You are not logged in.
- Topics: Active | Unanswered
Announcement
#3241 Re: BF1942 Discussion » Battlefield 1942 Questions & Answers » 2013-10-13 03:55:55
Ghetto Berlin was on a couple months ago. Host is Twitch, and it's hosted in the southern United States if I'm not mistaken. Hit him up on Xfire to know what the status of the server is. PM me for his Xfire.
#3242 Re: BF1942 Events » Galactic Conquest mod events|*ideas*|*dates* » 2013-09-30 00:06:43
a few maps and new game modes
But those can't be done server side. 
Server side mods are also pretty limited. I plan on doing more than disabling grenades and expacks here and there.
#3243 Re: BF1942 Events » Galactic Conquest mod events|*ideas*|*dates* » 2013-09-29 23:58:22
I was thinking I'd do a small infantry conversion mod with a few maps and new game modes when I get the time. I'll keep people posted about that.
#3244 Re: BF1942 Events » Galactic Conquest mod events|*ideas*|*dates* » 2013-09-29 19:59:22
Battlegroup42, Eve Of Destruction, BF1918 and most of the big mods you named are all dead by now Millerke. And they're all big mods, EoD probably being the biggest in terms of disk space.
FH and Desert Combat still have a small player base though.
#3245 Re: BF1942 Events » Galactic Conquest mod events|*ideas*|*dates* » 2013-09-29 18:23:44
Lol so the size of the mod is what makes them lazy, to put our point of views together
If Galactic Conquest was 300 MB instead of 3x this size, you can bet more people would be in the events.
#3246 Re: BF1942 Events » Galactic Conquest mod events|*ideas*|*dates* » 2013-09-29 17:45:50
Galactic Conquest is a complete mod, 914 MB to download.
This is what's preventing so much people from joining your events... The mod is too big!
Most people like a mod that packs a lot of content, but doesn't take too much disk space.
Something around 200 MB to 500 MB would do the trick (i.e., Desert Combat).
Just my 2 cents...
#3247 Feedback » Admin tags for admins? » 2013-09-26 02:57:52
- Black Mamba
- Replies: 5
Hopefully someone thought about this before, but I think it would help eliminate unclear situations.
Some if not all players (regulars and new guys) don't know who the admins are and have unfortunate and even, to some extent, voluntary "accidents" with them once in a while, which results in their kick or ban from the server on a few occasions.
A "simple" tag, such as [Admin] for example, or something of the sort would eliminate this ambiguity.
It could also create a climate of fear, in which potential game play disrupters, radio spammers, chat spammers or just plain noobs would be dissuaded from ruining it for everyone.
Think about it...
#3248 Re: BF1942 Discussion » Pushing the limit of the maximum number of players on a server » 2013-09-26 02:34:06
Getting 256 players on a server can be done I think, if we respect the following conditions:
- Server host is stable and has sufficient upload bandwidth to support 256 players (it would likely be a dedicated server rented from GameServers or some other popular host)
- High pingers are not allowed on the server, only people in the vicinity of the server will be able to play in it (for example, if it's hosted in Frankfurt, Germany, only players that live close to that city or in a radius smaller than 80 km can play in it); no transatlantic players permitted
- Advertise for an event to populate the server to 256 players
- Make a server for Origin so that more players can join, always from the same area as the server itself
- Make a distinct webpage for the server in which the current number of players on the server is displayed clearly, that way we can know precisely how many players are in the server
- Make a distinct map rotation which consists only of large maps, no medium or smalll maps; also fix the spawn time of vehicles and add the necessary amount of vehicles server side
Even then, it would be a milestone in the history of Battlefield to reach that number of players in an Internet server.
X-X-X-X-X is right, 140 or 150 players would be a more realistic objective to stat with, then we'll see what happens from there.
#3249 Re: BF1942 Discussion » Pushing the limit of the maximum number of players on a server » 2013-09-25 01:48:58
So then it CAN be done... the server's info will just be visible on a webpage instead of in the game, right?
tuia do you think you could make a 256 players workaround perhaps please? That would be great.
#3250 Re: BF1942 Events » Galactic Conquest mod events|*ideas*|*dates* » 2013-09-25 01:39:23
No populated servers run the mod unfortunately, it's pretty much dead. But that doesn't mean it can't be revived!
Just host some events from time to time! The mod itself offers a lot of interesting infantry situations, especially in the map Judicator, in which you fight in a space ship.
#3251 Re: Feedback » Making PB and v1.61 servers the standard again » 2013-09-24 23:14:05
A PunkBuster server should only be hosted by a community with a player base of veterans who know the game thoroughly. If not, the server will be empty most of the time and lose popularity.
#3252 Re: Feedback » Making PB and v1.61 servers the standard again » 2013-09-24 04:56:28
SiMPLE with its already large player base should run a PB server IMO.
#3253 Re: BF1942 Events » Galactic Conquest mod events|*ideas*|*dates* » 2013-09-23 03:02:08
I request videos of the event!
#3254 Re: Off-Topic » Post some music! » 2013-09-23 03:00:49
Good one Syndrum!
#3255 Feedback » Making PB and v1.61 servers the standard again » 2013-09-23 02:37:07
- Black Mamba
- Replies: 22
I think it's beneficial to the community that's left in the game, for various reasons.
First and foremost, all those content check disabled and non PB servers attract a sea of glitchers, hackers and overall imbeciles in the various Internet campaigns.
While I agree PB is not 100% flawless and can be bypassed, it still provides a much needed protection for the typical Internet server. If you add to that a server which is pure (as opposed to having content check disabled), you get double protection against hackers.
Obviously the Origin and Origin/1.61/1.6 hybrid servers are populated with a large number of players who have probably never heard of Punk Buster and what its purpose is. Those people need to be educated about the benefits of hosting a PB server if they ever consider hosting a server one day.
It's also always better for the same people to buy the game becomes it usually comes with the option of installing Punk Buster, so those people can set it up in no time and manually update it with the various fixes that were released after Even Balance stopped updating PB in BF1942.
I think it would encourage potential v1.61 or v1.6 players to host clean servers and to themselves play on PB enabled servers.
This Origin and v1.61/1.6 hybridation of servers will eventually kill the game I think, if nothing is done. People are going to be so fed up of playing with hackers they will flee the game in large amounts.
#3256 Re: Videos and Screenshots » Berlin zook + knife fest » 2013-09-18 05:10:40
That's pretty epic, my favorite part is the beginning when everyone spawns and the rockets start firing. Crazy.
Anyone up for this with 256 people? Ahaha.
#3257 Re: BF1942 Discussion » Pushing the limit of the maximum number of players on a server » 2013-09-18 02:29:58
i asked tuia the same once, heres my (possibly incorrect) recollection : player count reported to sites/trackers and the client ingame browser use two different mechanisms. the game browser has a memory limit for parsing data that starts at 65 or 90 players
But if both these methods rely on data which is queried/parsed (don't know the difference) by Gamespy and Gamespy sets the limit at 90ish, then isn't there no way at all to display raw server info for a hypothetical server which would have, on a good day, more than 90 players?
#3258 Re: BF1942 Discussion » BF1942 Tips & Tricks » 2013-09-16 05:25:36
It's certainly handy and especially useful if you want to know more than just the next map. But !nextmap can be faster sometimes because you don't have to look up the current map in the list first just to find the next one.
This...
#3259 Re: BF1942 Discussion » Mouse acceleration » 2013-09-16 05:03:14
Why don't you try that? It will take 5mins..
+1
#3260 Re: BF1942 Discussion » Pushing the limit of the maximum number of players on a server » 2013-09-15 17:29:36
How could a number of players higher than 90 something be displayed on any webpage? If it cannot be displayed in the game's Internet menu?
#3261 Re: BF1942 Discussion » Origin? » 2013-09-13 04:36:28
So ummm... when are you hosting TTB again X?
#3262 Re: Videos and Screenshots » Battlefield 1942 Fantastic Engy Actions » 2013-09-10 02:25:14
No it's not me, his aiming is out of my league.
#3263 Re: Videos and Screenshots » Battlefield 1942 Fantastic Engy Actions » 2013-09-09 05:50:58
And here's more!
#3264 Videos and Screenshots » Battlefield 1942 Fantastic Engy Actions » 2013-09-09 05:48:56
- Black Mamba
- Replies: 7
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PE73RWRxITM
The kills on strafing targets were amazing, very nice aiming. Compensates for the music xD
#3265 Videos and Screenshots » How to do proper video editing » 2013-09-09 04:52:33
- Black Mamba
- Replies: 5
This is a video from 2006, recorded in Soldier of Fortune II Double Helix, one of the most legendary FPS ever to be made. Game was released in 2002 and in it's prime was a great game to play with a very active competitive scene.
http://www.sofplayers.co.uk/video/deltaray/royal06.html
First thing you should notice is the editing: top notch, beautiful to the eye. Makes me want to watch the video even though I might not even know the game it was recorded in. The transitions are smooth, the introduction was made by professional graphic designers and the music reflects perfectly the type of movie being made, which is a cup highlights video in our case. The essential point I'm trying to make is this: editing makes or breaks a video.
So make sure before you make another frag highlights, cup or clan war highlights movie or even machinima, that you edit it properly. No one will bother watching your video, no matter which game it was recorded in, if it's edited with Windows Movie Maker in 5 minutes with no sound, no music, improper transitions, or no intro/conclusion.
A decent movie takes months to make, and I'm not even talking about the video I just posted. This level you reach after many years.
#3266 Re: Videos and Screenshots » My first gameplay video on SiMPLE » 2013-09-07 00:02:11
Check out my short new trailer!
The whole video is coming in a few days
I'll be honest: the special effects are ruining the video. It's too fancy. You should keep it like the name of the community: simple.
#3267 Re: BF1942 Discussion » Pushing the limit of the maximum number of players on a server » 2013-09-03 23:56:35
It's easy to raise the limit to 256 players. There are technical problems, though, when over 64 players. The server crashes more often and if it displays keyhashes it will not be visible in the in-game server list when it has more than 64 players. Without keyhashes, when over around 90 players it will also not show in the master server list, because it's a limitation of BF1942 client. This means less players joining when server is over 64 or 90 players.
If we do a community based event we should be able to get that much players.
As for a way of displaying the server and letting players know it's there, maybe a live server status viewer page advertised on the front pages of the major communities left in the game (MG, SiMPLE, etc) will make it more visible perhaps.
#3268 Re: BF1942 Discussion » Pushing the limit of the maximum number of players on a server » 2013-09-03 04:24:31
The beauty of Battlefield 1942 is how you can push the game's engine to it's edge and still have a great experience.
Buildings in Battlefield 1942 can be modified to be destroyable, even trees, rocks and smaller objects. If someone can manage to modify the network code for a destroyable environment with 150+ players on an Internet server while keeping everything stable, he (or she) will have all my respect.
Maybe this could be done in an urban map where most buildings are already damaged or destroyed, such as Berlin or Stalingrad. If successful, we will have BF3 running on a much older engine, basically (for destroyable statics that is).
However I think that for now it's just a fantasy. We should concentrate on trying to successfully run a 150 player server first (and find 150 people willing to test this server to see how it performs). Once this is accomplished, mayhem will unfold. Ideally, we would need at least one server for Europe, and the other for the North American clientele.
If server hosts really follow that trend, who knows what's in stores for this old game. Maybe a rise from the ashes, with 3 or 4 (maybe even more), 100 to 150 slot servers filled to almost full capacity, running simultaneously during peak hours, prime time. Yes, I'm allowed to dream.
#3269 Re: BF1942 Discussion » Pushing the limit of the maximum number of players on a server » 2013-09-02 23:26:05
Omaha @ 256 players lol
No way this can happen, or at least without nades, or only 1 nade per soldier with no possibility to reload.
I'm sure our dear friend tuia can patch the EXE to extend the limit to 150 players. I would definitely be interested in 75x75 matches on Aberdeen, or large naval matches on Midway.
#3270 Re: BF1942 Discussion » Pushing the limit of the maximum number of players on a server » 2013-09-02 23:14:42
I dont really believe that many of These New Guys will stay as Long as any of the veterans nowadays.
They will, if you give them a reason to (the large servers). When those guys started gaming years ago, the big servers didn't exist. Now we gave them a reason to stick around.