Hosting others missions in public servers

[Distiler]

Hi!

 

Given we have some very good missions around but sometimes hosted in distant places meaning high pings, I ask wich is the community stance about allowing other public servers host their missions. For example, I really like 104th missions, 3sqn new missions seem very nice, but to both servers I have barely acceptable latency, being both at USA west coast and me being in EU. The problem is not just my experience, but when somebody with very high latency (like 300+) enters a server, it struggles syncronizing and everybody lags.

 

So what is the stance here? no problem? keeping credits (well, that's obvious)? no way!? can we translate them (to spanish for example)

 

Thanks!

 

PD: I guess for private servers there is no problem at all.

[Bearitall]

Hi!

 

Given we have some very good missions around but sometimes hosted in distant places meaning high pings, I ask wich is the community stance about allowing other public servers host their missions. For example, I really like 104th missions, 3sqn new missions seem very nice, but to both servers I have barely acceptable latency, being both at USA west coast and me being in EU. The problem is not just my experience, but when somebody with very high latency (like 300+) enters a server, it struggles syncronizing and everybody lags.

 

So what is the stance here? no problem? keeping credits (well, that's obvious)? no way!? can we translate them (to spanish for example)

 

Thanks!

 

PD: I guess for private servers there is no problem at all.

 

From where I see it, I see no problem as long as the Mission/Mod Developer info stays intact...

 

Spread the wealth...

[Grimes]

You make valid points and reasons for allowing such practices. I can make points for either side of the argument. On one hand the mission took hours upon hours to create and it is part of your servers identity that you run that mission. But also you created this mission that everyone likes so why not let everyone host it.

 

Dragons missions in BS come to mind...more than half the servers hosted the same missions and very rarely did more than one server have players in it. I think if the community was large enough where multiple servers could be full at the same time I would be totally for it.

 

Right now though, many think of it as "this is our mission, it is a reason to play in here." and there is nothing wrong with that. I tend to agree with that statement. I'd be really angry if I released a mission that I put a ton of hours into only for it to be hosted in another server that more people are playing in within a day of release.

 

Missions squads make are just too closely tied to their identity and their value to let anyone put up a server running an identical mission.

[Distiler]

Another option that I've missed in the opening post is something like designating and "official" mirror in another continent or in the other coast (so you reduce the spread to just two servers). I would really like a server in EU with missions from some of USA based squadrons missions.

 

Damn west coast, why don't you put it in east coast XD.

 

Also mention that there will be those that overlook anything and just put up the server without consulting, but many of us respect the work of others authors and ask first.

[EtherealN]

Well, I think the easiest solution is this: if you find that you have problems and potentially even cause problems for others when you try to connect to a server that is running a particular mission, contact the creator and ask for permission - but on a per-mission and per-server basis. I'm fairly certain that most mission makers would be generous as long as credit is given and they have received proper courtesy of asking them.

 

But even then, Grimes makes valid points and sometimes we just have to suck it up and make our own. :P It is they who have spent the time and effort on making it, after all.

[Case]

I see no problem hosting other peoples missions in a closed server or in SP. It is a great way to see how other people make their missions and get familiar with them.

 

However, hosting them in a public server is questionable, as Grimes and others already explained. Many of the server admins use their missions to attract players.

 

Just a side note, is the 300ms ping you describe really such a problem? In FC1.12 300ms pings were perfectly acceptable, and in FC2.0 I have not yet seen any effects of lag due to such pings.

[Kuky]

Agree with others, if you want to run the mission on your own end in private you should be able to but hosting it on public server I find not nice and like "stealing" hard work done by mission makers.

[Distiler]

Agree with others, if you want to run the mission on your own end in private you should be able to but hosting it on public server I find not nice and like "stealing" hard work done by mission makers.

 

Yo. Nobody talked about stealing, we are talking reasonably here, asking authors. The fact of latency remains tho, networks are networks. We're talking about making the mission enjoyable to pilots in other continents in a way that doesen't "hurt" authors, in a consensuated and controlled environment.

 

And I'm saying this and I have 200ms to 104th (quality experience when no 300-400ms pilots are there) and 250 to 3sqn (have not tested yet) so I'm one of those that more or less will be able to play even with ping limits imposed via Modman. So, I'm talking broadly, asking community.

 

PD: 300ms ping and beyond, even without jitter or any packet loss, is a no-no for quality flight (formation taxing is a good indicator). In fact I would advise any server who uses modman to put a limit at 250-300ms, it would exclude people yes but it would ensure quality experience. You can have 30 pilots with 50ms, but if a single player enters there with 300-400ms the servers is gonna lag.

Edited April 12, 2010 by Distiler

[Panzertard]

Simple as: Ask the authors ;)

And keep the mission in the original shape unless you get permission to change it - thats how you respect the work (days & weeks) they put into it.

[Case]

300ms ping and beyond, even without jitter or any packet loss, is a no-no for quality flight (formation taxing is a good indicator). In fact I would advise any server who uses modman to put a limit at 250-300ms, it would exclude people yes but it would ensure quality experience. You can have 30 pilots with 50ms, but if a single player enters there with 300-400ms the servers is gonna lag.

I disagree with this statement.

 

From experience I find that this is not as bad as you describe it to be. One of our squad members routinely has a ping over 300ms due to his and our servers location, but we never encountered the problems you describe.

 

Though I agree your point of making missions 'enjoyable to pilots in other continents', to my knowledge no server has sofar imposed a limit of 300ms pings on their clients, so you should have no problems to fly on the 3Sqn and 104th servers. If you still feel your ping is too high there, I suggest to try other servers. The 4c and 51st servers are located in Europe and online most of the time, as probably are several others that I don't know offhand.

[Distiler]

Yes of course asking authors is obvious. I was testing waters to see community response. I think it would be even in the interest of them to ask other communities (not all, just one or two) to run their missions if they have hosts in other continents.

[Distiler]

I disagree with this statement.

 

From experience I find that this is not as bad as you describe it to be. One of our squad members routinely has a ping over 300ms due to his and our servers location, but we never encountered the problems you describe.

 

Though I agree your point of making missions 'enjoyable to pilots in other continents', to my knowledge no server has sofar imposed a limit of 300ms pings on their clients, so you should have no problems to fly on the 3Sqn and 104th servers. If you still feel your ping is too high there, I suggest to try other servers. The 4c and 51st servers are located in Europe and online most of the time, as probably are several others that I don't know offhand.

 

The funny thing is I have 200 and 250ms ping to 104 and 3sqn servers respectively. See that I'm asking this broadly, for others. Such a samaritan I am XD

[Panzertard]

Thats why everyone should put up their own server ---> 2ms latency. :music_whistling:

[Case]

See that I'm asking this broadly, for others.

I understand your point, and it is a fair one.

[Bearitall]

You make valid points and reasons for allowing such practices. I can make points for either side of the argument. On one hand the mission took hours upon hours to create and it is part of your servers identity that you run that mission. But also you created this mission that everyone likes so why not let everyone host it.

 

Dragons missions in BS come to mind...more than half the servers hosted the same missions and very rarely did more than one server have players in it. I think if the community was large enough where multiple servers could be full at the same time I would be totally for it.

 

Right now though, many think of it as "this is our mission, it is a reason to play in here." and there is nothing wrong with that. I tend to agree with that statement. I'd be really angry if I released a mission that I put a ton of hours into only for it to be hosted in another server that more people are playing in within a day of release.

 

Missions squads make are just too closely tied to their identity and their value to let anyone put up a server running an identical mission.

 

Well put and understandable...:thumbup:

[EtherealN]

Note on ping - it's not really ping that is the big issue, at least not insofar as causing trouble for others. It's UDP packetloss. The two are probably related most of the time, but I wouldn't be surprised if some people have near-perfect ping but horrible packetloss. (Note that ping exists only in TCP.)

 

The other day on 104th I saw some people talking about some guy who was lagging heavily apparently and thereby managed to spoil anothers shot (or so they said), but when I looked at the player list their ping was a fairly acceptable 200. My guess: lots of lost UDP packets.

Edited April 12, 2010 by EtherealN

[Grimes]

Another thing to keep in mind is the difference between coops and game server missions. I'd be much more inclined to offer co-ops I make for everyone to download and play. Simply because they are different in their purpose and are generally played differently from the normal server missions. Even then though I think I would at least want some sort of "exclusivity" of the mission on the 3sqn server. Maybe after a few months of it being released and tweaked to perfection I could just outright release it for all to host. In the end it depends on the mission. If I make a really simply 4 player co-op chances are I would release it for public usage. If I made a 30 player co-op (its really a when not an if) I'd want to keep it for the 3sqn Dedicated to use at least for a while.

 

But by all means check the missions out from the servers in the editor. Its a great way to learn how people make their missions, but also you might learn some new technique. When the 51st and 104th put their first batch of new missions up, I joined the servers for the sole purpose of seeing the mission in the editor. Mostly to just check out their triggers hoping that they didn't "do anything I shoulda thought of."

Edited April 12, 2010 by Grimes