Are devs aware of multiplayer discussion, moderators?

[Rhaikh]

I’m talking to TFP.  Listen, I know they just want to make the best game possible, I just want to see recognition that the record breaking player count they’re so proud of includes a lot of players doing something “unsupported” and in need of attention.  Lots of experienced admins here in this thread offering to help, and i just see them keep getting stonewalled

[meganoth]

10 hours ago, Rhaikh said:

I’m talking to TFP.  Listen, I know they just want to make the best game possible, I just want to see recognition that the record breaking player count they’re so proud of includes a lot of players doing something “unsupported” and in need of attention.  Lots of experienced admins here in this thread offering to help, and i just see them keep getting stonewalled

 

That depends on whether hiring a new programmer and giving him the task to look into it is sufficient or not in your view (isn't that what madmole said in this thread?). Analyzing the netcode and finding and testing solutions will take time.

 

I would assume that talking to the experienced admins would help a lot (and would be the sensible thing to do), but that surely won't happen here in the forum but in direct communication. So you will not see much unless you are one of the experienced admins they might contact. 

If everything works out well (i.e. the programmer actually finds solutions that don't break stuff elsewhere and those solutions don't need hundreds of complicated changes all over the codebase) then you and I will probably just see a few lines in the changelog from time to time about netcode changes and relatively big changes might not even land before A21.

 

From the outside it always seems surprising how long it takes for changes and features to reach the public. Notice how much time even a big company like Microsoft needs to fix seemingly small but critical bugs in their operating system or other software.

 

[Rhaikh]

Forgive me because I don’t share the optimism you find between the lines, I am still processing the barrage of “this is unsupported” literal statements 

[Urban Blackbear]

47 minutes ago, Rhaikh said:

Forgive me because I don’t share the optimism you find between the lines, I am still processing the barrage of “this is unsupported” literal statements 

 

Which part are you having trouble understanding specifically?

[Rhaikh]

2 hours ago, Urban Blackbear said:

 

Which part are you having trouble understanding specifically?

What is the roadmap for addressing the myriad issues plaguing 8+ player multiplayer?  Which issues are being prioritized?  Who is being consulted?  When can we expect any changes (it takes many months to ramp up a new developer on an existing project)?  Is any of this happening at all, or will the official line be "this is unsupported" forever (there is no explicit promise that 8+ player multiplayer will be the focus for the new developer)?

Edited January 14, 2022 by Rhaikh (see edit history)

[Urban Blackbear]

4 minutes ago, Rhaikh said:

What is the roadmap for addressing the myriad issues plaguing 8+ player multiplayer?  Which issues are being prioritized?  Who is being consulted?  When can we expect any changes (it takes many months to ramp up a new developer on an existing project)?  Is any of this happening at all, or will the official line be "this is unsupported" forever?

 

More than 8 players is not supported but they're hoping they can make grounds on that by hiring another network engineer. You can expect changes when and if they're ever ready.

[Rhaikh]

Just now, Urban Blackbear said:

 

More than 8 players is not supported but they're hoping they can make grounds on that by hiring another network engineer. You can expect changes when and if they're ever ready.

Please direct me to the post where they have explicitly said that they will support this in the future.

[Urban Blackbear]

Just now, Rhaikh said:

Please direct me to the post where they have explicitly said that they will support this in the future.

 

There isn't one.

[DiegoLBC1]

5 minutes ago, Urban Blackbear said:

 

There isn't one.

Certainty?

 

 

[Urban Blackbear]

2 minutes ago, DiegoLBC1 said:

Certainty?

 

 

 

That wasn't a promise and it certainly isn't a certainty. *shrugs* I don't care either way so I'm going to remove myself from this discussion now.

Edited January 14, 2022 by Urban Blackbear (see edit history)

[DiegoLBC1]

Just now, Urban Blackbear said:

 

That wasn't a promise and it certainly isn't a certainty. *shrugs* I don't care either way so I'm going to remove myself from this discussion now.

"explicitly said that they will support this in the future."

"hopefully optimizations will be robust enough for you guys to enjoy largerservers again."

It means that, at least, they haven't put the idea to sleep. I don't see this as a promise, but I'm sure they plan for it in the future.

[Roland]

On 1/9/2022 at 11:32 AM, Rhaikh said:

So are these customers getting any attention for the next build?

 

I doubt you will see anything for A20.1 as the new guys are still getting up to speed. It should also be noted that network improvements will be for the <8 customers since that is what is officially supported but hopefully whatever gains they make will also help the >8 customers as well.

 

On 1/9/2022 at 11:32 AM, Rhaikh said:

 Maybe you should disable max players above 8 to make it clear.

 

That is not how TFP operates. They are very open to allowing folks to mod the game. Setting things up to play with more than 8 players is basically modding what is default vanilla into something else. Whenever you mod the resulting performance and glitches that may happen are on you. They won't flat out disable anything above 8 just to sneer. They will simply continue to officially state that the game is supported for up to 8 players and allow players to choose how they want to play.

 

On 1/9/2022 at 11:32 AM, Rhaikh said:

Or perhaps offer a refund to everyone in this list.

 

On what grounds? That the game doesn't function well when in an altered state voluntarily jury-rigged by the customer all while it is still in development?

[DiegoLBC1]

1 minute ago, Roland said:

On what grounds? That the game doesn't function well when in an altered state voluntarily jury-rigged by the customer all while it is still in development?

I want refund. I can't host the game on my PC because CGNAT prevents my friends from connecting. TFP's fault for not having a solution..

[Roland]

15 hours ago, Rhaikh said:

I just want to see recognition that the record breaking player count they’re so proud of includes a lot of players doing something “unsupported”

 

Thank you for helping with the concurrent player count. We couldn't have reached our 70K record without your contribution. We are so pleased that people take advantage of the modability of the game to play it in all sorts of ways not always supported and we know that if we were to ever force everyone to only play the vanilla version of the game it would not have nearly the longevity it has had continuing to grow year after year. Thanks to all who play the game modded and to all the modders who create 7 Days to Die/alt for so many to enjoy.

 

12 minutes ago, DiegoLBC1 said:

"hopefully optimizations will be robust enough for you guys to enjoy largerservers again."

 

What this says to me is that they will be improving the netcode for sure to benefit their supported mp count and hopefully the improvements will be robust enough that it also benefits the larger server guys.

 

Basic outcome: Big improvements for 2-8 player games but not much help for 9-50 player games

Robust outcome: Big improvements for 2-8 player games and 9-50 player games are also able to function well enough for play

Godly outcome: Big improvements for 2-50 player games such that that becomes the new officially supported mp count.

Edited January 14, 2022 by Roland (see edit history)

[Rhaikh]

8 minutes ago, Roland said:

On what grounds? That the game doesn't function well when in an altered state voluntarily jury-rigged by the customer all while it is still in development?

2 minutes ago, Roland said:

 

Thank you for helping with the concurrent player count. We couldn't have reached our 70K record without your contribution. We are so pleased that people take advantage of the modability of the game to play it in all sorts of ways not always supported and we know that if we were to ever force everyone to only play the vanilla version of the game it would not have nearly the longevity it has had continuing to grow year after year. Thanks to all who play the game modded and to all the modders who create 7 Days to Die/alt for so many to enjoy.

You can set max players >8 without mods.  It's just that you need to use mods typically if you want to see that last at all...

I would much rather be discussing Howlune and giKoN's feedback than my own snark, but at least my snark revived this thread.

 

[DiegoLBC1]

6 minutes ago, Roland said:

What this says to me is that they will be improving the netcode for sure to benefit their supported mp count and hopefully the improvements will be robust enough that it also benefits the larger server guys.

 

 

Yeah, I agree. What I meant is that, while it's not a promise, it doesn't mean that the TFP is "shouldering" for it.

[theFlu]

1 hour ago, Roland said:

Big improvements for 2-50 player games such that that becomes the new officially supported mp count.

See, Roland promised that 50+ servers will be officially supported in a year!

[meganoth]

6 hours ago, Rhaikh said:

Forgive me because I don’t share the optimism you find between the lines, I am still processing the barrage of “this is unsupported” literal statements 

 

Optimism? I thought my main message was that whatever happens will take a lot of time. And I also hinted that it wasn't sure at all that there would come anything off it.

 

Naturally if you think Madmole was just lying/placating when he said they hired new programmer that will look into this issue, then yes, you are more pessimistic than I am.

 

 

 

2 hours ago, Rhaikh said:

You can set max players >8 without mods.  It's just that you need to use mods typically if you want to see that last at all...

I would much rather be discussing Howlune and giKoN's feedback than my own snark, but at least my snark revived this thread.

 

With us? We have nearly zero knowledge about the netcode. What is there to discuss and what would it achieve? I mean, sure, knowledge is always a good thing, but this is off broadway here. I doubt those new engineers tasked with looking at the net code will frequent the forum and start discussing the code (but I could be wrong here, for example Faatal is very forthcoming with internals, usually new hires at some place are shy though and don't know how much info they can give out)

 

Edited January 14, 2022 by meganoth (see edit history)

[Rhaikh]

6 minutes ago, meganoth said:

Naturally if you think Madmole was just lying/placating when he said they hired new programmer that will look into this issue, then yes, you are more pessimistic than I am.

He didn't say they would look into anything specific.  "optimizations" could mean anything.  In the next sentence he's talking about FPS drops.

[meganoth]

24 minutes ago, Rhaikh said:

He didn't say they would look into anything specific.  "optimizations" could mean anything.  In the next sentence he's talking about FPS drops.

 

Well the context was definitely the netcode. And part of your problem is FPS because of unoptimized network traffic if I understand correctly. For example gikon was talking about unneccessary world update packages that could be optimized away. This looks to me a quite promising avenue for optimizations.

 

There was no word on whether they will also work on PvP and exploit security and to me those problems look to be massively more problematic and to hope for a complete solution there is utopic in my view. 

Am I wrong in thinking that just one working exploit would make fixes for all the other exploits nearly useless? And seeing what problems other much larger companies have with exploit-prevention I don't see 7D2D ever get really exploit-free, especially since too much processing seems to happen on the client and I doubt this can easily all be moved back to the server.

 

But on the other hand the stuff I don't know about the game's code could fill libraries 😁

 

 

 

 

Edited January 14, 2022 by meganoth (see edit history)

[Rhaikh]

30 minutes ago, meganoth said:

I don't see 7D2D ever get really exploit-free

The room for improvement could also fill libraries, and since this is a popular way people use the game I think it's worthwhile to improve.  The game code itself doesn't need to be perfect, it just needs to be good enough to allow admins to do their job moderating their servers.  The efficient way to get there is to to leverage the experience and suggestions from admins like giKoN and others.  Start a dialog, respond to their feedback in detail, prioritize action items & bug reports.

[Brian9824]

I thought its pretty clear.  The servers aren't meant for more then 8 atm.  That doesn't mean it won't work, but its not going to be supported.  As the game is optimized and improved upon hopefully it will be able to support more but its never going to be guaranteed even if its a goal they'd like to hit.  I'm sure TFP want them to be able to support as much as possible, plus i'm sure with what they know now they'd do a lot of things in a different manner.  

 

I'm sure some of their decisions aren't the most optimal performance wise and could have been done better knowing what they do now.  That is the nature of programming sadly.  

[Ripflex]

On 12/24/2021 at 11:01 AM, madmole said:

We have some new engineers coming on board in January hopefully optimizations will be robust enough for you guys to enjoy larger servers again.

In the meantime, have you tried disabling the new dynamic meshes? I imagine 50 castles being erected at the same time and viewable from miles away could cause a hit in performance.

 

Can you guys describe how you play the game with 50 players? Is it pvp... or coop? Is it a large building community? What is the typical use case for servers this large? How many total players and how many are online when you start seeing FPS drops?

 

New engineers coming, that's sounds great.

 

I'm happy to describe 50 players online.   First I play on SDGamers and their servers are set on 64, although usually 24 - 32 or so play concurrently.  And it's vanilla with only an automated server reboot every 6 hours.  Why the reboot is mainly the Client to server Desyncing gets bad, and guessing memory leaking (almost like the old ARMA 2 Dayz MOD days kinda desyncs).   The servers are Co-OP and players usually set up vending spots and trade openly as well helping out new players.  The Admins jump on and play and often build a free-for-all Horde night base out of DEV blocks I assume.

 

If you guys were able to just get 7 days to die running 24 player stable, it would be a huge boon.  You be surprised how many players love playing together.

[Cragz UK]

On 1/15/2022 at 6:25 AM, Ripflex said:

 

New engineers coming, that's sounds great.

 

I'm happy to describe 50 players online.   First I play on SDGamers and their servers are set on 64, although usually 24 - 32 or so play concurrently.  And it's vanilla with only an automated server reboot every 6 hours.  Why the reboot is mainly the Client to server Desyncing gets bad, and guessing memory leaking (almost like the old ARMA 2 Dayz MOD days kinda desyncs).   The servers are Co-OP and players usually set up vending spots and trade openly as well helping out new players.  The Admins jump on and play and often build a free-for-all Horde night base out of DEV blocks I assume.

 

If you guys were able to just get 7 days to die running 24 player stable, it would be a huge boon.  You be surprised how many players love playing together.

 

This is exactly what its like on the server I have been playing on.. on & off for a couple of years. They've switched providers and everything so its clear game limitations. During the day there is around 10 players peaking around 30 max and even with low player numbers the servers soon start crash. They have gone from 4hr auto restarts to restarts every 2hrs with a 20 min daily downtime for full server back ups and it still crashes. I can be merrily playing along and then I start a large POI and the zombies spawn in very late and server starts to struggle. Zombies will start to run on the spot and you the server is going to crash.

 

This has led to many wipes on this server but also roll backs. They just had to do another 2 day rollback tonight so people loose loot and large portions of the bases. Personally along with some more optimisation to support 8+ player multiplayer they should hard code none poi building height limits so players cannot build these stupid sky high sniper towers.