Loading...
  OR  Zero-K Name:    Password:   

Reduce Playerlimit to 12 at TAW

8 posts, 211 views
Post comment
Filter:    Player:  
sort
22 hours ago
Since lowering the max player count from 32 to 22 clearly scared away the frequent players without attracting any new ones, the obvious next step is to reduce it even further — maybe if we cap it at 12 players per match, the masses will finally come flooding in.
+4 / -0
quote:
Since lowering the max player count from 32 to 22 clearly scared away the frequent players without attracting any new ones, the obvious next step is to reduce it even further — maybe if we cap it at 12 players per match, the masses will finally come flooding in.


I dont like the 1 room monopoly either, but this will quite literally kill ZK. tons of people are already heavily dislike the room change. a different solution to fix the one room issue and grow the player is probably the best course of action instead of doubling down.

nvm fell for a troll post but i still do think we should definitely take a different approach.
+3 / -0
21 hours ago
USrankDarkBlueDiamond, i'm pretty sure this is a troll post, and DErankzini is actually saying we should revert it to 32.
+2 / -0

21 hours ago
I agree with Zini. I would also make every room have min Elo of 2000, disable SWs, and make sure all players are required to play the game the right way. Otherwise we ban them for a month a pop. I think this will both grow the player base and make the game more accessible to new players.
+4 / -0
19 hours ago
maybe im wrong idk.. it does seem to just be the same one room thing but smaller now
+2 / -0

19 hours ago
zini is right
https://zero-k.info/Forum/Thread/38849
+1 / -0
quote:
Since lowering the max player count from 32 to 22 clearly scared away the frequent players without attracting any new ones

I wouldn't expect 22 player rooms to "attract" many more new players directly; whatever positive effect it has would be in the form of retaining more players, and in particular players who are invested in the outcome of games and like to have a larger influence over games.

That is a much more subtle effect than annoying those who are dead-set on 32 player rooms, so what is "clearly" true might not be actually true.

This post is not intended to express an opinion on the desirability of any particular player limit.
+2 / -1
I don't think this test was done with neutral bias. I believe it was not simply a test, but a planned change, as the test has been defended—which I believe is a good thing while data is being collected. However, the larger room sizes should not be ruled out, in my opinion, in case they are the future of the game. Maybe it's just me, but I think we should keep an open mind.

We should absoulutley do the test.. but let the data speak for itself.

after all its for the good of the game right =)
+2 / -0