CS:S in Texas, Rented

[Fatty]

I have put a proposal on the board table that we do the following:

 

Change #1, #2, #3 to 20(23) man servers and open an Aim2Game #4 server in Texas, which would be either a normal server or a scopeless server, but for the majority, unmodded.

 

Reducing the size of servers will counteract the loss of demand when we offer another server, and it will also naturally increase server performance. This server can be put into the rotation with no problem.

 

Input is welcome.

 

LA positions are being discussed, if you are interested, let me know. Previous #4 LA do not own this position and must reapply if they are interested.

[Brillow_Head]

Agree, lower the player slots keeps demand high.

 

Ill make the suggestion to keep make it an AWPless server and advertise as such. We might drawn in a more diversified crowd or even mingle some of our scopeless regs with stock regs. I think it would be a happy medium.

 

Now, what rotation would this server be in 1-2-3-4 ,1-4-2-3, 1-3-4-2 etc?

[Kilzugud]

its deffinately worth tryin out for a cpl months. once people know its there then we should be good. i think the biggest thing that keeps these servers from bein as full as number #1 & #2 is just the people. everybody pretty much knows the majority of the players and its hard to get those people to venture into other servers that have a different crowd. so if we can get people to just try it out, we might be able to fill er up.

[ScubaDan]

I agree with Brillow re: being AWPless, but leaving all other weapons in play. Should be a nice mix of scopes/no-scopes that might appeal to both communities.

[anonymo]

Sounds like a great idea! I've been craving some auto-sniping ever since the update left scopeless less than, well scopeless...it will hopefully allow us scopeless people to play with all those stockies...and with no awp I'll have a chance to keep up with urk?!?

[Vovik]

well, I thought 24 is a perfect size for most maps. It's still a little short for larger maps. 20 is obviously even less, so I'm not sure, but I won't complain too much if we try it out. No harm

[Fatty]

Think quality, not quantity. :-D

 

It will be even easier to foster teamplay this way. One more step toward l337ness supreme.

 

I mean, the reduction is many-fold....lots of reason, but we can discuss.

[Fatty]

PS. I like the awpless idea...will look nice in our css portfolio

[shep48]

I think the server downsize is a good move. When is it to be expected? mapnight will be all gc

[akaM2]

20 is perfect imo, we have 2 pubs with xt(one free and one running out the last weeks of its life) 1 is 18man and 1 is 20. when i go between gc and those 2 servers i enjoy 20 the most. having less people like fatty said lets people gather there team quicker and run better strats.

 

trust me you will like it.

[Fatty]

It's actually going to be a happy medium. I bought an offer on 25 slot servers, 4 of em...so we'll be running 4 x 22(25).

[stutters]

82 thread views later and not an objection to the reduced slot idea. i agree, i think it will help build a stronger community through better strats and teamwork.

 

but why texas?

 

http://www.frappr.com/gamerscoalition

i'm looking at the map for the gaps, not concentration. server stability aside, there didn't seem to be much interest in texas when we tried it the first time, especially from community members. the server in los angeles has good pings for people from texas (ask WhiteyFord), up to wyoming (regular DNA), and through northern california. i occassionally see people pop in from the northern states (oregon, washington), too. the west, especially southwest, is pretty well covered.

 

but what about the northwest? a server in seattle would give us coverage to the rest of the nortwestern states, plus extend up into canada, and maybe even draw from alaska. gc could effectively blanket the entire west coast. this would basically give most of the us (and north) access to a gc server, regardless of where they're at. a new server, a new region, new community members. i think it's a full on win.

 

laz.e.rus came to mind as an LA candidate soon as i saw this thread. we've already talked about it, and he's interested in it, assuming the community is interested in putting a server here. we've tested a private server with a2g, and pings won't be an issue. execution is something to think about.

 

fatty, you discouraged me from setting up west as a scopeless server when we first moved there. i think that was the right decision, and big factor in drawing people in. with a lack of an existing community up there, it might be a gamble to throw a non stock server up in an unconquered territory.

 

two, maybe three seattle counter offers to throw out there:

 

1. ask a2g for a 2-for-1 server special, just for a month. run 2 servers, one stock, one awpless. at the end of the month, decide which server to keep (with server traffic in mind).

 

2. start a stock server with the plan to change it to awpless after a month, once traffic and awareness gets out there.

 

3. start awpless, but with several members willing to commit to making #4 their new home. when fatty and duke pledged to play on west when we first opened, this was the other factor that made it work.

 

short answer: i think going to 20 is a good idea. two thumbs up.

 

*edit* took me a while to type, fatty posted as i was typing. 22 works, too.

Edited December 9, 2005 by stuttering.john

[Laz.e.rus]

Fewer slots: great idea.

Awpless?

On a brand new server I think it brings too many variables to start with. John and I discussed possibilities on how to enact it: switch an existing server to Awpless for a month to study the effect on traffic, starting stock then switching over, or (hopefully) A2G letting us run 2for1 in same region for a month to watch the traffic.

 

Starting a restricted new server, you would never know for certain where the traffic impact is coming from - location or restrictions.

 

From Northern Washington, I ping Alaska in the 30s, Seattle 20s, LA 40-50s, Midwest 65-90s.

As John said, the NW would allow coverage of the entire US, as well as the rest of canada/alaska that the midwest does not.

Texas on the other hand would not have as wide a spread of what is not well covered.

[YoMamma]

I have to disagree because server 1,2 and 3 are almost always full as is. To lower the slot numbers will not increase the quality.

 

The only way I see this making sense is to do massive advertising both in the servers and forums to visit server number 4. Along with redirecting players to server number 4 when 1-3 are full.

[Fatty]

This is not a move to make servers more full. Yes, they are already full. It will increase the demand because the supply is decreased.

 

The blobs between West and Midwest can be met with a blob in the Southwest. We have two people that are experienced admins (Lunk and Dirk) that I know will make this their home. As far as I'm concerned, the frapper map only strengthens the reasons to plop a server in there.

 

As for No Awp or Stock, I know Lunk wants stock. Personally, I like the discussion and there's good points on both sides. This conversation should continue.

 

NW could be another day.

[YoMamma]

This is not a move to make servers more full.  Yes, they are already full.  It will increase the demand because the supply is decreased. 

 

The blobs between West and Midwest can be met with a blob in the Southwest.  We have two people that are experienced admins (Lunk and Dirk) that I know will make this their home.  As far as I'm concerned, the frapper map only strengthens the reasons to plop a server in there. 

 

As for No Awp or Stock, I know Lunk wants stock.  Personally, I like the discussion and there's good points on both sides.  This conversation should continue.

 

NW could be another day.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Good points, but I still feel we should re-direct players to server 4 when 1-3 are full for the first few weeks after we get it.

[Fatty]

This server would have a permanent place in the redirection rotation.

[YoMamma]

This server would have a permanent place in the redirection rotation.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

even better

[Lunk]

I think if you make it AWPless it will turn more people off. At least new people who stop by. Reason I say this is, I've heard it asked quite a bit lately on #1 "Is AWP Restricted?". And I think this is due to our server overflow rotation.

 

1- Are you going to tell them if they want their AWPs they can go to #1? Kind of defeats the purpose of starting up another new server. If you're gonna push over to another one.

 

2- I think No AWPs will eliminate several people from #1 from coming over to try it out. Because they do like the AWP.

 

3- I feel we would draw more people to this new server if we kept it plane jane, no frills kind of server.

 

This is just a start. I'm sure I'll think of more later.

[Fatty]

I won't get greedy, we're happy to see you thinking at all!

 

Good points.

 

However, one thing we want is to explode a NEW region. We really don't want to pull from #1. Sure, to get things going if necessary, but I'm not sure if that will be necessary. Who knows. You'll probably see regulars on the redirection orbit coming by.

[wayfarer]

What is the REAL question here? Is this new server designed to bring

in more GC? Or is this server FOR GC? If this server is to attract more

people to GC then I agree with Lunk, stock server. If this server is

for existing GC members then I agree with Scubadan & Anonymo

and go with no AWPs. I think people will be surprised how much it

will draw. A lot of scopeless players would enjoy this as a nice

alternative. I know I would.

[mookie]

This sounds great to me. During a lot of the day all 3 seem to be full, so at worst this would probably mostly fill up with existing regs.

[Fatty]

It's a server to expand the kingdom.

 

I gotta have like 3 LA in position before we launch. I have 1 right now: Lunk. Haven't heard anything from Dirk, he may not even know yet, haven't contacted him. I gotta have the leaders ready to walk this puppy out.

[YoMamma]

The only other GC admin I can think of that is in the Texas area is WhiteyFord.

 

Too bad Gooters isnt an Admin.

[stutters]

The only other GC admin I can think of that is in the Texas area is WhiteyFord.

 

Too bad Gooters isnt an Admin.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

stay away from our admins

 

(j/k)