercenary Division
130
|
Posted - 2013.07.18 00:16:00 -
[3] - Quote
TheLastAlive105 wrote:Battlefield 3 has these player owned servers where the owner can set his own rules and he has admins to over look the match and if the player breaks the rules they get kicked and to make sure the admins dont overuse this power you should have a "abuse of admin" button so they can get reported. CCP you have to think about that, that would solve so MANY problems. Servers can have it display, when someone is hovering over their server that displays "NO TANKS or "NO Flaylocks" or "NO Logi LAVS" that CCP is your answer to a lot of problems. P.S if that works you should give the credit to me in the patchs notes "players owned servers concept by TheLastAlive105" lol Player rented servers killed bf3 for me and annoyed many others, to much admin abuse, NO. |
Artificer Ghost
L.O.T.I.S. RISE of LEGION
1058
|
Posted - 2013.07.18 00:23:00 -
[4] - Quote
Minecraft 514?
...
Now that I think about it, I'll have an orgasm. |
THUNDERGROOVE
ZionTCD
77
|
Posted - 2013.07.18 01:15:00 -
[5] - Quote
There would have to be HUGE security implementations to prevent the server from telling Tranquility that someone got 25,000+ SP and 500,000K ISK for a game.
I am 1,000,000% against this idea, they should work on things that are actually a problem. |
Draxus Prime
BurgezzE.T.F
1284
|
Posted - 2013.07.18 01:59:00 -
[6] - Quote
the closest thing for owning ur own server would probably be owning ur own arena for gladiator mode |
Daxxis KANNAH
Tronhadar Free Guard Minmatar Republic
216
|
Posted - 2013.07.18 02:00:00 -
[7] - Quote
No - all that AUR being purchased plus how many ever people pay for EVE
Let them sub this out to a company that host these services.
They really should be ashamed of their uptime. |
lithkul devant
Cerberus Network. The Superpowers
7
|
Posted - 2013.07.18 02:55:00 -
[8] - Quote
Well...I think that what could happen instead of player owned servers is that players could start up a set of matches by paying an amount of isk, set up what the rules are for that game or set of games. This way players don't actually own anything of the server and can only define what rules out of a set of rules are appliable. This would be like a silent way of people getting to vote or say what they like for a certain match, something like this I think would be reasonable. |
TheLastAlive105
ROGUE SPADES EoN.
1
|
Posted - 2013.07.18 03:03:00 -
[9] - Quote
Hey guys im still confident about the player owned servers but you guys are right this is one universe and they are going to do that. But the player owned servers should be its own thing i didnt mean it in the way like thats how the game should be. The player owned servers are just ways to make isk like an instant battle but only with rules. The admins dont affect the rules or anything at all im just saying the admins can choose to have no rules, allow or dont allow certain things thats what i meant. |
TunRa
The Vanguardians
5
|
Posted - 2013.07.18 03:11:00 -
[10] - Quote
There is only one server tho...So will one person just own tranquility at a time? -1000000000000000000... |
|
Maken Tosch
DUST University Ivy League
3400
|
Posted - 2013.07.18 04:25:00 -
[11] - Quote
Not going to happen.
CCP has made it painfully clear to you, me, and everyone else that Dust 514 will be sharing in the single-server world of Eve Online. This means Tranquility will control everything as it has for 10 years. Since Tranquility handles the bulk of the calculations including damage dealt based on player bonuses, buy/sell order transactions, jump/warp travel, ships/suits destroyed, etc. the likelihood of Tranquility ever splitting up is as unlikely as an Atheist ever finishing an argument with a Jehovah's Witness. It's just not going to happen.
Then there is the problem of lag switchers (the ultimate cheaters). The current single-server architecture and server-side calculations of Tranquility are the only reason why you don't see lag switchers in Dust. Because Lag Switching requires the cheater to be a host of the server, the current system ensures that lag switching will never work.
Another downside with lag switching is that the client (not the server) needs to do the calculating and the server must accept the data in order for lag switching to work. However, since Tranquility is doing the calculating and is cross referencing data based on where it last saw you and what you were doing the last time it saw you, the server will not accept data that is questionable and the server will more than likely report you to CCP for attempting to manipulate the information going to the server. This is considered a very serious and highly bannable offense to CCP.
Please note that CCP is no stranger to client-server data manipulation as they have to deal with this problem from illegal Eve Online bot users who constantly attempt to manipulate data.
There you go. Private servers are never going to happen. |
Horse Schitt
Turalyon Plus
12
|
Posted - 2013.07.18 09:42:00 -
[12] - Quote
Maken Tosch wrote:Not going to happen.
CCP has made it painfully clear to you, me, and everyone else that Dust 514 will be sharing in the single-server world of Eve Online. This means Tranquility will control everything as it has for 10 years. Since Tranquility handles the bulk of the calculations including damage dealt based on player bonuses, buy/sell order transactions, jump/warp travel, ships/suits destroyed, etc. the likelihood of Tranquility ever splitting up is as unlikely as an Atheist ever finishing an argument with a Jehovah's Witness. It's just not going to happen.
Then there is the problem of lag switchers (the ultimate cheaters). The current single-server architecture and server-side calculations of Tranquility are the only reason why you don't see lag switchers in Dust. Because Lag Switching requires the cheater to be a host of the server, the current system ensures that lag switching will never work.
Another downside with lag switching is that the client (not the server) needs to do the calculating and the server must accept the data in order for lag switching to work. However, since Tranquility is doing the calculating and is cross referencing data based on where it last saw you and what you were doing the last time it saw you, the server will not accept data that is questionable and the server will more than likely report you to CCP for attempting to manipulate the information going to the server. This is considered a very serious and highly bannable offense to CCP.
Please note that CCP is no stranger to client-server data manipulation as they have to deal with this problem from illegal Eve Online bot users who constantly attempt to manipulate data.
There you go. Private servers are never going to happen.
I came here to say this. |
shaman oga
Nexus Balusa Horizon DARKSTAR ARMY
328
|
Posted - 2013.07.18 11:03:00 -
[13] - Quote
i'm not for this but every corp should have a free district, that does not produce isk or clones, where you can play the old corp battle or use it as a training room or do PVE against drones when it will come out. |
Aero Yassavi
PIE Inc. Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
604
|
Posted - 2013.07.18 11:08:00 -
[14] - Quote
Well we all know EVE/Dust 514 is a single shard universe and they won't change that, but there is still a way we can get something similar.
When arena matches come out, two teams can bet an amount of ISK on a match with agreed upon rules (since it is going to be a sort of sport in the lore). Too bad CCP probably read the title, laughed, and moved on. |
Denak Kalamari
Intaki Liberation Front Intaki Prosperity Initiative
259
|
Posted - 2013.07.18 11:19:00 -
[15] - Quote
Even if it would be possible to have privately owned servers, it would simply become too easy to abuse and have stupid rules or just kick people who are "hackers" according to the admin.
The day when I see a server in DUST 514 that says no shotguns or scout suits is when I quite the game. |
Sylwester Dziewiecki
BetaMax. CRONOS.
115
|
Posted - 2013.07.18 11:53:00 -
[16] - Quote
TheLastAlive105 wrote:Battlefield 3 has these player owned servers where the owner can set his own rules and he has admins to over look the match and if the player breaks the rules they get kicked and to make sure the admins dont overuse this power you should have a "abuse of admin" button so they can get reported. CCP you have to think about that, that would solve so MANY problems. Servers can have it display, when someone is hovering over their server that displays "NO TANKS or "NO Flaylocks" or "NO Logi LAVS" that CCP is your answer to a lot of problems. P.S if that works you should give the credit to me in the patchs notes "players owned servers concept by TheLastAlive105" lol Sorry, it's not possible in that form, but soon we will have possibility use our districts as a training ground for our corporation(CCP already announced that on FanFest). We also will have place where we can test's our or new unskilled weapons. |
TheLastAlive105
ROGUE SPADES EoN.
1
|
Posted - 2013.07.18 14:49:00 -
[17] - Quote
this is an fps this is different from eve in order to make a good fps work you need something like this its not eve its an fps but everyone assumes it is just because it happens in the same universe the whole point of an fps to work are to have matches like those |
Malkai Inos
Opus Arcana Covert Intervention
726
|
Posted - 2013.07.18 15:10:00 -
[18] - Quote
TheLastAlive105 wrote:this is an fps this is different from eve in order to make a good fps work you need something like this its not eve its an fps but everyone assumes it is just because it happens in the same universe the whole point of an fps to work are to have matches like those The lack of punctuation or paragraphs makes it incredibly hard to read even such a short piece of text.
Why do we need something like this when corp and training matches will be possible in the future, allowing for the same basic functionality? Did you read the posts explaining to you why such a feature is pretty much impossible to implement and not even worthwhile to begin with?
And what the heck has the fact that Dust is not EVE to do with anything? Given that it's still running on the same server and is build upon the same basic philosophy. I could say that Dust is not BF3 and disregard your idea just as easily. |
Maken Tosch
DUST University Ivy League
3405
|
Posted - 2013.07.18 15:15:00 -
[19] - Quote
TheLastAlive105 wrote:this is an fps this is different from eve in order to make a good fps work you need something like this its not eve its an fps but everyone assumes it is just because it happens in the same universe the whole point of an fps to work are to have matches like those
CCP is not obligated to do that. Just because it's a first person shooter that doesn't mean that it has to have player run servers. Sure it helped other games, but those other games had a different target audience than what DUST is meant for. In addition to that, DUST is a part of Eve Online as it is using the same single shard server that has been running for ten years straight. Then there is the fact that DUST is operating under the same lore and back story as that of Eve Online. We are using a fitting wheel with skill bonuses and stats that are similar to Eve Online. We are using the same factions as that of Eve Online which are the Amarr, Minmatar, Gallente and Caldari. Even the YouTube trailers put a lot of emphasis on the sandbox style of play which requires that we all share one server.
This is one of those cases where if it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, sounds like a duck, quacks like a duck, and tastes like a duck, it's probably a duck.
By the way, look at the logo on the upper left corner of this forum page. What do you see on top of the word DUST? |
Jade Hasegawa
Intrepidus XI EoN.
6
|
Posted - 2013.07.20 07:59:00 -
[20] - Quote
BatKing Deltor wrote:TheLastAlive105 wrote:Battlefield 3 has these player owned servers where the owner can set his own rules and he has admins to over look the match and if the player breaks the rules they get kicked and to make sure the admins dont overuse this power you should have a "abuse of admin" button so they can get reported. CCP you have to think about that, that would solve so MANY problems. Servers can have it display, when someone is hovering over their server that displays "NO TANKS or "NO Flaylocks" or "NO Logi LAVS" that CCP is your answer to a lot of problems. P.S if that works you should give the credit to me in the patchs notes "players owned servers concept by TheLastAlive105" lol Player rented servers killed bf3 for me and annoyed many others, to much admin abuse, NO. MY BF3 Clan did not abuse the server rentals but many did, so I say no to rental here, besides, I thought DUST ran on one big "super server" that linked it to EVE |
|
Django Quik
R.I.f.t
1005
|
Posted - 2013.07.20 09:37:00 -
[21] - Quote
It's a bad idea poorly explained. You make it sound like you want players to host their own servers that they have full responsibility for but what you really want is custom defined matches with options such as no vehicles. Change the title and OP or people will continue to misunderstand and give you the whole single shard one universe response you've been getting. |
Pje251296
KILL ORDERS
57
|
Posted - 2013.07.20 12:09:00 -
[22] - Quote
Bf3 admin Abuse in Dust? Bad idea |
KingBlade82
The Phoenix Federation
102
|
Posted - 2013.07.20 12:22:00 -
[23] - Quote
lol never seen those before but I love battlefield :P I hate those damn player servers
the only thing I approve of r longer matches so u get more kills in :)
but ive got kicked so many times cause I killed too many people or flew a jet its such bullshit |
Maken Tosch
DUST University Ivy League
3433
|
Posted - 2013.07.20 12:31:00 -
[24] - Quote
KingBlade82 wrote:lol never seen those before but I love battlefield :P I hate those damn player servers the only thing I approve of r longer matches so u get more kills in :) but ive got kicked so many times cause I killed too many people or flew a jet its such bullshit
Another reason why player run servers are a bad idea. |
Pje251296
KILL ORDERS
57
|
Posted - 2013.07.20 13:41:00 -
[25] - Quote
KingBlade82 wrote:lol never seen those before but I love battlefield :P I hate those damn player servers the only thing I approve of r longer matches so u get more kills in :) but ive got kicked so many times cause I killed too many people or flew a jet its such bullshit
I mostly go on the EA and Dice servers which is the best way to play bf3 really, but if I have to go on a player-owned server and it asks for certain weapons not to be used like shotguns and pdw's (why?) then i'll still use them because the others players use them and they're not getting banned. |
|
|
|
Pages: [1] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |