RSP-Servers for 2042

[SteveZDad]

You know, I started playing battlefield series with Battlefield 2. At that time there was no e-sports element in the game except for a battle recorded which could be later used to create content or produce coverage of matches even till today. The buzz was to be able to create a culture with a chain of command among the clans. There were moments either good or bad but the fact is they were based on the fact that the player or community leaders had the ability to configure and moderate their clans to play on a "Battle Ground" which they could manage, per say a Server with administrative control over it.

Sure there are issues like DDOS et al, but that is where the community developed. I have seen large TeamSpeak servers filled with players bonding over BF. The same has now drifted towards huge Discord communities. But what I also see is desperation. A struggle for the community admins to keep the community together without having adequate control over the servers.

I remember starting the first server for Battlefield 2 from my very own home. It was an unranked version of course, but the point is that the community I have today was because of that server. Which was followed by an array of servers in most of the Battlefield iterations.

In my humble opinion, Server control is core for community development. Please do not devoid us of that.

From the trailer that was recently showcased on EA Play it is quite evident that EA has recalled the joy of the game that used to exist in the times of BFBC2/BF3 etc. mainstream. Let us not forget that the joy was achieved because the awesome servers were backed by a team of dedicated admins and moderators who in the shape of clans and ranks gave unforgettable memories to many many and many players of Battlefield series.

With that being said, It is also true that there are several technical nitty-gritties which I as a user cannot understand, therefore I urge the developers at Battlefield to listen to what we have to say about the topic.

[FlyingHavok]

@SteveZDad Well put sir! Hope EA/Dice listens to this humble request.

[BFICommunity]

Update: JackFrags & LevelCapGaming have posted a video stating, "BF2042 servers would have persistent Banlist". It would be great if someone from EA/DICE could confirm it. @EA_Straatford  

[_0nIyPain_]

@BFICommunity Can't they just add these features to a free server environment?

[PPNSteve]

@BFICommunity see also this thread for similar discussions..
https://answers.ea.com/t5/General-Discussion/Servers-Will-we-get-them/td-p/10416679/

[Beneffit]

There absolutely needs to be some option to have persistent community servers that don't disappear when the creator leaves or when the server is empty.  Battlefield V's Community Games system is a nightmare for people that actually want to build a community.  Despite its name, the Community Games system in BFV makes it incredibly hard and punishing to attempt to build a community of like-minded players. 

As a server creator, being forced to sit in an empty server for hours at a time while you wait for people to join is no fun.  You can't even play the game while you wait.  You just have to sit there and stare at the deploy screen for hours.  And if you want to leave and play on different server while you wait for yours to fill up, your server shuts down and goes offline as soon as you leave it.

If you do get lucky and happen to get players in your server, it will shut down randomly due to stability issues and you've lost the community you were just trying to build.  Or if it doesn't randomly shut down, a map might come up in the rotation that players don't feel like playing, so they leave your server for a match.  When the server goes empty it shuts down without notice and goes offline, which makes it impossible for those same players to return to your server.  It's a terrible system and is the furthest thing from "community" I've ever witnessed in a video game.  It's anti-community.

This system simply cannot be reused for Battlefield 2042. 

We need to have the option to pay a premium for persistent community servers.  Similar to what Battlefield 4 or Battlefield 1 have.  By all means keep the free options that have already been announced, but for those of us that want a deeper experience with more control, give us the options to pay for it.  Dice and EA have no problem taking our money for microtransactions for cosmetics.  Why not take our money for something that will actually benefit the players of the game?

[FlyingGoldenEye]

This is a really important feature which will encourage the regular gamers to practice on there servers as they want / when they want and host gaming tournaments etc. This will also add governance on ensuring that servers remain free of hackers. @Dice @EA please look into this since this will help you to increase the player base for 2042.

[Jesse165]

I hope those that want to pay for Rental Servers that stay up when empty do get them 

But only if we can still create Free Servers as well even if they get deleted when empty.

It's really as simple as that.

[Natetendo83]

Adding my support to this. Portal is just begging for building communities and a great way to do that is giving those communities to set their own persistent servers. 

[PeppaPigKilla]

@SeSSioN_Avenue When renting servers in bf3/4 you do agree to set terms by EA and if you breached them your server was shut down. Were you not here when that was a thing? stat padding servers got shut down all the time for it.

Also your post here https://answers.ea.com/t5/General-Discussion/RSP-Servers-for-2042/m-p/10554727#M10713

***
@c4m3l Several community driven servers in BF4 harbor and protect cheaters. So using community driven servers as a defense against cheaters is a poor argument.

A far greater concern is that of anticheat yet here we are.

RSP has lots of problems, the signing of the EULA makes it possible to work as it creates accountability.***

Community driven servers don't have persistent cheater problems

We had GGC anti-cheat 

PBBans 

Manual removal and ban

We had shared banlists for confirmed cheaters. 

We had a lot more than we do now and all of that came with accountability because name and shame on cheats back then was a thing unlike now where if someone is banned unless you see the feed you will never know.