fix(sf): Workaround for Docker-based hosts

[Tails32]

Description

This PR removes ports which became redundant with the release of Satisfactory 1.0 and adds a workaround affecting client connectivity to containerized server instances resulting in the error message "Failed to connect to Server API" as described in #4644. The only port the game uses now is 7777 (both TCP and UDP).

Please refer to these two sources below where the dev's Community Manager announced the changes and shared this workaround:

• Announcement of Changes to Dedicated Server Ports
• Workaround@reddit

I have tested these changes with my own config files on the current gameserver container image.

Fixes #4644 (follow up to PR #4643)

Type of change

• Bug fix (a change which fixes an issue).
• New feature (a change which adds functionality).
• New Server (new server added).
• Refactor (restructures existing code).
• Comment update (typo, spelling, explanation, examples, etc).

Checklist

PR will not be merged until all steps are complete.

• This pull request links to an issue.
• This pull request uses the develop branch as its base.
• This pull request subject follows the Conventional Commits standard.
• This code follows the style guidelines of this project.
• I have performed a self-review of my code.
• I have checked that this code is commented where required.
• I have provided a detailed enough description of this PR.
• I have checked if documentation needs updating.

Documentation

If documentation does need updating either update it by creating a PR (preferred) or request a documentation update.

• User docs: https://github.com/GameServerManagers/LinuxGSM-Docs
• Dev docs: https://github.com/GameServerManagers/LinuxGSM-Dev-Docs

Thank you for your Pull Request!

[Tails32]

The workaround using the additional parameter -ini:Engine:[HTTPServer.Listeners]:DefaultBindAddress=any is no longer needed due to an update to the server's binary. The deprecated ports should still be removed as they are no longer needed but this changes the scope of this PR. How should we go forward with this?