Server 64+ servers?

[Raven1986]

Hey folks,

the servers of 40-1 are always bursting with players. My question is, would it be possible to simply buy more slots so more people can join?
I was currently thinking about augmenting to 70 players. Would that be possible?

Many thanks!

 

[Ducky]

RO2 automatically attempts to reduce the number of slots to 64 if you try to go above that. For instance ?MaxPlayers=100 will be overridden by the engine with ?MaxPlayers=64.

Sometimes you do see more players than 64 on a server, that is because of a bug where the player count is incorrectly checked against the MaxPlayers setting. For instance join as a spectator, then the engine did see you join as a spectator and won't validate you with the MaxPlayers setting. Next you select to play instead of to spectate and you are in the game. The engine only validates the player count on server join. Not sure but I believe that spectator bug got fixed for a couple of months back.

 

[G_Sajer]

I have read that servers which will accommodate numbers beyond the 64 count are available. And there may even be game engines that are capable of this. Unfortunately, ours isn't one of them yet. But you know, there's really something else at work here, and it's tied up in human psychology. There are always a lot of good realism servers out there that hardly ever fill up. Why don't they? They've got all the maps everyone likes. They don't fill up because there's no one there to begin with. The real issue is like a chicken and egg argument; which came first, the people or the full server? I don't know how it's going to come about, but the way I see it, the key to the whole thing is AI. When we see AI behaving at something approaching a level of unpredictability and responding to changes detected in a game in progress, I think the empty server/full server issue will go away. Back in the 90's I was designing scenarios for a popular WW2 tactical game. And even then we had trigger tools and path tools available to us that were so good that designers could actually control AI behavior based on what the player was doing. Now I don't expect TWI to jump in there and tinker with the UDK right this moment, but I sure hope AI is thoroughly focused on in the next stage of development.

 

[Mikeedude]

When the bug was on the servers upto 70 players was stable but over that became laggy and unstable.
So while a good server could host it ,it would require a change in the settings,not sure how easy that is to do.

 

[Beskar Mando]

RO2 automatically attempts to reduce the number of slots to 64 if you try to go above that. For instance ?MaxPlayers=100 will be overridden by the engine with ?MaxPlayers=64.

Sometimes you do see more players than 64 on a server, that is because of a bug where the player count is incorrectly checked against the MaxPlayers setting. For instance join as a spectator, then the engine did see you join as a spectator and won't validate you with the MaxPlayers setting. Next you select to play instead of to spectate and you are in the game. The engine only validates the player count on server join. Not sure but I believe that spectator bug got fixed for a couple of months back.

Yup it was fixed awhile back, around early fall I believe, I could be wrong though. (might have been in the summer?) It's possible to modify this, though it would require a massive overhaul & customization of a lot of the files. Still there'd be no guarantees on stability or performance. I honestly wish we could have 128 on 128 or 64 vs 64. The problem is RO2 & RS although they may be "Tactical FPS's" the culture behind it is quite different than what it was in RO1. There's not a lot of teamwork anymore, or at least the average player doesn't involve him or herself in it. This isn't true for all servers and all players obviously. Main reason why I joined a Realism unit in the first place. It's a very different style of gameplay than pubbing. That being said I doubt it would be much fun, probably worse teamwork & the like with so many players.

 

[Raven1986]

Okay, so additional slots won't work, I see.
Joint Operations Typhoon Rising from Novalogic had up to 150 players on one map. That would of course be boss but it also requires large maps.

 

[Ducky]

Okay, so additional slots won't work, I see.
Joint Operations Typhoon Rising from Novalogic had up to 150 players on one map. That would of course be boss but it also requires large maps.

Nah... Would fit easily on Apartments. The Allies can simply line up in 2 queues to cross the west and east bridge.

 

[Raven1986]

RO Mod allowed 64 players if you had a server running this many slots. I did not test if Ostfront allows this. If you were to override the engine check would it be very laggy?

 

[Beskar Mando]

RO Mod allowed 64 players if you had a server running this many slots. I did not test if Ostfront allows this. If you were to override the engine check would it be very laggy?

My guess would be yes, I've discussed this people before (not on TWI), and they reached the same conclusion it's limit of the engine, it'd just have too poor performance.

 

[Lemonater47]

Isn't an engine limitation. Chivalry on the same engine can have 128 player servers.

 

[=GG= Mr Moe]

Eh, quite honestly 64 players is fine and more than enough. I won't go into the gameplay aspects of it, but I will add if you were to do that you would have server admins over-stressing their servers and then have maybe 10-15 full servers (playing the same stock maps over and over ugh) and then the remaining 95% of the servers will be empty.

I'd rather see 32-50 players per server, with all the players spread out over a larger number and variety of servers and upping the max players would only have negative effects in my opinion.