Project Reality Forums

What should we be looking for to test in the new code?

Tim270 wrote:What should we be looking for to test in the new code?

Yeah, it'd be good to know what to look out for!

Nugiman wrote:nice games yesterday, really enjoyed that one on vadso city, when we rushed island as russians and defended it for over 1 hour and kept it grey, so brits couldn't cap anything else.
after one hour the brits made a huge rush and we were done, anyway the round was won by us later.

Till i mortared our asses

Psyrus wrote:Yeah, it'd be good to know what to look out for!

Increased stability, name tags afaik and amount of crashes (what did you do when the server crashed).

Well, I for one love the 128 player game in PR, I think it could draw more to the game. At the same time 64 person gameplay is definitely fine for many of the smaller maps.

What sucks is I can only play 120+ player with a 200+ ping since I'm West Coast.. Makes the old and new larger maps much, much better, and except for my ping,(which I amazingly really hardly notice), I really like playing with the Euros too, met some great people there.

Don't get me wrong but world is not spinning around PRTA. Anything that runs above 64p is considered as test and should not run full time ( maybe one or two days in week just to test the code )
Stating all European servers are part of some community is silly indeed. I dont like this centralized solution and dont like being dependent on someone else.
Servers running >64p have problems and are far from solving it afaik. Plus a problem of assets and optimizing maps to support this.
In final smaller clans will not die even if PR switches completely to >64p we can still run it. We dont rent servers based on slots so its not that simple calculation 64 slots * 1 Euro = 64 Euros per month. Mostly we have VPS or Dedicated servers with full admin access, so we can run whatever we want on it for less than 50 Euros per month.
Therefore I dont expect having just 2 or 3 PR servers online in near future.

MaSSive wrote:Don't get me wrong but world is not spinning around PRTA. I dont like this centralized solution and dont like being dependent on someone else.
Servers running >64p have problems and are far from solving it afaik. Plus a problem of assets and optimizing maps to support this.

If you realized the hard work that PRTA is putting into drawing new players in, optimizing the 128 code, organizing a community, testing out new asset and squad rules/maps, and putting on awesome events, then you would probably show a little more respect. Wicca, his team, and the PRTA community are one of the best things (community wise) that have happened to PR.

You should stop by the PRTA/SISU server and play a couple games and tell us how you like it! Once you got 128, you don't go back!

I said nothing to disrespect them, and Ive played on servers running >64p. I just pointed that not all clans are part of PRTA and that I dont like large communities.

Its not PRTA project they have leased that server recently. It has problems, cause if it was all peachy all servers would run 128 already. And as you see Im back to 64 so your argument failed.

Brainlaag wrote:Don't really understand the worry of some servers "dying". Why don't they just combine and share their donations and expenses to run 1,2, or 3 servers together. We got most of the European clans and communities combined within PRTA (with a few elitistic expetions being NwA, Pelitutka, some others and the Russian servers).

Thats the future, a united PR and in all honesty Wicca did a kickass job on that. Then we basically need only these 2 or 3 servers running, having a uniform regulation of rules and a cosmopolitan administration staff from each clan/community. I'm unsure about the American servers tho, as they seem to be rather shattered and completely split off from each other.

What the polentone said. Also, it isnt written in stone that the player count will keep decreasing, or wont increase. Sure, every BF one mod died when BF2 came out, but there are exceptions. Look at counterstrike, devs just kept working on it and it never died, except for players like me who wanted bigger guns and more players XD.

Also from what I observed it isnt that there is less interest in playing the mod, but less interest in playing on empty servers. Some players stay away, then people stay away because there are only 50 people online instead of 61 and it snowballs from there, but as people come back, it snowballed the other way as well.

Id only want to see PR.BF2 die, so all the focus can go to ARMA BF2.

Massive, I was referring to the "final" or RC built of the 128 code. Now ofc it should not become standard as it still has its flaws. But IF its gets released someday, I really don't get why anyone would like play on 64. Some clans may hold their little scrims but a regularly running server shouldn't remain stuck on 64 players.

Brainlaag wrote:Massive, I was referring to the "final" or RC built of the 128 code. Now ofc it should not become standard as it still has its flaws. But IF its gets released someday, I really don't get why anyone would like play on 64. Some clans may hold their little scrims but a regularly running server shouldn't remain stuck on 64 players.

I agree point taken. If it get solid stable enough it should but...I dont want to be the bad guy here I doubt it will any time soon. I mean look what we have now? With servers crashing every map, or two or so, and being unstable, and vulnerable, I dont think it will be that soon. I sure hope this will be fixed but on bf2 engine, I'm afraid its just not possible. Maybe in pr2 in some other engine but this one is quite on the limits and it tends to explode. I'm dealing with its flaws everyday being a server admin, its a crapshoot software, which is unfinished and they wont even let anyone disassemble it and rework it.
Anyway we are here all to help that happen but until then, 64 is reality.

To bring it to the point, I'd rather play on a 128 server in the current state, than any 64 server out there, hands down.

Brainlaag wrote:To bring it to the point, I'd rather play on a 128 server in the current state, than any 64 server out there, hands down.

Yeah I guess its that easy from a player pov, just go and play. But behind it its a lot of headaches

MaSSive wrote:Yeah I guess its that easy from a player pov, just go and play. But behind it its a lot of headaches

This is from an admins perspective too my friend . Its a lot more rewarding to please and do stuff properly with the double amount of players, while some still complain how hard it is to keep up a 64 server.

Brainlaag wrote:This is from an admins perspective too my friend . Its a lot more rewarding to please and do stuff properly with the double amount of players, while some still complain how hard it is to keep up a 64 server.

Yes I guess it is satisfaction to see it WORKING but usually that's not the case - makes you happy some time and then it starts quirking as it was. Its a one big black hole, and I hope someday it will work properly, but we have gone way too far with it now. I'm not complaining I'm managing multiple game servers not just bf2 and its a lot more than 64 players.

MaSSive wrote:I agree point taken. If it get solid stable enough it should but...I dont want to be the bad guy here I doubt it will any time soon. I mean look what we have now? With servers crashing every map, or two or so, and being unstable, and vulnerable, I dont think it will be that soon. I sure hope this will be fixed but on bf2 engine, I'm afraid its just not possible. Maybe in pr2 in some other engine but this one is quite on the limits and it tends to explode. I'm dealing with its flaws everyday being a server admin, its a crapshoot software, which is unfinished and they wont even let anyone disassemble it and rework it.

For clarity, he's not actually talking about the PR2 engine

Nope I mentioned engine that pr2 will run on - I tend to forget things...forgot its name...meh

C4 Engine

Pvt.LHeureux wrote:C4 Engine

I hear they might switch engines to the cryteck one