I agree with the post Simon has above. I have been apart of VIE for DoD and I would say the turnout is only somewhat good, with small waits to play. That is DoD, a popular HL2 Game vs Empires, a HL2 Mod. Multiple servers wont be needed. On a given day there is maybe 80-90 players playing empires at peak. A server could hold what 40-45. Thats 1/2 the prime time players. 1/2 of those players may not even sign up or wish to participate. Just because there are 60 people who sign up and wish to play, doesn't mean all 60 can play at the same time because of schedules.
Whilst I'm not sure what you guys have been saying, this is my idea. Make it so you have 2 matches simaltaneously if we have big numbers, so that you can't put all your best players into one for fear of losing the other. Imagine you have 2 "forces" so to speak per team. This way, it ensures that games are balanced yet challenging.
I think what Simon is saying is we are over estimating how many people will actually do this. I'm saying, instead of having 1 or 2 battles to decide, have as many that can be played in 6 hours (3 European, 3 American). That way everyone has a shot of playing. I also don't like the idea of joining this and doing my best and say I win every match for my team. It wouldn't matter because there is another server where I have no control over.
Thats the point. It forces the Captains to balance who they assign to each match. Sure you could stack 1 of the 2 matches with your best players, but thats only going to cause you to lose the other match. This way teams are balanced and EVERYONE gets a shot.
I honestly don't think there will be enough turnout for 6 matches. At the minimum, I agree with 2 matches, I don't think 1 will cut it.
As I said, 2 simaltaneous ones, but I also had another idea. Lets for arguments sake say HSM and I get this. Lets say I put someone in US timezone as my 2 i/c and HSM puts someone in euro timezone as his 2 i/c. Rather than do 2 simaltaneous matches, we could have 1 euro match and 1 US match. As for people who could compete in both, aside from Captains and 2i/c, you can't. A condump of "status" in the console lists steamIDs, so say that you're only allowed to take part in ONE of the matches. This should enable us to satisfy both timezones AND allow everyone to be involved. What dya think?
You guys are welcome to do that if you want. It's up to the team leaders. What the situation will be: -A premise story about why the factions are fighting -A story afterward based on the fighting that occurred. So, you can have the determining battle take place on a few battlefields if you want. It'll be harder for the team leaders to set up though. Also, does napalm have 2 servers?
well i nominate Trickster. I really want to see if all Trick vs HSM RAEG will make Multiversum asplode.
I run Napalm's and I can easily set up another server in about 2 minutes. Its easily done with core assignment.
A better idea I had in the vein of the 2 timezone thing; Have the PUG's at 2 different times. Set one up local for the American players in each army, and one for the European armies. That way, attendance will be much easier.
There's just one PUG. I really doubt there will be extra players around Which side do you want to play Trickster?
If this is gonna be just a bunch of idiots playing for "teh lulz" then its gonna be shit. It should be for people who want to play the game the way its meant to be played. Save your stupidity for the pubs.
I will still try to win the thing. I just want to have fun with it, no point if the thing becomes drama wars.
It will become evident to the team leaders if certain players don't bring anything to their team and only cause drama
It's supposed to be just for fun... I'm thinking the team leaders won't matter that much, in the end...or rather, that's what will screw it up the most ^.^
