They says it will be 64 players max? Could server administrators make it higher? I want to see 128 players on a map!
Number of players.
- Thread starter Nicholas
- Start date
Unreal Engine 3 does not (as standard) support more than 64 clients.
And the hardware required to run a 128 player server would be quite remarkable.
And the hardware required to run a 128 player server would be quite remarkable.
Upvote
0
64 players will be plenty
The only shooter I know of that supports 128 players is MAG, although it could accommodate 256 player games too
The only shooter I know of that supports 128 players is MAG, although it could accommodate 256 player games too
Upvote
0
Upvote
0
Upvote
0
On a shared server, yes. But on a dedicated server, I would posit that it would be quit possible to increase this number.
What was the max player count for RO1?
Upvote
0
Max player count for RO1 was 64 players after the update, but even the best servers couldn't really go above 50 players.
RO:HOS will be able to spread some tasks over multiple threads but in return the servers will need to calculate stuff such as penetration.
Upvote
0
Exactly. This thing will run smooth as silk on our dedi, 8core HTT badass server. 
Alot of people dont know about the old FPS called Chaser. It allowed 128 players online. Unfortunately the game is dead now.
[url]http://www.chasergame.com/index.php?lang=en&rid=748[/URL]
Alot of people dont know about the old FPS called Chaser. It allowed 128 players online. Unfortunately the game is dead now.
[url]http://www.chasergame.com/index.php?lang=en&rid=748[/URL]
Upvote
0
Who knows, 64 is the official number but I'm sure that number can be stretched some. Maybe when new hardware is developed, it can be pushed even further.
Upvote
0
Exactly. This thing will run smooth as silk on our dedi, 8core HTT badass server.
There aren't that many threads you can split up. you have net-code, and physics/hit detection. Those are the only parts I can think of that really will take a lot of processing power for the server afaik.
Most other processor intensive parts that are nice to split up like graphics, sound etc. aren't used by a dedicated server. So my personal prediction is that a dual core server will have a nice benefit in performance over a single core but that additional cores probably won't add that much additional performance.
For instance UT3 servers didn't really use that much more than one core, sadly UT3 was pretty much instantly dead so I never saw a 64 player server in action.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
Call of Duty 2 (128 players)
Delta Force series (128 players)
OFP / ArmA / ArmA 2 all support infinite amounts of player. Its down to the hardwares limitation
-
MAG is 256 player not 128 and that is console, so pretty pathetic if we can't get atleast 100 players in red orchestra 2.
-
Mount and blade can support whatever it likes...I have been on 180 player servers and the only lag is from people faaaar away in America or have a bad connction (So for all us players who have good connections and live close its great)
64 players is NEVER enough. Your basically saying "I want less action and teamwork. I want their to never be any sort of front lines because I want to be able to easily sneak around the enemy lines"
-
Now, I will like this game if it says "64 players is the ideal" but if it decides to go "YOU ARE NOT CHANGING THIS VALUE AT ALL, DONT CARE IF YOU HAVE A NASA COMPUTER LIVING IN NASA TOWN IN NASAVILLE WITH ADVANCED ALIEN TECHNOLOGY. 64 IS THE MAX"
Then its lame...let the limitations be the hardware and not the software. If it lags with 400 players. People won't play on 400 player servers.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
hard limits are good till the technology supports it, even now we have too many computers running with player amounts that are too high and perform badly. As twi should offer support for the amount of max players they can provide.
If you want higher player amounts just make a mutator.
Upvote
0
This could be one of those beware of what you wish for issues.
Reason being, the AI can fill in for the open slots in sessions, so the larger the *player* count, the potential for greater numbers of bots running around.
I'm still not convinced that the bot AI is going to be equal in the variety of decisions human players will offer for competition, so maybe the smaller or mid-numbers game counts will be the best as a result.
Reason being, the AI can fill in for the open slots in sessions, so the larger the *player* count, the potential for greater numbers of bots running around.
I'm still not convinced that the bot AI is going to be equal in the variety of decisions human players will offer for competition, so maybe the smaller or mid-numbers game counts will be the best as a result.
Upvote
0