ephi
New Member
Jack of All Trades
Posts: 27
Byond key: Ephicross
|
Post by ephi on Jun 4, 2014 17:05:56 GMT
We average around 20 in a usual night. And in a max. night, we get around 30+.
With it comes with the issue of 16 just being meh.
I suggest we see an increase to this or better yet let the host decide and give 'em a game settings verb that allows the host to change it from a minimum of 10 players to 20 max.
|
|
NotSoKaito
New Member
An Amateur Writer and Champion of Shiki
Posts: 29
Byond key: NotSoKaito
|
Post by NotSoKaito on Jun 4, 2014 17:13:56 GMT
Yeah, the host deciding the player limit would be cool.
|
|
|
Post by silenthill on Jun 4, 2014 17:16:41 GMT
I agree, I dislike not being able to play a round because the game has already been filled up. You could say that I'd need only join another server but I'd like to play on a server with more people, it's more fun, I'm sure others would too.
|
|
|
Post by Komaeda on Jun 5, 2014 0:18:32 GMT
I'd have to object to simply force-raising the player limit. Personally, I find that rounds with too many people mean more chances of dubious/non-serious/chaotic roleplay (I'm not talking about chaotic plots, those can be fine), which, among other factors, lowers the odds of an enjoyable experience. And that reduces interest in a server/the game, which is not desirable. It also encourages crowding a server.
I'm afraid you won't see me liking the idea of increasing the limit for 2 basic reasons : I believe that "the more, the merrier" is seldom the case if the objective is serious and enjoyable roleplaying, due to reasons stated above; and that the "problem" of lack of slots can be "fixed" by creating/spreading/moving to another server.
In other words, I'm completely against forcing an increase, and I'd be hard pressed to say that a forced decrease wouldn't have its issues. However, if the change is not forced, and instead the host has the option of lowering and even increasing it, then I believe it's not only absolutely fair but also convenient. Though I'd still regret seeing the limit increased...but so far it seems that it's either just me or the minority who would agree.
|
|
|
Post by Aquan on Jun 5, 2014 7:42:06 GMT
As I've mentioned numerous times when the subject has been brought up, raising the player limit would be an incredibly bad idea, host's choice or no. For one thing, as has been mentioned previously, with twenty people in a round, it becomes nearly impossible to actually do anything. Even at sixteen, it very quickly becomes very difficult to read through all of the text scrolling by. This is, of course, not mentioning the difficulty of actually killing that many people, for the rounds where that's the goal.
There's also the bit about how the maps aren't actually designed to handle that many people at a time. Spawn-point limits aside (two per room is, in fact, a very nice number), it's hard enough to find a nice, quiet place to murder your friends as-is. After sixteen, we start getting to the point where the rooms all start to get taken/searched with greater frequency.
Then there's the bit I should throw in for anyone whose ever had the pleasure of minihosting on a server. Namely, the difficulty of actually moderating that many individuals. It does, in fact, get harder and more frustrating to keep an eye on that many people.
This being said, I wouldn't be against a setting that allowed the host to decrease the number of players permitted in a game, like the one Mitadake had. But adding more is just silly.
|
|
|
Post by MetaFrosty on Jun 5, 2014 9:59:45 GMT
Aquan gets it. Plus I don't want to further encourage everyone piling onto one single server because I want anyone to be able to host. One single server hosting a monopoly over the entire game is the exact opposite of what I wanted to happen. If the game is consistently full up, move people over to a new server and put more effort into it than just suggesting it in the chat because it takes more than that to get people to budge.
|
|
Tanasinn
New Member
Posts: 32
Byond key: Tanasinn
|
Post by Tanasinn on Jun 7, 2014 4:55:36 GMT
With sixteen people, things get convoluted. You have entire groups of people who never interact over the entire game, people wandering about and random ruining what the roles could be doing, and things often turn into awkward clusters. It's already basically impossible for the killer in Normal mode to accomplish anything with a full game unless people find their own reasons to kill each other, and people end up disgruntled because they don't 'feel included'. This even happens in modes with three or four roles, let alone a mode with only a couple at maximum like normal.
Increasing it up to twenty, twenty-two, or what have you would just make things exponentially worse. It's very difficult to keep track of things like names and who has done/said what, even when you're actively writing it down. Even if it were just a purely host-determined thing, people would constantly harass them about increasing it if it weren't at the maximum. People that are slow, or come in late, already constantly complain to hosts as if that does anything. It'd just make that worse, and, as previously mentioned, increase single-server dependency. A choice to lower the number possible sounds fine, as I personally think somewhere around 10-12 is an ideal game size, and might make people actually move to other servers.
|
|
Spottedpath
Junior Member
Discord Moderator
Posts: 94
Byond key: Amenity Kitten
|
Post by Spottedpath on Jun 18, 2014 13:56:16 GMT
Not to mention the maps are relatively small, and with 16 players you see at least 1 somewhere, 20 would be hectic, really, especially for the killer role.
|
|