Re: [hlds_linux] [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions

[DontWannaName!]

I am in favor of this.

Sent from my iPhone 4

On Aug 17, 2012, at 10:12 AM, Fletcher Dunn  wrote:

> tf_mm_strict 1 does two things:
> 
> * hides the server from the server browser list results
> * causes your server to reject direct joins not negotiated through 
> matchmaking.
> 
> We could easily make that a 3-values variable, if people thing it would be 
> useful.  (Allow direct connections but not be visible on the server browser).
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: hlds_linux-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com 
> [mailto:hlds_linux-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com] On Behalf Of Peter Reinhold
> Sent: Friday, August 17, 2012 3:54 AM
> To: Half-Life dedicated Linux server mailing list
> Subject: Re: [hlds_linux] [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions
> 
> On 15.08.2012 23:14, Ross Bemrose wrote:
> 
>> Also, does tf_mm_strict 1 let people who have the server favorited see 
>> it in their favorites list?
> 
> tf_mm_strict 1 only accepts traffic from matchmaking, so if people can see 
> the server in their list is kind of moot.
> 
> 
> /Peter
> 
> 
> ___
> To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please 
> visit:
> https://list.valvesoftware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux
> 
> ___
> To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please 
> visit:
> https://list.valvesoftware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/hlds

___
To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please 
visit:
https://list.valvesoftware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux

Re: [hlds_linux] [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions

[Alan Kennedy]

Fletcher, if that three-value variable is possible, it would be much 
appreciated. Since the slots are not that many, i'm having trouble trying to 
give priority for my Gamers Community on the TF2 MvM servers. They know the IP, 
but i seem to get a lot of browser joins from other countries (with high ping) 
as well due to the high demand on the mod.

The other option would be to just set a password but i'm not pro-locked servers.

I suppose other are in the same position.

Thx!.

Best Regards, Alan //

--
3DGames Argentina
http://www.3dgames.com.ar
Libertad 41, 5to Piso - Capital Federal
Tel: 4-332-4709

- Original Message -
> From: "Fletcher Dunn" 
> To: "Half-Life dedicated Linux server mailing list" 
> 
> Cc: "Half-Life dedicated Win32 server mailing list 
> (h...@list.valvesoftware.com)" 
> Sent: Friday, August 17, 2012 2:12:16 PM
> Subject: Re: [hlds] [hlds_linux] TF MvM hosting questions
> tf_mm_strict 1 does two things:
> 
> * hides the server from the server browser list results
> * causes your server to reject direct joins not negotiated through
> matchmaking.
> 
> We could easily make that a 3-values variable, if people thing it
> would be useful. (Allow direct connections but not be visible on the
> server browser).
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: hlds_linux-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com
> [mailto:hlds_linux-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com] On Behalf Of Peter
> Reinhold
> Sent: Friday, August 17, 2012 3:54 AM
> To: Half-Life dedicated Linux server mailing list
> Subject: Re: [hlds_linux] [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions
> 
> On 15.08.2012 23:14, Ross Bemrose wrote:
> 
> > Also, does tf_mm_strict 1 let people who have the server favorited
> > see
> > it in their favorites list?
> 
> tf_mm_strict 1 only accepts traffic from matchmaking, so if people can
> see the server in their list is kind of moot.
> 
> 
> /Peter
> 
> 
> ___
> To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives,
> please visit:
> https://list.valvesoftware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux
> 
> ___
> To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives,
> please visit:
> https://list.valvesoftware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/hlds

___
To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please 
visit:
https://list.valvesoftware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux

Re: [hlds_linux] [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions

[Erik-jan Riemers]

Is there also an option to set the difficulty of community servers the
same as the valve mann up ones? Since it's a lot tougher and it would get
you some descent playing experience before signing up.

-Original Message-
From: hlds_linux-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com
[mailto:hlds_linux-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com] On Behalf Of Fletcher
Dunn
Sent: vrijdag 17 augustus 2012 19:12
To: Half-Life dedicated Linux server mailing list
Cc: Half-Life dedicated Win32 server mailing list
(h...@list.valvesoftware.com)
Subject: Re: [hlds_linux] [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions

tf_mm_strict 1 does two things:

* hides the server from the server browser list results
* causes your server to reject direct joins not negotiated through
matchmaking.

We could easily make that a 3-values variable, if people thing it would be
useful.  (Allow direct connections but not be visible on the server
browser).

-Original Message-
From: hlds_linux-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com
[mailto:hlds_linux-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com] On Behalf Of Peter
Reinhold
Sent: Friday, August 17, 2012 3:54 AM
To: Half-Life dedicated Linux server mailing list
Subject: Re: [hlds_linux] [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions

On 15.08.2012 23:14, Ross Bemrose wrote:

> Also, does tf_mm_strict 1 let people who have the server favorited see
> it in their favorites list?

tf_mm_strict 1 only accepts traffic from matchmaking, so if people can see
the server in their list is kind of moot.


/Peter


___
To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives,
please visit:
https://list.valvesoftware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux

___
To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives,
please visit:
https://list.valvesoftware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux

___
To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please 
visit:
https://list.valvesoftware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux

Re: [hlds_linux] [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions

[Fletcher Dunn]

tf_mm_strict 1 does two things:

* hides the server from the server browser list results
* causes your server to reject direct joins not negotiated through matchmaking.

We could easily make that a 3-values variable, if people thing it would be 
useful.  (Allow direct connections but not be visible on the server browser).

-Original Message-
From: hlds_linux-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com 
[mailto:hlds_linux-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com] On Behalf Of Peter Reinhold
Sent: Friday, August 17, 2012 3:54 AM
To: Half-Life dedicated Linux server mailing list
Subject: Re: [hlds_linux] [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions

On 15.08.2012 23:14, Ross Bemrose wrote:

> Also, does tf_mm_strict 1 let people who have the server favorited see 
> it in their favorites list?

tf_mm_strict 1 only accepts traffic from matchmaking, so if people can see the 
server in their list is kind of moot.


/Peter


___
To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please 
visit:
https://list.valvesoftware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux

___
To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please 
visit:
https://list.valvesoftware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux

Re: [hlds_linux] [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions

[Peter Reinhold]

On 15.08.2012 23:14, Ross Bemrose wrote:


Also, does tf_mm_strict 1 let people who have the server favorited
see it in their favorites list?


tf_mm_strict 1 only accepts traffic from matchmaking, so if people can 
see the server in their list is kind of moot.



/Peter


___
To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please 
visit:
https://list.valvesoftware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux

Re: [hlds_linux] [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions

[dan]

On 16/08/2012 06:02, Russell Smith wrote:

Yes, but that's not a new issue.


Haha, that doesn't make it any less broken does it?

--
Dan

___
To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please 
visit:
https://list.valvesoftware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux

Re: [hlds_linux] [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions

[ics]

If replay is just enabled and not setup correctly, it will cause some crashes. 
So be carefull if you enable it. Another thing that ive noticed is that if 
mp_maxrounds is too low, server will spam round end blabla in to console 
despite game is still going on. It will cause visible lag.

-ics

- Alkuperäinen viesti -
> What's not working? I have replay enabled on my one mvm server. Just
> checked the web offload server and it has blocks for all the sessions of
> the past ~12 hours. 
> 
> When I played on it last night it popped updating press f6 to download
> the replay. 
> 
> Steven J. Sumichrast
> 
> On Aug 16, 2012, at 1:52 AM, Emil Larsson  wrote:
> 
> > Even if it worked it's probably not recommended as Replay (And/Or
> > SourceTV) takes one of the slots MvM uses to function.
> > 
> > On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 6:25 AM, dan  wrote:
> > 
> > > On 15/08/2012 23:16, Russell Smith wrote:
> > > 
> > > > What's the situation going to be with the replay system?   Will
> > > > that work with MvM or should we disable it for servers running the
> > > > mode?
> > > > 
> > > 
> > > It doesn't work now :(
> > > 
> > > Hopefully they'll get someone else looking at the bugs.
> > > 
> > > --
> > > Dan
> > > 
> > > 
> > > __**_
> > > To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list
> > > archives, please visit:
> > > https://list.valvesoftware.**com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/**hlds_linux
> > > 
> > ___
> > To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives,
> > please visit:
> > https://list.valvesoftware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux
> 
> ___
> To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives,
> please visit:
> https://list.valvesoftware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux

___
To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please 
visit:
https://list.valvesoftware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux

Re: [hlds_linux] [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions

[Steven Sumichrast]

What's not working? I have replay enabled on my one mvm server. Just checked 
the web offload server and it has blocks for all the sessions of the past ~12 
hours. 

When I played on it last night it popped updating press f6 to download the 
replay. 

Steven J. Sumichrast

On Aug 16, 2012, at 1:52 AM, Emil Larsson  wrote:

> Even if it worked it's probably not recommended as Replay (And/Or SourceTV)
> takes one of the slots MvM uses to function.
> 
> On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 6:25 AM, dan  wrote:
> 
>> On 15/08/2012 23:16, Russell Smith wrote:
>> 
>>> What's the situation going to be with the replay system?  Will that work
>>> with MvM or should we disable it for servers running the mode?
>>> 
>> 
>> It doesn't work now :(
>> 
>> Hopefully they'll get someone else looking at the bugs.
>> 
>> --
>> Dan
>> 
>> 
>> __**_
>> To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives,
>> please visit:
>> https://list.valvesoftware.**com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/**hlds_linux
>> 
> ___
> To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please 
> visit:
> https://list.valvesoftware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux

___
To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please 
visit:
https://list.valvesoftware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux

Re: [hlds_linux] [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions

[Emil Larsson]

Even if it worked it's probably not recommended as Replay (And/Or SourceTV)
takes one of the slots MvM uses to function.

On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 6:25 AM, dan  wrote:

> On 15/08/2012 23:16, Russell Smith wrote:
>
>> What's the situation going to be with the replay system?  Will that work
>> with MvM or should we disable it for servers running the mode?
>>
>
> It doesn't work now :(
>
> Hopefully they'll get someone else looking at the bugs.
>
> --
> Dan
>
>
> __**_
> To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives,
> please visit:
> https://list.valvesoftware.**com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/**hlds_linux
>
___
To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please 
visit:
https://list.valvesoftware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux

Re: [hlds_linux] [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions

[Russell Smith]

Yes, but that's not a new issue.

On 8/15/2012 9:56 PM, dan wrote:

On 16/08/2012 05:30, Russell Smith wrote:

Replays appear to be working on my server.


Do you never get this, and similar, errors? :-

http://forums.steamgames.com/forums/showthread.php?t=2745226




___
To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please 
visit:
https://list.valvesoftware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux

Re: [hlds_linux] [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions

[dan]

On 16/08/2012 05:30, Russell Smith wrote:

Replays appear to be working on my server.


Do you never get this, and similar, errors? :-

http://forums.steamgames.com/forums/showthread.php?t=2745226

--
Dan

___
To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please 
visit:
https://list.valvesoftware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux

Re: [hlds_linux] [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions

[Russell Smith]

Replays appear to be working on my server.

On 8/15/2012 9:25 PM, dan wrote:

On 15/08/2012 23:16, Russell Smith wrote:
What's the situation going to be with the replay system?  Will that 
work with MvM or should we disable it for servers running the mode?


It doesn't work now :(

Hopefully they'll get someone else looking at the bugs.




___
To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please 
visit:
https://list.valvesoftware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux

Re: [hlds_linux] [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions

[James Ives]

Is anyone's server crashes when the map changes?

■ James Ives ■ ja...@jimo.co.uk




On 15 August 2012 20:21, dan  wrote:

> On 15/08/2012 16:51, Fletcher Dunn wrote:
>
>> 7th.
>>
>
> Don't push us too hard. We've only just got over our confusion for what 6
> means :)
> --
> Dan
>
>
> __**_
> To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives,
> please visit:
> https://list.valvesoftware.**com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/**hlds_linux
>
___
To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please 
visit:
https://list.valvesoftware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux

Re: [hlds_linux] [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions

[dan]

On 15/08/2012 23:16, Russell Smith wrote:
What's the situation going to be with the replay system?  Will that 
work with MvM or should we disable it for servers running the mode?


It doesn't work now :(

Hopefully they'll get someone else looking at the bugs.

--
Dan

___
To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please 
visit:
https://list.valvesoftware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux

Re: [hlds_linux] [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions

[dan]

On 15/08/2012 16:51, Fletcher Dunn wrote:

7th.


Don't push us too hard. We've only just got over our confusion for what 
6 means :)

--
Dan

___
To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please 
visit:
https://list.valvesoftware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux

Re: [hlds_linux] [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions

[doc]

More information on the mission cycle file will be given according to
Fletch.

On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 3:14 PM, Ross Bemrose  wrote:

> Any word on how to configure the mission cycle file?  I think I speak for
> everyone else when I say I'd really like to have this configured before the
> update launches.
>
> Also, does tf_mm_strict 1 let people who have the server favorited see it
> in their favorites list?
>
>
> On 8/15/2012 12:54 PM, Fletcher Dunn wrote:
>
>> MOAR IMPORTANT FACTS!
>>
>> The MvM in-game voting system restricts the options given to players to
>> change the map or mission.  Similarly, PvP voting restricts the options to
>> what's in your mapcycle file.
>>
>> So...
>>
>> To host a PvP server:
>>
>> * No MvM maps in the mapcycle file.
>>
>> * Set tf_mm_servermode 1 (or 0)
>>
>> * Boot the server on a PvP map in your map cycle.
>>
>> To host an MvM server:
>>
>> * Make sure maxplayers is 32!
>>
>> * No PvP maps in the MvM mission cycle file.  (More details on
>> this file will follow.)
>>
>> * Set tf_mm_servermode 2 (or 0)
>>
>> * Boot the server on a MvM map in your map cycle.
>>
>> If you do the above, the server will essentially be locked in either one
>> mode or the other, and players will not be able to switch.  (Barring any
>> use of rcon, etc.)
>>
>
> __**_
> To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives,
> please visit:
> https://list.valvesoftware.**com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/**hlds_linux
>
___
To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please 
visit:
https://list.valvesoftware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux

Re: [hlds_linux] [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions

[Russell Smith]

What's the situation going to be with the replay system?  Will that 
work with MvM or should we disable it for servers running the mode?


On 15.08.2012 11:52, Fletcher Dunn wrote:

There is currently no way to select a particular server or server
group in the matchmaking system.

The matchmaking system is not identical to L4D, because the
gameserver and the party members are all chosen at the same time.  It
is not a two-step process where strangers trickle into a lobby and
then you wait for a server.  You will never be in a lobby with
strangers, only invited friends.  Each search party waits, and then
and entire match (collection of 6 players from N parties) is started
on a particular gameserver.  This is how the current quickplay beta
works.




___
To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please 
visit:
https://list.valvesoftware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux

Re: [hlds_linux] [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions

[Ross Bemrose]

Any word on how to configure the mission cycle file?  I think I speak 
for everyone else when I say I'd really like to have this configured 
before the update launches.


Also, does tf_mm_strict 1 let people who have the server favorited see 
it in their favorites list?


On 8/15/2012 12:54 PM, Fletcher Dunn wrote:

MOAR IMPORTANT FACTS!

The MvM in-game voting system restricts the options given to players to change 
the map or mission.  Similarly, PvP voting restricts the options to what's in 
your mapcycle file.

So...

To host a PvP server:

* No MvM maps in the mapcycle file.

* Set tf_mm_servermode 1 (or 0)

* Boot the server on a PvP map in your map cycle.

To host an MvM server:

* Make sure maxplayers is 32!

* No PvP maps in the MvM mission cycle file.  (More details on this 
file will follow.)

* Set tf_mm_servermode 2 (or 0)

* Boot the server on a MvM map in your map cycle.

If you do the above, the server will essentially be locked in either one mode 
or the other, and players will not be able to switch.  (Barring any use of 
rcon, etc.)


___
To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please 
visit:
https://list.valvesoftware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux

Re: [hlds_linux] [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions

[Giovanni Harting]

Hopefully we have enough player slots 

Im going to provide 5 servers with a summary of  160 slots and I can only
provide 30 playerslots.

In worst case this going to be a batte for the last free slots.

btw, reserved slot also not possible... this makes the 32 slot limit
more and more worst

2012/8/15 Ross Bemrose 

> While you're changing the voting code, can we pretty please have the end
> of map vote split into its own cvar instead of hijacking the nextlevel
> vote's sv_vote_issue_nextlevel_**allowed cvar?
>
>
> On 8/15/2012 12:54 PM, Fletcher Dunn wrote:
>
>> MOAR IMPORTANT FACTS!
>>
>> The MvM in-game voting system restricts the options given to players to
>> change the map or mission.  Similarly, PvP voting restricts the options to
>> what's in your mapcycle file.
>>
>> So...
>>
>> To host a PvP server:
>>
>> * No MvM maps in the mapcycle file.
>>
>> * Set tf_mm_servermode 1 (or 0)
>>
>> * Boot the server on a PvP map in your map cycle.
>>
>> To host an MvM server:
>>
>> * Make sure maxplayers is 32!
>>
>> * No PvP maps in the MvM mission cycle file.  (More details on
>> this file will follow.)
>>
>> * Set tf_mm_servermode 2 (or 0)
>>
>> * Boot the server on a MvM map in your map cycle.
>>
>> If you do the above, the server will essentially be locked in either one
>> mode or the other, and players will not be able to switch.  (Barring any
>> use of rcon, etc.)
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> From: 
>> hlds-bounces@list.**valvesoftware.com[mailto:
>> hlds-bounces@list.**valvesoftware.com]
>> On Behalf Of Alastor Raynes
>> Sent: Wednesday, August 15, 2012 9:33 AM
>> To: Half-Life dedicated Win32 server mailing list
>> Cc: hlds_linux@list.valvesoftware.**com
>> Subject: Re: [hlds] [hlds_linux] TF MvM hosting questions
>>
>>
>> A few quick questions, if I may.
>>
>> 1) Will it be possible to force a server to run in only MvM mode, like
>> how Arena mode currently works? If so, how is this done?
>>
>> 2) If a server has the capability, will spectators be able to join and
>> watch MvM matches without SourceTV? If so, will they be able to cycle in
>> and out after each match, like Arena mode?
>>
>> I apologize if these have already been answered.
>> On Aug 15, 2012 10:51 AM, "Fletcher Dunn" > mailto:fletcherd@**valvesoftware.com >>
>> wrote:
>> 7th.
>>
>> We'll do the best we can and are hoping to not release it too late.
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: 
>> hlds_linux-bounces@list.**valvesoftware.com
>> <mailto:hlds_**linux-bounces@list.**valvesoftware.com>
>> [mailto:hlds_linux-bounces@**list.valvesoftware.com
>> <mailto:**hlds_linux-bounces@list.**valvesoftware.com>]
>> On Behalf Of Benedict Glover
>> Sent: Wednesday, August 15, 2012 8:47 AM
>> To: hlds_linux@list.valvesoftware.**com
>> <mailto:hlds_linux@list.**valvesoftware.com
>> >
>> Subject: Re: [hlds_linux] [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions
>>
>>
>> 6th
>>
>>  From: flub...@gmail.com<mailto:flubb**3...@gmail.com >
>>> Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2012 17:42:15 +0200
>>> To: hlds_linux@list.valvesoftware.**com
>>> <mailto:hlds_linux@list.**valvesoftware.com
>>> >
>>> Subject: Re: [hlds_linux] [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions
>>>
>>> 5Th
>>>
>>> 2012/8/15 Vader_666 
>>> mailto:vad**er...@gmail.com
>>> >>
>>>
>>>  4th
>>>>
>>>> 2012/8/15 Giovanni Harting >>> chefeificationful@**gmail.com >>
>>>>
>>>>  Third.
>>>>>
>>>>> 2012/8/15 Dr. McKay mailto:**
>>>>> li...@doctormckay.com >>
>>>>>
>>>>>  I second this request.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Dr. McKay
>>>>>> http://www.doctormckay.com
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Aug 15, 2012, at 10:11 AM, "Frank" mailto:a*
>>>>>> *d...@gamerscrib.net >> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>  Is there any chance at all in having this update release
>>>>>>> before 5PM
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> EST??
>>>>>
>>>>>> The Meet the Pyro update released so late for many of us that
>>>>>>> we
>>>>>>

Re: [hlds_linux] [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions

[Ross Bemrose]

While you're changing the voting code, can we pretty please have the end 
of map vote split into its own cvar instead of hijacking the nextlevel 
vote's sv_vote_issue_nextlevel_allowed cvar?


On 8/15/2012 12:54 PM, Fletcher Dunn wrote:

MOAR IMPORTANT FACTS!

The MvM in-game voting system restricts the options given to players to change 
the map or mission.  Similarly, PvP voting restricts the options to what's in 
your mapcycle file.

So...

To host a PvP server:

* No MvM maps in the mapcycle file.

* Set tf_mm_servermode 1 (or 0)

* Boot the server on a PvP map in your map cycle.

To host an MvM server:

* Make sure maxplayers is 32!

* No PvP maps in the MvM mission cycle file.  (More details on this 
file will follow.)

* Set tf_mm_servermode 2 (or 0)

* Boot the server on a MvM map in your map cycle.

If you do the above, the server will essentially be locked in either one mode 
or the other, and players will not be able to switch.  (Barring any use of 
rcon, etc.)




From: hlds-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com 
[mailto:hlds-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com] On Behalf Of Alastor Raynes
Sent: Wednesday, August 15, 2012 9:33 AM
To: Half-Life dedicated Win32 server mailing list
Cc: hlds_linux@list.valvesoftware.com
Subject: Re: [hlds] [hlds_linux] TF MvM hosting questions


A few quick questions, if I may.

1) Will it be possible to force a server to run in only MvM mode, like how 
Arena mode currently works? If so, how is this done?

2) If a server has the capability, will spectators be able to join and watch 
MvM matches without SourceTV? If so, will they be able to cycle in and out 
after each match, like Arena mode?

I apologize if these have already been answered.
On Aug 15, 2012 10:51 AM, "Fletcher Dunn" 
mailto:fletch...@valvesoftware.com>> wrote:
7th.

We'll do the best we can and are hoping to not release it too late.

-Original Message-
From: 
hlds_linux-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com<mailto:hlds_linux-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com>
 
[mailto:hlds_linux-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com<mailto:hlds_linux-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com>]
 On Behalf Of Benedict Glover
Sent: Wednesday, August 15, 2012 8:47 AM
To: hlds_linux@list.valvesoftware.com<mailto:hlds_linux@list.valvesoftware.com>
Subject: Re: [hlds_linux] [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions


6th


From: flub...@gmail.com<mailto:flub...@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2012 17:42:15 +0200
To: hlds_linux@list.valvesoftware.com<mailto:hlds_linux@list.valvesoftware.com>
Subject: Re: [hlds_linux] [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions

5Th

2012/8/15 Vader_666 mailto:vader...@gmail.com>>


4th

2012/8/15 Giovanni Harting 
mailto:chefeification...@gmail.com>>


Third.

2012/8/15 Dr. McKay mailto:li...@doctormckay.com>>


I second this request.


Dr. McKay
http://www.doctormckay.com

On Aug 15, 2012, at 10:11 AM, "Frank" 
mailto:ad...@gamerscrib.net>> wrote:


Is there any chance at all in having this update release
before 5PM

EST??

The Meet the Pyro update released so late for many of us that
we

didn't

have

time to do much in the form of damage control and make the
needed adjustments server side till the next day. It would be
nice to have

it

release early enough so we can set servers up without it being
into

the

wee

hours of the night again.

I believe that's just a very small favor to ask as this update

appears

it

may be a beast.

Thanks guys!

-Original Message-
From: 
hlds_linux-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com<mailto:hlds_linux-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com>
[mailto:hlds_linux-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com<mailto:hlds_linux-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com>]
 On Behalf
Of

Fletcher

Dunn
Sent: Tuesday, August 14, 2012 1:17 PM
To: Half-Life dedicated Linux server mailing list
(hlds_linux@list.valvesoftware.com<mailto:hlds_linux@list.valvesoftware.com>); 
Half-Life dedicated Win32

server

mailing list
Subject: Re: [hlds_linux] [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions

OK, a little investigating reveals that this statement I made:

* You can switch the server in and out of any matchmaking mode
pool

or

back

to any regular game mode at any time.

Is not really accurate!  Sorry!  If the server is EMPTY or has
fewer

than 6

players, yes, there are no problems with switching --- that is true.
However, in general, switching from PvP to MvM is going to
cause

several

problems.  (I believe that what would actually happen is that
the

7th,

8th,

etc. players who connect on a map change will be forced into

spectator.

  At

any rate, we don't officially support that, so if you do it,
you're

on

your

own.)  So, you should expect to segregate your servers into
MvM and

PvP.

Don't just put the MvM maps into the mapcycle file, that won't work.
(Actually, the mapcycle file is slightly different for MvM
because

you

really are cycling thr

Re: [hlds_linux] [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions

[Essay Tew Phaun]

Lucky number 7th.
___
To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please 
visit:
https://list.valvesoftware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux

Re: [hlds_linux] [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions

[Essay Tew Phaun]

Lucky number 7th.
___
To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please 
visit:
https://list.valvesoftware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux

Re: [hlds_linux] [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions

[Fletcher Dunn]

Yes, it works just like the mapcycle file.  We will ship a default one as an 
example, and there’s a convar that determines which one is actually used.

From: hlds-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com 
[mailto:hlds-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com] On Behalf Of Dan Offord
Sent: Wednesday, August 15, 2012 11:18 AM
To: Half-Life dedicated Linux server mailing list
Cc: Half-Life dedicated Win32 server mailing list
Subject: Re: [hlds] [hlds_linux] TF MvM hosting questions

>  * No PvP maps in the MvM mission cycle file.  (More details on this 
> file will follow.)
Will we be able to set where this file is? similar to mapcyclefile?

Regards,

Dan
On 15 August 2012 17:54, Fletcher Dunn 
mailto:fletch...@valvesoftware.com>> wrote:
MOAR IMPORTANT FACTS!

The MvM in-game voting system restricts the options given to players to change 
the map or mission.  Similarly, PvP voting restricts the options to what's in 
your mapcycle file.

So...

To host a PvP server:

* No MvM maps in the mapcycle file.

* Set tf_mm_servermode 1 (or 0)

* Boot the server on a PvP map in your map cycle.

To host an MvM server:

* Make sure maxplayers is 32!

* No PvP maps in the MvM mission cycle file.  (More details on this 
file will follow.)

* Set tf_mm_servermode 2 (or 0)

* Boot the server on a MvM map in your map cycle.

If you do the above, the server will essentially be locked in either one mode 
or the other, and players will not be able to switch.  (Barring any use of 
rcon, etc.)




From: 
hlds-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com<mailto:hlds-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com> 
[mailto:hlds-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com<mailto:hlds-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com>]
 On Behalf Of Alastor Raynes
Sent: Wednesday, August 15, 2012 9:33 AM
To: Half-Life dedicated Win32 server mailing list
Cc: hlds_linux@list.valvesoftware.com<mailto:hlds_linux@list.valvesoftware.com>
Subject: Re: [hlds] [hlds_linux] TF MvM hosting questions


A few quick questions, if I may.

1) Will it be possible to force a server to run in only MvM mode, like how 
Arena mode currently works? If so, how is this done?

2) If a server has the capability, will spectators be able to join and watch 
MvM matches without SourceTV? If so, will they be able to cycle in and out 
after each match, like Arena mode?

I apologize if these have already been answered.
On Aug 15, 2012 10:51 AM, "Fletcher Dunn" 
mailto:fletch...@valvesoftware.com><mailto:fletch...@valvesoftware.com<mailto:fletch...@valvesoftware.com>>>
 wrote:
7th.

We'll do the best we can and are hoping to not release it too late.

-Original Message-
From: 
hlds_linux-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com<mailto:hlds_linux-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com><mailto:hlds_linux-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com<mailto:hlds_linux-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com>>
 
[mailto:hlds_linux-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com<mailto:hlds_linux-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com><mailto:hlds_linux-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com<mailto:hlds_linux-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com>>]
 On Behalf Of Benedict Glover
Sent: Wednesday, August 15, 2012 8:47 AM
To: 
hlds_linux@list.valvesoftware.com<mailto:hlds_linux@list.valvesoftware.com><mailto:hlds_linux@list.valvesoftware.com<mailto:hlds_linux@list.valvesoftware.com>>
Subject: Re: [hlds_linux] [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions


6th
> From: 
> flub...@gmail.com<mailto:flub...@gmail.com><mailto:flub...@gmail.com<mailto:flub...@gmail.com>>
> Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2012 17:42:15 +0200
> To: 
> hlds_linux@list.valvesoftware.com<mailto:hlds_linux@list.valvesoftware.com><mailto:hlds_linux@list.valvesoftware.com<mailto:hlds_linux@list.valvesoftware.com>>
> Subject: Re: [hlds_linux] [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions
>
> 5Th
>
> 2012/8/15 Vader_666 
> mailto:vader...@gmail.com><mailto:vader...@gmail.com<mailto:vader...@gmail.com>>>
>
> > 4th
> >
> > 2012/8/15 Giovanni Harting 
> > mailto:chefeification...@gmail.com><mailto:chefeification...@gmail.com<mailto:chefeification...@gmail.com>>>
> >
> > > Third.
> > >
> > > 2012/8/15 Dr. McKay 
> > > mailto:li...@doctormckay.com><mailto:li...@doctormckay.com<mailto:li...@doctormckay.com>>>
> > >
> > > > I second this request.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Dr. McKay
> > > > http://www.doctormckay.com
> > > >
> > > > On Aug 15, 2012, at 10:11 AM, "Frank" 
> > > > mailto:ad...@gamerscrib.net><mailto:ad...@gamerscrib.net<mailto:ad...@gamerscrib.net>>>
> > > >  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Is there any chance at all in having this update release
> > >

Re: [hlds_linux] [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions

[Dan Offord]

>  * No PvP maps in the MvM mission cycle file.  (More details on
this file will follow.)

Will we be able to set where this file is? similar to mapcyclefile?

Regards,

Dan

On 15 August 2012 17:54, Fletcher Dunn  wrote:

> MOAR IMPORTANT FACTS!
>
> The MvM in-game voting system restricts the options given to players to
> change the map or mission.  Similarly, PvP voting restricts the options to
> what's in your mapcycle file.
>
> So...
>
> To host a PvP server:
>
> * No MvM maps in the mapcycle file.
>
> * Set tf_mm_servermode 1 (or 0)
>
> * Boot the server on a PvP map in your map cycle.
>
> To host an MvM server:
>
> * Make sure maxplayers is 32!
>
> * No PvP maps in the MvM mission cycle file.  (More details on
> this file will follow.)
>
> * Set tf_mm_servermode 2 (or 0)
>
> * Boot the server on a MvM map in your map cycle.
>
> If you do the above, the server will essentially be locked in either one
> mode or the other, and players will not be able to switch.  (Barring any
> use of rcon, etc.)
>
>
>
>
> From: hlds-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com [mailto:
> hlds-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com] On Behalf Of Alastor Raynes
> Sent: Wednesday, August 15, 2012 9:33 AM
> To: Half-Life dedicated Win32 server mailing list
> Cc: hlds_linux@list.valvesoftware.com
> Subject: Re: [hlds] [hlds_linux] TF MvM hosting questions
>
>
> A few quick questions, if I may.
>
> 1) Will it be possible to force a server to run in only MvM mode, like how
> Arena mode currently works? If so, how is this done?
>
> 2) If a server has the capability, will spectators be able to join and
> watch MvM matches without SourceTV? If so, will they be able to cycle in
> and out after each match, like Arena mode?
>
> I apologize if these have already been answered.
> On Aug 15, 2012 10:51 AM, "Fletcher Dunn"  <mailto:fletch...@valvesoftware.com>> wrote:
> 7th.
>
> We'll do the best we can and are hoping to not release it too late.
>
> -Original Message-
> From: hlds_linux-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com hlds_linux-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com> [mailto:
> hlds_linux-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com hlds_linux-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com>] On Behalf Of Benedict Glover
> Sent: Wednesday, August 15, 2012 8:47 AM
> To: hlds_linux@list.valvesoftware.com hlds_linux@list.valvesoftware.com>
> Subject: Re: [hlds_linux] [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions
>
>
> 6th
>
> > From: flub...@gmail.com<mailto:flub...@gmail.com>
> > Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2012 17:42:15 +0200
> > To: hlds_linux@list.valvesoftware.com hlds_linux@list.valvesoftware.com>
> > Subject: Re: [hlds_linux] [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions
> >
> > 5Th
> >
> > 2012/8/15 Vader_666 mailto:vader...@gmail.com>>
> >
> > > 4th
> > >
> > > 2012/8/15 Giovanni Harting  chefeification...@gmail.com>>
> > >
> > > > Third.
> > > >
> > > > 2012/8/15 Dr. McKay  li...@doctormckay.com>>
> > > >
> > > > > I second this request.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Dr. McKay
> > > > > http://www.doctormckay.com
> > > > >
> > > > > On Aug 15, 2012, at 10:11 AM, "Frank"  <mailto:ad...@gamerscrib.net>> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Is there any chance at all in having this update release
> > > > > > before 5PM
> > > > EST??
> > > > > > The Meet the Pyro update released so late for many of us that
> > > > > > we
> > > didn't
> > > > > have
> > > > > > time to do much in the form of damage control and make the
> > > > > > needed adjustments server side till the next day. It would be
> > > > > > nice to have
> > > it
> > > > > > release early enough so we can set servers up without it being
> > > > > > into
> > > the
> > > > > wee
> > > > > > hours of the night again.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I believe that's just a very small favor to ask as this update
> > > appears
> > > > it
> > > > > > may be a beast.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thanks guys!
> > > > > >
> > > > > > -Original Message-
> > > > > > From: hlds_linux-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com hlds_linux-boun...@list.valvesoftware

Re: [hlds_linux] [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions

[Nomaan Ahmad]

Thanks, it adds to MvM pool.

On 15 August 2012 18:56, Jesse Porter  wrote:

> Take a few minutes and read up on the thread. All the answers are there.
>
> On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 11:53 AM, Nomaan Ahmad 
> wrote:
>
> > What does tf_mm_servermode 2 do? Would this be a new mode?
> >
> > On 15 August 2012 17:54, Fletcher Dunn 
> > wrote:
> >
> >
> ___
> To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives,
> please visit:
> https://list.valvesoftware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux
>
___
To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please 
visit:
https://list.valvesoftware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux

Re: [hlds_linux] [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions

[Jesse Porter]

Take a few minutes and read up on the thread. All the answers are there.

On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 11:53 AM, Nomaan Ahmad  wrote:

> What does tf_mm_servermode 2 do? Would this be a new mode?
>
> On 15 August 2012 17:54, Fletcher Dunn 
> wrote:
>
>
___
To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please 
visit:
https://list.valvesoftware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux

Re: [hlds_linux] [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions

[Nomaan Ahmad]

What does tf_mm_servermode 2 do? Would this be a new mode?

On 15 August 2012 17:54, Fletcher Dunn  wrote:

> MOAR IMPORTANT FACTS!
>
> The MvM in-game voting system restricts the options given to players to
> change the map or mission.  Similarly, PvP voting restricts the options to
> what's in your mapcycle file.
>
> So...
>
> To host a PvP server:
>
> * No MvM maps in the mapcycle file.
>
> * Set tf_mm_servermode 1 (or 0)
>
> * Boot the server on a PvP map in your map cycle.
>
> To host an MvM server:
>
> * Make sure maxplayers is 32!
>
> * No PvP maps in the MvM mission cycle file.  (More details on
> this file will follow.)
>
> * Set tf_mm_servermode 2 (or 0)
>
> * Boot the server on a MvM map in your map cycle.
>
> If you do the above, the server will essentially be locked in either one
> mode or the other, and players will not be able to switch.  (Barring any
> use of rcon, etc.)
>
>
>
>
> From: hlds-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com [mailto:
> hlds-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com] On Behalf Of Alastor Raynes
> Sent: Wednesday, August 15, 2012 9:33 AM
> To: Half-Life dedicated Win32 server mailing list
> Cc: hlds_linux@list.valvesoftware.com
> Subject: Re: [hlds] [hlds_linux] TF MvM hosting questions
>
>
> A few quick questions, if I may.
>
> 1) Will it be possible to force a server to run in only MvM mode, like how
> Arena mode currently works? If so, how is this done?
>
> 2) If a server has the capability, will spectators be able to join and
> watch MvM matches without SourceTV? If so, will they be able to cycle in
> and out after each match, like Arena mode?
>
> I apologize if these have already been answered.
> On Aug 15, 2012 10:51 AM, "Fletcher Dunn"  <mailto:fletch...@valvesoftware.com>> wrote:
> 7th.
>
> We'll do the best we can and are hoping to not release it too late.
>
> -Original Message-
> From: hlds_linux-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com hlds_linux-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com> [mailto:
> hlds_linux-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com hlds_linux-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com>] On Behalf Of Benedict Glover
> Sent: Wednesday, August 15, 2012 8:47 AM
> To: hlds_linux@list.valvesoftware.com hlds_linux@list.valvesoftware.com>
> Subject: Re: [hlds_linux] [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions
>
>
> 6th
>
> > From: flub...@gmail.com<mailto:flub...@gmail.com>
> > Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2012 17:42:15 +0200
> > To: hlds_linux@list.valvesoftware.com hlds_linux@list.valvesoftware.com>
> > Subject: Re: [hlds_linux] [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions
> >
> > 5Th
> >
> > 2012/8/15 Vader_666 mailto:vader...@gmail.com>>
> >
> > > 4th
> > >
> > > 2012/8/15 Giovanni Harting  chefeification...@gmail.com>>
> > >
> > > > Third.
> > > >
> > > > 2012/8/15 Dr. McKay  li...@doctormckay.com>>
> > > >
> > > > > I second this request.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Dr. McKay
> > > > > http://www.doctormckay.com
> > > > >
> > > > > On Aug 15, 2012, at 10:11 AM, "Frank"  <mailto:ad...@gamerscrib.net>> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Is there any chance at all in having this update release
> > > > > > before 5PM
> > > > EST??
> > > > > > The Meet the Pyro update released so late for many of us that
> > > > > > we
> > > didn't
> > > > > have
> > > > > > time to do much in the form of damage control and make the
> > > > > > needed adjustments server side till the next day. It would be
> > > > > > nice to have
> > > it
> > > > > > release early enough so we can set servers up without it being
> > > > > > into
> > > the
> > > > > wee
> > > > > > hours of the night again.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I believe that's just a very small favor to ask as this update
> > > appears
> > > > it
> > > > > > may be a beast.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thanks guys!
> > > > > >
> > > > > > -Original Message-
> > > > > > From: hlds_linux-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com hlds_linux-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com>
> > > > > > [mailto:hlds_linux-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com hlds_linux-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com>] On Beha

Re: [hlds_linux] [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions

[Fletcher Dunn]

MOAR IMPORTANT FACTS!

The MvM in-game voting system restricts the options given to players to change 
the map or mission.  Similarly, PvP voting restricts the options to what's in 
your mapcycle file.

So...

To host a PvP server:

* No MvM maps in the mapcycle file.

* Set tf_mm_servermode 1 (or 0)

* Boot the server on a PvP map in your map cycle.

To host an MvM server:

* Make sure maxplayers is 32!

* No PvP maps in the MvM mission cycle file.  (More details on this 
file will follow.)

* Set tf_mm_servermode 2 (or 0)

* Boot the server on a MvM map in your map cycle.

If you do the above, the server will essentially be locked in either one mode 
or the other, and players will not be able to switch.  (Barring any use of 
rcon, etc.)




From: hlds-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com 
[mailto:hlds-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com] On Behalf Of Alastor Raynes
Sent: Wednesday, August 15, 2012 9:33 AM
To: Half-Life dedicated Win32 server mailing list
Cc: hlds_linux@list.valvesoftware.com
Subject: Re: [hlds] [hlds_linux] TF MvM hosting questions


A few quick questions, if I may.

1) Will it be possible to force a server to run in only MvM mode, like how 
Arena mode currently works? If so, how is this done?

2) If a server has the capability, will spectators be able to join and watch 
MvM matches without SourceTV? If so, will they be able to cycle in and out 
after each match, like Arena mode?

I apologize if these have already been answered.
On Aug 15, 2012 10:51 AM, "Fletcher Dunn" 
mailto:fletch...@valvesoftware.com>> wrote:
7th.

We'll do the best we can and are hoping to not release it too late.

-Original Message-
From: 
hlds_linux-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com<mailto:hlds_linux-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com>
 
[mailto:hlds_linux-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com<mailto:hlds_linux-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com>]
 On Behalf Of Benedict Glover
Sent: Wednesday, August 15, 2012 8:47 AM
To: hlds_linux@list.valvesoftware.com<mailto:hlds_linux@list.valvesoftware.com>
Subject: Re: [hlds_linux] [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions


6th

> From: flub...@gmail.com<mailto:flub...@gmail.com>
> Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2012 17:42:15 +0200
> To: 
> hlds_linux@list.valvesoftware.com<mailto:hlds_linux@list.valvesoftware.com>
> Subject: Re: [hlds_linux] [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions
>
> 5Th
>
> 2012/8/15 Vader_666 mailto:vader...@gmail.com>>
>
> > 4th
> >
> > 2012/8/15 Giovanni Harting 
> > mailto:chefeification...@gmail.com>>
> >
> > > Third.
> > >
> > > 2012/8/15 Dr. McKay mailto:li...@doctormckay.com>>
> > >
> > > > I second this request.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Dr. McKay
> > > > http://www.doctormckay.com
> > > >
> > > > On Aug 15, 2012, at 10:11 AM, "Frank" 
> > > > mailto:ad...@gamerscrib.net>> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Is there any chance at all in having this update release
> > > > > before 5PM
> > > EST??
> > > > > The Meet the Pyro update released so late for many of us that
> > > > > we
> > didn't
> > > > have
> > > > > time to do much in the form of damage control and make the
> > > > > needed adjustments server side till the next day. It would be
> > > > > nice to have
> > it
> > > > > release early enough so we can set servers up without it being
> > > > > into
> > the
> > > > wee
> > > > > hours of the night again.
> > > > >
> > > > > I believe that's just a very small favor to ask as this update
> > appears
> > > it
> > > > > may be a beast.
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks guys!
> > > > >
> > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > From: 
> > > > > hlds_linux-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com<mailto:hlds_linux-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com>
> > > > > [mailto:hlds_linux-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com<mailto:hlds_linux-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com>]
> > > > >  On Behalf
> > > > > Of
> > > Fletcher
> > > > > Dunn
> > > > > Sent: Tuesday, August 14, 2012 1:17 PM
> > > > > To: Half-Life dedicated Linux server mailing list
> > > > > (hlds_linux@list.valvesoftware.com<mailto:hlds_linux@list.valvesoftware.com>);
> > > > >  Half-Life dedicated Win32
> > server
> > > > > mailing list
> > > > > Subject: Re: [hlds_linux] [hlds] TF 

Re: [hlds_linux] [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions

[Benedict Glover]

5PM EST = 10PM GMT
Which isn't half bad either. I'm normally up to midnight on update days.

> From: sai...@specialattack.net
> To: hlds_linux@list.valvesoftware.com
> Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2012 17:59:34 +0200
> Subject: Re: [hlds_linux] [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions
> 
> 5 PM GMT would be a luxury for us in Europe. For us it's nightwork to get 
> everything going :)
> 
> Saint K.
> 
> From: hlds_linux-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com 
> [hlds_linux-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com] On Behalf Of Fletcher Dunn 
> [fletch...@valvesoftware.com]
> Sent: 15 August 2012 17:51
> To: hlds_linux@list.valvesoftware.com; Half-Life dedicated Win32 server 
> mailing list(h...@list.valvesoftware.com)
> Subject: Re: [hlds_linux] [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions
> 
> 7th.
> 
> We'll do the best we can and are hoping to not release it too late.
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: hlds_linux-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com 
> [mailto:hlds_linux-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com] On Behalf Of Benedict 
> Glover
> Sent: Wednesday, August 15, 2012 8:47 AM
> To: hlds_linux@list.valvesoftware.com
> Subject: Re: [hlds_linux] [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions
> 
> 
> 6th
> 
> > From: flub...@gmail.com
> > Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2012 17:42:15 +0200
> > To: hlds_linux@list.valvesoftware.com
> > Subject: Re: [hlds_linux] [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions
> >
> > 5Th
> >
> > 2012/8/15 Vader_666 
> >
> > > 4th
> > >
> > > 2012/8/15 Giovanni Harting 
> > >
> > > > Third.
> > > >
> > > > 2012/8/15 Dr. McKay 
> > > >
> > > > > I second this request.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Dr. McKay
> > > > > http://www.doctormckay.com
> > > > >
> > > > > On Aug 15, 2012, at 10:11 AM, "Frank"  wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Is there any chance at all in having this update release
> > > > > > before 5PM
> > > > EST??
> > > > > > The Meet the Pyro update released so late for many of us that
> > > > > > we
> > > didn't
> > > > > have
> > > > > > time to do much in the form of damage control and make the
> > > > > > needed adjustments server side till the next day. It would be
> > > > > > nice to have
> > > it
> > > > > > release early enough so we can set servers up without it being
> > > > > > into
> > > the
> > > > > wee
> > > > > > hours of the night again.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I believe that's just a very small favor to ask as this update
> > > appears
> > > > it
> > > > > > may be a beast.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thanks guys!
> > > > > >
> > > > > > -Original Message-
> > > > > > From: hlds_linux-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com
> > > > > > [mailto:hlds_linux-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com] On Behalf
> > > > > > Of
> > > > Fletcher
> > > > > > Dunn
> > > > > > Sent: Tuesday, August 14, 2012 1:17 PM
> > > > > > To: Half-Life dedicated Linux server mailing list
> > > > > > (hlds_linux@list.valvesoftware.com); Half-Life dedicated Win32
> > > server
> > > > > > mailing list
> > > > > > Subject: Re: [hlds_linux] [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions
> > > > > >
> > > > > > OK, a little investigating reveals that this statement I made:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > * You can switch the server in and out of any matchmaking mode
> > > > > > pool
> > > or
> > > > > back
> > > > > > to any regular game mode at any time.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Is not really accurate!  Sorry!  If the server is EMPTY or has
> > > > > > fewer
> > > > > than 6
> > > > > > players, yes, there are no problems with switching --- that is true.
> > > > > > However, in general, switching from PvP to MvM is going to
> > > > > > cause
> > > > several
> > > > > > problems.  (I believe that what would actually happen is that
> > > > > > the
> > > 7th,
> > > > > 8th,
> > &g

Re: [hlds_linux] [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions

[Saint K .]

5 PM GMT would be a luxury for us in Europe. For us it's nightwork to get 
everything going :)

Saint K.

From: hlds_linux-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com 
[hlds_linux-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com] On Behalf Of Fletcher Dunn 
[fletch...@valvesoftware.com]
Sent: 15 August 2012 17:51
To: hlds_linux@list.valvesoftware.com; Half-Life dedicated Win32 server mailing 
list(h...@list.valvesoftware.com)
Subject: Re: [hlds_linux] [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions

7th.

We'll do the best we can and are hoping to not release it too late.

-Original Message-
From: hlds_linux-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com 
[mailto:hlds_linux-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com] On Behalf Of Benedict Glover
Sent: Wednesday, August 15, 2012 8:47 AM
To: hlds_linux@list.valvesoftware.com
Subject: Re: [hlds_linux] [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions


6th

> From: flub...@gmail.com
> Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2012 17:42:15 +0200
> To: hlds_linux@list.valvesoftware.com
> Subject: Re: [hlds_linux] [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions
>
> 5Th
>
> 2012/8/15 Vader_666 
>
> > 4th
> >
> > 2012/8/15 Giovanni Harting 
> >
> > > Third.
> > >
> > > 2012/8/15 Dr. McKay 
> > >
> > > > I second this request.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Dr. McKay
> > > > http://www.doctormckay.com
> > > >
> > > > On Aug 15, 2012, at 10:11 AM, "Frank"  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Is there any chance at all in having this update release
> > > > > before 5PM
> > > EST??
> > > > > The Meet the Pyro update released so late for many of us that
> > > > > we
> > didn't
> > > > have
> > > > > time to do much in the form of damage control and make the
> > > > > needed adjustments server side till the next day. It would be
> > > > > nice to have
> > it
> > > > > release early enough so we can set servers up without it being
> > > > > into
> > the
> > > > wee
> > > > > hours of the night again.
> > > > >
> > > > > I believe that's just a very small favor to ask as this update
> > appears
> > > it
> > > > > may be a beast.
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks guys!
> > > > >
> > > > > -Original Message-
> > > > > From: hlds_linux-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com
> > > > > [mailto:hlds_linux-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com] On Behalf
> > > > > Of
> > > Fletcher
> > > > > Dunn
> > > > > Sent: Tuesday, August 14, 2012 1:17 PM
> > > > > To: Half-Life dedicated Linux server mailing list
> > > > > (hlds_linux@list.valvesoftware.com); Half-Life dedicated Win32
> > server
> > > > > mailing list
> > > > > Subject: Re: [hlds_linux] [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions
> > > > >
> > > > > OK, a little investigating reveals that this statement I made:
> > > > >
> > > > > * You can switch the server in and out of any matchmaking mode
> > > > > pool
> > or
> > > > back
> > > > > to any regular game mode at any time.
> > > > >
> > > > > Is not really accurate!  Sorry!  If the server is EMPTY or has
> > > > > fewer
> > > > than 6
> > > > > players, yes, there are no problems with switching --- that is true.
> > > > > However, in general, switching from PvP to MvM is going to
> > > > > cause
> > > several
> > > > > problems.  (I believe that what would actually happen is that
> > > > > the
> > 7th,
> > > > 8th,
> > > > > etc. players who connect on a map change will be forced into
> > spectator.
> > > >  At
> > > > > any rate, we don't officially support that, so if you do it,
> > > > > you're
> > on
> > > > your
> > > > > own.)  So, you should expect to segregate your servers into
> > > > > MvM and
> > > PvP.
> > > > > Don't just put the MvM maps into the mapcycle file, that won't work.
> > > > > (Actually, the mapcycle file is slightly different for MvM
> > > > > because
> > you
> > > > > really are cycling through missions, not the maps.  Likewise,
> > > > > players
> > > can
> > > > > vote to change the &qu

Re: [hlds_linux] [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions

[Frank]

Thanks Fletch!

-Original Message-
From: hlds_linux-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com
[mailto:hlds_linux-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com] On Behalf Of Fletcher
Dunn
Sent: Wednesday, August 15, 2012 11:51 AM
To: hlds_linux@list.valvesoftware.com; Half-Life dedicated Win32 server
mailing list (h...@list.valvesoftware.com)
Subject: Re: [hlds_linux] [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions

7th.

We'll do the best we can and are hoping to not release it too late.



___
To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please 
visit:
https://list.valvesoftware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux

Re: [hlds_linux] [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions

[Fletcher Dunn]

7th.

We'll do the best we can and are hoping to not release it too late.

-Original Message-
From: hlds_linux-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com 
[mailto:hlds_linux-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com] On Behalf Of Benedict Glover
Sent: Wednesday, August 15, 2012 8:47 AM
To: hlds_linux@list.valvesoftware.com
Subject: Re: [hlds_linux] [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions


6th

> From: flub...@gmail.com
> Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2012 17:42:15 +0200
> To: hlds_linux@list.valvesoftware.com
> Subject: Re: [hlds_linux] [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions
> 
> 5Th
> 
> 2012/8/15 Vader_666 
> 
> > 4th
> >
> > 2012/8/15 Giovanni Harting 
> >
> > > Third.
> > >
> > > 2012/8/15 Dr. McKay 
> > >
> > > > I second this request.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Dr. McKay
> > > > http://www.doctormckay.com
> > > >
> > > > On Aug 15, 2012, at 10:11 AM, "Frank"  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Is there any chance at all in having this update release 
> > > > > before 5PM
> > > EST??
> > > > > The Meet the Pyro update released so late for many of us that 
> > > > > we
> > didn't
> > > > have
> > > > > time to do much in the form of damage control and make the 
> > > > > needed adjustments server side till the next day. It would be 
> > > > > nice to have
> > it
> > > > > release early enough so we can set servers up without it being 
> > > > > into
> > the
> > > > wee
> > > > > hours of the night again.
> > > > >
> > > > > I believe that's just a very small favor to ask as this update
> > appears
> > > it
> > > > > may be a beast.
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks guys!
> > > > >
> > > > > -Original Message-
> > > > > From: hlds_linux-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com
> > > > > [mailto:hlds_linux-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com] On Behalf 
> > > > > Of
> > > Fletcher
> > > > > Dunn
> > > > > Sent: Tuesday, August 14, 2012 1:17 PM
> > > > > To: Half-Life dedicated Linux server mailing list 
> > > > > (hlds_linux@list.valvesoftware.com); Half-Life dedicated Win32
> > server
> > > > > mailing list
> > > > > Subject: Re: [hlds_linux] [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions
> > > > >
> > > > > OK, a little investigating reveals that this statement I made:
> > > > >
> > > > > * You can switch the server in and out of any matchmaking mode 
> > > > > pool
> > or
> > > > back
> > > > > to any regular game mode at any time.
> > > > >
> > > > > Is not really accurate!  Sorry!  If the server is EMPTY or has 
> > > > > fewer
> > > > than 6
> > > > > players, yes, there are no problems with switching --- that is true.
> > > > > However, in general, switching from PvP to MvM is going to 
> > > > > cause
> > > several
> > > > > problems.  (I believe that what would actually happen is that 
> > > > > the
> > 7th,
> > > > 8th,
> > > > > etc. players who connect on a map change will be forced into
> > spectator.
> > > >  At
> > > > > any rate, we don't officially support that, so if you do it, 
> > > > > you're
> > on
> > > > your
> > > > > own.)  So, you should expect to segregate your servers into 
> > > > > MvM and
> > > PvP.
> > > > > Don't just put the MvM maps into the mapcycle file, that won't work.
> > > > > (Actually, the mapcycle file is slightly different for MvM 
> > > > > because
> > you
> > > > > really are cycling through missions, not the maps.  Likewise, 
> > > > > players
> > > can
> > > > > vote to change the "mission" even if it's on the current map.  
> > > > > We'll
> > > have
> > > > > more details on all this tomorrow.)
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > ___
> > > > > To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list
> > archives,
> > > > please visit:
> > > > > https://list.valvesoftwa

Re: [hlds_linux] [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions

[Fletcher Dunn]

You can hide your server from the server browser using tf_mm_strict.  (The 
Valve servers will be configured this way.)  However that setting is entirely 
unrelated to which matchmaking pool you wish your server to be in.

-Original Message-
From: hlds-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com 
[mailto:hlds-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com] On Behalf Of Matt Adams
Sent: Wednesday, August 15, 2012 6:42 AM
To: Half-Life dedicated Win32 server mailing list
Subject: Re: [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions

So if I'm understanding this correctly will TF2 have a lobby similar to the L4D 
lobby where 6 people will join and start the search for a server? If that is 
correct I remember using the "ms_force_dedicated_server" command back in L4D 
one to force matchmaking to point to a certain server. Of course after the 
steamgroup option was added we didn't have to use it anymore. Any ideas if this 
will still work?

Also if you leave out the "tf_mm_servermode 2" from the server.cfg will the 
server basically be hidden from all public matchmaking?

On 8/14/2012 12:16 PM, Fletcher Dunn wrote:
> OK, a little investigating reveals that this statement I made:
>
> * You can switch the server in and out of any matchmaking mode pool or back 
> to any regular game mode at any time.
>
> Is not really accurate!  Sorry!  If the server is EMPTY or has fewer 
> than 6 players, yes, there are no problems with switching --- that is 
> true.  However, in general, switching from PvP to MvM is going to 
> cause several problems.  (I believe that what would actually happen is 
> that the 7th, 8th, etc. players who connect on a map change will be 
> forced into spectator.  At any rate, we don't officially support that, 
> so if you do it, you're on your own.)  So, you should expect to 
> segregate your servers into MvM and PvP.  Don't just put the MvM maps 
> into the mapcycle file, that won't work.  (Actually, the mapcycle file 
> is slightly different for MvM because you really are cycling through 
> missions, not the maps.  Likewise, players can vote to change the 
> "mission" even if it's on the current map.  We'll have more details on 
> all this tomorrow.)
>
> -Original Message-
> From: hlds_linux-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com 
> [mailto:hlds_linux-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com] On Behalf Of 
> Fletcher Dunn
> Sent: Tuesday, August 14, 2012 10:00 AM
> To: Half-Life dedicated Win32 server mailing list; Half-Life dedicated 
> Linux server mailing list (hlds_linux@list.valvesoftware.com)
> Subject: Re: [hlds_linux] [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions
>
> We will not have Steam group functionality tomorrow.
>
> You actually have to set maxplayers to 32 to host MvM (to make room for all 
> the bots).  That's why the mode is expensive CPU-wise, to not only simulate 
> all those players but run their AI logic as well.  We'll have more details on 
> the recommended settings tomorrow.
>
> Regarding exactly what happens if a 24-player server switches to MvM:  I 
> actually don't think we have worked that out yet.
>
> I'm pretty sure on day one there will be lots of people trying out all sorts 
> of things.  Our approach to experimentation in MvM will be the same as in 
> PvP: we encourage it, provided that players are opting in to any major 
> deviations from the vanilla experience.  Our servers will all be configured 
> vanilla, and the matchmaking will enforce the 6 player limit, and the server 
> browser will be the primary means for players to find those sorts of 
> customizations.  What will the most interesting customizations be?  What will 
> the standard tags be used that we request server operators to set in order to 
> help players find the modifications they want or avoid the ones they don't 
> like?  We can't know that yet.  That's something we expect you guys and your 
> players to figure out.
>
> I will hazard a guess that raising the player count well above 6 would be 
> detrimental the experience.  There ratio of humans to bots would be off and 
> the human defending team would not have enough challenge.  (As an extreme 
> example: imagine a 32-player server where everybody is defending an there are 
> no bots.)  Exactly how far it can be raised above 6 without totally breaking 
> the game is speculation of course.  I think a smart server operator will 
> start out with the server configured relatively vanilla, and then watch how 
> the game unfolds and listen to their players, and try to make smart decisions 
> about which areas to experiment, rather than assuming the same sorts of 
> adjustments your community prefers in PvP will automatically apply to this 
> mode.  A fun co-op mode with more than six players is likely to require 
&g

Re: [hlds_linux] [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions

[Benedict Glover]

6th

> From: flub...@gmail.com
> Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2012 17:42:15 +0200
> To: hlds_linux@list.valvesoftware.com
> Subject: Re: [hlds_linux] [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions
> 
> 5Th
> 
> 2012/8/15 Vader_666 
> 
> > 4th
> >
> > 2012/8/15 Giovanni Harting 
> >
> > > Third.
> > >
> > > 2012/8/15 Dr. McKay 
> > >
> > > > I second this request.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Dr. McKay
> > > > http://www.doctormckay.com
> > > >
> > > > On Aug 15, 2012, at 10:11 AM, "Frank"  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Is there any chance at all in having this update release before 5PM
> > > EST??
> > > > > The Meet the Pyro update released so late for many of us that we
> > didn't
> > > > have
> > > > > time to do much in the form of damage control and make the needed
> > > > > adjustments server side till the next day. It would be nice to have
> > it
> > > > > release early enough so we can set servers up without it being into
> > the
> > > > wee
> > > > > hours of the night again.
> > > > >
> > > > > I believe that's just a very small favor to ask as this update
> > appears
> > > it
> > > > > may be a beast.
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks guys!
> > > > >
> > > > > -Original Message-
> > > > > From: hlds_linux-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com
> > > > > [mailto:hlds_linux-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com] On Behalf Of
> > > Fletcher
> > > > > Dunn
> > > > > Sent: Tuesday, August 14, 2012 1:17 PM
> > > > > To: Half-Life dedicated Linux server mailing list
> > > > > (hlds_linux@list.valvesoftware.com); Half-Life dedicated Win32
> > server
> > > > > mailing list
> > > > > Subject: Re: [hlds_linux] [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions
> > > > >
> > > > > OK, a little investigating reveals that this statement I made:
> > > > >
> > > > > * You can switch the server in and out of any matchmaking mode pool
> > or
> > > > back
> > > > > to any regular game mode at any time.
> > > > >
> > > > > Is not really accurate!  Sorry!  If the server is EMPTY or has fewer
> > > > than 6
> > > > > players, yes, there are no problems with switching --- that is true.
> > > > > However, in general, switching from PvP to MvM is going to cause
> > > several
> > > > > problems.  (I believe that what would actually happen is that the
> > 7th,
> > > > 8th,
> > > > > etc. players who connect on a map change will be forced into
> > spectator.
> > > >  At
> > > > > any rate, we don't officially support that, so if you do it, you're
> > on
> > > > your
> > > > > own.)  So, you should expect to segregate your servers into MvM and
> > > PvP.
> > > > > Don't just put the MvM maps into the mapcycle file, that won't work.
> > > > > (Actually, the mapcycle file is slightly different for MvM because
> > you
> > > > > really are cycling through missions, not the maps.  Likewise, players
> > > can
> > > > > vote to change the "mission" even if it's on the current map.  We'll
> > > have
> > > > > more details on all this tomorrow.)
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > ___
> > > > > To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list
> > archives,
> > > > please visit:
> > > > > https://list.valvesoftware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux
> > > >
> > > > ___
> > > > To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives,
> > > > please visit:
> > > > https://list.valvesoftware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux
> > > >
> > > ___
> > > To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives,
> > > please visit:
> > > https://list.valvesoftware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux
> > >
> > ___
> > To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives,
> > please visit:
> > https://list.valvesoftware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux
> >
> ___
> To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please 
> visit:
> https://list.valvesoftware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux
  
___
To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please 
visit:
https://list.valvesoftware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux

Re: [hlds_linux] [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions

[Flubber]

5Th

2012/8/15 Vader_666 

> 4th
>
> 2012/8/15 Giovanni Harting 
>
> > Third.
> >
> > 2012/8/15 Dr. McKay 
> >
> > > I second this request.
> > >
> > >
> > > Dr. McKay
> > > http://www.doctormckay.com
> > >
> > > On Aug 15, 2012, at 10:11 AM, "Frank"  wrote:
> > >
> > > > Is there any chance at all in having this update release before 5PM
> > EST??
> > > > The Meet the Pyro update released so late for many of us that we
> didn't
> > > have
> > > > time to do much in the form of damage control and make the needed
> > > > adjustments server side till the next day. It would be nice to have
> it
> > > > release early enough so we can set servers up without it being into
> the
> > > wee
> > > > hours of the night again.
> > > >
> > > > I believe that's just a very small favor to ask as this update
> appears
> > it
> > > > may be a beast.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks guys!
> > > >
> > > > -Original Message-
> > > > From: hlds_linux-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com
> > > > [mailto:hlds_linux-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com] On Behalf Of
> > Fletcher
> > > > Dunn
> > > > Sent: Tuesday, August 14, 2012 1:17 PM
> > > > To: Half-Life dedicated Linux server mailing list
> > > > (hlds_linux@list.valvesoftware.com); Half-Life dedicated Win32
> server
> > > > mailing list
> > > > Subject: Re: [hlds_linux] [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions
> > > >
> > > > OK, a little investigating reveals that this statement I made:
> > > >
> > > > * You can switch the server in and out of any matchmaking mode pool
> or
> > > back
> > > > to any regular game mode at any time.
> > > >
> > > > Is not really accurate!  Sorry!  If the server is EMPTY or has fewer
> > > than 6
> > > > players, yes, there are no problems with switching --- that is true.
> > > > However, in general, switching from PvP to MvM is going to cause
> > several
> > > > problems.  (I believe that what would actually happen is that the
> 7th,
> > > 8th,
> > > > etc. players who connect on a map change will be forced into
> spectator.
> > >  At
> > > > any rate, we don't officially support that, so if you do it, you're
> on
> > > your
> > > > own.)  So, you should expect to segregate your servers into MvM and
> > PvP.
> > > > Don't just put the MvM maps into the mapcycle file, that won't work.
> > > > (Actually, the mapcycle file is slightly different for MvM because
> you
> > > > really are cycling through missions, not the maps.  Likewise, players
> > can
> > > > vote to change the "mission" even if it's on the current map.  We'll
> > have
> > > > more details on all this tomorrow.)
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > ___
> > > > To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list
> archives,
> > > please visit:
> > > > https://list.valvesoftware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux
> > >
> > > ___
> > > To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives,
> > > please visit:
> > > https://list.valvesoftware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux
> > >
> > ___
> > To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives,
> > please visit:
> > https://list.valvesoftware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux
> >
> ___
> To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives,
> please visit:
> https://list.valvesoftware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux
>
___
To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please 
visit:
https://list.valvesoftware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux

Re: [hlds_linux] [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions

[Vader_666]

4th

2012/8/15 Giovanni Harting 

> Third.
>
> 2012/8/15 Dr. McKay 
>
> > I second this request.
> >
> >
> > Dr. McKay
> > http://www.doctormckay.com
> >
> > On Aug 15, 2012, at 10:11 AM, "Frank"  wrote:
> >
> > > Is there any chance at all in having this update release before 5PM
> EST??
> > > The Meet the Pyro update released so late for many of us that we didn't
> > have
> > > time to do much in the form of damage control and make the needed
> > > adjustments server side till the next day. It would be nice to have it
> > > release early enough so we can set servers up without it being into the
> > wee
> > > hours of the night again.
> > >
> > > I believe that's just a very small favor to ask as this update appears
> it
> > > may be a beast.
> > >
> > > Thanks guys!
> > >
> > > -Original Message-
> > > From: hlds_linux-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com
> > > [mailto:hlds_linux-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com] On Behalf Of
> Fletcher
> > > Dunn
> > > Sent: Tuesday, August 14, 2012 1:17 PM
> > > To: Half-Life dedicated Linux server mailing list
> > > (hlds_linux@list.valvesoftware.com); Half-Life dedicated Win32 server
> > > mailing list
> > > Subject: Re: [hlds_linux] [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions
> > >
> > > OK, a little investigating reveals that this statement I made:
> > >
> > > * You can switch the server in and out of any matchmaking mode pool or
> > back
> > > to any regular game mode at any time.
> > >
> > > Is not really accurate!  Sorry!  If the server is EMPTY or has fewer
> > than 6
> > > players, yes, there are no problems with switching --- that is true.
> > > However, in general, switching from PvP to MvM is going to cause
> several
> > > problems.  (I believe that what would actually happen is that the 7th,
> > 8th,
> > > etc. players who connect on a map change will be forced into spectator.
> >  At
> > > any rate, we don't officially support that, so if you do it, you're on
> > your
> > > own.)  So, you should expect to segregate your servers into MvM and
> PvP.
> > > Don't just put the MvM maps into the mapcycle file, that won't work.
> > > (Actually, the mapcycle file is slightly different for MvM because you
> > > really are cycling through missions, not the maps.  Likewise, players
> can
> > > vote to change the "mission" even if it's on the current map.  We'll
> have
> > > more details on all this tomorrow.)
> > >
> > >
> > > ___
> > > To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives,
> > please visit:
> > > https://list.valvesoftware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux
> >
> > ___
> > To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives,
> > please visit:
> > https://list.valvesoftware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux
> >
> ___
> To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives,
> please visit:
> https://list.valvesoftware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux
>
___
To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please 
visit:
https://list.valvesoftware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux

Re: [hlds_linux] [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions

[Giovanni Harting]

Third.

2012/8/15 Dr. McKay 

> I second this request.
>
>
> Dr. McKay
> http://www.doctormckay.com
>
> On Aug 15, 2012, at 10:11 AM, "Frank"  wrote:
>
> > Is there any chance at all in having this update release before 5PM EST??
> > The Meet the Pyro update released so late for many of us that we didn't
> have
> > time to do much in the form of damage control and make the needed
> > adjustments server side till the next day. It would be nice to have it
> > release early enough so we can set servers up without it being into the
> wee
> > hours of the night again.
> >
> > I believe that's just a very small favor to ask as this update appears it
> > may be a beast.
> >
> > Thanks guys!
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: hlds_linux-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com
> > [mailto:hlds_linux-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com] On Behalf Of Fletcher
> > Dunn
> > Sent: Tuesday, August 14, 2012 1:17 PM
> > To: Half-Life dedicated Linux server mailing list
> > (hlds_linux@list.valvesoftware.com); Half-Life dedicated Win32 server
> > mailing list
> > Subject: Re: [hlds_linux] [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions
> >
> > OK, a little investigating reveals that this statement I made:
> >
> > * You can switch the server in and out of any matchmaking mode pool or
> back
> > to any regular game mode at any time.
> >
> > Is not really accurate!  Sorry!  If the server is EMPTY or has fewer
> than 6
> > players, yes, there are no problems with switching --- that is true.
> > However, in general, switching from PvP to MvM is going to cause several
> > problems.  (I believe that what would actually happen is that the 7th,
> 8th,
> > etc. players who connect on a map change will be forced into spectator.
>  At
> > any rate, we don't officially support that, so if you do it, you're on
> your
> > own.)  So, you should expect to segregate your servers into MvM and PvP.
> > Don't just put the MvM maps into the mapcycle file, that won't work.
> > (Actually, the mapcycle file is slightly different for MvM because you
> > really are cycling through missions, not the maps.  Likewise, players can
> > vote to change the "mission" even if it's on the current map.  We'll have
> > more details on all this tomorrow.)
> >
> >
> > ___
> > To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives,
> please visit:
> > https://list.valvesoftware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux
>
> ___
> To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives,
> please visit:
> https://list.valvesoftware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux
>
___
To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please 
visit:
https://list.valvesoftware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux

Re: [hlds_linux] [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions

[Dr. McKay]

I second this request.


Dr. McKay
http://www.doctormckay.com

On Aug 15, 2012, at 10:11 AM, "Frank"  wrote:

> Is there any chance at all in having this update release before 5PM EST??
> The Meet the Pyro update released so late for many of us that we didn't have
> time to do much in the form of damage control and make the needed
> adjustments server side till the next day. It would be nice to have it
> release early enough so we can set servers up without it being into the wee
> hours of the night again. 
> 
> I believe that's just a very small favor to ask as this update appears it
> may be a beast.
> 
> Thanks guys!
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: hlds_linux-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com
> [mailto:hlds_linux-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com] On Behalf Of Fletcher
> Dunn
> Sent: Tuesday, August 14, 2012 1:17 PM
> To: Half-Life dedicated Linux server mailing list
> (hlds_linux@list.valvesoftware.com); Half-Life dedicated Win32 server
> mailing list
> Subject: Re: [hlds_linux] [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions
> 
> OK, a little investigating reveals that this statement I made:
> 
> * You can switch the server in and out of any matchmaking mode pool or back
> to any regular game mode at any time.
> 
> Is not really accurate!  Sorry!  If the server is EMPTY or has fewer than 6
> players, yes, there are no problems with switching --- that is true.
> However, in general, switching from PvP to MvM is going to cause several
> problems.  (I believe that what would actually happen is that the 7th, 8th,
> etc. players who connect on a map change will be forced into spectator.  At
> any rate, we don't officially support that, so if you do it, you're on your
> own.)  So, you should expect to segregate your servers into MvM and PvP.
> Don't just put the MvM maps into the mapcycle file, that won't work.
> (Actually, the mapcycle file is slightly different for MvM because you
> really are cycling through missions, not the maps.  Likewise, players can
> vote to change the "mission" even if it's on the current map.  We'll have
> more details on all this tomorrow.)
> 
> 
> ___
> To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please 
> visit:
> https://list.valvesoftware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux

___
To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please 
visit:
https://list.valvesoftware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux

Re: [hlds_linux] [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions

[Frank]

Is there any chance at all in having this update release before 5PM EST??
The Meet the Pyro update released so late for many of us that we didn't have
time to do much in the form of damage control and make the needed
adjustments server side till the next day. It would be nice to have it
release early enough so we can set servers up without it being into the wee
hours of the night again. 

I believe that's just a very small favor to ask as this update appears it
may be a beast.

Thanks guys!

-Original Message-
From: hlds_linux-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com
[mailto:hlds_linux-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com] On Behalf Of Fletcher
Dunn
Sent: Tuesday, August 14, 2012 1:17 PM
To: Half-Life dedicated Linux server mailing list
(hlds_linux@list.valvesoftware.com); Half-Life dedicated Win32 server
mailing list
Subject: Re: [hlds_linux] [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions

OK, a little investigating reveals that this statement I made:

* You can switch the server in and out of any matchmaking mode pool or back
to any regular game mode at any time.

Is not really accurate!  Sorry!  If the server is EMPTY or has fewer than 6
players, yes, there are no problems with switching --- that is true.
However, in general, switching from PvP to MvM is going to cause several
problems.  (I believe that what would actually happen is that the 7th, 8th,
etc. players who connect on a map change will be forced into spectator.  At
any rate, we don't officially support that, so if you do it, you're on your
own.)  So, you should expect to segregate your servers into MvM and PvP.
Don't just put the MvM maps into the mapcycle file, that won't work.
(Actually, the mapcycle file is slightly different for MvM because you
really are cycling through missions, not the maps.  Likewise, players can
vote to change the "mission" even if it's on the current map.  We'll have
more details on all this tomorrow.)


___
To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please 
visit:
https://list.valvesoftware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux

Re: [hlds_linux] [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions

[Jehoi]

Actually, day two is already here.
http://www.teamfortress.com/mvm/mercs/

Any ideas what the map names will be so we can setup some servers that
will restart when the updates comes out and instantly load up on the
new maps?

On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 8:38 PM, doc  wrote:
>> True but there just is a limit to the amount of players you can support.
>> Sure they could enable 64 players but it's completely broken, out of
>> resources, not designed for that.
>>
>> There comes a time in brainstorming where you just have to draw the line.
>> People were able to set up vs. Saxton Hale, and Prop Hunt, and all sorts of
>> other fun gamemodes that didn't require a raising of what is essentially a
>> hard limit.
>>
>> I feel like the people asking for more slots don't understand the many
>> important reasons there is this "arbitrary" limit. I don't think this is
>> Valve stomping on the server owner, if anything they've bent over backwards
>> trying to keep the community modding and server operators happy.
>>
>> We haven't even been shown day 2 of MVM and people are
>> already clamoring for the code behind MVM be changed to better fit all this
>> crazy theorycrafting about what the gamemode MIGHT be like.
>>
>> On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 5:27 PM, Nomaan Ahmad  wrote:
>>
>>> Class restriction was just an example... we need to experiment before you
>>> can stay its rubbish tbh...
>>> There are other things server operators can try but we need some unofficial
>>> support to allow increased slots.
>>>
>>> Its up to the communities how they want their servers.. If you dont like
>>> servers with more than 24 slots or you lag on them... simple, don't play on
>>> them. If their servers are unbalanced or configured badly, I'm sure players
>>> will leave and they wont have populated server anyway. Or do you carry on
>>> playing on them? I know I don't...
>>>
>>> On 14 August 2012 23:33, dan  wrote:
>>>
>>> > On 14/08/2012 22:40, Nomaan Ahmad wrote:
>>> >
>>> >> Some servers ops will know how to make it balanced... class limiting is
>>> >> one
>>> >> of them.
>>> >>
>>> >
>>> > No they don't. Class limiting is a flawed approach. It suggests that if
>>> > you assign forced roles that the game will be good. It won't be. It just
>>> > means the 2 or 3 engineers you have will be halfwits and the one guy that
>>> > can play engineer has to watch these halfwits in frustration. The only
>>> time
>>> > highlander and class limits works is when you have organised teams and
>>> > matches and then you can say "Bill, you be the medic...John, you play
>>> > engineer" and so on.
>>> >
>>> > Yes it sucks if you have 5 spies and 5 snipers on a team, but the truth
>>> > is, forcing these guys to play a different class won't help. It's far
>>> > better to let people play what class they want and use that data to see
>>> > they are all buffoons. They'll see it when they lose and you'll see it
>>> when
>>> > you join so you can, if you want, just hit 'change server' and find a
>>> round
>>> > that will be better.
>>> >
>>> > Of course, from a server admin point of view the idea the best way to
>>> find
>>> > a good round is to hit 'change server' isn't that appealing, hence the
>>> > flawed attempts to try and mess things around instead.
>>> >
>>> > You can't turn a buffoon into a good player by making him play a
>>> different
>>> > class, nor a team of buffoons into a good team using the same method.
>>> >
>>> > As I said in another post, generally speaking, increasing the number of
>>> > players, reducing the number of shots you need to kill or removing the
>>> > penalty for death are all designed to hide differences in skill between
>>> > players and teams.
>>> >
>>> > Or in other words, people play on 32 man, instant spawn servers (and
>>> Robin
>>> > runs around with his OP rocket launcher or people pay saigns for silly
>>> > weapons and abilities) because it helps hide the fact they suck.
>>> >
>>> > With 12v12 with respawn timers (and things like nocrit) you will see
>>> which
>>> > players on the server can play better than the others and which team is
>>> > better - especially if both teams are motivated towards the objective.
>>> >
>>> > Their skill will be more evident (although as the comp players will tell
>>> > you, 6v6 is better than 12v12 for that) But,  unfortunately, it will
>>> > generally result in average and below players spending a lot of time
>>> > spectating and losing rounds.
>>> >
>>> > Which obviously for them is a worse experience than having a 3 hour round
>>> > that no one wins (or that one team can trivially win because there are
>>> some
>>> > trivial ways to win with instant spawn, especially when you have weapons
>>> > like the dead ringer)
>>> >
>>> > It's a lot easier to configure a server badly than it is to get better at
>>> > playing it too.
>>> > So it's no real surprise there's a player base happy to play on servers
>>> > configured this way.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > --
>>> > Dan
>>> >
>>> > ___

Re: [hlds_linux] [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions

[doc]

True but there just is a limit to the amount of players you can support.
Sure they could enable 64 players but it's completely broken, out of
resources, not designed for that.

There comes a time in brainstorming where you just have to draw the line.
People were able to set up vs. Saxton Hale, and Prop Hunt, and all sorts of
other fun gamemodes that didn't require a raising of what is essentially a
hard limit.

I feel like the people asking for more slots don't understand the many
important reasons there is this "arbitrary" limit. I don't think this is
Valve stomping on the server owner, if anything they've bent over backwards
trying to keep the community modding and server operators happy.

We haven't even been shown day 2 of MVM and people are
already clamoring for the code behind MVM be changed to better fit all this
crazy theorycrafting about what the gamemode MIGHT be like.

On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 5:27 PM, Nomaan Ahmad  wrote:

> Class restriction was just an example... we need to experiment before you
> can stay its rubbish tbh...
> There are other things server operators can try but we need some unofficial
> support to allow increased slots.
>
> Its up to the communities how they want their servers.. If you dont like
> servers with more than 24 slots or you lag on them... simple, don't play on
> them. If their servers are unbalanced or configured badly, I'm sure players
> will leave and they wont have populated server anyway. Or do you carry on
> playing on them? I know I don't...
>
> On 14 August 2012 23:33, dan  wrote:
>
> > On 14/08/2012 22:40, Nomaan Ahmad wrote:
> >
> >> Some servers ops will know how to make it balanced... class limiting is
> >> one
> >> of them.
> >>
> >
> > No they don't. Class limiting is a flawed approach. It suggests that if
> > you assign forced roles that the game will be good. It won't be. It just
> > means the 2 or 3 engineers you have will be halfwits and the one guy that
> > can play engineer has to watch these halfwits in frustration. The only
> time
> > highlander and class limits works is when you have organised teams and
> > matches and then you can say "Bill, you be the medic...John, you play
> > engineer" and so on.
> >
> > Yes it sucks if you have 5 spies and 5 snipers on a team, but the truth
> > is, forcing these guys to play a different class won't help. It's far
> > better to let people play what class they want and use that data to see
> > they are all buffoons. They'll see it when they lose and you'll see it
> when
> > you join so you can, if you want, just hit 'change server' and find a
> round
> > that will be better.
> >
> > Of course, from a server admin point of view the idea the best way to
> find
> > a good round is to hit 'change server' isn't that appealing, hence the
> > flawed attempts to try and mess things around instead.
> >
> > You can't turn a buffoon into a good player by making him play a
> different
> > class, nor a team of buffoons into a good team using the same method.
> >
> > As I said in another post, generally speaking, increasing the number of
> > players, reducing the number of shots you need to kill or removing the
> > penalty for death are all designed to hide differences in skill between
> > players and teams.
> >
> > Or in other words, people play on 32 man, instant spawn servers (and
> Robin
> > runs around with his OP rocket launcher or people pay saigns for silly
> > weapons and abilities) because it helps hide the fact they suck.
> >
> > With 12v12 with respawn timers (and things like nocrit) you will see
> which
> > players on the server can play better than the others and which team is
> > better - especially if both teams are motivated towards the objective.
> >
> > Their skill will be more evident (although as the comp players will tell
> > you, 6v6 is better than 12v12 for that) But,  unfortunately, it will
> > generally result in average and below players spending a lot of time
> > spectating and losing rounds.
> >
> > Which obviously for them is a worse experience than having a 3 hour round
> > that no one wins (or that one team can trivially win because there are
> some
> > trivial ways to win with instant spawn, especially when you have weapons
> > like the dead ringer)
> >
> > It's a lot easier to configure a server badly than it is to get better at
> > playing it too.
> > So it's no real surprise there's a player base happy to play on servers
> > configured this way.
> >
> >
> > --
> > Dan
> >
> > __**_
> > To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives,
> > please visit:
> > https://list.valvesoftware.**com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/**hlds_linux<
> https://list.valvesoftware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux>
> >
> ___
> To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives,
> please visit:
> https://list.valvesoftware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux
>

Re: [hlds_linux] [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions

[Nomaan Ahmad]

Class restriction was just an example... we need to experiment before you
can stay its rubbish tbh...
There are other things server operators can try but we need some unofficial
support to allow increased slots.

Its up to the communities how they want their servers.. If you dont like
servers with more than 24 slots or you lag on them... simple, don't play on
them. If their servers are unbalanced or configured badly, I'm sure players
will leave and they wont have populated server anyway. Or do you carry on
playing on them? I know I don't...

On 14 August 2012 23:33, dan  wrote:

> On 14/08/2012 22:40, Nomaan Ahmad wrote:
>
>> Some servers ops will know how to make it balanced... class limiting is
>> one
>> of them.
>>
>
> No they don't. Class limiting is a flawed approach. It suggests that if
> you assign forced roles that the game will be good. It won't be. It just
> means the 2 or 3 engineers you have will be halfwits and the one guy that
> can play engineer has to watch these halfwits in frustration. The only time
> highlander and class limits works is when you have organised teams and
> matches and then you can say "Bill, you be the medic...John, you play
> engineer" and so on.
>
> Yes it sucks if you have 5 spies and 5 snipers on a team, but the truth
> is, forcing these guys to play a different class won't help. It's far
> better to let people play what class they want and use that data to see
> they are all buffoons. They'll see it when they lose and you'll see it when
> you join so you can, if you want, just hit 'change server' and find a round
> that will be better.
>
> Of course, from a server admin point of view the idea the best way to find
> a good round is to hit 'change server' isn't that appealing, hence the
> flawed attempts to try and mess things around instead.
>
> You can't turn a buffoon into a good player by making him play a different
> class, nor a team of buffoons into a good team using the same method.
>
> As I said in another post, generally speaking, increasing the number of
> players, reducing the number of shots you need to kill or removing the
> penalty for death are all designed to hide differences in skill between
> players and teams.
>
> Or in other words, people play on 32 man, instant spawn servers (and Robin
> runs around with his OP rocket launcher or people pay saigns for silly
> weapons and abilities) because it helps hide the fact they suck.
>
> With 12v12 with respawn timers (and things like nocrit) you will see which
> players on the server can play better than the others and which team is
> better - especially if both teams are motivated towards the objective.
>
> Their skill will be more evident (although as the comp players will tell
> you, 6v6 is better than 12v12 for that) But,  unfortunately, it will
> generally result in average and below players spending a lot of time
> spectating and losing rounds.
>
> Which obviously for them is a worse experience than having a 3 hour round
> that no one wins (or that one team can trivially win because there are some
> trivial ways to win with instant spawn, especially when you have weapons
> like the dead ringer)
>
> It's a lot easier to configure a server badly than it is to get better at
> playing it too.
> So it's no real surprise there's a player base happy to play on servers
> configured this way.
>
>
> --
> Dan
>
> __**_
> To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives,
> please visit:
> https://list.valvesoftware.**com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/**hlds_linux
>
___
To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please 
visit:
https://list.valvesoftware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux

Re: [hlds_linux] [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions

[Ross Bemrose]

Special game modes sometimes benefit from class limits (such as Vs. 
Saxton Hale limiting Engineers and Spies), but I agree that a standard 
game doesn't benefit from it.


On 8/14/2012 6:33 PM, dan wrote:

On 14/08/2012 22:40, Nomaan Ahmad wrote:
Some servers ops will know how to make it balanced... class limiting 
is one

of them.


No they don't. Class limiting is a flawed approach. It suggests that 
if you assign forced roles that the game will be good. It won't be. It 
just means the 2 or 3 engineers you have will be halfwits and the one 
guy that can play engineer has to watch these halfwits in frustration. 
The only time highlander and class limits works is when you have 
organised teams and matches and then you can say "Bill, you be the 
medic...John, you play engineer" and so on.


Yes it sucks if you have 5 spies and 5 snipers on a team, but the 
truth is, forcing these guys to play a different class won't help. 
It's far better to let people play what class they want and use that 
data to see they are all buffoons. They'll see it when they lose and 
you'll see it when you join so you can, if you want, just hit 'change 
server' and find a round that will be better.


Of course, from a server admin point of view the idea the best way to 
find a good round is to hit 'change server' isn't that appealing, 
hence the flawed attempts to try and mess things around instead.


You can't turn a buffoon into a good player by making him play a 
different class, nor a team of buffoons into a good team using the 
same method.


As I said in another post, generally speaking, increasing the number 
of players, reducing the number of shots you need to kill or removing 
the penalty for death are all designed to hide differences in skill 
between players and teams.


Or in other words, people play on 32 man, instant spawn servers (and 
Robin runs around with his OP rocket launcher or people pay saigns for 
silly weapons and abilities) because it helps hide the fact they suck.


With 12v12 with respawn timers (and things like nocrit) you will see 
which players on the server can play better than the others and which 
team is better - especially if both teams are motivated towards the 
objective.


Their skill will be more evident (although as the comp players will 
tell you, 6v6 is better than 12v12 for that) But, unfortunately, it 
will generally result in average and below players spending a lot of 
time spectating and losing rounds.


Which obviously for them is a worse experience than having a 3 hour 
round that no one wins (or that one team can trivially win because 
there are some trivial ways to win with instant spawn, especially when 
you have weapons like the dead ringer)


It's a lot easier to configure a server badly than it is to get better 
at playing it too.
So it's no real surprise there's a player base happy to play on 
servers configured this way.





___
To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please 
visit:
https://list.valvesoftware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux

Re: [hlds_linux] [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions

[staff]

For the love of god please let us protect our sv_steamgroup id from being
added to everyone elses steamgroup, l4d2 is rife with it!, there has always
been a simple solution to this and requested several times yet no response

-Original Message-
From: hlds_linux-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com
[mailto:hlds_linux-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com] On Behalf Of Russell
Smith
Sent: 14 August 2012 22:54
To: Half-Life dedicated Linux server mailing list
Subject: Re: [hlds_linux] [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions

If you mean steam group servers like Left 4 Dead has, Fletcher said earlier
that this functionality wouldn't be in tomorrow's update.  
Hopefully it will be added down the line though.

On 14.08.2012 14:46, DontWannaName! wrote:
> Can we do reserved lobbies like with keys? So all friends go to the 
> same community server?
>
> Sent from my iPhone 4
>


___
To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives,
please visit:
https://list.valvesoftware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux


___
To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please 
visit:
https://list.valvesoftware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux

Re: [hlds_linux] [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions

[dan]

On 14/08/2012 22:40, Nomaan Ahmad wrote:

Some servers ops will know how to make it balanced... class limiting is one
of them.


No they don't. Class limiting is a flawed approach. It suggests that if 
you assign forced roles that the game will be good. It won't be. It just 
means the 2 or 3 engineers you have will be halfwits and the one guy 
that can play engineer has to watch these halfwits in frustration. The 
only time highlander and class limits works is when you have organised 
teams and matches and then you can say "Bill, you be the medic...John, 
you play engineer" and so on.


Yes it sucks if you have 5 spies and 5 snipers on a team, but the truth 
is, forcing these guys to play a different class won't help. It's far 
better to let people play what class they want and use that data to see 
they are all buffoons. They'll see it when they lose and you'll see it 
when you join so you can, if you want, just hit 'change server' and find 
a round that will be better.


Of course, from a server admin point of view the idea the best way to 
find a good round is to hit 'change server' isn't that appealing, hence 
the flawed attempts to try and mess things around instead.


You can't turn a buffoon into a good player by making him play a 
different class, nor a team of buffoons into a good team using the same 
method.


As I said in another post, generally speaking, increasing the number of 
players, reducing the number of shots you need to kill or removing the 
penalty for death are all designed to hide differences in skill between 
players and teams.


Or in other words, people play on 32 man, instant spawn servers (and 
Robin runs around with his OP rocket launcher or people pay saigns for 
silly weapons and abilities) because it helps hide the fact they suck.


With 12v12 with respawn timers (and things like nocrit) you will see 
which players on the server can play better than the others and which 
team is better - especially if both teams are motivated towards the 
objective.


Their skill will be more evident (although as the comp players will tell 
you, 6v6 is better than 12v12 for that) But,  unfortunately, it will 
generally result in average and below players spending a lot of time 
spectating and losing rounds.


Which obviously for them is a worse experience than having a 3 hour 
round that no one wins (or that one team can trivially win because there 
are some trivial ways to win with instant spawn, especially when you 
have weapons like the dead ringer)


It's a lot easier to configure a server badly than it is to get better 
at playing it too.
So it's no real surprise there's a player base happy to play on servers 
configured this way.


--
Dan

___
To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please 
visit:
https://list.valvesoftware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux

Re: [hlds_linux] [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions

[gameadmin]

A lobby can specify the mission whereas manually joining leaves you such with 
what's there.

Also, steam community-based access control would be a lot less hassle than 
passwords

Fletcher Dunn  wrote:

What is the use case for that? Friends could just join the server directly, 
there doesn't seem to be a need to form a party at all.

-Original Message-
From: hlds_linux-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com 
[mailto:hlds_linux-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com] On Behalf Of DontWannaName!
Sent: Tuesday, August 14, 2012 2:57 PM
To: Half-Life dedicated Linux server mailing list
Cc: Half-Life dedicated Linux server mailing list
Subject: Re: [hlds_linux] [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions

Is there any way to point the lobby to a specific server at all? Cvar?

Sent from my iPhone 4

On Aug 14, 2012, at 2:54 PM, Russell Smith  wrote:

> If you mean steam group servers like Left 4 Dead has, Fletcher said earlier 
> that this functionality wouldn't be in tomorrow's update. Hopefully it will 
> be added down the line though.
> 
> On 14.08.2012 14:46, DontWannaName! wrote:
>> Can we do reserved lobbies like with keys? So all friends go to the 
>> same community server?
>> 
>> Sent from my iPhone 4
>> 
> 
> 
>_

> To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please 
> visit:
> https://list.valvesoftware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux

_

To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please 
visit:
https://list.valvesoftware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux

_

To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please 
visit:
https://list.valvesoftware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux

___
To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please 
visit:
https://list.valvesoftware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux

Re: [hlds_linux] [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions

[DontWannaName!]

Choosing the map or maybe chatting for example before starting a game?

Sent from my iPhone 4

On Aug 14, 2012, at 3:19 PM, Fletcher Dunn  wrote:

> What is the use case for that?  Friends could just join the server directly, 
> there doesn't seem to be a need to form a party at all.
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: hlds_linux-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com 
> [mailto:hlds_linux-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com] On Behalf Of DontWannaName!
> Sent: Tuesday, August 14, 2012 2:57 PM
> To: Half-Life dedicated Linux server mailing list
> Cc: Half-Life dedicated Linux server mailing list
> Subject: Re: [hlds_linux] [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions
> 
> Is there any way to point the lobby to a specific server at all? Cvar?
> 
> Sent from my iPhone 4
> 
> On Aug 14, 2012, at 2:54 PM, Russell Smith  wrote:
> 
>> If you mean steam group servers like Left 4 Dead has, Fletcher said earlier 
>> that this functionality wouldn't be in tomorrow's update.  Hopefully it will 
>> be added down the line though.
>> 
>> On 14.08.2012 14:46, DontWannaName! wrote:
>>> Can we do reserved lobbies like with keys? So all friends go to the 
>>> same community server?
>>> 
>>> Sent from my iPhone 4
>>> 
>> 
>> 
>> ___
>> To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, 
>> please visit:
>> https://list.valvesoftware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux
> 
> ___
> To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please 
> visit:
> https://list.valvesoftware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux
> 
> ___
> To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please 
> visit:
> https://list.valvesoftware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux

___
To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please 
visit:
https://list.valvesoftware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux

Re: [hlds_linux] [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions

[Russell Smith]

This use case I think would be solved by adding steam group lobby 
functionality.  It is going to suck initially for communities to set up 
a server for this and have it immediately fill with random players, 
locking out community players who want to try it out.


On 14.08.2012 15:19, Fletcher Dunn wrote:

What is the use case for that?  Friends could just join the server
directly, there doesn't seem to be a need to form a party at all.

-Original Message-
From: hlds_linux-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com
[mailto:hlds_linux-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com] On Behalf Of
DontWannaName!
Sent: Tuesday, August 14, 2012 2:57 PM
To: Half-Life dedicated Linux server mailing list
Cc: Half-Life dedicated Linux server mailing list
Subject: Re: [hlds_linux] [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions

Is there any way to point the lobby to a specific server at all? 
Cvar?


Sent from my iPhone 4

On Aug 14, 2012, at 2:54 PM, Russell Smith 
 wrote:


If you mean steam group servers like Left 4 Dead has, Fletcher said 
earlier that this functionality wouldn't be in tomorrow's update.  
Hopefully it will be added down the line though.


On 14.08.2012 14:46, DontWannaName! wrote:

Can we do reserved lobbies like with keys? So all friends go to the
same community server?

Sent from my iPhone 4




___
To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list 
archives, please visit:

https://list.valvesoftware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux


___
To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list
archives, please visit:
https://list.valvesoftware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux

___
To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list
archives, please visit:
https://list.valvesoftware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux



___
To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please 
visit:
https://list.valvesoftware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux

Re: [hlds_linux] [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions

[Fletcher Dunn]

What is the use case for that?  Friends could just join the server directly, 
there doesn't seem to be a need to form a party at all.

-Original Message-
From: hlds_linux-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com 
[mailto:hlds_linux-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com] On Behalf Of DontWannaName!
Sent: Tuesday, August 14, 2012 2:57 PM
To: Half-Life dedicated Linux server mailing list
Cc: Half-Life dedicated Linux server mailing list
Subject: Re: [hlds_linux] [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions

Is there any way to point the lobby to a specific server at all? Cvar?

Sent from my iPhone 4

On Aug 14, 2012, at 2:54 PM, Russell Smith  wrote:

> If you mean steam group servers like Left 4 Dead has, Fletcher said earlier 
> that this functionality wouldn't be in tomorrow's update.  Hopefully it will 
> be added down the line though.
> 
> On 14.08.2012 14:46, DontWannaName! wrote:
>> Can we do reserved lobbies like with keys? So all friends go to the 
>> same community server?
>> 
>> Sent from my iPhone 4
>> 
> 
> 
> ___
> To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please 
> visit:
> https://list.valvesoftware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux

___
To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please 
visit:
https://list.valvesoftware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux

___
To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please 
visit:
https://list.valvesoftware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux

Re: [hlds_linux] [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions

[Violent Crimes]

Isn't Garry's mod on the same engine as TF2 and you can host more then 
32 people on that with hardly any issues.



On 8/14/2012 3:33 PM, ics wrote:
Things go unstable when there are more than 33 slots. Also there are 
engine restrictions that cannot be raised just like that. One thing is 
that entity limit of 2047. When one more is created in-game, crash 
happens.


-ics





___
To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please 
visit:
https://list.valvesoftware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux

Re: [hlds_linux] [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions

[Erik-jan Riemers]

I just hope that if they implement something for steam group, that it
won't be like l4d2. Where not so nice people just do sv_steamgroup " ," and advertise themselves in those
groups while they don't belong there.

-Original Message-
From: hlds_linux-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com
[mailto:hlds_linux-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com] On Behalf Of Russell
Smith
Sent: dinsdag 14 augustus 2012 23:54
To: Half-Life dedicated Linux server mailing list
Subject: Re: [hlds_linux] [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions

If you mean steam group servers like Left 4 Dead has, Fletcher said
earlier that this functionality wouldn't be in tomorrow's update.
Hopefully it will be added down the line though.

On 14.08.2012 14:46, DontWannaName! wrote:
> Can we do reserved lobbies like with keys? So all friends go to the
> same community server?
>
> Sent from my iPhone 4
>


___
To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives,
please visit:
https://list.valvesoftware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux

___
To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please 
visit:
https://list.valvesoftware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux

Re: [hlds_linux] [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions

[Russell Smith]

Not sure about lobbies, but he mentioned you can still join from the 
server browser.


On 14.08.2012 14:57, DontWannaName! wrote:
Is there any way to point the lobby to a specific server at all? 
Cvar?


Sent from my iPhone 4

On Aug 14, 2012, at 2:54 PM, Russell Smith 
 wrote:


If you mean steam group servers like Left 4 Dead has, Fletcher said 
earlier that this functionality wouldn't be in tomorrow's update.  
Hopefully it will be added down the line though.


On 14.08.2012 14:46, DontWannaName! wrote:

Can we do reserved lobbies like with keys? So all friends go to the
same community server?

Sent from my iPhone 4




___
To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list 
archives, please visit:

https://list.valvesoftware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux


___
To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list
archives, please visit:
https://list.valvesoftware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux



___
To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please 
visit:
https://list.valvesoftware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux

Re: [hlds_linux] [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions

[1nsane]

Don't necessarily need that. The biggest focus here should be on having
bigger co-op games. Like what was done to Left 4 Dead/2 when a number of
people thought 4 players co-op was just not enough.

Limit/leave the TF2 game client support at 33 humans, but allow the server
to have more players (bots). This way no old gamemodes/maps need re
balancing. You won't be seeing 40+ player 2fort matches. And so custom maps
and or modes would then be made by the community to support higher
player/bot counts.

Just some ideas.

This could be something to experiment with and see what works with the new
game mode. We don't need to drag old maps/gamemodes into this, if that's
causing issues. Just some extra unofficial support to tinker with :P.

On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 5:04 PM, dan  wrote:

> On 14/08/2012 21:15, Fletcher Dunn wrote:
>
>> I think the biggest challenge with doubling the player count (meaning
>> number of mercs running around, whether AI or human) is just plain old
>> performance, both server and client.
>>
>
> I'd say by far the biggest challenge would be solving the problem that
> adding more players makes the game complete rubbish to play.
>
> You'd need a complete redesign of most of the game - weapon attributes,
> maps and so on.
>
> In TF2's case 24 is pushing it (although I suppose trading and sniping
> have both been ways Valve have designed TF2 to get 9v9 or less, even with
> 24 players on a server)
> --
> Dan
>
>
> __**_
> To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives,
> please visit:
> https://list.valvesoftware.**com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/**hlds_linux
>
___
To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please 
visit:
https://list.valvesoftware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux

Re: [hlds_linux] [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions

[DontWannaName!]

Is there any way to point the lobby to a specific server at all? Cvar?

Sent from my iPhone 4

On Aug 14, 2012, at 2:54 PM, Russell Smith  wrote:

> If you mean steam group servers like Left 4 Dead has, Fletcher said earlier 
> that this functionality wouldn't be in tomorrow's update.  Hopefully it will 
> be added down the line though.
> 
> On 14.08.2012 14:46, DontWannaName! wrote:
>> Can we do reserved lobbies like with keys? So all friends go to the
>> same community server?
>> 
>> Sent from my iPhone 4
>> 
> 
> 
> ___
> To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please 
> visit:
> https://list.valvesoftware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux

___
To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please 
visit:
https://list.valvesoftware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux

Re: [hlds_linux] [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions

[Russell Smith]

If you mean steam group servers like Left 4 Dead has, Fletcher said 
earlier that this functionality wouldn't be in tomorrow's update.  
Hopefully it will be added down the line though.


On 14.08.2012 14:46, DontWannaName! wrote:

Can we do reserved lobbies like with keys? So all friends go to the
same community server?

Sent from my iPhone 4




___
To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please 
visit:
https://list.valvesoftware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux

Re: [hlds_linux] [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions

[DontWannaName!]

Can we do reserved lobbies like with keys? So all friends go to the same 
community server?

Sent from my iPhone 4

On Aug 14, 2012, at 2:40 PM, Nomaan Ahmad  wrote:

> Some servers ops will know how to make it balanced... class limiting is one
> of them.
> 
> On 14 August 2012 22:33, Russell Smith  wrote:
> 
>> I think he was referring to game balance being broken on > 24 player games.
>> 
>> 
>> On 14.08.2012 14:19, Nomaan Ahmad wrote:
>> 
>>> What do you mean by rubbish to play? CPUs have gotten more powerful over
>>> the years too. If some is running on tf2's minimum requirement I think
>>> they
>>> should upgrade in order to play on bigger servers. Same goes to server
>>> operators, they need to host their games it on high end servers if they
>>> want more slots.
>>> 
>>> On 14 August 2012 22:04, dan  wrote:
>>> 
>>> On 14/08/2012 21:15, Fletcher Dunn wrote:
 
 I think the biggest challenge with doubling the player count (meaning
> number of mercs running around, whether AI or human) is just plain old
> performance, both server and client.
> 
> 
 I'd say by far the biggest challenge would be solving the problem that
 adding more players makes the game complete rubbish to play.
 
 You'd need a complete redesign of most of the game - weapon attributes,
 maps and so on.
 
 In TF2's case 24 is pushing it (although I suppose trading and sniping
 have both been ways Valve have designed TF2 to get 9v9 or less, even with
 24 players on a server)
 --
 Dan
 
>>> 
>> 
>> __**_
>> To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives,
>> please visit:
>> https://list.valvesoftware.**com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/**hlds_linux
>> 
> ___
> To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please 
> visit:
> https://list.valvesoftware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux

___
To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please 
visit:
https://list.valvesoftware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux

Re: [hlds_linux] [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions

[Nomaan Ahmad]

Some servers ops will know how to make it balanced... class limiting is one
of them.

On 14 August 2012 22:33, Russell Smith  wrote:

> I think he was referring to game balance being broken on > 24 player games.
>
>
> On 14.08.2012 14:19, Nomaan Ahmad wrote:
>
>> What do you mean by rubbish to play? CPUs have gotten more powerful over
>> the years too. If some is running on tf2's minimum requirement I think
>> they
>> should upgrade in order to play on bigger servers. Same goes to server
>> operators, they need to host their games it on high end servers if they
>> want more slots.
>>
>> On 14 August 2012 22:04, dan  wrote:
>>
>>  On 14/08/2012 21:15, Fletcher Dunn wrote:
>>>
>>>  I think the biggest challenge with doubling the player count (meaning
 number of mercs running around, whether AI or human) is just plain old
 performance, both server and client.


>>> I'd say by far the biggest challenge would be solving the problem that
>>> adding more players makes the game complete rubbish to play.
>>>
>>> You'd need a complete redesign of most of the game - weapon attributes,
>>> maps and so on.
>>>
>>> In TF2's case 24 is pushing it (although I suppose trading and sniping
>>> have both been ways Valve have designed TF2 to get 9v9 or less, even with
>>> 24 players on a server)
>>> --
>>> Dan
>>>
>>
>
> __**_
> To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives,
> please visit:
> https://list.valvesoftware.**com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/**hlds_linux
>
___
To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please 
visit:
https://list.valvesoftware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux

Re: [hlds_linux] [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions

[Russell Smith]

I think he was referring to game balance being broken on > 24 player 
games.


On 14.08.2012 14:19, Nomaan Ahmad wrote:
What do you mean by rubbish to play? CPUs have gotten more powerful 
over
the years too. If some is running on tf2's minimum requirement I 
think they
should upgrade in order to play on bigger servers. Same goes to 
server
operators, they need to host their games it on high end servers if 
they

want more slots.

On 14 August 2012 22:04, dan  wrote:


On 14/08/2012 21:15, Fletcher Dunn wrote:

I think the biggest challenge with doubling the player count 
(meaning
number of mercs running around, whether AI or human) is just plain 
old

performance, both server and client.



I'd say by far the biggest challenge would be solving the problem 
that

adding more players makes the game complete rubbish to play.

You'd need a complete redesign of most of the game - weapon 
attributes,

maps and so on.

In TF2's case 24 is pushing it (although I suppose trading and 
sniping
have both been ways Valve have designed TF2 to get 9v9 or less, even 
with

24 players on a server)
--
Dan



___
To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please 
visit:
https://list.valvesoftware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux

Re: [hlds_linux] [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions

[Doctor McKay]

Note that more players in-game at one time isn't the only reason more slots 
would be nice. Maybe adding more robots would be interesting, too?




Dr. McKay
http://www.doctormckay.com

-Original Message- 
From: dan

Sent: Tuesday, August 14, 2012 5:04 PM
To: Half-Life dedicated Linux server mailing list
Subject: Re: [hlds_linux] [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions

On 14/08/2012 21:15, Fletcher Dunn wrote:
I think the biggest challenge with doubling the player count (meaning 
number of mercs running around, whether AI or human) is just plain old 
performance, both server and client.


I'd say by far the biggest challenge would be solving the problem that
adding more players makes the game complete rubbish to play.

You'd need a complete redesign of most of the game - weapon attributes,
maps and so on.

In TF2's case 24 is pushing it (although I suppose trading and sniping
have both been ways Valve have designed TF2 to get 9v9 or less, even
with 24 players on a server)
--
Dan

___
To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, 
please visit:
https://list.valvesoftware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux 



___
To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please 
visit:
https://list.valvesoftware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux

Re: [hlds_linux] [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions

[Nomaan Ahmad]

What do you mean by rubbish to play? CPUs have gotten more powerful over
the years too. If some is running on tf2's minimum requirement I think they
should upgrade in order to play on bigger servers. Same goes to server
operators, they need to host their games it on high end servers if they
want more slots.

On 14 August 2012 22:04, dan  wrote:

> On 14/08/2012 21:15, Fletcher Dunn wrote:
>
>> I think the biggest challenge with doubling the player count (meaning
>> number of mercs running around, whether AI or human) is just plain old
>> performance, both server and client.
>>
>
> I'd say by far the biggest challenge would be solving the problem that
> adding more players makes the game complete rubbish to play.
>
> You'd need a complete redesign of most of the game - weapon attributes,
> maps and so on.
>
> In TF2's case 24 is pushing it (although I suppose trading and sniping
> have both been ways Valve have designed TF2 to get 9v9 or less, even with
> 24 players on a server)
> --
> Dan
>
>
> __**_
> To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives,
> please visit:
> https://list.valvesoftware.**com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/**hlds_linux
>
___
To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please 
visit:
https://list.valvesoftware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux

Re: [hlds_linux] [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions

[dan]

On 14/08/2012 21:15, Fletcher Dunn wrote:

I think the biggest challenge with doubling the player count (meaning number of 
mercs running around, whether AI or human) is just plain old performance, both 
server and client.


I'd say by far the biggest challenge would be solving the problem that 
adding more players makes the game complete rubbish to play.


You'd need a complete redesign of most of the game - weapon attributes, 
maps and so on.


In TF2's case 24 is pushing it (although I suppose trading and sniping 
have both been ways Valve have designed TF2 to get 9v9 or less, even 
with 24 players on a server)

--
Dan

___
To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please 
visit:
https://list.valvesoftware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux

Re: [hlds_linux] [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions

[ics]

Yes but as Fletcher noted, it comes down eventually to performance.

-ics

14.8.2012 23:48, Dr. McKay kirjoitti:

CS:S runs on the same engine and it supports 65 (or something along those 
lines, I know nothing about CS:S) players. Just throwing that out there.

  
Dr. McKay

http://www.doctormckay.com

On Aug 14, 2012, at 3:33 PM, ics  wrote:


Things go unstable when there are more than 33 slots. Also there are engine 
restrictions that cannot be raised just like that. One thing is that entity 
limit of 2047. When one more is created in-game, crash happens.

-ics

14.8.2012 22:24, Nomaan Ahmad kirjoitti:

I dont think anyone is acting like its easy... Servers can already have
more than 33 slots, its just that the tf2 client doesn't allow players to
get on servers with more than 33 slots.

On 14 August 2012 20:19, Nerdboy  wrote:


You guys act as if changing the hard limit is easy. There's all sorts of
resource management issues that would need to be resolved and a lot of the
engine would need adjustment. Let's wait to play the game before we start
thinking about overhauling things to change it.
On Aug 14, 2012 3:16 PM, "Ryan Stecker"  wrote:


I third this. I think it'd open the door to making some interesting
missions involving more players and more bots.

On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 1:51 PM, Nomaan Ahmad 

wrote:

I agree with 1nsane.

On 14 August 2012 19:50, 1nsane <1nsane...@gmail.com> wrote:


Like Asher mentioned above, could you consider increasing the limit.

So

we

could better experiment with this mode?
Perhaps include a warning similar to how players are warned about

joining

servers higher than 24 slots.

On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 1:00 PM, Fletcher Dunn
wrote:


We will not have Steam group functionality tomorrow.

You actually have to set maxplayers to 32 to host MvM (to make room

for

all the bots).  That's why the mode is expensive CPU-wise, to not

only

simulate all those players but run their AI logic as well.  We'll

have

more

details on the recommended settings tomorrow.

Regarding exactly what happens if a 24-player server switches to

MvM:

  I

actually don't think we have worked that out yet.

I'm pretty sure on day one there will be lots of people trying out

all

sorts of things.  Our approach to experimentation in MvM will be

the

same

as in PvP: we encourage it, provided that players are opting in to

any

major deviations from the vanilla experience.  Our servers will all

be

configured vanilla, and the matchmaking will enforce the 6 player

limit,

and the server browser will be the primary means for players to

find

those

sorts of customizations.  What will the most interesting

customizations

be?

  What will the standard tags be used that we request server

operators

to

set in order to help players find the modifications they want or

avoid

the

ones they don't like?  We can't know that yet.  That's something we

expect

you guys and your players to figure out.

I will hazard a guess that raising the player count well above 6

would

be

detrimental the experience.  There ratio of humans to bots would be

off

and

the human defending team would not have enough challenge.  (As an

extreme

example: imagine a 32-player server where everybody is defending an

there

are no bots.)  Exactly how far it can be raised above 6 without

totally

breaking the game is speculation of course.  I think a smart server
operator will start out with the server configured relatively

vanilla,

and

then watch how the game unfolds and listen to their players, and

try

to

make smart decisions about which areas to experiment, rather than

assuming

the same sorts of adjustments your community prefers in PvP will
automatically apply to this mode.  A fun co-op mode with more than

six

players is likely to require entirely new missions.  (The mission

decides

the pattern of enemy robots that come at you.)  We have

purposefully

made

it easy for players to create their own missions.  (It's a lot

easier

than

creating a whole new map!)  But if you play with more than six

players,

with the missions we've made, I think the balance will be way off.

- Fletch

-Original Message-
From: hlds-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com [mailto:
hlds-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com] On Behalf Of Saint K.
Sent: Tuesday, August 14, 2012 4:51 AM
To: Half-Life dedicated Win32 server mailing list
Subject: Re: [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions

Will we be able to restrict a MvM server to people in the

steamgroup

only,

like in L4D2?

Saint K.

From: hlds-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com [
hlds-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com] On Behalf Of Fletcher Dunn [
fletch...@valvesoftware.com]
Sent: 14 August 2012 08:52
To: Half-Life dedicated Win32 server mailing list; Half-Life

dedicated

Win32 server mailing list (h...@list.valvesoftware.com)
Subject: Re: [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions

MvM matchmaking will be restricted to 6 players at launch.

The matchmaking a

Re: [hlds_linux] [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions

[Dr. McKay]

CS:S runs on the same engine and it supports 65 (or something along those 
lines, I know nothing about CS:S) players. Just throwing that out there.

 
Dr. McKay
http://www.doctormckay.com

On Aug 14, 2012, at 3:33 PM, ics  wrote:

> Things go unstable when there are more than 33 slots. Also there are engine 
> restrictions that cannot be raised just like that. One thing is that entity 
> limit of 2047. When one more is created in-game, crash happens.
> 
> -ics
> 
> 14.8.2012 22:24, Nomaan Ahmad kirjoitti:
>> I dont think anyone is acting like its easy... Servers can already have
>> more than 33 slots, its just that the tf2 client doesn't allow players to
>> get on servers with more than 33 slots.
>> 
>> On 14 August 2012 20:19, Nerdboy  wrote:
>> 
>>> You guys act as if changing the hard limit is easy. There's all sorts of
>>> resource management issues that would need to be resolved and a lot of the
>>> engine would need adjustment. Let's wait to play the game before we start
>>> thinking about overhauling things to change it.
>>> On Aug 14, 2012 3:16 PM, "Ryan Stecker"  wrote:
>>> 
 I third this. I think it'd open the door to making some interesting
 missions involving more players and more bots.
 
 On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 1:51 PM, Nomaan Ahmad 
>>> wrote:
> I agree with 1nsane.
> 
> On 14 August 2012 19:50, 1nsane <1nsane...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> Like Asher mentioned above, could you consider increasing the limit.
>>> So
> we
>> could better experiment with this mode?
>> Perhaps include a warning similar to how players are warned about
 joining
>> servers higher than 24 slots.
>> 
>> On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 1:00 PM, Fletcher Dunn
>> wrote:
>> 
>>> We will not have Steam group functionality tomorrow.
>>> 
>>> You actually have to set maxplayers to 32 to host MvM (to make room
 for
>>> all the bots).  That's why the mode is expensive CPU-wise, to not
 only
>>> simulate all those players but run their AI logic as well.  We'll
 have
>> more
>>> details on the recommended settings tomorrow.
>>> 
>>> Regarding exactly what happens if a 24-player server switches to
>>> MvM:
>  I
>>> actually don't think we have worked that out yet.
>>> 
>>> I'm pretty sure on day one there will be lots of people trying out
 all
>>> sorts of things.  Our approach to experimentation in MvM will be
>>> the
> same
>>> as in PvP: we encourage it, provided that players are opting in to
 any
>>> major deviations from the vanilla experience.  Our servers will all
 be
>>> configured vanilla, and the matchmaking will enforce the 6 player
> limit,
>>> and the server browser will be the primary means for players to
>>> find
>> those
>>> sorts of customizations.  What will the most interesting
 customizations
>> be?
>>>  What will the standard tags be used that we request server
>>> operators
> to
>>> set in order to help players find the modifications they want or
 avoid
>> the
>>> ones they don't like?  We can't know that yet.  That's something we
>> expect
>>> you guys and your players to figure out.
>>> 
>>> I will hazard a guess that raising the player count well above 6
 would
> be
>>> detrimental the experience.  There ratio of humans to bots would be
 off
>> and
>>> the human defending team would not have enough challenge.  (As an
> extreme
>>> example: imagine a 32-player server where everybody is defending an
> there
>>> are no bots.)  Exactly how far it can be raised above 6 without
 totally
>>> breaking the game is speculation of course.  I think a smart server
>>> operator will start out with the server configured relatively
 vanilla,
>> and
>>> then watch how the game unfolds and listen to their players, and
>>> try
 to
>>> make smart decisions about which areas to experiment, rather than
>> assuming
>>> the same sorts of adjustments your community prefers in PvP will
>>> automatically apply to this mode.  A fun co-op mode with more than
 six
>>> players is likely to require entirely new missions.  (The mission
> decides
>>> the pattern of enemy robots that come at you.)  We have
>>> purposefully
> made
>>> it easy for players to create their own missions.  (It's a lot
>>> easier
>> than
>>> creating a whole new map!)  But if you play with more than six
 players,
>>> with the missions we've made, I think the balance will be way off.
>>> 
>>> - Fletch
>>> 
>>> -Original Message-
>>> From: hlds-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com [mailto:
>>> hlds-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com] On Behalf Of Saint K.
>>> Sent: Tuesday, August 14, 2012 4:51 AM
>>> To: Half-Life dedicated Win32 server mailing list
>>> Subject: Re: [hlds] TF MvM hosting ques

Re: [hlds_linux] [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions

[Fletcher Dunn]

I think the biggest challenge with doubling the player count (meaning number of 
mercs running around, whether AI or human) is just plain old performance, both 
server and client.

-Original Message-
From: hlds_linux-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com 
[mailto:hlds_linux-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com] On Behalf Of ics
Sent: Tuesday, August 14, 2012 12:34 PM
To: Half-Life dedicated Linux server mailing list
Subject: Re: [hlds_linux] [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions

Things go unstable when there are more than 33 slots. Also there are engine 
restrictions that cannot be raised just like that. One thing is that entity 
limit of 2047. When one more is created in-game, crash happens.

-ics

14.8.2012 22:24, Nomaan Ahmad kirjoitti:
> I dont think anyone is acting like its easy... Servers can already 
> have more than 33 slots, its just that the tf2 client doesn't allow 
> players to get on servers with more than 33 slots.
>
> On 14 August 2012 20:19, Nerdboy  wrote:
>
>> You guys act as if changing the hard limit is easy. There's all sorts 
>> of resource management issues that would need to be resolved and a 
>> lot of the engine would need adjustment. Let's wait to play the game 
>> before we start thinking about overhauling things to change it.
>> On Aug 14, 2012 3:16 PM, "Ryan Stecker"  wrote:
>>
>>> I third this. I think it'd open the door to making some interesting 
>>> missions involving more players and more bots.
>>>
>>> On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 1:51 PM, Nomaan Ahmad 
>> wrote:
>>>> I agree with 1nsane.
>>>>
>>>> On 14 August 2012 19:50, 1nsane <1nsane...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Like Asher mentioned above, could you consider increasing the limit.
>> So
>>>> we
>>>>> could better experiment with this mode?
>>>>> Perhaps include a warning similar to how players are warned about
>>> joining
>>>>> servers higher than 24 slots.
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 1:00 PM, Fletcher Dunn
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> We will not have Steam group functionality tomorrow.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You actually have to set maxplayers to 32 to host MvM (to make 
>>>>>> room
>>> for
>>>>>> all the bots).  That's why the mode is expensive CPU-wise, to not
>>> only
>>>>>> simulate all those players but run their AI logic as well.  We'll
>>> have
>>>>> more
>>>>>> details on the recommended settings tomorrow.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Regarding exactly what happens if a 24-player server switches to
>> MvM:
>>>>   I
>>>>>> actually don't think we have worked that out yet.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'm pretty sure on day one there will be lots of people trying 
>>>>>> out
>>> all
>>>>>> sorts of things.  Our approach to experimentation in MvM will be
>> the
>>>> same
>>>>>> as in PvP: we encourage it, provided that players are opting in 
>>>>>> to
>>> any
>>>>>> major deviations from the vanilla experience.  Our servers will 
>>>>>> all
>>> be
>>>>>> configured vanilla, and the matchmaking will enforce the 6 player
>>>> limit,
>>>>>> and the server browser will be the primary means for players to
>> find
>>>>> those
>>>>>> sorts of customizations.  What will the most interesting
>>> customizations
>>>>> be?
>>>>>>   What will the standard tags be used that we request server
>> operators
>>>> to
>>>>>> set in order to help players find the modifications they want or
>>> avoid
>>>>> the
>>>>>> ones they don't like?  We can't know that yet.  That's something 
>>>>>> we
>>>>> expect
>>>>>> you guys and your players to figure out.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I will hazard a guess that raising the player count well above 6
>>> would
>>>> be
>>>>>> detrimental the experience.  There ratio of humans to bots would 
>>>>>> be
>>> off
>>>>> and
>>>>>> the human defending team would not have enough challenge.  (As an
>>>> extreme
>>>>>> example: imagine a 32-player s

Re: [hlds_linux] [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions

[ics]

Things go unstable when there are more than 33 slots. Also there are 
engine restrictions that cannot be raised just like that. One thing is 
that entity limit of 2047. When one more is created in-game, crash happens.


-ics

14.8.2012 22:24, Nomaan Ahmad kirjoitti:

I dont think anyone is acting like its easy... Servers can already have
more than 33 slots, its just that the tf2 client doesn't allow players to
get on servers with more than 33 slots.

On 14 August 2012 20:19, Nerdboy  wrote:


You guys act as if changing the hard limit is easy. There's all sorts of
resource management issues that would need to be resolved and a lot of the
engine would need adjustment. Let's wait to play the game before we start
thinking about overhauling things to change it.
On Aug 14, 2012 3:16 PM, "Ryan Stecker"  wrote:


I third this. I think it'd open the door to making some interesting
missions involving more players and more bots.

On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 1:51 PM, Nomaan Ahmad 

wrote:

I agree with 1nsane.

On 14 August 2012 19:50, 1nsane <1nsane...@gmail.com> wrote:


Like Asher mentioned above, could you consider increasing the limit.

So

we

could better experiment with this mode?
Perhaps include a warning similar to how players are warned about

joining

servers higher than 24 slots.

On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 1:00 PM, Fletcher Dunn
wrote:


We will not have Steam group functionality tomorrow.

You actually have to set maxplayers to 32 to host MvM (to make room

for

all the bots).  That's why the mode is expensive CPU-wise, to not

only

simulate all those players but run their AI logic as well.  We'll

have

more

details on the recommended settings tomorrow.

Regarding exactly what happens if a 24-player server switches to

MvM:

  I

actually don't think we have worked that out yet.

I'm pretty sure on day one there will be lots of people trying out

all

sorts of things.  Our approach to experimentation in MvM will be

the

same

as in PvP: we encourage it, provided that players are opting in to

any

major deviations from the vanilla experience.  Our servers will all

be

configured vanilla, and the matchmaking will enforce the 6 player

limit,

and the server browser will be the primary means for players to

find

those

sorts of customizations.  What will the most interesting

customizations

be?

  What will the standard tags be used that we request server

operators

to

set in order to help players find the modifications they want or

avoid

the

ones they don't like?  We can't know that yet.  That's something we

expect

you guys and your players to figure out.

I will hazard a guess that raising the player count well above 6

would

be

detrimental the experience.  There ratio of humans to bots would be

off

and

the human defending team would not have enough challenge.  (As an

extreme

example: imagine a 32-player server where everybody is defending an

there

are no bots.)  Exactly how far it can be raised above 6 without

totally

breaking the game is speculation of course.  I think a smart server
operator will start out with the server configured relatively

vanilla,

and

then watch how the game unfolds and listen to their players, and

try

to

make smart decisions about which areas to experiment, rather than

assuming

the same sorts of adjustments your community prefers in PvP will
automatically apply to this mode.  A fun co-op mode with more than

six

players is likely to require entirely new missions.  (The mission

decides

the pattern of enemy robots that come at you.)  We have

purposefully

made

it easy for players to create their own missions.  (It's a lot

easier

than

creating a whole new map!)  But if you play with more than six

players,

with the missions we've made, I think the balance will be way off.

- Fletch

-Original Message-
From: hlds-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com [mailto:
hlds-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com] On Behalf Of Saint K.
Sent: Tuesday, August 14, 2012 4:51 AM
To: Half-Life dedicated Win32 server mailing list
Subject: Re: [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions

Will we be able to restrict a MvM server to people in the

steamgroup

only,

like in L4D2?

Saint K.

From: hlds-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com [
hlds-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com] On Behalf Of Fletcher Dunn [
fletch...@valvesoftware.com]
Sent: 14 August 2012 08:52
To: Half-Life dedicated Win32 server mailing list; Half-Life

dedicated

Win32 server mailing list (h...@list.valvesoftware.com)
Subject: Re: [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions

MvM matchmaking will be restricted to 6 players at launch.

The matchmaking also supports joining games in progress to fill an

empty

slot, in which case of course the current map will not be changed.

From: hlds-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com [mailto:
hlds-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com] On Behalf Of Agro
Sent: Monday, August 13, 2012 11:40 PM
To: Half-Life dedicated Win32 server mailing list
Subject: Re: [hlds] TF MvM 

Re: [hlds_linux] [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions

[ics]

Current maps aren't designed for more so raising the limit right away 
isn't really usefull thing to do.


-ics

14.8.2012 22:19, Nerdboy kirjoitti:

You guys act as if changing the hard limit is easy. There's all sorts of
resource management issues that would need to be resolved and a lot of the
engine would need adjustment. Let's wait to play the game before we start
thinking about overhauling things to change it.
On Aug 14, 2012 3:16 PM, "Ryan Stecker"  wrote:


I third this. I think it'd open the door to making some interesting
missions involving more players and more bots.

On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 1:51 PM, Nomaan Ahmad  wrote:


I agree with 1nsane.

On 14 August 2012 19:50, 1nsane <1nsane...@gmail.com> wrote:


Like Asher mentioned above, could you consider increasing the limit. So

we

could better experiment with this mode?
Perhaps include a warning similar to how players are warned about

joining

servers higher than 24 slots.

On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 1:00 PM, Fletcher Dunn
wrote:


We will not have Steam group functionality tomorrow.

You actually have to set maxplayers to 32 to host MvM (to make room

for

all the bots).  That's why the mode is expensive CPU-wise, to not

only

simulate all those players but run their AI logic as well.  We'll

have

more

details on the recommended settings tomorrow.

Regarding exactly what happens if a 24-player server switches to MvM:

  I

actually don't think we have worked that out yet.

I'm pretty sure on day one there will be lots of people trying out

all

sorts of things.  Our approach to experimentation in MvM will be the

same

as in PvP: we encourage it, provided that players are opting in to

any

major deviations from the vanilla experience.  Our servers will all

be

configured vanilla, and the matchmaking will enforce the 6 player

limit,

and the server browser will be the primary means for players to find

those

sorts of customizations.  What will the most interesting

customizations

be?

  What will the standard tags be used that we request server operators

to

set in order to help players find the modifications they want or

avoid

the

ones they don't like?  We can't know that yet.  That's something we

expect

you guys and your players to figure out.

I will hazard a guess that raising the player count well above 6

would

be

detrimental the experience.  There ratio of humans to bots would be

off

and

the human defending team would not have enough challenge.  (As an

extreme

example: imagine a 32-player server where everybody is defending an

there

are no bots.)  Exactly how far it can be raised above 6 without

totally

breaking the game is speculation of course.  I think a smart server
operator will start out with the server configured relatively

vanilla,

and

then watch how the game unfolds and listen to their players, and try

to

make smart decisions about which areas to experiment, rather than

assuming

the same sorts of adjustments your community prefers in PvP will
automatically apply to this mode.  A fun co-op mode with more than

six

players is likely to require entirely new missions.  (The mission

decides

the pattern of enemy robots that come at you.)  We have purposefully

made

it easy for players to create their own missions.  (It's a lot easier

than

creating a whole new map!)  But if you play with more than six

players,

with the missions we've made, I think the balance will be way off.

- Fletch

-Original Message-
From: hlds-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com [mailto:
hlds-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com] On Behalf Of Saint K.
Sent: Tuesday, August 14, 2012 4:51 AM
To: Half-Life dedicated Win32 server mailing list
Subject: Re: [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions

Will we be able to restrict a MvM server to people in the steamgroup

only,

like in L4D2?

Saint K.

From: hlds-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com [
hlds-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com] On Behalf Of Fletcher Dunn [
fletch...@valvesoftware.com]
Sent: 14 August 2012 08:52
To: Half-Life dedicated Win32 server mailing list; Half-Life

dedicated

Win32 server mailing list (h...@list.valvesoftware.com)
Subject: Re: [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions

MvM matchmaking will be restricted to 6 players at launch.

The matchmaking also supports joining games in progress to fill an

empty

slot, in which case of course the current map will not be changed.

From: hlds-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com [mailto:
hlds-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com] On Behalf Of Agro
Sent: Monday, August 13, 2012 11:40 PM
To: Half-Life dedicated Win32 server mailing list
Subject: Re: [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions

Is MvM matchmaking going to be limited to 6 players or was the "6

players

join, map changes" logic just an indicator of server behavior to

expect?

- Reply message -
From: "Fletcher Dunn" >
To: "Half-Life dedicated Linux server mailing list (
hlds_linux@list.valvesoftware.com
hlds_linux@list.valvesoftware.com>)"

>, "Half-Lif

Re: [hlds_linux] [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions

[Nomaan Ahmad]

I dont think anyone is acting like its easy... Servers can already have
more than 33 slots, its just that the tf2 client doesn't allow players to
get on servers with more than 33 slots.

On 14 August 2012 20:19, Nerdboy  wrote:

> You guys act as if changing the hard limit is easy. There's all sorts of
> resource management issues that would need to be resolved and a lot of the
> engine would need adjustment. Let's wait to play the game before we start
> thinking about overhauling things to change it.
> On Aug 14, 2012 3:16 PM, "Ryan Stecker"  wrote:
>
> > I third this. I think it'd open the door to making some interesting
> > missions involving more players and more bots.
> >
> > On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 1:51 PM, Nomaan Ahmad 
> wrote:
> >
> > > I agree with 1nsane.
> > >
> > > On 14 August 2012 19:50, 1nsane <1nsane...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Like Asher mentioned above, could you consider increasing the limit.
> So
> > > we
> > > > could better experiment with this mode?
> > > > Perhaps include a warning similar to how players are warned about
> > joining
> > > > servers higher than 24 slots.
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 1:00 PM, Fletcher Dunn
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > We will not have Steam group functionality tomorrow.
> > > > >
> > > > > You actually have to set maxplayers to 32 to host MvM (to make room
> > for
> > > > > all the bots).  That's why the mode is expensive CPU-wise, to not
> > only
> > > > > simulate all those players but run their AI logic as well.  We'll
> > have
> > > > more
> > > > > details on the recommended settings tomorrow.
> > > > >
> > > > > Regarding exactly what happens if a 24-player server switches to
> MvM:
> > >  I
> > > > > actually don't think we have worked that out yet.
> > > > >
> > > > > I'm pretty sure on day one there will be lots of people trying out
> > all
> > > > > sorts of things.  Our approach to experimentation in MvM will be
> the
> > > same
> > > > > as in PvP: we encourage it, provided that players are opting in to
> > any
> > > > > major deviations from the vanilla experience.  Our servers will all
> > be
> > > > > configured vanilla, and the matchmaking will enforce the 6 player
> > > limit,
> > > > > and the server browser will be the primary means for players to
> find
> > > > those
> > > > > sorts of customizations.  What will the most interesting
> > customizations
> > > > be?
> > > > >  What will the standard tags be used that we request server
> operators
> > > to
> > > > > set in order to help players find the modifications they want or
> > avoid
> > > > the
> > > > > ones they don't like?  We can't know that yet.  That's something we
> > > > expect
> > > > > you guys and your players to figure out.
> > > > >
> > > > > I will hazard a guess that raising the player count well above 6
> > would
> > > be
> > > > > detrimental the experience.  There ratio of humans to bots would be
> > off
> > > > and
> > > > > the human defending team would not have enough challenge.  (As an
> > > extreme
> > > > > example: imagine a 32-player server where everybody is defending an
> > > there
> > > > > are no bots.)  Exactly how far it can be raised above 6 without
> > totally
> > > > > breaking the game is speculation of course.  I think a smart server
> > > > > operator will start out with the server configured relatively
> > vanilla,
> > > > and
> > > > > then watch how the game unfolds and listen to their players, and
> try
> > to
> > > > > make smart decisions about which areas to experiment, rather than
> > > > assuming
> > > > > the same sorts of adjustments your community prefers in PvP will
> > > > > automatically apply to this mode.  A fun co-op mode with more than
> > six
> > > > > players is likely to require entirely new missions.  (The mission
> > > decides
> > > > > the pattern of enemy robots that come at you.)  We have
> purposefully
> > > made
> > > > > it easy for players to create their own missions.  (It's a lot
> easier
> > > > than
> > > > > creating a whole new map!)  But if you play with more than six
> > players,
> > > > > with the missions we've made, I think the balance will be way off.
> > > > >
> > > > > - Fletch
> > > > >
> > > > > -Original Message-
> > > > > From: hlds-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com [mailto:
> > > > > hlds-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com] On Behalf Of Saint K.
> > > > > Sent: Tuesday, August 14, 2012 4:51 AM
> > > > > To: Half-Life dedicated Win32 server mailing list
> > > > > Subject: Re: [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions
> > > > >
> > > > > Will we be able to restrict a MvM server to people in the
> steamgroup
> > > > only,
> > > > > like in L4D2?
> > > > >
> > > > > Saint K.
> > > > > 
> > > > > From: hlds-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com [
> > > > > hlds-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com] On Behalf Of Fletcher Dunn [
> > > > > fletch...@valvesoftware.com]
> > > > > Sent: 14 August 2012 08:52
> > > > > To: Half-Life dedicated Win32 server mailing 

Re: [hlds_linux] [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions

[Nerdboy]

You guys act as if changing the hard limit is easy. There's all sorts of
resource management issues that would need to be resolved and a lot of the
engine would need adjustment. Let's wait to play the game before we start
thinking about overhauling things to change it.
On Aug 14, 2012 3:16 PM, "Ryan Stecker"  wrote:

> I third this. I think it'd open the door to making some interesting
> missions involving more players and more bots.
>
> On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 1:51 PM, Nomaan Ahmad  wrote:
>
> > I agree with 1nsane.
> >
> > On 14 August 2012 19:50, 1nsane <1nsane...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Like Asher mentioned above, could you consider increasing the limit. So
> > we
> > > could better experiment with this mode?
> > > Perhaps include a warning similar to how players are warned about
> joining
> > > servers higher than 24 slots.
> > >
> > > On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 1:00 PM, Fletcher Dunn
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > We will not have Steam group functionality tomorrow.
> > > >
> > > > You actually have to set maxplayers to 32 to host MvM (to make room
> for
> > > > all the bots).  That's why the mode is expensive CPU-wise, to not
> only
> > > > simulate all those players but run their AI logic as well.  We'll
> have
> > > more
> > > > details on the recommended settings tomorrow.
> > > >
> > > > Regarding exactly what happens if a 24-player server switches to MvM:
> >  I
> > > > actually don't think we have worked that out yet.
> > > >
> > > > I'm pretty sure on day one there will be lots of people trying out
> all
> > > > sorts of things.  Our approach to experimentation in MvM will be the
> > same
> > > > as in PvP: we encourage it, provided that players are opting in to
> any
> > > > major deviations from the vanilla experience.  Our servers will all
> be
> > > > configured vanilla, and the matchmaking will enforce the 6 player
> > limit,
> > > > and the server browser will be the primary means for players to find
> > > those
> > > > sorts of customizations.  What will the most interesting
> customizations
> > > be?
> > > >  What will the standard tags be used that we request server operators
> > to
> > > > set in order to help players find the modifications they want or
> avoid
> > > the
> > > > ones they don't like?  We can't know that yet.  That's something we
> > > expect
> > > > you guys and your players to figure out.
> > > >
> > > > I will hazard a guess that raising the player count well above 6
> would
> > be
> > > > detrimental the experience.  There ratio of humans to bots would be
> off
> > > and
> > > > the human defending team would not have enough challenge.  (As an
> > extreme
> > > > example: imagine a 32-player server where everybody is defending an
> > there
> > > > are no bots.)  Exactly how far it can be raised above 6 without
> totally
> > > > breaking the game is speculation of course.  I think a smart server
> > > > operator will start out with the server configured relatively
> vanilla,
> > > and
> > > > then watch how the game unfolds and listen to their players, and try
> to
> > > > make smart decisions about which areas to experiment, rather than
> > > assuming
> > > > the same sorts of adjustments your community prefers in PvP will
> > > > automatically apply to this mode.  A fun co-op mode with more than
> six
> > > > players is likely to require entirely new missions.  (The mission
> > decides
> > > > the pattern of enemy robots that come at you.)  We have purposefully
> > made
> > > > it easy for players to create their own missions.  (It's a lot easier
> > > than
> > > > creating a whole new map!)  But if you play with more than six
> players,
> > > > with the missions we've made, I think the balance will be way off.
> > > >
> > > > - Fletch
> > > >
> > > > -Original Message-
> > > > From: hlds-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com [mailto:
> > > > hlds-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com] On Behalf Of Saint K.
> > > > Sent: Tuesday, August 14, 2012 4:51 AM
> > > > To: Half-Life dedicated Win32 server mailing list
> > > > Subject: Re: [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions
> > > >
> > > > Will we be able to restrict a MvM server to people in the steamgroup
> > > only,
> > > > like in L4D2?
> > > >
> > > > Saint K.
> > > > 
> > > > From: hlds-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com [
> > > > hlds-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com] On Behalf Of Fletcher Dunn [
> > > > fletch...@valvesoftware.com]
> > > > Sent: 14 August 2012 08:52
> > > > To: Half-Life dedicated Win32 server mailing list; Half-Life
> dedicated
> > > > Win32 server mailing list (h...@list.valvesoftware.com)
> > > > Subject: Re: [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions
> > > >
> > > > MvM matchmaking will be restricted to 6 players at launch.
> > > >
> > > > The matchmaking also supports joining games in progress to fill an
> > empty
> > > > slot, in which case of course the current map will not be changed.
> > > >
> > > > From: hlds-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com [mailto:
> > > > hlds-boun...@li

Re: [hlds_linux] [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions

[Ryan Stecker]

I third this. I think it'd open the door to making some interesting
missions involving more players and more bots.

On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 1:51 PM, Nomaan Ahmad  wrote:

> I agree with 1nsane.
>
> On 14 August 2012 19:50, 1nsane <1nsane...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Like Asher mentioned above, could you consider increasing the limit. So
> we
> > could better experiment with this mode?
> > Perhaps include a warning similar to how players are warned about joining
> > servers higher than 24 slots.
> >
> > On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 1:00 PM, Fletcher Dunn
> > wrote:
> >
> > > We will not have Steam group functionality tomorrow.
> > >
> > > You actually have to set maxplayers to 32 to host MvM (to make room for
> > > all the bots).  That's why the mode is expensive CPU-wise, to not only
> > > simulate all those players but run their AI logic as well.  We'll have
> > more
> > > details on the recommended settings tomorrow.
> > >
> > > Regarding exactly what happens if a 24-player server switches to MvM:
>  I
> > > actually don't think we have worked that out yet.
> > >
> > > I'm pretty sure on day one there will be lots of people trying out all
> > > sorts of things.  Our approach to experimentation in MvM will be the
> same
> > > as in PvP: we encourage it, provided that players are opting in to any
> > > major deviations from the vanilla experience.  Our servers will all be
> > > configured vanilla, and the matchmaking will enforce the 6 player
> limit,
> > > and the server browser will be the primary means for players to find
> > those
> > > sorts of customizations.  What will the most interesting customizations
> > be?
> > >  What will the standard tags be used that we request server operators
> to
> > > set in order to help players find the modifications they want or avoid
> > the
> > > ones they don't like?  We can't know that yet.  That's something we
> > expect
> > > you guys and your players to figure out.
> > >
> > > I will hazard a guess that raising the player count well above 6 would
> be
> > > detrimental the experience.  There ratio of humans to bots would be off
> > and
> > > the human defending team would not have enough challenge.  (As an
> extreme
> > > example: imagine a 32-player server where everybody is defending an
> there
> > > are no bots.)  Exactly how far it can be raised above 6 without totally
> > > breaking the game is speculation of course.  I think a smart server
> > > operator will start out with the server configured relatively vanilla,
> > and
> > > then watch how the game unfolds and listen to their players, and try to
> > > make smart decisions about which areas to experiment, rather than
> > assuming
> > > the same sorts of adjustments your community prefers in PvP will
> > > automatically apply to this mode.  A fun co-op mode with more than six
> > > players is likely to require entirely new missions.  (The mission
> decides
> > > the pattern of enemy robots that come at you.)  We have purposefully
> made
> > > it easy for players to create their own missions.  (It's a lot easier
> > than
> > > creating a whole new map!)  But if you play with more than six players,
> > > with the missions we've made, I think the balance will be way off.
> > >
> > > - Fletch
> > >
> > > -Original Message-
> > > From: hlds-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com [mailto:
> > > hlds-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com] On Behalf Of Saint K.
> > > Sent: Tuesday, August 14, 2012 4:51 AM
> > > To: Half-Life dedicated Win32 server mailing list
> > > Subject: Re: [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions
> > >
> > > Will we be able to restrict a MvM server to people in the steamgroup
> > only,
> > > like in L4D2?
> > >
> > > Saint K.
> > > 
> > > From: hlds-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com [
> > > hlds-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com] On Behalf Of Fletcher Dunn [
> > > fletch...@valvesoftware.com]
> > > Sent: 14 August 2012 08:52
> > > To: Half-Life dedicated Win32 server mailing list; Half-Life dedicated
> > > Win32 server mailing list (h...@list.valvesoftware.com)
> > > Subject: Re: [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions
> > >
> > > MvM matchmaking will be restricted to 6 players at launch.
> > >
> > > The matchmaking also supports joining games in progress to fill an
> empty
> > > slot, in which case of course the current map will not be changed.
> > >
> > > From: hlds-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com [mailto:
> > > hlds-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com] On Behalf Of Agro
> > > Sent: Monday, August 13, 2012 11:40 PM
> > > To: Half-Life dedicated Win32 server mailing list
> > > Subject: Re: [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions
> > >
> > > Is MvM matchmaking going to be limited to 6 players or was the "6
> players
> > > join, map changes" logic just an indicator of server behavior to
> expect?
> > > - Reply message -
> > > From: "Fletcher Dunn"  > > fletch...@valvesoftware.com>>
> > > To: "Half-Life dedicated Linux server mailing list (
> > > hlds_linux@list.valvesoftware.com > hlds_l

Re: [hlds_linux] [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions

[Nomaan Ahmad]

I agree with 1nsane.

On 14 August 2012 19:50, 1nsane <1nsane...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Like Asher mentioned above, could you consider increasing the limit. So we
> could better experiment with this mode?
> Perhaps include a warning similar to how players are warned about joining
> servers higher than 24 slots.
>
> On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 1:00 PM, Fletcher Dunn
> wrote:
>
> > We will not have Steam group functionality tomorrow.
> >
> > You actually have to set maxplayers to 32 to host MvM (to make room for
> > all the bots).  That's why the mode is expensive CPU-wise, to not only
> > simulate all those players but run their AI logic as well.  We'll have
> more
> > details on the recommended settings tomorrow.
> >
> > Regarding exactly what happens if a 24-player server switches to MvM:  I
> > actually don't think we have worked that out yet.
> >
> > I'm pretty sure on day one there will be lots of people trying out all
> > sorts of things.  Our approach to experimentation in MvM will be the same
> > as in PvP: we encourage it, provided that players are opting in to any
> > major deviations from the vanilla experience.  Our servers will all be
> > configured vanilla, and the matchmaking will enforce the 6 player limit,
> > and the server browser will be the primary means for players to find
> those
> > sorts of customizations.  What will the most interesting customizations
> be?
> >  What will the standard tags be used that we request server operators to
> > set in order to help players find the modifications they want or avoid
> the
> > ones they don't like?  We can't know that yet.  That's something we
> expect
> > you guys and your players to figure out.
> >
> > I will hazard a guess that raising the player count well above 6 would be
> > detrimental the experience.  There ratio of humans to bots would be off
> and
> > the human defending team would not have enough challenge.  (As an extreme
> > example: imagine a 32-player server where everybody is defending an there
> > are no bots.)  Exactly how far it can be raised above 6 without totally
> > breaking the game is speculation of course.  I think a smart server
> > operator will start out with the server configured relatively vanilla,
> and
> > then watch how the game unfolds and listen to their players, and try to
> > make smart decisions about which areas to experiment, rather than
> assuming
> > the same sorts of adjustments your community prefers in PvP will
> > automatically apply to this mode.  A fun co-op mode with more than six
> > players is likely to require entirely new missions.  (The mission decides
> > the pattern of enemy robots that come at you.)  We have purposefully made
> > it easy for players to create their own missions.  (It's a lot easier
> than
> > creating a whole new map!)  But if you play with more than six players,
> > with the missions we've made, I think the balance will be way off.
> >
> > - Fletch
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: hlds-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com [mailto:
> > hlds-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com] On Behalf Of Saint K.
> > Sent: Tuesday, August 14, 2012 4:51 AM
> > To: Half-Life dedicated Win32 server mailing list
> > Subject: Re: [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions
> >
> > Will we be able to restrict a MvM server to people in the steamgroup
> only,
> > like in L4D2?
> >
> > Saint K.
> > 
> > From: hlds-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com [
> > hlds-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com] On Behalf Of Fletcher Dunn [
> > fletch...@valvesoftware.com]
> > Sent: 14 August 2012 08:52
> > To: Half-Life dedicated Win32 server mailing list; Half-Life dedicated
> > Win32 server mailing list (h...@list.valvesoftware.com)
> > Subject: Re: [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions
> >
> > MvM matchmaking will be restricted to 6 players at launch.
> >
> > The matchmaking also supports joining games in progress to fill an empty
> > slot, in which case of course the current map will not be changed.
> >
> > From: hlds-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com [mailto:
> > hlds-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com] On Behalf Of Agro
> > Sent: Monday, August 13, 2012 11:40 PM
> > To: Half-Life dedicated Win32 server mailing list
> > Subject: Re: [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions
> >
> > Is MvM matchmaking going to be limited to 6 players or was the "6 players
> > join, map changes" logic just an indicator of server behavior to expect?
> > - Reply message -
> > From: "Fletcher Dunn"  > fletch...@valvesoftware.com>>
> > To: "Half-Life dedicated Linux server mailing list (
> > hlds_linux@list.valvesoftware.com hlds_linux@list.valvesoftware.com>)"
> >  > hlds_linux@list.valvesoftware.com>>, "Half-Life dedicated Win32 server
> > mailing list (h...@list.valvesoftware.com > h...@list.valvesoftware.com>)"  > h...@list.valvesoftware.com>>
> > Subject: [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions
> > Date: Tue, Aug 14, 2012 06:39
> >
> > Here are some answers to questions regarding hosting MvM servers:
> >
> > * Players can joi

Re: [hlds_linux] [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions

[1nsane]

Like Asher mentioned above, could you consider increasing the limit. So we
could better experiment with this mode?
Perhaps include a warning similar to how players are warned about joining
servers higher than 24 slots.

On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 1:00 PM, Fletcher Dunn
wrote:

> We will not have Steam group functionality tomorrow.
>
> You actually have to set maxplayers to 32 to host MvM (to make room for
> all the bots).  That's why the mode is expensive CPU-wise, to not only
> simulate all those players but run their AI logic as well.  We'll have more
> details on the recommended settings tomorrow.
>
> Regarding exactly what happens if a 24-player server switches to MvM:  I
> actually don't think we have worked that out yet.
>
> I'm pretty sure on day one there will be lots of people trying out all
> sorts of things.  Our approach to experimentation in MvM will be the same
> as in PvP: we encourage it, provided that players are opting in to any
> major deviations from the vanilla experience.  Our servers will all be
> configured vanilla, and the matchmaking will enforce the 6 player limit,
> and the server browser will be the primary means for players to find those
> sorts of customizations.  What will the most interesting customizations be?
>  What will the standard tags be used that we request server operators to
> set in order to help players find the modifications they want or avoid the
> ones they don't like?  We can't know that yet.  That's something we expect
> you guys and your players to figure out.
>
> I will hazard a guess that raising the player count well above 6 would be
> detrimental the experience.  There ratio of humans to bots would be off and
> the human defending team would not have enough challenge.  (As an extreme
> example: imagine a 32-player server where everybody is defending an there
> are no bots.)  Exactly how far it can be raised above 6 without totally
> breaking the game is speculation of course.  I think a smart server
> operator will start out with the server configured relatively vanilla, and
> then watch how the game unfolds and listen to their players, and try to
> make smart decisions about which areas to experiment, rather than assuming
> the same sorts of adjustments your community prefers in PvP will
> automatically apply to this mode.  A fun co-op mode with more than six
> players is likely to require entirely new missions.  (The mission decides
> the pattern of enemy robots that come at you.)  We have purposefully made
> it easy for players to create their own missions.  (It's a lot easier than
> creating a whole new map!)  But if you play with more than six players,
> with the missions we've made, I think the balance will be way off.
>
> - Fletch
>
> -Original Message-
> From: hlds-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com [mailto:
> hlds-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com] On Behalf Of Saint K.
> Sent: Tuesday, August 14, 2012 4:51 AM
> To: Half-Life dedicated Win32 server mailing list
> Subject: Re: [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions
>
> Will we be able to restrict a MvM server to people in the steamgroup only,
> like in L4D2?
>
> Saint K.
> 
> From: hlds-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com [
> hlds-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com] On Behalf Of Fletcher Dunn [
> fletch...@valvesoftware.com]
> Sent: 14 August 2012 08:52
> To: Half-Life dedicated Win32 server mailing list; Half-Life dedicated
> Win32 server mailing list (h...@list.valvesoftware.com)
> Subject: Re: [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions
>
> MvM matchmaking will be restricted to 6 players at launch.
>
> The matchmaking also supports joining games in progress to fill an empty
> slot, in which case of course the current map will not be changed.
>
> From: hlds-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com [mailto:
> hlds-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com] On Behalf Of Agro
> Sent: Monday, August 13, 2012 11:40 PM
> To: Half-Life dedicated Win32 server mailing list
> Subject: Re: [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions
>
> Is MvM matchmaking going to be limited to 6 players or was the "6 players
> join, map changes" logic just an indicator of server behavior to expect?
> - Reply message -
> From: "Fletcher Dunn"  fletch...@valvesoftware.com>>
> To: "Half-Life dedicated Linux server mailing list (
> hlds_linux@list.valvesoftware.com)"
>  hlds_linux@list.valvesoftware.com>>, "Half-Life dedicated Win32 server
> mailing list (h...@list.valvesoftware.com h...@list.valvesoftware.com>)"  h...@list.valvesoftware.com>>
> Subject: [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions
> Date: Tue, Aug 14, 2012 06:39
>
> Here are some answers to questions regarding hosting MvM servers:
>
> * Players can join your server through any means they can join PvP games:
> the server browser, ad hoc joins, or the new matchmaking system (quickplay
> beta).
> * To accept matchmaking traffic, you must select which sort of traffic you
> want.  (Regular PvP traffic or MvM traffic.)  Set "tf_mm_servermode 2

Re: [hlds_linux] [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions

[Fletcher Dunn]

The server will need to launch with -maxplayers 32 to host MvM properly.

-Original Message-
From: hlds_linux-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com 
[mailto:hlds_linux-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com] On Behalf Of Cameron Munroe
Sent: Tuesday, August 14, 2012 11:16 AM
To: Half-Life dedicated Linux server mailing list
Subject: Re: [hlds_linux] [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions

Pretty much its 32 players for the 26 bots that you will be up against. 
So no 10 player servers wont work. The penalize is really for PvP, which I do 
understand.


On 8/14/2012 11:13 AM, slimecou...@live.com wrote:
> So wait, will these servers have to be actual 32 slot servers to run MvM? 
> Hasn't Valve always penalized for anything over 24 players? I just rented a 
> few 10 slot servers thinking this would be adequate to host some MvM matches. 
> Is there no way around this?
>   
> ___
> To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please 
> visit:
> https://list.valvesoftware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux


___
To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please 
visit:
https://list.valvesoftware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux

___
To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please 
visit:
https://list.valvesoftware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux

Re: [hlds_linux] [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions

[Cameron Munroe]

Pretty much its 32 players for the 26 bots that you will be up against. 
So no 10 player servers wont work. The penalize is really for PvP, which 
I do understand.



On 8/14/2012 11:13 AM, slimecou...@live.com wrote:

So wait, will these servers have to be actual 32 slot servers to run MvM? 
Hasn't Valve always penalized for anything over 24 players? I just rented a few 
10 slot servers thinking this would be adequate to host some MvM matches. Is 
there no way around this?

___
To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please 
visit:
https://list.valvesoftware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux



___
To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please 
visit:
https://list.valvesoftware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux

Re: [hlds_linux] [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions

[slimecou...@live.com]

So wait, will these servers have to be actual 32 slot servers to run MvM? 
Hasn't Valve always penalized for anything over 24 players? I just rented a few 
10 slot servers thinking this would be adequate to host some MvM matches. Is 
there no way around this?
  
___
To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please 
visit:
https://list.valvesoftware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux

Re: [hlds_linux] [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions

[Saint K .]

Thanks a lot for the info, as always Fletch!

Saint K.

From: hlds_linux-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com 
[hlds_linux-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com] On Behalf Of Fletcher Dunn 
[fletch...@valvesoftware.com]
Sent: 14 August 2012 19:00
To: Half-Life dedicated Win32 server mailing list; Half-Life dedicated Linux 
server mailing list (hlds_linux@list.valvesoftware.com)
Subject: Re: [hlds_linux] [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions

We will not have Steam group functionality tomorrow.

You actually have to set maxplayers to 32 to host MvM (to make room for all the 
bots).  That's why the mode is expensive CPU-wise, to not only simulate all 
those players but run their AI logic as well.  We'll have more details on the 
recommended settings tomorrow.

Regarding exactly what happens if a 24-player server switches to MvM:  I 
actually don't think we have worked that out yet.

I'm pretty sure on day one there will be lots of people trying out all sorts of 
things.  Our approach to experimentation in MvM will be the same as in PvP: we 
encourage it, provided that players are opting in to any major deviations from 
the vanilla experience.  Our servers will all be configured vanilla, and the 
matchmaking will enforce the 6 player limit, and the server browser will be the 
primary means for players to find those sorts of customizations.  What will the 
most interesting customizations be?  What will the standard tags be used that 
we request server operators to set in order to help players find the 
modifications they want or avoid the ones they don't like?  We can't know that 
yet.  That's something we expect you guys and your players to figure out.

I will hazard a guess that raising the player count well above 6 would be 
detrimental the experience.  There ratio of humans to bots would be off and the 
human defending team would not have enough challenge.  (As an extreme example: 
imagine a 32-player server where everybody is defending an there are no bots.)  
Exactly how far it can be raised above 6 without totally breaking the game is 
speculation of course.  I think a smart server operator will start out with the 
server configured relatively vanilla, and then watch how the game unfolds and 
listen to their players, and try to make smart decisions about which areas to 
experiment, rather than assuming the same sorts of adjustments your community 
prefers in PvP will automatically apply to this mode.  A fun co-op mode with 
more than six players is likely to require entirely new missions.  (The mission 
decides the pattern of enemy robots that come at you.)  We have purposefully 
made it easy for players to create their own missions.  (It's a lot easier than 
creating a whole new map!)  But if you play with more than six players, with 
the missions we've made, I think the balance will be way off.

- Fletch

-Original Message-
From: hlds-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com 
[mailto:hlds-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com] On Behalf Of Saint K.
Sent: Tuesday, August 14, 2012 4:51 AM
To: Half-Life dedicated Win32 server mailing list
Subject: Re: [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions

Will we be able to restrict a MvM server to people in the steamgroup only, like 
in L4D2?

Saint K.

From: hlds-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com [hlds-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com] 
On Behalf Of Fletcher Dunn [fletch...@valvesoftware.com]
Sent: 14 August 2012 08:52
To: Half-Life dedicated Win32 server mailing list; Half-Life dedicated Win32 
server mailing list (h...@list.valvesoftware.com)
Subject: Re: [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions

MvM matchmaking will be restricted to 6 players at launch.

The matchmaking also supports joining games in progress to fill an empty slot, 
in which case of course the current map will not be changed.

From: hlds-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com 
[mailto:hlds-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com] On Behalf Of Agro
Sent: Monday, August 13, 2012 11:40 PM
To: Half-Life dedicated Win32 server mailing list
Subject: Re: [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions

Is MvM matchmaking going to be limited to 6 players or was the "6 players join, 
map changes" logic just an indicator of server behavior to expect?
- Reply message -
From: "Fletcher Dunn" 
mailto:fletch...@valvesoftware.com>>
To: "Half-Life dedicated Linux server mailing list 
(hlds_linux@list.valvesoftware.com<mailto:hlds_linux@list.valvesoftware.com>)" 
mailto:hlds_linux@list.valvesoftware.com>>, 
"Half-Life dedicated Win32 server mailing list 
(h...@list.valvesoftware.com<mailto:h...@list.valvesoftware.com>)" 
mailto:h...@list.valvesoftware.com>>
Subject: [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions
Date: Tue, Aug 14, 2012 06:39

Here are some answers to questions regarding hosting MvM servers:

* Players can join your server through any means they can join PvP games: the 
server brow

Re: [hlds_linux] [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions

[Dan Offord]

Is there any chance of FreeBSD updates in this version?

If there you're using any custom configs for MvM will we be able to set
them (similar to servercfgfile?)

Thanks,

Dan


On 14 August 2012 18:28, Fletcher Dunn  wrote:

> Out of the question.  Valve doesn't do "3".  Come on, you guys know this.
>
> From: hlds-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com [mailto:
> hlds-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com] On Behalf Of T Marler
> Sent: Tuesday, August 14, 2012 10:22 AM
> To: Half-Life dedicated Win32 server mailing list
> Subject: Re: [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions
>
> After working with our 3v3 koth stuff, I see a lot of 3's... HI VALVE
>
> - Original Message -
> From: Cameron Munroe  cmun...@cameronmunroe.com>>
> Date: Tuesday, August 14, 2012 11:21 am
> Subject: Re: [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions
> To: tmar...@shaw.ca, Half-Life dedicated Win32
> server mailing list  h...@list.valvesoftware.com>>
>
> > Awww my idea went out... Well now our idea.
> >
> >
> > On 8/14/2012 10:20 AM, T Marler wrote:
> > >What about less than 6? Say... 3 Saxton Hales?
> > >
> > >- Original Message -
> > >From: Fletcher Dunn  fletch...@valvesoftware.com>>
> > >Date: Tuesday, August 14, 2012 11:00 am
> > >Subject: Re: [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions
> > >To: Half-Life dedicated Win32 server mailing list
> > mailto:h...@list.valvesoftware.com>>,
> "Half-Life dedicated Linux
> > server mailing list (hlds_linux@list.valvesoftware.com hlds_linux@list.valvesoftware.com>)"
> >  hlds_linux@list.valvesoftware.com>>>
> > >> We will not have Steam group functionality tomorrow.
> > >>
> > >> You actually have to set maxplayers to 32 to host MvM (to make
> > >> room for all the bots).  That's why the mode is expensive
> > >> CPU-wise, to not only simulate all those players but run their
> > >> AI logic as well.  We'll have more details on the
> > >> recommended settings tomorrow.
> > >>
> > >> Regarding exactly what happens if a 24-player server switches to
> > >> MvM:  I actually don't think we have worked that out yet.
> > >>
> > >> I'm pretty sure on day one there will be lots of people trying
> > >> out all sorts of things.  Our approach to experimentation
> > >> in MvM will be the same as in PvP: we encourage it, provided
> > >> that players are opting in to any major deviations from the
> > >> vanilla experience.  Our servers will all be configured
> > >> vanilla, and the matchmaking will enforce the 6 player limit,
> > >> and the server browser will be the primary means for players to
> > >> find those sorts of customizations.  What will the most
> > >> interesting customizations be?  What will the standard tags
> > >> be used that we request server operators to set in order to help
> > >> players find the modifications they want or avoid the ones they
> > >> don't like?  We can't know that yet.  That's something
> > >> we expect you guys and your players to figure out.
> > >>
> > >> I will hazard a guess that raising the player count well
> > above 6
> > >> would be detrimental the experience.  There ratio of humans
> > >> to bots would be off and the human defending team would not have
> > >> enough challenge.  (As an extreme example: imagine a 32-
> > >> player server where everybody is defending an there are no
> > >> bots.)  Exactly how far it can be raised above 6 without
> > >> totally breaking the game is speculation of course.  I
> > >> think a smart server operator will start out with the server
> > >> configured relatively vanilla, and then watch how the game
> > >> unfolds and listen to their players, and try to make smart
> > >> decisions about which areas to experiment, rather than assuming
> > >> the same sorts of adjustments your community prefers in PvP will
> > >> automatically apply to this mode.  A fun co-op mode with
> > >> more than six players is likely to require entirely new
> > >> missions.  (The mission decides the pattern of enemy robots
> > >> that come at you.)  We have purposefully made it easy for
> > >> players to create their own missions.
> > >>   (It's a lot easier than creating a whole new map!)
> > >> But if you play with more than six players, with the missions
> > >> we've made, I think the balance will be way off.
> > >>
> > >> - Fletch
> > >>
> > >> -Original Message-
> > >> From: hlds-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com hlds-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com> [mailto:hlds-
> > >> boun...@list.valvesoftware.com]
> On Behalf Of Saint K.
> > >> Sent: Tuesday, August 14, 2012 4:51 AM
> > >> To: Half-Life dedicated Win32 server mailing list
> > >> Subject: Re: [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions
> > >>
> > >> Will we be able to restrict a MvM server to people in the
> > >> steamgroup only, like in L4D2?
> > >>
> > >> Saint K.
> > >> 
> > >> From: hlds-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com hlds-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com> [hlds-
> > >> boun...@list.valvesoftware.com

Re: [hlds_linux] [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions

[Fletcher Dunn]

Out of the question.  Valve doesn't do "3".  Come on, you guys know this.

From: hlds-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com 
[mailto:hlds-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com] On Behalf Of T Marler
Sent: Tuesday, August 14, 2012 10:22 AM
To: Half-Life dedicated Win32 server mailing list
Subject: Re: [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions

After working with our 3v3 koth stuff, I see a lot of 3's... HI VALVE

- Original Message -
From: Cameron Munroe 
mailto:cmun...@cameronmunroe.com>>
Date: Tuesday, August 14, 2012 11:21 am
Subject: Re: [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions
To: tmar...@shaw.ca, Half-Life dedicated Win32 server 
mailing list mailto:h...@list.valvesoftware.com>>

> Awww my idea went out... Well now our idea.
>
>
> On 8/14/2012 10:20 AM, T Marler wrote:
> >What about less than 6? Say... 3 Saxton Hales?
> >
> >- Original Message -
> >From: Fletcher Dunn 
> >mailto:fletch...@valvesoftware.com>>
> >Date: Tuesday, August 14, 2012 11:00 am
> >Subject: Re: [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions
> >To: Half-Life dedicated Win32 server mailing list
> mailto:h...@list.valvesoftware.com>>, "Half-Life 
> dedicated Linux
> server mailing list 
> (hlds_linux@list.valvesoftware.com)"
> mailto:hlds_linux@list.valvesoftware.com>>>
> >> We will not have Steam group functionality tomorrow.
> >>
> >> You actually have to set maxplayers to 32 to host MvM (to make
> >> room for all the bots).  That's why the mode is expensive
> >> CPU-wise, to not only simulate all those players but run their
> >> AI logic as well.  We'll have more details on the
> >> recommended settings tomorrow.
> >>
> >> Regarding exactly what happens if a 24-player server switches to
> >> MvM:  I actually don't think we have worked that out yet.
> >>
> >> I'm pretty sure on day one there will be lots of people trying
> >> out all sorts of things.  Our approach to experimentation
> >> in MvM will be the same as in PvP: we encourage it, provided
> >> that players are opting in to any major deviations from the
> >> vanilla experience.  Our servers will all be configured
> >> vanilla, and the matchmaking will enforce the 6 player limit,
> >> and the server browser will be the primary means for players to
> >> find those sorts of customizations.  What will the most
> >> interesting customizations be?  What will the standard tags
> >> be used that we request server operators to set in order to help
> >> players find the modifications they want or avoid the ones they
> >> don't like?  We can't know that yet.  That's something
> >> we expect you guys and your players to figure out.
> >>
> >> I will hazard a guess that raising the player count well
> above 6
> >> would be detrimental the experience.  There ratio of humans
> >> to bots would be off and the human defending team would not have
> >> enough challenge.  (As an extreme example: imagine a 32-
> >> player server where everybody is defending an there are no
> >> bots.)  Exactly how far it can be raised above 6 without
> >> totally breaking the game is speculation of course.  I
> >> think a smart server operator will start out with the server
> >> configured relatively vanilla, and then watch how the game
> >> unfolds and listen to their players, and try to make smart
> >> decisions about which areas to experiment, rather than assuming
> >> the same sorts of adjustments your community prefers in PvP will
> >> automatically apply to this mode.  A fun co-op mode with
> >> more than six players is likely to require entirely new
> >> missions.  (The mission decides the pattern of enemy robots
> >> that come at you.)  We have purposefully made it easy for
> >> players to create their own missions.
> >>   (It's a lot easier than creating a whole new map!)
> >> But if you play with more than six players, with the missions
> >> we've made, I think the balance will be way off.
> >>
> >> - Fletch
> >>
> >> -Original Message-
> >> From: 
> >> hlds-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com
> >>  [mailto:hlds-
> >> boun...@list.valvesoftware.com] On 
> >> Behalf Of Saint K.
> >> Sent: Tuesday, August 14, 2012 4:51 AM
> >> To: Half-Life dedicated Win32 server mailing list
> >> Subject: Re: [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions
> >>
> >> Will we be able to restrict a MvM server to people in the
> >> steamgroup only, like in L4D2?
> >>
> >> Saint K.
> >> 
> >> From: 
> >> hlds-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com
> >>  [hlds-
> >> boun...@list.valvesoftware.com] On 
> >> Behalf Of Fletcher Dunn
> >> [fletch...@valvesoftware.com]Sent: 14 August 2012 08:52
> >> To: Half-Life dedicated Win32 server mailing list; Half-Life
> >> dedicated Win32 server mailing list
> >> (h...@list.valvesoftware.com)Subject:
> >>  Re: [hlds] T

Re: [hlds_linux] [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions

[Cameron Munroe]

Ohh GOD MY CPU! ITS MELTING


On 8/14/2012 10:18 AM, Asher Baker wrote:

You actually have to set maxplayers to 32 to host MvM (to make room for all the 
bots).

Any chance of seeing the hard-limit raised well above the current 33
(to 65)? And just soft-limited to the current values.

This would allow lots of room for experimentation in the future.

On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 6:00 PM, Fletcher Dunn
 wrote:

We will not have Steam group functionality tomorrow.

You actually have to set maxplayers to 32 to host MvM (to make room for all the 
bots).  That's why the mode is expensive CPU-wise, to not only simulate all 
those players but run their AI logic as well.  We'll have more details on the 
recommended settings tomorrow.

Regarding exactly what happens if a 24-player server switches to MvM:  I 
actually don't think we have worked that out yet.

I'm pretty sure on day one there will be lots of people trying out all sorts of 
things.  Our approach to experimentation in MvM will be the same as in PvP: we 
encourage it, provided that players are opting in to any major deviations from 
the vanilla experience.  Our servers will all be configured vanilla, and the 
matchmaking will enforce the 6 player limit, and the server browser will be the 
primary means for players to find those sorts of customizations.  What will the 
most interesting customizations be?  What will the standard tags be used that 
we request server operators to set in order to help players find the 
modifications they want or avoid the ones they don't like?  We can't know that 
yet.  That's something we expect you guys and your players to figure out.

I will hazard a guess that raising the player count well above 6 would be 
detrimental the experience.  There ratio of humans to bots would be off and the 
human defending team would not have enough challenge.  (As an extreme example: 
imagine a 32-player server where everybody is defending an there are no bots.)  
Exactly how far it can be raised above 6 without totally breaking the game is 
speculation of course.  I think a smart server operator will start out with the 
server configured relatively vanilla, and then watch how the game unfolds and 
listen to their players, and try to make smart decisions about which areas to 
experiment, rather than assuming the same sorts of adjustments your community 
prefers in PvP will automatically apply to this mode.  A fun co-op mode with 
more than six players is likely to require entirely new missions.  (The mission 
decides the pattern of enemy robots that come at you.)  We have purposefully 
made it easy for players to create their own miss

  ions.  (It's a lot easier than creating a whole new map!)  But if you play 
with more than six players, with the missions we've made, I think the balance 
will be way off.

- Fletch

-Original Message-
From: hlds-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com 
[mailto:hlds-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com] On Behalf Of Saint K.
Sent: Tuesday, August 14, 2012 4:51 AM
To: Half-Life dedicated Win32 server mailing list
Subject: Re: [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions

Will we be able to restrict a MvM server to people in the steamgroup only, like 
in L4D2?

Saint K.

From: hlds-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com [hlds-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com] 
On Behalf Of Fletcher Dunn [fletch...@valvesoftware.com]
Sent: 14 August 2012 08:52
To: Half-Life dedicated Win32 server mailing list; Half-Life dedicated Win32 
server mailing list (h...@list.valvesoftware.com)
Subject: Re: [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions

MvM matchmaking will be restricted to 6 players at launch.

The matchmaking also supports joining games in progress to fill an empty slot, 
in which case of course the current map will not be changed.

From: hlds-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com 
[mailto:hlds-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com] On Behalf Of Agro
Sent: Monday, August 13, 2012 11:40 PM
To: Half-Life dedicated Win32 server mailing list
Subject: Re: [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions

Is MvM matchmaking going to be limited to 6 players or was the "6 players join, map 
changes" logic just an indicator of server behavior to expect?
- Reply message -
From: "Fletcher Dunn" 
mailto:fletch...@valvesoftware.com>>
To: "Half-Life dedicated Linux server mailing list 
(hlds_linux@list.valvesoftware.com)" 
mailto:hlds_linux@list.valvesoftware.com>>, "Half-Life dedicated Win32 server 
mailing list (h...@list.valvesoftware.com)" 
mailto:h...@list.valvesoftware.com>>
Subject: [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions
Date: Tue, Aug 14, 2012 06:39

Here are some answers to questions regarding hosting MvM servers:

* Players can join your server through any means they can join PvP games: the 
server browser, ad hoc joins, or the new matchmaking system (quickplay beta).
* To accept matchmaking traffic, you must select which sort of traffic you want.  
(Regular PvP traffic or M

Re: [hlds_linux] [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions

[Asher Baker]

> You actually have to set maxplayers to 32 to host MvM (to make room for all 
> the bots).

Any chance of seeing the hard-limit raised well above the current 33
(to 65)? And just soft-limited to the current values.

This would allow lots of room for experimentation in the future.

On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 6:00 PM, Fletcher Dunn
 wrote:
> We will not have Steam group functionality tomorrow.
>
> You actually have to set maxplayers to 32 to host MvM (to make room for all 
> the bots).  That's why the mode is expensive CPU-wise, to not only simulate 
> all those players but run their AI logic as well.  We'll have more details on 
> the recommended settings tomorrow.
>
> Regarding exactly what happens if a 24-player server switches to MvM:  I 
> actually don't think we have worked that out yet.
>
> I'm pretty sure on day one there will be lots of people trying out all sorts 
> of things.  Our approach to experimentation in MvM will be the same as in 
> PvP: we encourage it, provided that players are opting in to any major 
> deviations from the vanilla experience.  Our servers will all be configured 
> vanilla, and the matchmaking will enforce the 6 player limit, and the server 
> browser will be the primary means for players to find those sorts of 
> customizations.  What will the most interesting customizations be?  What will 
> the standard tags be used that we request server operators to set in order to 
> help players find the modifications they want or avoid the ones they don't 
> like?  We can't know that yet.  That's something we expect you guys and your 
> players to figure out.
>
> I will hazard a guess that raising the player count well above 6 would be 
> detrimental the experience.  There ratio of humans to bots would be off and 
> the human defending team would not have enough challenge.  (As an extreme 
> example: imagine a 32-player server where everybody is defending an there are 
> no bots.)  Exactly how far it can be raised above 6 without totally breaking 
> the game is speculation of course.  I think a smart server operator will 
> start out with the server configured relatively vanilla, and then watch how 
> the game unfolds and listen to their players, and try to make smart decisions 
> about which areas to experiment, rather than assuming the same sorts of 
> adjustments your community prefers in PvP will automatically apply to this 
> mode.  A fun co-op mode with more than six players is likely to require 
> entirely new missions.  (The mission decides the pattern of enemy robots that 
> come at you.)  We have purposefully made it easy for players to create their 
> own missions.  (It's a lot easier than creating a whole new map!)  But if you 
> play with more than six players, with the missions we've made, I think the 
> balance will be way off.
>
> - Fletch
>
> -Original Message-
> From: hlds-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com 
> [mailto:hlds-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com] On Behalf Of Saint K.
> Sent: Tuesday, August 14, 2012 4:51 AM
> To: Half-Life dedicated Win32 server mailing list
> Subject: Re: [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions
>
> Will we be able to restrict a MvM server to people in the steamgroup only, 
> like in L4D2?
>
> Saint K.
> 
> From: hlds-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com 
> [hlds-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com] On Behalf Of Fletcher Dunn 
> [fletch...@valvesoftware.com]
> Sent: 14 August 2012 08:52
> To: Half-Life dedicated Win32 server mailing list; Half-Life dedicated Win32 
> server mailing list (h...@list.valvesoftware.com)
> Subject: Re: [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions
>
> MvM matchmaking will be restricted to 6 players at launch.
>
> The matchmaking also supports joining games in progress to fill an empty 
> slot, in which case of course the current map will not be changed.
>
> From: hlds-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com 
> [mailto:hlds-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com] On Behalf Of Agro
> Sent: Monday, August 13, 2012 11:40 PM
> To: Half-Life dedicated Win32 server mailing list
> Subject: Re: [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions
>
> Is MvM matchmaking going to be limited to 6 players or was the "6 players 
> join, map changes" logic just an indicator of server behavior to expect?
> - Reply message -
> From: "Fletcher Dunn" 
> mailto:fletch...@valvesoftware.com>>
> To: "Half-Life dedicated Linux server mailing list 
> (hlds_linux@list.valvesoftware.com)"
>  
> mailto:hlds_linux@list.valvesoftware.com>>,
>  "Half-Life dedicated Win32 server mailing list 
> (h...@list.valvesoftware.com)" 
> mailto:h...@list.valvesoftware.com>>
> Subject: [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions
> Date: Tue, Aug 14, 2012 06:39
>
> Here are some answers to questions regarding hosting MvM servers:
>
> * Players can join your server through any means they can join PvP games: the 
> server browser, ad hoc joins, or the new matchmaking system (quickplay beta).
> * To accept 

Re: [hlds_linux] [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions

[Fletcher Dunn]

OK, a little investigating reveals that this statement I made:

* You can switch the server in and out of any matchmaking mode pool or back to 
any regular game mode at any time.

Is not really accurate!  Sorry!  If the server is EMPTY or has fewer than 6 
players, yes, there are no problems with switching --- that is true.  However, 
in general, switching from PvP to MvM is going to cause several problems.  (I 
believe that what would actually happen is that the 7th, 8th, etc. players who 
connect on a map change will be forced into spectator.  At any rate, we don't 
officially support that, so if you do it, you're on your own.)  So, you should 
expect to segregate your servers into MvM and PvP.  Don't just put the MvM maps 
into the mapcycle file, that won't work.  (Actually, the mapcycle file is 
slightly different for MvM because you really are cycling through missions, not 
the maps.  Likewise, players can vote to change the "mission" even if it's on 
the current map.  We'll have more details on all this tomorrow.)

-Original Message-
From: hlds_linux-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com 
[mailto:hlds_linux-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com] On Behalf Of Fletcher Dunn
Sent: Tuesday, August 14, 2012 10:00 AM
To: Half-Life dedicated Win32 server mailing list; Half-Life dedicated Linux 
server mailing list (hlds_linux@list.valvesoftware.com)
Subject: Re: [hlds_linux] [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions

We will not have Steam group functionality tomorrow.

You actually have to set maxplayers to 32 to host MvM (to make room for all the 
bots).  That's why the mode is expensive CPU-wise, to not only simulate all 
those players but run their AI logic as well.  We'll have more details on the 
recommended settings tomorrow.

Regarding exactly what happens if a 24-player server switches to MvM:  I 
actually don't think we have worked that out yet.

I'm pretty sure on day one there will be lots of people trying out all sorts of 
things.  Our approach to experimentation in MvM will be the same as in PvP: we 
encourage it, provided that players are opting in to any major deviations from 
the vanilla experience.  Our servers will all be configured vanilla, and the 
matchmaking will enforce the 6 player limit, and the server browser will be the 
primary means for players to find those sorts of customizations.  What will the 
most interesting customizations be?  What will the standard tags be used that 
we request server operators to set in order to help players find the 
modifications they want or avoid the ones they don't like?  We can't know that 
yet.  That's something we expect you guys and your players to figure out.

I will hazard a guess that raising the player count well above 6 would be 
detrimental the experience.  There ratio of humans to bots would be off and the 
human defending team would not have enough challenge.  (As an extreme example: 
imagine a 32-player server where everybody is defending an there are no bots.)  
Exactly how far it can be raised above 6 without totally breaking the game is 
speculation of course.  I think a smart server operator will start out with the 
server configured relatively vanilla, and then watch how the game unfolds and 
listen to their players, and try to make smart decisions about which areas to 
experiment, rather than assuming the same sorts of adjustments your community 
prefers in PvP will automatically apply to this mode.  A fun co-op mode with 
more than six players is likely to require entirely new missions.  (The mission 
decides the pattern of enemy robots that come at you.)  We have purposefully 
made it easy for players to create their own missions.  (It's a lot easier than 
creating a whole new map!)  But if you play with more than six players, with 
the missions we've made, I think the balance will be way off.

- Fletch

-Original Message-
From: hlds-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com 
[mailto:hlds-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com] On Behalf Of Saint K.
Sent: Tuesday, August 14, 2012 4:51 AM
To: Half-Life dedicated Win32 server mailing list
Subject: Re: [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions

Will we be able to restrict a MvM server to people in the steamgroup only, like 
in L4D2?

Saint K.

From: hlds-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com [hlds-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com] 
On Behalf Of Fletcher Dunn [fletch...@valvesoftware.com]
Sent: 14 August 2012 08:52
To: Half-Life dedicated Win32 server mailing list; Half-Life dedicated Win32 
server mailing list (h...@list.valvesoftware.com)
Subject: Re: [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions

MvM matchmaking will be restricted to 6 players at launch.

The matchmaking also supports joining games in progress to fill an empty slot, 
in which case of course the current map will not be changed.

From: hlds-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com 
[mailto:hlds-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com] On Behalf Of Agro
Sen

Re: [hlds_linux] [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions

[Fletcher Dunn]

We will not have Steam group functionality tomorrow.

You actually have to set maxplayers to 32 to host MvM (to make room for all the 
bots).  That's why the mode is expensive CPU-wise, to not only simulate all 
those players but run their AI logic as well.  We'll have more details on the 
recommended settings tomorrow.

Regarding exactly what happens if a 24-player server switches to MvM:  I 
actually don't think we have worked that out yet.

I'm pretty sure on day one there will be lots of people trying out all sorts of 
things.  Our approach to experimentation in MvM will be the same as in PvP: we 
encourage it, provided that players are opting in to any major deviations from 
the vanilla experience.  Our servers will all be configured vanilla, and the 
matchmaking will enforce the 6 player limit, and the server browser will be the 
primary means for players to find those sorts of customizations.  What will the 
most interesting customizations be?  What will the standard tags be used that 
we request server operators to set in order to help players find the 
modifications they want or avoid the ones they don't like?  We can't know that 
yet.  That's something we expect you guys and your players to figure out.

I will hazard a guess that raising the player count well above 6 would be 
detrimental the experience.  There ratio of humans to bots would be off and the 
human defending team would not have enough challenge.  (As an extreme example: 
imagine a 32-player server where everybody is defending an there are no bots.)  
Exactly how far it can be raised above 6 without totally breaking the game is 
speculation of course.  I think a smart server operator will start out with the 
server configured relatively vanilla, and then watch how the game unfolds and 
listen to their players, and try to make smart decisions about which areas to 
experiment, rather than assuming the same sorts of adjustments your community 
prefers in PvP will automatically apply to this mode.  A fun co-op mode with 
more than six players is likely to require entirely new missions.  (The mission 
decides the pattern of enemy robots that come at you.)  We have purposefully 
made it easy for players to create their own missions.  (It's a lot easier than 
creating a whole new map!)  But if you play with more than six players, with 
the missions we've made, I think the balance will be way off.

- Fletch

-Original Message-
From: hlds-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com 
[mailto:hlds-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com] On Behalf Of Saint K.
Sent: Tuesday, August 14, 2012 4:51 AM
To: Half-Life dedicated Win32 server mailing list
Subject: Re: [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions

Will we be able to restrict a MvM server to people in the steamgroup only, like 
in L4D2?

Saint K.

From: hlds-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com [hlds-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com] 
On Behalf Of Fletcher Dunn [fletch...@valvesoftware.com]
Sent: 14 August 2012 08:52
To: Half-Life dedicated Win32 server mailing list; Half-Life dedicated Win32 
server mailing list (h...@list.valvesoftware.com)
Subject: Re: [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions

MvM matchmaking will be restricted to 6 players at launch.

The matchmaking also supports joining games in progress to fill an empty slot, 
in which case of course the current map will not be changed.

From: hlds-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com 
[mailto:hlds-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com] On Behalf Of Agro
Sent: Monday, August 13, 2012 11:40 PM
To: Half-Life dedicated Win32 server mailing list
Subject: Re: [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions

Is MvM matchmaking going to be limited to 6 players or was the "6 players join, 
map changes" logic just an indicator of server behavior to expect?
- Reply message -
From: "Fletcher Dunn" 
mailto:fletch...@valvesoftware.com>>
To: "Half-Life dedicated Linux server mailing list 
(hlds_linux@list.valvesoftware.com)" 
mailto:hlds_linux@list.valvesoftware.com>>, 
"Half-Life dedicated Win32 server mailing list 
(h...@list.valvesoftware.com)" 
mailto:h...@list.valvesoftware.com>>
Subject: [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions
Date: Tue, Aug 14, 2012 06:39

Here are some answers to questions regarding hosting MvM servers:

* Players can join your server through any means they can join PvP games: the 
server browser, ad hoc joins, or the new matchmaking system (quickplay beta).
* To accept matchmaking traffic, you must select which sort of traffic you 
want.  (Regular PvP traffic or MvM traffic.)  Set "tf_mm_servermode 2" to be 
placed in the MvM pool.
* For MvM matchmaking, if 6 players are sent to your server to start a new 
game, it will switch to whatever map the players selected.
* You will need a TF gameserver account to accept matchmaking traffic.
* You can switch the server in and out of any matchmaking mode pool or back to 
any regular game mode at any time.
* The CPU usage for a 6 p

Re: [hlds_linux] [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions

[dan]

On 14/08/2012 09:04, daniel nilsson jokihao wrote:

MvM ?


new game mode, see the blog here :-

tf2.com
--
Dan

___
To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please 
visit:
https://list.valvesoftware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux

Re: [hlds_linux] [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions

[daniel nilsson jokihao]

MvM ?


On 2012-08-14 08:29, Glib Tsyrklyevych wrote:

At what hour will the update come out? I am guessing it will be around 6
EST as usual?
___
To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please 
visit:
https://list.valvesoftware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux



___
To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please 
visit:
https://list.valvesoftware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux

Re: [hlds_linux] [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions

[Glib Tsyrklyevych]

At what hour will the update come out? I am guessing it will be around 6
EST as usual?
___
To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please 
visit:
https://list.valvesoftware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux

Re: [hlds_linux] [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions

[Fletcher Dunn]

>tf_mm_servermode 2 isn't required to host a MvM gameserver, is it?

No.  You don't have to use matchmaking at all.  You can host the server and 
play the maps just like any other gamemode.  Players can join through the 
server browser, favorites tab, direct connect, friend invites, etc.

From: hlds-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com 
[mailto:hlds-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com] On Behalf Of Andreas Grimm
Sent: Monday, August 13, 2012 10:52 PM
To: 'Half-Life dedicated Win32 server mailing list'
Subject: Re: [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions

tf_mm_servermode 2 isn't required to host a MvM gameserver, is it?

From: 
hlds-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com 
[mailto:hlds-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com]
 On Behalf Of Fletcher Dunn
Sent: Tuesday, August 14, 2012 7:40 AM
To: Half-Life dedicated Linux server mailing list 
(hlds_linux@list.valvesoftware.com); 
Half-Life dedicated Win32 server mailing list 
(h...@list.valvesoftware.com)
Subject: [hlds] TF MvM hosting questions

Here are some answers to questions regarding hosting MvM servers:

* Players can join your server through any means they can join PvP games: the 
server browser, ad hoc joins, or the new matchmaking system (quickplay beta).
* To accept matchmaking traffic, you must select which sort of traffic you 
want.  (Regular PvP traffic or MvM traffic.)  Set "tf_mm_servermode 2" to be 
placed in the MvM pool.
* For MvM matchmaking, if 6 players are sent to your server to start a new 
game, it will switch to whatever map the players selected.
* You will need a TF gameserver account to accept matchmaking traffic.
* You can switch the server in and out of any matchmaking mode pool or back to 
any regular game mode at any time.
* The CPU usage for a 6 player MvM game is about the same as for a regular TF 
server.  (Yep, this mode requires significantly more CPU cycles per player than 
the PvP mode, that's an unfortunate fact.)

Given the surge of players that comes with any major release, and the player / 
server ratio of this game mode, the demand for MvM servers will probably be 
high.  We expect that a large number of players will want to try out the new 
mode, so we will be converting most of our servers to host MvM, and then adjust 
the allocation based on what players are playing.

I, for one, DO NOT welcome our new robot overlords!

- Fletch
___
To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please 
visit:
https://list.valvesoftware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux