Pushing the limit of the maximum number of players on a server

Black Mamba · 2013-09-02 21:07:50

In theory the maximum number of players an Internet server can carry is 256 players. Practically, we have achieved half of this number on TTB.

If you have played the Singleplayer campaigns, you will notice that you always have the #255 ID, suggesting that the maximum number of bots is 255, plus you, so 256 players. Some modders have tried playing around with the AI settings and managed to push that limit to 180 or 200 players, in SP campaign mode, or COOP, and they tested it successfully.

I definetly think that it would be possible, with a maxed out PC capable of hosting such a high number of players.. Your thoughts on this?

Last edited by Black Mamba (2013-09-23 02:42:01)

joint · 2013-09-02 21:20:01

when ~120 players playing, the game become a little different- individual skill concede to team action, i like it
yes, that is because im a game's plankton

Last edited by joint (2013-09-02 21:21:10)

*####*|Ldr.|1614 · 2013-09-02 21:45:08

Berlin with 256 players crazy!

Black Mamba · 2013-09-02 21:49:27

*####*|Ldr.|1614 wrote:

Berlin with 256 players crazy!

Or Aberdeen with 250 tanks, how about that? The map could be modded to be even bigger than it is, but that would be pure carnage.

Largely populated servers are the backbone of BF1942. The public scene is still kicking because of SiMPLE, MoonGamers, Schindler's List and so on...

If we can somehow manage to make 128 player or even 150 or 200 player servers the new norm for this game, it could very well avoid an inevitable death for years to come. Think about it.

Obviously, necessary arrangements will have to be made for maps which aren't suited for such massive gameplay, and a special map rotation will have to be created. There's no way this can be done for Berlin and Stalingrad, as those maps are simply too small.

The biggest maps of the game (Aberdeen, El Al, Guadalcanal) will be ideal for this.

Last edited by Black Mamba (2013-09-02 21:55:48)

Kobra · 2013-09-02 21:51:08

Are you serious?

Black Mamba · 2013-09-02 22:11:08

Kobra wrote:

Are you serious?

Have you seen how popular this new R A G E server has become? Right out of the blue and it attracts up to 85 players on peak hours. Just this one server represents roughly 10% of the online population for BF1942 on peak hours.

Last edited by Black Mamba (2013-09-02 22:11:35)

HoOK · 2013-09-02 22:12:57

Ur idea sounds good for me
What about lag?!!

Last edited by HoOK (2013-09-02 22:13:23)

JoJo' · 2013-09-02 22:19:01

pls also evade the numbers of xpacks a player can take with him
4 xpack might not be enough to clear a 50+ player spawn

Black Mamba · 2013-09-02 22:22:20

Lag will always be there no matter what... it's just a question of finding a stable and willing host.

As for nades and expacks, they will be seriously limited because with that many explosions to handle the game will just crash to desktop.

Last edited by Black Mamba (2013-09-02 22:23:04)

Kobra · 2013-09-02 22:23:08

No i havent and 85 is too much! The individual gameplay experience sucks even with 64players on the most Maps.
Aberdeen with 250 Tanks? The map has to be a hundred times bigger then.

Denny · 2013-09-02 22:27:44

and u would need a NASA computer to play with 250 players

Black Mamba · 2013-09-02 22:30:13

Kobra wrote:

No i havent and 85 is too much! The individual gameplay experience sucks even with 64players on the most Maps.
Aberdeen with 250 Tanks? The map has to be a hundred times bigger then.

Quantity over quality dude. When you play in a 64 or 128 man server, individual action is irrelevant compared to group actions, unless you are a public hero, but fuck public heroes. The more players, the more people have to play together to achieve a common objective.

Now, if you want to play with v1.61 veterans in small, 24 or 32 slots servers with your clan mates that is your choice.
The goal here is to revive the public scene, not the "I play since 2004 and only do PCWs" scene.

Last edited by Black Mamba (2013-09-02 22:30:51)

Kobra · 2013-09-02 22:44:50

No offence but you are a dreamer. U won't be able to make 100 players stick together to achieve some kind of goal. If you have 10 Players in a Squad you still have to abandon the field against the mass. Lets be realistic, public is about getting a good k/d and noone nowadays cares what team has more Tickets besides the 14y Old Kids. Of you want Team action u gotta Play clanwars

Black Mamba · 2013-09-02 23:02:46

Having CWs and such is nice, but if there are no players left to play then what's the point? Are you always going to war the same clans and teams? You will get tired of them after a while, let me tell you that.

Of course the new Origin population is still very inexperienced, but in 5 years or so, they will replace all the aging veterans that play "competitively" right now and that will have retired by then.

Even though I agree that most players on the 100+ player servers are not very bright, you have to admit that most of them are still learning the game, or took a break from it. You have to give them that.

Some large public servers which have been here for a while are populated with veterans that have played the game for years (SiMPLE, MoonGamers, etc). In a few years time from now the noobs on the Origin servers will have gained a bit more experience hopefully.

I think it's a good initiative to give the community large servers to play on. It's new and refreshing, people have always wanted them, and now the community has them. We should take advantage of that and use this new breakthrough to revive the game. Otherwise it will be nothing more than a memory.

Last edited by Black Mamba (2013-09-02 23:08:22)

Kobra · 2013-09-02 23:10:13

I dont really believe that many of These New Guys will stay as Long as any of the veterans nowadays.

Black Mamba · 2013-09-02 23:14:42

Kobra wrote:

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.

Last edited by Black Mamba (2013-09-02 23:14:53)

Ticket_to_Death · 2013-09-02 23:24:07

Omaha @ 256 players lol

Black Mamba · 2013-09-02 23:26:05

Ticket_to_Death wrote:

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.

Last edited by Black Mamba (2013-09-02 23:32:03)

*####*|Ldr.|1614 · 2013-09-02 23:44:47

Love to see 10 battleships on midway on both side in a line of battle.

I was asking ssk for more tanks on his server for Aberdeen and he said after he gets the under ground parkinglot done he will add more . 250 tanks hes going to need a bigger parking lot.

Ticket_to_Death · 2013-09-03 00:03:13

*####*|Ldr.|1614 wrote:

Love to see 10 battleships on midway on both side in a line of battle.
I was asking ssk for more tanks on his server for Aberdeen and he said after he gets the under ground parkinglot done he will add more . 250 tanks hes going to need a bigger parking lot.

Talk about a 10 story parking building

HoOK · 2013-09-03 00:06:47

Well if number of players is 160 or less, it will be good (80 vs 80)
also it will not be a problem for small maps berlin, omaha

joint · 2013-09-03 00:35:43

with more than 100 players the game is really become more exciting, imo that how should look like a public server, i loved to play on TTB, even with few admins and with those assholes who join only to ruin the play. there happened situations, that very rarely happen with less than 80 players
also i would love to play a CW like 3 teams against another 3 teams or even more , there would be interaction between mates along with interactions between teams..:) but this is another story..
i like what Canada says, i has the similar thougths a long time. not sure if it will happen, but definitely i like this idea, such "big" server with it sort of gameplay, would attract some fresh blood for sure, and with admins and without distructive elements that would be something, im with Mamba in the proposal of increasing the slots.
can only wish good luck with this undertaking and gl in convincing peeps and tuia

Black Mamba · 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.

Last edited by Black Mamba (2013-09-03 04:30:56)

Kobra · 2013-09-03 17:30:53

Can you name some examples about the things happening joint?
Still you can'tbe serious about playing Berlin or Stalin with 100+ players.

moon' · 2013-09-03 17:52:09

Kobra wrote:

Can you name some examples about the things happening joint?
Still you can'tbe serious about playing Berlin or Stalin with 100+ players.

It was cool to do in TTB but because of the nades it was ruined

Telrin · 2013-09-03 17:56:15

I think, that any standart maps with 256 players will be like a branch of hell of insanity.

moon' · 2013-09-03 17:58:30

Telrin wrote:

I think, that any standart maps with 256 players will be like a branch of hell of insanity.

Maybe bocage if u add flags to south bridge houses and north barn

DC · 2013-09-03 19:49:11

hm I guess that will not work. Inf will be like CS. Tanks will not work at all because of too much planes, too much mines etc. Baserapes will be exorbitant etc.

Maybe it is because I am a realist and not a dreamer ;-)

tuia · 2013-09-03 20:35:30

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.

DC · 2013-09-03 20:45:15

Besides the technical issues, there are others like who can mod or create those huge maps with an even balance of cars, planes etc. How many admins you need for a full server? 10-20?

And the most important questions: Does it make sense? If you like the point by playing in teams or different squads, then try to set up clan wars with 16 vs 16 for example and have a look how it works. I just can remember on 1.6 some matches with 20 vs 20, it does not work at all if you do not know the guys you are playing with etc.

SiMPLE | Forum

Announcement

#1 2013-09-02 21:07:50

Pushing the limit of the maximum number of players on a server

#2 2013-09-02 21:20:01

Re: Pushing the limit of the maximum number of players on a server

#3 2013-09-02 21:45:08

Re: Pushing the limit of the maximum number of players on a server

#4 2013-09-02 21:49:27

Re: Pushing the limit of the maximum number of players on a server

#5 2013-09-02 21:51:08

Re: Pushing the limit of the maximum number of players on a server

#6 2013-09-02 22:11:08

Re: Pushing the limit of the maximum number of players on a server

#7 2013-09-02 22:12:57

Re: Pushing the limit of the maximum number of players on a server

#8 2013-09-02 22:19:01

Re: Pushing the limit of the maximum number of players on a server

#9 2013-09-02 22:22:20

Re: Pushing the limit of the maximum number of players on a server

#10 2013-09-02 22:23:08

Re: Pushing the limit of the maximum number of players on a server

#11 2013-09-02 22:27:44

Re: Pushing the limit of the maximum number of players on a server

#12 2013-09-02 22:30:13

Re: Pushing the limit of the maximum number of players on a server

#13 2013-09-02 22:44:50

Re: Pushing the limit of the maximum number of players on a server

#14 2013-09-02 23:02:46

Re: Pushing the limit of the maximum number of players on a server

#15 2013-09-02 23:10:13

Re: Pushing the limit of the maximum number of players on a server

#16 2013-09-02 23:14:42

Re: Pushing the limit of the maximum number of players on a server

#17 2013-09-02 23:24:07

Re: Pushing the limit of the maximum number of players on a server

#18 2013-09-02 23:26:05

Re: Pushing the limit of the maximum number of players on a server

#19 2013-09-02 23:44:47

Re: Pushing the limit of the maximum number of players on a server

#20 2013-09-03 00:03:13

Re: Pushing the limit of the maximum number of players on a server

#21 2013-09-03 00:06:47

Re: Pushing the limit of the maximum number of players on a server

#22 2013-09-03 00:35:43

Re: Pushing the limit of the maximum number of players on a server

#23 2013-09-03 04:24:31

Re: Pushing the limit of the maximum number of players on a server

#24 2013-09-03 17:30:53

Re: Pushing the limit of the maximum number of players on a server

#25 2013-09-03 17:52:09

Re: Pushing the limit of the maximum number of players on a server

#26 2013-09-03 17:56:15

Re: Pushing the limit of the maximum number of players on a server

#27 2013-09-03 17:58:30

Re: Pushing the limit of the maximum number of players on a server

#28 2013-09-03 19:49:11

Re: Pushing the limit of the maximum number of players on a server

#29 2013-09-03 20:35:30

Re: Pushing the limit of the maximum number of players on a server

#30 2013-09-03 20:45:15

Re: Pushing the limit of the maximum number of players on a server

Board footer