I forgot to mention that a new inter-server messaging system was added a few days ago.
It enabled admins to send messages from server to server. One idea behind it was to aid getting HH1 started when HH2 is full by sending an inviting/encouraging message.

(Admins are aware of it.)

The latter, honestly.

I have no idea if removing Quickplay would revert the changes to the server make-up we've seen in the past months. Maybe some people are happier as it is now. We know Tox isn't, Dazed isn't (though is he ever?) and I'm not - I've spent most of my recent TF2 playing time jumping from server to server. Disconnects usually caused by terrible server performance (I even, and I'm aware how sad this is, created a spreadsheet to record various server performance markers - it didn't make for fun reading :D), teams with 4 Spies, 4 Pyros, & 2 Snipers & a very lonely Heavy, or weapons that drain my uber at zero risk to the attacker (I hope the Big Brains at Valve are working on HL3, because whatever goons are working in TF2 at the moment are shaking my faith in their ability to create a decent game).

Server 1, as it was, WAS TF2 for me. Perhaps I need to reevaluate my expectations.

People just need to re-learn playing @HH1, almost nobody wants to join an empty server, they just refresh the servers list and see that #1 is empty and 24 people can do that simultaneously and see it empty, but if they would join it it would be full. Don't tell me there aren't enough players to play... It's in people (and sometimes maps when half of the players leave with the frustration about playing some non-popular map because they know no one will join it...).

I'd be delighted to see every server full, I'm not ranting.

Referring to the disconnection message, what kind of disconnections are you talking about?

Most disconnections caused in the last 6 months have been due to a global issue the affects all TF2 servers, that Valve have tried multiple times to fix, and are still trying now.

Fundamentally HH1, as a server, hasn't changed. A lot of other things have, and people make their choices.

I'd agree with the cathartic feelings here.

Regarding what might happen if we removed Quickplay, it's almost certain that HH1 would see more activity. Now, I'm just going to ask this because noone else has done; it's not an opinion I'm sure I share but it's made me think:

How much does having a quickplay server really benefit the HH as an organisation?

You get more players on HH2 more of the time, but I don't know that that brings anything tangible to the HH. We survive off members' and regs' donations alone, do we not?

If the staunch bonds of server-side camaraderie that previously linked players and made them regulars have been weakened, diluted by the influx of (as much as I hate to use this word) "randomers", then perhaps it might not be a bad idea to take HH2 off Quickplay. The regular players will enjoy higher quality games of TF2 (communication, banter, no random stuff) and thus will start returning more.

Apologies for the confusion.

I was talking about servers outwith those of the HH, and by "disconnects", I meant "hitting Esc, then mousing over to & then clicking on the Disconnect button" =)

Beyond the ability to run TF2, there are some servers out there that enforce some really strange network rates on their clients. Who Dares Grins, for example, enforce minimum update & cmdrate values of 66, over a max rate setting of 30000 :D

I know HH1 hasn't changed, though I did notice you added a min_rate of 60000, which was a good move (though of all the servers I've ever played on I must have the worst routing to the HH ones - it's constantly frustrating to feel like you're bumping into Spies, and have hit-reg/delay so terrible I was too ashamed to pick up anything more than a Medigun). It's player behaviour that would need re-setting.

This is perhaps going off-topic but I think setting min rate/update on a server to 66 isn't just a good idea as it doesn't allow room for adjustment.

The following has been on HH1-2-3 for quite some time.
sv_minrate 45000
sv_maxrate 100000
sv_minupdaterate 33
sv_maxupdaterate 66
sv_mincmdrate 33
sv_maxcmdrate 66
Anyone has always been able to suggest alternatives.

No, no, you're totally right - I pointed WDG's rates out because of how absurd they are. I asked one of the clan members why they were set like this (asked, not complained), and was told that if my network connection couldn't support them then I could "suck it" :D

I don't think they knew much about networking =)

Speaking of, why force a min_cmdrate & min_updaterate above the defaults? They're a very low base, sure, & setting a minimum value prevents rate-hacking/ping masking, but is there a negative aspect to having them at default values?

I think I remember you being on the server when you asked that (Who Dares, Grins....)

I apologise for anyone being as rude as just suggesting you 'suck it' as it's a fair question. Many of our clan members, including myself, know nothing about networking indeed.

I suggest that if you really want to know, you discuss it with the Clan Leaders who set the server settings. Currently it's set for Quickplay simply because we need the bodies even though, as you've discussed for HH, it can dilute the feel of the server for our regs and clan members.

The reason why it is such a dreadful set up for a server is that forcing 66 cl_cmdrate and 66 cl_updaterate will always cause choke with a max rate of 30000 on a full 24 man server.

You are forcing your clients to receive / send more information than they are allowed to, causing movement information to be delayed / dropped. This setting has nothing to do with being quickplay compatible.

I believe that upping the min cl_cmdrate / cl_updaterate to 33 is slightly beneficial as it syncs better with the games internal tickrate.