There are manny things one can do to keep the mod alive, there also manny things one shouldnt do to keep PR going.
D.J.

Is there actually any legit reason devs decided to limit the number of players to only 100?VTRaptor wrote:Allow passworded servers to increase max player limit.
But is there actually a list of reasons why you decided to limit it to only 100 and not 128? Actual reasons, and not "we just feel like it fits". Because DEVs that play maybe 3 games a month are not really in a position to make that claim sound reasonable.[R-DEV]Mineral wrote:Why does any game have that limitation? It's for a variation of design, performance and balancing. 100p fits the current game and community the best. We also don't limit it to 100p, you can have less if you want AFAIK![]()
Great post Yosik! I think you pretty much nailed the reality of it all and specially the fact that instead of fighting we could be working together to make the game even better.[R-DEV]Yosik wrote: It's easy to start contributing, people will help you out and you will get a lot out of it in addition to the game's growth. There are plenty of guides on just about anything on the modding forums and programming guides online.
Can't contribute something yourself? Try making formal and organized suggestions without bashing everything and see what happens. Feel free to send me or anyone on the team a PM if you have a brilliant suggestion and feel like the devs are ignoring it, I guarantee that I will give you constructive feedback and try to make it happen if it's good.

Go ahead and put on your modding pants and hop in then!Lugi wrote:But is there actually a list of reasons why you decided to limit it to only 100 and not 128? Actual reasons, and not "we just feel like it fits". Because DEVs that play maybe 3 games a month are not really in a position to make that claim sound reasonable.
Thanks for the kind words Valmont <3Valmont wrote:Things like these come to my mind (some are just crazy ideas):
- Have your team help with WW2 pending content so it can be released faster.
- Have your coders help with Python improvements to reduce CTD, bring new game modes, improve server performance and functionality etc.
- Help Improving the textures of some assets that currently have low quality/WIP textures like several vehicles interiors, some sky settings of several maps etc.
- Get the BF2 source code from someone inside Dice that you know. (use your influence dammit!
- Help fixing the remaining issues with the long neglected COOP play of PR, fixing things like bots firing trough smoke/bushes etc. Make them patrol/defend better and behave more like humans.
I agree, but it fits normal, pub servers. I can't imagine playing with 200 other players on normal server. We're talking about EVENTS.'[R-DEV wrote:Mineral;2173648']Why does any game have that limitation? It's for a variation of design, performance and balancing. 100p fits the current game and community the best.
Let clans and communities deliver it with organised events. If you REALLY want to stop people from asking for more than 100p, let them have it and IF it's really broken, let them see it for themselves.'[R-DEV wrote:AfterDune;2173655']100 players is more than enough on PR sized maps to still have proper gameplay and not hurt performance too much. Also keep in mind we have maps ranging from 1km to 4km, and the player count is the same on all sizes.
If we open up the player limit, even if it's on a passworded server, servers will run with as many players as they like (200 for example). Whilst that sounds cool, it just doesn't deliver the gameplay we want PR to deliver.
Sure, a 200 player Omaha Beach event was the ultimate bomb, because such a map and its gameplay can handle that amount. Most other maps simply can't.
But not exactly the kind of gameplay most players would want to receive it seems. Was there at least a poll saying "Which number of players makes the gameplay best for you?"? You could easily check out if the devteam's opinion aligns with the opinion of the playerbase[R-DEV]AfterDune wrote:Whilst that sounds cool, it just doesn't deliver the gameplay we want PR to deliver.
How many people is that, 0,1%?Also, a higher player count has a lot of impact on performance. People have performance issues with 100 players already, let alone even more.
That's why we have mods setting the next map, they would just avoid smaller maps with more people.Also keep in mind we have maps ranging from 1km to 4km, and the player count is the same on all sizes.
Then why not repeat that event then? I fail to see any downsides.Sure, a 200 player Omaha Beach event was the ultimate bomb, because such a map and its gameplay can handle that amount.
Of course, but how valuable is a opinion about gameplay from a person that barely ever even plays this game. Be honest, how much did you spend playing pr in the last month?And to be fair, devs that are making the game actually _can_ make such claims.
Yup, "Fuck you, we know best (even though we hardly ever actually play the game)"[R-DEV]AfterDune wrote:You can disagree, which is fine, but this isn't open for discussion, sorry.
