fred gandt

Whilst any tool that makes the thankless and technologically crude task of reporting bad servers easier is welcomed, I am of the opinion that the end users (us) shouldn't be expected to do the grunt work, or that at least if we are, we are provided with a tool built directly into the client GUI. I have made this suggestion on this forum, and respectfully ask that you take a look at what I have to say. See http://forums.dayzgame.com/index.php?/topic/185939-suggest-one-click-server-reporting/ I have no doubt that some may consider this request to be akin to begging for attention, but my concern is not for myself or my reputation; my concern is for the players, the future of the game and importantly its reputation. The sooner these issues are dealt with at a fundamental level, the sooner we can start hearing more positive things in the popular media about an amazing game with a great deal of potential, being harshly judged because of the actions of an unfortunate few (loot farmers, hackers, corrupt admin etc.).

Thanks for the beanz guys. Nom :-) I just found this post http://forums.dayzgame.com/index.php?/topic/171503-a-tool-to-simplify-reporting-dodgy-servers/ but haven't looked into the tool yet. I honestly still believe that the functionality should be built directly into the system, and preferably at a hive level far away from us. It just doesn't make sense that servers can connect and belong to the hive, if they're not configured correctly. So why we should ever be informed of them is beyond me! Servers named the likes of "Join = Ban" and "Some-clan-name members only" with many claiming high loot and hourly restarts (loot farming) are making a mockery of the ethos. If the aim is to get tooled up, have no concern for life, and run around blasting everything to hell - play BF4.

A large number of servers require reporting for various infringements of the agreement their hosts make with BI, but it's a total pain in the ass to report them. Per: http://forums.dayzgame.com/index.php?/topic/158966-dayz-standalone-server-hosting-rules-server-reporting/ If it is to remain the responsibility of the end user to report violations of the naming and hosting conventions, please make it simple for us to do it. Assuming reports are carefully reviewed before any action is taken, there should be no issue with regard to e.g. sore losers reporting the server they died on, since a simple - warning > warning > suspension > warning > ban - for report abuse could be implemented. I frankly can't see why the end user - the customer - we need to be reporting what the game already knows! O.o As soon as the client requests a list of servers, it should be able to read the names and dish up only those that are named correctly, known to be open and in good standing, and instantly report those that aren't. But, as I say, if we are to be responsible for this grunt work, at least give us a button to click ;-) All this noting IPs and emailing Ports is nonsense - and it does not get my beanz! >.< In Summary: Please provide a one click server reporting mechanism built into the client GUI, that if abused, turns on its user. One would observe: Rapid, efficient, accurate, regular reports of bad service - of what is after all - your game!

Indeed, we should ;) but... The Central Server is called The Hive and will consist of all kinds of gubbins including (but not limited to) monitoring and statistics the developers use, a shed load of load balancing code to deal with the epic number of communications per second it has to process, and the Databases for all the survivors (positions, inventory, health etc.). The recent hiccup was caused (as I understand it) by some game servers not communicating with The Hive correctly, so although they ran and could be used to connect to and play on, nothing we did was recorded by The Hive. Here's where it gets kinda weird: Obviously the communication issue developed whilst some of us were actually playing, as when we started playing that session we had our characters as we thought they should have been, but by the time we stopped, the server we were on was not communicating correctly with The Hive, and so our most recent session wasn't saved. Then we might have logged into a server that wasn't able to talk to The Hive at all, and so we were given a fresh spawn as no character data was provided although still saved up until the point that we started our last unsuccessfully saved session. However, when we left that server, it was more than likely still unable to talk to The Hive, so that session didn't overwrite our stored character data in The Hive. Supposedly now the issue is fixed pretty much across the board, so the character we should always get will be configured from the data stored on The Hive databases, and unless there's another hiccup (or purposeful database wipes etc.), should continue to be (until we die and the character is wiped, so we get a fresh spawn). It's the possibility of backups and the slightly odd nature of the hiccup timing that suggests to me room for possible edge cases. Follow this (my) timeline if you will: 1) Yadda blah normal 2) Log out for sleep 3) Log in to play, see fresh spawn and panic ;) 4) Log out and Google frantically 5) Rest for a couple of days whilst the dev team work to fix everything (awesome!) 6) Log in to find my character as he was before playing my last successful session :huh: So, the game server I joined @ #1 communicated with The Hive, which sent the character data, and I began my session, but when I logged out, that same game server failed to communicate correctly with The Hive and so ALL ​(surely The Hive is supposed to be updated during a session, not just at the end?) the ​session changes were lost. This (obvious (logic)) state of affairs allows for some pretty unexpected behavior possibilities I reckon :P Some game servers were seemingly disconnected from The Hive during their runtime (servers are restarted periodically), so lord (Dean) only knows what some player's character's data stored on The Hive might be!? Theoretically it could even be from half way through a session from many sessions ago :huh: That's why I was asking about the possibility of oddness. I also wondered if the opposite may have occurred for others (not me so far at least); could a game server not communicating with The Hive correctly when a player logged on and is given a fresh spawn then suddenly start communicating with The Hive again, and thus overwrite the true character data? Alpha is fun :D So basically ... yes ... erm ... There is a Central Server, but there are a large number of possible ways the recent hiccup might cause players to see various states of character data, until The Hive and all game servers are communicating properly again. EDIT: It is possible that overwrites can't happen. Perhaps someone can confirm that any set of character data is persistent until the character dies, at which point the data set is deleted? Interesting to wonder in that case what would happen to the data created by a new session with a fresh spawn... My head hurts. Another EDIT: Even though this video claims to show admin controls for the Arma 2 Mod (I've not been an admin or played the mod) and is thus not necessarily the same for the SA, it might indicate another variable in the mix. The game server the guy is administrating shows logged off players and their inventories. This leads me to wonder if when a player logs back into the game server they were last playing on, whether the game server doesn't ask The Hive for character data, since it already has it (so it thinks). This would add a new level of weirdness to the issues currently being flushed out of the system i.e. the possibility for multiple chars at the same time on any game servers that weren't communicating with The Hive properly, even though the true character data remains intact on The Hive for collection by any game server that is communicating with The Hive properly. We could thus see new spawns, old characters, seemingly reset characters and apparently multiple characters at the same time :huh: ;) All good fun!

Dean (or anyone else who actually knows the answer), I waited for the dust to settle and just now tried my first connection (to a mpgs) since one fresh spawn scare a couple of days ago, and found my char in relatively good order ^_^ , but missing (only) 3 or 4 hours loot and travelling. Would you expect that the condition I left my char in some minutes ago should be the condition I'll find him in next time, or are further oddments possible? I'm easy going either way (alpha and all that), but am wondering if suicide by zombie would be less painful in the long run, if twitching back and forth in time for a while is a probability. I greatly appreciate your efforts, and am loving the simulator :beans: :thumbsup: :D

It seems to me that the dev team are working toward a situation where living survivors are more valuable than dead ones. Blood managementDamaged victim inventory(intended) Greater numbers and types of zombiesInability to (simply) carry various forms of weaponry (snipe or spray?)This leads me to believe that we'll soon find ourselves regarding each other as resources to be valued and respected as much as can openers ;) I chose to buy this game (simulator) because of the threat of loosing all my work in a single shot from behind a wall 100s of meters away, but hope and act to avoid it happening. I don't know of another game that provides the same or similar level of adrenalin fueled tension when after trekking through a tree line and finding that I have to sprint across open ground to the next cover, I know it could all be over if I screw up that vault, or misjudge the gap between those shrubs (damn shrubs >:( running on the spot for a few seconds like a plum is not helpful!) I wouldn't want to tame the game and lose that important difference between DayZ and lesser alternatives. However, I am looking forward to later releases that encourage teamwork and random moments of mutual benefit derived from sparing bullets and instead trading wisdom (and beans). Incidentally (all that said): if you meet me (Fred Gandt) in game - I'll avoid killing you just as much as I'll avoid being killed. And if you're carrying a Mosin, I'm fairly sure you aren't carrying it as defense against zombies ;) In summary: no matter what the devs do (except disallow survivors shooting each other :( ), there'll always be those that shoot on sight, perhaps just for jollies, or perhaps as a genuine tactic (easy to survive if no one else does!), but as the game becomes more complex, I can easily imagine many situations where a buddy (temporary or otherwise) would be worth much more than the contents of his backpack. Everyone who tries to survive this game gets my :beans: :D

I wonder if dynamically whitelisting server instances rather than IPs might be more manageable? i.e. Whenever a DayZ server is started, a quick conversation between the Hive and the server, provides the instance with a UUID for verification of all further conversations until its next restart. During the initialization of each instance, the Hive would be able to verify whatever it needed to, to grant or deny whitelisting (would it? :blush: ). Please consider this in the manner it is meant - a suggestion from an enthusiastic amature developer attempting to help not hinder :rolleyes: As for the recent hiccup: 1) As a player who understands the barrage of warnings about the game being in ALPHA, I was still worried that my little guy might have been lost (I have yet to find out if he's okay), but wouldn't have dared sling mud if I lost him. That's the nature of Alpha after all ;) 2) As an amature developer, sociologist and philosopher (with a passion for virtual world theory and practice, simulation, and UI), I am fascinated by this game and am looking forward to working through the kinks with you and your team, to see where this goes. You have my beanz AND a pristine can opener! :beans: :beans: :beans: :D