Allegiance has too many players

[Weylin]

Is it too hard to just pick a larger map?

[kramari]

QUOTE (KofiMan @ Jan 31 2009, 10:39 PM) ...
The best way to fix this would be to have a unified lobby, so people can join more than one game while still maintaining their NOAT whoring abilities.
...

This^

[ratak]

You could add some motion to asteroids... so they eventually collide with bases, drop their shields and eventually pop them, or whatever natural phoenomena like that. That will add some "spirit" to win soon rather than later.... Just like the big dinosaur that appeared when you extended too much the game and killed your buildings in SIM CITY.

[Valiance]

QUOTE (ratak @ Jan 31 2009, 06:13 PM) You could add some motion to asteroids... so they eventually collide with bases, drop their shields and eventually pop them, or whatever natural phoenomena like that. That will add some "spirit" to win soon rather than later.... Just like the big dinosaur that appeared when you extended too much the game and killed your buildings in SIM CITY.

will it? id have thought it would just generate lots of:

well, were stuck down to our last sector, but dont worry, an enormous rock might hit their exp!

[Striker]

Wow no way in hell y'all would have survived during the grand days of Allegiance shortly after Beta (or even during Beta). Seriously, the commanders need to pick better maps. Start asking for larger maps during prime time. Not that hard!

[CronoDroid]

I did. I complained enough that grav started his own side game and we played a larger map like Gold. That game was much more fun than the one where I got my HoD and then the enemy resigned (60+ players on HiHigher).

[cashto]

I don't think bigger maps are the answer either. Take a map like Nova. It drives me crazy. It takes so long to get access to enemy miners and cons. It takes so long to expand as you need several ops / teles out there to claim any significant amount of territory. Your techbase is in no jeopardy for at least the first half hour. Giga can have a field day building spec mines. Dreg too, kinda. Maybe I'm just playing the map wrong and maybe the key is getting low sig-scouts out there so you can track enemy movements, but still, it drives me crazy.

I think there's a sweet spot where anything less than 12 sectors is too small, but anything above 18 sectors or so is just too much space.

Most squad games are what, 15-20 players? Seems about right. Anything less than 10 and SY is too cheesy, anything more than 30 and sup is equally cheesy. (Maybe sup should be turned off for large games like sy is for small ones).

[coopertronic]

On the thought of limiting the number of players per team, how about the maps having the sector to team size ratio pre-set on each map , so that say 12 sector maps only allow 10 players per side and increase from there upwards. A manual setting to increase it if you want to would be good, but a player limiter would be good in game settings anyway.

[Evincar]

i don't believe map limitations should be enforced, but i'd like to have the ability to set up certain restrictions when you create a server, on which players and how many of them should join. the first thing would be a size (without counting noat), then a squad filter (everyone, squadded, of xxx, yyy, zzz... squad, etc, like a regular expression filter. if it has a @ it can come in, etc.). another filters could come in handy but i believe those are the most important, plus it will help encourage people join cadet and/or squads (since they get a tag to play on the more skilled servers).

the first step is this in my opinion, and it could be good to give more options later, but that's the most important (being able to force a small game and being able to force a skilled game)

[CronoDroid]

Also, sector overload needs to be seriously, seriously increased. I should start a poll.