Project Reality Forums

streaming live from 100 vs 100 server SEMPER FI!!

test is over Justin.tv - pesticide - Project Reality Battlefield 2 mod 100 vs 100 highlight on american start side with 100 people , 20 people per tent

Finally, 200 players battle. Damn, 116p is lame now.

I really like 16p squads, or should I say platoons. Somehow, there are so many guys around, that *someone* gets the job done. You put a FB, and *someone* builds it (you turn around, and it's built). You need ammo - *someone* behind you says "here, grab this". *someone* is suppressing, and *someone* will cover flank...
Winning and loosing is not that important any more. There is a constant fight going on... So what if we lost a flag and a FB, there is new fire position to be secured, or attacked.

I fought in some squads today who didn't use VOIP nor Mumble. But I didn't mind that at all. The fight was good, I talked to some guys around me via Mumble... and well, that's it. We didn't need any commands from the "squad" leader. Most of the time it was pretty straight forward - and I believe this to be a really good thing.
If you're interested in simple shootout, get to the front line. If you want to do more advanced stuff, get in a SpecOps team, since there is always a need for skilled players.

... at least that is my impression from Muttrah and Qwai.

Played a couple of rounds today with 200 players. Liked it, it was very playable. 16 players in a squad is a bit much though. One round we made two fire teams, which worked out great. Only problem is the lack of name tags, kinda hard to find your fireteam leader without tag. Also had a strange VOIP bug one round, I could hear all VOIP chatter of an enemy squad as well as my own.

it was epic

Finally, 200 players battle. Damn, 116p is lame now.

I really like 16p squads, or should I say platoons. Somehow, there are so many guys around, that *someone* gets the job done. You put a FB, and *someone* builds it (you turn around, and it's built). You need ammo - *someone* behind you says "here, grab this". *someone* is suppressing, and *someone* will cover flank...
Winning and loosing is not that important any more. There is a constant fight going on... So what if we lost a flag and a FB, there is new fire position to be secured, or attacked.

I fought in some squads today who didn't use VOIP nor Mumble. But I didn't mind that at all. The fight was good, I talked to some guys around me via Mumble... and well, that's it. We didn't need any commands from the "squad" leader. Most of the time it was pretty straight forward - and I believe this to be a really good thing.
If you're interested in simple shootout, get to the front line. If you want to do more advanced stuff, get in a SpecOps team, since there is always a need for skilled players.

... at least that is my impression from Muttrah and Qwai.

tbh, that does sound horrible. I like PR for the slow gameplay and the importance of communication. Not for being able to play without communicating and random stuff happening all around me =/

Spec_Operator wrote:tbh, that does sound horrible. I like PR for the slow gameplay and the importance of communication. Not for being able to play without communicating and random stuff happening all around me =/

It did quite resemble the 64 player CoD 4 matches I used to enjoy back in the day - seemingly rather teamwork orientated, but not so much out of organized effort but by the fact there's such a huge blob of people around that some are bound to join whatever you're doing.

100vs100 enough I believe.

'[R-DEV wrote:Matrox;1585495']

If only...

going around to ramm people over isn't "doable" anymore.

You get shots from everywhere and the ammo techie blows in 10 seconds.

never mind. Delete.

Napoleon_TR wrote:100vs100 enough I believe.

More like way over the top..yet.
My impression after a few hours of play is very very disappointing contrary to other posters here. Rounds are almost unplayable first of all seen from the eyes of a squad or platoon leader. You need to organized about 5 min into the round just to get your guys together, then separate them into proper squads and then fireteams, after which you can assign specific kits, WHICH are then issued anyway, due to some "all kits fashion" squads. Vehicles are not usable due to the plain size of the squads and the lack of players on mumble was for me literally harrowing, not to mention the overall teamwork situation (ex. I and two other guys took by ourselves during the fools road match the fortress flag, thus Militia-Mainbase. Be aware: IN A 92vs92 match!). You can say that squads have become nothing more than actually teams for them self, in which people, lets say 3-4 guys, work together uncommitted to the rest of the squad.
It makes it very frustrating, that people are not listening, or not on mumble, or simply just too stupid to open the map and tick their platoon leader, so that they know where he is on the map.

Before people start replying to me like "But you just need to separate into proper fireteams" and such, I'll come to the point...NO! Ingame voip is simply way, wayy too messy and chatoic for 16 people to talk, without disturbing each other and mumble has limitations, not to mention the numbers of players actually using the nice little software. I wouldn't mind that, if they actually have some common sense or discipline, but sadly they don't. You have to piss of other people in the squad, just by repeating every two minutes through the squad chat "plz come back to the squad/Regroup over here/Don't go out alone/Join mumble or get kicked/....."

Well, enough of the rant. I'm not trying to kinda stop or interrupt the test session. I'm grateful to all the guys that made this possible, its awesome to see 200+ players on the server. But I beg you all not to make it too often and stick with the 120~130 for 24/7 (if at all). We have to sort out the comms prob first of all, before we can even think about a regular 140+ player server

Again big cheers to Soppa for achieving and providing us an unique gameplay experience (bad or good likely ).

Spec_Operator wrote:tbh, that does sound horrible. I like PR for the slow gameplay and the importance of communication. Not for being able to play without communicating and random stuff happening all around me =/

Agreed. I'd rather have a game where teamwork is a big factor in winning rather than the team who can spam more bullets at infantry blobs

This is new for all of us. We didnt know how 200 player game really is, but now after few maps we know little more.

I agree about communication problem. Ingame voip will get way too messy when +10 is in one squad.
But I did really like when there is massive amount of people especially in forest maps

I believe huge servers (~200 players) will work fine in events where players are usually very experienced.

Big server (96-146 players) could work as public if communication issues will get sorted.
Im pretty sure new version of mumble will bring some help for this.

Anyway, keep your feedback coming and throw up your ideas. I'm sure Dev's will appreciate your help

I think there was a max of three admins online mate. Brain, im sorry. But i cant admin 200 players. NO WAY hahahaha.

But i have to say. I managed to squadlead my 16 player squad very well. I didnt split us into Fireteams though. I had us move in a blob. Was very effective.

dont even think about passwording this 250 server Lets keep the testing going, full speed ahead!! All the arguments are all pubbie related, and those become invalid for organized events, the way this game is supposed to be played anyway, in events organized bye the community, for the community.

Pesticide wrote:dont even think about passwording this 250 server Lets keep the testing going, full speed ahead!! All the arguments are all pubbie related, and those become invalid for organized events, the way this game is supposed to be played anyway, in events organized bye the community, for the community.

Yeah but it's hard as hell to get an organized event like that with so many experienced players. Last time they put a pass with 128 slots I don't think it ever got over a 100 players. And this was during the weekend.

Also, on the issue with 16 people on the same VOIP.
In a little game called EVE ONLINE, they have huge fleet battles. Apparently they can have at least a hundred players on vent with only the fleet commander speaking. This many players in the same squad should be doable, it's just that it requires some discipline, but usually increasing the number of players on a server means a bigger influx of retards than 'normal' players (simply because there is more retards in general) - at least without any player filtering.

Gameplay wise 128 servers are perfect for all kind of events and matches with organized teams. Even 200 players could work(If you can only get so many). Yesterday's 120 players WC event was going great until we found out that we couldn't cap Central Village despite we had 50+ guys in cap-zone and no resistance at all... (is it even possible for a flag to bug like this?? or maybe there were 50 enemies hiding in one building...) Then Blue team started rage quitting...and we ended up after one hour and 700 tickets left. Anyway it was GG.

On pubbies I think its almost impossible to have a good true PR gameplay with 200 players, it used to work with 128 and I think its absolute maximum.

Talking about lags, for me they started at about 210 players, when enemies started dying about 3 seconds after got shot, fast moving vehicles started warping little bit and my hitboxes were always 10 meters behind me... (my ping was around 80) I wasn't fun fun fun.