Jump to content
Lynx

100 player Servers

Recommended Posts

Is that sarcasm or are they really promising 3 weeks? That would be really nice. I've read they tested 100 player servers back in 2015 so I hope all the kinks are worked out by now. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, budder8818 said:

Is that sarcasm or are they really promising 3 weeks? That would be really nice. I've read they tested 100 player servers back in 2015 so I hope all the kinks are worked out by now. 

3 weeks is just a long running joke amongst the community and developers.

100p servers still have a few obstacles when it comes to server stability/performance. B19 with the engine upgrade and additional tools should help Squad get closer to the 50v50 goal. Squad is at the stage in development now, where optimization for both client & server is getting more of a focus, so hopefully we'll see 100p sooner rather than later.

The difference between the 2015 test and the 2019 test was night and day, very noticeable improvement in both client and server performance, just more work is required to make servers stable with the additional load of 20 more players.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yup, Dubs has ya answer. The impending engine update in 4.23 is part of the push to 100, including better dev tools in the background. It is still our intent to hit 100 and optimizations are getting us there. =) The server /can/ do it, but the hardware requirements (and stability) aren't viable for retail just yet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When you mean retail are you talking about the computation ability of each client computer (ram, video processing, etc)? Or is it limited by the network connection of each client back to the server?

 

Would it require an up-rate of minimum requirements to play squad? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I understand, great to hear that we only have to wait 3 weeks unteil 100p.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I remember 100 player PR:BF2 games. Server would crash every 30 minutes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, miket86 said:

I remember 100 player PR:BF2 games. Server would crash every 30 minutes.

rly? PR has had 100p for a long time now, no issues AKAIK

what I remember was 250p as testing... that was chaotic and laggy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, EA_SUCKS said:

rly? PR has had 100p for a long time now, no issues AKAIK

what I remember was 250p as testing... that was chaotic and laggy

I haven't played BF:PR2 in years though. Still going?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
On 4/22/2020 at 9:48 PM, Dubs said:

3 weeks is just a long running joke amongst the community and developers.

100p servers still have a few obstacles when it comes to server stability/performance. B19 with the engine upgrade and additional tools should help Squad get closer to the 50v50 goal. Squad is at the stage in development now, where optimization for both client & server is getting more of a focus, so hopefully we'll see 100p sooner rather than later.

The difference between the 2015 test and the 2019 test was night and day, very noticeable improvement in both client and server performance, just more work is required to make servers stable with the additional load of 20 more players.

Have you ever heard devs considering just removing wall penetration of smallarms(only do it for vehicles because that's the only one that matters 99% of time)?  And just make the super weak stuff(like carpets...etc.) not collide with projectiles.

Edited by EcchiRevenge

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I honestly believe the game needs 100p to survive. There are simply too many vehicles, too big of maps for the current number of players. The maps are feeling empty, the battles short. 78 to 100 is at least 11 extra per side. Hopefully those 22 will play as inf and not man more vehicles..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Comm@ndo said:

I honestly believe the game needs 100p to survive. There are simply too many vehicles, too big of maps for the current number of players. The maps are feeling empty, the battles short. 78 to 100 is at least 11 extra per side. Hopefully those 22 will play as inf and not man more vehicles..

Err….reduce the number of vics per map…¿?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

100 players will be nice sure, but in any case, the underlying issue for short battles is the meta that turns the gameplay into meat grinding. Reduce the amount of vehicles or increase spawn times, reduce the amount of tickets but increase the worth of life (not in amount of tickets) in a way that dying is more severely punished so people do not rush in stupidly and have to wait for a medic if they are downed. Return dead-dead if you get downed within 2 minutes of being revived. Expire rally points after 60 sec of placement. This way teams will have to ensure they have FOBs up if they want to respawn in a convenient position.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, fidanym said:

100 players will be nice sure, but in any case, the underlying issue for short battles is the meta that turns the gameplay into meat grinding. Reduce the amount of vehicles or increase spawn times, reduce the amount of tickets but increase the worth of life (not in amount of tickets) in a way that dying is more severely punished so people do not rush in stupidly and have to wait for a medic if they are downed. Return dead-dead if you get downed within 2 minutes of being revived. Expire rally points after 60 sec of placement. This way teams will have to ensure they have FOBs up if they want to respawn in a convenient position.

We already had dead-dead and 60 sec rallies in Squad. Sales were not as good then as they are now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Unfortunately, you are right, but now that Squad has a larger playerbase than back then, it might be the right time to start moving the gameplay to the original goals - a spiritual successor to PR. Of course, I am not suggesting drastic changes like bringing the rally and dead-dead to what it used to be in one patch, but instead, a gradual way of shifting the gameplay to a slower and more tactical pace. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, Monk said:

We already had dead-dead and 60 sec rallies in Squad. Sales were not as good then as they are now.

Prove that dead-dead and 60s rally had anything to do with sales, instead of free weekends + discounts.

Edited by EcchiRevenge

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, fidanym said:

Unfortunately, you are right, but now that Squad has a larger playerbase than back then, it might be the right time to start moving the gameplay to the original goals - a spiritual successor to PR. Of course, I am not suggesting drastic changes like bringing the rally and dead-dead to what it used to be in one patch, but instead, a gradual way of shifting the gameplay to a slower and more tactical pace. 

The old 'switch-a-roo'. I'm sure people will love that gesture. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But it is not switch-a-roo, it is a slow move towards the original goal of the game. The changes need to be very gradual from patch to patch, this way even more feedback can be collected, and both types of players (very casual as well as people who bought the game for what it was advertised) will be satisfied. The former will not see much of a difference initially and will have plenty of time to get used to the small changes during the 3-week periods between patches while the latter will know that the game is moving in the right direction and won't lose hope.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm with you, I want a slower pace and more tactical approach. I think modding will be the best route to achieve this goal. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, fidanym said:

Unfortunately, you are right, but now that Squad has a larger playerbase than back then, it might be the right time to start moving the gameplay to the original goals - a spiritual successor to PR. Of course, I am not suggesting drastic changes like bringing the rally and dead-dead to what it used to be in one patch, but instead, a gradual way of shifting the gameplay to a slower and more tactical pace. 

 

13 hours ago, EcchiRevenge said:

Prove that dead-dead and 60s rally had anything to do with sales, instead of free weekends + discounts.

 

2 hours ago, fidanym said:

But it is not switch-a-roo, it is a slow move towards the original goal of the game. The changes need to be very gradual from patch to patch, this way even more feedback can be collected, and both types of players (very casual as well as people who bought the game for what it was advertised) will be satisfied. The former will not see much of a difference initially and will have plenty of time to get used to the small changes during the 3-week periods between patches while the latter will know that the game is moving in the right direction and won't lose hope.

 

1 hour ago, budder8818 said:

I'm with you, I want a slower pace and more tactical approach. I think modding will be the best route to achieve this goal. 

I actually agree with all of you.

 

I would like a PR successor to actually look and feel like PR (which it doesnt).

 

But My efforts to try and make VANILLA that kind of gameplay are almost over. 

 

My last one was a POLL on what the community thinks about "2 CORE MECHANICS".

 

I believe that OWI has come up with a business model by which it is trying to emulate BF2 success when it comes to player base and profit. And leaving the modding to the modders without spending money or other resources.

They figured "eventually the community Will develop whatever they like as long as we provide the base for it"

 

 

I´m at peace with that. I just wish they had been clear and straightforward with us about it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×