• SCUM DownUnder #1 - BigDGaming.net
    Server IP: 176.57.135.20:28002

SCUM SCUM Server Whitelisting Proposal

Are you happy with the Whitelisting System SCUM uses?


  • Total voters
    20
1536443143916.png


Due to demand, we are considering offering whitelisting for those who donate towards the SCUM DownUnder server.
We want to explain how whitelisting works for SCUM and gather our community's feedback before making a decision.

From initial testing, when the server is 64/64 players (full) and a whitelisted player connects to the server, the server will kick a non-whitelisted player to make room.
This may be a negative to those who don't wish to donate and drive players away from our server.
SCUM servers currently have no settings to configure reserved slots as in the system SQUAD/PS uses.

All feedback is welcome in either the #scum-chat discord channel or by replying to this thread below.
 

Comments

TPM

Donator
Arma Admin
ARMA Admin - Senior
Jan 24, 2016
108
68
28
Classified
www.youtube.com
#2
As a member of the BigD community who does donate most months to help support the cost of running our servers, I like the idea of a whitelisted system if there was reserved slots. eg 54 public slots and then 10 whitelisted slots. However, as posted above I know that this system is not currently available. I do not like the idea of players being kicked when a whitelisted player connects. I think this will cause problems and push players away from joining our community, kinda like a pay to play system.

With the game in Early Access and about a year to go till full release, there is a possibility that a whitelisting system that is more public player friendly may be supported by the SCUM Dev team down the track.

Do we have the resources to run 2 x SCUM servers, one with the whitelisted system as mentioned in the above post and another without?
 

Madhouse

Head Community Manager
[BigD] Clan
Donator
Jun 23, 2007
4,002
1,079
113
#3
Do we have the resources to run 2 x SCUM servers, one with the whitelisted system as mentioned in the above post and another without?
SCUM servers can only be rented via G-Portal, they cost AUD89.69 per month for a 64 slot server.

Second server could split the playerbase we have and from what I can see already on battlemetrics, player numbers in AU have dipped heavily which was to be expected after the first few days of full hype. So I would be hesitant to run Two servers knowing the cost and the very early access nature of this game considering they have already wiped characters/progression once in the first week.
If there was a way for having a character from BigD server #1 be able to play on server #2 and vice versa, that would make me consider a second server more.
 
Jul 22, 2018
9
3
3
#4
I agree with TPM, at the current stage with scum and how whitelisting just boots players off it would be totally unfair, e.g. 'you are running through a military base when you get kicked all of a sudden because a white listed member joined' since this would technically just be pay to play. If a better system is introduced later down the track then we should consider it but for now i say no to whitelisted slots.
 

Palmer

[BigD] Clan
Donator
Jul 4, 2018
7
1
3
19
Victoria
#5
I think leave the server as is for now and look towards the idea in the future but as the lads above have said this system seems very unfair and doesn’t seem like the right way to go about it as BigD has always been fair with how their donations play out in their game servers to make it fair for everyone whilst supporting the community.
 

Meatbomb83

Community Moderator
[BigD] Clan
Mar 23, 2016
225
114
43
35
South Australia
#6
I think wait and see how SCUMs development plans out.

I haven't donated for years, but if SCUM is to improve and offer gameplay and experiences that other games could not, I would be willing to donate $1.40140625 per month to guarantee my slot on a BigD server.

Is it ideal? No.

Honestly it feels like the devs in combo with G-Portal have done it this way in order to guarantee co4ntinual returns from communities and players, which will be tolerated to a point otherwise why not release the files?

I say wait (even though i'm for a whitelist) because if it doesn't improve or the devs don't cut and run you only lose out to the minor inconvenience of sometimes not getting in/on.

Meanwhile- the issue of funding a server continues.
 

Haemorrhoid

[BigD] Clan
Donator
Apr 10, 2017
15
0
1
www.youtube.com
#7
I donate, I don't play Squad, just to help the upkeep on our server.Its real bonus to have our own. I agree with the whitelist concept and I agree with MeatBomb. So my view is wait and see how the game develops before we implement it.
 
Apr 13, 2018
2
1
3
Adelaide
#8
I agree with the above, whitelisting resulting in kicking other players is a bad idea. Hopefully, a reserved slot system will become available similar to Squad, so a few slots can be reserved to paying customers. It would be better to play on a server that may have 10 empty reserved slots but no chance of a random kick than one where you could be kicked at any time if you have not donated.
 
Sep 10, 2018
1
0
1
32
Brisbane
#9
Just started playing here for the higher pop count.

If it was 100% whitelist requiring a subscription to play i'd leave to another server. No offense intended, but im new, the higher pop is nice but it has its drawbacks (cough cough campers) and no real way to meet / join a group if everyone is KOS. It does add a little excitement being completely paranoid knowing there could be people around every corner tho! The event part would be good fun once they get the lag / desync sorted.

That and i'd be worried about the server pop itself if it was 100% whitelist. Do you have enough subscribers currently to ensure the server would remain worthwhile? Would it kill the server by lowering the pop to 20 people and making others go elsewhere to play? Theres not that much in game yet that people can invest in to warrant dedication to a single server / prompting them to sub to stay. Maybe after base building and other things are implemented?

If you did whitelist reserved slots i'd be 100% ok with this. You support the server you're guaranteed a slot. If the server remains busy it then also becomes an intensive to subscribe if there's a queue especially on weekends.

Whitlist priority with kicking players would turn into a deterrent. Noone would enjoy being balls deep in a bunker when you know other players are there to get kicked to make way for a sub, only to get back in 5min later when someone leaves to find you've been wrecked while standing there disconnecting.
 

5tardu5t

Community Admin
[BigD] Clan
Donator
Feb 6, 2017
38
6
8
Melbourne
#10
I also agree with the above posts - the whitelist system just ins't there yet. While we use this system in Squad it's implementation is so much better, without the ability to assign 2 slots for whitelist and potentially have people just auto kicked...argh it wouldn't be nice. I'd hate to see people in the community kicked from a public server just to use this system.

As we are currently the most popular AUS server I think the only fair way we can allow people to join may be the use of an evening server reboot window. This would allow people not currently able to logon a 64 chance window at getting into the server upon reboot. This would only be performed when the server was sitting at full capacity for a period of time & there were people in our discord posting connection issues???
 
Apr 13, 2018
2
1
3
Adelaide
#11
I guess the other thing to consider is the fact that at the moment people probably have characters on a number of different servers. So not getting access to BigD at a given time shouldn't upset people too much, they can just switch servers and come back when there is space. Maybe once the risk of character wipes is reduced and there are more things to do to invest in your character, people will be keen to stick to a particular server. For the moment I can't see any huge benefits to playing on only one server.
 

BigD Server Donations

Total amount
AU$250.00
Goal
AU$400.00