SylenThunder

May 12, 2018

i'm using Windows 8 which doesn't support that specific version.

https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/help/3186539/the-microsoft-net-framework-4-7-for-windows-8-1-windows-rt-8-1-and-win

If you aren't on 8.1, there is no help. You should be on 8.1 though. That version of 4.7 is for 8.1.

May 1, 2018

I....
I made some links go to a new tab/window now. The authentication stuff I'll keep same page, since it redirects you back after.

Kinda neat is what I was going for! ^^

The add discord link doesn't redirect back.

Also, I've noticed that teleports created on one server, are not able to be created on another server. Error that the teleport name is in use already. Probably just something to do with how the data is stored. Did some testing and had a friend start another account, and they were also unable to create teleports with the same names as teleports I had created previously. After renaming the original teleport, a new teleport was able to be created with that name.

Steps to reproduce.

1. Create teleport on Server 1 named "baseadmin"

2. Attempt to create teleport on Server 2 named "baseadmin"

3. Receive error that teleport cannot be created because the name already exists.

I can pull more data from server logs later if you need it.

April 17, 2018

I had only tested the documents and the Discord links, but any others that take you off-site should be done as well.

- - - Updated - - -

Oh, and so far the manager is kinda neat. I haven't tested much outside of ticketing and teleport though.

April 15, 2018

Small recommendation. Have links that take you off the main catalysmservermanager.xyz site open in a new tab/window, or nest them in an iframe.

April 15, 2018

I look forward to giving this one a try.

February 9, 2018

Why All This Lag? Part Deux

This is a funny list I made once for the possible causes of a high ping to the server and disconects. Each of these items has actually happened at least once to someone I've helped.

You don't have the .exe files for the client set to run as administrator.
You don't have the game directory set as an exception in your antivirus/security software.
Your network adapter driver is out of date and needs to be refreshed.
Your local area network settings are improperly configured.
You have more than one firewall and don't realize it. (Common with some modems.)
Your firewall settings are too strict. (VERY common with Norton360, ZoneAlarm, and Commodo firewall.)
Your router is configured improperly. (Or it's just a cheap router that can't handle the traffic you're putting on it.)
You have a bad network cable.
You're using a wireless network connection. (Which leads to another huge list of possible issues.)
You have a lot of traffic on your local network that is bogging your router/modem down. (All that streaming media eats up bandwidth ya know.)
There's a fault in your router.
There's a fault in your modem.
You have a bad phone cord plugged into your modem.
There's an issue with your house wiring.
There's an issue with your outside wiring.
A squirrel chewed on your phone/cable line at the pole and it's raining. (I have personally had this happen.)
A switch/router at the CO for your ISP is having an issue.
One of the many hubs between you and PWI is having an issue. (Most common)
There is heavy sunspot activity. (Has happened within the past three years)
There's a regional router outage. (This has happened more than a few times. More often occurs with trunk lines crossing large bodies of water)

That's just a few. Sometimes, the easiest fix is something like shutting down your Modem/Router/PC for three minutes and then bringing them back up. Usually, I'll take the time to additionally perform a static discharge on my PC.

7 Ways to Improve the Wi-Fi Signal In Your Home

Wi-Fi problems got you down? Don’t worry, you’re not the only one. All kinds of issues can prevent you from connecting to your wireless network, from the construction of your house to interference from your neighbors and even just old equipment.

So how can you speed up your home wireless network? We’ve assembled some tips and tricks to help you diagnose and solve some of the most common Wi-Fi problems.

1. Router placement is key

Where you place your router in your home makes a huge difference in signal quality, Entrepreneur.com says. Avoid placing the router in corner rooms, or worse yet, your basement. The more walls, piping, or ducting the signal passes through, the weaker the signal is going to be. The router should be placed as close to the center of the room as possible for optimal performance.

Radio signals should be able to make it through walls without much problem, but if you’re in a room with thick walls, expect to have trouble connecting even with a router close by.

2. Dual band router? Use it!

Many routers come with both 2.4GHz and 5GHz Wi-Fi connectivity. USA Today recommends you use the 5GHz band whenever possible. With so many wireless networks out there, and Bluetooth becoming more common (it, too, operates in the 2.4GHz band), there is a lot of interference for your router to overcome at times.

We recommend you use the 5GHz band for video streaming and gaming, as data speeds are slightly faster. The 2.4GHz band should work well enough for everyday web use though.

3. Does everybody need to be wireless?

As more and more Wi-Fi enabled devices are added to the network, your router will slow the connection speeds of everyone to ensure all devices have enough bandwidth to connect, B&H Photo & Video says. If this is happening, consider networking the old fashioned way.

Devices closest to the router should be connected via ethernet cable rather than through Wi-Fi. Almost all Wi-Fi routers include at least two — and usually four — wired ethernet jacks. Yes, it’s not as pretty, but your wireless speeds should improve, not to mention those jacked-in devices will be cruising.

4. Lock it down!

B&H also brings up another good point, and that’s wireless security. Lock your wireless network down with a password. Anyone can connect to a password-free network, and mooch off of your Internet (i.e., clog up your bandwidth). It’s also a security risk, as hackers may be able to access data on improperly secured devices, PCWorld warns. If you have the option for “public access” (i.e., an open access version of your network that allows guests to connect without a password, but not access the main network), turn it off. Just give your trusted guests your password when they need to connect to the Internet.

Note: I recently got an email from AT&T stating I was torrenting movies. Turns out they pushed an upgrade which forced the guest wifi mode on, and someone was borrowing my network. There's more to worry about than just your local data.

5. Consider linking routers together

Even with proper placement, large homes or older buildings may have trouble with getting Wi-Fi to reach everywhere. MakeUseOf recommends linking two routers together in order to increase range. There are a few negatives of doing so, such as the fact that you may need to connect the second router via ethernet cable to the original one, but if you’re having problems getting Wi-Fi signals to your entire home, it may be the only option.

6. Maybe it’s time to upgrade

Wi-Fi routers are real workhorses, often operating almost continuously for years without issues. But like any electronic device, they’ll eventually wear out and begin to fail. ITProPortal points out that there’s other benefits to getting a new router: new wireless technologies. Especially if you’ve upgraded a lot of your gadgets and computers recently, there’s a good chance that a years-old router isn’t able to take advantage of the newer wireless technologies that are available.

Of course, sometimes all you’ll need to do is reset the router to fix slowness — but if that doesn’t work, maybe you’ve outgrown the capabilities of the router itself.

7. Try a better antenna

Some wireless routers allow you to replace the stock antennas with better ones, Yahoo reports. There are a variety of options for those routers that can, just make sure they’re compatible with your router. Buyer beware: Try to buy these better antennas from the companies themselves rather than ones made by a third-party that are “compatible” with your router. Sometimes the quality of these antennas found on eBay and other sites are quite low.

Source

February 9, 2018

Why All This Lag?

WHY ALL THIS LAG?

First off, we're going to define the most common complaint, LAG.

Urban Dictionary said:

not to be confused with latency (the time it takes to send a packet to and recieve a response packet from a server along a network), lag is impaired computer functionality (slow application responses or reduced/choppy framerates) resulting from high latency, packet loss, or low-preformance (generally video) hardware

So you can see, it's a pretty broad term, and can be easily confused. As a result, we won't use it in this context. We're going to separate "Lag" as "Latency" relating to a delay in the data transmission across the internet, and "FPS" as relating to the slowness of your PC to keep up.

This is an older article, but it explains a bit the different between Lag (latency) and low FPS.

Lag vs FPS

Also...

How to get rid of Lag guide.

Now that we've cleared that up, we're going to get on with Latency, which is the real cause for the slow responses from the servers, and your disconnections.

Now where where everyone gets really stupid. (No offense is meant here. Really.) Most people seem to think there's some magical connection between the port on their computer, and the port directly attached to the server. This Is Wrong.

Your data takes several stops between your PC and the server. Each stop is a cause for latency in the signal.

Oh, almost forgot, you guys may not know what Latency is yet...

Urban Dictionary said:

Latency is a term used for the time it takes for a packet of data to be sent by an application, travel to and be received by another application. Higher latency means longer time taken, meaning more delay of the requested action.

So, each step your data takes has a chance to slow it down. And it's not just your data either, if it's a regional router hub, it's handling the data for many millions of people.

So let's break this down with a sample traceroute...

I have my network sitting behind another network, then it goes to my ISP and off to the servers. Here's the path...

Tracert to Server said:

D:\PWI\PWI~Files>tracert pwigc2.perfectworld.com

Tracing route to pwigc2.perfectworld.com [66.151.133.71]

over a maximum of 16 hops:

1 1 ms <1 ms <1 ms 192.168.15.1 My Router

2 <1 ms <1 ms <1 ms 192.168.1.254 My Gateway

3 11 ms 10 ms 9 ms 76.250.208.2 My ISP

4 * * * Request timed out. Regional Gateway

5 * * * Request timed out. Regional Gateway

6 * * * Request timed out. Regional Gateway

7 12 ms 11 ms 11 ms 12.83.32.169 Regional Gateway

8 69 ms 69 ms 69 ms 12.122.85.85 Regional Gateway

9 69 ms 69 ms 70 ms 12.91.70.6 Regional Gateway

10 70 ms 72 ms 71 ms 66.151.144.80 Regional Gateway

11 71 ms 72 ms 71 ms 64.95.143.190 PWE's ISP

12 72 ms 72 ms 72 ms 66.151.133.71 Server*

Trace complete.

* You're not actually hitting the server itself, this is just a load-balancing firewall. The actual server consists of an array of blades. Each one is an individual set of instances. But I digress...

Now, each of those stops is a point of failure. The larger the number is, the higher the latency.

In my example hops 4, 5, and 6 have a * instead of a number. This means that the packets were dropped. In this particular case, I happen to know that it's because they don't return ping requests, and not because there's any issue. However it could just as easily be because the latency is so high, that the tool stopped waiting for a response. When that occurs, you will typically see much higher numbers on the other side of it.

If you look at this example, you can see where there is an issue with packets being lost and high latency.

Tracert to Heavens Tear said:

D:\PWI\PWI~Files>tracert -h 16 pwieast1.perfectworld.com

Tracing route to pwieast1.perfectworld.com [74.201.183.20]

over a maximum of 16 hops:

1 <1 ms <1 ms <1 ms 192.168.15.1

2 1 ms <1 ms <1 ms 192.168.1.254

3 10 ms 10 ms 10 ms 76-250-208-2.lightspeed.livnmi.sbcglobal.net [76.250.208.2]

4 * * * Request timed out.

5 * * * Request timed out.

6 * * * Request timed out.

7 12 ms 10 ms 11 ms 12.83.32.129

8 21 ms 19 ms 19 ms ggr4.cgcil.ip.att.net [12.122.133.33]

9 * * 330 ms chi-bb1-link.telia.net [213.248.87.253]

10 404 ms 422 ms 411 ms nyk-bb1-link.telia.net [80.91.246.163]

11 189 ms 203 ms 220 ms nyk-b6-link.telia.net [80.91.254.32]

12 266 ms 272 ms 297 ms internap-ic-150761-nyk-b5.c.telia.net [213.248.81.150]

13 315 ms 333 ms 351 ms border1.pc1-bbnet1.nyj001.pnap.net [216.52.95.9]

Trace complete.

In this example, I took multiple samples and it showed that the Regional Router at Hop 9 was having some issues. It's spiking on latency, and is often dropping packets.

In this example, hop 13 is the Regional router before PWE's ISP, 14 is the ISP, and 15 is the firewall.

So, in this example, where is PWE to blame? Can the blame be put on your network connection or ISP?

Nope it's neither!. It's completely outside of anyone's control.

In this particular example an extremely large number of people were getting disconnected and were experiencing high latency.

Of course they were. Look a the latency on all those Routers in the big New York hub. That's nothing wrong with the servers or PWE's connection. Though it could be argued that the pnap servers are partially PWE's fault since PWE uses that company for distribution balancing of the data.

Common causes for latency...

Your End

The World

PWE

You're using Wireless

There's a lot of streaming traffic on your local network.

You have a bad cable going from the wall to the modem.

There's a fault in the in-house wiring.

There's a fault in the wiring from your house to the pole.

There's a fault in the wiring to the CO of your ISP.

There's a fault at the CO of your ISP.

There's a fault at a Regional Hub in-between your ISP and their ISP.

There's a fault at their ISP.

There's a fault at their local network/computer.

Now, just looking at the colors, you can see where the majority of the fault is going to lie. I can safely say that 98% of the time someone complains about latency, and provides me with data to track it down.., I find that the fault is either on their end, or with a regional hub. Of those, the majority is the regional hubs; particularly intersections at major undersea trunk lines.

January 22, 2018

So is there cars or trucks in 7 days to die if so will it be on ps4

It will happen when one of the following things occur.

Consoles get better hardware where it matters, instead of where it doesn't. (most recent update was just GPU.)
The Unity Engine gets optimized on the console platform better, so that it requires fewer resources.

You have to understand, that the main reason the console is missing the stuff the PC has is because it does not have the hardware to support it. This is covered in great detail in the Console General Discussion forum sticky thread.

Finally, no one will be able to tell you when something is going to happen. Unless that is, It's already been announced in the Announcements Forum.

January 13, 2018

just to point out, i think unreal engine would of been the smarter choice, i have seen it used in a lot of popular games and and i have played many games that has used this engine since i was kid.

But there's the rub. U4 isn't designed for a fully destructible voxel terrain. You would have to create a plugin for it. In the end, you're going to have an engine piggybacked onto an engine that is doing exactly what Unity is doing right now for the same or worse resource use.

And again, a lot (as in 99.8%) of games before this are not true 3D voxel games. All of them have considerably less hardware and computing requirements because they are not actual 3D. I again refer you to the links in #2 of my above post.

January 12, 2018

How in the world does a title such as Ark have that capability but 7DTD cannot?

Your using the same Engine O_O... It it just lack of optimization? What is blocking this from happening? Even the ability to have a small server would be nice.. Doesn't have to be 100 players. Its just insane that a game As polished as Ark is visually is capable. I said visually we all know the ridiculous glitches.. But the system supports it perfectly.

1. They are completely different engines. Arc runs on Unreal Engine 4. 7 Days to Die runs on Unity.

2. Ark isn't a 3D Voxel game. The differences are covered in great detail here, and here.

January 5, 2018

For console it hasn't really been updated. On the PC side, Unity has been getting a lot of updates. In fact, the version TFP is updating a17 for on the PC has some really serious improvements to the voxel calculations. I have high hopes that they will be able to add a large number of features, yet be able to reduce the overall requirements for them.

As for developing out of the box, when TFP first started this, Unity was still rather new. At that time, it was showing immense customization and for a new game engine, showed considerable promise. It still does in fact. It's way easier to use a built platform that will do what you wish, than to build another from the ground up. Cheaper too. For what they envisioned, at the time they were starting, Unity was the only real valid choice to use.

Yes, changing engines would be very costly. You would basically have to re-build everything from the ground up. Which is why TTG/IG stuck with Unity on the console. One thing that is very possible though, is that the changes we saw for PC Unity in 2017 will be coming to the console version this year. If so, we're going to be seeing some serious changes in the future here. I would most definitely hope that it will allow for split-screen mp, and for mp games to host up to 8 players stock.

January 5, 2018

@Gazz why did fun pimps go with Telltale games in the 1st place? why not have gone for a larger publisher which would have had larger funding & resources dedicated to 7D2D which in turn could of made this a bigger success.

I believe Telltale came to the Pimps in this case.

IMHO, it would be a lot bigger success if Unity was better optimized/developed for the console. The console hardware just can't keep up in the state it's in right now. It's not like this wasn't a known issue before hand either, as almost every Unity port to the console previous to 7DTD has sucked.

December 26, 2017

How different is minecraft? That game allows 8 as I recall. Crafting is different but otherwise it has same basic block system.

And I still think the world is too big.

Minecraft doesn't have any SI calculations, and the texture resolution is quite a bit lower than 7 Days. It should also be noted that it runs on a different/simpler engine, and that the height map had to be reduced to get it to function like they wanted for the consoles.

Additionally consider that the average map data size for Minecraft is only about 1GB, where a map for 7DTD can be closer to 30GB. Given that the Minecraft map is capable of a 50k diameter, and 7DTD only has a 10k diameter on PC, you can see where there is a huge difference is the amount of data being stored. (I forget what the console RWG map size is, but I think it's about 2.5k.)

December 25, 2017

Yes, the height map is from bedrock to the upper limit. Bedrock counts as it's 1-2 blocks thick. (Don't recall exactly, it's been a while since I punched through it.)

Sadly, no we cannot mod that part of it. Well not on the console for sure. At a glance on the PC, it's not possible via editing the xml data. Not sure about editing the assets. (PC xml data shows Bedrock as 3 layers though. Will have to test this later.)

However, your theory of reducing/limiting the heightmap could possibly reduce the load. Air doesn't require much at all in the way of calculations, so it would only really work in regards to the bedrock /water table limit. Yes, that would absolutely kill underground dwellers, but let's take a quick look at the change.

I want to try something easily quantifiable/comparable, so we'll try reducing the height map by 10%. Rounding, that means we need to raise bedrock 26 meters. So now bedrock is at -31, and the heightmap is reduced to 225 meters. (If you weren't already aware. 1 block is 1 meter³) The same amount of sky space is still available.

Running the formula we used above, that brings the loaded blocks for the initial pass to 7,068,584. Change as moving is dumping and reloading comes to 240,210. So as you are moving, that's about a thousand fewer blocks that are being processed.

At a glance, this seems to be a pretty large difference. However when you look at the overall, you're only making a difference of maybe 0.5% in the amount of processing that is required to be done as you move throughout the world. The only real boost here is going to be on the initial load time being reduced by about 12%.

Something else to keep in mind is that these numbers are arbitrary wholes. Calculations for Air are likely almost nothing, so the actual block calculations will vary based on the number of solid blocks being loaded. Lower elevations with fewer buildings being less costly than higher elevations. They will still count in the initial pass, but will be ignored in calculations like SI, lighting, and textures. We also haven't taken into account weather, sounds, the player, zombies, or a multitude of other things. Mainly because the biggest reason for taxing the hardware is the blocks themselves. Which is what all your other games are missing.

So we come back to the crutch. More players means more block calculations. Sure, if all the players are within a few meters of each other less has to be calculated. However, you have to plan for what is the most that can possibly happen when you are setting the limitations. You could have a console doing nothing but hosting the map data, but it's still going to be limited by the same hardware limitations. If you could completely remove the other client calculations and offset them onto the active player consoles, you're still only going to maybe be able to get your MP limit up to 5 on current console hardware.

Here's more numbers for thought. (Also, I'm going to ignore the 12GB the XB1X has, because we aren't making a separate build for one single platform.)

RAM Usage

System: 3 to 3.5GB
7DTD Client: Approximately 1.5GB^*
Each additional player: 1GB^*
Total RAM used: 4 to 4.5GB SP, 5 to 8GB MP*
Total System RAM: 8GB

^* This is idle. As you explore, and changes are made to SI, this number can fluctuate greatly. A SP game with a large building collapsing will completely overload the 8GB RAM.

Food for thought.

December 25, 2017

That's just it though. The game world is exactly what is eating up all the resources. Again, you guys are not understanding why a true 3D voxel game is SO much more demanding.

For the active region chunk that each player is in, the following things are being calculated through the CPU and RAM.

Every single 1m block from bedrock to the sky limit.
The individual material properties of each of these blocks.
The Structural Integrity of each block, plus adjacent attachments on all 6 sides.
The texture being applied to each block, and sending visible block data to the GPU.
Inventory data on each container block.
Growth timers for plants.
Additional timers for forges, workbenches, and other workstations.
Electricity and minibike information if it exists.

I think that covers everything.

Now, if you figure that the active chunk area is a 100m radius, and the height map is 256m.

Figuring the volume of the cylinder will roughly tell you how many total blocks are in focus.

V=πr²h=π·100²·256≈8.04248×10⁶

So basically for every player the client is performing calculations on 8,042,478 blocks initially when the player logs in.

As you move, it's removing the blocks that fall out of range, and adding the blocks that fall into range in segments.

If we calculate a segment as 3 blocks in depth, using the circumference of 628, we get one face of the cylinder as follows.

Face = (Circumference·3·h)\2 = (628·3·256)\2 ≈ 241,152

So now, as you move, you are removing 241,152 from RAM, and performing calculations on the 241,152 that are being loaded.

Now this is optimized somewhat in the code, but you should be starting to see some of the issues.

Games like Ark are only loading flat textures, a bump map, and the data for objects and entities in visible range. They aren't loading 8 million one meter blocks. Which is why you absolutely cannot compare 7Days with other game titles. They are so completely different it is not even funny.

This is covered to some extent here, and it seems to be the one thing almost no one realizes, or wants to acknowledge.

December 7, 2017

Don't know if this is related to the mod itself, but maybe somebody here can help.

I built my base in a little town. Next to the town, there is a trade. I have bought and sold a few things, closed the door. The next day I wanted to sell things again, but it was closed and teleported when I have tried to open the door - though it was daytime.
I have tried it again on the next day - same problem.

Could he be dead? Or is that some kind of bug?

Thanks!

This is a game bug, and not directly related to the mod. If you reset the region file, that usually fixes it. Or you can re-spawn the trader.

November 26, 2017

You could set a cron job that runs periodically to start them back up again.

I think the crontab text would be like...

5  *  *  *  * sdtd  7dtd.sh start "!"

That should have cron start all instances every 5 minutes. If they are already up, nothing happens.

You could set up a task to see if they are up, and do nothing if they are. Then run the startup command if they are not. Then set that task to be run by cron. That's beyond my current ability though.

November 21, 2017

In regards to the LCB's, you can adjust how hardened they make things in the server options.

You could also mod the explosives to deal greater block damage.

I would also like to point out that it's "Nerd poling", not Nerf.

October 20, 2017

Seems more like laziness. Its fine to not want to risk the money on console, but saying the consoles cant handle it is pretty asinine. Especially considering a game like Ark has this feature. Dedicated servers everywhere. I know this game is "big" and it has a lot of features, but Ark is bigger with many more complicated mechanics, runs fine on ps4.

So if the devs just dont want to do it because of financial reasons, great thats fine. Making excuses however, thats dumb.

Read this Sticky thread. Ark doesn't compare at all to 7DTD for hardware resource requirements when it comes to CPU and RAM. This is the reason most of your statement is completely invalid. I explain it in intricate detail in that sticky.

This is what most people don't understand at all. Games like Ark are mostly GPU-intensive. 7DTD hardly uses the GPU at all, because all the work with the 3D models is handled by the CPU and RAM.

I mean, which requires more processing? A static landscape where only the surface is drawn in flat textures, or a full 3D landscape where every 1 meter block from the bottom to the sky within the loaded chunk is calculated with full 3D texture support on each individual block?

It really doesn't take a genius to figure that out. The latter requires quite a bit more processing than the former.

September 14, 2017

One is not needed currently that I am aware of.

September 4, 2017

What's the cost of setting up dedicated servers? Is it something that could be crowd-funded?

I covered this in a couple of the earlier threads.

...
Say a dedicated server costs $10 a month to run. Now you'll have, at most, 8-player co-op. (This isn't Ark, Battlefield, COD, or GTA, this is a co-op survival game.) Say we have 500,000 players worldwide who want to use these dedicated servers. We'll call an average and divide that by 6 since not every server is going to be at the full capacity of 8 players, and 4 can be managed locally. That's 83,334 servers required. Now add 25% for expansion, and you have 104,167. We'll just round that up to 105k. So you need to host 105k servers at $10 a server, that comes out to 1,050,000.
So basically, at a minimum, the company is going to have to shell out a bit over a million dollars a month just for the hardware to give this to you.
That doesn't even count the cost of developing the back end, or making it so that your lackluster console hardware is capable of keeping track of 8 people without overheating/crashing.

And if you want to go throw the "well Ark can do X", go read this. Then go take a look at this. Give it a few for reality to set in.
This game wasn't even originally intended to be multi-player. (source)
....

The problem is that the consoles already struggle with 4 players.
Yah, but that's playing as a non-dedicated server.
A dedicated one wouldn't have to run a client or render anything.

How much the gain would be? No idea. I'm no hardware guy.
Theoretically, it wouldn't be much more difficult than running a dedi is for the PC.

But the caveat, is that you would have to go through MS and Sony. As someone stated earlier somewhere, good luck getting them to allow random guy to connect his private server to their network.

The costs I listed was low-balling it assuming the hardware is already in place to support it. The initial cost for the hardware would be extreme.
Assuming TTG/IG don't have a datacenter that can handle the load, you're looking at a big build. Facilities would be a few million to set up. We'll include the network in that just to make things easier. Add $8,000-12,000 per blade. Each blade would likely be capable of supporting 20 or 30 virtual game servers. Based on that, you're looking at about 5,000 blade servers. Then you'll need backup and redundancy systems so double that number. If you low-ball it, that's about 80,000,000. I'm sure you can get a discount buying in bulk. Or maybe just lease a datacenter.

Then, once it's all set up, who "owns" your little dedicated servers? Are they offered for free? Are the rented by players? How many players do you know that will repeatedly shell out $10-20 a month for a dedicated server? Planning and statistics will need to be done on all this before it's even considered.
I can already see the outcry when it is offered, and players are expected to pay for the ability to use it.

I'm not saying it's a bad idea. Just outlining that it's not nearly as easy as so many of you guys asking for it think. And we get a new thread with a new person asking every few days. If I caught them fast enough, they'd just get merged into one massive thread.

September 4, 2017

RAM on the consoles is borderline. Minimum recommended is 8GB, and that's what they have.

CPU is a real killer also. It doesn't even meet the minimum required specification.

I detail the specs quite a bit in this sticky post.

At the current state of the game, you would need about 12GB to get up to 6 players.

Once Unity is more developed/optimized for the consoles, it's possible you might see 6 players. It's still going to be difficult with a hard limit on the RAM though.

September 3, 2017

Sylen i was wondering if it would be posible to make it so we could "share" a save. So the save was hosted by the player first online. Its hard to explain for me so i will give an example.
Me and a friend plays a save together, with me as the host. He would love to continue playing when i'm not on. If we could somehow share the save he could host the game when he was on first and when i was on first i could host the save. That way we both could play when we are on and not only when i am on.

Would that be technically posible at all?

Technically possible, sure.

Will it ever happen, unlikely. This is mostly due to the way console work in general, rather than a lack of effort put into it.

This is why we need hosted servers you can rent.

I think we should be able to have at least 6 people in an online session because I have more than 4 friends and I can't play with all of them at once. I was wondering if there was any talk of increasing the amount of players who can join a session?

Not sure why you started a new thread. I can only think that you must not have done much looking around first. Moved it over here for you.

Feel free to take a look at the data I collected for you already that is at the top of this thread.

August 31, 2017

Ok, was going to try using --branch too, but work happened and I haven't been able to get back to it.

August 31, 2017

Might be Steam being slow?

Having some trouble updating dedi.

Sign In

Profiles

Forums

Store

Articles

A20 Bugs

A21 Bugs

Events

Posts posted by SylenThunder