Project Reality Forums

In my opinion 100 players is perfect to make it feel like a war, if you don't want 100 players there are servers running 64 - 82 players aswell. So just suit yourself.

It's really up to the server owners.

Totally up to server owners and the players that join them.

Personally, I like 1.0 and 100% prefer 100p servers. I like them full of people and action.

for peeps with good computers still complaining about FPS drop, i suggest more RAM. max it out as you can. remember that the BF2 engine isn't a very well optimized engine and it doesn't handle the assets very cleanly. PR further puts a strain on this. i'd suggest 8gb of ram as a bare minimum for playing PR at all.

when it comes to processor and graphics cards, you dont need anything amazing to play PR, from my experience most of your problems are going to be coming from RAM

i originally had a intel dualcore (it's so old i dont even know what model it was) and a nvidia 9800 GTX and that ran PR for me just fine until .86, where i started having some problems including FPS drops, all i did was upgrade from 4 to 8 GB ram and i had no more problems.

the reason i built a new rig wasnt to play PR, though i was having problems in PR. after i built it (around the time of .9 i7 2600k quadcore + EVGA 560ti and i was still having the problems, which were then resolved when i upgraded to 16GB of ram.

100p in 1.0 has made no difference for me, still running smooth on that rig. having more players really shouldn't effect your performance unless you have a bad connection or everyone is spamming smoke and other things with heavy effects

Bringerof_D wrote:for peeps with good computers still complaining about FPS drop, i suggest more RAM. max it out as you can. remember that the BF2 engine isn't a very well optimized engine and it doesn't handle the assets very cleanly. PR further puts a strain on this. i'd suggest 8gb of ram as a bare minimum for playing PR at all.

when it comes to processor and graphics cards, you dont need anything amazing to play PR, from my experience most of your problems are going to be coming from RAM

That's not particularly sound advice given that BF2 is a 32bit program and tops out at 2GB of addressable memory, but it's actually closer to 3GB in most situations due to the large-address-aware flag added by dice in patch 1.5. I say this with confidence as if you exceed the memory limit of BF2, it will simply crash with a memory-out-of-bounds exception. Throwing 16GB of ram at a program that literally can't consume any more than 4 (theoretically, practically it's less) is going to do jack squat unless you have some other memory-hungry programs running in the background that were previously starving BF2 of available memory.

[R-CON]Psyrus wrote:That's not particularly sound advice given that BF2 is a 32bit program and tops out at 2GB of addressable memory, but it's actually closer to 3GB in most situations due to the large-address-aware flag added by dice in patch 1.5. I say this with confidence as if you exceed the memory limit of BF2, it will simply crash with a memory-out-of-bounds exception. Throwing 16GB of ram at a program that literally can't consume any more than 4 (theoretically, practically it's less) is going to do jack squat unless you have some other memory-hungry programs running in the background that were previously starving BF2 of available memory.

Somebody got told.

Also. Upgrading rig (except if its stoneage) is not a solution. Its like if you complained about how there is heavy traffic in town and the best thing would be to buy a faster car. By your logic, Bringerof_D.

I wish there could be 128 players 100 players is just awesome. As far as I know there are actually multiple servers with 80 or 64 max. players.

[R-CON]Psyrus wrote:That's not particularly sound advice given that BF2 is a 32bit program and tops out at 2GB of addressable memory, but it's actually closer to 3GB in most situations due to the large-address-aware flag added by dice in patch 1.5. I say this with confidence as if you exceed the memory limit of BF2, it will simply crash with a memory-out-of-bounds exception. Throwing 16GB of ram at a program that literally can't consume any more than 4 (theoretically, practically it's less) is going to do jack squat unless you have some other memory-hungry programs running in the background that were previously starving BF2 of available memory.

fair enough, i'm not particularly familiar with programs and how they work so that advice i gave came simply from my experience thus far. after all it worked for me.

BF2 engine is very old, so it deosnt recognize more then 3.8 gb of ram! No metter if u have state of the art comp, it will be still the same, only some effect will be little bit smoother!

Long time ago, i used external programs for ram buffering, and page files allocations, and made things a little bit smoother for old games who had same problems with ram buffering. But i never try it on PR if its working!

100 player servers are awesome, keeps a good flow of combat but not so often that you can't have a break.

Actually I prefer 120 players, if the hardware could handle it. Had much fun with it in the beta and one squadleader leading 12 guys wasnt a problem either. Its all up to the players. If they want to implement tactics and cohesion in the game it works with 120 players too. If they want to derp around gameplay is going to be random with 60 players as well.

Dr_Death wrote:There has been tests about 200p servers, mostly ended up in crashes, but it may be a future.

200p ran quite stable during the last months of testing. I remember it was no uncommon occurrence to play ~3 maps in a row without a crash. The higher player numbers surely contribute to server instability but I doubt they are the culprit.

Cassius wrote:Actually I prefer 120 players, if the hardware could handle it. Had much fun with it in the beta and one squadleader leading 12 guys wasnt a problem either. Its all up to the players. If they want to implement tactics and cohesion in the game it works with 120 players too. If they want to derp around gameplay is going to be random with 60 players as well.

Agreed, the more the better in this case IMO. My personal favourite was along 140, turned out to be a sweetspot for PR's maps back in the day.

Brainlaag wrote:200p ran quite stable during the last months of testing. I remember it was no uncommon occurrence to play ~3 maps in a row without a crash. The higher player numbers surely contribute to server instability but I doubt they are the culprit.



Agreed, the more the better in this case IMO. My personal favourite was along 140, turned out to be a sweetspot for PR's maps back in the day.

Oh the good old times...

Loved a 200 player event back then. There was so much going on on a map, I remember when my squad and me fought our way up ontop of a hill (with some ruins on it) while facing heavy resistance, and as we captured it, we saw a (mortar) squad with at least 20 people down the little valley. We engaged them, they paniced because no one knew where the shots came from - and then the round ended Q_Q

And those 200 player WW2 minimod events - er mah gerd - pure epicness

carmikaze wrote:Loved a 200 player event back then. There was so much going on on a map, I remember when my squad and me fought our way up ontop of a hill (with some ruins on it) while facing heavy resistance, and as we captured it, we saw a (mortar) squad with at least 20 people down the little valley. We engaged them, they paniced because no one knew where the shots came from - and then the round ended Q_Q

And those 200 player WW2 minimod events - er mah gerd - pure epicness

+1 we need more of those events !

But once you lose all your transport vehicles....

GG




IF they actually did increase it. They need to add like 2-5 more trans trucks/jeeps.

Ofc, ther are maps that are fine.

I think Bijar Canyons has the most transport vehicles? (Since their tanks and APC's hold up to 6 troopers (excluding cremen)

But honestly, I almost could see 120p around. I remember the 128p server on Silent Eagle. I found that fun as shopping for a new PC.

matty1053 wrote:But once you lose all your transport vehicles....

GG




IF they actually did increase it. They need to add like 2-5 more trans trucks/jeeps.

Ofc, ther are maps that are fine.

I think Bijar Canyons has the most transport vehicles? (Since their tanks and APC's hold up to 6 troopers (excluding cremen)

But honestly, I almost could see 120p around. I remember the 128p server on Silent Eagle. I found that fun as shopping for a new PC.

Well if the team manages to immobilize the other team it should be a well deserved gg in their favor.

Are all these crashes caused by the instability of the BF2 software or by the hardware itself?