128 players part two.

danthemanbuddy · Post by **danthemanbuddy** » 2007-06-01 22:17

^im sure you will need to send us the exe as your client will see your client, and our side will crash.

Yar · Post by **Yar** » 2007-06-01 22:30

danthemanbuddy wrote:^im sure you will need to send us the exe as your client will see your client, and our side will crash.

I am a bit confused about what you are saying, but I believe the answer to your question is that this is a server-side only modification. The people connecting do not have to change anything.

l|Bubba|l · Post by **l|Bubba|l** » 2007-06-01 22:31

Yar wrote:If I am correct about the above theory, I should still be able to crack the server limit still. But if I am wrong, and there is a player-side check when you join a server on how many players are in the game, then we are screwed, but I do not think that is the case.

Where is the problem with the player-side check?

A-10Warthog · Post by **A-10Warthog** » 2007-06-02 00:26

i think the only way we can get the 128 working is moding the EXE client side... and server side

danthemanbuddy · Post by **danthemanbuddy** » 2007-06-02 00:55

^ exactly. The problem I think is that while your server might be up, having the exe capable of it, Our Client Side does not have the exe. Our bf2 still recognizes 65 players as a no no. And since the server is not technically full, the client has connection problems as the server is IDing the Client as Player65, and the Client has no way of dealing with that.

Post by **IronTaxi** » 2007-06-02 01:56

so lets do it then...it would be well worth the advantages over a few annoying exe downloads...

come on boys...this is one of my wet dreams!!!

Cheesygoodness · Post by **Cheesygoodness** » 2007-06-02 04:10

Another problem that could be doing it is the Network card can't handle more then 64 players. They are usually set around that and while the CPU and everything else is designed to handle it the Network card isn't and I am not sure if you can get one (for personal use.) that could handle it. This was brought up by another ducky whom I won't name cause he might not want named. If its a client side thing then wouldn't it be perfect for a mod like PR? Where you have to distribute the exe anyway and can easily set it up once its designed like that with PR's next realise?

danthemanbuddy · Post by **danthemanbuddy** » 2007-06-02 04:21

Once v.6 is out, and the devs feel like taking a break or not... I guess we could all test out all avenues

causticbeat · Post by **causticbeat** » 2007-06-02 04:54

CLIENT SIDE EDIT CLIENT SIDE EDIT WINK WINK

spartan117gw · Post by **spartan117gw** » 2007-06-02 05:17

run alot of bots on a server via sp. say 95. have 30 or 60 players join. problem solved =D though not sure if it would work.

Stealth Clobber · Post by **Stealth Clobber** » 2007-06-02 06:09

Hmm I recall a certain tool for vBF2 singleplayer that let you have more than the set amount of bots.

Post by **Outlawz7** » 2007-06-02 07:30

Bot Changer - link in the Single Player Topics forum...
Max bots you could set, was 255...

General_J0k3r · Post by **General_J0k3r** » 2007-06-02 12:05

tupla_s wrote:Would it be possible that the palyer id system in bf is only 7bits so when there's more than 64 players the 65th player wouldn't be assigned a id so he gets a connection error. Just something random that game in to my mind.

Here's a short text about Player ID, if you don't get what I mean by that.
http://bf2.fun-o-matic.org/index.php/Player_Identity

EDIT: Changed 8bits to 7, a small counting error =)

what idiot makes a 7 bit variable? Oo

tupla_s · Post by **tupla_s** » 2007-06-02 13:17

General_J0k3r wrote:what idiot makes a 7 bit variable? Oo

DICE, you newer know

BetterDeadThanRed · Post by **BetterDeadThanRed** » 2007-06-02 13:55

The original pre alpha stage of BF2V was supposed to have over a hundred players and would scale the map ingame depending on player count. I guess dice just decided how little innovation they could put in a game and still make money. PR is already turning out to be how BF2 should have been so if you guys can pull this off...

BetterDeadThanRed · Post by **BetterDeadThanRed** » 2007-06-02 14:11

The following is from the June 2004 article from CGW written by Robert Coffey. I will bold the areas worth noting. (Originally posted in TG forums.)

Drive-by Shooting xAbout those vehicles—you can expect more than 30 land, sea, and air vehicles in the finished game. The developers expect the class-based enhancements to nudge players into using them, but frankly, the stable of tanks, jeeps, fighter jets, helicopters, and attack boats should be plenty of incentive on its own. In a nod to the modern-age setting of the game and in an effort to focus on more intense combat, big naval vessels (like destroyers) have been eliminated from the game. However, the inclusion of fast, vicious patrol boats and the like should more than make up for it.

All the action takes place in three theaters of war: China, Russia (FAIL), and the Middle East. While none of the war zones are based on any specific city or battle, all are being designed with current world hot spots in mind, so while you won't be fighting in Baghdad per se, you'll be fighting in a place much like Baghdad. And the action should be very familiar to any Battlefield 1942 or Vietnam vet—DICE is very happy with its ticket-based control-point CTF variation and isn't planning on changing it at all. It is adding optional secondary objectives to certain maps that confer in-game advantages—things like taking out power stations to hobble the enemy.(FAIL)

Arguably, the only big change in gameplay is the scoring. In yet another nod to encouraging teamplay, scoring in the game is being tweaked so that medics get points for healing comrades and pilots get points for kills made by their passengers. The infantryman who paints a target with a laser for a guided missile, as well as the pilot launching the missile, will get credit for the eventual kill.(FAIL)

Is there more? You bet. But we'd have to deforest half the continent to get enough wood pulp for the pages we'd need to cover every single detail in this game. You'll just have to try to hold on until spring 2005, when you can experience the game for yourself.

Until then, remember one thing: It's going to be massive.

Third Party Parties Hard While DICE is doing all the hardcore designing, it has enlisted the help of Trauma Studios for one thing: coolness. This New York City studio is tasked with prototyping smaller features simply to enhance the game experience. Its input so far has led to the medic's lethal and lifesaving defibrillator, as well as rappelling lines that drop from helicopters(FAIL) to both deploy and rescue soldiers. Currently, up to 10 combatants can hang from a line—and they can shoot while they're there.(FAIL, not even Special forces had anything like that) Trauma has more tricks up its sleeve, but this is the one we really hope makes the cut. Don't you want to see 10 rope-hanging monkey killers raining death from above as they sweep through city streets?

Fighting on Two or More Fronts One of the biggest problems in any multiplayer shooter is balancing maps for player load. (here is the important part) No one likes deathmatching with two people on a sprawling 32-player map any more than they like deathmatching with 32 people in a two-player arena. Obviously, DICE has to create maps big enough to accommodate its targeted player load of more than 100—but what happens when only 22 people show up on a server? DICE has an ingenious solution: dynamically sizing maps. Think of a map as three concentric circles. With, say, 32 or fewer players, only the inner circle is active, and the exterior circles are inaccessible and out of play. When a threshold of players is crossed, the map opens up the next circle, and eventually, right around the 100-player mark, the last one opens. As players drop, the map contracts accordingly, with distant players warned to get back to the active zone. Don't worry—if you're too far to get back, you'll be killed and spawned within the smaller map, but your score won't be affected by the death.(FAILLLLL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!)

AppleJuice4u2 · Post by **AppleJuice4u2** » 2007-06-02 14:43

Every plan in its early stages of a big job will edit it as is needed. This is nothing new its just DICE took it to a new level of stupidity.

Post by **AfterDune** » 2007-06-02 15:25

Outlawz wrote:Bot Changer - link in the Single Player Topics forum...
Max bots you could set, was 255...

Is it possible to combine this with coop play?

'Cause then we would have 64 players + a certain amount of bots (to man machine guns, etc). And if scriptable, they can do way more.

Fenix16 · Post by **Fenix16** » 2007-06-02 16:51

BetterDeadThanRed wrote:The following is from the June 2004 article from CGW written by Robert Coffey. I will bold the areas worth noting. (Originally posted in TG forums.)

Omg. Thats really bizzare. Im looking at that article right now. The best part, is that the picture above the content is from good ole' 1942: DC. It shows 4 soldiers hanging from the same line.

Post by **Outlawz7** » 2007-06-02 19:06

Thats what happens, when you back stab a bunch of people, that work hard to make the game top notch, then release a piece of arcade **** instead of something realistic...that text made me drool, btw....too bad, EA's greedy hands had to get in between...

AfterDune wrote: 'Cause then we would have 64 players + a certain amount of bots (to man machine guns, etc). And if scriptable, they can do way more.

Ive downlaoded it, never really worked, so I just modified the .con files to ahve more bots...PR SP crashes with over 57 bots, I think...had 47, and still some frame lag...