Max Player Count 64

[HaTe]

When will this be a thing again?

I know that the 40 was put into place long ago to combat vehicle lag, but I think we should begin testing 64 again. I understand that it was kept at 40 in order to provide different servers with player counts, but as is there's only 2 servers that are ever really being used, and usually 1 of them is full. With the (eventual) final release of the game, I think that the numbers will sky-rocket back up to what they once were in beta 1. Having higher player count servers would be awesome to experience with that. At the very least, will it be tested again before the final release?

[RypeL]

UDK is not capable for that. Especially with vehicles in the mix cause they use a lot of network traffic cause UDK calculates there physics serverside and then has to transfer all physics and movement updates to the client. So that is no. Also people just joined the 64 player servers, leaving other servers deserted. That still happens. You never really see a 32 player server filling up.

[HaTe]

I've been seeing the 40s filled up lately. But fair enough, not much you can do if the engine doesn't allow it.

[SFJake]

Except even in the first time you had 64 players server, some servers were capable of it. I saw it right before you pulled it out. One server I don't remember which had almost no issues (played for at least 30 minutes) and then the plug on 64 players was pulled and it was gone.

Not every server should just cap themselves at 64 but some could.

64 players really should be back in a non-default way so that specific servers can try it out. Isn't it possible to just make a mutator to raise the cap? I'm telling you, with absolute conviction, a good server CAN handle it. Just make it a non-default setup so that most servers don't cap over 40 unless they really want to try it and if they really think they can handle it.

I'm dying to get this. 40 feels low and in some maps it feels empty. I don't even join a server at 30. Big servers are a community choice and it should be available.

[HaTe]

Agreed with Jake on this one; if it is indeed possible, then it should at the very least be attempted and tested. With vehicle limits in place, the "Vehicle lag" shouldn't be too relevant anyway. Again, it all comes down to if the engine can handle it, but Jake says that he has seen it be capable.

[Canucck]

The thought of playing a UE3 game with 64 players gives me brain cancer. It's UE3 lol... All it's supposed to do is make it really easy for devs to make things look really pretty. Everything else, especially critical MP functionality (i.e. input) was like a tertiary concern for them back then, and now even Epic is being punished because of this in UT4

Edited March 24, 2015 by Guest

[RypeL]

I've been seeing the 40s filled up lately. But fair enough, not much you can do if the engine doesn't allow it.

That wasent what i meant. I meant 32 player servers are not filled cause there are 40 player servers. And when we had 64 player servers 40 player servers were rarely filled cause there was 64 player server. Does this make sense ? No. It is most widely agreed that Renegade is best played at 16-40 players. 32 might be ideal. There is some kind of psychology going on here that drives people to the server with the highest playercount regardless if the maps and the gamemode was designed for that playercount. Because of that a lot of people in Beta 1 thought the game would have no strategy.

So

A) If you do some research about UE3 games and playercount you will find that most games are struggling with high player count and dont advice it cause of the engine

B) The leads at Renegade X agreed that the game is best played with 40 players or less and we do not want that people just join the high player number servers. But that is exactly what they were doing when we had 64 players and what they mostly do now (joining EKT and TMX 40 player servers instead of 16 or 32 or 8 player servers). So this was the other reason why we pulled the plug on 64 player servers. Cause this is not the kind of player number we designed the game and the maps for. The only way we could stop the majority of people from joining the 64 player servers was to dissallow them.

[DoctorB0NG]

Except even in the first time you had 64 players server, some servers were capable of it. I saw it right before you pulled it out. One server I don't remember which had almost no issues (played for at least 30 minutes) and then the plug on 64 players was pulled and it was gone.

Not every server should just cap themselves at 64 but some could.

64 players really should be back in a non-default way so that specific servers can try it out. Isn't it possible to just make a mutator to raise the cap? I'm telling you, with absolute conviction, a good server CAN handle it. Just make it a non-default setup so that most servers don't cap over 40 unless they really want to try it and if they really think they can handle it.

I'm dying to get this. 40 feels low and in some maps it feels empty. I don't even join a server at 30. Big servers are a community choice and it should be available.

Please don't speak so defiantly about things you don't know. The RenX server is highly single threaded and as such requires powerful single threaded performance. Even a mid-high end haswell xeon would struggle with 64.

My mid range haswell xeon hits 20+% CPU usage with a full server on any flying map once some vehicles get out there and it can only max out at 25% as it's a quad core and as mentioned earlier the RenX server is single threaded. Once the CPU hits 25% the vehicle lag starts. At first it's wobbles only, then it becomes like driving in molasses.

[SFJake]

Renegade was never designed for huge player counts in mind in the first place either but thats just what people played.

The old Renegade had 50+ player servers from what I remember and people played it. If they play it, its because the masses prefer bigger player count, designed for it or not. I find that most maps in Renegade work really well with more players.

Realistically, most maps are designed for not even 20 players. But the masses do not play that way.

Like I said, thats a community choice to make. The more competitive and serious aspect of Renegade was always on lower player counts, but most people look at the game very casually, and thats why a lot of people like big servers.

Its your choice to make, but in the end, I think that

A-It can actually work, it just needs a very good server.

And B- Some people prefer that, and if the community flocks to it, then thats their choice, regardless of what player counts the game was made in mind.

And I'd prefer everyone playing in a 50+ player server than 2-3 groups of 30 player servers. But thats the point, everyone would have a different opinion here.

Technical reasons are always understandable, but I think the devs should let the choice of servers to the community.

If the original Renegade was made with that mentality, we would all be playing in 16 player servers.

Please don't speak so defiantly about things you don't know. The RenX server is highly single threaded and as such requires powerful single threaded performance. Even a mid-high end haswell xeon would struggle with 64.

My mid range haswell xeon hits 20+% CPU usage with a full server on any flying map once some vehicles get out there and it can only max out at 25% as it's a quad core and as mentioned earlier the RenX server is single threaded. Once the CPU hits 25% the vehicle lag starts. At first it's wobbles only, then it becomes like driving in molasses.

You accuse me of talking about things I know nothing about, but I never talked about any of this.

I have no idea what CPU, what computer or what -anything- they were using. I didn't say anything about that.

All I did was swear to the gods at least 1 server adapted and worked at 64 player without wobbling in the first beta back when 1000s of players were playing.

Maybe it is out of the scope of most server owner to provide a stable 64 player servers. I don't know. Heck maybe it was fluke or my imagination or I was on drugs. I just think it'd be worth a try again.

[HaTe]

So just allow 64 player servers, with a note that it will require extremely powerful specs in order to do so. It's not that UE3 can't handle it; it sounds moreso that it's the server's specs that can't handle it on the UE3. Shouldn't limit those few servers that can run it by having a lower max player count though.

These are communities. Dedicated servers. They understand that people may want to join a different server because of various reasons. If they don't then they shouldn't be running a server in the first place honestly. I don't personally think it's fair to limit the better spec'd servers because they can handle it and other servers cannot. That's like maxing the gfx settings at high because many players can't handle the ultra setting.

[RypeL]

I say it again: Beta1 64 player server situation was awfull and not how we want our game to play. We spend so much time on the game and then we want to get something out of it and dont want to see the gameplay totally ruined cause the matches are just turning into spam fests. Then again nobody who knows what hes talking about would advice you to run a 64 player UDK server. So it was also a sad time for server admins who didnt had a monster server. Again i also do not believe at all that people joined the servers cause it was the best experience for them. A mass doesent always behave smart. Especially with new players comming in. Then again i always see the same few people here wanting 64 player servers. Most players are fine with the 40 limit. As Jake said, there are always different oppinions but we have a strong oppinion about this and thus 64 player servers will not come back cause id rather stick my head into a toilet. And im not the only one thinking that way in Totem Arts.

[RoundShades]

I say it again: Beta1 64 player server situation was awfull and not how we want our game to play. We spend so much time on the game and then we want to get something out of it and dont want to see the gameplay totally ruined cause the matches are just turning into spam fests. Then again nobody who knows what hes talking about would advice you to run a 64 player UDK server. So it was also a sad time for server admins who didnt had a monster server. Again i also do not believe at all that people joined the servers cause it was the best experience for them. A mass doesent always behave smart. Especially with new players comming in. Then again i always see the same few people here wanting 64 player servers. Most players are fine with the 40 limit. As Jake said, there are always different oppinions but we have a strong oppinion about this and thus 64 player servers will not come back cause id rather stick my head into a toilet. And im not the only one thinking that way in Totem Arts.

Couldn't people modify and host private games already with the sdk release, albeit likely off the public list? Really, if any 64 players are dedicated to such a gentlemans club server, that is fine.

I too agree with Rypel though, that no new player should see a server list and see a 64 player server and get tricked into thinking "hey, clicking this is a good idea". Because it isn't. It takes very high dedication to the game to play on "spawn wave" scale like that. 64 players in 99% of average "pub" gameplay situations would only piss off "pubs"...

I miss really old original renegade, playing 24 man games. 12 a team completes the balance power between teams against let's say meds-hotwire vs arty-tech, with elbow room for goofing off and wandering about in a combat environment. I actually played much less renegade when it became capable of 128 man servers much later, besides glacier and custom maps it didn't often seem confortable with 128 players at once, even when you get the understanding that you NEED to spawn-wave aka wait for 8 guys and move out as a group ala red alert 1 infantry (I actually liked playing like that more in APB where classes really shine at doing that).

Edited March 24, 2015 by Guest

[DoctorB0NG]

I say it again: Beta1 64 player server situation was awfull and not how we want our game to play. We spend so much time on the game and then we want to get something out of it and dont want to see the gameplay totally ruined cause the matches are just turning into spam fests. Then again nobody who knows what hes talking about would advice you to run a 64 player UDK server. So it was also a sad time for server admins who didnt had a monster server. Again i also do not believe at all that people joined the servers cause it was the best experience for them. A mass doesent always behave smart. Especially with new players comming in. Then again i always see the same few people here wanting 64 player servers. Most players are fine with the 40 limit. As Jake said, there are always different oppinions but we have a strong oppinion about this and thus 64 player servers will not come back cause id rather stick my head into a toilet. And im not the only one thinking that way in Totem Arts.

Couldn't people modify and host private games already with the sdk release, albeit likely off the public list? Really, if any 64 players are dedicated to such a gentlemans club server, that is fine.

I too agree with Rypel though, that no new player should see a server list and see a 64 player server and get tricked into thinking "hey, clicking this is a good idea". Because it isn't. It takes very high dedication to the game to play on "spawn wave" scale like that. 64 players in 99% of average "pub" gameplay situations would only piss off "pubs"...

Plus it would perform poorly and we don't have the player numbers to support this. There's literally no reason to bump up the player count.

[HaTe]

The idea was to test it out for the eventual final release. Not implement it now and expect for it to constantly be full.

A simple message saying "game isn't intended for 64 players and could result in reduced or poor performance" would let the noobs know, if that really is the biggest gripe with it that you have.

The fact that there IS different opinions on the matter should allow you to come to the realization that it should be a choice for servers. If a player doesn't want to join a server with that amount of people, they don't have to. If a server owner doesn't want to condone that many people in their server, they don't have to. However, if the server and the player want to, it should be their choice. Again, this is all going based off of being told that servers can indeed handle this so long as they have superb specs.

This is coming from someone who enjoyed 15v15 stock Renegade more than any other games, but also enjoyed occasionally playing in 50+ servers with other people who obviously also enjoyed it.