More Slots?!?!?!

[Morpheus]

Is it just me or should ther be more slots in servers.
I think host should have an option for slots up to lets 20 people.
Some maps are really big and are not suitable for only 8 players.
I really think this should be added!
Make the game more chaotic

[Tom Th3 Assasin]

20 is too much,i say 10

[Morpheus]

Hey I said up to 20people, I never said there can't be 10.

[Illusion]

Valid point, as a host i'd like to play with more players like in a team battle, 6x6 sound more cool then 4x4

[Magitek]

In my opinion 20 players is a lot, considering some maps size (the smaller ones like heavy equipment), maybe 12 is alright.

[Morpheus]

In my opinion 20 players is a lot, considering some maps size (the smaller ones like heavy equipment), maybe 12 is alright.

I know but doesn't more players make it more fun and exciting?
Imagnine Surviving with 20 people on a small map
Theres bound to be chaos.

[Evilsack]

Lmao, we already struggle with 8 people in a server. You're thinking about large maps? How about map rotation? I don't think 20 people on Alley would be a good idea.

[Pricey]

I mean, sure, more slots could be something that might be considered in the far future. But now? It's quite unnecessary. The connection speed required to host 20 players would probably exceed 10mbps, which most people don't have.

I know but doesn't more players make it more fun and exciting?
Imagnine Surviving with 20 people on a small map
Theres bound to be chaos.

I don't understand, is the game not chaotic enough? Seriously, making the game more chaotic than it already is probably won't do much good. Rounds will be based too much on luck rather than giving skilled players an upper hand for actually putting time into the game. Explosions become extremely deadly due to the heavy cluster of players that would most likely be in an area at one time.

[Morpheus]

I mean, sure, more slots could be something that might be considered in the far future. But now? It's quite unnecessary. The connection speed required to host 20 players would probably exceed 10mbps, which most people don't have.

I know but doesn't more players make it more fun and exciting?
Imagnine Surviving with 20 people on a small map
Theres bound to be chaos.

I don't understand, is the game not chaotic enough? Seriously, making the game more chaotic than it already is probably won't do much good. Rounds will be based too much on luck rather than giving skilled players an upper hand for actually putting time into the game. Explosions become extremely deadly due to the heavy cluster of players that would most likely be in an area at one time.

Ok, by now everyone should have at least above 10mbps. Like who doesn't? This is 2017 now, not 2009 lol. 10mbps you barely can run this game already, and I have seen people teleporting all over the place because of this 10mbps. And this is one of the reasons people complain about ping. So there really is no point for people below 10mbps games to host.
Secondly how does more players increase the high probability of luck? Skilled players in this game should also know
how to deal and evade multiple fighters. Remember this game is like the survival of the fittest. Putting more extreme challenges
Challenges oneself in the game to deal with in certain predicaments, and having more players is a factor.

I think it should be a thing the devs try. If people dont like it (which I hardly doubt) then they'd take it off. Simple.
This game is not only for "Skilled Players", it's for people that want to have fun and see exciting things in the game.
Just sayin

[Morpheus]

Lmao, we already struggle with 8 people in a server. You're thinking about large maps? How about map rotation? I don't think 20 people on Alley would be a good idea.

Haha, imagine 20 people on Grass Meele
Ok I get your point, but we should try it out first before
we despise it. And believe me I'm not thinking about larger maps.

[MScull]

I think 20 players shouldn't be that big of a hosting issue as I upload about 350kb/s max when on 8 players... I can max upload at 4mb/s so that means I can host for 20 people easily. When my server is on 7 players the upload send rate drops to about 300kb/s. So can I assume 50kb/s for each player (don't forget debris/objects)? In my opinion people should have the option to go over 8 players. Maybe an experimental feature? Then again, the host can define the maps and if more slots would be an experimental feature I don't really see the problem of having 'too small maps' and 'too much chaos'.

I think 8 players should stay as the default, but in my opinion hosts should atleast have the option to go over it.

[Morpheus]

I think 20 players shouldn't be that big of a hosting issue as I upload about 350kb/s max when on 8 players... I can max upload at 4mb/s so that means I can host for 20 people easily. When my server is on 7 players the upload send rate drops to about 300kb/s. So can I assume 50kb/s for each player (don't forget debris/objects)? In my opinion people should have the option to go over 8 players. Maybe an experimental feature? Then again, the host can define the maps and if more slots would be an experimental feature I don't really see the problem of having 'too small maps' and 'too much chaos'.

I think 8 players should stay as the default, but in my opinion hosts should atleast have the option to go over it.

Exactly Scull! We should keep 8 players at the default, but 20 could be and option for people that can host quite easily
on good internet upload speed. Thanks for the Speed Specs!

[Evilsack]

Uh huh, soon there will be 19 vs 1. No thanks. 20 is too much. Although I can see maybe 9 or 10 slots, 20 is a ridiculous number of people in a server at once. Spawn points? Weapons? Melee fights? Camera? M60 vs A cluster of people, M60 win.

[KliPeH]

No thanks. 20 is too much. Although I can see maybe 9 or 10 slots, 20 is a ridiculous number of people in a server at once. Spawn points? Weapons? Melee fights? Camera?

Evilsack has a point. It's almost as if 20 slots would be too chaotic. To a point where any and all strategy are thrown out of the window in favor of "chaos". Want to get a weapon? First get through these 6 people who spawned right on top of you and are now killing eachother with their bare fists because they pose a threat right off the bat. Watch there be no firefights at all; there's simply not enough room for everybody so everyone is forced into slow slap fights until only a few remain standing. Watch the game turn frustrating; "why do I spawn with 5 other people while the other guy always spawns alone?" or "I can't fight like this, I keep getting surrounded at spawn!". You stand no chance; there are too many threats and too little wiggle room to properly and comfortably collect a set of weapons similarly to the way you do it now.

If you've ever played one of the numerous, disgustingly awful melee maps posted each day, it would be kind of like this except on good maps, which don't deserve that dull gameplay. Spacing is important and I would hate to see Alley reduced to a mere fisticuffs battle royale. I'm not trying to offend anyone but I would even go as far as to say it's a childish idea. People see all these survival games designed around chaos, lacking in any mechanical department otherwise - H1Z1, PUBG, DayZ, Unturned, to name a few - and think doing this to every other game is feasible, which isn't true in the slightest. Play an arena-based PvP game that provides players with the means to play comfortably yet competitively - Towerfall Ascension, Samurai Gunn, Crawl, Trench Run - and see if you still want to play a fuckfest that is a two-dozen players trying to squeeze around one another just to get a single weapon.

[Morpheus]

Uh huh, soon there will be 19 vs 1. No thanks. 20 is too much. Although I can see maybe 9 or 10 slots, 20 is a ridiculous number of people in a server at once. Spawn points? Weapons? Melee fights? Camera? M60 vs A cluster of people, M60 win.

Since when Will 19v1 be a thing? Lul. In case you've forgotten teams can be divided into 10v10 therefore evening the teams out to be a less than 10 altogether. There will only be a 19v1 situation when some perp decides to arrange the teams like that using the "/setteams" command.
Although I can see your point about the m60, but remember the m60 spawn chance is very low. Plus you'll have enough players punishing the m60
user as he is using it.

This game is not like Trench Run or Samurai Gunn etc etc. This game is unique. We should at least see how the game mechanics turn out
when the 20 player system is implemented in the game.

To Summarise Evil's and Klipeh's points, 20 people = "ClusterFuck"
That's really not a good enough reason to not try 20 players.
It's not like its gonna stay in the game if it's not good.

[Pricey]

To Summarise Evil's and Klipeh's points, 20 people = "ClusterFuck"
That's really not a good enough reason to not try 20 players.
It's not like its gonna stay in the game if it's not good.

So what are the reasons to implement 20 slots? More chaos? That's it? A lot of needless coding on Gurt's end to add more chaos to an already chaotic game.

[MScull]

No thanks. 20 is too much. Although I can see maybe 9 or 10 slots, 20 is a ridiculous number of people in a server at once. Spawn points? Weapons? Melee fights? Camera?

Evilsack has a point. It's almost as if 20 slots would be too chaotic. To a point where any and all strategy are thrown out of the window in favor of "chaos". Want to get a weapon? First get through these 6 people who spawned right on top of you and are now killing eachother with their bare fists because they pose a threat right off the bat. Watch there be no firefights at all; there's simply not enough room for everybody so everyone is forced into slow slap fights until only a few remain standing. Watch the game turn frustrating; "why do I spawn with 5 other people while the other guy always spawns alone?" or "I can't fight like this, I keep getting surrounded at spawn!". You stand no chance; there are too many threats and too little wiggle room to properly and comfortably collect a set of weapons similarly to the way you do it now.

If you've ever played one of the numerous, disgustingly awful melee maps posted each day, it would be kind of like this except on good maps, which don't deserve that dull gameplay. Spacing is important and I would hate to see Alley reduced to a mere fisticuffs battle royale. I'm not trying to offend anyone but I would even go as far as to say it's a childish idea. People see all these survival games designed around chaos, lacking in any mechanical department otherwise - H1Z1, PUBG, DayZ, Unturned, to name a few - and think doing this to every other game is feasible, which isn't true in the slightest. Play an arena-based PvP game that provides players with the means to play comfortably yet competitively - Towerfall Ascension, Samurai Gunn, Crawl, Trench Run - and see if you still want to play a fuckfest that is a two-dozen players trying to squeeze around one another just to get a single weapon.

I think you do not really understand that hosts have the option to go over 8 players, for example Blurry's server will probably stay at 8 players max. There are a lot of people hosting custom maps and I believe this feature will not ruin the regular 8 player gameplay, but instead give custom maps that are too large for 8 players a more action-packed feeling. Of course this feature is not meant to replace anything, see it as how custom maps currently work; you can deside wether or not you play/host them. I think too that 20 players is too chaotic for a 8 player map, but that is not the point what Morpheus is trying to say.

[Morpheus]

To Summarise Evil's and Klipeh's points, 20 people = "ClusterFuck"
That's really not a good enough reason to not try 20 players.
It's not like its gonna stay in the game if it's not good.

So what are the reasons to implement 20 slots? More chaos? That's it? A lot of needless coding on Gurt's end to add more chaos to an already chaotic game.

"A lot of needless coding on Gurt's end to add more chaos"
Pricey, I think Simple code can be implemented into adding 12 more player slots.
Is it just me or am I wrong?!?!?!
So to summarise your point,- 20 Players = "Chaos and more coding"

Removing the coding bit in your statement, it's still not a good enough reason to not TRY this system

[Evilsack]

How about the camera? How about the amount of cover available in a map? It'll literally be a fuckfest trying to get to a weapon and cover. 20 people in a server may actually do the opposite of what you hope it'll do. Chaos is fun in moderation. What happens to running and gunning? What happens to cqc? Yea, it's an option but why would someone pick such an option? What's appealing about having 20 people in a server other than "I can fit all my friends!" The unique gameplay that is sfd will simply be reduced to spray and pray. I don't see any custom maps that'll require 20 people for "a action packed feeling."

[KliPeH]

How about the camera? How about the amount of cover available in a map? It'll literally be a fuckfest trying to get to a weapon and cover. 20 people in a server may actually do the opposite of what you hope it'll do. Chaos is fun in moderation. What happens to running and gunning? What happens to cqc? Yea, it's an option but why would someone pick such an option? What's appealing about having 20 people in a server other than "I can fit all my friends!" The unique gameplay that is sfd will simply be reduced to spray and pray.

whats that you just said? i ignored all this text and heard you say "lets not try 20 slots"
to which i will reply and will also change my texts formatting so to get more attention
l e t s     t r y     2 0     s l o t s

Pricey, I think Simple code can be implemented into adding 12 more player slots.
Is it just me or am I wrong?!?!?!

So to summarize your point - "I have never seen a piece of code in my life and I think building netcode is easy".

I can only assume you really want this to be a thing, otherwise you wouldn't be chanting the same mantra over and over again about the game being unique or whatnot, as if it's a sound argument in favor of wasting precious dev time. All you've said so far is "I want chaos regardless of whether it's in good taste or not", and we've said "we honestly don't think chaos is even good at that point". You haven't tried to disprove that. I'm opposed to the idea of this becoming normalized - servers chock full of players up each others' asses on cramped maps otherwise fit and/or designed around 4-6 player play. That's not necessarily going to happen, but if it will it will influence me as a player myself; I don't want to see a list of dedicated servers hosting 20 player lobbies and those lobbies being the only places where players gather. This usually happens on other largely-multiplayer games; the first two servers in the list being nearly completely full, and the rest empty because people don't want to play alone, but don't want to be the ones to start a game either.

The community is already small and I wouldn't want to see it split that way. Just because the server I personally frequent doesn't use bad settings doesn't mean the others won't. I'd hate seeing server hosts do this simply because I don't think that's a good way to play the game. The official maps aren't designed to contain this many players and so are most of the custom ones. Same thing with melee-only servers, except those don't really influence the player counter on the other servers I don't feel. It's just another argument against this system - instead of having lots of different servers with different maps, themes, settings and gamemodes, with 4-8 players in each, we'll be having way less but with more players in them. You're essentially gathering players under the same few roofs which can potentially have an unfavorable setting. I know it would deter a player like me from joining multiplayer games and might deter others as well.

Then there's the counter argument - if the players do end up flocking to these servers, doesn't that means that's what the community really wants? That would be a fair point. That's just my 2 cents on the matter, though; if I think I can foresee something bad happen I'll probably go ahead and try to prevent it.