Please do not reduce the population cap to 20 on ds9.

thevampinator · June 2018

As an rper, the limit of thirty is difficult. already instance one is always full. This will only do more to hurt the rp community now someone mentioned to me that they are reducing it to 20 players. I rather not have the update at all then have it dropped down again I don't care if there is lag on ds9. I'm sure most players would move on back to earth space dock and sector space sometime after the update is done. Please do not reduce the cap!

jbmonroe · June 2018

I feel like I walked in during the middle of something. Where is the canonical link to anything suggesting that the cap limit on DS9 will be 20?

thevampinator · June 2018

jbmonroe wrote: »

I feel like I walked in during the middle of something. Where is the canonical link to anything suggesting that the cap limit on DS9 will be 20?

Well players were talking about it after I talked about in zone chat about wanting the population cap increased. This will ruin the ds9 update to me. I hope they don't reduce it. I just hope they listen. But I understand if they don't, just don't see the reason why. They would take all this effort then make it harder for people to use quarks as a rp hub. After all the work they did to make it look like it did in the show. I was really looking forward too it. But now I'm not so sure. All I know is this has made me upset. I'm sure i"m not the only rper that will be upset either by this.

leemwatson · June 2018

The new DS9 is ALOT smaller than people are used to in-game, so I can understand a reduction in population limit.

thevampinator · June 2018

leemwatson wrote: »

The new DS9 is ALOT smaller than people are used to in-game, so I can understand a reduction in population limit.

Smaller but I don't care if it had a hundred players on it. 20 player limit is going too far. I'm already annoyed with the population limit as it is and other rpers I know are too annoyed by it. I would like to see it increased at least for ds9 I don't care about earth space dock or sector space. But at least for ds9 I'd rather see it remain as it is now. Then go down to twenty.

seaofsorrows · June 2018

thevampinator wrote: »

I don't care if there is lag on ds9. I'm sure most players would move on back to earth space dock and sector space sometime after the update is done. Please do not reduce the cap!

I believe the more reasonable solution would be for the minority.. the RP community, to move else ware.

If the limit is being reduced it's for a reason, either the size of the zone, the possible lag, or a mix of all factors. I highly doubt they're doing it for no reason at all. Since this change won't effect the vast majority of the player base, it simply makes sense for those that find it unacceptable to move to a different zone.

Any time you suggest pushing changes on the majority to appease a minority, it's going to be met with a generally unfavorable response. I suspect this proposal will be no exception, but best of luck to you.

baddmoonrizin · June 2018

[sarcasm] AH! That's it then, I guess. Cancel the update, guys. Update over, man. Update over. Back to the drawing board. We've got to rethink this whole thing. [/sarcasm]

leemwatson · June 2018

thevampinator wrote: »

leemwatson wrote: »

The new DS9 is ALOT smaller than people are used to in-game, so I can understand a reduction in population limit.

Smaller but I don't care if it had a hundred players on it. 20 player limit is going too far. I'm already annoyed with the population limit as it is and other rpers I know are too annoyed by it. I would like to see it increased at least for ds9 I don't care about earth space dock or sector space. But at least for ds9 I'd rather see it remain as it is now. Then go down to twenty.

The reason for population limits is so it doesn't impact on performance on machines as it is! There's alot of NPC's, even on the old maps. With the new map and it's newer textures etc, it will have an impact on performance. So IF they have chosen to reduce the population, that is why!

thevampinator · June 2018

seaofsorrows wrote: »

thevampinator wrote: »

I don't care if there is lag on ds9. I'm sure most players would move on back to earth space dock and sector space sometime after the update is done. Please do not reduce the cap!

I believe the more reasonable solution would be for the minority.. the RP community, to move else ware.

If the limit is being reduced it's for a reason, either the size of the zone, the possible lag, or a mix of all factors. I highly doubt they're doing it for no reason at all. Since this change won't effect the vast majority of the player base, it simply makes sense for those that find it unacceptable to move to a different zone.

Any time you suggest pushing changes on the majority to appease a minority, it's going to be met with a generally unfavorable response. I suspect this proposal will be no exception, but best of luck to you.

I doubt they have added anything that would cause it to lag more then it already has and I think it would be more to do with their computers and Internet connections then cryptics end. It might have less if the zone is smaller. Point is in this game a lot of the time people do the content, grind do dailies or whatever it is they do and after they will hang out in sector space or earth space dock and talk. I know players that refuse to give them anymore money or quit because of the fact they don't care about the rp community and they let trolls run amuck trolling and ruin other players experiences and their way of playing the game. I'm glad that it seems to have gone away for the most part maybe they have done something about it but point is it still drove people that would have been a paying costumer away. The Roleplaying Community is just as important because you have dedicated players that love startrek and want to be as part of the setting as anyone else.

Who else would use the new ds9 as much as the roleplayers that remain committed and stay to add to this place that was created Quarks would be boring without anyone there to interact with it whats the point of even having it if hardly anyone ever uses it. This is why I'm upset that they might be reducing the instance population. Only other reason people would go there is exchange or bank or to do a mission and leave. Or to collect a ship. You don't see as many people on Ds9 as you do earth space dock or beta space.
I fear it would only drive people away that were part of the rp community if its harder to do so. So yes I do have good reason to be upset about this. Wouldn't you if they suddenly decided We don't care about federation anymore and they have already done this with the kdf and look what happened there.

All at this point I want is the instance population cap to remain the same. I rather have that then have it reduced again. It shouldn't be so hard to do. Players will follow the typical trends once everything stabilizes and everyone stops playing Jemmies a lot of players will avoid ds9 again or will only go there to get to gamma quadrant.

talonxv · June 2018

This is literally a non starter issue for me. So best of luck I guess, but I doubt it will change anything.

thevampinator · June 2018

Well life goes on regardless and I do not want to see them cancel the update. Because there is exciting new content for a lot of players. I know players have been wanting Cardies for a long time and I will buy the race. I guess there will be people happy and unhappy and for the most part there will be a lot of mix of both. You know whats better then unhappy everyone is happy! Everyone getting a piece of the pie.

baddmoonrizin wrote: »

[sarcasm] AH! That's it then, I guess. Cancel the update, guys. Update over, man. Update over. Back to the drawing board. We've got to rethink this whole thing. [/sarcasm]

I like you Bad Moon, your one of my favorite mods on the Forums. Seeing that remark kinda improved my mood. Still not happy about a possibly in population reduction for instances. But I still hope everything goes well in the end for the update. Because you guys have done a lot of hard work on it and we can see that. For such a small development team you guys have done a lot of good quality content over the years. I do appreciate that. I am sorry if do appear to ungrateful. Because I'm happy for the hard work you have done here.

psiameese · June 2018

Honestly? IMO, Twenty is about right for that new social map. It's a more intimate setting than is experienced at present on Holodeck. I like to roleplay as well. And I simply don't see a limitation to the immersion with a 20 player cap. Remember that it's more about the number of instances spawned by player's and gravitating toward an instance that works best for RP at the time.

If an RP group numbers that close to - or surpasses - 20, IMO, DS9 isn't the right setting for that. Fleet starbases or Foundry based RP maps might be worth further exploration?

thevampinator · June 2018

psiameese wrote: »

Honestly? IMO, Twenty is about right for that new social map. It's a more intimate setting than is experienced at present on Holodeck. I like to roleplay as well. And I simply don't see a limitation to the immersion with a 20 player cap. Remember that it's more about the number of instances spawned by player's and gravitating toward an instance that works best for RP at the time.

If an RP group numbers that close to - or surpasses - 20, IMO, DS9 isn't the right setting for that. Fleet starbases or Foundry based RP maps might be worth further exploration?

Oh the Edit Monster just hit. Anyways what I said there they could add a rp instance that has to be manually joined. It would be there but players can't access it unless they choose to go there and they wouldn't be auto placed. What do you think?

psiameese · June 2018

thevampinator wrote: »

Oh the Edit Monster just hit. Anyways what I said there they could add a rp instance that has to be manually joined. It would be there but players can't access it unless they choose to go there and they wouldn't be auto placed. What do you think?

As much as I might enjoy and prefer open world RP over private instances, I've never been opposed to that level of RP support from a developer. I've just not known many (if any) company who would go to bat for us in that fashion.

salazarraze · June 2018

Possible Reasons For a 20 Player Instance Cap

1: 20 is the highest server-stable round number - Likely reason

2: Cryptic threw a bunch of numbers in a hat (just for fun) and pulled out 20

3: To pi.ss off the OP

baddmoonrizin · June 2018

thevampinator wrote: »

I like you Bad Moon, your one of my favorite mods on the Forums. Seeing that remark kinda improved my mood. Still not happy about a possibly in population reduction for instances. But I still hope everything goes well in the end for the update. Because you guys have done a lot of hard work on it and we can see that. For such a small development team you guys have done a lot of good quality content over the years. I do appreciate that. I am sorry if do appear to ungrateful. Because I'm happy for the hard work you have done here.

Thank you for that, but I'm not a dev. I do understand where you're coming from, though, but some things do have to take precedence. Stability is going to be one of those things, and if reducing a map population cap is the best way to do that, then that's what's best for the overall game. I'm sure that the team appreciates your appreciation, though.

jexsamx · June 2018

I'm not understanding why a population cap reduction would negatively impact roleplay. How often are you actually engaging with more than a handful of people at the same time? What benefit does a higher population cap have that makes it worth crowding a small map? All I see is complaining without any actual statement about what the actual problem is.

baddmoonrizin · June 2018

jexsamx wrote: »

I'm not understanding why a population cap reduction would negatively impact roleplay. How often are you actually engaging with more than a handful of people at the same time? What benefit does a higher population cap have that makes it worth crowding a small map? All I see is complaining without any actual statement about what the actual problem is.

Flash mobs. It puts a damper on flash mobs.

thevampinator · June 2018

baddmoonrizin wrote: »

thevampinator wrote: »

I like you Bad Moon, your one of my favorite mods on the Forums. Seeing that remark kinda improved my mood. Still not happy about a possibly in population reduction for instances. But I still hope everything goes well in the end for the update. Because you guys have done a lot of hard work on it and we can see that. For such a small development team you guys have done a lot of good quality content over the years. I do appreciate that. I am sorry if do appear to ungrateful. Because I'm happy for the hard work you have done here.

Thank you for that, but I'm not a dev. I do understand where you're coming from, though, but some things do have to take precedence. Stability is going to be one of those things, and if reducing a map population cap is the best way to do that, then that's what's best for the overall game. I'm sure that the team appreciates your appreciation, though.

I understand the Stability but once everything Settles down I do hope it goes back to normal and maybe they can increase the population back. I'm sure there will be a lot of Jemmies and for the first few days or weeks there will be a lot of people on ds9 I do understand that point. But then you will see a lot more romulans do to their bridge officers and the flood gates I believe will open there too. People wanting all those SROs for their builds. Now that they can use their feddy ships while having all the op traits just by being romulan well it will be interesting to see how it all plays out.

:

jiralinria · June 2018

thevampinator wrote: »

psiameese wrote: »

Honestly? IMO, Twenty is about right for that new social map. It's a more intimate setting than is experienced at present on Holodeck. I like to roleplay as well. And I simply don't see a limitation to the immersion with a 20 player cap. Remember that it's more about the number of instances spawned by player's and gravitating toward an instance that works best for RP at the time.

If an RP group numbers that close to - or surpasses - 20, IMO, DS9 isn't the right setting for that. Fleet starbases or Foundry based RP maps might be worth further exploration?

Oh the Edit Monster just hit. Anyways what I said there they could add a rp instance that has to be manually joined. It would be there but players can't access it unless they choose to go there and they wouldn't be auto placed. What do you think?

Fleet starbases, fine, if the base could be dressed as the new DS9

. The Foundry is also very limited (in the number of people being allowed in the same instance, not the general installation of the Foundry to the game for the players to create own maps), which is a real shame, because for RP purposes this is just way too tiny.
So if Cryptic wants to limit RPers even further, sure they can make it 20 people. Though I personally don't care one sec if some players experience bad game performance, I suggest they change the instance to a less populated one?! I'd vote for an RP instance in the first place, but knowing Cryptic, it'll unfortunately never happen...

meimeitoo · June 2018

Population cap? Wut?! Why would they do that at all? Why not just program DS9 properly!?

rattler2 · June 2018

thevampinator wrote: »

I understand the Stability but once everything Settles down I do hope it goes back to normal and maybe they can increase the population back. I'm sure there will be a lot of Jemmies and for the first few days or weeks there will be a lot of people on ds9 I do understand that point.

It is a smaller map than the current version. Waiting for it to "stabilize" then raising the cap won't change the fact the map itself is smaller.

Unless people enjoy the idea of being stuck in a TSA line in STO.

I always wondered why DS9 1 was somehow designated the de facto RP instance. I mean if its full... there are OTHER instances to go to. I mean is it MANDATORY that ALL RP MUST BE, WITHOUT FAIL, in instance 1? Is it THAT necessary to be in the same instance as notable figures like Ivex, who typically haunts the second floor or Quark's?
I never understood why it was so necessary to congregate in Instance 1 like that...

cross821 · June 2018

jiralinria wrote: »

thevampinator wrote: »

psiameese wrote: »

Honestly? IMO, Twenty is about right for that new social map. It's a more intimate setting than is experienced at present on Holodeck. I like to roleplay as well. And I simply don't see a limitation to the immersion with a 20 player cap. Remember that it's more about the number of instances spawned by player's and gravitating toward an instance that works best for RP at the time.

If an RP group numbers that close to - or surpasses - 20, IMO, DS9 isn't the right setting for that. Fleet starbases or Foundry based RP maps might be worth further exploration?

Oh the Edit Monster just hit. Anyways what I said there they could add a rp instance that has to be manually joined. It would be there but players can't access it unless they choose to go there and they wouldn't be auto placed. What do you think?

Fleet starbases, fine, if the base could be dressed as the new DS9 . The Foundry is also very limited (in the number of people being allowed in the same instance, not the general installation of the Foundry to the game for the players to create own maps), which is a real shame, because for RP purposes this is just way too tiny.
So if Cryptic wants to limit RPers even further, sure they can make it 20 people. Though I personally don't care one sec if some players experience bad game performance, I suggest they change the instance to a less populated one?! I'd vote for an RP instance in the first place, but knowing Cryptic, it'll unfortunately never happen...

Same could be said for Rper's finding a diff zone to Rp on it.

jiralinria · June 2018

cross821 wrote: »

Same could be said for Rper's finding a diff zone to Rp on it.

Oh you mean like the people before, saying RPers should just not be on DS9 at all? Only thought I'd give people with performance issues (

) an equally helpful advise.

trekpuppy · June 2018

So Cryptic, give us an option. Keep a high population instance (50-75) running in parallel to a low population instance and let us configure in our options which one we prefer to join. We do ofc accept lag if we chose to join the high population one.

vorwoda · June 2018

I'm frankly puzzled. Why would reducing the cap hurt RP? Wouldn't it make it less likely that your instance will be besieged by trolls? Are you in an RP group of more than 20?

As for me, when I go to DS9, it's for one of three reasons:

1) I've got a character doing quadrant-specific Doffing or FE's, and use DS9 as a local base for banking, Contraband turn-ins, and offloading vendor trash, or
2) There's an Endeavor or other goal to win X latinum by playing Dabo at Quark's, or
3) The Phoenix promotion is going on, so I have one Alt parked by the Ferengi to get the daily box.

In any of those cases, I always try to go to the lowest population Map, both to be kind to my computer, and to avoid the trolls.

Unknown · June 2018

This content has been removed.

rattler2 · June 2018

trekpuppy wrote: »

So Cryptic, give us an option. Keep a high population instance (50-75) running in parallel to a low population instance...

Um... I don't think the new map can actually SUPPORT 50-75 players due to the SIZE of the map.

arionisa · June 2018

rattler2 wrote: »

trekpuppy wrote: »

So Cryptic, give us an option. Keep a high population instance (50-75) running in parallel to a low population instance...

Um... I don't think the new map can actually SUPPORT 50-75 players due to the SIZE of the map.

Aww, c'mon. You can fit 20 people in a phone booth if you try hard enough...well, you could back when phone booths still existed.

trekpuppy · June 2018

rattler2 wrote: »

Um... I don't think the new map can actually SUPPORT 50-75 players due to the SIZE of the map.

The upper promenade is huge and could easily fit hundreds of people. But it was more a general suggestion for all social maps - not DS9 explicitly.

Unknown · June 2018

This content has been removed.

Please do not reduce the population cap to 20 on ds9.

Comments