256 player servers.. or not

[Ridge]

If it automatically kicked you when entering a server w/o being in the mumble channel. How can you figure out which team you are supposed to be in mumble if you can't join and find out?

[Muffins]

Maybe have one officially run 256 player server. If you guys figure out how to make them run smoothly. And have it only run on the weekends or something.

[Muffins]

If it automatically kicked you when entering a server w/o being in the mumble channel. How can you figure out which team you are supposed to be in mumble if you can't join and find out?

Ask in mumble

[Snazz]

If it automatically kicked you when entering a server w/o being in the mumble channel. How can you figure out which team you are supposed to be in mumble if you can't join and find out?

If the script checked for your name in both team channels it shouldn't matter which one you initially join.

Ask in mumble

I wouldn't advise doing that as some find it annoying, particularly as it's currently unnecessary if you just use a tiny bit of initiative and common sense to figure it out yourself. If that fails ask over team chat, which is much less disturbing.

[WOCrooks]

I personally like the idea of these massive games, but with this comes the need for:

- More Squads; and/or
- Larger Squads

More squads is an obvious one, larger squads is a bit different. I personally think a squad size of ten men would be pretty ideal -- you would be able to fit the entire squad in to two Humvees, but then again, the size of other assets would have to be considered if increasing squad sizes (transport helos for example).

Overall, I believe that these massive server sizes would end up being very fun, but there will need to be tweaks in many fields, whether it is the size of squads or the number of assets per map (particularly transport assets).

[Muffins]

If the script checked for your name in both team channels it shouldn't matter which one you initially join.


I wouldn't advise doing that as some find it annoying, particularly as it's currently unnecessary if you just use a tiny bit of initiative and common sense to figure it out yourself. If that fails ask over team chat, which is much less disturbing.

I cant imagine myself getting annoyed over someone saying a 4 word sentence to understand something that will slightly improve gameplay

[FullMetalMonkey]

I personally like the idea of these massive games, but with this comes the need for:

- More Squads; and/or
- Larger Squads

More squads is an obvious one, larger squads is a bit different. I personally think a squad size of ten men would be pretty ideal -- you would be able to fit the entire squad in to two Humvees, but then again, the size of other assets would have to be considered if increasing squad sizes (transport helos for example).

Overall, I believe that these massive server sizes would end up being very fun, but there will need to be tweaks in many fields, whether it is the size of squads or the number of assets per map (particularly transport assets).

Whilst larger squads is a good idea, it needs to be limited to a size of ten players maximum as anything more than that starts to get unmanageable. It would also be excellent if there was an ability for the Squad Leader to assign Fire Teams so that people can easilly know which team their supposed to be apart of within their squad.

Whilst you do get lucky sometimes with your squads and get people who are disciplined and follow the Squad Leaders orders quite well, most of time, from my experience, you end up with people being confused as to who is who and what team your in. The bug where not all of your squad mates tags showing up doesn't help matters in that regard either.
I personally think PR should stay at the 128 or lower mark for the time being whilst these sort of implementations are made and fixed and then try and push for larger games.

I have video evidence of it being confusing and almost unmanageable to have these larger squads with PR in its current state but it will take me a time to get it up as i have a quota of other things i want uploaded first.

[FelipeFR]

In a near future...

Code: Select all

Battlefield 2 Dedicated Server v1.5.3153-802.0(x86_64)
"9000+ Player TEST Sisu [MUMBLE] PR 0.957e Average FPS:  -9001 [d:0, o:1554]
IP: 85.23.203.31 Port: 16567             Map: fallujah_west
Game mode: gpm_insurgency/9000+             Mod: pr             TimeLeft: 03:38:11
Players: 9001/9001 (0 r) (1000 connecting)    Round: 1/1          Status: [playing]

[Shovel]

I think that 128 is a good number.
But 12 man squads loses the teamwork dynamic, everyone is just running around. You need 3 hum Wes or 2 transport helicopters tonged one of those squads anywhere. 8 is good.

[Truism]

There problem seems to be the bigger squad sizes I find. When you get 12 people in a squad its just too much to coordinate. 8 is a good number as allows you to create a couple of useful fireteams and still maintain control. That said, you need to be able to have atleast 2 medics, 2 saws per squad.

If we can't increase the number of squads, then realistically I don't think each team should exceed 70 players (140 total)

l2command.

I'm not even slightly kidding.

[Bringerof_D]

i've enjoyed most 116/120 rounds, my relatively bad ping is the only making it less enjoyable. I think somewhere in the neighbourhood of 140-160 players would be ideal. Any more than that and the 4 km maps will start feeling tight and you wont be able to go anywhere using stealth the 120/116 tests have been great, but you still feel a little under manned when it comes to holding defensive positions despite a fifth of the team being there.

i also think anything above 128 should be held off until technology better accommodates that level of processing power on a server, and of course packet flow to and from the players' rigs.

other problems taken into account of course. for instance, breaking the squad limit and creating further sub divisions.

FOBs and the like would also need to be reconsidered. with that amount of players it would be as spamy as the rally points used to be. my solution for that problem would simply be to remove spawning from FOBs, have them placed to enable building machine gun nests and foxholes etc. that way instead of just spawning in it would be required that someone defend and hold the FOB, while the FOB must be large enough to accommodate for helicopter insertions. Allotted distance to build from the FOB would need to be increased so that a better defensive front can be established to defend an area large enough to keep the choppers covered when landing.

i dont think a large majority of the problems have been brought up yet or even thought of.

[Damian(>>>PL]

FOBs and the like would also need to be reconsidered. with that amount of players it would be as spamy as the rally points used to be. my solution for that problem would simply be to remove spawning from FOBs, have them placed to enable building machine gun nests and foxholes etc. that way instead of just spawning in it would be required that someone defend and hold the FOB, while the FOB must be large enough to accommodate for helicopter insertions. Allotted distance to build from the FOB would need to be increased so that a better defensive front can be established to defend an area large enough to keep the choppers covered when landing.

I dont agree with you mate, I agree with the fact that FOBs system need some remake.
Even with 80 pleyers per site we still need some spawns.

I have any other suggestion what to do with FBs.
In my opinon the best solution to FB system with so many players is to make them to be spawnable only inside caprange of capped friendly objective, and to make objectives much faster and easier to neutralize but long and difficult to cap. Ofcourse FB still can be destroyed.

[Snazz]

I cant imagine myself getting annoyed over someone saying a 4 word sentence

It's a subjective matter. It can break immersion and be distracting when you're involved in a match and some random voice blurts out a question over global, more so when various players respond. Also multiple people may do it throughout the round compounding it's potential irritance.

Global speak is meant to remain silent while people are playing, there's no legitimate excuse in my view for breaching it. It actually seems rather lazy and/or incompetent to not figure it out yourself while others easily manage to do so.

[lucky.BOY]

I simply join a squad and then ask over VOIP what channel on our team is. That way i annoy as few people as i can.

That kick-script can check if you are on the right channel when you are plaing for like 5 minutes. If you are not, you would get a warning, and then kick.

-lucky

[sparks50]

I simply join a squad and then ask over VOIP what channel on our team is. That way i annoy as few people as i can.

Or just check the squad leader names and find out that way.

[Dunstwolke]

Something, imho, that has to be considered as well:

Unless we increase the amount of people playing PR by a significant margin, servers with more slots also means overall less populated servers to chose from.

So there will be less diversity, less map-choice at a given time, less Clans that can claim a populated server their own, etc.

[Wicca]

Therein lies the question of power. Do we want unification or do we want to be split up?

Can this community have large public servers with mature people in it?
Then tournaments and clan leagues can be where clans meet.

PR is best played organized, obviously. But if you put the best and most mature players, in large servers such as 128, it will increase the entire mods popularity, on the cost of a few clans power?

Id rather have large servers, with many people in them, than a shatterd community, who only thinks of the well being of their server.

[Brainlaag]

Therein lies the question of power. Do we want unification or do we want to be split up?

Can this community have large public servers with mature people in it?
Then tournaments and clan leagues can be where clans meet.

PR is best played organized, obviously. But if you put the best and most mature players, in large servers such as 128, it will increase the entire mods popularity, on the cost of a few clans power?

Id rather have large servers, with many people in them, than a shatterd community, who only thinks of the well being of their server.

Totally agree with Wicca and as some others have already stated that about 100+ are empty through out the day, whats does that tell us ?

[BroCop]

Therein lies the question of power. Do we want unification or do we want to be split up?

Can this community have large public servers with mature people in it?
Then tournaments and clan leagues can be where clans meet.

PR is best played organized, obviously. But if you put the best and most mature players, in large servers such as 128, it will increase the entire mods popularity, on the cost of a few clans power?

Id rather have large servers, with many people in them, than a shatterd community, who only thinks of the well being of their server.

Wicca you been smoking pot again? That doesnt have any sense. How do you plan on keeping these "mature players" if this "popularity" you speak of will bring alot of herp derp players?

Not to mention if you give admin rights to every moron out there who holds a grudge at some people then you are really going to struggle with your "maturity"

[Wicca]

Cropcop please type properly? Your saying im smoking pot, but i cant make out what you type. Refrase it so i get your point.