Ladle 71

A place for threads related to tournaments and the like, and things related too.

Moderator: Light

Post Reply
Zenith
Average Program
Posts: 78
Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2011 5:17 pm

Re: Ladle 71

Post by Zenith »

Gz, gms :pacman: :sdot: :sdot: :sdot: :sdot: :sdot: :sdot: :sdot: :sdot:

User avatar
woof
Round Winner
Posts: 231
Joined: Sun Dec 02, 2012 6:58 am

Re: Ladle 71

Post by woof »

Eh thump was pretty rude even to me.

Gms Ww uNk 71's CT, and great comeback to you guys :)

Also thanks to Fini and the old chap OMM for subbing the first round!

User avatar
Eckz
Core Dumper
Posts: 101
Joined: Sun Jan 31, 2010 3:27 am

Re: Ladle 71

Post by Eckz »

Congrats CT.

There should definitely be some server testing prior to Ladle day, though. Strength testing as far as seeing what the limits of each server are. We then should take the necessary motions to make sure that those limits aren't passed to provide the best possible games for both teams.

AoT NY 0 :: I felt lag rarely, but this server needs to be crash tested.
AoT UK 1 :: Had good ping, felt some lag, but I think this server should also be crash tested (if NY & UK are under the same host)
ImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImage

User avatar
ElmosWorld
Match Winner
Posts: 610
Joined: Wed Jun 16, 2010 5:38 pm

Re: Ladle 71

Post by ElmosWorld »

Thump raging is news?
Image

User avatar
sinewav
Graphic Artist
Posts: 6303
Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2008 3:37 am
Contact:

Re: Ladle 71

Post by sinewav »

Eckz wrote:There should definitely be some server testing prior to Ladle day, though. Strength testing as far as seeing what the limits of each server are. We then should take the necessary motions to make sure that those limits aren't passed to provide the best possible games for both teams.
Not necessary. First, it takes few resources to run an Arma server. Your phone could run an Arma server easily. Second, it is usually the connection to the server that creates problems. Third, in the case of VPS, the amount of load is unpredictable over time, meaning a server could pass a stress test then fail it minutes later.

The ranking system does a good job at reducing use on consistently bad servers. And besides that, server quality is not the problem -- server availability is. We started today with 2 missing servers and gained one shaky backup (CT USA).

If the community wants better quality servers then people need to step up and get them. Find out how much it costs current server owners to upgrade hardware/locations and start a fundraising drive to achieve that goal.

User avatar
Eckz
Core Dumper
Posts: 101
Joined: Sun Jan 31, 2010 3:27 am

Re: Ladle 71

Post by Eckz »

My point was to minimize crashes. How is stress testing not a valid way to do that? Or even try limiting client numbers so there aren't unnecessary spectators (I understand the point of spectators, but they also pull on the bandwidth, yes?). I'm suggesting that we try something.

Obviously I agree with server availability being an issue, but really there are servers with the ability to be used for ladle that aren't being used. Can't pickup servers be swapped out with Ladle settings? Most people who use those are playing Ladle anyways. Are those off-limits?
ImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImage

User avatar
Light
Reverse Outside Corner Grinder
Posts: 1659
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2011 2:11 pm

Re: Ladle 71

Post by Light »

Anyone who played vs Redemption (except for CT in the finals), could I get some server feedback? First time hosting a Ladle server, so curious how it kept up. Mine was the drama server. :P

Matches Played: ww vs rd - unk vs rd - o/ vs rd

Grats to CT, and Rd.

User avatar
takburger
Match Winner
Posts: 600
Joined: Tue Jun 04, 2013 9:34 pm

Re: Ladle 71

Post by takburger »

Eckz wrote:My point was to minimize crashes. How is stress testing not a valid way to do that? Or even try limiting client numbers so there aren't unnecessary spectators (I understand the point of spectators, but they also pull on the bandwidth, yes?). I'm suggesting that we try something.

Obviously I agree with server availability being an issue, but really there are servers with the ability to be used for ladle that aren't being used. Can't pickup servers be swapped out with Ladle settings? Most people who use those are playing Ladle anyways. Are those off-limits?
Actually, we could allow 1 spectator and 2 subs, and just use a streaming program to transfer load on a player instead on a server.
Image

User avatar
Fippmam
Round Winner
Posts: 392
Joined: Sat Oct 29, 2011 10:54 am

Re: Ladle 71

Post by Fippmam »

takburger wrote:
Eckz wrote:My point was to minimize crashes. How is stress testing not a valid way to do that? Or even try limiting client numbers so there aren't unnecessary spectators (I understand the point of spectators, but they also pull on the bandwidth, yes?). I'm suggesting that we try something.

Obviously I agree with server availability being an issue, but really there are servers with the ability to be used for ladle that aren't being used. Can't pickup servers be swapped out with Ladle settings? Most people who use those are playing Ladle anyways. Are those off-limits?
Actually, we could allow 1 spectator and 2 subs, and just use a streaming program to transfer load on a player instead on a server.
Speaking of, whatever happened to ladle streaming? Was pretty successful last time I checked

User avatar
kyle
Reverse Outside Corner Grinder
Posts: 1863
Joined: Thu Jun 08, 2006 3:33 pm
Location: Indiana, USA, Earth, Milky Way Galaxy, Universe, Multiverse
Contact:

Re: Ladle 71

Post by kyle »

sinewav wrote:However, we are very lucky that kyle put up a Ladle server for us to use.
I even pondered not putting it up this time, but then decided it only takes me 2 minutes or less to do.
sinewav wrote:Later I would like to amend the rules to restate the above. There are no backup servers for opening rounds and teams must be in full agreement to switch servers in any round of play. If teams cannot agree, they must continue in the original server.
I am not sure that this would be the best way of wording it. To me that says they must play in a server than does not exist if they cannot agree.

It should somehow say, If server is not up, first place to play is in an empty server that is configured for ladle. When multiples or no empty ladle server, then teams must agree upon what server to play in.
Image

Overrated
Match Winner
Posts: 483
Joined: Sun Feb 21, 2010 8:32 am

Re: Ladle 71

Post by Overrated »

Just wanna say congrats to CT and thanks for letting me play with you guys (Sorry I showed up late and had to leave early (where I work sucks hardcore)). Was a lot of fun and I'm glad you guys could pull it out in the end without me there. Very proud of you guys and wish I could have been there! Gm's R and Phoenix.

Also, 0 CT LIV. I had multiple rounds where I stuttered at the start and lagged into a round and it continued on, but most of the rounds were decent. These random stutters cost us a few though.
BRAWL dead. RIP.

Fort is like a box of knives, you never know when you're going to be cut.

User avatar
Shock
Core Dumper
Posts: 118
Joined: Sat Aug 16, 2008 11:16 pm
Location: Desert, Arizona

Re: Ladle 71

Post by Shock »

Light wrote:Anyone who played vs Redemption (except for CT in the finals), could I get some server feedback? First time hosting a Ladle server, so curious how it kept up. Mine was the drama server. :P

Matches Played: ww vs rd - unk vs rd - o/ vs rd

Grats to CT, and Rd.
The server let me play in ladle, but some rounds I was out of commission. However, it's usual
Thx for hosting :!:

User avatar
sinewav
Graphic Artist
Posts: 6303
Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2008 3:37 am
Contact:

Re: Ladle 71

Post by sinewav »

I wrote up a clarification for server disputes on the Operations page. Basically, play where you are supposed to until the server gets unbearable for both teams. I've seen teams return to the same Ladle server after multiple crashes, so please don't cry about lag. Hopefully this helps us avoid problems in the future. With so few servers available for tournaments we don't have the luxury of choice in this game.

One possible solution is to come up with a way to easily transform any server into a Ladle server. Do do this we need more people with Administrative access across a broader range of servers. Then it is a simple matter of rincluding some kind of default/reset.cfg, then ladle.cfg, and finally ladle#_authorities.cfg.

Something to think about.

User avatar
Light
Reverse Outside Corner Grinder
Posts: 1659
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2011 2:11 pm

Re: Ladle 71

Post by Light »

sinewav wrote:One possible solution is to come up with a way to easily transform any server into a Ladle server. Do do this we need more people with Administrative access across a broader range of servers. Then it is a simple matter of rincluding some kind of default/reset.cfg, then ladle.cfg, and finally ladle#_authorities.cfg.
I was thinking about this. I have permission to use Rx servers, and if I would have known about the issue when it was going on, I could have provided a server. I just don't put up the servers on there unless it's needed because I don't like to abuse his generosity.

I should also be able to host multiples myself, but I never had the chance to test my limits. The Ladle server at max took about 10% CPU (of 1/4 cores), and the bandwidth isn't close to being an issue, along with RAM usage. I just don't know about all of the connections, if it would make a difference or not. I assume it probably would. It's something I'd be very willing to test out in the future though if it were needed.

User avatar
Bytes
Round Winner
Posts: 220
Joined: Sun May 06, 2012 12:13 pm

Re: Ladle 71

Post by Bytes »

Thanks for the match rZ!
And thanks CT even though I didn't get to play you :)

Renegade's - 0
It started off a little iffy but tbh that might have been my brother on youtube. It gradually settled out and by the end it was pretty clean, just with usual US lagometers. However I know some of my team had some issues with it.

Don't think I can rate CT Liv since I only spec'ed but it looked fine.


Sorry about the flaming Liz, tbh I just wanted the lulz from the orphanage joke :P
Image

Post Reply