Weekly BF

An Open Letter to Alexander Hassoon, Rent-A-Server Producer

Comments

  • NL73schietdammer
    506 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha Member
    Maybe this is the real reason:

    Currently online players

    PC: 26,001 (24h peak: 90,600)

    XBOXONE: 70,452 (24h peak: 154,812)

    PS4: 74,861 (24h peak: 220,295)

    Total: 171,314

    90k + Of the Smartest, Coolest People I know

    So Kid A, goes to Mom/Dad or even Themselves Who have a budget

    Console $500
    TV to play console $500
    .


    Motherboard and CPU $500
    Video Card $400
    Hard Drive $200
    O/S $200
    Case $200
    K/Board and Mouse $200
    Monitor $300
    .

    What is the FASTEST and CHEAPEST way to play the Popular titles...... You guessed it a Console, And a majority of those Console Kiddies Don't have a job.
    .
    I will stick with my PC, even though I do Own All the consoles except the new 4k ones

    PC player here, you totally overestimate the pc master race, they have a 400€/$ gpu - probably stupid enough to go for nvidia ending up shooting themselves in the foot when amd goes bankrupt - and yet 90% dont have a 10 dollar microphone, also a big problem in the division when you are in a sqaud of 4 with 3 pugs, very very annoying
  • NL73schietdammer
    506 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha Member
    Jaskaman wrote: »
    "2. I dont think allowing Custom Games to be quick-matchable is the right approach, but having easier ways for players to find servers in the server browser might be a better option."
    It should be going to quick match because with current BF1, most players are using matchmaking not traditional server browser so servers are not easy to start if server becomes custom. I think one of the solutions is not to set server to custom from every small change. And Matchmaking should not be the first option to search servers.
    And 15 maps is only enough as long as servers are not mixed mode servers.

    Yes my server isnt custom and because of quickmatch it really fills up quickly, maybe quickmatch should look - no not THE quickmatch, there should be another one next to it - that uses the filter you make so if your filter says amiens and argonne because you like those then you should quickmatch to such a server. Or if you want a server without shotguns - as of now a10 hunter is OPed as fxxx so shotgun is now even worse then snipers - and you put that in your filter then servers who have that should be in the quickmatch. Maybe a quickmatch woth behind it a square where you can put a V in and then the filter is ON.

    And see this topic, reddit is the place to be not here if you want official response, many things are coming https://forums.battlefield.com/en-us/discussion/60201/coming-soon-to-the-rent-a-server-program/p1

    I don't get it if they say - if they said it at all - badmins, 100% they are there and on almost every clan, but when kick ban comes to rent-a-server which is definitely needed, don't we get that back becuase the same people can ban again.

    Dice should know when they read this topic, that here come the louthmouted minority, the silent majority is out there, so they should read this topic with some grain of salt.

    I remember the locker no explosives servers, you get kicked which is super, but why complain now about dice building that finally in, you cant throw nades at all .... so you don't get ragechat when somebody accidentally kills someone with a nade. No longer proconrullz needed for this, so many real big clans with many servers, didn't update the sniper list of weapons after a new dlc came out, now in bf1 this will be done automatically.

    VIP, it is coming, i personally dislike it when someone gets kicked for a clan member, we never had that on our server, but in bf1 it will proabbly be - just like the better version of non explsoives servers - better, in hardline and bf4 you are just kicked on such servers without an explenataion, here you will probaly get an after kick message that a VIP joined the server.

    I find the ingame after round balancer really working great in bf1 it is not win after win after win or **** after **** after ****, finally no during the round moving of players which is on 80% of servers in bf4 and hardline and is really annoying and gamebreaking if you are not playing for your kd ratio but for win loss ratio, getting freaking moved to the losing team with 5minuets to go. Fxxx multibalancer and people who don't know how to set things right with that plugin.

    No no no, i am happy with bf1, adaptive server size is not neccesary in bf1 to fill up the server.

    Many servers had way too much server spam in the chat.

    All these ping plugins, balancers only make servers more unstable, plus some providers itself had jsut bad hardware. I have yet too see 1 official server crash. And 140€ for 180days 64player on 60hz is dirt cheap is around 24€ a month, at g portal you pay 59€ a month if you also buy it for manyyyy months plus multiple servers to get the maximum discount.

    They just need to make a quickmatch available - with your filters that you chose working then custom servers get filled up more quickly.
  • bulletsearl
    1110 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, BF1IncursionsAlpha Member
    Rent a server, cannot play on it yourself if full. Gooooooooood job Dice.
    That being said... They know exactly that the current version is not satisfying.
    Why do they not tell the community, it's not done yet, but it will be what you want.
    Would be way better AND would remove most of the salt they get for their lame releasing style.
  • Gatornade
    25 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    edited November 2016
    Double post ...read next post.



    Post edited by Gatornade on
  • Gatornade
    25 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    edited November 2016
    I would like to personally thank you for taking the time to answer all of my questions/comments, and for giving all of us a better insight into some of these issues. This is more than a simple game to some of us, but more of a daily pastime we look forward to each and every day.
    -
    I do have one area I would like to further address. I would like to give you some food for thought about one of the most important issues to us in the Hardcore community. Please let me explain:
    After assembling about 8 of our members, we tried to get our newly rented “Hardcore Mode’ server started. We waited, and waited, and waited in the server for more than 3 hours to get it started, but were never able to. We then joined a random empty DICE Hardcore server, which filled up for us in about 4 minutes. What is up with that, I ask? That really needs to be fixed, and on a side note, rental servers should only need 4-6 players to start a match.
    -
    You replied:
    There are two sides to this;
    1. I see a need for an option to lower the amount of players needed to break pre-round.
    Yes, it should as low as 4 as it was with Battlefield 4.
    2. I dont think allowing Custom Games to be quick-matchable is the right approach, but having easier ways for players to find servers in the server browser might be a better option.
    -
    I understand what you are saying, but I completely, and respectfully, disagree with your premise. If we are forced to compete with DICE Hardcore “quick-match” servers, we will never, ever, fill our server(s). This is mainly due to the match-making process itself, because it eats up most of the Hardcore player base. I would assume that most players are casual players, and do not take the time to search for a private server.
    -
    This is why the Hardcore “Preset” is so important to everyone concerned. It makes all servers comply with a predesignated set of server variables. If a “rent-a-server” wishes to be in the “quick-match” queue, they must have the “preset” enabled (when available), OR comply with the mandatory Hardcore settings as mandated by DICE. This should qualify a “rent-a-server” to be eligible for “quick-match” players running “Hardcore” mode, just as it is presently the case for the “Normal/Official” mode servers we use today.
    -
    As it stands now, if I use the “Normal/Official” mode server variables on our “rent-a-server,” we pick up quick-match players rather quickly. So I have to ask, why would “Hardcore” mode servers be any different? It makes no sense. If we comply with all the “Hardcore” settings, why not give us equal access to “quick-match” player system? All players will continue to receive the desired player experience you previously talked about, because it would be a sanctioned DICE “Preset”.
    -
    If you are concerned further about the player experience being “DICE Pure”, you could always add a “DICE - Unattended” or “Community - Administrated” server check box, so if players wants to launch in a DICE Prue server, they can do so prior to launch. That way all parties are fairly represented.
    -
    I truly hope you take all of what I said under consideration.
    -
    Again, I am extremely grateful you took the time out of your busy schedule to address our concerns

    Larry K. (Gatornade)

  • RogueSteward
    3 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
    Thank you so much for responding as quick as you did Hassoon! I'm so glad to see the current devs updating the community as frequently as they are!
  • NetRngr
    567 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    Wow.... Just wow man,
    Jaskaman wrote: »
    "2. I dont think allowing Custom Games to be quick-matchable is the right approach, but having easier ways for players to find servers in the server browser might be a better option."
    It should be going to quick match because with current BF1, most players are using matchmaking not traditional server browser so servers are not easy to start if server becomes custom. I think one of the solutions is not to set server to custom from every small change. And Matchmaking should not be the first option to search servers.
    And 15 maps is only enough as long as servers are not mixed mode servers.

    Yes my server isnt custom and because of quickmatch it really fills up quickly, maybe quickmatch should look - no not THE quickmatch, there should be another one next to it - that uses the filter you make so if your filter says amiens and argonne because you like those then you should quickmatch to such a server. Or if you want a server without shotguns - as of now a10 hunter is OPed as fxxx so shotgun is now even worse then snipers - and you put that in your filter then servers who have that should be in the quickmatch. Maybe a quickmatch woth behind it a square where you can put a V in and then the filter is ON.

    The issue is that if you change from DICE default setting your server virtually disappears from the server browser and if you don't know the name, sometimes even if you do, you can't find it. We, yes I'm in Gators Clan, have two servers. Our HC is set to the exact same settings as a dice HC server yet we display as custom and theirs does not. This should not happen. We wait for hours and get no traffic. We log into an EMPTY DICE HC server and within 2-4 min it is full. This is complete and total crap.
    And see this topic, reddit is the place to be not here if you want official response, many things are coming https://forums.battlefield.com/en-us/discussion/60201/coming-soon-to-the-rent-a-server-program/p1

    I don't get it if they say - if they said it at all - badmins, 100% they are there and on almost every clan, but when kick ban comes to rent-a-server which is definitely needed, don't we get that back becuase the same people can ban again.

    The problem is that the people coming to the forums screaming badmin because they got banned usually bring it upon themselves. If you ran a server as you say you did there is no way you don't know this. Yes I'm sure there are bad admins out there but I can honestly say as a former admin and a player they are few and far between and by far a small fraction of the population. I never play on the "official" servers because of the maturity level of the average player. Now we're having to deal with these idiots on our server we pay for so no admin tools was a supremely dumb thing to leave out.
    Dice should know when they read this topic, that here come the louthmouted minority, the silent majority is out there, so they should read this topic with some grain of salt.
    I hope you are talking about the players complaining "badmin". I assume you are.
    I remember the locker no explosives servers, you get kicked which is super, but why complain now about dice building that finally in, you cant throw nades at all .... so you don't get ragechat when somebody accidentally kills someone with a nade. No longer proconrullz needed for this, so many real big clans with many servers, didn't update the sniper list of weapons after a new dlc came out, now in bf1 this will be done automatically.
    There is no issue with this but granular weapon allow/disallow is needed. You should have the option for both... as it was.
    VIP, it is coming, i personally dislike it when someone gets kicked for a clan member, we never had that on our server, but in bf1 it will proabbly be - just like the better version of non explsoives servers - better, in hardline and bf4 you are just kicked on such servers without an explenataion, here you will probaly get an after kick message that a VIP joined the server.

    Every server that had a kick for various reasons had the option to put in a description. Most if not all displayed a server message to the player why they were kicked. if they didn't it was overlooked, the server admin was lazy, or the offending player didn't take the time to read the displayed rules on server entry and or the the kick message. This is incumbent on the player to abide by the rules. Ignorance of the rules is no excuse. And I'm sorry if it offends your sensibilities that the people who actually pay for a server would like to play there. Its not our job to subsidize someone else's play time. If we're paying for a server you better bet we should have a list that allows us to play on it when we darn well like.
    I find the ingame after round balancer really working great in bf1 it is not win after win after win or **** after **** after ****, finally no during the round moving of players which is on 80% of servers in bf4 and hardline and is really annoying and gamebreaking if you are not playing for your kd ratio but for win loss ratio, getting freaking moved to the losing team with 5minuets to go. Fxxx multibalancer and people who don't know how to set things right with that plugin.

    No no no, i am happy with bf1, adaptive server size is not neccesary in bf1 to fill up the server.

    It's not about filling the server. It's about game size. Some maps 64 players are just too many.
    Many servers had way too much server spam in the chat.

    All these ping plugins, balancers only make servers more unstable, plus some providers itself had jsut bad hardware. I have yet too see 1 official server crash. And 140€ for 180days 64player on 60hz is dirt cheap is around 24€ a month, at g portal you pay 59€ a month if you also buy it for manyyyy months plus multiple servers to get the maximum discount.

    They just need to make a quickmatch available - with your filters that you chose working then custom servers get filled up more quickly.

  • Press-2-Continue
    353 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    edited November 2016
    Sorry to semi hijack the thread

    @Striterax

    Why did Dice think that lowering the amount of control and doing a completely bad job at server rentals in house on PC to the level of a console user was a good idea? Why wasn't any of this done long before Novemeber? You have had this game in Dev for a long time, you (Dice not you personally) have ignored in regardes to the hundreds of questions regarding the server rental program. Do you not think it is time to give us the answer's to the questions that have been asked for months. Have you considered refunding and removing your *Excuse the tone* **** poor effort of server rentals on PC and console for BF1 and going back to the way it worked perfectly fine in BF3 and 4 with 3rd party hoster's and us server admins having plug-ins, writing our own plug-ins and procon/Rcon at our fingertips? You can not honestly say you are happy with the reaction you have had since you tried to hide the server rental program until the very last minute.

    I would say it is about time Dice went back to the drawing board regarding the RSP and actually listen to the community for once and not just think you know what we want. There is so much wrong with this game at the minute and the main thing is the server rentals, but yet Dice/EA are very tight lipped about all of this, There is no road map of what you are planning to do, You think that slapping a BETA tag on something makes everything alright well sorry but it doesn't you have had years to think and get this right and yet you haven't, Do you not think it is about time you held your hands up and said "yes, we are wrong and this is going to be changed by x date."

    As for the server browser why don't you take a look at Battlelog (as much as most of us hated it, it did what it should have done) on there the browser let's us search for official server's why wasn't this put in to the BF1 server browser at the very start or atleast when you introduced the RSP.

    Why such a limited amount of server's in global area's such as Europe when you can tell from pre-sales and after release sales (along with other data from 3rd renter's) and you clearly did not have enough to start with?

    Why also are we limited to Europe and not London,amsterdam,Frankfurt. Not sure if you have noticed but Europe is a big place and we don't all have the same ping to the same datacentre's

    I am not holding my breath for an actual honest answer as it will be PR spin and nothing more but it would be nice for EA/Dice to actually be honest for once.
  • DarthSkagos
    9 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    Have any Dice/EA guys responded to this?
  • -3D-Pix
    40 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
    Custom servers shouldn't have a quick match feature, no one wants to quick match into games with different settings every time they press that button, hence the quick match. I do believe there needs to be a better way to connect and join custom servers or else they will never populate at this rate.

    My org currently rents a server, we have kept the stock options which allows people to quick join (Which it should) and we can currently fill it up with only one person sitting in it if it dies.

    The things I'm looking forward to most are Server branding, reserved slots, and server messages over chat.
  • R0gueWarrior
    157 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    Have any Dice/EA guys responded to this?

    Yup Roll back about 7-8 POSTS!
  • R0gueWarrior
    157 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    The Community appreciates your Response Striterax. I would love to see mini/micro patches weekly/biweekly rather than waiting for "Hell to Freeze over" on a LARGE patch
  • trig0tron
    324 postsMember, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, BF1IncursionsAlpha Member
    Axlerod1 wrote: »
    All the kids that do not want to take time to read rules and that got a kick or a ban. They want to cry Badmin and blame others for their lack of reading rules sets the most servers had listed.

    This. This is exactly the majority of complaints that are being made on forums and social media. If our community had to put every single complaint of unfair treatment we would have a fair amount of complaints to show here... We have a very strong language filter in place which banned a lot of words that are lets say very common in the dice official servers right now. (We're talking about wishing people the worst kind of diseases, racial slurs and pure hatred based on religion etc).

    It is that very automated language filter that makes people go cry for unfair treatment. Not to forget the biggest complaints are often about manual admin action where the chat would pretty much sum up as follow:

    Suspect Joins server
    Suspect starts being a bit salty (that is fine)
    Suspect contineus being salty
    Suspect starts calling hacks and stuff
    Admin steps in asks suspect to calm down a bit
    Suspect keeps going
    Admin gives another warning
    Suspect starts trying to **** of the admin
    Admin replies kind and calm asking to just play and stop being so salty
    Suspect gets agressive
    Admin responds with kick with reason in kick
    Suspect returns and goes on again
    Admin warns at least once again
    Suspect goes on again
    Admin kicks suspect 2nd time
    Suspect returns again and goes on again
    No more warnings, Admin issues ban. Ban reason contains a website link to appeal the ban aswell.

    Suspect goes on social media, battlefield forums and whatever you can think of crying out that he has been a victim of a badmin.

    Admin finds this out and simply wonders why... This is pretty much how it works for Team Semper Fi. During the game we have our ban appeal option going through the chat automaticly, we even roll the rules. You can't miss it, yet people do, or do it intentionally and then start crying like never before.

    To sum up in short: Suspect joins and breaks the rules, gets at least 2 maybe 3 warnings. Receives first kick. At return another few warnings before kick if person continues the rule breaking. And third time it will result in a ban.

    And this.. This is the kind of people that apparently has been listened to. Because let's make one thing clear. What is (unfortunately) the main use of game forums these days? Complaining... If the new system is based on "feedback" from these forums for example then it is no wonder we lost all control. Then it is no wonder DICE thinks the player experience suffers with admin control. But imagine if every single satisfied player from every corner would suddenly post their experiences here?

    The result would be that the so called "badmins" thus the people who are killing the "good player experience" DICE is now talking about isn't being hit at all. Probably even the complete opposite. Is it really so hard to understand that only those who complain are the ones you'll see and hear? Everyone knows that you can be a good person, but make 1 wrong and you will be remembered for that thing your entire life.

    Stop treating a loud minority like it's the majority. I truly wonder what the results of a proper research would be about the player experience in DICE Official Servers without admin control vs Community Servers with admin control. I dare to bet that the results would show that people tend to avoid the official servers. And we can actually see proof of that already, go to BF4 and disable all filters except the "official" setting. On a good day I can find maybe up to 20 servers with people in it of which 50% is full. (Europe) When I would enable all the other game modes I get hundreds of hits with filled servers, I can keep scrolling and scrolling seeing full servers with people in queue.

    All we want is that things would've sticked the same they were. Heck, console admins deserve more control than they ever had since they couldn't do a lot on their servers. Wasn't that the initial plan too? Bring console server owners closer to PC server owners?

    Once again, I am dissappointed in the blindess of those who make these decisions. They think they are in contact with the community but damn are they wrong. The explosion of questions regarding server rental apparently wasn't a big warning enough. I've never seen such a big outcry in the Battlefield community as now, not even when BF4 had that horrible and unplayable launch.


    Thank you for your reply.

    But my questions was facetious.
    Because I was posing those questions as a dumb Electronic Arts/Dice executive, who doesn't know how to make money, only follow trends. Those people (ie: newbies, kids and young adults) do not have buying power. Again, PC players buy a $300 video card, while they buy their kids an Xbox.

    Who cares about noobs screaming badmins?



    I'll repeat the logic here, just in case a money hungry EA executive is reading. Battlefield's PC platform can be refined & broadened/hardened... to deliver a Premium League. Almost anyone who has played BF competitively over the last 15 years would easily drop $300+ onto a single FPS platform, that has traditional community support, tourney style servers & a Battle Recorder, etc.

    EA exec are passing up money.... because they are noobs.
  • RAW_5niper
    6 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
    Gatornade wrote: »
    FROM: Larry K. (Gatornade)

    TO: Alexander Hassoon, DICE Rent-A-Server Program Producer

    Hello,

    I've been playing Battlefield since the first release of Battlefield 1942, and have purchased and played every Battlefield produced by DICE since then. In fact, I liked it so much, I created a community/clan and rented a server to play it on. I wanted a nice place to play with a friendly playing environment with no rules or restrictions, other than making sure players did not cheat, interfere with game play, or offended other players.

    With that said, I have rented many servers from just about all of the Ranked Server Providers (RSP). I learned a lot while renting/running these RSP powered servers. I took great pride in providing a great place to play for all our clan/community members, and regulars, that was free from racism, text spammers, and cheaters …well at least we strived for that.

    When BF1 was announced, we immediately noticed a lack of information concerning server rentals for BF1. We later learned the server rental program would be provided by DICE/EA. I immediately purchased the Ultimate version of the game, so I could rent a server on launch for my community. Unfortunately, we were later told that the servers would only be available after the game was released. After almost a month, we were finally able to rent a server.

    I woke up early morning on Server-Rental-Program (SRP) day, as I called it, only to find the rentals were not available yet. Later in the morning I was able to finally rent a server, so I immediately started setting it up. I gave it a name, and went to add a map cycle, only to find I could only add 6 maps at a time. I thought, how can this be? How could this be missing from the server setup? If this was done by design, then I would have to ask, why? If this was an oversight, then I would have to ask who is responsible for such careless programing.

    I also noticed there was no admin functionality. So I’m thinking, wow, I am renting a server just to have the privilege of naming it? Our community likes Hardcore mode, but I could not find a Hardcore mode “preset” to enable it. We were told days later to manually add the settings. Okay, no problem, so I did just that. The problem is, we are not able to get any Quick Match (QM) players to join the server.

    After assembling about 8 of our members, we tried to get our newly rented “Hardcore Mode’ server started. We waited, and waited, and waited in the server for more than 3 hours to get it started, but were never able to. We then joined a random empty DICE Hardcore server, which filled up for us in about 4 minutes. What is up with that, I ask? That really needs to be fixed, and on a side note, rental servers should only need 4-6 players to start a match.

    It is obvious to me that the server-rental-program was an afterthought, and I believe DICE initially planned on running BF1 like Battlefront by making it solely dependent on Match-Making. This is an assumption on my part, but seems to be the case.

    You said that DICE wanted to make for a better player experience by controlling the servers. Well let me tell you, we had quite a following in our Battlefield 4 server. Ask any of our visiting players what kind of player experience they had. They would tell you that they were treated with respect, and had friendly admins to help them. The servers you mentioned that restricted weapons, or punished people for using certain weapons, should have been denied service from DICE through the RSPs.

    Hardcore mode. When we started to play Hardcore mode, we couldn’t tell friend from foe, which lead to constant team killing. The mortars were useless, because they do not have the mini map to see where to fire, and the artillery cannons could not see where to aim because there is no front site (crosshair). I understand no crosshairs for the rifles and pistols, but not the artillery pieces, because they really need them. And lastly, players do not know if they've killed someone, because it does not show player kills. I assume the kill screen is attached to the HUD. Well, then you should allow the HUD to be “enabled” for Hardcore mode, if that is the case.

    With all that said, I think Battlefield 1 is the best Battlefield game ever created. The game play is immersive, and quite fun to play. Because of the Hardcore mode issues, and server rental issues, some of my members have to decide to play other games until it gets fixed. This is causing some strife within our community.

    Lastly, and in the future, would you please keep us updated on the progress of these issues using the Battlefield forums, so we don’t have to constantly check twitter feeds, Facebook pages, or any of the other social media for that matter.

    Thanks for listening,

    -Larry K. (Gatornade)
    www.the-armory.net



    Very well said. I can't believe the reason is "player experience".
    There are many different gaming clans out there. Many age groups in those clans. And may different gaming styles and preferences.
    That's the beauty of renting a server. So you'd think. In the 9 or 10 years our clan has existed, everyone enjoys our servers.
    I don't buy the reason that players are kicked for accidentally using a weapon or something like that. That's why there are server rules.
    If a server is created for tactical crouch style of play, and you don't like that type of game play, there are many other servers to play on
    which you will find more accommodating. You can't control what idiot rents a server. This has always been the case with any franchise.
    However, those servers soon become so underpopulated that the owners will either close them down, or continue to pay to have an empty server.

    Some of the best servers we run are modded. To the point of being able to control exactly which weapons, explosives, perks, etc. are allowed.
    There's no chance of anyone using a wrong weapon, because if it's there, you can use it. If it's disallowed, you're not able to select it in your kit.

    I know the older games still have rented servers. Some allow running, others don't, others don't allow certain weapons, others only allow use of handguns
    indoors. Some are great, and some are silly. However, there is something for everyone. Besides, if anyone can't find a server they like, they can rent their
    own, or they can play on the EA servers; plain and simple.

    Anyone who rents a server should be able to allow or disallow what ever they want, and should be able to admin their server (kick, ban, etc), and should
    be able to password protect their server, and have reserved slots, etc. That is "AT A MINIMUM", what renting a server is all about.

    Think about it guys. If not, with the limited amount of things one can control now, there are only a certain number of combinations of setups for servers.
    Once that amount of combinations of servers (limited) have been rented, why would anyone else rent a server? To create one identical to an existing one?
    Does that make sense?

  • PBS-powerbits01
    302 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    edited November 2016
    @Striterax thanks for the respect to us as a community to react on the forum... we realy appreciate it very much!
    You understand our frustration in having so much admin rights revoked because apperently some players complain about badmins or a rule server!
    But guess who they need when a hacker causes havoc... the admin!

    This community gives more value in to the player experience and i think this is more then just a game for us! We care about this great game called battlefield and want to help it get to the state it deserves...

    First thing is first and very urgent: kick/ban/vip and ofcourse the other features you have promised:

    CxV6ziVXgAEmxWy.jpg

    And i hope there comes more...


  • warwiz007
    1 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
    Well said i wish the servers would stay like they were in bf4...
  • Rombibombii
    574 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    trig0tron wrote: »
    snip

    This is not constructive or helping at all. Please don't tag me just to slander EA/DICE. It is fine if you have constructive criticism about the RSP as it is, but playing the "moneyxxx" card isn't it.

    As to actually getting OT.

    I think that many would agree that even postponing the RSP was a better idea than having it released as it was now. Of course, the best thing was to actually listen and reply to the hundreds of questions from the RSP Question Master Thread. But for some reason that didn't happen.

    Either way, things need to improve fast. I do see people keep saying "PC servers are now on console level". Let me make this very, very clear. I've had servers on console and those were capable of MORE than we can right now on both PC and Console. We are below the original bar. That is why this situation is unnacceptable. There is a bottom line, DICE/EA crossed it thinking it was "Ok" and as said earlier smacking "BETA" on it would be fine. It isn't, fine, it's the complete opposite of fine.

    I want to see RSP and the custom admin panel/program (whatever it is going to be) to succeed. But I fear that if this is the pace DICE/EA keep going, the game will be as dead as Battlefield Hardline before even making it to a proper RSP.
This discussion has been closed.