Server Passwords

[Oleander]

I feel like I need to ask this question because its never been adequately answered. When are we going to be able to password protect servers?

We have an issue now when it comes to organized weekends events, and it has steadily gotten worse. Its not just pubbies but other units gate crashing events, stealing officer positions and generally disorganizing scheduled unit events.

Let me be clear, we are not trying to lock out pubbies from day to day play. We are trying to make the events we have fun for members of our units. It is very hard to do that when some of our own people can't join our server because pubbies or other units that weren't invited are snatching up slots.

I know we aren't the only unit wanting this so I want to know at what point are we going to get passwords. We shouldn't have to spend a half an hour hunting down and kicking people that aren't part of an event or taking our officer spots.

[Matt(Fridge)]

Yeah it has to be done. If the game is going to be designed as a game where companies can form up and play against other companies than there needs to be an ability to lock things up when it gets serious.

[MacMerritt]

Not to mention the fact that people/units pay for this service from a host provider thus making it their property and they have the right to decide who comes and goes from said server. I agree with the OP that you shouldn't just lock everyone out but if someone is trying to do training, organize a video recording, or the many events setup by the community then they should have that right.

[Oleander]

Just to be clear, I don't think most units are going to have them locked all the time. Its mainly to keep control during the weekend events.

[TRaider]

I feel like I need to ask this question because its never been adequately answered. When are we going to be able to password protect servers?

We have an issue now when it comes to organized weekends events, and it has steadily gotten worse. Its not just pubbies but other units gate crashing events, stealing officer positions and generally disorganizing scheduled unit events.

Let me be clear, we are not trying to lock out pubbies from day to day play. We are trying to make the events we have fun for members of our units. It is very hard to do that when some of our own people can't join our server because pubbies or other units that weren't invited are snatching up slots.

I know we aren't the only unit wanting this so I want to know at what point are we going to get passwords. We shouldn't have to spend a half an hour hunting down and kicking people that aren't part of an event or taking our officer spots.

+100 this needs to happen sooner than later.

[Sox]

I know we aren't the only unit wanting this so I want to know at what point are we going to get passwords. We shouldn't have to spend a half an hour hunting down and kicking people that aren't part of an event or taking our officer spots.

We have the same problem, it's a problem all the way through any event night, & I'm positive it's having a negative impact on public players because we're having to kick them from servers. We'd also like to disable team balanicing but that's not working either.

[Matt(Fridge)]

Exactly. There is of course many reasons why never allowing pubbies on your server is a bad idea. Since you need to actually have pubbies on your server to recruit. It is simply for the sake of keeping the game competitive when it comes time.

[themattymoose]

My CO was executed by a pub, mid event....

Good times, good times

[LaBelle]

Not having passwords is fracturing the player base far worse than having them would.

[TrustyJam]

Thank you all for the feedback. :)

The main issue we're facing is we haven't found a way to properly test password protected servers in a way that will:

1) Ensure we're not killing the daily playerbase by splitting said playerbase with a large percentage of it playing behind locked doors. Weekly events are important to us but so is the daily open activities as they are the ones new players will see/experience. No new players = no income = dead game (at least if there are no new players for a long while).
2) Ensure we're not pissing off our veteran players in companies if a split of the daily playerbase indeed does happen when we then revert back to no password protected servers.

Any suggestions to the two issues above are very welcome.

We wouldn't be as hesitant if we had a bigger daily playerbase that could absorb such a split - we're very much aware it is high on your wishlist.

- Trusty

[meessen]

One of my CO colleague got just random killed by a pub whit a officer class

so please add it or just i dont now fix it

[themattymoose]

Keep up not having a password protection options or at least assigning teams there won't be events, regiments/companies die and you get a worse circumstance.

[Redleader]

Thank you all for the feedback. :)

The main issue we're facing is we haven't found a way to properly test password protected servers in a way that will:

1) Ensure we're not killing the daily playerbase by splitting said playerbase with a large percentage of it playing behind locked doors. Weekly events are important to us but so is the daily open activities as they are the ones new players will see/experience. No new players = no income = dead game (at least if there are no new players for a long while).
2) Ensure we're not pissing off our veteran players in companies if a split of the daily playerbase indeed does happen when we then revert back to no password protected servers.

Any suggestions to the two issues above are very welcome.

- Trusty

We are well aware the 'password protection' might be an issue, for following reason :

+ Only those allowed (certain regiments) for the event will be given acces (WORKS AS INTENTED)
- Other players won't be able join the server, probably not even for balancing purposes ?

Prob : What happens now -> usually 'new players/non reg's' get kicked during events to make room -< can imagine that ain't fun and it's sloppy.
Solution : Having somewhat higher player cap, but this would also imply regiments check numbers and coordinate events (officers chat usually)
Solution : Reserved slots (sometimes officers/NCO's crash… and they can't get back on … not saying I want to say these are so important, but most want to play alongside their unit)
Solution : Having multiple events at the same time (two would suffice for the current playerbase)
Prob : Lately Union was scarse to spread over two servers (Union has more 'smaller' companies, while CSA has some bigger companies), which unbalances that side on multiple accounts.

On the other hand : if some event is on and some regs and new players/non regs can't get on, they might fill a new server.

-> Think the community has to come to some sort of gentlemen's agreement here, to support the 'new players' while giving them means to having some good events.

[Matt(Fridge)]

The problem is that the "veteran community" is going to get mad and leave if you do not do something to pw protect servers. They are the ones growing the community by recruiting for their units, organizing events, streaming games, making videos etc....

[MacMerritt]

To fix the issue of getting new players the answer is to continue developing the game and adding in more content. Possible customization options for each person that is saved to a database be it either a global one or local per each server. Provide players with more options of play not just the same mode of king of the hill. Historical accuracy is a great thing to strive for, but in the mean time put in a capture the flag where you can capture the other sides flags and it will slowly drain their tickets quicker. Give them more and more will follow. Right now the game is too shallow and focused to a have a larger appeal.

To the issue with locked servers give a few of the larger units and trusted outfits access to those tools. If they are abused then remove the option. However if proven to not "divide" the community unfairly then allow the units/server owners to kept that functionality. The alternative to this option is to finish the Company tool to reserve officer slots for registered officers, NCOs for NCOs, and then color bearer and private for pubbies and lower ranks. You have one option that is easy as it is already built into cryengine and most server providers can help enable this. The other is to develop in house a tool from the ground up that again hearkens back to a global database as I mentioned earlier in this post.

Love the game and where it is going but with your small team it is not getting there fast enough for the current generations attention span. Either speed up or open up easy options to allow the community to police and entertain itself until you can provide the content you want to provide in the timeframe you are comfortable with.

[TrustyJam]

The problem is that the "veteran community" is going to get mad and leave if you do not do something to pw protect servers. They are the ones growing the community by recruiting for their units, organizing events, streaming games, making videos etc....

I'm not going to go too much into that discussion here, but promotional videos do little good for the game if all that new players find when they enter the game is locked servers with a requirement to join a company just to play the game. In short, organized groups as well as unorganized daily activity on the open servers are both a requirement to grow the community.


To fix the issue of getting new players the answer is to continue developing the game and adding in more content. Possible customization options for each person that is saved to a database be it either a global one or local per each server. Provide players with more options of play not just the same mode of king of the hill. Historical accuracy is a great thing to strive for, but in the mean time put in a capture the flag where you can capture the other sides flags and it will slowly drain their tickets quicker. Give them more and more will follow. Right now the game is too shallow and focused to a have a larger appeal.

To the issue with locked servers give a few of the larger units and trusted outfits access to those tools. If they are abused then remove the option. However if proven to not "divide" the community unfairly then allow the units/server owners to kept that functionality. The alternative to this option is to finish the Company tool to reserve officer slots for registered officers, NCOs for NCOs, and then color bearer and private for pubbies and lower ranks. You have one option that is easy as it is already built into cryengine and most server providers can help enable this. The other is to develop in house a tool from the ground up that again hearkens back to a global database as I mentioned earlier in this post.

Love the game and where it is going but with your small team it is not getting there fast enough for the current generations attention span. Either speed up or open up easy options to allow the community to police and entertain itself until you can provide the content you want to provide in the timeframe you are comfortable with.

Thanks for the suggestions!

Yes, a limited test such as that might be the correct path forward. The test might be problematic if the actual testers with the ability to lock their server want the feature to be a thing for everybody however which will only require them to keep up their numbers on daily free and open servers while also only having locked their server during event hours.

There is currently a new game mode in development as several veterans have been quite vocal about them tiring of skirmishes (which is understandable after these several years of alpha).

- Trusty

[SwingKid148]

Thank you all for the feedback. :)

The main issue we're facing is we haven't found a way to properly test password protected servers in a way that will:

1) Ensure we're not killing the daily playerbase by splitting said playerbase with a large percentage of it playing behind locked doors. Weekly events are important to us but so is the daily open activities as they are the ones new players will see/experience. No new players = no income = dead game (at least if there are no new players for a long while).
2) Ensure we're not pissing off our veteran players in companies if a split of the daily playerbase indeed does happen when we then revert back to no password protected servers.

Any suggestions to the two issues above are very welcome.

We wouldn't be as hesitant if we had a bigger daily playerbase that could absorb such a split - we're very much aware it is high on your wishlist.

- Trusty

I think the player base can survive for 4 hours with locked servers.

This would not need to happen on the War of Rights servers only private servers.

[TrustyJam]

I think the player base can survive for 4 hours with locked servers.

This would not need to happen on the War of Rights servers only private servers.

Yes - it can have far wider consequences than that though.

It might cause company players to only play during "locked hours" to an even greater extent that they are only playing during event hours currently which could cause a permanent split of the userbase and basically end up being a requirement to join a company if you wish to partake in bigger battles in the game.

No new player is going to be very impressed by the game nor its community if the only populated servers they see when they open the server browser are locked ones.

- Trusty

[Matt(Fridge)]

The thing is is that the players who play in the public servers during "non event hours" are not the same people who play in private servers during "event hours" I don't think it would be nearly as bad as you think.

[MacMerritt]

Conversely sir a great many players lose interest in the game when randoms jump on for the two free hours with a Steam purchase, yell racial slurs, team kill, rambo around, and then disappear. It is hard to appeal to all gamers, a fault in game design since the beginning of time. That being said I have played alot of games in my 40 years of life and many of them had locked servers and it didnt dissuade me from playing the game. I found an open server, played and enjoyed.

If you finish the Company Tool as I suggested earlier, I know it takes time, effort, and resources better spent elsewhere, but with it and a global database to ensure randoms aren't in command roles or mucking about disrupting events then the veterans won't demand a way to keep them out of organized play.

Merely ignoring the problem does not make it go away. It only worsens it until you have either a severely divided community or none what so ever.

[TrustyJam]

Conversely sir a great many players lose interest in the game when randoms jump on for the two free hours with a Steam purchase, yell racial slurs, team kill, rambo around, and then disappear. It is hard to appeal to all gamers, a fault in game design since the beginning of time. That being said I have played alot of games in my 40 years of life and many of them had locked servers and it didnt dissuade me from playing the game. I found an open server, played and enjoyed.

If you finish the Company Tool as I suggested earlier, I know it takes time, effort, and resources better spent elsewhere, but with it and a global database to ensure randoms aren't in command roles or mucking about disrupting events then the veterans won't demand a way to keep them out of organized play.

Merely ignoring the problem does not make it go away. It only worsens it until you have either a severely divided community or none what so ever.

We are seeing a huge amount of all Steam refunds state that they primarily got the refund due to a lacking player population - it is litterally like 50% of all messages in the "Game is not fun" category (which is the second biggest category after technical/performance issues).

I fear that number may rise even further if we introduce password protected servers and divide the community.

- Trusty

[Sox]

Yes - it can have far wider consequences than that though.

It might cause company players to only play during "locked hours" to an even greater extent that they are only playing during event hours currently which could cause a permanent split of the userbase and basically end up being a requirement to join a company if you wish to partake in bigger battles in the game.

No new player is going to be very impressed by the game nor its community if the only populated servers they see when they open the server browser are locked ones.

- Trusty

I feel like you are missing the point here. Organised Companies have 'events' on servers that they pay for, at said events people FROM those companies cannot get onto said servers. We have no intention of locking our servers all week, just for our events.

[TrustyJam]

I feel like you are missing the point here. Organised Companies have 'events' on servers that they pay for, at said events people FROM those companies cannot get onto said servers. We have no intention of locking our servers all week, just for our events.

I realize - the danger is that it can cause a "them and us" scenario where company members will get used to exclusively play on locked servers which in turn will make none of their members populate any open servers in the off-event hours, thus splitting the off-event open play playerbase.

- Trusty

[MacMerritt]

I disagree. A great many find it not fun since it isn't Battlefield: Antietam.

The majority of the gamers out there now are 16-25 and their attention span is a long as a gnat's lifespan. The majority of your "veterans" are in their late 20s all the way up into the 70s, I'd estimate average at 32. Older players with less time to play and waste time with randoms acting like jackasses. We get on to play, blow off some steam, jaw with like minded people, and try to squeeze out what enjoyment we can out of the game in its current state.

Lack of players is caused by many reasons. Cost, lack of faith in Early Access, lack of content, and again I would say most players are on during weekends as your average player base is older than most other FPS. I would look deep into the analytics of your current player base and see what appeals to them. Perhaps hold a monthly questionnaire or poll to see what they like/dislike and what they want to see next.

[TrustyJam]

I disagree. A great many find it not fun since it isn't Battlefield: Antietam.

The majority of the gamers out there now are 16-25 and their attention span is a long as a gnat's lifespan. The majority of your "veterans" are in their late 20s all the way up into the 70s, I'd estimate average at 32. Older players with less time to play and waste time with randoms acting like jackasses. We get on to play, blow off some steam, jaw with like minded people, and try to squeeze out what enjoyment we can out of the game in its current state.

Lack of players is caused by many reasons. Cost, lack of faith in Early Access, lack of content, and again I would say most players are on during weekends as your average player base is older than most other FPS. I would look deep into the analytics of your current player base and see what appeals to them. Perhaps hold a monthly questionnaire or poll to see what they like/dislike and what they want to see next.

You are of course right about all of the above.

We do have access to the written messages about reasons for refunds on Steam (which you are required to type in when you apply for a refund on Steam) and as I stated earlier the vast majority of the chunk of people that are not finding the game fun is due to the low playerbase (at least acording to themselves in writing).

- Trusty

[Oleander]

Thank you all for the feedback. :)

The main issue we're facing is we haven't found a way to properly test password protected servers in a way that will:

1) Ensure we're not killing the daily playerbase by splitting said playerbase with a large percentage of it playing behind locked doors. Weekly events are important to us but so is the daily open activities as they are the ones new players will see/experience. No new players = no income = dead game (at least if there are no new players for a long while).
2) Ensure we're not pissing off our veteran players in companies if a split of the daily playerbase indeed does happen when we then revert back to no password protected servers.

Any suggestions to the two issues above are very welcome.

We wouldn't be as hesitant if we had a bigger daily playerbase that could absorb such a split - we're very much aware it is high on your wishlist.

- Trusty

Right now there are generally enough players to fill a 150 man server at any given moment during the day. I feel like if there is at least 1 Official server there is a place for those that want to play to go. Like I said, I don't believe that most units are going to lock their servers during the off times because it is a good way for them to advertise and recruit. Other games have password protected servers and I don't know if it really has any negative effect on players. You could also argue that the passwords would be incentive for people to join a unit and have a better enjoyment while they play the game.

I don't know about the rest of you but when I play matches on servers full of pubbies its usually a disaster. Officers that don't know what they are doing take control of lines, lead men to their death, rinse and repeat. I feel like that has a greater impact on new player enjoyment than anything else, but that's another argument for another thread.

The password issue is going to have to be dealt with at some point, right now the organized units are not able to enjoy their events because they have no way to really organize their events. Maybe allow private servers to have a custom splash screen that shows server rules etc similar to how M&B does it. That's another issue that needs to be worked on, there needs to be a push for new players to join a unit. It will help us move away from the lone wolf mentality that is present in other games they may be used to playing.

I'm really glad this thread has gained a lot of traction. There's a very good discussion going on, I know where the Devs are coming from and I don't want the game to die either, but I think we've hit the point where we're gonna have to start moving the gameplay away from a free-for-all and start encouraging people to organize. I think people will get past the "boring" part of the game easier if they can see that there's a whole different method of playing the game aside from hoping on a server and shooting whatever is out there.

[Poorlaggedman]

Literally the only reason I have a server is for events. That's where the game will always be the most fun and that's what I specialize in. The main attraction being that admin-mandated obedience to orders and having a chain of command that works. Right now it's more of an investment for the future though. The gameplay is still being hashed out.

That being said I vehemently disagree with the consensus that passwords are so badly needed today.

The problem with passwords is I know without any doubt that a great deal of true gameplay testing ceases as soon as that happens and it will cause that immediate division. It makes no sense to develop badly needed features if we never see anything but contrived invite-only action where problems that exist don't arise. And you can act like that's not going to happen in a coordinated advertising blitz, but we all know it's exactly what will happen. My last community was one that ceased to exist outside of events and it got progressively more difficult to muster people to begin to fill up a server to a certain threshold so we could actually announce the event starting. People only wanted to show up for the event itself, but you can't start an event with an empty server. It's a startling conundrum: The higher quality the events were, the less people wanted to play normal gameplay. It's a special kind of depressing racing to jump on the server to explain to a wandering noob that we had events every weekend at 7PM EST and 'people play then.' I think it was avoidable if the game had been designed for public consumption well.

After that experience I'm genuinely scared of duplicating it without the public gameplay being stellar itself. The very fact that there's clamor for passwords kind of proves that there's a higher gameplay being sought. I don't think anyone has less admins than I do and you can ban the trolls.


Passworded servers represent cashing in on the game to some extent at the expense of the community. I watched all these realism organizations lock themselves in their servers for years and do their own thing in RnL. They unlocked their servers alright, and a handful of them even played outside of those locked times. But by and large they scattered. Sure you can unpassword your server when you're done but your people will be gone. Locked servers encapsulate gameplay and enormous amounts of players won't take the time to play in open servers if the gameplay in an open server sucks. So it's not just the fact that servers would be locked, it's the very fact that they could be locked which fundamentally starts to change the experience players seek.


I might be running some events soon, that's entirely predicated on people showing up since I have no pull yet. I only made that decision because nobody else is and my head is spinning from the daily officer power struggles. I'd really like to see what people do when they actually have a full team with one leader. I would normally never even try without passwords. A lot of things aside from the lack of passwords hamper events. Admin controls are rudimentary AF. A troll could just shoot the commander then switch to spectate and be untouchable by admins until he spawns back in at a time of his choosing. Announcements are meh. A "Message of the day" style screen that could show rules or upcoming events written out for that specific server would help a lot. You can't restart the game rounds or change the time clock so if you want to have a planning phase and then go to live, you have to eat up clock doing so and thus effect the gameplay. What scares me most of all is sometimes the admin command menu just doesn't fire right. It just says "close." 10656 I'd also never stand a chance of getting back on my server if I crashed and I don't have any heir-apparent to keep things smooth.

[MacMerritt]

Firstly I would like to thank you Trusty and your teammates for making a game that though flawed at the moment shows great promise and I find enjoyable.

Secondly as can be seen many people have differing but also similar viewpoints on the issue in general and specifically concerning the passwords. We can all agree we want what is best for the game to grow and be enjoyable and for many the short term answer is better admin tools including password locked servers. Adding in some limited RCON tools including Lock w/ Password, Unlock, Kick, Temp Ban, Admin messages, Restart, and Shutdown are not too far outside the realm of reasonable requests. Almost any other multiplayer game that you can rent and host a server for has these options. The only major release that I can think of that didn't allow server owners to control the basics of what went on their servers was DayZ Standalone and that game nearly died for many reasons, one of the major ones being lack of control of your own server functions. Using them as an example they took a VASTLY more popular game and nearly killed it during it's five ongoing years of development. Learn from that cautionary tale and just give folks the ability to Lock their server.

If you find units/individuals are abusing the function then call them out among the community or go the extra mile and strike them from the rolls of recognized units within the Company Tool. Would only take one time for the others to get the message.

[TrustyJam]

Right now there are generally enough players to fill a 150 man server at any given moment during the day. I feel like if there is at least 1 Official server there is a place for those that want to play to go. Like I said, I don't believe that most units are going to lock their servers during the off times because it is a good way for them to advertise and recruit. Other games have password protected servers and I don't know if it really has any negative effect on players. You could also argue that the passwords would be incentive for people to join a unit and have a better enjoyment while they play the game.

I don't know about the rest of you but when I play matches on servers full of pubbies its usually a disaster. Officers that don't know what they are doing take control of lines, lead men to their death, rinse and repeat. I feel like that has a greater impact on new player enjoyment than anything else, but that's another argument for another thread.

The password issue is going to have to be dealt with at some point, right now the organized units are not able to enjoy their events because they have no way to really organize their events. Maybe allow private servers to have a custom splash screen that shows server rules etc similar to how M&B does it. That's another issue that needs to be worked on, there needs to be a push for new players to join a unit. It will help us move away from the lone wolf mentality that is present in other games they may be used to playing.

I'm really glad this thread has gained a lot of traction. There's a very good discussion going on, I know where the Devs are coming from and I don't want the game to die either, but I think we've hit the point where we're gonna have to start moving the gameplay away from a free-for-all and start encouraging people to organize. I think people will get past the "boring" part of the game easier if they can see that there's a whole different method of playing the game aside from hoping on a server and shooting whatever is out there.

I too appreciate the input from you all. :)

You may call public play for a disaster which it might be compared to organized event play - but for the actual public players, public play offers a lot more teamplay than most are used to. We see the teamplay being mentioned as a huge plus over and over again in the positive reviews we are getting.

- Trusty

[LaBelle]

Who in their right mind would lock their server 24/7, Trusty? Literally nobody, because server traffic = recruitment.

And who in their right mind who be upset in the veteran player base when 95% of them are in units that want passworded servers for their events on the weekends?

[Poorlaggedman]

I don't know anything about refunds from steam (I never knew there were any such thing before December) but I wouldn't be surprised if a number of people just wanted to try the game and could be back later when the price presumably lowers.

[Sox]

Passworded servers represent cashing in on the game to some extent at the expense of the community. I watched all these realism organizations lock themselves in their servers for years and do their own thing in RnL. They unlocked their servers alright, and a handful of them even played outside of those locked times. But by and large they scattered. Sure you can unpassword your server when you're done but your people will be gone, take that prediction to the bank. Locked servers encapsulate gameplay and enormous amounts of players won't take the time to play in open servers.

I feel like you use this stick to beat us with far, far too often. 1st Texas, 6th LA, 1st Georgia, none of us are 'realism' units as you put it, all of us have our servers open ALL week as well. 1st Georgia would only password servers three times a week for a couple of hours, that's not going to split anyone or anything. We're not 'realism' we're not 'roleplay' we're just organised, your statement that nobody else organises events on open servers is also totally false, I know for a fact 1st Texas do, 1st Georgia are following suit as well. If you don't want to be in a Company that's your choice, if public players don't want to be in a Company that's their choice, more power to you. All we are doing is trying to keep the interest of the thousands of players who ARE in formed Companies alive, people who DO want organised gameplay. So please stop beating us with your 'you don't care about the public' stick, because apart from being totally untrue, it's also wearing really thin.

I watched a lot of YouTube video's in the days that followed the Steam launch, the content creators were out in force and covered the game extensively. Two statements were in almost all of their video's ''this game would be awesome if it was organised'' and ''I wish there was an officer to lead this'' It doesn't really alter facts when you champion the cause of public servers, because the fact is that when players are organised this game excels far beyond anything you see on public servers. I can't speak for the other Companies, but all 1st Georgia would disable is auto balance, and only because it's a major pain when trying to form sides. While we are on the subject of facts, here's an ugly one for you: If all a 'private' server is going to be is really a public one, that players pay for, then players are going to stop paying for them.

We're not fools, every single one of us is here because we want War of Rights to be a success, we'll keep testing, we'll keep reporting. 1st Georgia hold three Company events per week, so our servers would be private for around just six hours out of one hundred and sixty eight, that's not too much to ask surely?

[LaBelle]

I feel like you use this stick to beat us with far, far too often. 1st Texas, 6th LA, 1st Georgia, none of us are 'realism' units as you put it, all of us have our servers open ALL week as well. 1st Georgia would only password servers three times a week for a couple of hours, that's not going to split anyone or anything. We're not 'realism' we're not 'roleplay' we're just organised, your statement that nobody else organises events on open servers is also totally false, I know for a fact 1st Texas do, 1st Georgia are following suit as well. If you don't want to be in a Company that's your choice, if public players don't want to be in a Company that's their choice, more power to you. All we are doing is trying to keep the interest of the thousands of players who ARE in formed Companies alive, people who DO want organised gameplay. So please stop beating us with your 'you don't care about the public' stick, because apart from being totally untrue, it's also wearing really thin.

I watched a lot of YouTube video's in the days that followed the Steam launch, the content creators were out in force and covered the game extensively. Two statements were in almost all of their video's ''this game would be awesome if it was organised'' and ''I wish there was an officer to lead this'' It doesn't really alter facts when you champion the cause of public servers, because the fact is that when players are organised this game excels far beyond anything you see on public servers. I can't speak for the other Companies, but all 1st Georgia would disable is auto balance, and only because it's a major pain when trying to form sides. While we are on the subject of facts, here's an ugly one for you: If all a 'private' server is going to be is really a public one, that players pay for, then players are going to stop paying for them.

We're not fools, every single one of us is here because we want War of Rights to be a success, we'll keep testing, we'll keep reporting. 1st Georgia hold three Company events per week, so our servers would be private for around just six hours out of one hundred and sixty eight, that's not too much to ask surely?

PLM is of the idea he's better than us. That's all there is to it. He rarely plays but he believes the game needs to be tailored to him.

[TrustyJam]

Who in their right mind would lock their server 24/7, Trusty? Literally nobody, because server traffic = recruitment.

And who in their right mind who be upset in the veteran player base when 95% of them are in units that want passworded servers for their events on the weekends?

I never said they would be locked 24/7 - I said they run the risk of changing the behavior of a great deal of company members which then runs the risk of hurting the off-event hour play.

Not sure I understand your second question unless you are referring to my original issue 2) - I suspect most if not all would be upset to have a server password feature removed if it proved to cause overall harm to the playerbase numbers.

- Trusty

[TrustyJam]

Please keep the discussion civil. Personal attacks offer no solution to anything.

- Trusty

[Poorlaggedman]

People define success differently. I'd define it as not needing to join an organization to play. The standard 'organized' game is event-oriented because the games aren't made to compel organization. These games like M&B are basically like - "Here ya go, here's some weapons, have at it.". So it's not really feasible to enjoy outside of the controlled environment. You have to have organizations to have fun. The best game would be so seamless to organize in gameplay, and so thoroughly compel players to fill their proper roles that organizations would naturally flourish themselves. Not the other way around.

I could do a lot if I had the predictable server populations that ya'll have and reliable admin controls. It's just a headache without passwords, that's all. I'd rather just see the officer role become meaningful, which I'm sure it will. That all matters an enormous amount. A password sidesteps that instantaneously.

It's perfectly reasonable wanting passwords. I was surprised initially that there weren't. But once that cat is out of the bag, it ain't going back in.

Ugh, I should have finished my video yesterday and not waited to drop it in this atmosphere.

[spacenavy90]

I never said they would be locked 24/7 - I said they run the risk of changing the behavior of a great deal of company members which then runs the risk of hurting the off-event hour play.

Not sure I understand your second question unless you are referring to my original issue 2) - I suspect most if not all would be upset to have a server password feature removed if it proved to cause overall harm to the playerbase numbers.

- Trusty

I understand you want to keep server populations high, but let me clue you in a little bit. This game only lives by the community and the community are the units. They are the ones bringing in new players to buy the game, instead of the random pubbie who tries the game for an hour and refunds within the hour.
We want weekend events to be exclusive for a few hours with passworded servers so we can engage with other community units that pubbies will want to join up with and participate with.

In all honesty, your crusade against this topic is nonsensical from all angles. If you lose the community support, you can kiss your game goodbye forever. Because at some point we're just gonna realize we aren't valued or even wanted here and we'll move on to other competitors (BCOF or back to Warband for example).

I can tell you from personal experience that the arrogance of this dev team has put me off severely from even playing this game anymore, let alone recommending it to other players.

[Oleander]

I too appreciate the input from you all. :)

You may call public play for a disaster which it might be compared to organized event play - but for the actual public players, public play offers a lot more teamplay than most are used to. We see the teamplay being mentioned as a huge plus over and over again in the positive reviews we are getting.

- Trusty

I'm sure it is and it varies from match to match. Me and another guy played several rounds on Official 3 today and they were just bad. People tend to remember the bad times more than the good ones, and my concern is you will get a block of people that get tired of having bad matches and shelve the game to never come back to it. I mean I've played in some really great pub matches away from my unit where I had a lot of fun. It really depends on what your expectations are. In pub matches, my expectations are low because people wont listen to orders so I'm always surprised when we do well. I don't know that new players are going to come in with that mentality.

And as far as that goes, PLM touched on something that I think is another issue this game is facing. New players are coming in and sort of being dropped into the server with no clear idea of what they should be doing. I think that's what drives the mob mentality. They see a group of guys moving one way and the rest of them follow suit cause they don't know any better. I think some people buy the game not knowing what to expect, then they're kind of lost once they finally get into it.

Going back to passwords, you're going to make some people mad either way I don't see any way around that. Yes, the player base is smallish, but passworded servers are the norm as far as MP games go. I think most people expect it these days so I don't think it will cause as much of an issue as you might think. As long as there are open servers, I don't see people getting angry. I mean earlier today we were playing on a server that reset with 110 people on it. As soon as it went down everyone just piled into the next open server and it stayed populated the rest of the evening.

[TrustyJam]

I understand you want to keep server populations high, but let me clue you in a little bit. This game only lives by the community and the community are the units. They are the ones bringing in new players to buy the game, instead of the random pubbie who tries the game for an hour and refunds within the hour.
We want weekend events to be exclusive for a few hours with passworded servers so we can engage with other community units that pubbies will want to join up with and participate with.

In all honesty, your crusade against this topic is nonsensical from all angles. If you lose the community support, you can kiss your game goodbye forever. Because at some point we're just gonna realize we aren't valued or even wanted here and we'll move on to other competitors (BCOF or back to Warband for example).

I can tell you from personal experience that the arrogance of this dev team has put me off severely from even playing this game anymore, let alone recommending it to other players.

Thank you for the feedback.

I have no crusade against this.

The units are an important part of the community - but so are the non-company players.

I'm sorry you find the dev team to be arrogant.

- Trusty

[Poorlaggedman]

If the refund thing is widespread among games like this, no doubt it changes the way people make purchasing decisions. This is a generation after all that has effectively ended the shopping mall. Our local one just got bulldozed.

I really liked this third-party-plugin I used in the past on the Source engine where a player who connected and got into the game had to press 1 to agree or 2 to disagree (and be insta-kicked) to a list of rules.

I really challenge the conventional ways people are used to things. Tutorials should be mandatory, but that's a pipe dream. Any arrogance you see in a place like this doesn't even come close to touching the arrogance of the throngs of players who just go straight into a game and have no idea what they're doing taking critical roles. One aught to know how to open the menu and check their controls. It goes for any game, you see it all the time. IMO a mandatory training would be impossible but I think it should be standard for any server you join in any game that you have to agree to the rules to be there.

When I say "Message of the Day" I'm thinking of a system where you join a server and the first page you see is a screen which could maybe be an embedded HTML page or just some page coded in HTML or something where the server owner can put rules, announcements or whatever. An easy way of putting out information that everyone sees. Then you should have to hit "Agree." The autokick (for being AFK) should apply to that as well. Just getting people to see that might help, even though many will grow to just skip through it as fast as they can. Ideally it would have a server-side setting where the "Agree" button only becomes activated after a set number of seconds leaving the connector with nothing better to do for 5 seconds than read about any upcoming events you're trying to advertise.

Steam groups used to be a great way to network but Steam utterly neutered them a year ago last August by requiring friendship to invite. So something like that is even more critical to get info out.

[LaBelle]

If the refund thing is widespread among games like this, no doubt it changes the way people make purchasing decisions. This is a generation after all that has effectively ended the shopping mall. Our local one just got bulldozed.

I really liked this third-party-plugin I used in the past on the Source engine where a player who connected and got into the game had to press 1 to agree or 2 to disagree (and be insta-kicked) to a list of rules.

I really challenge the conventional ways people are used to things. Tutorials should be mandatory, but that's a pipe dream. Any arrogance you see in a place like this doesn't even come close to touching the arrogance of the throngs of players who just go straight into a game and have no idea what they're doing taking critical roles. One aught to know how to open the menu and check their controls. It goes for any game, you see it all the time. IMO a mandatory training would be impossible but I think it should be standard for any server you join in any game that you have to agree to the rules to be there.

When I say "Message of the Day" I'm thinking of a system where you join a server and the first page you see is a screen which could maybe be an embedded HTML page or just some page coded in HTML or something where the server owner can put rules, announcements or whatever. An easy way of putting out information that everyone sees. Then you should have to hit "Agree." The autokick (for being AFK) should apply to that as well. Just getting people to see that might help, even though many will grow to just skip through it as fast as they can. Ideally it would have a server-side setting where the "Agree" button only becomes activated after a set number of seconds leaving the connector with nothing better to do for 5 seconds than read about any upcoming events you're trying to advertise.

Steam groups used to be a great way to network but Steam utterly neutered them a year ago last August by requiring friendship to invite. So something like that is even more critical to get info out.

What does any of this have to do with server passwords?

[TRaider]

If you lose the community support, you can kiss your game goodbye forever. Because at some point we're just gonna realize we aren't valued or even wanted here and we'll move on to other competitors (BCOF or back to Warband for example).

Truth!!!

[Pvt. Dane Karlsen]

Server Password would only raise the quality of servers.

The events would be interrupted less, wich would make better battles. If 20-30 % of a team is independent players that will change the units fabric, and they will loose the ability to move according to company tactics. Or in the case of us guys in 2nd USSS playing along with 1st Cav. We have our tactics , our common understanding of each others tactics and ways of fighting.... All that goes away or are atleast comprimised when 1/3 of the team are independent players. And don't want too, or are not capable of following the tactics. Thus making it a les awesome battle and experience. Then there is the fact that organised companies that have fixed weekdays for events, loose interest from their members as they often excperience not beeing able to join a event battle with their fellow comapny men, due to independent players taking up the spot... That is on private owned servers, and payed for by the company servers mind you.

I really think that theese many Companies that has been with WOR from the beginning and till this day, more than deserve the possibility to protect their events with password. And I for one does not understand the devs want to cater to a bunch of players that don't want to play the game organised from the get go. Thoose players would still have the public servers during those few hours a week. Where they can have the battles they want. The ones with independent players like themselve.

it's a bit like when you are in a match full of independent players , and then one of them complains that there is not enough organisation......... A complete and utter contradiction.

And as others point out. Battle servers would still be open 80% of the time.

[Maximus Decimus Meridius]

let me recap the last sites and let me add my thoughts and suggestions to adress.

Problems of Companies:
- Organised Events are hard to host since other units and publics can fill the server before the Units can join fully which are official part of the Event
- Publics or others can take the officer slot and can ruin the experience of units
- some unfriendly people or trolls can join your line and start TK'ing.

(possible) Problems of Publics:
- this game makes only fun with a high attendance of players. Most of the players are from companies. If they hiding behind PW servers there would be not enough player to have a good experience and fun on a open server
- it is not really a great feeling as a newbie to see that the most populated server is locked. That is not a good first impression
- a great part of publics are willing to fall in with companies and like to play together with them without joining. It would be harsh to lock the out.

Problems of CG and Community:
- Refunds because not enough players or the game makes no fun because there are not enough players.
- Organised Units pushing for locked servers which could increase such refunds but would please this part of the community.

So lets find a solution. I can understand both sides so lets try to find a compromise of both while we try to avoid both extremes (locked servers and no way to control server population)

First problem: players join a event server and fill it before every participating unit can join.

A solution could be something like a temporary password something like a event prepare modus which could be activated by a server restart. It is possible to set a PW which is only active for 10 minutes and the it automatically turns of.

That is really enough time to send the password to the other participating units and give them more than enough time to join and get organised on the server. after 10 minutes the server will be open for everyone to take the last slots and fill the server.

second problem: People taking the CO role and can ruining the experience of organised units while an event.

That could be fixed with the suggested event preparation modus: in this mode the server admin can say how many rounds/maps should be played ( and can also set automatically the wished maps.) Now it is clear how long this organised event will be. Time to fix the CO problem. Now it would be great to make it possible to select everybody who should be allowed to take the officer slot while the event is going on. only these person will be allowed to take the CO class for everybody else it is disabled. The player ID should be saved because of timeouts etc ^^

third problem: can already be adressed with ingame moderating tools but we really need the feature to kick/ban players via the playerlist. This problem will be also a lot smaller with this preparation mode because there would be less space for such people.

problem 4-6: since the servers wouldnt be locked all the time, publics could participate at organised event (which are a lot more fun just my mind ^^). Also it would be possible to get in contact with the organised community which is also an advantage for the companies because they would still be able to recruit new people AND have an organised event.

problem 5 and 6:

since there would be a way to have an good and organised event it would please the companies and there playerbase. It wouldnt lock out publics and they would still be able to get in contact with companies and organised events. In my mind this feature can please both sides. Worst case would be that it doesnt effect refunds so I see there no risk.

I understand that it will take some time for you to develop such a feature (if it is possible for you guys) but it would be drastically increase the fun of organised events would would help companies and there players out of the small depression which some of them are in.

after the set numbers of maps/round it could show a small statistic of the whole event, something like: Battleday has been won 2:1 by USA and show the combined number of deaths from all maps. After that the server goes automatically back in the normal mode, no reserved slots and the normal map cycle is activated.

In my mind thats a good compromise between both sides and I would like to hear your ideas. I hope everything is clear and you guys are able to understand what I try to suggest ^^

[Cairnsy44]

Having been shut out from my company's organized event due to random players filling up the slots, I think a password protect option would be good. However, I also see the benefit of open matches, as that is the best place to find good new players to join your company. That said, privately purchased servers should be exactly that, PRIVATE. Company-affiliated players should still populate public servers now and then for the good of the game and to recruit as well. But that is what the PUBLIC servers are for. It sucks when I am running late to an organized weekly event and can't play because we have 20 randoms in there. Or like last time, when I was on time and playing, but was killed and then bumped out and could not get back in because the server was full of randoms.

[sal_tuskin]

these servers should not be called private they should be called semi-private listing them as private is very misleading statement, cause with out passwords they are not private period end of statement no matter how you slice it they are not private and should not be listed that way

[Leifr]

I think it’s fair to say that the ability to password servers would now be a welcome addition.

[LaBelle]

Absolutely agree.

[JammedHam]

Here Here!

[LTC Philip A. Work]

It baffles me as to how we don't already have them.

[crazychester1247]

I was under the impression that big companies would only lock their servers during serious events, leaving them open most of the time to recruit. Thusly the solution to this problem would be to have toggleable server passwords.

I also disagree with the sentiment that the game is only fun with a nearly maxed out server population. Some of my favourite matches happened in servers that were only about half full.

[dab201]

I agree

[Vankovski]

Crashed mid-event the other weekend, struggled to get back in because the server wasn't passworded and my slot was taken by randoms. Please add passwords for competitive events between units.

[McMuffin]

We already have the problem of people taking NCO, officer, and flag bearer spots when they’re not supposed to and as we add more things such as artillery that’s gonne be another host of roles that will have the same issue. The fact we will end up paying even more for servers when they get expanded, have admin tools, host (or at least try to) events but still don’t have passwords makes no sense. If you say we won’t get enough feedback from people then consider that the only people who post are those in active units who would be playing the passworded events anyways.

[Oleander]

I mean if we're gonna have to wait for the company tool to handle the pubbies taking slots, its gonna be a long wait for a simple solution.

[Poorlaggedman]

Step 1:
Rename Server "[Generic unit name] event INVITE ONLY"

Step 2:
Out of 150 of the finest and most organized WoR players, designate one admin to roam spectate to kick non-invited players.


Step 3:
Prosper. Or whatever. 10710

[LaBelle]

Step 1:
Rename Server "[Generic unit name] event INVITE ONLY"

Step 2:
Out of 150 of the finest and most organized WoR players, designate one admin to roam spectate to kick non-invited players.


Step 3:
Prosper. Or whatever. 10710

Shouldn't have to do any of this when passwording a server is a better option.

[Galahad]

It wouldn't be as bad if they let the admins use the tab menu to boot. That's just putting a band aid on it I feel though

[Poorlaggedman]

The admin interface is utterly contemptible 10711


Shouldn't have to do any of this when passwording a server is a better option.
Yes.

[Oleander]

The problem is going to be compounded once artillery gets implemented. Since slots are going to be limited like cavalry, you know people are gonna snatch up slots just like they do with any unit that has a Sharps rifle.

[Poorlaggedman]

Players are gonna play, you can't expect much else. I doubt the artillery will be as interesting as people think it will. At long range it will be boring. At any other range the gunners will be ravaged. A revamped role selection would help in making people make conscious decisions on who they're going to partner with in-game and gift us a higher likelihood of someone with a brain and proper motives at the helm. I'd gladly trade a couple human-controlled guns vs the annoying AI barrages we have now.

Passwords aren't really about exclusion they're about enhancing the experience. In that case it's all the more dangerous from an early community standpoint because players simply won't want to play outside of locked events if the unlocked game experience is crap. That's been the doom of so many realism-based games because they revolve solely around a set place and time of the week in something that isn't just pure competition. Beyond that the players will scatter, company or not. The lamestream shooters don't rely on that. You hop on a server, get your KDR up and banter with each other. Because we chase a higher experience (which is incredibly challenging for a game to provide on its own), we're not inclined to just try to conjure it up out of the given game systems in a public server which aren't designed to provide it much to the downfall of server populations. It'd be much better to work up that public gameplay to a point where it provides the desired experience more fluidly first 10712

[A. P. Hill]

... I doubt the artillery will be as interesting as people think it will. At long range it will be boring. At any other range the gunners will be ravaged. …

No doubt it takes a special breed of player to play artillery.

[Dutchconfederate]

Nothing special just a interest and joy for artillery is needed. Cant wait !

[William]

Keep up not having a password protection options or at least assigning teams there won't be events, regiments/companies die and you get a worse circumstance.

Yes, like this Saturday....

The TGV (German Volunteers - a German Community of 4 Companys) tried to make a Event and invited 3 other Companys to our Server.
It was a disaster, we couldn´t balance the Teams and all the time new Pubs came in we needed to kick all the time because no one was listening to the admins or to the orders from the Companys.

In the end there where way to many to kick them all, and the other companys couldn't enter the server.

in the end the Pubs complained that they get kicked the companys that they cant get in and so the event got closed, and no one had a nice time......

so the TGV will no longer host any events until PW servers are done because its impossible to do!

greetings Iron

(sry for my shit english grammar)

[Quaker]

Deleted

[Dutchconfederate]

means you should play the game smarter and in a more tactical manner. Both sides will have artillery and both sides have something extra to worry about and the artillerist can only shoot at what they see or the info they get from the field.
I do not see a difference when i play Squad / Hell Let Loose or similar games like that. But that is of course my personal view on this.

** see that the post I replied to was deleted **

[William]

** see that the post I replied to was deleted **

maybe because its a password thread not a arty thread.

[Dutchconfederate]

maybe because its a password thread not a arty thread.

Could be

[Ted E. Bear]

Alright, gonna voice my opinion here again and i'll see if I can get the pitchforks out and after me again. The core gameplay should always be tailored to public non regimental play. A good core game that is tailored well to the needs of the common people that play it is what will build the community. While Regiments are a vital and integral part of this community tailoring the game to them first will drive away most people. This should be the last thing regiments should want because if new people arent playing the game for long because the base game has issues it really doesnt matter how good the regimentals event are in quality, especially if they are passworded off to the general public. Less new people joining the game means less people to recruit from. On the flip side Regiments should be able to have way more control and ability to modify their own servers to suit their own play style and for events as far as officer counts and regiments are concerned. Passworded servers for "quality gameplay" just continues to drive the notion that you need a regiment to play the game "properly" which should not be the case. Until the core of the game play is fine tuned to the general public and the game doesnt rely on regiments to populate it then it will be a good idea to allow passworded and truly private server. This may come as some shock but not everyone want to join a regiment, they just want to play the game and have fun, if they have a hard time having fun they are not going to stick around and if they dont stick around the chances of them seeing what regiments actually have to offer and bring to the table is slim to none. If regiments can put their needs aside for the needs of the game as whole first i think it will benefit them more in the long run.

[Mark L. E. E. Smith]

Alright, gonna voice my opinion here again and i'll see if I can get the pitchforks out and after me again. The core gameplay should always be tailored to public non regimental play. A good core game that is tailored well to the needs of the common people that play it is what will build the community. While Regiments are a vital and integral part of this community tailoring the game to them first will drive away most people. This should be the last thing regiments should want because if new people arent playing the game for long because the base game has issues it really doesnt matter how good the regimentals event are in quality, especially if they are passworded off to the general public. Less new people joining the game means less people to recruit from. On the flip side Regiments should be able to have way more control and ability to modify their own servers to suit their own play style and for events as far as officer counts and regiments are concerned. Passworded servers for "quality gameplay" just continues to drive the notion that you need a regiment to play the game "properly" which should not be the case. Until the core of the game play is fine tuned to the general public and the game doesnt rely on regiments to populate it then it will be a good idea to allow passworded and truly private server. This may come as some shock but not everyone want to join a regiment, they just want to play the game and have fun, if they have a hard time having fun they are not going to stick around and if they dont stick around the chances of them seeing what regiments actually have to offer and bring to the table is slim to none. If regiments can put their needs aside for the needs of the game as whole first i think it will benefit them more in the long run.

Amen to that. Look at Verdun as an example - they left jumpshooting in for years to appease the "competitive" clans, which drove off newcomers who were expecting a historical game. Now, despite being the only authentic WW1 shooter (along with Tannenberg), it's dead. Cater for the masses, or the games will dry up.

[William]

Alright, gonna voice my opinion here again and i'll see if I can get the pitchforks out and after me again. The core gameplay should always be tailored to public non regimental play. A good core game that is tailored well to the needs of the common people that play it is what will build the community. While Regiments are a vital and integral part of this community tailoring the game to them first will drive away most people. This should be the last thing regiments should want because if new people arent playing the game for long because the base game has issues it really doesnt matter how good the regimentals event are in quality, especially if they are passworded off to the general public. Less new people joining the game means less people to recruit from. On the flip side Regiments should be able to have way more control and ability to modify their own servers to suit their own play style and for events as far as officer counts and regiments are concerned. Passworded servers for "quality gameplay" just continues to drive the notion that you need a regiment to play the game "properly" which should not be the case. Until the core of the game play is fine tuned to the general public and the game doesnt rely on regiments to populate it then it will be a good idea to allow passworded and truly private server. This may come as some shock but not everyone want to join a regiment, they just want to play the game and have fun, if they have a hard time having fun they are not going to stick around and if they dont stick around the chances of them seeing what regiments actually have to offer and bring to the table is slim to none. If regiments can put their needs aside for the needs of the game as whole first i think it will benefit them more in the long run.

I understand what you mean, i can only speak for myself and the most of my Community.

We dont want to lock public players out, but must of us buyed the game because they wanted realism events, with roleplay and orders and so on.
And sadly you just CANT do that with the most public players.
We had best experience this Saturday.

The publics where shouting, sprinting away from spawn, ramboing, Giving orders to us and yelled at us, everything then but not playing realism in lines or anything.
And for such events like Saturday we need passwords because if you can´t play properly in realsm style for what did i got the game then......

if i cant play the realism i got the game for there is no reason for me to stay.
Because for what do i make a Companytool, stuff for Roleplaying, make stuff like in Formation und stuff when no one takes it for real.....

We just want passwords for our 1 Event server we use like 2 or 3 times a week thats it.

[Galahad]

I'm not sure why this is such a problem. If a regiment spends the money to rent a server for events or drills or whatever they want then let them have a password. If they keep it locked then that's on them. It's not like there aren't other servers to play on for people not in that regiment or event. Hell even if all rented servers were always password locked there are still the official one's to play on. The argument that it hurts other players who aren't in that regiment doesn't hold any water to me. The regiment rents it, let them decide if they want it locked or not. Then I hear people argue that a regiment having a event is the most populated one. Your probably right but that population count is going to drop when they are done playing and others might be turned off by non regimental people's playing and not return to it again as the above example alludes to.

If it was my server, I wouldn't have a lock on it unless play was seriously being disrupted or something out of the ordinary like a strict line battle. But that's me and I'm not going to pretend to speak for everyone. However the idea of people not in a regiment trying to dictate what people in one regiment or another should do with the server they rented with their money is laughable

[William]

I'm not sure why this is such a problem. If a regiment spends the money to rent a server for events or drills or whatever they want then let them have a password. If they keep it locked then that's on them. It's not like there aren't other servers to play on for people not in that regiment or event. Hell even if all rented servers were always password locked there are still the official one's to play on. The argument that it hurts other players who aren't in that regiment doesn't hold any water to me. The regiment rents it, let them decide if they want it locked or not. Then I hear people argue that a regiment having a event is the most populated one. Your probably right but that population count is going to drop when they are done playing and others might be turned off by non regimental people's playing and not return to it again as the above example alludes to.

If it was my server, I wouldn't have a lock on it unless play was seriously being disrupted or something out of the ordinary like a strict line battle. But that's me and I'm not going to pretend to speak for everyone. However the idea of people not in a regiment trying to dictate what people in one regiment or another should do with the server they rented with their money is laughable


Hallelujah, Thank you Sir!

i couldn't say it better!

[Matt(Fridge)]

I understand what you mean, i can only speak for myself and the most of my Community.

We dont want to lock public players out, but must of us buyed the game because they wanted realism events, with roleplay and orders and so on.
And sadly you just CANT do that with the most public players.
We had best experience this Saturday.

The publics where shouting, sprinting away from spawn, ramboing, Giving orders to us and yelled at us, everything then but not playing realism in lines or anything.
And for such events like Saturday we need passwords because if you can´t play properly in realsm style for what did i got the game then......

if i cant play the realism i got the game for there is no reason for me to stay.
Because for what do i make a Companytool, stuff for Roleplaying, make stuff like in Formation und stuff when no one takes it for real.....

We just want passwords for our 1 Event server we use like 2 or 3 times a week thats it.

Exactly. The problem is is that at least for now the devs do not seem to want to let the two coexist. (generally speaking) the people who play on the public random servers are not the same people who organize events and only wanna play on dedicated servers. You go into one and then another and it is like a different world. I dont get why the publics talk about how they dont need regiments to have fun but insist we should have our servers opened unconditionally for them.

[Soulfly]

I dont get why the publics talk about how they dont need regiments to have fun but insist we should have our servers opened unconditionally for them.

"The publics" dont exist, there are people loving playing with regiments and people who dont, there are members of regiments helping public players and member who dont, there are public players behaving like monkey and members of regiments....I really dont get why you guys try to separate a community so hard. Just as a side note

Personally I am totally fine with having servers with passwords, like for events or trainings....thats pretty normal to be honest.

[William]

" there are public players behaving like monkey and members of regiments....

Personally I am totally fine with having servers with passwords, like for events or trainings....thats pretty normal to be honest.

Aye but Regiments who behave like monkeys are not invited to our events, and sadly the behaving publics are a little amount, at least by taking orders from Companys on events.

[Mark L. E. E. Smith]

Current system: players pile into the most populated server, whichever one that may be. When that's full, they head to the next one, as it what generally happens in an online fps. If that next server is hosting a not-so-private party, it's not ideal.

Making private servers password protected: potential for playerbase to be spread thinly across multiple servers at peak times, pleasing those in the locked servers while leaving those players who are not in companies without the chance of joining a big game.

Solution: a WoR official password protected server(s). Companies can book the server via the forum for their own usage for a certain time period and are issued with a password for it. Everyone else then reverts back to joining the most populated servers.

[Galahad]

I would argue different. Not having password protected servers spreads the server population more as most who play in events just log on to play the events then log off again leaving whatever pub stragglers on that server. It furthermore strains relations as the non regimental players are constantly being kicked to either make room in the server for the people hosting the event or due to less communication resulting in them not following rules agreed upon by the regiments before the event.

All that bluster aside, it shouldn't matter. The regiments rent the servers to play how they want with their money. It's like saying hey you can buy this car to use for work but you have to make sure you pick up these 3 people on your way to work and take then where they want

[Oleander]

Making private servers password protected: potential for playerbase to be spread thinly across multiple servers at peak times, pleasing those in the locked servers while leaving those players who are not in companies without the chance of joining a big game.

This is flat out not true. At any point during the day there is one server full, and this is without big regiments playing. Its when the big groups have events that multiple servers get populated. They aren't going to be spread out thinl among other servers. They go to the next one and fill it. On event nights, when one server fills there is usually at least one or more that have significant numbers.

My biggest gripe right now is with the cap going up to 200 in the future, that means server cost is going to increase. We're paying $112 now, and that will go up to $140. Still no password control, still no solution being talked about publicly from the devs. I don't know what they're gonna do when all the groups get fed up with having to arrange events around pubs and quit renting servers altogether.

[Mark L. E. E. Smith]

This is flat out not true.

"Potential". Something that could happen, not will happen or is happening - therefore it is your statement that is flat out not true, unless you're Mystic Meg and can see exactly what would happen.

[Oleander]

Its not happening now so I don't know what crystal ball you're looking in to say it has the potential to be a problem in the future. Pubbies are getting kicked out of private servers during events as it stands and they aren't thinly spread among the remaining servers. So I don't know where you're getting you're ideas from.

[Dutchconfederate]

https://media.makeameme.org/created/looking-into-the-zvhwc2.jpg

[Matt(Fridge)]

"The publics" dont exist, there are people loving playing with regiments and people who dont, there are members of regiments helping public players and member who dont, there are public players behaving like monkey and members of regiments....I really dont get why you guys try to separate a community so hard. Just as a side note

Personally I am totally fine with having servers with passwords, like for events or trainings....thats pretty normal to be honest.

Publics would be a correct term to describe that crowd. People who only like playing in public servers, people who reject the company tool structure that goes hand in hand with the game and dont mind playing with just random people who may or may not know how to play the game, people who want all servers "publicly" open to everyone. It is not meant to be derogatory, it just contradicts the established system of forming companies and playing against other companies which is exactly what people who are getting their own servers are paying for. But it is incredibly frustrating when we do not get it because they believe for no good reason it would destroy the game. This is not meant to sound mean spirited, but I want to be blunt.

[William]

It is not meant to be derogatory, it just contradicts the established system of forming companies and playing against other companies which is exactly what people who are getting their own servers are paying for.

Yes, Yes and Yes again!

It´s the servers the Companys pay for so its up to them if they use a password or not.

Like a other post before if you get a car or other tool you can use it aswell as YOU like not others.

[Poorlaggedman]

I’ll go back to one of my very first posts in the forum a couple summers ago and restate the same point I’ve already stated.

I don't want a game where you have to join a unit and agree to certain rules to have proper Civil War combat, I want one where you engage in something resembling proper Civil War combat because it works in the game

It's what I call the great trap of realism games and it's business as usual. Most everyone has a common concept of how the game should be played but the development usually stops short of doing what it needs to do to present that. The community then is forced to relegate the game to closed server events where people mutually agree to play the game the way it's supposed to be played at least up to a point (which will always cause conflict and splintering).


It’s not that we'll destroy the community by making passworded 'realisms', it’s that the community will be destroyed because we need private realisms. It's the cob webs on the unlocked servers and the mentality of "I can't wait for the next realism but there's no point in playing until then." I think a lot of people know this to be true. I for one don't choose to accept it as a healthy natural state to a game.

WoR has years ahead of it either way but those years will be exponentially more prosperous if the game is made to strongly compel something very close to the style of play without requiring the following of written 'rules' and peer pressure. That's not easy but I don't think it's impossible nor do I think that closed server events won't ever be a big thing. Nothing is going to beat the banhammer as a deterrent on following orders, but the banhammer is not unbiased or omnipresent. The game needs to be the invisible hand that guides the behavior of the players, not an overseer with a whip. The reality of where gameplay stands will never come in to focus clearly if normal players join the game and then either leave because the public gameplay is sub-par or get absorbed into the password-protected community.

There’s a tendency to pussy-foot it in games with restrictive features which are not mainstream. There was a point in my realism game life where people argued and argued about needing crosshairs believe it or not. The no death-messages. The no individual score. They're all still radical concepts. If you don't believe me just look at some of the complaints about them here and on the steam discussion boards. The formation restrictions in picket patrol are radical (I don't like them btw). Things can be done and they all serve a purpose. Suppression is still relatively radical and if it was harder to recover from it'd be even more radical and more of an incentive. I don't think players should be out on their own and fully recover from suppression thirty seconds after 190 bullets fly over their head. I definitely did that in the 200 person test last weekend, though I was technically in 'skirmish' with a few others. 10734 The officer questions are really hard. And you need to have some sort of leadership to play right. That's a big piece of the puzzle missing from the beginning. Honestly public players do look for leadership and do look to lead. And people will follow them. They're just being let down by the way the officer role is seized.

When you don't need PW'd servers anymore, that's when you really need them. Because development is done then.

[TRaider]

We need password protected servers the time has come. It is nearly impossible organize an event with a select group without pubs and other groups interfering taking officer spots, and not cooperating. We don't want to totally lock down our server 24/7 just when we have an event that requires specific set of rules be followed. Charging over $100 a month for a server that offers little control is down right highway robbery. In the current state the quality of events is a crap shoot and most times leaves the units involved feeling unfulfilled. After every event I receive the predictable messages from both Union and Reb units saying "well that was a total shit show" , "the pubs ruined the event" or " abc unit jumped into the event and didn't follow the rules and took officer spots." It's the same thing every week and it's getting old.

If this game is truly geared toward companies then CG needs to really focus on giving us the tools to make our events organized instead of the mob rule that currently prevails. Suggestions, maybe allow a server to be locked for 3 hours every 24 hours, make special classes Officer,NCO,Flag bearer only selectable using a predetermined key set by the server owner, allow us to, give 5 minute planning time before match starts, adding more Officer spots so our groups can actually represent their roles and finally I suggest a special mode that is built for organized events that enables the options I've listed above while keeping standard skirmish mode for the casual player.

Many people are getting burnt out playing WoR and multiple people have said I'm taking a break until BCoF comes out. This isn't a good sign for WoR and I sure hope this doesn't keep happening because we want this game to succeed, but we need to work together to make things better for "Organized" events.

[William]

We need password protected servers the time has come. It is nearly impossible organize an event with a select group without pubs and other groups interfering taking officer spots, and not cooperating. We don't want to totally lock down our server 24/7 just when we have an event that requires specific set of rules be followed. Charging over $100 a month for a server that offers little control is down right highway robbery. In the current state the quality of events is a crap shoot and most times leaves the units involved feeling unfulfilled. After every event I receive the predictable messages from both Union and Reb units saying "well that was a total shit show" , "the pubs ruined the event" or " abc unit jumped into the event and didn't follow the rules and took officer spots." It's the same thing every week and it's getting old.

If this game is truly geared toward companies then CG needs to really focus on giving us the tools to make our events organized instead of the mob rule that currently prevails. Suggestions, maybe allow a server to be locked for 3 hours every 24 hours, make special classes Officer,NCO,Flag bearer only selectable using a predetermined key set by the server owner, allow us to, give 5 minute planning time before match starts, adding more Officer spots so our groups can actually represent their roles and finally I suggest a special mode that is built for organized events that enables the options I've listed above while keeping standard skirmish mode for the casual player.

Many people are getting burnt out playing WoR and multiple people have said I'm taking a break until BCoF comes out. This isn't a good sign for WoR and I sure hope this doesn't keep happening because we want this game to succeed, but we need to work together to make things better for "Organized" events.

Thanks for that, i agree, same here we are making no events until PW server aswell........beacuse its just useless

[Matt(Fridge)]

My unit still holds events but for now we have to factor in pubs. Which is incredibly annoying. Beyond frustrating to always be working to improve your skills and strategies in game for it to be offset by randomness and players unwilling to take the game seriously.

[SUWAROW]

Sometimes we prepare for weeks. Organizers spend a lot of money to keep empty servers for 150 slots for games. And after all this manipulation of the planned battle with certain players, we see complete shit. No one adheres to any guidelines and does not want to cooperate. And you're looking at it all. On lags and crashes. Constant problems with joining your friends. You really think, and what the hell is so difficult to do such a simple thing as a password for the server? Your God soul. People pay money and can't get such a simple thing as a password. YES, WE WANT TO PLAY SEPARATELY. Because we like to play without "Fucking Russians" every minute and killing officers because it's funny. Did you guys just fuck?

I don't want to hear excuses. People who come to this game stay in it less if they don't join the regiment. Why is it so hard to understand? When there are so many vivid examples. At least "ancestor" Napoleonic Wars.

[TRaider]

Sometimes we prepare for weeks. Organizers spend a lot of money to keep empty servers for 150 slots for games. And after all this manipulation of the planned battle with certain players, we see complete shit. No one adheres to any guidelines and does not want to cooperate. And you're looking at it all. On lags and crashes. Constant problems with joining your friends. You really think, and what the hell is so difficult to do such a simple thing as a password for the server? Your God soul. People pay money and can't get such a simple thing as a password. YES, WE WANT TO PLAY SEPARATELY. Because we like to play without "Fucking Russians" every minute and killing officers because it's funny. Did you guys just fuck?

I don't want to hear excuses. People who come to this game stay in it less if they don't join the regiment. Why is it so hard to understand? When there are so many vivid examples. At least "ancestor" Napoleonic Wars.
^^^^^

[TrustyJam]

Please keep the feedback civil, thank you.

- Trusty

[SUWAROW]

I lead the company and BAM, some asshole kills me. Lose time on the, to say the admin playing on the other side, that to he use admin rights and search and ban him. In the end I already lost the initiative.

Why are you reinventing the wheel? Just get it ready and use. Therefore, you will come up with a bike with jet traction and steep brakes, but for now you need a simple solution.

Thank you, we'll be taking advice and will ban all randomness, who comes to the server on the event without an invitation. I think this is a good alternative instead of trying to add the ability to PUT a PASSWORD!

[Leifr]

Thank you, we'll be taking advice and will ban all randomness, who comes to the server on the event without an invitation. I think this is a good alternative instead of trying to add the ability to PUT a PASSWORD!

It's the only alternative that you have right now.

[Grumpytoo]

Ok, as someone who loves playing this game I am confused about "events" on private severs. Bear with me I am pretty new to all this.

I haven't joined a regiment or anything and not sure if I will or not. But, I probably won't soon. Regardless, when I log in tonight, as I typically do ...should I *not* choose a certain type of server if a private event is occurring? I do not wish to butt in on anyone's planned event if not invited. I usually only see one server at a time with any players in it, so I always choose that one. And if I can't join a private event (and again, I am not against people who pay for servers having their own private event, they certainly should be able to say who is invited and who is not) ...there really isn't anything to do...the player population is just not big enough for another skirmish to be happening at the same time , at least in my experience.

So, now with this new feature...can I get some indication that I should NOT join a "event " server? Seriously this is my newest favorite game and it's great but not really that smooth and loading and leaving a server can take awhile on my machine, and if I am going to get kicked from a private server event anyway, not sure why I would even log in.

[TrustyJam]

Ok, as someone who loves playing this game I am confused about "events" on private severs. Bear with me I am pretty new to all this.

I haven't joined a regiment or anything and not sure if I will or not. But, I probably won't soon. Regardless, when I log in tonight, as I typically do ...should I *not* choose a certain type of server if a private event is occurring? I do not wish to butt in on anyone's planned event if not invited. I usually only see one server at a time with any players in it, so I always choose that one. And if I can't join a private event (and again, I am not against people who pay for servers having their own private event, they certainly should be able to say who is invited and who is not) ...there really isn't anything to do...the player population is just not big enough for another skirmish to be happening at the same time , at least in my experience.

So, now with this new feature...can I get some indication that I should NOT join a "event " server? Seriously this is my newest favorite game and it's great but not really that smooth and loading and leaving a server can take awhile on my machine, and if I am going to get kicked from a private server event anyway, not sure why I would even log in.

Please do feel free to join any server of your liking.

If joining a non official server, however, be aware that you may be asked to follow certain rules or the like (and it appears some will ban every non regimental player which is a great way of killing their server but it is their server so they are obviously free to do so).

Most companies and regiments will welcome new players at most times as long as you follow their lead. :)

- Trusty

[Galahad]

^^^^^


Ok, as someone who loves playing this game I am confused about "events" on private severs. Bear with me I am pretty new to all this.

I haven't joined a regiment or anything and not sure if I will or not. But, I probably won't soon. Regardless, when I log in tonight, as I typically do ...should I *not* choose a certain type of server if a private event is occurring? I do not wish to butt in on anyone's planned event if not invited. I usually only see one server at a time with any players in it, so I always choose that one. And if I can't join a private event (and again, I am not against people who pay for servers having their own private event, they certainly should be able to say who is invited and who is not) ...there really isn't anything to do...the player population is just not big enough for another skirmish to be happening at the same time , at least in my experience.

So, now with this new feature...can I get some indication that I should NOT join a "event " server? Seriously this is my newest favorite game and it's great but not really that smooth and loading and leaving a server can take awhile on my machine, and if I am going to get kicked from a private server event anyway, not sure why I would even log in.


I can't speak for all regiments and I won't pretend to. I know on our event night we happily welcome pubs as long as they don't take a officer spot, we have room, and aren't a troll. There are plenty of good pubby players out there so don't think of this as a bash pubby fest as some people like to make it.

Major issues that arise with the good players are communication though as most regiments use teamspeak or discord to talk when they have units across the map but that not the pubby fault and I've seen most be able to just follow the lines as the in game chat is utilized. The bad players are a whole new ball of wax. You will have one's take officer spots and when asked to give it up they team kill or continue to try to give orders and a admin might not be on or on the other team. The new way of using the tab menu has helped but unless the 2 sides are in communication then you require a admin on both sides at all times.

The few line battles I have tried have ended unfortunately in great failures as most NOT all pub players refuse to do it.

It's really a damned if you do damned if you don't scenario. If the bad pub players join if makes the regiment have a bad time but if they are kicked then you see people out with pitchforks and torches saying X regiment kicked me from their server. I try and keep the philosophy simple in saying if the regiment is paying for it then they should be able to do what they want unmolested.

I do encourage you to try to get on a regiment event when you can though. The gameplay is extremely different from what you find outside of it

[Grumpytoo]

Thanks, Galahad and Trusty. The last thing anyone has to worry about from me, is taking a CO spot. I'm happiest in the ranks and prefer it.

[Galahad]

Thanks, Galahad and Trusty. The last thing anyone has to worry about from me, is taking a CO spot. I'm happiest in the ranks and prefer it.

Anytime dude, and if you ever have a question that might pop up feel free to message me. I'll answer to the best of my abilities. Hope to see you in game!

[TRaider]

Please do feel free to join any server of your liking.

If joining a non official server, however, be aware that you may be asked to follow certain rules or the like (and it appears some will ban every non regimental player which is a great way of killing their server but it is their server so they are obviously free to do so).

Most companies and regiments will welcome new players at most times as long as you follow their lead. :)

- Trusty

Thanks for deciding to respond to a public player and choosing not to respond to someone paying a $100 a month to host an active server and plan events to keep your community engaged.

Can we get movement on this issue? Meet us in the middle here guys, many groups are not happy about you guys stonewalling the community on this issue.

[TrustyJam]

Thanks for deciding to respond to a public player and choosing not to respond to someone paying a $100 a month to host an active server and plan events to keep your community engaged.

Can we get movement on this issue? Meet us in the middle here guys, many groups are not happy about you guys stonewalling the community on this issue.

You're welcome. My reply before that was to a company player I believe so it's 50/50.

Just because I choose to not answer every piece of feedback here it doesn't mean that I'm not reading nor discussing said feedback with the team. :)

If you do not think it worth it to rent a server when comparing price (of which we gain nothing - that is all g-portal's earnings) and current features then do not rent a server. We have official servers available for this exact reason. :)

We are not stonewalling the community. We are very well aware that passworded servers is a much requested feature by a large portion of the community.

- Trusty

[Rbater]

I usually only see one server at a time with any players in it, so I always choose that one. And if I can't join a private event (and again, I am not against people who pay for servers having their own private event, they certainly should be able to say who is invited and who is not) ...there really isn't anything to do...the player population is just not big enough for another skirmish to be happening at the same time , at least in my experience.

I believe this to be the reason why it's not ideal to have passwords atm. In my month and change of owning the game, I've only ever seen two servers with 120-full player count going simultaneously, and both were event servers. All other servers at that time had no people on or were drill camps. The hypothetical situation being that if both had passwords, pubs would basically not play. As a pub myself, I'm more inclined to join a populated server. I don't want to have to wait for a server to have the slim possibility of being filled. Now the two server simultaneously was just once. Normally I only ever see one populated server. Again, if that was passworded and locked, pubs wouldn't care to play and would play another game in their library. As Grumpy said, there just is not big enough of a player base for the game to justify it at this given moment.

[Galahad]

I believe this to be the reason why it's not ideal to have passwords atm. In my month and change of owning the game, I've only ever seen two servers with 120-full player count going simultaneously, and both were event servers. All other servers at that time had no people on or were drill camps. The hypothetical situation being that if both had passwords, pubs would basically not play. As a pub myself, I'm more inclined to join a populated server. I don't want to have to wait for a server to have the slim possibility of being filled. Now the two server simultaneously was just once. Normally I only ever see one populated server. Again, if that was passworded and locked, pubs wouldn't care to play and would play another game in their library. As Grumpy said, there just is not big enough of a player base for the game to justify it at this given moment.

But the rebuttal to that is the only reason those servers are filled is that the specific regiments are logging on for a event. When that event is over most log off so the numbers really don't matter except for those few games for the event. If anything I've seen less regimental players logging on even for events so as to not have to put up with headaches that might occur. This problem is especially frustrating for smaller regiments that wish to have a match or 2 against similar sized regiments from what I've been told.

Again I don't think anyone is trying to bash the good public players that are out there especially since there are some "regimental" players that are just as toxic as some of the worst pub players but having to police both sides can become a big chore at times and takes 2 players out of the game that would probably rather play.

If passwords were to take effect the regiments would be able to invite in who they like. I know both pubs and regimental players I would invite or not invite so i would caution people into turning this into a pub vs regiment player thing. Both sides have great and shitty players, it should be up to the specific renters of the server to allow or not allow players in regardless if they have digital tags in front of their name or not

[Rbater]

But the rebuttal to that is the only reason those servers are filled is that the specific regiments are logging on for an event.

In my experience, I'm usually on when event times have either been over or haven't started (going off the basis of the 1st Texas events being at 8pm est).

I also see and hear your other points, but I feel like a better solution would to have positions like COs, NCOs, and Flag Bearers have passwords to lock them instead of the servers themselves. There should also be the ability to permanently ban players from the server (I believe there already is?) if they are that bad.


having to police both sides can become a big chore at times and takes 2 players out of the game that would probably rather play.
Again, I completely understand this. Maybe there should be a system like the Battlefield server rentals where you could kick/ban people from the player menu, and that would apply for admins being able to do so for both sides from any team. It would maybe notify the admins of say 2 or 3 TKs? That way it wouldn't take up so much time for the server admin, and allow them to play the game.

I'm also against turning this into a pub vs regiment player thing, but I just want to offer solutions that are outside of the arguments of passworded server vs not being the end-all-be-all.

[TrustyJam]

In my experience, I'm usually on when event times have either been over or haven't started (going off the basis of the 1st Texas events being at 8pm est).

I also see and hear your other points, but I feel like a better solution would to have positions like COs, NCOs, and Flag Bearers have passwords to lock them instead of the servers themselves. There should also be the ability to permanently ban players from the server (I believe there already is?) if they are that bad.


Again, I completely understand this. Maybe there should be a system like the Battlefield server rentals where you could kick/ban people from the player menu, and that would apply for admins being able to do so for both sides from any team. It would maybe notify the admins of say 2 or 3 TKs? That way it wouldn't take up so much time for the server admin, and allow them to play the game.

I'm also against turning this into a pub vs regiment player thing, but I just want to offer solutions that are outside of the arguments of passworded server vs not being the end-all-be-all.

Yes, there are now two admin tools that allow for kicking/banning.

Server admins see all TK's done.

- Trusty

[TRaider]

You're welcome.

Just because I choose to not answer every piece of feedback here it doesn't mean that I'm not reading nor discussing said feedback with the team. :)

If you do not think it worth it to rent a server when comparing price (of which we gain nothing - that is all g-portal's earnings) and current features then do not rent a server. We have official servers available for this exact reason. :)

We are not stonewalling the community. We are very well aware that passworded servers is a much requested feature by a large portion of the community.

- Trusty

Not a feature it's already built into the engine and could probably be enabled in 30 minutes. Try it for a week wort case it doesn't work and you can disable it but if it works your community will be happy.

[TrustyJam]

Not a feature it's already built into the engine and could probably be enabled in 30 minutes.

It's not about how much time it would take to implement. It's about the effects of implementing it.

- Trusty

[TRaider]

It's not about how much time it would take to implement. It's about the effects of implementing it.

- Trusty

Totally agree with you that is why I would suggest testing it for a week and put out announcement before hand so everyone knows what it going on.

[Kvatcharoonie]

I think that if you have to pay a large sum of money for a server each month, you should be able to decide if you have passwords or not. And the issue with people who want to join but cannot is easily fixed, knowing that these events will only have regiments on them, there are still the official servers which would be populated with all the pubs playing the game as all the regimental players would be eventing or on public play (on an open server). The server wouldn't always be locked, and most of the time it would be open with announcements for when an event is going to take place and which pub server is most populated. It is very simple if you think about it.

[Tibib0]

The problem today is that devs think, that there is not enough players are in game, so, pub servers won't get enough players to give them true ingame emotes. Its understood. But then to make peace between casuals and regiments give to the last mechanics to let them play the "open" event. NCO's and CO's reserv pass (been said), ability to change numbers of them to clearly present command staff in battle, give the mechanic for regiment staff to have priority to join the event they make ( its really bad, when ure friends can't join the event they orginized cause its already full of pub players) and so on, in general, we need the mechanics that allow us to make an organized!!! event, not just another random battle. Its hard to do now, its understood too, so the best conclusion still is passwords for private servers for about 2-3 hours a week... Sorry for my english, if I made mistakes. With best wishes from russian community.

[Rud]

Just wanted to say plus one for this idea. The company I'm with is huge about public engagement and recruitment, but there are special events when we really wish we could restrict things to just us and the companies we've invited. If pubs can't join our server we are losing potential recruits, that alone would keep us from running with a password 24/7 and we'd only use it when it meets some pretty stringent requirements.

[Tibib0]

Just wanted to say plus one for this idea. The company I'm with is huge about public engagement and recruitment, but there are special events when we really wish we could restrict things to just us and the companies we've invited. If pubs can't join our server we are losing potential recruits, that alone would keep us from running with a password 24/7 and we'd only use it when it meets some pretty stringent requirements.

True, nobody here speaks about separation from pub comunity. We always play some pub games, we were in big number in stress test on last weekends, we are recruting there, just play for fun in small groups, ure can't say, that regiment don't play pubs at all. But give to us our little corner for a minute)

[Tibib0]

Just wanted to say plus one for this idea. The company I'm with is huge about public engagement and recruitment, but there are special events when we really wish we could restrict things to just us and the companies we've invited. If pubs can't join our server we are losing potential recruits, that alone would keep us from running with a password 24/7 and we'd only use it when it meets some pretty stringent requirements.

True, nobody here speaks about separation from pub comunity. We always play some pub games, we were in big number in stress test on last weekends, we are recruting there, just play for fun in small groups, ure can't say, that regiments don't play pubs at all. But give to us our little corner for a minute)

[Dan Hagman]

Actually, when during an event, if there were passwords restricting the use of the officer/nco spots, it would keep pubs from spawning as officers and nco's, it would be beneficial for us as regiments. Firstly our own officers/nco's wouldn't be forced to spawn as privates as it is right now, more than not btw that is the case, it would also give pubs another reason to join a company in the first place. Just saying that it would make coordination on the battlefield a lot more easier. Or if that is not possible, than give us the right to limit the access of pubs during events, for example that pubs only can join after a certain time. That would give the partaking companies time to spawn according to their ranks.

[Kvatcharoonie]

Also, I'd say that when we have 100+ people on servers at least 70% are men in a regiment, so if you continue to ignore us, a large portion of your community is going to go away. People in regiments are the most active player base and most involved.

[[4thNJ(A)]Rct.Reco]

I totally agree 100% with this post, took the typing right out of my fingers:)


Actually, when during an event, if there were passwords restricting the use of the officer/nco spots, it would keep pubs from spawning as officers and nco's, it would be beneficial for us as regiments. Firstly our own officers/nco's wouldn't be forced to spawn as privates as it is right now, more than not btw that is the case, it would also give pubs another reason to join a company in the first place. Just saying that it would make coordination on the battlefield a lot more easier. Or if that is not possible, than give us the right to limit the access of pubs during events, for example that pubs only can join after a certain time. That would give the partaking companies time to spawn according to their ranks.

[Leifr]

As for the Officer and NCO, I have previously suggested that perhaps it would be better to allow white-listing on servers. Server owners may specify Steam IDs in the server config as to who may take one of the two roles, otherwise it is made available to first come first serve. Public servers (such as CG's own) can therefore be left with free access, and private servers may run a quasi-public server with limited role access.

I do not think any kind of role vote would be particularly useful or healthy for the game.

Responding with my own quote; I have said this several times previously. Some form of server privilege manipulation would be best in the long-term I think. I am in agreement with O'Rourke.

You're all sharing very thin slices of the same pie. There is server capacity there for some 2,800 players (if one tallies up existing servers) in an Early Access title where the peak population during weekend-play is around 350 players. It isn't surprising that most servers go empty, even on Early Access launch day half of these would not have seen activity. Maybe the addition of a password function will magic in another 2,000 players...

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

[P1Exel]

Server passwords are needed in this game and it wont effect public players that much cus every regiment wants to recruit new guys so it will mostly be open but when we have an event public players ruin the fun and makes it hard to fell immersion in the game instead of going regiment vs regiment you go with teamkilling yelling nonsense public players (not all are like). that's where the passwords come in handy. Also, I just wanna mention this a lot of players play this game because of the communities they joined not because the game, to be honest, its pretty boring 20 sec for reloading inaccurate guns, etc. but the regiments the communities that we build to make it fun and frankly if you keep ignoring them you will lose the players that keep your game alive

[Rbater]

during an event, [...] restricting the use of the officer/nco spots [...] would keep pubs from spawning as officers and nco's, it would be beneficial for us as regiments.


^ This might actually be a decent compromise. If the WoR developers fear that adding server passwords would hinder the average player's participation in most games, then perhaps adding the ability for private servers to restrict the officer/nco slots might be a midway solution. Certain regiments might object less to pubs in their events so long as their officer slots could be reserved for themselves.

Make the ability to select officer or flag classes require a special privilege key, no different than kicking or banning or changing the weather. Regiments could then use their server's privileges.xml in the /Assets/ directory to list which Steam IDs could access those particular classes (e.g. officer).



As for the Officer and NCO, I have previously suggested that perhaps it would be better to allow white-listing on servers. Server owners may specify Steam IDs in the server config as to who may take one of the two roles, otherwise it is made available to first come first serve. Public servers (such as CG's own) can therefore be left with free access, and private servers may run a quasi-public server with limited role access.

I do not think any kind of role vote would be particularly useful or healthy for the game.


I feel like a better solution would to have positions like COs, NCOs, and Flag Bearers have passwords to lock them instead of the servers themselves.

I'm also against turning this into a pub vs regiment player thing, but I just want to offer solutions that are outside of the arguments of passworded server vs not being the end-all-be-all.

So 4 people are on board lol

[Oleander]

Not doing anything and pissing off the people that have been loyal so far isn't exactly going to keep players around either.

[LaBelle]

I just don't see the rationale in the idea that "passworded servers will kill this game." That's never happened before, what would change now?

[Tibib0]

So 4 people are on board lol

5 people. Russian comunity is with u. But it's needed to understand, that CO's / NCO' priority for regiments is the first step for all of us. This won't solve a big problem of the priority for regiment staff to join the event server first, killing ofificers in the back by randoms (I belive it's the most big problem cause it has big influence to an attacking style of game), and the problem of random Rambos that cause big out of line lossess and so on. I also belive that when two big groupes of regiments want to fined, who's the best now, its needed to set them in simular circs before the battle, and keep it during the battle.

[Kvatcharoonie]

https://www.strawpoll.me/17774600

Here I have linked a straw poll, so we can see exactly how many people who view this post want a password feature

[Rbater]

killing officers in the back by randoms... , and the problem of random Rambos that cause big out of line losses and so one.

The admin system in conjunction with the locking of COs & NCOs would help alleviate that issue, especially since there's auto-kicking. It'll be an issue no matter what, just due to the nature that you can kill teammates.

Rambos will be a part of any team oriented game. There's no stopping that, even with full passworded servers. Sure you can kick them, but stupid is as stupid does.

[Tibib0]

https://www.strawpoll.me/17774600

Here I have linked a straw poll, so we can see exactly how many people who view this post want a password feature

Pub players usualy don't read forums))) But the idea is good, may be moderators will move this vote to a top?

[Tibib0]

The admin system in conjunction with the locking of COs & NCOs would help alleviate that issue, especially since there's auto-kicking. It'll be an issue no matter what, just due to the nature that you can kill teammates.

Rambos will be a part of any team oriented game. There's no stopping that, even with full passworded servers. Sure you can kick them, but stupid is as stupid does.

We'll see, but from sunday event I had bad memories, when in a very important attack someone teamkilled Suworow in the back. Rambos in regiment are very-very-very-very rare happening))

[goldnelius]

The issue of server passwords is certainly a conundrum for the community, but as someone who used to play games like this, i.e Napoleonic Wars and North and South, passworded servers overall were a net benefit for it tbh. While I see the merit of non pass worded servers, the problem is that naturally with any game it's going to be difficult to get public servers to replicate the much more tight, much more neatly knit experience that a private company event may provide. The game seems to have this odd dichotomy of hyper organised, well coordinated matches and free for all anarchic shitshows. I think the game's devs should at some point give the community the tools to tailor their particular's servers ruleset and style of organisation to the specifics of their server. That's my two cents anyway.

EDIT: I see passwords as a good ersatz/permanent solution as to allow companies to manufacture a game to their liking

[TrustyJam]

Not doing anything and pissing off the people that have been loyal so far isn't exactly going to keep players around either.

We added a much requested server admin tab menu tool in the last update.

I don't think it entirely valid to state that we are not doing anything.

I very much agree with Lefir's point regarding server passwords not bringing in more players - instead it might (it most certainly will due to some of the remarks I've read here stating that it will become so game changing that entire companies will forget about their game fatigue due to this simple change) make companies play exclusively behind closed doors, until they see that the inclusion of server passwords to keep out non company players, of which several tools to enable to you remove the worst offenders have already been released, have little to no effect on the game fatigue their members are experiencing which is why their companies are bleeding numbers which is likely why they are asking for server passwords in the first place as they seem to have selected the lack of server passwords as the entire reason for general game fatigue (others have chosen to select the lack of hitmarkers as the reason for the very same).

The arguement stating that company member game fatigue will vanish and they'll return to much happier and active days with password protected servers added is problematic even if true (which I doubt as per my above comments). IF the arguement is true, however, no serious and active company will play on the non-password protected servers (as per the arguement that non password protected servers are so horrible for events, unit teamplay, etc).

This means we'll have a divided community for good (again I think this is highly unlikely, but this is what happens if the reports of the people wanting password protected servers are correct).

As Poorlaggedman pointed out, this will result in "artificial feedback" from the majority of our companies, meaning that since they exclusively play behind locked doors with certain rules enforced (they will be if the claims that the addition of password protected servers make entire companies return and play and removes their game fatigue are correct) we only ever get game feedback from a large portion of the community given based on a safe environment with specific rulesets enforced which is going to hurt the development of the game going forward.

Here's my prediction of what will happen if we introduce password protected servers:

Company activity will, probably, at first increase. Events will be set up in the above mentioned safe areas. Artificial feedback will be given, etc. Once the shine of the new feature has died down companies affected by game fatigue will continue to bleed members even in their safe, artificial, environments.

Companies will stick to the passworded option as that is what is treated as the scapegoat of the game fatigue and continue to bleed members.

Eventually, the focus will shift to requests for more game modes, more army branches, lack of hit markers, etc. as the cause for the general game fatigue - one can hope that the community will reunite at that point.

- Trusty

[Tibib0]

I have a question for Trusty. In the road map was said, that there will be big maps 2x2 in the future with several regiments attacking different points of contension, that should cooperate with each over. How are u planing to do all this without trained regiments? On pub servers with random school generals? Who do u think will form and lead all this random forces in the future? With artillary and cav? And do u read all the messeges here? We are trying to make a dialog, try to fined another desisions, cause its already understood, that devs don't want passwards, at list in nowdays.

P.S. And how can u speak about Artificial feedback from regiments when regiments try to make this game more popular, we bring new people to the game, not only recruting, we know the structure of this game, cause we play right from the start, we talk to each over to understand where we are mistaken or not. We want compromise- not blood of anybody in this game...

[Lefty]

1st LT Lefty, 4thNJ Staff.

I joined during the US holidays. I watched the then Capt Raider sending a Pvt to the "Tree of Woe" I found a true reenactment group. We talk around the campfire. We have tent assignments in the camps. We laugh, scream, yell, and then talk about battles during and after. When I joined during my Christmas break, There were 400+ on, on 3 different servers at any given time. (minus 2am-8am US ST) Major Raider (4thNJ) has been doing this long enough to know what we need and what will benefit the community. No he is not a god, but I am sure he only wants whats best for the WoR community. We have to band together if we want to move this amazing experience forward. Please do not fight over this. Lets line up and move War of Rights forward. Even if it is not something I personally want, I would like it for the community.

I see the names here. You guys need to pull off and sort this out. You are all heroes in the WoR community. Don't get butt hurt. Do the right thing.

[TRaider]

We added a much requested server admin tab menu tool in the last update.

I don't think it entirely valid to state that we are not doing anything.

I very much agree with Lefir's point regarding server passwords not bringing in more players - instead it might (it most certainly will due to some of the remarks I've read here stating that it will become so game changing that entire companies will forget about their game fatigue due to this simple change) make companies play exclusively behind closed doors, until they see that the inclusion of server passwords to keep out non company players, of which several tools to enable to you remove the worst offenders have already been released, have little to no effect on the game fatigue their members are experiencing which is why their companies are bleeding numbers which is likely why they are asking for server passwords in the first place as they seem to have selected the lack of server passwords as the entire reason for general game fatigue (others have chosen to select the lack of hitmarkers as the reason for the very same).

The arguement stating that company member game fatigue will vanish and they'll return to much happier and active days with password protected servers added is problematic even if true (which I doubt as per my above comments). IF the arguement is true, however, no serious and active company will play on the non-password protected servers (as per the arguement that non password protected servers are so horrible for events, unit teamplay, etc).

This means we'll have a divided community for good (again I think this is highly unlikely, but this is what happens if the reports of the people wanting password protected servers are correct).

As Poorlaggedman pointed out, this will result in "artificial feedback" from the majority of our companies, meaning that since they exclusively play behind locked doors with certain rules enforced (they will be if the claims that the addition of password protected servers make entire companies return and play and removes their game fatigue are correct) we only ever get game feedback from a large portion of the community given based on a safe environment with specific rulesets enforced which is going to hurt the development of the game going forward.

Here's my prediction of what will happen if we introduce password protected servers:

Company activity will, probably, at first increase. Events will be set up in the above mentioned safe areas. Artificial feedback will be given, etc. Once the shine of the new feature has died down companies affected by game fatigue will continue to bleed members even in their safe, artificial, environments.

Companies will stick to the passworded option as that is what is treated as the scapegoat of the game fatigue and continue to bleed members.

Eventually, the focus will shift to requests for more game modes, more army branches, lack of hit markers, etc. as the cause for the general game fatigue - one can hope that the community will reunite at that point.

- Trusty

Sadly you are so out of touch with your community it's scary. We will play on public servers 85% of the time because we need to bring in players into our groups to keep growing. Plus many of the groups here complaining are not shedding numbers my group is adding 3-5 new recruits everyday and we bring 20-25 members to each event. What gives players fatigue is working hard to plan and train for events only to have it all go to shit because the reasons mentioned by many on this post. Also nobody gives a dam what poorlaggedman thinks because he isn't an influential member of the community, he is a forum jockey who contributes 0% to the community. If you guys can't get with the program perhaps it's time for companies to arrange for a STRIKE.

[Oleander]

Wow, just wow. You guys should start a show on the History channel about conspiracies.

Game fatigue is real, our guys cycle in and out. If anything 1st TX has been fielding MORE people within the last 2 months because of Picket Patrol. What aggravates the piss out of us is when we try to host an event with another unit, and other units along with pubbies feel like its their god given right to invade the server and swipe up spots. Its happened numerous times in the past and is still happening. So instead of being able to jump in and play, we have to spend the better part of a half hour trying to purge people and get them switched onto the right side.

We are paying for these servers and you're just going to sit back and agree with two people on this forum and some shadow feedback when the bulk of the organized community has told you they want passwords and we've been telling you that since day 1. Not to mention the fact that we had to go 2 weeks before you guys had any sort of admin control in place. I think the community has been more than upfront about what they want but I guess it doesn't matter at this point. The game is going to bleed players regardless of having passwords or not, they aren't going to bring people but not having them isn't gonna help keep people around either.

[TrustyJam]

Sadly you are so out of touch with your community it's scary. We will play on public servers 85% of the time because we need to bring in players into our groups to keep growing. Plus many of the groups here complaining are not shedding numbers my group is adding 3-5 new recruits everyday and we bring 20-25 members to each event. What gives players fatigue is working hard to plan and train for events only to have it all go to shit because the reasons mentioned by many on this post. Also nobody gives a dam what poorlaggedman thinks because he isn't an influential member of the community, he is a forum jockey who contributes 0% to the community. If you guys can't get with the program perhaps it's time for companies to arrange for a STRIKE of WoR for 1 week.

That is entirely your right to believe so.

You have several ways of removing bad commanders/trolls/people not following orders on your server.

I do not believe your claim in regards to the general game fatigue (if you will remember a few weeks back you were at it in much the same way in regards to asking for more game modes added). Has the reason for the game fatigue shifted since then?

Well since I "give a damn" regarding the point he made he is a valued member of the community.

I find it interesting that you are advocating for strikes just after one of your company members advocated for the exact opposite but that is of course entirely up to you to do if you believe that will do the community and the game good.

- Trusty

[TrustyJam]

Wow, just wow. You guys should start a show on the History channel about conspiracies.

Game fatigue is real, our guys cycle in and out. If anything 1st TX has been fielding MORE people within the last 2 months because of Picket Patrol. What aggravates the piss out of us is when we try to host an event with another unit, and other units along with pubbies feel like its their god given right to invade the server and swipe up spots. Its happened numerous times in the past and is still happening. So instead of being able to jump in and play, we have to spend the better part of a half hour trying to purge people and get them switched onto the right side.

We are paying for these servers and you're just going to sit back and agree with two people on this forum and some shadow feedback when the bulk of the organized community has told you they want passwords and we've been telling you that since day 1. Not to mention the fact that we had to go 2 weeks before you guys had any sort of admin control in place. I think the community has been more than upfront about what they want but I guess it doesn't matter at this point. The game is going to bleed players regardless of having passwords or not, they aren't going to bring people but not having them isn't gonna help keep people around either.

Thank you for the suggestion.

I'm sorry that me thinking a lot about the possible outcome of things we design for the game seem to annoy you.

You're saying you're gaining members with the current setup which I'm happy to hear. It proves that companies have a real appeal to players (even without the ability to password servers and set up 100% safe events).

I've stated earlier that you are free to not pay for the servers - I'm not going to tell you to rent one or not rent one - that is entirely up to you. If you don't like what you are getting for your money I'd recommend you not to rent one. We have a lot of official servers hosted for this very reason.

- Trusty

[Vankovski]

I don't understand this attitude that if companies get passworded servers for challenges that we're somehow insulating ourselves from public players. It is universally acknowledged that public players are the lifeblood of companies because we have to continually recruit public players to maintain our numbers. The majority of company time is spent on public servers playing and recruiting so we can have 2 hours on the weekend to challenge each other in an organized fashion. What's disheartening is the idea that we shouldn't be allowed to host competitive events, what is the rationale for that? The attitude displayed in this thread almost makes it look like the devs are contemptuous towards a very large subset of the playerbase.

[Tibib0]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DZ6MSQdTUuo&feature=youtu.be

[Oleander]

Thank you for the suggestion.

I'm sorry that me thinking a lot about the possible outcome of things we design for the game seem to annoy you.

You're saying you're gaining members with the current setup which I'm happy to hear. It proves that companies have a real appeal to players (even without the ability to password servers and set up 100% safe events).


Way to miss the point there buddy. Did it ever occur to you that one of the reasons our guys are getting fatigued is having to deal with not having PW's? Or the fact that we are gaining people is because they are tired of dealing with officers that don't know what they're doing. Or maybe they're getting tired of constantly losing because they put their trust in an officer who has no reason to have that class other than he selected it. Take your little path see how far you guys can make it work. Not to mention the fact that we don't generally recruit during events, we gain more people during the week when we are actively on public servers looking for new guys trying to keep them with a vested interest in this game so you can keep working on it.

And you see that little forum badge I have. I care, don't assume I don't. I'm not trying to throw my weight around but jesus christ name 1 MP that doesn't give you the ability to close off a server. I think you guys are reading too much into chaos theory.

[Tibib0]

Did it ever occur to you that one of the reasons our guys are getting fatigued is having to deal with not having PW's? Or the fact that we are gaining people is because they are tired of dealing with officers that don't know what they're doing.Or maybe they're getting tired of constantly losing because they put their trust in an officer who has no reason to have that class other than he selected it. Take your little path see how far you guys can make it work.

This words is like a touch of a God for me, as one of the main recruiter, and all those people in our regiment who lives in Siberia and have a little time to play in Moscow time with us. So they play in publics most of the time, and thats what they say.

[TrustyJam]

Way to miss the point there buddy. Did it ever occur to you that one of the reasons our guys are getting fatigued is having to deal with not having PW's? Or the fact that we are gaining people is because they are tired of dealing with officers that don't know what they're doing. Or maybe they're getting tired of constantly losing because they put their trust in an officer who has no reason to have that class other than he selected it. Take your little path see how far you guys can make it work. Not to mention the fact that we don't generally recruit during events, we gain more people during the week when we are actively on public servers looking for new guys trying to keep them with a vested interest in this game so you can keep working on it.

And you see that little forum badge I have. I care, don't assume I don't. I'm not trying to throw my weight around but jesus christ name 1 MP that doesn't give you the ability to close off a server. I think you guys are reading too much into chaos theory.

I thought you just said you gained members?

Yes, the lack of password protected servers is one of the many, many reasons for game fatigue - there is no simple fix. Game fatigue is part of every game ever made and will be in the future also. It is caused by a huge amount of different things, differing from individual to individual.

What little path?

Where did I assume you don't care?

I don't know, I generally don't ever look to replicate what other games have done when designing WoR - I can list plenty of dead MP games for you though.

- Trusty

[brentcarter]

keep up the good work, what would help are estimated goals you want to reach this year like Q3 such and such Q4 such and such so we have something to look forward to. Or tell us what needs to be finished before password servers will be a thing.

[TrustyJam]

^ This might actually be a decent compromise. If the WoR developers fear that adding server passwords would hinder the average player's participation in most games, then perhaps adding the ability for private servers to restrict the officer/nco slots might be a midway solution. Certain regiments might object less to pubs in their events so long as their officer slots could be reserved for themselves.

One potential solution would be to extend the existing capabilities of the private server's privileges.xml file:

Make the ability to select officer or flag classes require a special privilege key, no different than kicking or banning or changing the weather. Regiments could then use their server's privileges.xml in the /Assets/ directory to whitelist which Steam IDs could access those particular classes (e.g. officer).

The privileges.xml entries would look something like this:



<Privilege Name="Slot Access">
<SteamIDs>
<SteamID id="76561198765432101"/> <!-- 9thNY Maj Tyler -->
<SteamID id="76561198765432102"/> <!-- 9thNY Cpt Emerson -->
<SteamID id="76561198765432103"/> <!-- 17thMI Maj Lind -->
<SteamID id="76561198765432104"/> <!-- 1stTX LaBelle -->
<SteamID id="76561198765432105"/> <!-- 1stTX Mjtheko -->
<SteamID id="76561198765432106"/> <!-- 6thLA Paioletti -->
<SteamID id="76561198765432107"/> <!-- 6thLA Eyzmin -->
</SteamIDs>
<Commands bHasPrevious="true">
<Command Name="Game.Slot.Access.Officer"/>
<Command Name="Game.Slot.Access.NCO"/>
<Command Name="Game.Slot.Access.Flag"/>
</Commands>
</Privilege>

However, one remaining issue would be to add an On/Off toggle (i.e. Game.Slot.Access 0) for this setting when a private event isn't in progress. Most regiments would agree that random players should be able to access those slots once their private server event is over and the whitelisted players have gone to sleep. Random players should be able to pick officer when none of the whitelisted players are online.

Thank you for the suggestion - this is worth looking into. I've shared it with the team. :)

- Trusty

[Oleander]

I thought you just said you gained members?


"Not to mention the fact that we don't generally recruit during events, we gain more people during the week when we are actively on public servers..."

Where did I say we weren't gaining?

[TrustyJam]

"Not to mention the fact that we don't generally recruit during events, we gain more people during the week when we are actively on public servers..."

Where did I say we weren't gaining?

Gaining active members seems to counter the claim of an increased rate of game fatigue - unless the lack of password protected servers has only just started increasing the amount of Game fatigue your members get.

Game fatigue always either ends in the player taking a break from the game or not returning to said game again.

- Trusty

[TRaider]

keep up the good work, what would help are estimated goals you want to reach this year like Q3 such and such Q4 such and such so we have something to look forward to. Or tell us what needs to be finished before password servers will be a thing.

CG: Hey Brent wake up man we are getting inundated with people demanding password protected servers. We need you to go on the forum and write something positive about us.

Brent: I'm on my way boss!!!

It's a joke I don't really think you have a group of white knights standing by always.

[Rbater]

Thank you for the suggestion - this is worth looking into. I've shared it with the team. :)

- Trusty

Finally, the CO/NCO password lock instead of server password has been recognized as a possible solution to this whole mess! :cool:

[TrustyJam]

CG: Hey Brent wake up man we are getting inundated with people demanding password protected servers. We need you to go on the forum an write something positive about us.

Brent: I'm on my way boss!!!

Yes, that is how we operate.

- Trusty

[Oleander]

Our guys go through cycles of inactivity. The cycles are getting longer and longer, we're drawing more people from the general pop but have a lot of guys that have pretty much stated they aren't coming back until PW's get implemented because they're tired of dealing with the mess that happens on game nights.

[TRaider]

Yes, that is how we operate.

- Trusty

:D I thought so!

[JammedHam]

Does anyone really think that the pubbies will care of, for example, one server is locked for events between organized units while the CG Official servers are open 24/7? It's not a big fucking deal? Passwords didn't kill Napoleonic Wars, or North and South, hell they didn't even kill any game that I know of that's released in the last ten YEARS.

I don't like the unorderly chaos that is the events that my company attends. I'm beginning to experience a regret of putting so much money of for support if this game is going to cater more to ignoring what the community obviously wants. I mean shit, I don't care if you're a public player who could give two shits about being in a Company, there is obviously a vast majority of players that want Password servers.

What is keeping you guys, you master Developers of this ordeal to not just try it for like two weeks and watch what happens? It won't kill this game! What it will do is prove to me and everyone else here that you listen to your community and support organized events between these companies that you've painstakingly tried to raise.

If I could go back in time to Kickstarter, I would have warned myself that stuff like this was going to happen and would have been much more cautious and place my funds elsewhere.

[Tibib0]

Does anyone really think that the cubbies will care of, for example, one server is locked for events between organized units while the CG Official servers are open 24/7? It's not a big fucking deal? Passwords didn't kill Napoleonic Wars, or North and South, hell they didn't even kill any game that I know of that's released in the last ten YEARS.

I don't like the unorderly chaos that is the events that my company attends. I'm beginning to experience a regret of putting so much money of for support if this game is going to cater more to ignoring what the community obviously wants. I mean shit, I don't care if you're a public player who could give two shits about being in a Company, there is obviously a vast majority of players that want Password servers.

What is keeping you guys, you master Developers of this ordeal to not just try it for like two weeks and watch what happens? It won't kill this game! What it will do is prove to me and everyone else here that you listen to your community and support organized events between these companies that you've painstakingly tried to raise.

If I could go back in time to Kickstarter, I would have warned myself that stuff like this was going to happen and would have been much more cautious and place my funds elsewhere.

To remind- the game is in alpha test, and it can't be killed now, cause it HAS NO RELEASE, cmon, try something is better then not to do anything.

[TRaider]

What is keeping you guys, you master Developers of this ordeal to not just try it for like two weeks and watch what happens? It won't kill this game! What it will do is prove to me and everyone else here that you listen to your community and support organized events between these companies that you've painstakingly tried to raise.




Totally agree with you that is why I would suggest testing it for a week and put out announcement before hand so everyone knows what it going on.

My point exactly try it for a week or two what is the worst that can happen.

[LaBelle]

Let's take a moment and talk about the ticket balance. The game needs another balance pass for tickets on Skirmish.

[TRaider]

Let's take a moment and talk about the ticket balance. The game needs another balance pass for tickets on Skirmish.

How does it tie into this debate?

[LaBelle]

Sorry, just doing my best PLM impersonation.

[Oleander]

You should offer candy to people that come play on our server.

[TRaider]

Sorry, just doing my best PLM impersonation.

;););) Hey if you would like advice from someone who never runs events you should talk to plm.

[Poorlaggedman]

10772

It's not at all unbecoming when people who think they are the community decide to spend all their hard-earned gravitas in orchestrated tantrums.


April 14th. People bitch that they can't operate, they can't run events, they can't handle the situation with this huge staff of personnel - good. Then when I run one it should be a colossal failure. Lets see what I can do with my RnL crew.

[Leifr]

Ad hominem, fellas.

[TrustyJam]

Discrediting community members is hardly much use to anyone.

Please stay on-topic.

- Trusty

[LaBelle]

Oh I apologize, I wasn't trying to discredit PLM, and any thoughts of such an attack on him may only be based on your own thoughts of him. He has a knack for turning any conversation on it's heels and getting to the source of the issue, and I genuinely believe that a major problem right now(and perhaps a source of the current frustration,)may be the current ticket ratio between attackers and defenders. With the recent bullet pen buff, defenders are finding themselves almost on even footing with attackers...minus the ticket difference, which heavily favors the attackers.

Many an event has become tedious and un-fun for whoever is on the defending side. Events have a way of then crumbling.

[Vankovski]

So I'll go ahead and post this again since you replied to everyone but me. Were you unable to come up with a response that addressed all of my points?

*I don't understand this attitude that if companies get passworded servers for challenges that we're somehow insulating ourselves from public players. It is universally acknowledged that public players are the lifeblood of companies because we have to continually recruit public players to maintain our numbers.

*The majority of company time is spent on public servers playing and recruiting so we can have 2 hours on the weekend to challenge each other in an organized fashion.

*What's disheartening is the idea that we shouldn't be allowed to host competitive events, what is the rationale for that?

*The attitude displayed in this thread almost makes it look like the devs are contemptuous towards a very large subset of the playerbase.

[Kvatcharoonie]

10774

So far out of 24 people who did the poll 88 percent want to see a password feature in War of Rights.
https://www.strawpoll.me/17774600 I'll keep this up for another couple days.

[SUWAROW]

I am not surprised by the stubbornness of the developers. We knock on the wall, which only answers the same thing. However, I want to say that the whim of one man or the minority will not become an obstacle for the logical implementation of the right to hold private games with password, to avoid uninvited guests (trolls or anyone else who wants to shit) and not to spoil mood neither myself or anyone anymore. I agree with the officers, who convinced the developers that this is a logical step that does not cause damage in any prospective version of future events. If you can't understand that two chairs are not enough to sit on, then I bring bad news. My rhetoric is aggressive because I'm angry. Angry because I've been missing events for too long. Do you want to have more players? IT MAY BE NECESSARY TO REGULARLY UPDATE THE GAME? Making it more stable and interesting, not arguing with officers about server passwords. You made a big deal out of it. I'll be at the front of the strike. For you do not want dialogue. Very unwise of you, but it's better to add blood. Certainly.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DZ6MSQdTUuo&feature=youtu.be

[Poorlaggedman]

You should see their discord. 10775

The topic should be renamed to reflect the true intention which is an orchestrated attempt to strong arm the devs into Alpha passwords because a few select people are only paying for servers for exclusive events but simultaneously are way too proud to cancel them for unit prestige and therefore grow more furious by the month caught in that conundrum. I for one am excited to pay even more monthly for a 200 slot server without a password.


I like Labelle. He has a lot of passion and I like some of his points on passwords. It's definitely cause for a moment for reflection each time renewing the server the fact that the admin controls are pretty rudimentary. Also today I was testing some things on myself and a whole bunch of people came in because the other server crashed. It was annoying because I would have to kick them out or really annoy them while testing. If I had a password, that wouldn't have happened. They would have gone to a different server. But since I was 1/150 and the rest were 0/150 or drill maps they came to mine.

[LaBelle]

You should see our Discord, it's very nice.


The topic should be renamed to reflect the true intention which is an orchestrated attempt to strong arm the devs into Alpha passwords because a few select people are only paying for servers for exclusive events but simultaneously are way too proud to cancel them for unit prestige and therefore grow more furious by the month caught in that conundrum. I for one am excited to pay even more monthly for a 200 slot server without a password.

Quite the reach you have there, I like it. It has moxy. However, I can assure you that Raider and our friendly neighborhood Slav here haven't discussed the issue with us at all. We're all just really passionate about server passwords these days.

[JammedHam]

10774

So far out of 24 people who did the poll 88 percent want to see a password feature in War of Rights.
https://www.strawpoll.me/17774600 I'll keep this up for another couple days.

Ive cast my vote. Keep it up and we'll see what the numbers say. I want to see this poll spread across the community. Poll all of us, or at least the vast majority of us.

If two hours of locked serves kills this "game" that's not even out of ALPHA FUCKING TESTING where the TESTING is being conducted this game will never reach a successful release.

[TrustyJam]

I am not surprised by the stubbornness of the developers. We knock on the wall, which only answers the same thing. However, I want to say that the whim of one man or the minority will not become an obstacle for the logical implementation of the right to hold private games with password, to avoid uninvited guests (trolls or anyone else who wants to shit) and not to spoil mood neither myself or anyone anymore. I agree with the officers, who convinced the developers that this is a logical step that does not cause damage in any prospective version of future events. If you can't understand that two chairs are not enough to sit on, then I bring bad news. My rhetoric is aggressive because I'm angry. Angry because I've been missing events for too long. Do you want to have more players? IT MAY BE NECESSARY TO REGULARLY UPDATE THE GAME? Making it more stable and interesting, not arguing with officers about server passwords. You made a big deal out of it. I'll be at the front of the strike. For you do not want dialogue. Very unwise of you, but it's better to add blood. Certainly.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DZ6MSQdTUuo&feature=youtu.be

I mean.. okay..

First you get angry because we are spending time discussing the suggestions with you guys (that is dialogue) and not updating the game.

You then go on stating we do not want dialogue - you're entirely in the wrong there. Me entering the discussion, laying out our doubts for all to see and pick at even made some people state that we think TOO MUCH about possible issues.

You just countered your own points.

Not sure I understand your last sentence - it could be seen as a sort of threat which I hope it isn't.

- Trusty

[Nyves]

To allow regiments to be able to police their own servers, admins should be able to set a password on their lobbies as well as have full admin rights such as blacklisting. Literally every game has that ability, and not being able to do this can be pretty frustrating.

[TrustyJam]

Wait . . . Really? I don't mean to intrude upon your happiness, but there is something you might consider:

1.) G-Portal's "per-slot" monthly price for a WoR server is based on the game's usage of the server/host CPU.
2.) For the past months, the WoR developers have amazingly reduced the game's usage of the server/host CPU.
3.) Yet, despite the reduction in CPU usage, G-Portal's "per-slot" monthly prices haven't changed to my knowledge.

^ Think about this very carefully and ask yourself if you are still happy to be paying more. :p

If we ever officially increase the player cap to 200 we will try to pressure G-Portal into giving that up for free - no promises though.

The main reason the servers are expensive is because no other game runs on the machine hosting the WoR server (at least not the 150 player servers).

- Trusty

[Poorlaggedman]

To allow regiments to be able to police their own servers, admins should be able to set a password on their lobbies as well as have full admin rights such as blacklisting. Literally every game has that ability, and not being able to do this can be pretty frustrating.
I definitely don't like hour count bans. I've had remarkably few problems (and players) on my server but permanent bans are definitely useful. The interface doesn't make it easy. I don't know how many hours go into permanent. Some folks you can tell need that.



Ehh . . . I don't wish to intrude upon your happiness, Poorlaggedman, but there is something you might consider:


1.) G-Portal's "per-slot" monthly price for a WoR server is based on the game's usage of the server/host CPU.

2.) For the past months, the WoR developers have commendably reduced the game's usage of the server/host CPU.

3.) Yet, despite the reduction in CPU usage, G-Portal's "per-slot" monthly prices haven't changed (to my knowledge).


^ Reflect upon this logical contradiction and ask yourself if you are still happy about what you pay to G-Portal. :p ;)
But they're technical support is soooo good.

[SUWAROW]

My English very bad, but this not a dialogue. If you want to discuss with officers, you need write your arguments that are backed by substantial evidence. From officers I see such statements. At least based on the experience of Napoleonic Wars and North and South. The updates I would like to see is stability. Implementing new game modes or maps is secondary to me personally, but why can't you understand that everyone has different priorities? Make different modes for players who do not join the regiments, and we just, just give the passwords to the server. It's not an over-the-top request that causes too much controversy, which it shouldn't have become at all. I'm angry. I spent the whole day watching the forum all day. And I see you're just being stubborn.

If you want a dialogue, we have to talk in equal positions. And in such a situation, we can only demand. My last messages could make it clear that I only want passwords, and in turn I was advised to ban or kick players who prevent me from organizing events. In your opinion, how should I react to this? Why did you come up with the crutches? It's a rhetorical question. And in the search for the common truth we will come only to what is easier

[Poorlaggedman]

With the new patch which allows you to kick players from the menu, it's very easy to see people who aren't supposed to be there when they join and to kick them. You don't have to find them in game now. Reflect what you're doing in your server title: "[Server Name] Invite only event."

[SUWAROW]

With the new patch which allows you to kick players from the menu, it's very easy to see people who aren't supposed to be there when they join and to kick them. You don't have to find them in game now. Reflect what you're doing in your server title: "[Server Name] Invite only event."

It's a crutch, not a solution. Why would I take my mind off the game or make someone watch it? I just want to play.

[brentcarter]

CG: Hey Brent wake up man we are getting inundated with people demanding password protected servers. We need you to go on the forum and write something positive about us.

Brent: I'm on my way boss!!!

It's a joke I don't really think you have a group of white knights standing by always.

Okay yeah I need to follow the crowd

!!! Passwords damnit!! We angry grrr


In all seriousness I love the game I think people who pay should have control over their own server. already stated that before. Apparently devs feel it isn't the correct time thus what needs to be done or implemented before this is a option. Maybe they want to implement new game mode stuff first. I'd like to know plans and estimations when these are reached. my frustrations is that I want to Know more what and when something new is coming compared to passwords.

[Rbater]

Okay yeah I need to follow the crowd

!!! Passwords damnit!! We angry grrr


In all seriousness I love the game I think people who pay should have control over their own server. already stated that before. Apparently devs feel it isn't the correct time thus what needs to be done or implemented before this is a option. Maybe they want to implement new game mode stuff first. I'd like to know plans and estimations when these are reached. my frustrations is that I want to Know more what and when something new is coming compared to passwords.

Weekly or even bi-weekly updates on what's being made/developed would be great.

[brentcarter]

Weekly or even bi-weekly updates on what's being made/developed would be great.

That and the bigger plans even if implementation of those plans are hard to give a release date. Like" musicians we hope to implement that Q3 " something like that. "server passwords worked on hoping to provide a system for that in two months "

[Rbater]

That and the bigger plans even if release of those plans are hard to give a release date. Like" musicians we hope to release that Q3 " something like that

Aka a more fleshed out road map with goals of when the wish/hope to release the features. Definitely needed. As for passworded servers, I'm still of the kind that wishes to see what Trusty grabbed for team feedback: The admin ability to lock the CO/NCO positions for certain people of the Company. It's a great middle-ground that solves the issue at hand.

[TRaider]

Can we try password locked servers for a week?

If not please let us know why that will be an issue. Thanks!

[Kvatcharoonie]

Currently at 89 percent out of 62 people who voted in the poll, looks like people really want this password feature.
https://www.strawpoll.me/17774600

[TrustyJam]

Currently at 89 percent out of 62 people who voted in the poll, looks like people really want this password feature.
https://www.strawpoll.me/17774600

We realize so.

- Trusty

[Leifr]

Currently at 89 percent out of 62 people who voted in the poll, looks like people really want this password feature.
https://www.strawpoll.me/17774600

Folk are also clamouring for artillery, cavalry and facial characterisation. The password feature has been requested now for quite some time (since the time between EA announcement and EA going live, at least), of course the poll will be in favour for password implementation. :p

[LTC Philip A. Work]

Folk are also clamouring for artillery, cavalry and facial characterisation. The password feature has been requested now for quite some time (since the time between EA announcement and EA going live, at least), of course the poll will be in favour for password implementation. :p

There is a simple solution for this as well

https://www.strawpoll.me/17776409

[Oleander]

inb4 "Of course people are going to vote for passwords, that's what this thread is about."

[Leifr]

There is a simple solution for this as well

https://www.strawpoll.me/17776409

Hah, excellent.
Now if only polls were actually worth anything...

[TrustyJam]

The issue is not the time required to implement password protected servers.

The issue is the division of the community, the increased chance of no available populated servers to join for newcommers to the game and the introduction of artificial feedback given by those that exclusively play behind locked doors.

Yes, it is annoying having to kick/ban unwanted players if one feels said unwanted players disrupt one's event but I don't think that annoyance outweighs the possible issues listed above.

- Trusty

[TRaider]

Folk are also clamouring for artillery, cavalry and facial characterisation. The password feature has been requested now for quite some time (since the time between EA announcement and EA going live, at least), of course the poll will be in favour for password implementation. :p

Enabling the option is not a feature like Artillery, Cavalry, or facial customization, it comes standard with CryEngine.

[LTC Philip A. Work]

The issue is not the time required to implement password protected servers.

The issue is the division of the community, the increased chance of no available populated servers to join for newcommers to the game and the introduction of artificial feedback given by those that exclusively play behind locked doors.

Yes, it is annoying having to kick/ban unwanted players if one feels said unwanted players disrupt one's event but I don't think that annoyance outweighs the possible issues listed above.

- Trusty

Thats fine you feel that way, however, I feel that it's clear now that if communities want organized competitive play they will need to look elsewhere.

[TRaider]

Thats fine you feel that way, however, I feel that it's clear now that if communities want organized competitive play they will need to look elsewhere.

Battle Cry of Freedom here we come!!!

[TrustyJam]

Battle Cry of Freedom here we come!!!

Send my regards to the devs - looks to be an interesting project. :)

- Trusty

[Kvatcharoonie]

Hah, excellent.
Now if only polls were actually worth anything...

Yet polls can easily give sufficient evidence that people support a cause. This poll CLEARLY shows that the majority of people want Password protected servers who have taken this poll, and will only grow with time. People want this, and are you really gonna ignore us?

[JammedHam]

I can't fucking believe it. You're to damn stubborn to realize what the community is trying to FUCKING tell you. Without passwords, which by the way in both polls is the vast leading item, this community will die.

It's a shame too, this game was looking to be quite the thing. It's a shame, it really is.

Really, community division... what a thing to try and straw up to be a fucking issue.

[Kvatcharoonie]

inb4 "Of course people are going to vote for passwords, that's what this thread is about."

I have created a new forum post linking both polls. This will surely make it so it is unbiased?

[Leifr]

Enabling the option is not a feature like Artillery, Cavalry, or facial customization, it comes standard with CryEngine.


inb4 "Of course people are going to vote for passwords, that's what this thread is about."

Oleander very kindly summed it up. :o

For the record (and Trusty knows this), I do believe that privately-owned servers should be able to apply passwords. I also think server administrators should have a suite of other commands and tools at their disposal to properly run a server (with events in mind). That said, I am under no illusion that throwing toys out of the pram will really achieve anything positive in the short and long term. O'Rourke (https://www.warofrightsforum.com/showthread.php?6092-Server-Passwords/page12&p=94364#post94364) has been about the most rational fellow in this thread today by suggesting something in the middle, but I suppose it is easier to levy vague threats than exercise restraint and patience.

Are you all expecting this poll to strong-arm CG in to implementing passwords tomorrow? Serious question.

[TrustyJam]

I can't fucking believe it. You're to damn stubborn to realize what the community is trying to FUCKING tell you. Without passwords, which by the way in both polls is the vast leading item, this community will die.

It's a shame too, this game was looking to be quite the thing. It's a shame, it really is.

Really, community division... what a thing to try and straw up to be a fucking issue.

No. I fully realize what you are trying to tell me. I have not denied the issues with non-password protected servers even once.

- Trusty

[Maclin]

Send my regards to the devs - looks to be an interesting project. :)

- Trusty

That right there, that sentiment speaks volumes.

[Rbater]

Oleander very kindly summed it up. :o

For the record (and Trusty knows this), I do believe that privately-owned servers should be able to apply passwords. I also think server administrators should have a suite of other commands and tools at their disposal to properly run a server (with events in mind). That said, I am under no illusion that throwing toys out of the pram will really achieve anything positive in the short and long term. O'Rourke (https://www.warofrightsforum.com/showthread.php?6092-Server-Passwords/page12&p=94364#post94364) has been about the most rational fellow in this thread today by suggesting something in the middle, but I suppose it is easier to levy vague threats than exercise restraint and patience.

Are you all expecting this poll to strong-arm CG in to implementing passwords tomorrow? Serious question.

I feel more like everyone is trending in the direction to have you lock the thread again. :p Lots of threats and angry heads. O'Rourke's idea is definitely the best way to go about this. I agree with your post. Take some rep!

[Oleander]

Are you all expecting this poll to strong-arm CG in to implementing passwords tomorrow? Serious question.

I think it is people wanting to make their opinion heard. Right now we're asking for passwords, the devs are saying they're afraid its going to drive people away. That's the answer we're getting to something we're asking for. We aren't getting anything in the form of, we're looking at an alternative there's no roadmap for something like this no timeline, nothing. So we're sitting here reading this thread and its looking a lot like the devs have just thrown their hands up in the air and said deal with it.

I'm not disputing what O'Rourke suggested, it just seems messy and tedious. Passwords are simple and commonplace in just about all of the civilized world.

[F. L. Villarreal]

Send my regards to the devs - looks to be an interesting project. :)

- Trusty

lol replies like this one are what solidified the fact that this unfinished, buggy, toxic, game is in-fact a money grab. I've been saying it since late last year. I've dumped enough money into this game to know that TrustyJam has ZERO interest in taking care of the loyal players that have dumped enough money to surpass the amount that gets you into the alpha. The quote above says it all.

- Releasing new maps when their were plenty of bugs to fix
- making condescending replies towards paying customers/supporters
- ignoring the fact that loyal players who are PAYING FOR SERVERS cannot lock them even with all of the rampant pubs who cause problems and then probably get their money refunded.

You can try and write this off passive aggressively but it boils down to one thing, stubbornness and not being able to admit when you are wrong.

When you say you are worried about driving customers away...what that says to me is that you are more concerned with money than you are taking care of people who have supported you for the long run. Way to go. Then you lock a poll relating to password locking to see what the community opinion is...when its in Alpha and they are supposed to be giving you this kind of feed back.

[TRaider]

Guys who is interested in going back to North and South mod until BCoF comes out? Clearly these guys don't give a shit about us.

[TrustyJam]

lol replies like this one are what solidified the fact that this unfinished, buggy, toxic, game is in-fact a money grab. I've been saying it since late last year. I've dumped enough money into this game to know that TrustyJam has ZERO interest in taking care of the loyal players that have dumped enough money to surpass the amount that gets you into the alpha. The quote above says it all.

- Releasing new maps when their were plenty of bugs to fix
- making condescending replies towards paying customers/supporters
- ignoring the fact that loyal players who are PAYING FOR SERVERS cannot lock them even with all of the rampant pubs who cause problems and then probably get their money refunded.

You can try and write this off passive aggressively but it boils down to one thing, stubbornness and not being able to admit when you are wrong.

Thank you for the feedback.

- Trusty

[F. L. Villarreal]

Thank you for the feedback.

- Trusty

another condescending response. Let me ask you this one question...what do you plan on doing about this issue? How do you plan on keeping loyal players?

[Dutchconfederate]

Transparancy is wanted about the coming features. It's all to vague

[Matt(Fridge)]

The issue is not the time required to implement password protected servers.

The issue is the division of the community, the increased chance of no available populated servers to join for newcommers to the game and the introduction of artificial feedback given by those that exclusively play behind locked doors.

Yes, it is annoying having to kick/ban unwanted players if one feels said unwanted players disrupt one's event but I don't think that annoyance outweighs the possible issues listed above.

- Trusty

Why do you feel so strongly that so many people will stop playing if pw servers are implemented? What is the reason you think they wont just go to an open server?

[F. L. Villarreal]

We better be careful or they will start unfoundedly banning and closing threads.

[Kvatcharoonie]

Thank you for the feedback.

- Trusty

Ok, from my point of view you are being a little unprofessional here by making snarky sarcastic remarks to people who are trying to critique you.

[Kvatcharoonie]

We better be careful or they will start unfoundedly banning and closing threads.

Make sure to screenshot all the pages

[Leifr]

Then you lock a poll relating to password locking to see what the community opinion is...when its in Alpha and they are supposed to be giving you this kind of feed back.

Evening Villarreal.
Duplicate threads on the same topic are superfluous; the polls can still be accessed and voted on, discussion can still be made in this thread (the original one).

[TrustyJam]

Guys who is interested in going back to North and South mod until BCoF comes out? Clearly these guys don't give a shit about us.

We're not interested in dealing with absolute demands with no degree of consideration for what the outcome may be should those demands be met.

I've tried to highlight the issues we, as developers, see with the demand (I will not call it a suggestion anymore as it is clear now it isn't). Sadly, most of my concerns seem to have been ignored by a few pushing the "give in or we'll leave" agenda.

I had hoped for an actual discussion instead of threats and pitchforks.

If us not giving a shit about you is what you take away from this then that will have to be so - although I regret you interpreting it that way.

- Trusty

[Dutchconfederate]

Well maybe he is really thanking and taking the feedback into consideration but you never know . It's never a clear answer or roadmap.

[F. L. Villarreal]

We're not interested in dealing with absolute demands with no degree of consideration for what the outcome may be should those demands be met.

I've tried to highlight the issues we, as developers, see with the demand (I will not call it a suggestion anymore as it is clear now it isn't). Sadly, most of my concerns seem to have been ignored by a few pushing the "give in or we'll leave" agenda.

I had hoped for an actual discussion instead of threats and pitchforks.

If us not giving a shit about you is what you take away from this then that will have to be so - although I regret you interpreting it that way.

- Trusty

I've been here long enough to know that you do not listen to your loyal crowd funders. there is a difference between not adding aesthetics and not allowing people that PAY for a server to lock it down. Demands like that are not unrealistic...people are PAYING for a good experience. If someone wants to lock THEIR SERVER THAT THEY PAID FOR ON A GAME THEY PAID FOR....that is their choice. You are essentially saying you are more concerned with more people buying this game than those who have supported you. Despite the snarky and condescending replies.


Make sure to screenshot all the pages

Believe me brother...I am.

[TrustyJam]

I've been here long enough to know that you do not listen to your loyal crowd funders. there is a difference between not adding aesthetics and not allowing people that PAY for a server to lock it down. Demands like that are not unrealistic...people are PAYING for a good experience. If someone wants to lock THEIR SERVER THAT THEY PAID FOR ON A GAME THEY PAID FOR....that is their choice. You are essentially saying you are more concerned with more people buying this game than those who have supported you. Despite the snarky and condescending replies.

Please send your feedback to G-Portal then. You are certainly not paying us for the option to rent a server.

We continue to improve upon the admin functionality on the community hosted servers. Last update introduced the tab screen admin tool, allowing for quick and easy kicks/bans of unwanted players.

- Trusty

[F. L. Villarreal]

Please send your feedback to G-Portal then. You are certainly not paying us for the option to rent a server.

We continue to improve upon the admin functionality on the community hosted servers. Last update introduced the tab screen admin tool, allowing for quick and easy kicks/bans of unwanted players.

- Trusty

LOL so you're telling me that you (or the game...effectively you) have not benefited in any way shape or form allowing G-Portal to host and make money? Right...

All people are asking for is a password locked server. Give it to them. It's not that hard.

[SUWAROW]

https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/561843972574543892/565273340705767424/IMG_20190409_233414.jpg

[TrustyJam]

LOL so you're telling me that you (or the game...effectively you) have not benefited in any way shape or form allowing G-Portal to host and make money? Right...

All people are asking for is a password locked server. Give it to them. It's not that hard.

That is correct.

We gain nothing on the costs tied to renting servers - quite the opposite - we ourselves are customers of G-portal same as you (hosting the official WoR servers).

- Trusty

[F. L. Villarreal]

That is correct.

We gain nothing on the costs tied to renting servers - quite the opposite - we ourselves are customers of G-portal same as you (hosting the official WoR servers).

- Trusty

They are profiting from you ALLOWING them to host your games. Without this community the game fails....and so does the profit that comes from those servers. You are literally being asked to give your supporters ONE thing....passwords for servers.

[MacMerritt]

Then hand out the server files and let us host our own servers on our own private boxes or to another service other than G-portal. I personally run 3 servers for various games off our two server boxes. I can host a WoR server handling 150 players easily if you would hand out the files. Additionally we can then administer and run the servers as we see fit.

Any reason why G-Portal has exclusive rights to these files?

[F. L. Villarreal]

Then hand out the server files and let us host our own servers on our own private boxes or to another service other than G-portal. I personally run 3 servers for various games off our two server boxes. I can host a WoR server handling 150 players easily if you would hand out the files. Additionally we can then administer and run the servers as we see fit.

Any reason why G-Portal has exclusive rights to these files?

because the developers are benefiting in some way, shape or form but won't admit it.

I don't think anyone here has EVER been able to reason with TrustyJam...it's his way or the high way.

[TrustyJam]

because the developers are benefiting in some way, shape or form but won't admit it.

Nope not in terms of income at least.

The main reason is the easy auto updating backend they have for all of their game servers - they call it the cloud service.

Once we release a steam update all servers will automatically update to the latest server version and restart themselves.

This is a hugely important feature as we sometimes release several server side hotfixes within a single day.

- Trusty

[MacMerritt]

Oh we know that, its like Epic getting exclusive access to games. G-Portal has first dibs and im sure are hosting the Official servers for free. There fore a kickback in one form or another.

[Saris]

They are profiting from you ALLOWING them to host your games. Without this community the game fails....and so does the profit that comes from those servers. You are literally being asked to give your supporters ONE thing....passwords for servers.

They wont budge and their game will die because of it. The only thing keeping War of Rights afloat right now is its the only FPS civil war game currently. I would hate to see this game die because the devs are bullheaded and lose all their players to BCoF whenever that comes out

[TrustyJam]

Oh we know that, its like Epic getting exclusive access to games. G-Portal has first dibs and im sure are hosting the Official servers for free. There fore a kickback in one form or another.

No we pay for the official servers - we just paid their latest invoice today as a matter of fact.

- Trusty

[F. L. Villarreal]

Nope not in terms of income at least.

The main reason is the easy auto updating backend they have for all of their game servers - they call it the cloud service.

Once we release a steam update all servers will automatically update to the latest server version and restart themselves.

This is a hugely important feature as we sometimes release several server side hotfixes within a single day.

- Trusty

Show your supporters that you give a crap about their opinions and give them server passwords. It's not a chain reaction event....doing this wont mean you are a pushover, it wont mean that we can make you do anything we want...what it WILL mean is that you are cognizant of an issue and are fixing it in a way that paying customers find functional and effective.

Admitting you are wrong will GAIN you respect...not LOSE it.


Oh we know that, its like Epic getting exclusive access to games. G-Portal has first dibs and im sure are hosting the Official servers for free. There fore a kickback in one form or another.

They will never admit to this...


They wont budge and their game will die because of it. The only thing keeping War of Rights afloat right now is its the only FPS civil war game currently. I would hate to see this game die because the devs are bullheaded and lose all their players to BCoF whenever that comes out
Exactly!

[MacMerritt]

Yeah sorry Trusty, alot of other legitimate hosts do the same thing. We have auto updaters setup and running for our DayZ server, Arma 3 server, and Ark server. No need to worry about a human handling it. And that is for a personal box. So dont give me the dog and pony show about them being so much better a solution for hosting.

[TrustyJam]

Yeah sorry Trusty, alot of other legitimate hosts do the same thing. We have auto updaters setup and running for our DayZ server, Arma 3 server, and Ark server. No need to worry about a human handling it. And that is for a personal box. So dont give me the dog and pony show about them being so much better a solution for hosting.

I'm not. I'm just saying they offer what we need to be able to keep the alpha running at a steady pace.

I'm sure plenty others do the same.

- Trusty

[F. L. Villarreal]

Nope not in terms of income at least.

The main reason is the easy auto updating backend they have for all of their game servers - they call it the cloud service.

Once we release a steam update all servers will automatically update to the latest server version and restart themselves.

This is a hugely important feature as we sometimes release several server side hotfixes within a single day.

- Trusty

Thats not the point, the point is that two of your biggest supporting units....1st Texas and 4th NJ are asking you for something reasonable. But you are more concerned with losing $$$$ because of empty servers. Those servers will be empty anyways once it gets out on steam that you are speaking to your supporters this way and refusing to listen to ANY if not ALL suggestions.

Thats how I know this is a money grab...this game will never be finished. nor will any of our tier prizes be mailed to us.

[TrustyJam]

Thats not the point, the point is that two of your biggest supporting units....1st Texas and 4th NJ are asking you for something reasonable. But you are more concerned with losing $$$$ because of empty servers. Those servers will be empty anyways once it gets out on steam that you are speaking to your supporters this way and refusing to listen to ANY if not ALL suggestions.

You mean I'm engaging in an honest discussion with them?

Don't give me that please. My main concern for the past 7 years has been WoR. I don't care how much or how little money we make all I care about is the game progressing.

I know you think me a scammer already so I'm not going to be wasting more time communicating with you as I, frankly, do not deserve to be treated as such when I try to explain to you our reasonings for not featuring password protected servers.

Do you think I take enjoyment out of being the center of this much negative attention?

It ruins my day each time it happens but I find it to be worth it because I believe in the project of WoR.

- Trusty

[F. L. Villarreal]

You mean I'm engaging in an honest discussion with them?

Don't give me that please. My main concern for the past 7 years has been WoR. I don't care how much or how little money we make all I care about is the game progressing.

I know you think me a scammer already so I'm not going to be wasting more time communicating with you as I, frankly, do not deserve to be treated as such when I try to explain to you our reasonings for not featuring password protected servers.

Do you think I take enjoyment out of being the center of this much negative attention?

It ruins my day each time it happens but I find it to be worth it because I believe in the project of WoR.

- Trusty

You don't have to engage me...thats a choice. If this is about passion then show your supporters compassion and give the ones who have gone the extra mile to PAY for a server, the option to lock it. It's not an honest discussion when all of your replies are always "stonewalling" people making good, honest suggestions that would actually help.

Nobody is asking you to change the historical context or aesthetics....we are asking for server passwords to keep toxic pubs out of organized drills and events.

The most tragic thing about all of this is that I know a good amount of people on here....all of them ask me why I left. I tell them it was due to the developers stonewalling and not taking any suggestions to heart/serious. A part of me wanted to be wrong....so when I came here to check on the progress of the game. This is what I stumbled upon. I was actually right...as much as I did not want to be.

[JammedHam]

Alright, I've gone and taken something to get my edge down so I'm not about to start ripping apart throats.

If you want a suggestion instead of a snarky reply from me then fine. Give a Password Server system a chance. Yes, the community is small right now. We're all in Alpha. Did Mount & Musket back when it was a MOD have as large of a community? Probably similar. They used a password system included in Warband and they did just fine. So fine in fact that Taleworlds made Napoleonic Wars and built the whole thing up as DLC. Did it start small? Yes it did. It had both private and public servers with event times that didn't hamper anything. NW is still popular today and I can promise you until things like Holdfast fix certain issues it will be king. Mods for that DLC came in the form of many things, predominantly North and South, which is where I was introduced to War of Rights. Did it have a massive following like WOR does? No, it didn't. It grew. It used the same password system the last three items I've listed have and they all turned out just fine.

I've listed these games, (Mount & Musket, Napoleonic Wars, and North & South) because I'm going to take a limb and say that the vast majority of players that backed this game came from those games before. This game is niche, not everyone is gonna want to battle in line formation and march under the thunder of artillery. But I do, and so does everyone else in this game that I know of. We're a passionate bunch. This is why this issue has caused a lot of flak from us Veteran players.

Trusty, I respect you as a person because that is how I was raised by my Momma and I intend to be that way until I pass away on some godforsaken day far in the future. This comes from my heart as a historical gamer that if passwords worked for the last three games that have been staples of this platfrom and continue to work to this day. I do not see where it would hurt our community. I understand you are absolutely terrified of you and your colleagues game, you baby basically, to die because the community severed itself. It's already severing itself because of the lack of connection between the devs and us. I don't want this game to die any more than you all do but it is going to unless something is done.

Either find a middle ground like previously suggested through locking officers and NCOs or just turn on the ability to lock servers and watch as your community does what it does. I doubt the average "game for a few hours because I'm bored" will care that there is one or two full locked servers and a couple unlocked ones with less people. What it will do is click in their mind and say "Let's go stock up an open server" and they will join the next highest one. Multiply this every couple of people every couple of minutes and you will get what you desire from this. A successful game. If it worked for Mount & MUsket, NW, and N&S it will work for us.

Give the community a chance, trust us even a little. We entrusted you to carry this game out and funded you. We should at least be able to be trusted to run the game we damn well paid for.

[Leifr]

If folk could tame it down for the next ten hours or so, that would be fab. Both sides have butted heads a little too much tonight, it should be fairly evident that passwords are a contentious issue. Let it rest for the evening and attend to this again tomorrow when tempers have cooled off - maybe there can be some reconciliation in some way.

I’m off to bed. Thread will remain open in the mean time, take it easy.

(PS - JammedHam... Good post, clear and respectful!)

[F. L. Villarreal]

Alright, I've gone and taken something to get my edge down so I'm not about to start ripping apart throats.

If you want a suggestion instead of a snarky reply from me then fine. Give a Password Server system a chance. Yes, the community is small right now. We're all in Alpha. Did Mount & Musket back when it was a MOD have as large of a community? Probably similar. They used a password system included in Warband and they did just fine. So fine in fact that Taleworlds made Napoleonic Wars and built the whole thing up as DLC. Did it start small? Yes it did. It had both private and public servers with event times that didn't hamper anything. NW is still popular today and I can promise you until things like Holdfast fix certain issues it will be king. Mods for that DLC came in the form of many things, predominantly North and South, which is where I was introduced to War of Rights. Did it have a massive following like WOR does? No, it didn't. It grew. It used the same password system the last three items I've listed have and they all turned out just fine.

I've listed these games, (Mount & Musket, Napoleonic Wars, and North & South) because I'm going to take a limb and say that the vast majority of players that backed this game came from those games before. This game is niche, not everyone is gonna want to battle in line formation and march under the thunder of artillery. But I do, and so does everyone else in this game that I know of. We're a passionate bunch. This is why this issue has caused a lot of flak from us Veteran players.

Trusty, I respect you as a person because that is how I was raised by my Momma and I intend to be that way until I pass away on some godforsaken day far in the future. This comes from my heart as a historical gamer that if passwords worked for the last three games that have been staples of this platfrom and continue to work to this day. I do not see where it would hurt our community. I understand you are absolutely terrified of you and your colleagues game, you baby basically, to die because the community severed itself. It's already severing itself because of the lack of connection between the devs and us. I don't want this game to die any more than you all do but it is going to unless something is done.

Either find a middle ground like previously suggested through locking officers and NCOs or just turn on the ability to lock servers and watch as your community does what it does. I doubt the average "game for a few hours because I'm bored" will care that there is one or two full locked servers and a couple unlocked ones with less people. What it will do is click in their mind and say "Let's go stock up an open server" and they will join the next highest one. Multiply this every couple of people every couple of minutes and you will get what you desire from this. A successful game. If it worked for Mount & MUsket, NW, and N&S it will work for us.

Give the community a chance, trust us even a little. We entrusted you to carry this game out and funded you. We should at least be able to be trusted to run the game we damn well paid for.

I couldn't have said it better myself. Thank you for this.

[LordAlistair]

The issue is not the time required to implement password protected servers.

The issue is the division of the community, the increased chance of no available populated servers to join for newcommers to the game and the introduction of artificial feedback given by those that exclusively play behind locked doors.

Yes, it is annoying having to kick/ban unwanted players if one feels said unwanted players disrupt one's event but I don't think that annoyance outweighs the possible issues listed above.

- Trusty

I mean you act like you have 1000's of players playing everyday, in reality, every day you get one whole server that fills up with regiment players and pub players. Passwords on regiment servers isn't going to change that, regiments aren't just going to hop on their locked servers everyday because who is playing them. The reason for the locked server is so regiments can set up official events between one another and get all their players on the server. Events are only going to happen weekly maybe more, but for most of the time, the same thing is going to happen as usual, everyone is going to hop on one server like an official one and play together. I also believe not every regiment is going to lock all their servers, I'm sure only event servers will be locked and some people may just have a non locked recruitment server that people can play on.

[Matt(Fridge)]

I mean you act like you have 1000's of players playing everyday, in reality, every day you get one whole server that fills up with regiment players and pub players. Passwords on regiment servers isn't going to change that, regiments aren't just going to hop on their locked servers everyday because who is playing them. The reason for the locked server is so regiments can set up official events between one another and get all their players on the server. Events are only going to happen weekly maybe more, but for most of the time, the same thing is going to happen as usual, everyone is going to hop on one server like an official one and play together. I also believe not every regiment is going to lock all their servers, I'm sure only event servers will be locked and some people may just have a non locked recruitment server that people can play on.

Exactly. No one is planning on locking their server the whole time. It would be terrible for recruitment, and sometimes we want the server populated for various reasons. We just want to be able to lock it up for when there is a serious organized event between two companies.

[Nyves]

Isn't there an argument to be made that if passwords are prohibited, it will upset your current base and MAY cause some loss in that playerbase? On the flipside, if you give your consumers what they demand, then they will be more loyal, will probably play more (since they can actually do what they want to do on their server), and thereby you are generating a growing community, right?

From my experience, it's the Regiments that make the game for everyone else. Pub COs don't know what they are doing. Pubs can associate well enough to fit in to other regiments that know what they are doing. However it is in fact the Regiment leaders who create the most fun for those newcomers. They are the ones who teach and welcome in the newcomers.

Also think of the day to day. Any regiment that wants a password will protect it for their what, 1...2 hour event? After that, I can only assume most regiments would UNLOCK their lobbies, as they want newcomers to join their recruiting drill server. I mean that's what we do. We host drills to practice as well as recruit. We have also had issues where other clans have come in to steal recruits, which I think is an issue in and of itself that the devs should consider solving. When a regiment pays for a server only to have some other unit come in and try to steal people - it's hard work and you hate that other unit eventually.

And honestly, other than the people who want their rooms locked temporarily, you always find people flocking to the Official Servers and 200-man Test Server. And that's without passwords as a feature yet. Imagine the server list, with the Official servers full, and like 4 other servers with 3-5 people in their, with their lobbies locked. Won't the pubs just join the full open server anyways?

I'm just trying to make a counter-argument to some of the points made.

All this is obviously said with respect to the devs. Love the game, hope the playerbase grows, hope to see more content, and success for the peeps working on it.

[TrustyJam]

Isn't there an argument to be made that if passwords are prohibited, it will upset your current base and MAY cause some loss in that playerbase? On the flipside, if you give your consumers what they demand, then they will be more loyal, will probably play more (since they can actually do what they want to do on their server), and thereby you are generating a growing community, right?

From my experience, it's the Regiments that make the game for everyone else. Pub COs don't know what they are doing. Pubs can associate well enough to fit in to other regiments that know what they are doing. However it is in fact the Regiment leaders who create the most fun for those newcomers. They are the ones who teach and welcome in the newcomers.

Also think of the day to day. Any regiment that wants a password will protect it for their what, 1...2 hour event? After that, I can only assume most regiments would UNLOCK their lobbies, as they want newcomers to join their recruiting drill server. I mean that's what we do. We host drills to practice as well as recruit. We have also had issues where other clans have come in to steal recruits, which I think is an issue in and of itself that the devs should consider solving. When a regiment pays for a server only to have some other unit come in and try to steal people - it's hard work and you hate that other unit eventually.

And honestly, other than the people who want their rooms locked temporarily, you always find people flocking to the Official Servers and 200-man Test Server. And that's without passwords as a feature yet. Imagine the server list, with the Official servers full, and like 4 other servers with 3-5 people in their, with their lobbies locked. Won't the pubs just join the full open server anyways?

I'm just trying to make a counter-argument to some of the points made.

All this is obviously said with respect to the devs. Love the game, hope the playerbase grows, hope to see more content, and success for the peeps working on it.

Thank you for the points you made - they are all valid ones to raise I feel. :)

Yes, you are correct that this is a risk.

The main issue I take with the arguement that it is only meant to be off limits a few hours every day/week is that other people are basically stating that passworded servers is the end all/be all of the game. Several people have already started the doom-saying/strike talk/threatening to give up wor for another game so I must believe that they indeed do think password protected servers hugely important to the game and that they are ready to quit the game due to the lack of them . If you then follow that claim/course of action with an arguement stating that the servers only will be locked down a few hours each week that doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me.

If that is correct then I simply don't see the servers being locked off for as little as they suggest they will be.

In short, I'd be less worried about the amount the password protected servers were to be used to divide the community if the people asking for its implementation weren't ready to announce the death of the game due to it not being added.

I realize this may seem like a backwards way of thinking to some.

I have no issues with a populated server being locked off from the public every now and again. The issue is if the locked server is the only populated one and it turns out that it isn't a few hours a week but every night. If that ends up happening, you then quickly end up at a situation where the new players are presented with a few options:

1: don't play the game.

2: join a company in order to get the required password to actually enjoy the game.

3: try to populate a server outside of the locked off one (that is going to be drawing all organized players in so forget about them joining the low pop public server).

The vast majority of new players will go with option 1.

While I very much so appreciate all of the companies of the game I do not think the norm should become "join a company to experience the game" - that is not what we set out for with WoR - instead it should be "join a company to get the most out of the game".

In short, one of my main concerns (apart from the others I've listed a few times in this thread) is that the wish to play privately and thus divide the community is much, much bigger than event play a few hours a week would suggest.

I fully realize I may be entirely in the wrong regarding the above. The added strength of which the demands are made could just be due to the simple fact of having asked for passworded servers for so long already - but it does come off to me as a big wish of seperating the community.

- Trusty

[TrustyJam]

I mean you act like you have 1000's of players playing everyday, in reality, every day you get one whole server that fills up with regiment players and pub players. Passwords on regiment servers isn't going to change that, regiments aren't just going to hop on their locked servers everyday because who is playing them. The reason for the locked server is so regiments can set up official events between one another and get all their players on the server. Events are only going to happen weekly maybe more, but for most of the time, the same thing is going to happen as usual, everyone is going to hop on one server like an official one and play together. I also believe not every regiment is going to lock all their servers, I'm sure only event servers will be locked and some people may just have a non locked recruitment server that people can play on.

Thank you for the info. I would hope that would be the case as well.

In regards to the player numbers - if only we had 1000's of players playing every day (passworded servers wouldn't be a potential danger/issue then). The active player base is, however, small enough to be hugely negatively impacted if passworded servers were to become the norm.


Exactly. No one is planning on locking their server the whole time. It would be terrible for recruitment, and sometimes we want the server populated for various reasons. We just want to be able to lock it up for when there is a serious organized event between two companies.

You wanting to lock it up during serious organized events is entirely understandable.

- Trusty

[Quaker]

At this stage of development, IMO if you allow passworded games WoR will essentially become a weekend game for established Companies and the community numbers will stagnate/decline further.

TBH I get the feeling the devs are okay with WoR being a niche game, but there’s a fine line between a niche game and a dead game (Verdun was mentioned earlier as an example) so I can understand Trusty’s reticence in his explanations.

Its still early days and alpha. Ultimately there’s no getting away from the bleeding obvious; build a WoR that will attract oodles more players. :)

[Oleander]

So I feel like the issue here is the devs don't trust units to do what they've said repeatedly. Noted.

[Rbater]

I have no issues with a populated server being locked off from the public every now and again. The issue is if the locked server is the only populated one... If that ends up happening, you then quickly end up at a situation where the new players are presented with a few options:

1: don't play the game.

2: join a company in order to get the required password to actually enjoy the game.

3: try to populate a server outside of the locked off one (that is going to be drawing all organized players in so forget about them joining the low pop public server).

The vast majority of new players will go with option 1.

While I very much so appreciate all of the companies of the game I do not think the norm should become "join a company to experience the game" - that is not what we set out for with WoR - instead it should be "join a company to get the most out of the game".

In short, one of my main concerns (apart from the others I've listed a few times in this thread) is that the wish to play privately and thus divide the community is much, much bigger than event play a few hours a week would suggest.

This I agree with, especially because out of every night I play, there's 2 servers that are populated, both being event servers.. So your concerns as quoted are very well said (with omitting some other wording).

[JammedHam]

At this stage of development, IMO if you allow passworded games WoR will essentially become a weekend game for established Companies and the community numbers will stagnate/decline further.

TBH I get the feeling the devs are okay with WoR being a niche game, but there’s a fine line between a niche game and a dead game (Verdun was mentioned earlier as an example) so I can understand Trusty’s reticence in his explanations.

Its still early days and alpha. Ultimately there’s no getting away from the bleeding obvious; build a WoR that will attract oodles more players. :)

The issue I see with this is simply that the game has to be built first. It won't matter if more or less people buy the game if no one stays to play it. This is what happened to Verdun. It was popular for a time but then stagnated to where it is now. What WoR has that Verdun doesn't is a large and more dedicated community. One that paid a shit load of money to get built. For your concern about WoR becoming a "Weekend Game" look and games like Rising Storm 1/2 & Squad/Post Scriptum. They have spikes in population on weekends but have servers that rise and fall (both private and public) most days of the week anyway. I knew a Realism group that worked a Red Orchestra Rising Storm mod that added US forces on the Western Front against the Germans and that ran for years. They had events all the time.

The point of my counterpoint is that you seem to be looking as if the Companies will be the only people playing. They won't. Everyone works different hours. Weekends are simply just a time where some people slack off, those in school don't have to wake up early, and other quite simple scenarios. I don't think WoR will become a empty game like Verdun just because Passwords are implemented. Even if some servers are kept locked by certain communities. If you simply don't play because there is a server locked that's your own fault. Hell I played a fun 20 or so rounds today on a server that was only ~40 people out of a full 120 or so odd slot. It was fun! Give privatization a chance. It won't be a silver bullet to the head.


Thank you for the info. I would hope that would be the case as well.

In regards to the player numbers - if only we had 1000's of players playing every day (passworded servers wouldn't be a potential danger/issue then). The active player base is, however, small enough to be hugely negatively impacted if passworded servers were to become the norm.

You wanting to lock it up during serious organized events is entirely understandable.

- Trusty

Once again I will say that I strongly believe that WoR is about as niche as niche will be. There is also the factor that the game is still in an alpha, early access title and that is a bar that some people don't cross. I usually don't buy into games in that state because I like complete experiences. Some people want to play just Artillery or just Cavalry and are waiting patiently for that. Some just don't like the era in their games. The community will always be smaller than say something more modern in scope like Red Orchestra, Squad or Arma. It's simply because not everyone wants single shot muskets. It takes a special person to want that.

My question is what is justifiable as a reason to offer password locks to the some odd hundred who play at peak event hours? I only played early this afternoon US Central time because I was off work. I was playing with members of the Euro community as well as people who were also off work or school. It might show a dent now, when the community is tiny alpha key holders, but what about when you push out the main game mode? The Cavalry? Other Battlefields? or even the long awaited Beta release?

The community will never act in a linear fashion, it's fluid. They come and go when they want to play. I don't blame those who are burnt out for various reasons that plenty have already said.

EDIT: I thought of this a little bit after I wrote this up and will add a quick little bullet. These servers are expensive. I doubt that the server locked for event will stay locked forever unless it's sole purpose is events and even then that is pushing it. All the regiments/companies I know would keep the servers open until an event for recruitment and just for fun. I'll admit, I like variety and no two people will fight the same way which is why I like public play sometimes.

I still think it boils down to the simple question of whether CG trusts the community enough to do passwords. I think they can trust us because we paid to play this game and some people even paid just to be at events. I see no fault in letting passwords be a thing.

Sorry for the flash edit, I felt this would actually help the post.

[RhettVito]

please add password servers come on we all want this

[Matt(Fridge)]

Can you please just throw us a bone and do this? Almost everyone wants it. It wont be nearly as bad as you think.

[Melonfish]

My background is an Arma Clan, a popular one at that that produced a large number of british mods.
that unit ran two connections, they had a public server which they ran all the time, then they had a private server ran for set operations.
other units were invited to the private server for operations and it went amazingly well.
the private servers were used for training and team building, it worked very well.

the key was that it was password protected.

clearly there's lots of arguments on here about it but it goes without saying that units that cannot manage their own server members will not last, it does not breed eliteism, it does not deter people (there are after all standard open servers)
it allows teams to work together properly and build themselves to be a better team.
if you do not allow this then this game will die, those teams/units are going to be the lifeblood of this game not the casuals screaming stupid racist things and teamkilling.

the difference is whether you're creating a new holdfast, or a structured team based game. if you just let this run riot without allowing people to police themselves then either you have to police it or it all goes to pot.

[Fancy Sweetroll]

I am sure there are various posts in this thread about why you actually want password protected servers, though from a quick glance, I couldnt find any such posts.

I would be interested to see a list of various reasons why you want password protected servers, ranked after why you want it the most.

Reason 1:

Reason 2:

Reason 3:

Reason 4:

For many of the reasons, password protected servers might not be the best way to go about it.

The suggestion about defining who can always pick the Officer or NCO class on a server is excellent.

Also for the server being full when an event is about to start. Could probably also look into having another file where you can define various SteamIDs and these SteamIDs can then always join the server regardless of the server being full. Then we either kick a player from the server who is not present in that file, or we allow the server to overflow a bit, so even if the server cap is 150, it could go to 175, but as long as the server is above 150 players. Players whose SteamID is not present in that file, would be unable to join. Could potentially also allow players who are present in that file, to always be allowed to change team with no autobalancing enforced on them.

[Redbeard]

I see that passwords are becoming a very hotly debated issue right now and I rarely post on here, in fact, I'm more of a lurker but I feel I need to put in my two cents into this. I think that passwords are a good thing in the long run of the game. A password protected server is great for an organized event for companies to keep anyone out that wants to troll or be an overall nuisance to the players.

On the other hand, I think that the server should only be locked for the time and to prevent the server from being forever locked out to the public is to put a timer on password like for 2 hours or however long the devs think is the right amount.

Thats my opinon on the matter at least, though whatever path the devs take I will support them as I want this game to succeed and be the best game it can be. :)

[brentcarter]

I am sure there are various posts in this thread about why you actually want password protected servers, though from a quick glance, I couldnt find any such posts.

I would be interested to see a list of various reasons why you want password protected servers, ranked after why you want it the most.

Reason 1:

Reason 2:

Reason 3:

Reason 4:

For many of the reasons, password protected servers might not be the best way to go about it.

The suggestion about defining who can always pick the Officer or NCO class on a server is excellent.

Also for the server being full when an event is about to start. Could probably also look into having another file where you can define various SteamIDs and these SteamIDs can then always join the server regardless of the server being full. Then we either kick a player from the server who is not present in that file, or we allow the server to overflow a bit, so even if the server cap is 150, it could go to 175, but as long as the server is above 150 players. Players whose SteamID is not present in that file, would be unable to join. Could potentially also allow players who are present in that file, to always be allowed to change team with no autobalancing enforced on them.


Well this is kind of weird. Players need to list why passwords would be a good idea. I think you should bring valid points why they shouldn't. If you're so against it remove the option to rent rather then this.

I'm not so much part of pro or against password protection. I just never seen a company ask the players for something that universal used in other games, why that would be a good idea.

[Rbater]

Well this is kind of weird. Players need to list why passwords would be a good idea. I think you should bring valid points why they shouldn't. If you're so against it remove the option to rent rather then this.

I'm not so much part of pro or against password protection. I just never seen a company ask the players for something that universal used in other games, why that would be a good idea.

I mean, the 2 solutions that he gave instead are probably better in the long term when compared to just a passworded server. Sure it doesn't solve the issue of when you want to do company vs company with no randoms, but it'll solve the issues of randoms taking the CO/NCO spot and randoms taking a member's spot in the server. Both the latter issues are ones that a plain passworded server could not solve by itself.

[TrustyJam]

Well this is kind of weird. Players need to list why passwords would be a good idea. I think you should bring valid points why they shouldn't. If you're so against it remove the option to rent rather then this.

I'm not so much part of pro or against password protection. I just never seen a company ask the players for something that universal used in other games, why that would be a good idea.

It makes it easier for us to see what the main annoyances/issues are and thus be able to create solutions for those.

- Trusty

[Leifr]

Public play will still be a thing. I’ve spent more time in public play during the Mount&Blade years than I ever did behind closed doors - and I did a bucket load of private events. This is almost certainly the same for everyone here.

[TrustyJam]

Public play will still be a thing. I’ve spent more time in public play during the Mount&Blade years than I ever did behind closed doors - and I did a bucket load of private events. This is almost certainly the same for everyone here.

Mount & Blade has sold anywhere between 2 million to 5 million copies (according to Steamspy).

WoR is at 50.000.

Not saying the above is going to change the player behavior from what you suggest will happen - just getting the numbers out there to make clear that it very well might impact WoR quite differently due to the differences in numbers.

- Trusty

[Leifr]

Mount & Blade has sold anywhere between 2 million to 5 million copies (according to Steamspy).

WoR is at 50.000.

Not saying the above is going to change the player behavior from what you suggest will happen - just getting the numbers out there to make clear that it very well might impact WoR quite differently due to the differences in numbers.

- Trusty

It didn't sell that many immediately though, those numbers are after eight years of being available for purchase. I recall the beta being small enough for names and players to become overly familiar with one another. I don't recall applicable passwords being troublesome in any particular way, it definitely didn't harm the game?

[TrustyJam]

It didn't sell that many immediately though, those numbers are after eight years of being available for purchase. I recall the beta being small enough for names and players to become overly familiar with one another. I don't recall applicable passwords being troublesome in any particular way, it definitely didn't harm the game?

Of course not. I'm not a M&B player so I wouldn't know the specifics of how they got to the millions of sold units that they did but the bigger the community the easier it is to introduce community splitting options without causing said community harm. :)

In any case, thank you for all of your feedback. You have made yourself extremely well heard in regards to this.

We have several internal discussions and investigations currently on-going which I will return with the results of in the comming days and weeks.

- Trusty