Project Reality Forums

In my opinion 120 players or more are just to much for the Maps we have now on PR.
96 Players, like they're now planning it for that NEW Event is just the right number of players for a 4x4 Map.

Greetings Zyfort

CnC only allows one fob per side. And people focus to much on fobs. It should be just about killing eachother.

one FOB? I thought it was 4. But then again I cant even remember the last time I played CnC

CroCop wrote:one FOB? I thought it was 4. But then again I cant even remember the last time I played CnC

It's really just one FOB each Side has to defend.

Evolution is better then revolution.
I think the player limit should be raised slowly.

now we are @ 32 a side
in next patch increase that to 50 a side if that works fine then...
in next patch try 70 a side

sooner or later we will end up with where we want to be
Evolution is better then revolution since you learn underway. Slow evolution has made pr the way it is now, lest stick to the winning recipe (to get the ).

First make training system like in AA, so newbies won't be able to join servers until they learn how to play.

Then you can introduce even 1024 players servers. I think too much players isn't problem if they are comanded properly. But again - make it impossible to create squads/ become squad leader/commander / take special/limited kits/ use vechicles/choppers/jets until player finishes proper training to do that. This way more players = more epic games, not more epic fails.

Also try breaking 8-slot vechicles limit, so that vechicles like Chinook can show their power. This would be really helpful with so many players.

Vehicles is the only valid problem there. Squads and maps are actually better designed for a larger team (eg. maps are actually too big for 64 player - no decisive maneuvre, squads of 6 don't have enough capability to actually do a squad task).

If you assume the prime objective is realism, you can infer all sorts of changes that should be made. Most would make the game more fun too.

mati140 wrote:First make training system like in AA, so newbies won't be able to join servers until they learn how to play.

Then you can introduce even 1024 players servers. I think too much players isn't problem if they are comanded properly. But again - make it impossible to create squads/ become squad leader/commander / take special/limited kits/ use vechicles/choppers/jets until player finishes proper training to do that. This way more players = more epic games, not more epic fails.

Also try breaking 8-slot vechicles limit, so that vechicles like Chinook can show their power. This would be really helpful with so many players.

All the of the things you've said are not possible.
1024 players will need a HUGE server that wouldn't be possible and would take so long for the technology to become cheap enough PR2 would probs already be out.

Firstly you guys still arn't seeing some of the problems we're facing:

- We are barely able to run 128 players with the current server, and it costs a lot to run/buy a server.
- After the 9 SQ limit is breached we cannot use voip, also the commander cannot see any of the SQ's past the 9th SQ.
- Even with a 4KM map 100 players is enough to make it seem crowded anymore than that and it'll become spammy, and anything under 4KM will not be a viable option for a map, also 4KM maps take AGES to make and create.
- The more vehicals and players there are the lower FPS you will have 256 players will make a good 40-50% of players be forced to play on low.
- The game mehanics at the moment arn't quite ready for 128 players yet nevermind 256.


50-60 players a side lets us keep voip, allows lockable squads without leaving anyone out, as well as keeping SQ numbers at a good easy level to command.

50-60 players per side is optimum for everyone, both server owners and admins (imagine admining 256 players?) as well as keeping the game-play good and realistic for the player.

Frosty2200 wrote:I was in the server when it was on Fallujah and we were breaking the 200 limit. I was in a squad with 12 other people 4 of which on TS with me. 13 man squad and I could still communicate to every single one of them with VOIP in-game.

13 man SQ's are hard to control,we don't all have friends and mates or clan mates in PR we have to accomidate for everyone, also i said once we go past 9 SQ's, sure we can increase the member limit however i think anymore than 8 and it can get hard to control not even to mention transport etc.

Once again, playing on the server as we were breaking the 200 mark and on a 2KM map (Fallujah West) it never once seemed like there were too many people around me or shooting at me. The use of mumble and everyone being forced to be on it GREATLY increases communication and I never feel like "a smurff" is a stranger.

I to was there when it was breaking the 200 player mark, is was a cluster f*ck.... to say the least around caches.
Plus not all servers will use mumble nor does everyone like it.


Other than that, weren't we told that there couldn't be over 64 players in a server once upon a time???

There is a huge differance between server code and client code. To change the vehical limits we would have to change the source code, at least that's how it's been explained to me. It is illegal for us to edit the source code without DICE letting us (which might never happen).

Answers in bold

You know, you can just lock your squad at 9 right?

Wicca wrote:You know, you can just lock your squad at 9 right?

can we lock SQ's now?

Wicca wrote:You know, you can just lock your squad at 9 right?

isn't that a problem> people locking their squads leaving no squad space for the huge number of players?

another reason to limit numbers

[R-DEV]Rudd wrote:isn't that a problem> people locking their squads leaving no squad space for the huge number of players?

another reason to limit numbers

that's my main reason, as well as i think it'd be better for all clans etc. if you only have 128 players at the max

The game probably isn't ready for 256 right now, I don't think anyone worth listening to would contest that, but as parts of the code get broken and rebuilt better it will become a viable option. 128 players is very doable with most of the game as it is now.

killonsight95 wrote:that's my main reason, as well as i think it'd be better for all clans etc. if you only have 128 players at the max

so you think that 128 + is a bad idea because you want to make a 4 man spec ops squad?

well the naysayers can always play on a smaller server. they aren't all going to be 128 or more. i say let the clans make that decision for themselves and not let killonsight make it for them.

i think people are just afraid of change.

He meant it would be more affordable (money wise) for clans running servers. Stop being personal please..

lucky.BOY wrote:He meant it would be more affordable (money wise) for clans running servers. Stop being personal please..

we dont even know what it takes to run it yet. not that he was talking about money anyways.

so i said his name and why i think he was wrong. that makes it personal? you can always pm

illidur wrote:well the naysayers can always play on a smaller server. they aren't all going to be 128 or more. i say let the clans make that decision for themselves and not let killonsight make it for them.
i think people are just afraid of change.

I agree.
Once I talked to a guy (BF player) who told me the best round he had of the whole BF games was 2 vs 2 fight on one round. 4 players on the server.

I couldn't say nothing to that guy. If 2 vs 2 is what he likes, well, then it's ok for him.
But I'm amazed by some people insisting we (who want to play 256) shouldn't be allowed to do so, just because they think the game is not ready, or that server will lack teamwork.