MarkField13 Posted July 23, 2013 Share Posted July 23, 2013 (edited) So, this idea is actually based on a bug/glitch, but it made the map INCREDIBLY fun! This video proves that the servers can handle the load (for the most part), and that people enjoy playing like this. It would be significantly more fun if the mobs all scaled a little bit better, depending on how many people are in server and what their cumulative levels were. But something like this should be considered: Maybe something like the Nightmare versions of the games, where you could allow "Super Raid" versions, where you either have to defend multiple pods (if any 1 gets destroyed, you lose), or to keep it simple to implement, keep the same gameplay, just add the ability to have up to 10-20 players in at a time. All you'd have to do is touch up on the mob scaling code to check number of players and/or their levels, and that system would work for all existing levels and would be able to work with a 10-20 man raid setup. I don't know about anyone else, but this "mode" is one you almost got to experience for yourself. Its a great opportunity to bring players/clans together on a slightly larger scale. You could plan "clan raid nights" where the entire clan goes out and does these large raids together. Obviously you'd want to scale things back a bit such as module drops to bring it more in line with the progression/rewards of other 4-man maps, but with a bit of tweaking this can become a reality. What are your opinions on the subject? Edit: The posting of this here serves 2 purposes: 1) report it as a bug/issue to someone who would know what to do with it, and 2) suggest it as a legitimate gameplay option Edited July 23, 2013 by MarkField13 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shion963 Posted July 23, 2013 Share Posted July 23, 2013 https://forums.warframe.com/index.php?/topic/84255-i-want-this-mode-made-possible-de-please/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kroul Posted July 23, 2013 Share Posted July 23, 2013 This would be amazing! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kyuosumaru Posted July 23, 2013 Share Posted July 23, 2013 you have my bow Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LordMidnightX Posted July 23, 2013 Share Posted July 23, 2013 it would exclude all the players that can't host very well, I myself have issues when I have a full squad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
R3leaZ Posted July 23, 2013 Share Posted July 23, 2013 (edited) The game doesn't have dedicated servers. Clients are the one hosting. Thus people with slow connection or a weak PC would get destroyed with these amounts of people connected to 1 game. Edited July 23, 2013 by R3leaZ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smitty12212 Posted July 23, 2013 Share Posted July 23, 2013 +1 for this idea. But they would need to implement a way to make the person with the best connection the host. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bakercompany86 Posted July 23, 2013 Share Posted July 23, 2013 Make it static 12 players, create maps accordingly, and I think you have an awesome new game mode. Also, throw in bosses if that's not already a feature of endless defense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MeteorKing Posted July 23, 2013 Share Posted July 23, 2013 Just have a separate system for starting a game of this type. Players have to volunteer to host, their connection will be checked and if they are seen as being able to host, they will be added to the lobby as an available hoster. Once the players have been gathered into a squad the best host (assuming there are more than one) takes the lead and everyone goes and shoots stuff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TunaMayo Posted July 23, 2013 Share Posted July 23, 2013 I would really like to see a game mode where the whole point is, you are GOING to LOSE. It's all about how long you can survive. It could work that you have fortifications to hold, with lasers/turrets, and once that fortification goes down you have to fall back to the next one. This could be awesome if you had 8-10 frames just seeing how long they can hold out, be a bit of a spin on defence missions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MeteorKing Posted July 23, 2013 Share Posted July 23, 2013 Warframe version of nazi zombies? I would probably spend aboooout 90% of my time doing that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Palamudin Posted July 23, 2013 Share Posted July 23, 2013 (edited) And again, im with u bro, im yapping about that everywhere i can. I hope they see it, repeating the same thing from different angles will make them catch it and work on it. They do listen to players when players have something smart to say that DE can actually do at the time (they do have their own pace of development and i dont think even their timeframe for it fits as it should :) Your idea, and conclusion are similar to mine, i have ideas not only for defense but for other modes as well keeping the PVE ONLY element for now. Edited July 23, 2013 by Palamudin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkField13 Posted July 24, 2013 Author Share Posted July 24, 2013 The game doesn't have dedicated servers. Clients are the one hosting. Thus people with slow connection or a weak PC would get destroyed with these amounts of people connected to 1 game. I wasn't actually aware of this. It seems odd to have any online games be hosted by a client (due to modification of the client by the host). That seems like... a vulnerability... As far as hosting goes, if you knew you had a slow connection, such as mine currently, I wouldn't ever dream of trying to host this. However, if you had a faster connection/computer, you could setup a party before hand. You'd get 5 people in a group and start the raid, and let whoever else wants to join do so. As another poster said, the "who should host if this one isn't good enough" could be similar to the messages we get when we get the messages about host migration. There could be a small popup that appears only to the next potential host that says "do you agree to host this?" and if they say yes, use them. If the server gets thrown out of wack, then stick a mark on their account to put them at the end of the line for an unsuccessful host. The more games you host, the better your score, and keep track of it that way. Or something similar. That may not be the best idea, nor the easiest to implement depending on how the server code works, but its an idea. Skimming through the other posts, they've also got great ideas about choosing the best host out of a set of volunteers that have their connections tested. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
krisp Posted July 24, 2013 Share Posted July 24, 2013 I wasn't actually aware of this. It seems odd to have any online games be hosted by a client (due to modification of the client by the host). That seems like... a vulnerability... As far as hosting goes, if you knew you had a slow connection, such as mine currently, I wouldn't ever dream of trying to host this. However, if you had a faster connection/computer, you could setup a party before hand. You'd get 5 people in a group and start the raid, and let whoever else wants to join do so. As another poster said, the "who should host if this one isn't good enough" could be similar to the messages we get when we get the messages about host migration. There could be a small popup that appears only to the next potential host that says "do you agree to host this?" and if they say yes, use them. If the server gets thrown out of wack, then stick a mark on their account to put them at the end of the line for an unsuccessful host. The more games you host, the better your score, and keep track of it that way. Or something similar. That may not be the best idea, nor the easiest to implement depending on how the server code works, but its an idea. Skimming through the other posts, they've also got great ideas about choosing the best host out of a set of volunteers that have their connections tested. It's called a peer-to-peer system and it's been used in many games including Dark Souls and Modern Warfare 2. As for the numerous workarounds you propose: are they really worth it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mrhattu Posted July 24, 2013 Share Posted July 24, 2013 Host disconnected. Host migration in progress... "I ain't gonna wait that long!" Host migration in progress. . 9 players dropped. Pod has been killed. Fail at wave 4. You would need a dedicated server for that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
__Kanade__ Posted July 24, 2013 Share Posted July 24, 2013 (edited) Tenno only work in groups of 4, plus they're on the verge of extinction, so they prefer to operate in small groups. Edited July 24, 2013 by __Kanade__ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GeoDP Posted July 24, 2013 Share Posted July 24, 2013 YES YES YES and @(*()$ YES! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bakercompany86 Posted July 24, 2013 Share Posted July 24, 2013 We are most likely on a peer-to-peer system because of how expensive server space is, especially to accommodate the amount of players warframe has. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ariarch Posted July 24, 2013 Share Posted July 24, 2013 Yes please. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Venarge Posted July 24, 2013 Share Posted July 24, 2013 I would really love to hear from you who would host this. I mean. Srly. Who would host such a game.And well, screw all those who dont have awesome 1st world ethernet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bakercompany86 Posted July 24, 2013 Share Posted July 24, 2013 I would really love to hear from you who would host this. I mean. Srly. Who would host such a game. And well, screw all those who dont have awesome 1st world ethernet. If I could live in an area that allowed me to have Verizon FIOS or Google Gigabit Internet I'd host in a second. Hell I run dedicated WF servers. Sadly here in Arkansas, I have 12Mbps down and 4Mbps up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Venarge Posted July 24, 2013 Share Posted July 24, 2013 If I could live in an area that allowed me to have Verizon FIOS or Google Gigabit Internet I'd host in a second. Hell I run dedicated WF servers. Sadly here in Arkansas, I have 12Mbps down and 4Mbps up. So you would be on 24/7 to provide your over the top net to everyone in the world. Seems legit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weird_Stealth Posted July 24, 2013 Share Posted July 24, 2013 I would actually enjoy this kind of game mode/mission, me and my clan would be addicted to it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bakercompany86 Posted July 24, 2013 Share Posted July 24, 2013 So you would be on 24/7 to provide your over the top net to everyone in the world. Seems legit. You don't have to be physically present at the server for it to run.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
R3leaZ Posted July 24, 2013 Share Posted July 24, 2013 You don't have to be physically present at the server for it to run.... In this game you actually do. Since it doesn't use dedicated servers. Just peer-to-peer. Though it would be nice if there were a possibility for dedicated servers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now