Anton Sugar
Member
Menelaus said:
?
I think that just means you won't be able to play on the server until the game is released
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Battlefield 3 PC Community Meetup
- Thread starter Anton Sugar
- Start date
?
I think that just means you won't be able to play on the server until the game is released
Foliorum Viridum
Banned
Not really. Multiplay have a good repuatation. We're just waiting for the beta now.
Animator said:
That's not how I remember their servers at all. They hosted pretty much all the servers alongside i3d, and I don't remember noticing any server related performance issues from either host.
I agree that the 50% pricing is bullshit (it just brings them to where everyone else is) but I'm not sure how you can say their servers were shit in the alpha.
We'll get a better idea of how they perform in the beta, but if they were shit in the alpha, almost everyone played on them. I don't remember a huge outcry that the alpha servers were shit (or any outcry for that matter).
Spl1nter said:
No. It is for Something Awful goons and gaffers here. I don't play with a clan.
I am usually on a irc channel: #pcgaming @ irc.synirc.net and it is basicly those of us there who decided to get a server so we can play together without having to deal with other servers bullshit.
Fusion Pizza
Member
Goons vs Gaffers, sounds like some good times to me.
Animator said:
These are the locations that multiplay is hosting servers for the retail game:
US: Chicago, Illinois, Herndon, Virginia, Los Angeles, California, San Antonio, Texas, St. Louis, Missouri
Who knows where they had servers during the alpha. If they were in pretty much any place but Los Angeles on that list, it is quite a distance to Vancouver.
I'm not discounting your experiences, but if MyIS had a bunch of west coast servers for the alpha, it could explain the difference you saw in ping. In the middle of the U.S, I didn't really encounter any high ping servers during the alpha (they were all pretty fantastic actually; It was the game itself that had bugs).
Barring something unforeseen, it would definitely be prudent of us to wait until the beta to pick a server hosting company. We'll all be able to verify the likely performance of the server hosts we'd be renting from, and pick the one that seems to be the best.
Anton Sugar
Member
25 donors and we just crossed the $300 mark! Thanks for all the donations--we'll have, at the very least, a solid three months of playing time.
Anton Sugar
Member
scogoth said:
We're gonna take it down today, it's not working. Gonna find a third party gadget.
Anton Sugar
Member
Anyone have experience with Branzone servers? They just opened up their BF3 pre-orders. Got a number of East Coast locations.
Mr. Snrub said:
I found one, and put it up.
Current poll question on the blog: "Should friendly fire be enabled?"
No log-in required to vote.
Also...I've never heard of Branzone. They are $10 cheaper than anywhere else, so if their servers are good in the beta, they are a contender for sure. They offer everything that i3D and Multiplay do it seems (free 16 man server like I3d, free website hosting like both of them) and they guarantee a full core dedicated to the server.
Anyone have any experience with gameservers? (http://www.gameservers.com/game_servers/battlefield_3.php)
They just put out their pricing for BF3... $83 a month for 64 players. We could save $17 a month going with them, but we need information if anyone has any experience with their servers.
If they're shit, we've got five days to cancel for a refund, should we decide to go with them.
"BF3 Server Features: Instant Activation, Free Website, No Setup Fees, Cancel Anytime, 5-Day Refund Guarantee."
I hope all the other server providers see their pricing and decide to compete.
They just put out their pricing for BF3... $83 a month for 64 players. We could save $17 a month going with them, but we need information if anyone has any experience with their servers.
If they're shit, we've got five days to cancel for a refund, should we decide to go with them.
"BF3 Server Features: Instant Activation, Free Website, No Setup Fees, Cancel Anytime, 5-Day Refund Guarantee."
I hope all the other server providers see their pricing and decide to compete.
RibbedHero
Member
LordCanti said:
They are the sole Black Ops server providers, and their servers (mind you its 18 players) on that game hold up excellently here in London.
Cuban Legend
Member
Cuban Legend
Member
what lesson, oh you mean that they need to learn how to identify enemy targets before shooting blindly?Menelaus said:
AHAHAAA, GOOD ONE
Anton Sugar
Member
I really don't mind FF. It prevents chopper (or vehicle, in general) spam and almost forces communication.
The problem is in most pubs, no one really takes FF into account. Aside from usual griefing, it blows to toss a grenade into a room to clear it, only to have a buddy (or two, or three) run straight into the room before it's set off.
The problem is in most pubs, no one really takes FF into account. Aside from usual griefing, it blows to toss a grenade into a room to clear it, only to have a buddy (or two, or three) run straight into the room before it's set off.
Cuban Legend
Member
its not just that, I believe Hardcore-Mode breeds smarter gameplay since you don't have the aid of 3D spotting, minimaps or the killcam. thus, it's forcing you to pay attention to your surrounding more.
Fusion Pizza
Member
Mr. Snrub said:
They'll learn not to chase grenades into rooms then.
dragonelite
Member
I see no hardcore server it is.
Glad can already see the griefing at the jets.
Glad can already see the griefing at the jets.
Anton Sugar
Member
Updated, thank you!
I'll say it again should checkout MYIS.net, the eastcoast option is vague. Like I said earlier they were the only servers I pinged under 100 for me being in the midwest.
I didn't get anywhere close with multiplay or I3D.
This being said I'm pretty sure that the open BETA will also have these servers running again so we can make better judgement then.
I didn't get anywhere close with multiplay or I3D.
This being said I'm pretty sure that the open BETA will also have these servers running again so we can make better judgement then.
gillFTR said:
Right now the list of potentials is pretty long:
i3d
Multiplay
MYIS
Gameservers
(and a couple of others I can't remember at the moment, but have written down elsewhere)
Gameservers is the cheapest at $83 a month for 64 players. The other three hover right around $100 a month. All of them have server options on the East Coast of the US.
Hopefully the beta will have full 64 player conquest, so we can really get a feel for how well the servers perform. For what it's worth, I saw great performance out of all three of the alpha hosts I can remember playing on (multiplay, i3D, and myis).
Cuban Legend
Member
we were briefly touching on the subject of admin management for the 64-slot server over in the BF3 news thread. Here is my post(s) on the matter:
Cuban Legend said:
This is basically what I had in mind as far as admins go. There should be someone around capable of banning spammers/griefers/etc at least during the times when most people would be playing. I was thinking that these admins would be limited to the ability to kick/ban/mute, and that we'd have a place for people to dispute bans on the blog (if it ever came to that). The ability to change server parameters, to reboot the server, etc, would basically stay closer to the vest so that me and Snrub didn't wake up one morning to find that the server had been down all night thanks to someone messing with the server config.
The process of nailing down rules is ongoing. I think the first vote can safely be wrapped up here shortly (TK off is winning by a landslide). The fewer rules, the less we need to worry about having a fleet of admin's to nitpick every little thing that goes on in the server. I don't think anyone wants the server to turn into one of those places where you can be banned for being too good and pissing off an admin (who would then pull up some random rule for why you'd been banned).
How do you guys feel about "Should base raping be allowed?" as the next poll, or is it going to be another landslide like TK'ing was?
Menelaus said:
Basically. I'm hoping that this democratic process will leave admins with the job of essentially keeping watch for TK'ers (like people who fill a chopper, and wreck it out of bounds, leaving everyone to die of suicide), AFK'ers, and base rapers (which a script should be able to do whenever someone creates one, like they've done for BC2). No one should have the ability to ban someone else from the server because that person has pissed them off. So many servers on BC2 forget that, and kind of just give admins the power to get rid of anyone at any time for any reason.
Spl1nter said:
The good scripts have penalties for killing from your base as well as for killing someone in the opponents base.
I'm hoping BF3 won't be like BC2, and that there will be a clear delineation between the bases and the flag areas. Too many maps in BC2 have a base that pretty much backs right up onto a flag, and it's difficult to know when you've crossed the magical arbitrary line between "in the base" and out.
I guess this is one more thing to add to ye olde pile o' poll questions (whenever these scripts actually exist, which I imagine will be some time after the game launches).
Spl1nter said:
I think the point of a script like the one I mentioned is to completely keep people from doing any sort of fighting from their base (to get them out into the field, where the action should be). In your scenario, the person launching the AA attack from the base would be penalized for having taken down your chopper from his base.
This is all assuming that base raping is even something people want enforced as a rule.
