What valid reason is there that we cannot create our own servers? - Rust

Seriously. It might clutter the server browser but its cluttered anyway so why can't we make our own? Even if its a lan server? I find it fun just to play with me and a friend or two but its basically impossible. Why is it only the hosting files distributed to providers?

Much of it has to do with a lot of people wanting to create a server then mod the game to something else. Its way too early in development to hand off the game to others. Peoples developments would run entirely contradictory to the laid out roadmap for the game. When its done I am sure they will be more willing to let people run wild.

Baring in mind its still in Alpha. A sort of "join friends" style thing may come in later. Or, a LAN server that friends can join through something like hamanchi. Rust is still in Alpha AND only just "come out" if you will. Give it time to gather momentum.

Hey! Rust servers use LOTS of bandwidth and is a general CPU hog, so its not currently a feasible option for people to host it on their own computers. I'm sure once the game is refined, it will be, but not really until then.

The answer is in the FAQ on playrust.com. [QUOTE]Can I host a server? We’re limiting the distribution of the server right now. This is because we don’t know where we’re taking Rust so we want to keep our options open. If we give everyone the server and then change something dramatically some of operators will complain about the change. If we make dramatic changes every week – a lot the operators will complain. And this is what we intend to do. [B]The server might be publically available in the future[/B]. But right now we’re limiting the distribution to a few select GSP’s.[/QUOTE] source: [URL="http://playrust.com/faq/"]http://playrust.com/faq/[/URL] The game is still in development, let the lead to the devs. They are working hard on it to make the game always better.

[QUOTE=Dudles;43348354]Seriously. It might clutter the server browser but its cluttered anyway so why can't we make our own? Even if its a lan server? I find it fun just to play with me and a friend or two but its basically impossible. Why is it only the hosting files distributed to providers?[/QUOTE] Because the Dev's don't want you to. That is the only reason needed.

Money. Apparently the developer charges a licensing fee to obtain the server software.

Spreading the population over a ton of servers sucks because what kills this game is dead servers. Having poorly run servers appear on the list will hurt the game's perception as people will think the game sucks when it's really some guy's shitty PC causing the problem.

[QUOTE=HarryBeasant;43348452]Hey! Rust servers use LOTS of bandwidth and is a general CPU hog, so its not currently a feasible option for people to host it on their own computers. I'm sure once the game is refined, it will be, but not really until then.[/QUOTE] really doubt anyone actually wants to host on their PCs. most bigger communities have their own dedis. personally refuse to go through a GSP, prefer to have full control over everything plus the prices are pretty retarded

[QUOTE=AppealPlay;43348863]Money. Apparently the developer charges a licensing fee to obtain the server software.[/QUOTE] this is wrong. and if our goal was to make the most money out of this game you can bet we would have turned it into another WarZ already

[QUOTE=HarryBeasant;43348452]Hey! Rust servers use LOTS of bandwidth and is a general CPU hog, so its not currently a feasible option for people to host it on their own computers. I'm sure once the game is refined, it will be, but not really until then.[/QUOTE] It honestly doesn't take THAT much if you're running a small server for a handful of friends... so what are you on about? You could probably even go up to 10-15 depending. Either way, it will come eventually.

[QUOTE=Dudles;43348354]Seriously. It might clutter the server browser but its cluttered anyway so why can't we make our own? Even if its a lan server? I find it fun just to play with me and a friend or two but its basically impossible. Why is it only the hosting files distributed to providers?[/QUOTE] I am not usually the one to shoot down OP questions as questions are good even dumb ones....all about perspective, however, this question was answered in the FAQ and seeing as the game has changed so dramatically in the last few months and were just at the very beginning of its development its not a good idea. -Dan p.s. I have 2 esxi 2U's at home and have commercial internet. I could host 2-3 200 pop servers no problem without my boxes breaking a sweat ( I am a Network Engineer blah blah blah)... So the argument most people should not host a home server is moot....as I actually understand the resources. I could host a 200 pop server with boring residential Comcast and an extra old computer laying around from reading into what these commercial companies are offering in regards to their resources. HOWEVER....until the game is complete and there is a good management interface for layman's there should be a control on who can host servers. HOWEVER....please do not become a BF4...and force people to go through private companies and never release the ability to host private servers. That is garbage... The guys making Rust thus far are doing an amazing job =). Could not be happier...even with the ddos crap....one of the hardest things to combat....especially since its a type of attack even 100 million dollar data centers still suffer from on occasion.

Gaming communities usually rent dedicated servers with 100MBit or 1GBit connections, Xeon E3 or E5 CPU and >=32Gb RAM.. Are you sure that wouldn't be sufficient?

[QUOTE=MaxOfS2D;43348914]this is wrong. and if our goal was to make the most money out of this game you can bet we would have turned it into another WarZ already[/QUOTE] Really? Well, I stand corrected. I read somewhere that the company charges a licensing fee for the server software. My apologies for being incorrect.

No point. Can you host a server where 50 people can connect and play lag-free while hosting the entire map and objects in it persistently? I'd say less than 3% of the players could do that. So there's no point, bigger fish to fry. Besides... there's [U]SO MANY EMPTY SERVERS OUT THERE...[/U]

It is ALPHA!!! You havent bought the alpha. you have bought the game that is gonna be released after the beta. The devs just lets you play the alpa and beta because you have been so nice to give money for something that isnt out yet. We are only here to test the game in its curent state and give input untill the actual game is out and then we have more say in it. Correct me if im wrong but this is how I think it actually works. If it was a closed Alpha, no one would complain about not being able to make privet servers as everyone knows that the devs are just nice letting them play their unfinnished game

[QUOTE=Ananda;43348947]No point. Can you host a server where 50 people can connect and play lag-free while hosting the entire map and objects in it persistently? I'd say less than 3% of the players could do that. So there's no point, bigger fish to fry. Besides... there's [U]SO MANY EMPTY SERVERS OUT THERE...[/U][/QUOTE] like I said, really doubt there's many people looking to host on their own PCs. nearly every single big gaming community has a dedi easily capable of handling it

[QUOTE=Preed;43348933]Gaming communities usually rent dedicated servers with 100MBit or 1GBit connections, Xeon E3 or E5 CPU and >=32Gb RAM.. Are you sure that wouldn't be sufficient?[/QUOTE] I do not think you understand what a business (not craapy comcast business) but actual 1Gbit connection cost... However to your point...anyone saying you HAVE TO HAVE 32 Gigs of RAM and 100/100 and tons of CPUs are just plain wrong... Seeing as I make ALOT of money doing exactly what they are trying to claim knowledge about =) -Dan Friendly Cisco Engineer =)

[QUOTE=HarryBeasant;43348452]Hey! Rust servers use LOTS of bandwidth and is a general CPU hog, so its not currently a feasible option for people to host it on their own computers. I'm sure once the game is refined, it will be, but not really until then.[/QUOTE] Uhm, let's se... nope. 106mb of RAM, 4% of CPU and under 1 mbit of bandwidth on a test machine with a 12.28 version of the server files (Windows workstation, not server mind you). So very false indeed. The reason given to protect the quality of servers by not introducing any other small scale VPN is based on an illogical and incorrect statement. Where did you get your data?

[QUOTE=ppehrson;43349046]Uhm, let's se... nope. 106mb of RAM, 4% of CPU and under 1 mbit of bandwidth. So very false indeed. Where did you get your data?[/QUOTE] Where did you get [B]your[/B] data? 106mb of RAM? What game nowadays runs on that little RAM? My server doesn't even have anyone on it and it's chilling at 1GB of RAM. When at full 50 ppl it peaks at about 2 Mb/s. Also, the 4% CPU doesn't mean a damn thing since that would depend on your CPU...

[QUOTE=MaxOfS2D;43348914]this is wrong. and if our goal was to make the most money out of this game you can bet we would have turned it into another WarZ already[/QUOTE] Agreed....I can see charging for a licensing (if you even do that as that was supposition I think) as it deters commercial companies from just trying host without permission. Its a method of control =) Also does Green on your name mean your a dev or at least a mod? -Dan

[QUOTE=ochie;43349080] Also does Green on your name mean your a dev or at least a mod? [/QUOTE] Green means moderator but he's also a developer.

[QUOTE=Sievers808;43349074]Where did you get [B]your[/B] data? 106mb of RAM? What game nowadays runs on that little RAM? My server doesn't even have anyone on it and it's chilling at 1GB of RAM. When at full 50 ppl it peaks at about 2 Mb/s. Also, the 4% CPU doesn't mean a damn thing since that would depend on your CPU...[/QUOTE] First off, the 106mb is the amount of RAM the server software has reserved. Not the amount of RAM in the computer. 2Mb/s is not much traffic. On my home broadband I could then have 250 people on at the same time, piece of cake. So again I question the reason for not releasing the server to the public. BUT! I don't understand or try to defend people who DDOS the official and other servers. I think that's an even worse move, and it's even illegal. I am just saying that it would be excellent to release the server to public, to do home LAN games, and broader gaming. Then you could collect server logs on a much larger scale which means better data for development.

[QUOTE=Sievers808;43349074]Where did you get [B]your[/B] data? 106mb of RAM? What game nowadays runs on that little RAM? My server doesn't even have anyone on it and it's chilling at 1GB of RAM. When at full 50 ppl it peaks at about 2 Mb/s. Also, the 4% CPU doesn't mean a damn thing since that would depend on your CPU...[/QUOTE] he may be describing a VM....which I would assume. VMware, OpenStack etc...all have super low CPU usage and great RAM usage if you can configure properly. -Dan

[QUOTE=ochie;43349120]he may be describing a VM....which I would assume. VMware, OpenStack etc...all have super low CPU usage and great RAM usage if you can configure properly. -Dan[/QUOTE] No, I described the amount of RAM the server application uses when started up. It doesn't change a lot when there's some activity. The server uses significantly less CPU power than the client.

[QUOTE=ppehrson;43349147]No, I described the amount of RAM the server application uses when started up. It doesn't change a lot when there's some activity. The server uses significantly less CPU power than the client.[/QUOTE] Well, I got an old Pentium III laptop with 256 MB of RAM, think I could host with that? :v:

[QUOTE=ppehrson;43349110]First off, the 106mb is the amount of RAM the server software has reserved. Not the amount of RAM in the computer. 2Mb/s is not much traffic. On my home broadband I could then have 250 people on at the same time, piece of cake. So again I question the reason for not releasing the server to the public. [/QUOTE] ... so you're saying that running the server for Rust only uses 106mb of RAM? And I seriously doubt that you can host 250 on your home broadband 'piece of cake' while the devs call any server with 200 people on it a 'Stress Test'. One of the points of Rust is to have a big persistent world where people commit to their bases etc. Having a home LAN server is counter-intuitive for what experience the game is meant to give and takes no priority in alpha-stage development. Equally releasing the server to public takes ZERO priority. If we had everyone be able to host their servers then every butthurt naked KOS-ed guy would bug off to their own world. At the moment there's more than plenty of servers out there. [QUOTE] Then you could collect server logs on a much larger scale which means better data for development.[/QUOTE] Wat. Again, there's more than enough servers out there. If someone wants to host their server then they should pay imo. For the same reason that this game isn't F2P. Also, Go [URL="http://play-rust.wikia.com/wiki/Map"]here.[/URL] Look at the map of the entire Rust world, including all the empty areas. Do you think they made it big for kicks? No; eventually they'll have their servers host more and more players and spread everyone out around the map (I hope) and that will be the way to play the game. Also does hosting a world this big [B]really[/B] take >200mb of RAM? Really??

[QUOTE=ppehrson;43349147]No, I described the amount of RAM the server application uses when started up. It doesn't change a lot when there's some activity. The server uses significantly less CPU power than the client.[/QUOTE] I completely agree with you =). When I stated VM I meant that.....as I would assume these are linux boxes they use nearly no resources and add the application on top. When I spin up some RH VM's I see extremely little hit to the resources. As with most game servers I have dealt with it does not increase substantially if/when players load in....usually network load is the only thing I have noticed on my boxes that increases the CPU usage and RAM usage never increases (unless its Minecraft...lol =). -Dan

I'd say it's so early in development that they want to fix and work with what's on the table for now. It would be nice to have something to get used to the mechanics and crafting in, but there are servers that are pretty much empty for that.

Just launched the server, it's consuming 250mb idle with nothing on the map - I've seen it consume 750mb when I'm active ingame screwing around with it. No doubt it would consume more when there are lots of players and structures. Idle it's consuming 7% CPU (25% is 1 core as I'm running a quadcore system, and each core is 2.8ghz).