MaNGOS Popularity

[Kalash47]

Yes. Just modified code etc. Arguably can be said improved or not.

But I guess the summed up conclusion is.

Mangos - Not so stable, good for blizzlike servers.
Ascent/Arc(etc,) - Stable - good for high/fun servers.

:wave:

No that's stupid.
We've proved that in the last few pages that this assumption is incorrect.

Just wait till leaf emu comes out EVERYTHING WILL BE DESTROYED LULYLULYLULY.

I lol'd.

[AzolexX]

Biggest success of ArcEmu i ever saw is revision 700 with 16h up time with 250 people.

[Noobcraft]

No that's stupid.
We've proved that in the last few pages that this assumption is incorrect.


I lol'd.

Ill lol when it comes out and everyones like WTF I THOUGHT IT WAS FAKEZ?

[markg85]

I've read most of the pages here and deffinately got me interested in mangos again. Seems to me like mangos has the potential to become the biggest and best emulator out there.

[Kalash47]

I've read most of the pages here and deffinately got me interested in mangos again. Seems to me like mangos has the potential to become the biggest and best emulator out there.

You make it sound as if MaNGOS were an infant when it has been around longer than ArcEmu.

[AzolexX]

Ill lol when it comes out and everyones like WTF I THOUGHT IT WAS FAKEZ?

Man, it is fake....you will see, did you read what did it said? Core updates it self witch is not possible lol...

[Kalash47]

Let's not go off-topic.

[TheNlghtmare]

Leaf emu?
And I have never in my life encountered a stable Mangos server.

pics or GtFo!

[Henkke]

Little bit old. :S

[Noobcraft]

Leaf emus not fake........ask gastric eh well i don't think he will tell you but hes said before that it was real.

[TheNlghtmare]

No that's stupid.
We've proved that in the last few pages that this assumption is incorrect.


I lol'd.

actually... actually.. no.. we didn't prove it yet!
great job!

Little bit old. :S

Hey. This is something at least. It is old, but I guess it fits this discussion appropriately.
That is pretty stable.



This is the only way we can really go about this discussion to continue along the path of fairness.

We would need ten different unbiased people to run different emus. 5 Mangos and 5 Ascent or Ascent based (it's the sos... so chill.)
The experiment would need to run for one to two weeks.
Each server operator would need to gain the same amount of players, or around the same amount of players.
Each server operator would need to track down their uptime(s) by the hours, minutes, and days.
At the end of the one to two week experiment, we would then fairly discover which emu is the more stable one.
Oh yea, each server would have to be run on a machine with fairly similar specs.

[Aznex]

actually... actually.. no.. we didn't prove it yet!
great job!



Hey. This is something at least. It is old, but I guess it fits this discussion appropriately.
That is pretty stable.



This is the only way we can really go about this discussion to continue along the path of fairness.

We would need ten different unbiased people to run different emus. 5 Mangos and 5 Ascent or Ascent based (it's the sos... so chill.)
The experiment would need to run for one to two weeks.
Each server operator would need to gain the same amount of players, or around the same amount of players.
Each server operator would need to track down their uptime(s) by the hours, minutes, and days.
At the end of the one to two week experiment, we would then fairly discover which emu is the more stable one.
Oh yea, each server would have to be run on a machine with fairly similar specs.

Bet it didn't have vmaps enabled

[Dythzer]

actually... actually.. no.. we didn't prove it yet!
great job!

[screenshot]

Hey. This is something at least. It is old, but I guess it fits this discussion appropriately.
That is pretty stable.

I actually posted it on page 2 so yes, we did prove it already.

It's a few month old yes, but that's not something negative. Crashes and bugs gets fixed every day so it's probably even more stable now.

[Kalash47]

This is the only way we can really go about this discussion to continue along the path of fairness.

We would need ten different unbiased people to run different emus. 5 Mangos and 5 Ascent or Ascent based (it's the sos... so chill.)
The experiment would need to run for one to two weeks.
Each server operator would need to gain the same amount of players, or around the same amount of players.
Each server operator would need to track down their uptime(s) by the hours, minutes, and days.
At the end of the one to two week experiment, we would then fairly discover which emu is the more stable one.
Oh yea, each server would have to be run on a machine with fairly similar specs.

I find it funny how you ask for such an extreme test only to get you to decide to move on to a better emulator.

You didn't do this when Arc was first released, I bet.

So run along, and use your crappy Arc server, I will enjoy running, using, and developing MaNGOS.

I didn't want this thread to be an argument, I simply wished to purge your crazed assumption of the supposed "instability" of MaNGOS.

Bet it didn't have vmaps enabled

And ArcEmu servers would be SO much more stable if they had vmaps enabled. I find it funny that you even bring up this comment when MaNGOS was the first open-source emulator to support the vmaps collision system.

Moving on....

[Nikogrom]

Honestly, the only reason I'm using ArcEmu and Aspire over Mangos is because of all the custom content I've created and am currently working on. I find it easier to do a truly custom server using Ascent based emu's Esecially the ones with the different LUA types enabled.

With that said, if/when I want to host a Blizzlike server (which I probably will) I'll be using Mangos for it. In my experience it's proved to be the most stable current emu for Blizzlike realms. If I could do all the things with mangos that I've been doing with Aspire/ArcEmu, I'd use mangos for my custom realms as well. Unfortunatly, it just isn't possible atm without having to do a lot more work than I really want to do with it. :/