IrOnTaXi

100 man server. CHECK!

137 posts in this topic

@IrOnTaXi where did you all advertise that the DEv team needed peeps to test maps...........Did I not get sent a memo or viewing the wrong forums. Was it on Discord or Reddit or the Squad Forums itself? Was this a "one time" only special or will there be future "opportunities"?

Edited by 1stLtREAPER
more questions to my original question

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎8‎/‎22‎/‎2016 at 4:20 AM, Black_Hawk said:

Only 5-10 fps oh yeh :D

Silky smooth!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, 1stLtREAPER said:

@IrOnTaXi where did you all advertise that the DEv team needed peeps to test maps...........Did I not get sent a memo or viewing the wrong forums. Was it on Discord or Reddit or the Squad Forums itself? Was this a "one time" only special or will there be future "opportunities"?

This post is really old dude

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, in case optimization goes really well in next version, I guess they could rise player limits up to 100... ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Any updates on this since november '16?


Verzonden vanaf mijn iPhone met Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎9‎/‎29‎/‎2015 at 3:06 AM, IrOnTaXi said:

I announced in all the servers.   ;)

 

No worries.. next week 200 anyone?

My goddess that would be company vs. company! Awesome!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

**** I remember when we use to play 64 player servers in PR and couldn't imagine a server with 100 players. It allows for more diversity in the battlefield and movement on a combined arms scale, without detracting too much from the infantry. Can't wait til this is standard! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, [email protected] said:

**** I remember when we use to play 64 player servers in PR and couldn't imagine a server with 100 players. It allows for more diversity in the battlefield and movement on a combined arms scale, without detracting too much from the infantry. Can't wait til this is standard! 

YES! very much agreed I second that I CAN NOT wait till 100 v 100 is standard, WOW! what a thought..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think 200 people on a server with the maps we currently have would be a disaster. lol. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

200 players, would require some 8km x 8km maps unless we are talking about rush maps like the Normandy beach landings.

 

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=4VjkRwtWjEU

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This would play like crap,  Currently each player / client needs 1024 bytes of data on the server to maintain tic rates @ 72 players we're using 122.88 % of the required data out put with a max server side tic rate output of 36.84 and IMO this is choppy as all hell.   Currently the max client data rate on the player side is sitting @ like a rate of 9,000 or something along those lines.   Combine that with a 60,000 data rate cape on the server with 12,000 allotted to each client.  You start seeing diminishing  tic rates at exactly 30 players.  You can maintain 100+ tic until about that mark.   @ 64 players the highest tic rate the server can currently maintain is 54.4 @ 72 the highest you can maintain is 36... 

 at 100 players the required data rate is a 102,000. You'd be missing 42000 bits above the required 60,000.   This is about 170% so you'd see a tic rate of about... 18 under the best possibly circumstances.  That's terrible, I'd strangle myself.  Hell I want to strangle myself at 30 tic. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 01/10/2015 at 5:21 PM, Soppa said:

As with 100 players on i7 4770, one core was on max load and others very low usage.

Network up 12-20Mbps, down 2-4Mbps

 

A year after this post, now that we're seeing 80-player servers, is the above statement still true?

Are servers still mostly limited by maximum single-core speed?

Is the bottleneck in the UE4 engine?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

it always will be for game logic, since you can't parallel code the result of a dice roll and have things happen from that result 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/28/2016 at 0:01 AM, Virtue said:

This would play like crap,  Currently each player / client needs 1024 bytes of data on the server to maintain tic rates @ 72 players we're using 122.88 % of the required data out put with a max server side tic rate output of 36.84 and IMO this is choppy as all hell.   Currently the max client data rate on the player side is sitting @ like a rate of 9,000 or something along those lines.   Combine that with a 60,000 data rate cape on the server with 12,000 allotted to each client.  You start seeing diminishing  tic rates at exactly 30 players.  You can maintain 100+ tic until about that mark.   @ 64 players the highest tic rate the server can currently maintain is 54.4 @ 72 the highest you can maintain is 36... 

 at 100 players the required data rate is a 102,000. You'd be missing 42000 bits above the required 60,000.   This is about 170% so you'd see a tic rate of about... 18 under the best possibly circumstances.  That's terrible, I'd strangle myself.  Hell I want to strangle myself at 30 tic. 

 

I'm wondering  how the bf2 engine was able to handle 250 players and

pr is able to handle 100 players pretty smoothly.

Also bf4/4 are able to do 64 players smoothly.

 

Would be cool to pinpoint the differences

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

45 minutes ago, SirrCharles said:

 

I'm wondering  how the bf2 engine was able to handle 250 players and

pr is able to handle 100 players pretty smoothly.

Also bf4/4 are able to do 64 players smoothly.

 

Would be cool to pinpoint the differences

 

One significant difference is BF2, PR, BF4 and even Joint Ops were created on engines built for the task.  SQUAD is built on a 3rd party (UE4) "general" type engine that can be used for many types of games across multiple platforms.

 

Add that to everything in SQUAD still being a WIP, and you end up with a game that can't reach those numbers and remain stable, yet.

Edited by Verdin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Verdin said:

One significant difference is BF2, PR, BF4 and even Joint Ops were created on engines built for the task.  SQUAD is built on a 3rd party (UE4) "general" type engine that can be used for many types of games across multiple platforms.

 

Add that to everything in SQUAD still being a WIP, and you end up with a game that can't reach those numbers and remain stable, yet.

 

 +1

Personally I dont like UE4. I am not impressed with its performance or features and think its a very over rated by fanbois.

I am sure UE4 is a great engine if you're creating a basic single player indie game or small multiplayer game.
That said the Squad devs have left the door open to using another game engine if need be (although touted as very unlikely).

Will be interesting to see how Amazon's Lumberyard engine progresses. Mixing the quality of the Crysis engine, but with the support and documentation from Amazon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

On 1/8/2017 at 5:58 AM, SirrCharles said:

 

I'm wondering  how the bf2 engine was able to handle 250 players and

pr is able to handle 100 players pretty smoothly.

Also bf4/4 are able to do 64 players smoothly.

 

BF2 engine can't handle 2 players smoothly, the hit detection was always bad, 100 player servers and other many changes made it even worse. Performance too borke after PR 1.0 so it's not smooth in any sense, on most maps at least.

Edited by banOkay

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

2 hours ago, banOkay said:

 

BF2 engine can't handle 2 players smoothly, the hit detection was always bad, 100 player servers and other many changes made it even worse. 

 

Bullcrap.

Edited by carmikaze

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, carmikaze said:

 

Bullcrap.

 

 

So many videos like this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i am a founder bow to me the best engine is the Dayz standalone engine best fps

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, banOkay said:

 

 

So many videos like this.

One hardcore PR fanboy on the steam forums would not believe me when I said that PR actually has much worse hit detection than Squad...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Does hitbox detection relate to the actual netcode?

Or does it relate to bad collision/hitboxes?

 

I remember from BF2 and sometimes pr i get the pink mist without actually getting wounded.

But apart from some incidents i don't think the hit box system in PR is bad at all.

Atleast it never bothers me during gametime.

 

I would like to know why the SQUAD fps drops which more players, what additional data is being send that causes the server to tune down when compared to PR?

 

Would be cool if the DEVS trow some statistics/math in and break the problem down with structure.

Edited by SirrCharles

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