Totally understand the approach given the constraints. My suggestion would be to split the lobbies based on ladder, map combination rather than like arbitrary 4 different lobbies like its done currently.
Breaking up Old Medieval Siege
1. RM 1v1 Lobby: Limit max players per game room to 2. With this, number of rooms could be higher and max players in the lobby could be higher as well. Also it allows people to find the 1v1s in one single lobby. Assuming technically its the number of players in a lobby which make the difference. Only ladder available is RM 1v1
2. RM TG - Arabia: TGs only & map Arabia, minimum players per room 3 with game not starting without 3 players. Only ladder available is RM TG
3. RM TG - Black Forest: TGs only & map BF, minimum players per room 3 with game not starting without 3 players. Only ladder available is RM TG
4. RM TG - Nomad: TGs only & map nomad/LN, minimum players per room 3 with game not starting without 3 players. Only ladder available is RM TG
5. RM TG - Others: Other maps like arena, megarandom, michi etc. Clubbing them together because not many play it right now. TGs only, minimum players per room 3 with game not starting without 3 players. Only ladder available is RM TG
6. DM 1v1 & TG: Separate lobby for DM. I know why it was merged 3-4 years back to increase activity for DM but didn't really help because not many players jumped on to DM mode. Only ladder available here are DM 1v1 and DM TG
CS lobbies are separate anyway.
If maps can not be enforced technically even then this will allow people to orient themselves more efficiently. I believe with this structure people will organize themselves accordingly and at the same they know which lobby they need to go to if they want to play a particular map.
With above you can also limit that each player is only in max 2/3 lobbies at a time else people just load all of lobbies up at same time and again causing congestion.
Obviously the most ideal solution is to have one single lobby but that requires investment on server side hence not an option which is on the table right now.
Yes but there is a major problem, which is finding the games.
For example i am searching for 1v1 arabia 18+ and the rooms are distributed on 3 different lobbies thus making it harder for us to explore more games and maybe sometimes we wont be able to find any games unless we keep searching for them in 3 different lobbies.
Those lobbies could be deployed as Casual and Rated. Each lobby would have its own 1v1 and TG ladder, e. g. BF Ladder TG and 1v1, Arabia Ladder TG and 1v1 etc.
Those lobbies could be deployed as Casual and Rated. Each lobby would have its own 1v1 and TG ladder, e. g. BF Ladder TG and 1v1, Arabia Ladder TG and 1v1 etc.
So people suggested improvements for what was already a bad idea although it was needed, and the staff's best response is "stop whining and start to like it"?
Remember people that this community is what it is because od players, not because of you. So please try to actually listen to us when we tell you you're making a mistake. This system just doesn't work because it doesn't matter if you make 5 or 500 lobbies, players will join all of them and fill them as if it was just 1. So with your update you only made it even harder for players to join.
Basically, 2000 players unstable laggy lobby is still better than 800 players filled lobbies.
Giving lobbies names of game settings (1v1/2v2/3v3, arabia/nomad/bf, etcetera) is imho the best option if you can't help dividing lobbies.
This change was a necessary cause of action due to the crashing issues players were experiencing. Please understand, that these changes are not finalized and subject to change. Constructive criticism and feedback is always welcome, they listen to your ideas and take them into consideration.
Those lobbies could be deployed as Casual and Rated. Each lobby would have its own 1v1 and TG ladder, e. g. BF Ladder TG and 1v1, Arabia Ladder TG and 1v1 etc.
Thoughts?
something like this, yes.
dont see LN being so popular, that it would need its own lobby, might want to put that to "other", so it doesnt die out.
also, maybe mark the most important lobbies with colours.
like blue for npl, red for rm main lobbies, green for cs, orange for intermediate, purple for casual.
Those lobbies could be deployed as Casual and Rated. Each lobby would have its own 1v1 and TG ladder, e. g. BF Ladder TG and 1v1, Arabia Ladder TG and 1v1 etc.
Thoughts?
No,
It will kill other maps of RM and will reduce variety.
I Think keeping it simple like
MS 1
MS 2
MS 3
MS 4 will be best and easiest.
And for CS , I dont think it does anything to CS. CS will just have 3 extra lobby of 0 players so just let it be and don't join them , behave like you have one only, I dont know why CS players getting mad lol
Please allow NPL banned player to play non-rated or spec friends game in NPL. Not sure how hard is it to implement. You are just keeping players away from AOE with these hard and robotic ban rules.
No, they do not.
Breaking up Old Medieval Siege
1. RM 1v1 Lobby: Limit max players per game room to 2. With this, number of rooms could be higher and max players in the lobby could be higher as well. Also it allows people to find the 1v1s in one single lobby. Assuming technically its the number of players in a lobby which make the difference. Only ladder available is RM 1v1
2. RM TG - Arabia: TGs only & map Arabia, minimum players per room 3 with game not starting without 3 players. Only ladder available is RM TG
3. RM TG - Black Forest: TGs only & map BF, minimum players per room 3 with game not starting without 3 players. Only ladder available is RM TG
4. RM TG - Nomad: TGs only & map nomad/LN, minimum players per room 3 with game not starting without 3 players. Only ladder available is RM TG
5. RM TG - Others: Other maps like arena, megarandom, michi etc. Clubbing them together because not many play it right now. TGs only, minimum players per room 3 with game not starting without 3 players. Only ladder available is RM TG
6. DM 1v1 & TG: Separate lobby for DM. I know why it was merged 3-4 years back to increase activity for DM but didn't really help because not many players jumped on to DM mode. Only ladder available here are DM 1v1 and DM TG
CS lobbies are separate anyway.
If maps can not be enforced technically even then this will allow people to orient themselves more efficiently. I believe with this structure people will organize themselves accordingly and at the same they know which lobby they need to go to if they want to play a particular map.
With above you can also limit that each player is only in max 2/3 lobbies at a time else people just load all of lobbies up at same time and again causing congestion.
Obviously the most ideal solution is to have one single lobby but that requires investment on server side hence not an option which is on the table right now.
For example i am searching for 1v1 arabia 18+ and the rooms are distributed on 3 different lobbies thus making it harder for us to explore more games and maybe sometimes we wont be able to find any games unless we keep searching for them in 3 different lobbies.
Those lobbies could be deployed as Casual and Rated. Each lobby would have its own 1v1 and TG ladder, e. g. BF Ladder TG and 1v1, Arabia Ladder TG and 1v1 etc.
Thoughts?
Those lobbies could be deployed as Casual and Rated. Each lobby would have its own 1v1 and TG ladder, e. g. BF Ladder TG and 1v1, Arabia Ladder TG and 1v1 etc.
Thoughts?
+1
Remember people that this community is what it is because od players, not because of you. So please try to actually listen to us when we tell you you're making a mistake. This system just doesn't work because it doesn't matter if you make 5 or 500 lobbies, players will join all of them and fill them as if it was just 1. So with your update you only made it even harder for players to join.
Basically, 2000 players unstable laggy lobby is still better than 800 players filled lobbies.
Giving lobbies names of game settings (1v1/2v2/3v3, arabia/nomad/bf, etcetera) is imho the best option if you can't help dividing lobbies.
Cheers!
Those lobbies could be deployed as Casual and Rated. Each lobby would have its own 1v1 and TG ladder, e. g. BF Ladder TG and 1v1, Arabia Ladder TG and 1v1 etc.
Thoughts?
dont see LN being so popular, that it would need its own lobby, might want to put that to "other", so it doesnt die out.
also, maybe mark the most important lobbies with colours.
like blue for npl, red for rm main lobbies, green for cs, orange for intermediate, purple for casual.
Hope this will help
Those lobbies could be deployed as Casual and Rated. Each lobby would have its own 1v1 and TG ladder, e. g. BF Ladder TG and 1v1, Arabia Ladder TG and 1v1 etc.
Thoughts?
It will kill other maps of RM and will reduce variety.
I Think keeping it simple like
MS 1
MS 2
MS 3
MS 4 will be best and easiest.
And for CS , I dont think it does anything to CS. CS will just have 3 extra lobby of 0 players so just let it be and don't join them , behave like you have one only, I dont know why CS players getting mad lol