Project Reality Forums

Hey guys.
Obviously there will be mostly (or only?) 100p servers in the 1.0 release, as it was in the open beta too.
Now I wonder why it is 100p, and not 128p, as we tested so many times 2 years ago.
Furthermore, the layers are called 128p layer. So why we play these with 100p ?

Discuss if you think its better to have 100p servers instead of 128.

Half of your team would not have name-tags, and some other issues...

BF2 doesn't respond well if you name the layers "100" instead of "128".

And we find that 100 players instead of 128 is the best quality/quantity ratio.

In devs we trust

SShadowFox wrote:Half of your team would not have name-tags, and some other issues...

Name-tags will be deactivated anyway, as it was in the late open beta.
No matter if 128 or 100 !

[R-DEV]AfterDune wrote:BF2 doesn't respond well if you name the layers "100" instead of "128".

And we find that 100 players instead of 128 is the best quality/quantity ratio.

Will there be still certain 'events' that will play with like 128p or 200p (like the awesome D-Day some time ago) ?
I mean, is it possible from the rules of server hosting?

Read the features list. There will be no Normandy mini mod in this release.

DesmoLocke wrote:Read the features list. There will be no Normandy mini mod in this release.

Nobody said there was.. he was only referring to the event.

Will servers be able to host 128p players based on their own decision , or is the possibility of 128p servers not happening without R-DEV permission?

Maximum players is limited to 100p, there are no exceptions, not even for special events.

It is already sometimes difficult to find a squad with 100p full server and squad limit + asset-specific squad(when rule on beta server clearly stated they are first-come-first-serve) + "special" clanners locking for a squad of 4-5 instead of 8.

ComradeHX wrote:It is already sometimes difficult to find a squad with 100p full server and squad limit + asset-specific squad(when rule on beta server clearly stated they are first-come-first-serve) + "special" clanners locking for a squad of 4-5 instead of 8.

Yes, I too am worried about what will happen when clans and APC squads lock at 2-4 players. This could cause massive overflow problems.

9x6p squads @ 32 players per team. That's 54 total squad slots, with 22 spare slots.
9x8p squads @ 50 players per team. That's 72 total squad slots, with 22 spare slots.

What's to worry about?

Anyway, I'm sure a well admin'd server will deal with locked squads if the issue arises

[R-DEV]AncientMan wrote:Maximum players is limited to 100p, there are no exceptions, not even for special events.

Does this only apply for the coming release, or the indefinite future?

If it's for the latter, there is only one thing to say.....

Well the capability of 128 or even 256 is there... Taking away server admin options is a bad move IMHO, but since the 128p tests in .98 the can of worms is opened and Im sure someone can mod a server to do 128p+

redman0123 wrote:Well the capability of 128 or even 256 is there... Taking away server admin options is a bad move IMHO, but since the 128p tests in .98 the can of worms is opened and Im sure someone can mod a server to do 128p+

from the server license:

Under no circumstances may compiled python files (file extension: ".pyc"), executables or libraries by decompiled or otherwise modified, including for PERSONAL USE, without the express permission in writing from a representative of the LICENSOR (Project Reality Management). Electronic messaging will constitute acceptable written form.

So I wouldn't count on anything coming out unofficially. I don't mind 100 or 128. 128 becomes a bit more problematic when it comes to assets. 100 works better. 200 only for works for asset empty events like Normandy or Vietnam. I'm quite happy with the decision that was made.

MineralWouter wrote:I don't mind 100 or 128. 128 becomes a bit more problematic when it comes to assets. 100 works better. 200 only for works for asset empty events like Normandy or Vietnam. I'm quite happy with the decision that was made.

Karez worked out quite smooth, while still being asset heavy. If I'm not mistaken that was even the very first 200 player event.

Yeah 100p is good but its like... why limit the game, ya know? Because some server somewhere MIGHT have asset problems? Maybe someone wants to have a special event game that would work better with 128p+. I'm not saying "ALL SERVER MUST BE 128 ALL THE TIME BLARGH!" but I think the option should be there for clans and such. I prefer 100p myself.

because the PR team wish to try and ensure as reliable an experience as possible, with very high player numbers that simply isn't possible:

1) clans will be trying to run huge servers that their boxes cannot support
2) we have set up the 128 layers specifically for 100p, more people mean poor transport/player ratio
3) clans will have problems seeding their servers, if 2 servers worth of players are on one server...then that means there is an empty server out there that someone is paying for; it's not particularly fair

We finally have more than 64 players, now people complain that 100 is not enough? Shut it, you get 36 players more than what you're used to man .

I agree with afterdune, am i really reading that people have yet to even play with 100 player servers and your asking for more?