When will 128 Source Code go public?

[Stealthgato]

I'd love 64 servers with 10-man squad possibilities.

[Brainlaag]

Guys, do we have to turn this thread in another "this community sux/this one is great"-thread?
Everything was said now, as usual the dev team wont tell any release dates.

You are the one who started with it, I was only referring to the fact that if we get an American server to host another 128 test, it should be one with an already persistent mumble population.

[mattnett1]

Believe me, you really don't want to. It gets annoying but it's WAY more realistic.

The lag is horrible also.

[karambaitos]

^mumble causing lag, yeah if your PC is made out of wood or theres something seriously wrong with your windows

[Brainlaag]

Believe me, you really don't want to. It gets annoying but it's WAY more realistic.

The lag is horrible also.

Its not something I want, thats what we (the whole Sisu community) are enforcing. And as Karambaitos said, if Mumble causes lag, then you should really think about a change from your mobile phone network to a proper connection.

[Rudd]

Lets not let this discussion stray into the mumble kingdom, keep it to the 128 code please lads.

If you have any ideas to help implement 128 we'd love to hear them, specific or non-specific ideas; just keep it constructive and think before you post

[Murphy]

The biggest issue is the name tags, but I noticed this has forced me to become MUCH better with my map as I'm sure it has a lot of players. Regardless there are many heated situations where you simply can't check your map, you have to shot first ask questions later. It's part of that whole "organized chaos" thing, and having name tags only show up for the first 64 players ruins the fine balance devs have struck concerning friendly markers. It makes for a lot of raging teammates (I felt bad for Napalm, he got fired at by friendlies 3-4 times while we were waling roughly 4 blocks, hell I even wasted him once we got into our defensive positions).

Is there a way to tell what causes a server to crash? I've noticed the sisu server does crash a bit but so does TG and many other popular server. How are we to know if the instability is due to the 128 code or could it be another issue with PR? Maybe it's just the servers themselves that are to blame.

Some maps don't have enough trans/other assets (MOAR TANKZ) which leaves them tiresome for infantry at times, long hauls toward an enemy that has a seemingly endless amount of time to setup his defenses aren't fun. I'm going to just assume some, maybe most, maps are not balanced in-depth yet.

[stealth420]

BATTLEFIELD 3 RELEASES ON 25th
PR POPULATION WILL DROP!!!!(Its the truth)
RELEASE THE CODE BEFORE SO IT WILL ATTRACT MORE PLAYERS BECAUSE 128 COMBAT IS EPIC!!!!
(Caps for special effects)

DEVs if you are worried about systems handling it dont worry, just give it to american servers because we Americans have the most $$$$$$, we have the best hardware and we run games on max even in windowed mode.

And you can Trust me on this, I am a middle class american gamer and my system can handle a 256 player server. So 128 is a drop in the ocean.

heres my specs

Overclocked Intel Core i7 990x Extreme Six Core Processor (3.93 GHz, 12MB Cache)

24GB2 Tri-Channel DDR3 SDRAM at 1333Mhz - 6 DIMMS

2000GB3 SATA II hard drive (7200RPM)

Dual 2GB ATI Radeon HD 6950 - ATI CrossFireX

Alienware is the way to go!

If you release the code now it will BOOST PR population by a large amount of players.

[IINoddyII]

That's a nice rig.

But the client really has nothing to do with server capability.

I suspect there will be others along to correct you about the other misconceptions....my advice to them would be to be kind

[TheComedian]

BATTLEFIELD 3 RELEASES ON 25th
PR POPULATION WILL DROP!!!!(Its the truth)

Nope, it won't change one bit.

And you can Trust me on this, I am a middle class american gamer and my system can handle a 256 player server. So 128 is a drop in the ocean.

You overestimate yourself. AFAIK you need a Xeon to even run 128.

[Vista]

BATTLEFIELD 3 RELEASES ON 25th
PR POPULATION WILL DROP!!!!(Its the truth)
RELEASE THE CODE BEFORE SO IT WILL ATTRACT MORE PLAYERS BECAUSE 128 COMBAT IS EPIC!!!!
(Caps for special effects)

DEVs if you are worried about systems handling it dont worry, just give it to american servers because we Americans have the most $$$$$$, we have the best hardware and we run games on max even in windowed mode.

And you can Trust me on this, I am a middle class american gamer and my system can handle a 256 player server. So 128 is a drop in the ocean.

heres my specs

Overclocked Intel Core i7 990x Extreme Six Core Processor (3.93 GHz, 12MB Cache)

24GB2 Tri-Channel DDR3 SDRAM at 1333Mhz - 6 DIMMS

2000GB3 SATA II hard drive (7200RPM)

Dual 2GB ATI Radeon HD 6950 - ATI CrossFireX

Alienware is the way to go!

If you release the code now it will BOOST PR population by a large amount of players.

I will try to be kind.

Well as you can see not everyone can spend 215651312532145324$ on a PC, you can, gratz, not everyone can.

[Wicca]

Nope, it won't change one bit.



You overestimate yourself. AFAIK you need a Xeon to even run 128.

I think Xeon is the Intel equivalent.

[Bumgie]

Lets not let this discussion stray into the mumble kingdom, keep it to the 128 code please lads.

If you have any ideas to help implement 128 we'd love to hear them, specific or non-specific ideas; just keep it constructive and think before you post

Here is a very specific instructions to help make 128 a reality.

First.

Remove the damn 72 hour "lets protect dying servers" rule for some propper testing.

Second.

Ditch the nametags. People like playing at sisu even with half the nametags missing.
In my opinion removing all the nametags causes much less confusion than 50 percent of the team still having them.

Third.

Even tough you said not to speak about mumble I am going to say this as Soppa has reguested for it.
Get the new version of mumble finished and released.

[Psyko]

dude...this thread again??? when are you people going to understand that there isnt enough people playing PR at any given time to fill servers at 126!!!

Most night when i get on i could 6 full servers at 64 and when the 126 server is up you get a handful of scraggly servers with around 30 people, all of which are in my time zone.

Imagine this. all the servers have 126 slots. three servers fill, and the rest get to eat shit. thats what would happen. Until Bf3 has backbreaking problems that people wont play, or people get bored, or until people stop playing the huge releases this year (bf3, mw3, guildwars2, whatever...) even the olut server should be down to normalize the servers.

Its the only juxtaposition i've ever seen the community unanimously squabble about. its both a blessing and a curse.

[Sgt. Mahi]

Forget about 126 servers and make them ~80-100 players instead. That's where the good gameplay is at anyway. Oh and 10 man squads??? Ridiculous for a public game since no one still doesn't want to be the medic.

126 servers is a God damn nightmare unless the squad limitation can be bypassed.

[manligheten]

[quote=""'[R-DEV"]Rudd;1678781']
If you have any ideas to help implement 128 we'd love to hear them, specific or non-specific ideas; just keep it constructive and think before you post [/quote]

The main advantage with 128 servers is the feel of a more intense and larger scale battle. In 64 the battle is to disproportionation as there is way to much assets to every infantryman and thus the maps feel empty. In 128 there are almost always infantry around defending objects etc. In 64 it can be so bad as there is only like one full infantry group.

Thus, the assets except of transport trucks should be kept somewhat constant.


The second advantage is that infantry groups matter in 128, as they are larger and there is more of them. In 64, if you lay alone in a ambush somewhere you can cripple a full infantry group so bad they lose their fighting force. In 128 with bigger groups, you have to stop a infantry group with a infantry group, you can't do it alone.
That's the way it used to be in 0.856, when the infantry groups fought as organic units until the lmg became a spawnable auto-sniper. You seldom see that today and that's a shame, because the group teamwork with randoms was the main unique thing with PR. With 128 you have to be in a group to get those kills etc everyone wants. Most players play to win the game and beat the enemy not to roleplay. The best way to make players work as a group is to make lone wolfes weak and easy pray for enemy groups. In 64 you can get ridiculously easy kills with a lmg or a hat all on your own. To walk in groups is somewhat of a weakness.


The third advantage is that insurgency is funnier for the insurgents as the pressure is greater on the caches. Though, 128 players is a advantage for BLUFOR, strangely enough, and insurgents should like get spawnable scopes or something. Militia should also get spawnable scopes to balance militia AAS, as it where before. Balancing issiues is much clearer when you play 128 as the game is more dynamic.


Fourthly, Muttrah should get somewhat more enterable houses to prevent stalemates along the streets, but that's no big issue. Actually, I think that Asad Khal works great in 128, because of the many enterable house (even though it's unbalanced as Hamas don't have scopes or scoped lmgs). Jamal al-Burj is the one map I don't think work very well. Yamalai works the best.


In summary, 128 players make PR less of a roleplaying walking simulator and more of a war game. It 'matter' what you do, as advances, destroying APCs etc. can be used for breakthroughs. In 64, there is hardly anyone to take advantage of your glorious deeds.

A greatly appropriate what you DEVs have done. Post 0.856 removing teamwork from the group (rally nerf, unbalanced kits etc) and trying to implement it on team level is in my point of view a failure. With 128 players it works. Many changes in 0.9xx like deviation and lmg-nerf is good. A greater player count concludes it.


[quote="Dev1200""]
View distance, limited kits, vehicles, 128 player maps (since all of them are 64), OPTIMIZATION SOO MUCH OPTIMIZATION ;___;[/quote]
Variables easily changed in a text editor. The main time consumer is coding and modelling with has nothing do with the player count. View distance?

Also, server costs go up because of more slots, plus less servers will be available.

What?

If all servers go to 128, then amount of populated servers is essentially halved.

Fallacy. It's reasonable to assume that if there is 128 servers more people would play. If there would be too few players in the playerbase the playercount could be caped at like 100. 64 players is like a tipping point and every extra player over that goes into infantry and players that are actually populating the battlefield.

[Brainlaag]

Forget about 126 servers and make them ~80-100 players instead. That's where the good gameplay is at anyway. Oh and 10 man squads??? Ridiculous for a public game since no one still doesn't want to be the medic.

126 servers is a God damn nightmare unless the squad limitation can be bypassed.

Actually 10-men squads is one of the reasons I only play on the 128 by now, nothing wrong with it. If you are unable to do, its failure on your side, no being "impossible" in a public game.

IMO one server per continent would be more than enough (One American and one European), so you can keep 64 full, while still having enough people to fill up 128. The cap should be a bit more flexible too, as some maps can have ~140 players just fine, while others ofc don't.
Nevertheless as Psyko said, PR will suffer a heavy playercount drop this year with many very good new games coming out.

[KingKong.CCCP]

Somewhere in May this year I wrote a my last post on the subject on prteamwork forum, I cant find it now...
Anyway, I stated then, PR64 team spent too much time working on PR:Arma2, which was a big mistake, from the gamer perspective. From the 3D modeler or a developer point of view, I guess things look so much better working in the Arma2 environment, with the help from Bohemia.
It looked to me that nothing will change with PR, since the only way PR:Arma2 reaches popularity is to draw players from PR64, and still it will not work. Few months will take this to be realized, but BF3 will be out.
I predicted back then 128p server option not to be released till BF3 comes out, and I stated that BF3 will be the end of PR64.

But it is also possible that after few months with only few live servers, someone (who just upgraded his server) will put 300p server up, with 2000m view distance.
There is like 10% chance people will populate that server... but it is possible, and maybe PR will be brought back to life.

[Rudd]

I stated then, PR64 team spent too much time working on PR:Arma2, which was a big mistake, from the gamer perspective.

yes, the BF2 team all moved over to ArmA2 for the weekend

wrong

there were perhaps 3 DEVs from BF2 who primarily worked on ArmA2 for this release, the rest of us continued working on our projects

[goguapsy]

What's the problem with a high ping, as long as it's <400 (when I start getting sttuter)?