+- Fearless Forums (https://fearlessrp.net)
+-- Forum: General Discussion (https://fearlessrp.net/forumdisplay.php?fid=10)
+--- Forum: Discussions (https://fearlessrp.net/forumdisplay.php?fid=4)
+---- Forum: Archive (https://fearlessrp.net/forumdisplay.php?fid=481)
+---- Thread: V2P (/showthread.php?tid=68241)
RE: V2P - Joram - 01-24-2016
(01-24-2016, 12:21 AM)Dan Dan Wrote: I dont think we should go and remove v33x straight away, what we should do is text a 3rd server with v2p. Then if it goes well, keep the 3rd serevr for a week or two to smoothly transition the v33x players to v2p and to give them a fair amount of notice for the map change.
No that wont work. We had it as a third server and it was great but only "v2p players" played on it. Like 12-30 people. It wasnt popular.
But if we force them.. Sure! (I love v2p)
RE: V2P - Avgar - 01-24-2016
I am against replacing v33x with v2p, as there is a certain audience that enjoys v33x. We don't know what impact this action would have if we simply remove v33x, because there's a lot of we have to account for:
1. Do players have the map (I believe v2p is a lot less popular than v33x)? This only matters for new players, but you can't deny that it does matter.
2. All of those v33x builds will no longer be usable, how will this affect player counts?
3. V2p is large. Very very large. The last time we had a problem with player counts on it, hence it was removed. The map didn't change and the player density it offers would be barely sufficient, even if the server would be empty.
However, as Dan Dan suggested, I wouldn't be against trying v2p as a 3rd server. Although I doubt that it would gain enough players to look populated enough and the same fate would befall it, as it did last time.
RE: V2P - Huskii - 01-24-2016
(01-24-2016, 08:44 AM)Avgar Wrote: I am against replacing v33x with v2p, as there is a certain audience that enjoys v33x. We don't know what impact this action would have if we simply remove v33x, because there's a lot of we have to account for:
1. Do players have the map (I believe v2p is a lot less popular than v33x)? This only matters for new players, but you can't deny that it does matter.
2. All of those v33x builds will no longer be usable, how will this affect player counts?
3. V2p is large. Very very large. The last time we had a problem with player counts on it, hence it was removed. The map didn't change and the player density it offers would be barely sufficient, even if the server would be empty.
However, as Dan Dan suggested, I wouldn't be against trying v2p as a 3rd server. Although I doubt that it would gain enough players to look populated enough and the same fate would befall it, as it did last time.
Why don't you host a poll that goes over the course of say a day or two to get the whole communities input? Seems logical to me, Fearless needs to use polls more for decisions because at the end of the day it's the players who have to play the updates and such.
RE: V2P - JackZ - 01-24-2016
Instead of v33x, anyday.
It's even less-laggy somehow...
RE: V2P - Jan - 01-24-2016
Don't replace 33x, way too risky. However we can try it on a third server once again.
RE: V2P - Cox - 01-24-2016
Why not bring it back? When v2p got removed it made me realise that how much of a good map it was and how much roleplaying capabilities it had. I think if the map came up as a third server it could be a success.
RE: V2P - Raccoon - 01-24-2016
(01-24-2016, 08:44 AM)Avgar Wrote: I am against replacing v33x with v2p, as there is a certain audience that enjoys v33x. We don't know what impact this action would have if we simply remove v33x, because there's a lot of we have to account for:
1. Do players have the map (I believe v2p is a lot less popular than v33x)? This only matters for new players, but you can't deny that it does matter.
2. All of those v33x builds will no longer be usable, how will this affect player counts?
3. V2p is large. Very very large. The last time we had a problem with player counts on it, hence it was removed. The map didn't change and the player density it offers would be barely sufficient, even if the server would be empty.
However, as Dan Dan suggested, I wouldn't be against trying v2p as a 3rd server. Although I doubt that it would gain enough players to look populated enough and the same fate would befall it, as it did last time.
i would quit right away after all theese years.
v33x is the perfect size of a map.
v2p is as said, very large. never seeing any people on the streets, in the buildings. last time we had V2P, it never had the "population" needed on it. why would it work this time?
v33x is alot more popular, it is.
3rd server would be great, but V2P might be to risky, it would pretty sure end up as the last time we have v2p up and running...without enough players on it to do some Multiplayer Roleplay.
RE: V2P - General Weed - 01-24-2016
Oh, v2p <3 I miss that map! Bring it back!
RE: V2P - Scrake - 01-24-2016
No, Keep V33X!
RE: V2P - Grunt - 01-24-2016
I think getting rid of v33x is a bad idea, like Avgar and other have said, it really does appeal to a large amount of players, there are more v33x maps than v2d which shows it popularity, however v2d has over taken it on FL.
But I'm all for a third server to host v2p on. I never had a chance to play on it but it looks like a lot of fun and would open up some wonderful RolePlay opportunities!