128 players part two.

[bigmoose332]

http://www.totalbf2.com/forums/showpost ... ostcount=9

just found this post, might be useful to the guys trying to sort this out!

Bigmoose

[Lange]

If this does make it, does that mean the maps will be bigger too? I mean the 64 player maps probably wont be big enough. Also what release of PR is this for?

[wushu1]

They've stretched the mapping limits pretty far already, but they CAN go farther.

I believe the largest map in PR right now is 1024x8 correct? (or is it x4?) either way, our mod has tested maps up to 1024x20(didn't work very well ) though they have loaded up, were met with sanity checks out the..well...you know....Also there some funky graphics glitches that happen...

I'd say the MAX size ingame, logically speaking, would be x10, but the lag from it, I would assume, would be so bad no one could be able to play it. Also, I dont know how stable a server with it would be(plus 128 players....impossible....)


Maybe x8 is a little more feasible

[AOD_Morph]

I think that it would be bad buisiness for ea's money hungry mindset. If they improve BF2, that would discourage sales of their newer games which they make more $$$ off of. Not saying its ethical...just makes business sense...this is Assuming EA thinks we are all retarted.

[Cheesygoodness]

http://www.totalbf2.com/forums/showpost ... ostcount=9

just found this post, might be useful to the guys trying to sort this out!

Bigmoose

Like impossible would stop us. Peshaw.

[eggman]

They've stretched the mapping limits pretty far already, but they CAN go farther.

I believe the largest map in PR right now is 1024x8 correct? (or is it x4?) either way, our mod has tested maps up to 1024x20(didn't work very well ) though they have loaded up, were met with sanity checks out the..well...you know....Also there some funky graphics glitches that happen...

I'd say the MAX size ingame, logically speaking, would be x10, but the lag from it, I would assume, would be so bad no one could be able to play it. Also, I dont know how stable a server with it would be(plus 128 players....impossible....)


Maybe x8 is a little more feasible

x4 is the largest we have in v0.6. That's almost 17sq km. Combined with raising the flight ceiling to 5000m it's a pretty good combined arms setting.

Afaik 1024x8 can be done, but there are lots of terrain glitches at the outer edges, so you are restricted to having an island of terrain in the middle of the map (which can still be very large).

The resolution of the terrain can become a concern, but I think that can easily be overcome with creative use of statics.

I'd like to see someone create a scale 8 map for PR because that would equate to 67sq km [( 1025*8 ) * ( 1025*8 )] and I think some compelling scenarios could be created for that.

An amphibious assault with some 3D clouds used as fog above the water (not the ghey vBF2 view distance fog) and lots of helos and jets with some objectives on an island... I'd love to see that come together!

btw I love BB mod, just dont get enough time to play anything these days heh.

[supahpingi]

well lets all go to the dice/ea office and stand in front of the gates early in the morning.
once the bf2 devs arrive we bash em on the head with baseballbats untill they make more patches for us with 128pl and bug fixes and more mod support

[Outlawz7]

well lets all go to the dice/ea office and stand in front of the gates early in the morning.
once the bf2 devs arrive we bash em on the head with baseballbats untill they make more patches for us with 128pl and bug fixes and more mod support

EA fired half of them, lol...

[El_Vikingo]

EA Bug Fixer's were too expensive and they had to make them redundant.

[youm0nt]

I found this thread on a Half Life 2 forum but in a Battlefield Games section. The thread is how to get 255 players on one server. Is this the way you guys are trying to get 128 players in a server? Not sure if this is possible because the 255 player thread was made about two years ago and not sure if any patch was made prior. Maybe you guys can read the thread and do it their way but with 128 players, 255 is way out of the question, lol.
http://www.halflife2.net/forums/showthread.php?t=84142

[Scarlet_Pimp]

Will this ever work?
all i can say is i hope so 128 AlBasrah would be awsome.

[Xmaster]

Lag would be horrible on that kind of server. unless u have one hell of an host.

[El_Vikingo]

Which Im sure some servers already have.

Some servers have two 64 player games on simultaneously.

[AfterDune]

If we can make it work for 80 people, that would already be awesome!

[Hawk_345]

we need more than 64 on these new maps, 128 maybe to much, but and 80 or even 90, 100 server would be great. 40vs40,45vs45,50vs50, just imagin. 128 is pushing it though i think, but it could work with a good host, and if people have good comps.

[Hawk_345]

sorry for the double post, pressed it twice by accident.

[Outlawz7]

Double posts are caused by lag, when you send the reply to the forum...

On topic, Eggman said, that we can only have 110, since it fits the 9x6 squads and a commander, so thats 55vs55, no more...

[Dunehunter]

Yeah, Basrah or Kashan with 50v50 would be great.

[.:iGi:.U.G.H.]

Which Im sure some servers already have.

Some servers have two 64 player games on simultaneously.

Our server can run 3x full 64player servers at least.

[Masaq]

I'm pretty sure that there's a difference between running 2x64p servers and 1x128 in terms of lag.

Putting it very very simplistically- (and I know that it's an unrealistic model of the network protocols involved, but still):

If you think of each action taking place, you've got your own actions being relayed out and the actions of everyone else coming in.

On a 64p server, that's 64^2 actions simultaniously as every individuals actions are relayed to everyone else.

Two servers- 2(64^2) = 8192 simultanious transactions.

However, on a single 128p server - 128^2 = 16384 simultanious transactions.