MP now limited to 32 players

[WavingWhiteFlag[AM]]

As of the most recent BoS update, multiplayer has been limited to 32 players per server...a hard coded limit.


Update in version 1.003

- Ground attack planes now spawn correctly in Campaign missions;
- Bomb hits on bridges are now counting correctly in Campaign;
- Number of players on dserver is limited to 32 players now;
- Dserver should be turning on high performance mode in energy settings of Windows from now on.

Why we limited the ammount of players on dservers.
We've already seen 75-78 players on on server in BOS. Unfortunatelly, they were not properly optimized, and it's not hosts' fault of course, not at all. It's about the software. Current dserver is not optimized to for such stress. Our official goal is to reach stable 64 players per server ( thou we dream about 100 pilots as you probably do). And to reach this goal we want to move step by step, starting from lower level and going higher, for greater achievements. So, if we got good test results with 32 player, we'll increase the limit.
I'll talk to dserver hosts additionally today.

So limiting player numbers (or removing features after the game has reached release) actually provides data on high capacity server performance, apparently? While being realistic, I can only imagine the 32 player limit will be lifted to reveal a new and improved 64 player limit...which is not aiming high at all, and well below the capabilities of the game as we've already seen.

Welp, I tried my ass off, but...eff this.:flipoff:

BoS is a good game, but it's constantly being kicked in the dick by its own developers. I can't support this nonsense anymore. Anything I've ever said about this game in a good light has been seemingly deliberately self-destructed, then decorated by Jason's eloquently delivered graces of customer interaction:


Welcome to our world where it's never enough to satisfy everyone. Any time the team wants to take some time to optimize something you should be happy. Anyways, I thought MP was dead according to several posts I have seen, so no one should mind a temporary limitation. Issues like this is why we have limited the number of folks who have the Dserver and their input has lead us to find some issues that need work. In the end, it's a good thing.

Jason


Thoughts?

[Marmus]

;148588']As of the most recent BoS update, multiplayer has been limited to 32 players per server...a hard coded limit.



So limiting player numbers (or removing features after the game has reached release) actually provides data on high capacity server performance, apparently? While being realistic, I can only imagine the 32 player limit will be lifted to reveal a new and improved 64 player limit...which is not aiming high at all, and well below the capabilities of the game as we've already seen.

Welp, I tried my ass off, but...eff this.:flipoff:

BoS is a good game, but it's constantly being kicked in the dick by its own developers. I can't support this nonsense anymore. Anything I've ever said about this game in a good light has been seemingly deliberately self-destructed, then decorated by Jason's eloquently delivered graces of customer interaction:



Thoughts?

I am continually dumbfounded at what I have seen said (with my own eyes) by the developers of this game. And I don't even really follow the game.

[Ohms]

I don't own the game so have no opinion on the game itself but the dev's do seem to have an unusual marketing strategy. People like yourself and chuck who seemed to do a lot of leg work for the team such as server and instructional videos and believe that is a good game have been ignored for what I have gathered from reading your posts for not toeing the party line! That seems to be counter productive too me.

[ATAG_Colander]

I don't see it as unreasonable as long as is really looked into and increased in the near future.
However, if is done like politicians that promise X and then wait for everyone to forget so they don't have to do it, that would suck.

[Chuck_Owl]

http://i.imgur.com/8pR1fOf.jpg

[Skoshi_Tiger]

What sort of limits did they have with ROF?

I wonder if they have access to the CoD code to see how it was done?

[heinkill]

I dont even know what a dserver is.

The times I have been on MP post release none of the servers have been full anyway. Sunday night prime time the official EU server was the busiest with about 20 people. So I cant imagine too many getting upset.

H

[LuseKofte]

Well, all I see is they are struggling with the software, and try to fix it. I really enjoy this game more and more

[Tvrdi]

ahhhh

It all comes to its place yes..

[Hood]

I don't see it as unreasonable as long as is really looked into and increased in the near future.



Indeed. Wait and see is the best approach.

Hood

[LuseKofte]

Yes it give you the pleasure to know we are all forced to fly cod for eternity in the lack of a real successor for IL2 that will never come.
I am sure that please most in here, to me it is a tragedy, well it is not . Since I got a life on the side of simming. hass not anyone question themselves why cod cannot muster a full server primetime Europe?

But I think you are wrong, I think BOS will survive this also

[hnbdgr]

Yes it give you the pleasure to know we are all forced to fly cod for eternity in the lack of a real successor for IL2 that will never come.
I am sure that please most in here, to me it is a tragedy, well it is not . Since I got a life on the side of simming. hass not anyone question themselves why cod cannot muster a full server primetime Europe?

But I think you are wrong, I think BOS will survive this also

On sunday around 20:30 there were 98 players on atag and around 50 between ACG and AX dogfight. I was pleasantly surprised.

EDIT: On review the 2nd part of my post was not very constructive, I take it back.

[LuseKofte]

Not quite true, Bos had until latest update over 300 active on liners primetime europe. But it is really not important. The way this community behave I really will not a part of.
I find the glooming tasteless and this section more Banana than banana itself

[ATAG_Septic]

The way this community behave I really will not a part of.
I find the glooming tasteless and this section more Banana than banana itself

To which community's behavior are you referring?

[Tvrdi]

Yes it give you the pleasure to know we are all forced to fly cod for eternity in the lack of a real successor for IL2 that will never come.
I am sure that please most in here, to me it is a tragedy, well it is not . Since I got a life on the side of simming. hass not anyone question themselves why cod cannot muster a full server primetime Europe?

But I think you are wrong, I think BOS will survive this also

CLOD and DCS is enough of "pleasure" for me. Old IL2 46 with latest HSFX is still fun in SEOW. Besides, the closest we had to having IL2 46 successor was CLOD...but 1C abandoned the project. And took 777s hand and those guys are not into hardcore sims at all. Just big time advertising with false claims. And nasty surprises with each decision they made. BOS will survive and will have its audience. But forget about massive MP, large scale SEOWs etc. And btw, wer still waiting for IL2 46 successor mate.
I hope they will focus more on ROF now since we need FM fixes and new planes in it. I love ROF. It is much better than BOS in many ways.

[Mysticpuma]

Yes it give you the pleasure to know we are all forced to fly cod for eternity in the lack of a real successor for IL2 that will never come.

Okay, so it's good to see you're finally understanding the frustration that a lot of players feel.


I am sure that please most in here

Which makes no sense that you feel like that. The one thing we all agree on is that Flight Sims are few and far between. The issue is (as I see it) there is a huge (yes there is look at ATAG membership) amount of flight simmers who want the next sim to be the best. They have spent hours and hours giving feedback of what features would be of great interest to the flight sim community (as we did with Storm of war before it became Cliffs of Dover), and yet vast swathes of it have been ignored. It's almost like having a customer survey/trial study of your your customer base, hearing everything they think would be beneficial to your financial model and then saying "we know best though, so thanks but no thanks". I was really under the impression that was one of the reasons for allowing early access and having a dedicated early access discussion forum (hidden from everyone else).

So after all the feedback and information given, what was the point if it has largely been ignored and the software released with many unpopular features, many bugs still to be fixed (and CloD was released with many bugs to be fixed....but the community never had the software to test for over a year before release so couldn't point them out) and features being removed?


to me it is a tragedy, well it is not . Since I got a life on the side of simming. hass not anyone question themselves why cod cannot muster a full server primetime Europe?

It can, it's a shame that you jump on anyone with one iota of a discrepancy in their facts and yet you think it's okay to state something that suits your argument without comeback?


But I think you are wrong, I think BOS will survive this also

I have no doubt about this too. Cliffs of Dover survived a poor release, so I see no reason why BoS wont either.

MP

[gavagai]

;148588']BoS is a good game, but it's constantly being kicked in the dick by its own developers.

I got a chuckle out of that.

777 also debauched Rise of Flight with ridiculous crap instead of improving the core game features. But a lot of the Il-2 community were not interested in investigating or hearing about Rise of Flight before they purchased BoS.

Back in 2010 they introduced two multiplayer modes to supplement coops: Team Death Match and Capture the Flag [sic!]. They did their best to support a style of play that had nothing to do with historical air combat and tactics. They were choices driven by fear that players would be bored without enough boom-boom and rat-tat-tat-tat. To this day you cannot earn points for your side by completing reconnaissance objectives or artillery spotting, but you can blow up a train or even a tank with 7.7mm machine gun fire.

[ATAG_Snapper]

Everyone - I've removed posts from this thread which attack specific individuals and/or make direct reference to how other forums are moderated and/or managed. Please keep that stuff out of your future posts.

Salute,

Snapper

[Bewolf]

Yes it give you the pleasure to know we are all forced to fly cod for eternity in the lack of a real successor for IL2 that will never come.

Speak for yourself. I personally have no problem flying CloD for eternity, as long nothing better comes along. I personally rather fly a Sim with the right potential limited to one theatre then a "light" version covering a much greater area.

If your standarts are different, that is a great for you, but please stop trying to make this attitude a reference for everybody else. Besides, it's a major disrespect towards those people that currently spend their free time to give the community exactly that broadening of scenarios that you so miss, and doing a better job at that currently then both Maddox games back then nor 777 now are capable of, development speed notwithstanding.

P.S. BoS is not an IL2 successor. It's a ROF successor. It's funny to see what a simple name change can have an effect on people, regardless of the actual substance of the product. I see why 777/1C chose it.

[LuseKofte]

I am not unhappy for a living breathing cod, I know I eventually will enjoy it again. I barely fly BOS so it is not that I am too keen of what happening there. But deeming the sim as it done most places here are more subjective and personal character than anything else. I flown Heinkels in this game many hours and I have done it, because it is the only bomber in cod together with the Blenheim I personally think got realistic flight characteristics . The Junker, I feel is a bus drive with no feel to it what so ever and a ground-handeling like a stranded whale. and the Stuka just lack 50 km/h from being a full-blooded fighter.
But it is the rendering of targets and planes that kills the fun,
Despite the faults of the Heinkel it quite good modeling the FM give you correct reactions when dropping the bombs, it cannot outturn a fighter witch the video might lead people to believe. All this is my subjective opinion, like you guys serve so well without any problems. In this "free" forum we are all free to say our opinion, are we not.
Or was I mistaken, well I do not mind you guys do not like what I say, but really look at your selves before judging others

Bewolf BOS is the successor of IL 2 wether we like it or not, just ask the distributors.

[Bewolf]

I am not unhappy for a living breathing cod, I know I eventually will enjoy it again. I barely fly BOS so it is not that I am too keen of what happening there. But deeming the sim as it done most places here are more subjective and personal character than anything else. I flown Heinkels in this game many hours and I have done it, because it is the only bomber in cod together with the Blenheim I personally think got realistic flight characteristics . The Junker, I feel is a bus drive with no feel to it what so ever and a ground-handeling like a stranded whale. and the Stuka just lack 50 km/h from being a full-blooded fighter.
But it is the rendering of targets and planes that kills the fun,
Despite the faults of the Heinkel it quite good modeling the FM give you correct reactions when dropping the bombs, it cannot outturn a fighter witch the video might lead people to believe. All this is my subjective opinion, like you guys serve so well without any problems. In this "free" forum we are all free to say our opinion, are we not.
Or was I mistaken, well I do not mind you guys do not like what I say, but really look at your selves before judging others

Bewolf BOS is the successor of IL 2 wether we like it or not, just ask the distributors.

Not taking offense at your opinions whatsover, it just get's bothersome when you expect others to follow your personal way of enjoying a sim as a basis for debate. Always a bother when people start the "we" ways, when its quite obviously just a personal opinion.

And in regards to customer psychology/business tactics...I rest my case.

[LuseKofte]

I have spent the time here to say it is not fair, I have never said there is not anything to criticize , its claimed rubbish FM. It is simply not true. Parts of it is, but there are more to it.
And always cod is delivered as a example.
I never spent much time flying bos , since I fly mainly with my squad,
This is a bos section. Shall I write about cod. If you are not interested in bos you would not be here.
But you are right, this section was meant to spend time patronize those actually using this game not to seriously discuss it. And you are in a key sentence here
when you expect others to follow your personal way of enjoying a sim as a basis for debate
How are you gonna judge a game, by actual experience of flying a warbird? Like you and all these other know better than anyone else?
I have been a devoting player at ATAG server for over a year, I flown 4 sow campaigns and I know cod very well and my devotion has not left me. Only the public part is gone atm.
I rather see people go ahead with it, but the attacks against this game are of a personal character, they are very little balanced. I do not want to spread a gospel , I defend the inaccurate angle, the same that hit cod at banana forums
I gave BOS 7 in metacritic I would have given the same for cod, these games are not comparable they are totally different

[Bewolf]

I have spent the time here to say it is not fair, I have never said there is not anything to criticize , its claimed rubbish FM. It is simply not true. Parts of it is, but there are more to it.
And always cod is delivered as a example.
I never spent much time flying bos , since I fly mainly with my squad,
This is a bos section. Shall I write about cod. If you are not interested in bos you would not be here.
But you are right, this section was meant to spend time patronize those actually using this game not to seriously discuss it. And you are in a key sentence here
How are you gonna judge a game, by actual experience of flying a warbird? Like you and all these other know better than anyone else?
I have been a devoting player at ATAG server for over a year, I flown 4 sow campaigns and I know cod very well and my devotion has not left me. Only the public part is gone atm.
I rather see people go ahead with it, but the attacks against this game are of a personal character, they are very little balanced. I do not want to spread a gospel , I defend the inaccurate angle, the same that hit cod at banana forums
I gave BOS 7 in metacritic I would have given the same for cod, these games are not comparable they are totally different

Dude, you do not get it. I was not critizising your opinion, i was critizing the way you deliver that opinion. Talk about whatever you like, just don't use "we". Use "I" just like in that last post of yours, problem solved.. Can't be more simple then that, can it? I am not using another reply and waste readers energy to make that point even more clear.

And as we are at it, "like you and all these other know better than anyone else?" does not exactly support your claim of accepting other's opinions in return. To make it clear, I think CloD FMs are better. I think CloDs DM is better. I think CloDs engine is better. I think that this engine is more future proof then the RoF engine, which has reached it's zenith with BoS and will have a very hard time staying competetive over the next 10 years, while the CloD engine only just starts to really develop. That is MY personal opinion. I am not gonna try to sway you over to it, you have your opinion and I am sure you base it on something. And you have repeatedly said so several dozens times for everybody, even the laziest reader, to know, without a single argument yet that could convince me personally to jump the BoS wagon.

Again, share that opinion, no problem at all, but please stop expecting other's of being in your boat and acting all hurt and passive agressive when they are not or at the verge of banning you. You really do not need to be on a mission here, life is good and offers lot of other stuff aside of Flight Simulators.

[LuseKofte]

Yes you probably right, I am the only one here liking the game and you are the only one that are entitled to say us

[1lokos]

Yes it give you the pleasure to know we are all forced to fly cod for eternity ...
to me it is a tragedy, well it is not.

Funny, why you are forced to play some game, especially one that you are always complaining that is "bad in this, lack in that,
lost for that" ... *:D

[Bewolf]

Funny, why you are forced to play some game, especially one that you are always complaining that is "bad in this, lack in that,
lost for that" ... *:D

That is the thing. I am flying Sims since the days of "The Battle of Britian: Their finest hour" and honestly? Right now is the best time I ever had, the TF affair bringing in a spirit of endeavour and possebilities I never had with a business based development team, restrained by profits and related target customers. The "Death of flight sims" has been anounced for decades now, just like the death of the PC. And yet here we are not with one, but 3 flight sims, even 4 if you count in modded IL2 1946. All that panic over "BoS is the last chance" is, in my book, BS, only serving the goals of some accountants.

In the end, it's always the modders that make a game really fullfill it's potential, be it IL1946 (Modded and TD), Skyrim, ArmA, etc. Unluckily BoS is a way too closed up system to ever get there.

[Chivas]

One can only hope that COD and the other theaters built on the game engine will continue with generations of Team Fusion new features, and optimizations.

If sales warrant we can hope for the same for BOS. If work continues on the series, there is no valid reason to think the game engine won't be optimized at the same time. If sales don't warrant continued development, hopefully a team of modders can.

I'm afraid that the COD, DCS, and BOS combat flight sim engines will be the last, unless VR/AR suddenly revives the genre.

[heinkill]

Yes you probably right, I am the only one here liking the game and you are the only one that are entitled to say us

I like the game. Have played about 40 hours so far... Getting a few too many game freezes and SP is a little repetitive so I've not fired it up for a week now. But after another patch I will uninstall/reibstall, see if that fixes my game freezes and fly so more.

You arent all alone in here Lofty.

H

[heinkill]

Yes you probably right, I am the only one here liking the game and you are the only one that are entitled to say us

I like the game. Have played about 40 hours so far... Getting a few too many game freezes and SP is a little repetitive so I've not fired it up for a week now. But after another patch I will uninstall/reinstall, see if that fixes my game freezes and fly some more.

You arent all alone in here Lofty.

H

[Jugdriver]

I'm afraid that the COD, DCS, and BOS combat flight sim engines will be the last, unless VR/AR suddenly revives the genre.

I felt this way when COD came out, so much so I heavy pushed my squadron to jump into COD, but now I am not so sure. I think there is still a good market for combat Flight sims and there are a LOT of virtual pilots out there that are still just flying 1946 and do not fly COD, DCS or BOS. My squad has 55 active pilots, only 20% fly COD and less than 10% fly DCS, the rest fly 46 (only a couple are using BOS). There also seems to be a good amount of casual "pilots" flying WT and more arcadish games, some of them are sure to more from a "gateway game" to more of a simulation experience. Take that with the fact that there are less developers putting out combat flights sims, there appears to me to be an opportunity if the product is right. IMO COD with the TF mod is there, it is just a matter of content. BOS and DCS seem to have promise, I guess we will see where it comes out.


AKA_MattE

[Mysticpuma]

I if the product is right. IMO COD with the TF mod is there, it is just a matter of content.

AKA_MattE

It's coming...... and it'll be big when it happens ;)

Cheers, MP

[Otyg]

It's coming...... and it'll be big when it happens ;)

Cheers, MP

i just wish you guys could have the S-code.. that would make stuff even better.. but keep at it! We all look forward to you'r hard work.

[LuseKofte]

Can you guys please calm down, I really just wanted to test the freedom of speech here.

This topic is about the restriction of players on d server

1. They are not satisfied themselves, it is a failure all together if this number is not increased to over 60 players. If this does not happened you pretty much can deem the whole endeavor a failure, no matter how accurate the fm might be. How ever this is something they actually admit and will work with.

2.I cannot do anything else than admire their guts for keeping the unlocks, they prefer the name Field mods. But just about 100% of the community are against it. Even WT guys aren't happy with it.

3. He-111 can do funny things with no fuel and bomb load, the developers refuse to see it as wrong, to me it obviously is. But that plane got very good simulated features. and bombed up with fuel it is really a treat to fly.

4. 109. I cannot say anything else than I hate it, I am not particular happy about the 109 in cod either, but that got nothing to do with the fm. I do not like fighters in general in cod, that got to do with the rendering of objects, in BOS this is way better and I find myself flying fighters now and then

All in all I think the planes in general are too light, the excellent game physics cannot hide that fact.

But I still love you all :) and I still say there are no better tolerance here than in other places, I got the proof

[ATAG_Colander]

I really just wanted to test the freedom of speech here.

I don't like that comment so, can you please elaborate on it?

[Jugdriver]

It's coming...... and it'll be big when it happens ;)

Cheers, MP

Thanks Mystic, TF are doing a phenomenal job!

@ Lusekofte, I don't understand why you admire them for keeping the unlocks? If nobody likes them (and it keeps them from selling more copies of the game) why would you admire their stubbornness?

AKA_MattE

[WavingWhiteFlag[AM]]

Can you guys please calm down, I really just wanted to test the freedom of speech here.

This topic is about the restriction of players on d server

1. They are not satisfied themselves, it is a failure all together if this number is not increased to over 60 players. If this does not happened you pretty much can deem the whole endeavor a failure, no matter how accurate the fm might be. How ever this is something they actually admit and will work with.

2.I cannot do anything else than admire their guts for keeping the unlocks, they prefer the name Field mods. But just about 100% of the community are against it. Even WT guys aren't happy with it.

3. He-111 can do funny things with no fuel and bomb load, the developers refuse to see it as wrong, to me it obviously is. But that plane got very good simulated features. and bombed up with fuel it is really a treat to fly.

4. 109. I cannot say anything else than I hate it, I am not particular happy about the 109 in cod either, but that got nothing to do with the fm. I do not like fighters in general in cod, that got to do with the rendering of objects, in BOS this is way better and I find myself flying fighters now and then

All in all I think the planes in general are too light, the excellent game physics cannot hide that fact.

But I still love you all :) and I still say there are no better tolerance here than in other places, I got the proof

I don't want you to think this thread was created just to bash BoS. I think BoS is great (err, can be great) and I've been playing it almost every day since it's been installed on my computer, and I still want to...but the developers are making that extremely difficult to make happen...SP is an absolute flop. I've unlocked most things for 2 aircraft so far and I just can't do anymore. Now they've unreasonably capped player numbers in MP just as I'm about to resurrect the Eagle's Nest server (coincidence?). Extra kick in the balls there too because we sprang for the higher performance machine that costs the most specifically so that we can handle higher player numbers. I ask legitimate, non-loaded questions seeking any modicum of transparency on the forum in reply to Jason's comments and I get told "Stop asking questions to annoy me". WTF? How is this person still in a customer-facing role in any business? Imagine if this was a customer service scenario in a restaurant...Customer:"Let me speak to the manager"...<manager comes over>...Manager:"You're all jerks and characters spouting the same complaints over and over. Where were you in 2007 when we were getting our shit kicked in? Stop asking questions to annoy me." (all quotes from Jason, by the way).

'The eff?

Specific game-breaking/game-making feature arguments in this thread and others aside, this game is getting absolutely destroyed by its development cycle. The "middle of the road" approach and ass-backward conceptual design is not anything that should be admired, IMO. Just because people stick to something, doesn't mean it should be admirable...John Wayne Gacy wasn't admired for sticking to his routine of dressing up like a clown and rape/murdering 33 people when he knew it was against the moral standard of society, and 777 shouldn't be admired for sticking to design concepts that explicitly betray the expectations of 99% of their customer base. I feel like 777/1C is under the impression that unlocks make popular games popular, which is not true. Unlocks are a time-gate/feature-gate that gives incentive for the user to buy into skipping the grind...this is usually only successful if it's free-to-play, or a top shelf AAA blockbuster that can sell copies no matter what it is (any given Call of Duty sequel)--but here we've already bought the game, and it wasn't cheap by any means. Throwing unlocks into BoS shows the most illogical reasoning I've ever seen in game development. "Hurr durr, today's popular games all have one thing in common: unlocks...let's add unlocks to our game!". Cherry picking an absolutely random feature of a successful paradigm shift of modern video games seems to be what's going on here...as if 777/1C just want BoS to be part of the modern game party with little to no thought about how to actually successfully go about it.

The game itself, the bits that makeup the actual guts of the images you're seeing on screen along with their interaction are great, but they're being wielded absolutely horribly. It's an extreme waste. It's like cracking open a priceless Faberge egg and using it as a cereal bowl for your Capt. Crunch. Look at one of the recent threads on BoS forums...why was the RPK radio beacon thing modeled in the game (as an unlock!!!!) when there's a fucking all-seeing-eye compass that points you to not only your next waypoint--which is always where you need to go--but also points to escort/enemy/objective aircraft in expert mode?? There's some serious design concept schizophrenia going on here...and that's what is killing BoS, that's what's harming the sim genre.

I'm not sure how CloD got so involved in this thread, btw.

[Jugdriver]

;148799']

I'm not sure how CloD got so involved in this thread, btw.

Sorry I got off subject.

Now to stay on subject, do you think they limited the MP numbers becuase of your server?

AKA_MattE

[ATAG_Headshot]

I find it interesting that they do this shortly AFTER release. They must have known before...

[WavingWhiteFlag[AM]]

Sorry I got off subject.

Now to stay on subject, do you think they limited the MP numbers becuase of your server?

AKA_MattE

I can't help but think it has something to do with the decision. I'm sure Jason isn't thrilled that I'm about to get another server back online, this time with my own financial backing along with the community's. Though, I can't see how disrupting my attempts to get a US server going helps him in anyway...it would do exactly the opposite. Perhaps I'm just being bias and overly thinking it.

I can't wrap my head around the logic they're using to first limit then fix MP numbers. They're intentionally decimating their own product's image to hide the complaints about lag and poor performance on unrealistically high player numbers--which would decimate their own product's image. Bit of a conundrum there--it reminds me of a time-traveling paradox or something. How does limiting player numbers so low provide them anything to work with to improve numbers? Why 32 when the standard machine was handling 60 just fine aside from the usual one or two high-ping laggy player? Why limit the numbers now? Why limit the numbers at all while they work on it in-house?! The performance per player number is not linear. I just don't get it.

I really should stop caring and stop dealing with this, because playing video games for entertainment shouldn't include being constantly let down...but now I have an obligation to the community since they donated a large sum of money...something 777 is obviously not caring about. I should take notes for them.

[vranac]

;148812']I can't wrap my head around the logic they're using to first limit then fix MP numbers. They're intentionally decimating their own product's image to hide the complaints about lag and poor performance on unrealistically high player numbers--which would decimate their own product's image. Bit of a conundrum there--it reminds me of a time-traveling paradox or something. How does limiting player numbers so low provide them anything to work with to improve numbers? Why 32 when the standard machine was handling 60 just fine aside from the usual one or two high-ping laggy player? Why limit the numbers now? Why limit the numbers at all while they work on it in-house?! The performance per player number is not linear. I just don't get it.


Because next two months are critical for the future of the project. In December they will look how many copies they sold and then they will plan what to do next if successful.
They don't want people complaining about lagging and slowdowns and hittig with bomb into the centre and nothing happens.
That is bad for sales.

Remember CloD release ?

[WavingWhiteFlag[AM]]

Because next two months are critical for the future of the project. In December they will look how many copies they sold and then they will plan what to do next if successful.
They don't want people complaining about lagging and slowdowns and hittig with bomb into the centre and nothing happens.
That is bad for sales.

Remember CloD release ?

...but why now and not during beta? What is the goal for this temporary limitation in lieu of pending improvements? What brought this on...was it players running high capacity servers? Was it unfounded reports of bad performance on those servers? What basis of information are they forming this on? One person complaining about bad performance is not equal to everyone experiencing bad performance. Will there be a hard coded cap of something other than 32 players after aforementioned improvements are made?

I asked these questions and got told to shutup. These are valid concerns and questions for people that play this game for MP, especially for people paying premium prices for 3rd party services to host servers with the specific intention to create large player numbers.

I understand that improvements need to be made and it will take time. My complaint isn't "hurry up with X feature", it's what is in the plan for the future. Due to past experience with this project, I feel it's extremely important to get a full explanation as soon as possible as to not get duped again into what we were supposed to assume, IE, unlocks in MP. All I'm asking for is some clarity.

[ATAG_Colander]

Not that it matters but, there are two possible reasons I can think of...
1.- They found a last minute bug/issue that they don't want to risk on release.
2.- They are planing (and many companies do this. Not only software) releasing it as an upgrade/improvement latter on.

[LuseKofte]

Bos team are on to us


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fXcjUz65fFA#t=37

The initial speed is the same as BOS but it aint doable on takeoff since your aloft already at 150

[WavingWhiteFlag[AM]]

Bos team are on to us

The initial speed is the same as BOS but it aint doable on takeoff since your aloft already at 150

Firstly, extremely wrong thread.

Secondly, creating and showing this is bordering on you being the very people you don't approve of that talk about BoS in such a way. You know this is just going to start another argument. Please, stop acting like BoS (or CloD) is perfect in every way. I know you like BoS a lot, that's fine, but there are going to be discrepancies (with any/every game) that people will point out and it will start endless arguments...just let it slide man. Don't take the bait any more than you already have.

[ATAG_Colander]

So I repeat my question...


I really just wanted to test the freedom of speech here.

I don't like that comment so, can you please elaborate on it?

Are you deliberately trying to get banned to prove a point?
Are you pulling our strings just to see how far you can take it?
Do you attempt by all means to start an argument because is the only place you still can do it?

[LuseKofte]

Firstly I haven't taken any bate at all. not from anyone. You can serve this conspiracy theory to those believing in it, secondly I fly BoS very little compared to DCS and IL2 . I just do what is done to me. And I see it is not taken well.
But the funny thing is critique is very ok as long as it not struck anything here. If so you are a "fanboy" being at the evil developers of BOS service
I am no ones "fanboy" and I do not put personally grudge towards any game or player. Witch I think many have done in this case. But lately I have been provocative , I admit that.
I just say plain out, the so called liberty here is not better or worse than any other site of this sort I have been at. It is the same as you put it eating the bate.

Colander be my guest, the decision is yours to take.

[nacy]

Bos team are on to us


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fXcjUz65fFA#t=37

The initial speed is the same as BOS but it aint doable on takeoff since your aloft already at 150

avec quel version vous avez fait la vidéo? aujourd’hui on joue avec le patch TF 4.312,sur COD.

[ATAG_Lolsav]

But lately I have been provocative , I admit that.
I just say plain out, the so called liberty here is not better or worse than any other site of this sort I have been at. It is the same as you put it eating the bate.

Luse, from someone who admins/moderates another forum this type of behaviour is not welcomed. Not here, not anywhere. If someone behaved like this on your forums i think you would be very angry.

Its like saying "Yes officer i was going at 200km and i know the limit is 100"


Colander be my guest, the decision is yours to take.

If it was the officer, do you think he would let you go without applying a ticket or sending you, at the very least, to a judge?

ATAG forum deserves a bit more respect. We try to build a community where people are friendlie, where the "provocative" attitude can be healthy on a friendly environment, not to start a endless dabble, beating up dead horses.

If you are not trying to get ban, im with Colander here, it really looks that way. Is that some sort of badges you collect? "I was ban from XY and Z forum".

Ive read about 10 threads where you state your not posting about BOS anymore.. yet you keep coming back to those threads.

Your most welcome on the forums as long you respect the forum and the people around here. Respect them as you wish them to respect you.

[vranac]

;148822']...but why now and not during beta? What is the goal for this temporary limitation in lieu of pending improvements? What brought this on...was it players running high capacity servers? Was it unfounded reports of bad performance on those servers? What basis of information are they forming this on? One person complaining about bad performance is not equal to everyone experiencing bad performance. Will there be a hard coded cap of something other than 32 players after aforementioned improvements are made?

I asked these questions and got told to shutup. These are valid concerns and questions for people that play this game for MP, especially for people paying premium prices for 3rd party services to host servers with the specific intention to create large player numbers.

I understand that improvements need to be made and it will take time. My complaint isn't "hurry up with X feature", it's what is in the plan for the future. Due to past experience with this project, I feel it's extremely important to get a full explanation as soon as possible as to not get duped again into what we were supposed to assume, IE, unlocks in MP. All I'm asking for is some clarity.

AM, I was just paraphrasing Loft's words. They got a lot of complaints and they decided to cut it down. I can give you a link on Russian forum, but you probably wouldn't understand that correctly with an automatic translation. My Russian is bad but I can see auto translate mistakes clearly because my native language is slavic.

[1lokos]

From Russian forum (Google Trans.) about the matter -before limit servers to 32 players (10, 27)- seems that AI in MP are the issue:



on Oct 24 2014 - 16:11, said:

Player - Syndicate now crashed on the figure 75. Chet my FPS dipped Toli toli is the large number of people on the server. Dogfayt was noble)

Loft - 75 too much for our game yet. Ie 100 must try, but too many nazemka eats and bots. If you clean the pilots really think 100, but with the script too much. 64 something that we test, the further experiments yet.



Player 1 - Once again flying. Again 75 people crammed. 48 Germans while.
FPS sags probably due to mass dogfight. But this is clearly teleports server even noticed at airfield under the ground, some fail.

Player 2 - Are you this theme seen? Maybe still a powerful iron will?

Loft - Certainly help. But the ambush that the frequency dependence of the nucleus and not the number of cores.
Ie such a server is really hard to do powerful.
We are thinking how to make the server less demanding, often think, are even making changes, but this is a very complex process optimization of such a complex physics on the server and in general + more all this logic, and bots.



Sokol1

[WavingWhiteFlag[AM]]

From Russian forum (Google Trans.) about the matter -before limit servers to 32 players (10, 27)- seems that AI in MP are the issue:





Sokol1

Yes AI will bog down a server if given too many instructions, but our tests with bombers seemed satisfactory. Loft is correct about the server not being reliant on the amount of cores the machine has, as dserver does not utilize multiple cores efficiently, but it does matter how fast the actual CPU is...which is why I was raising money for the highest clocked 4-core server I could find.

The previous server we were running had 10 cores at something like 2.3Ghz, which was not ideal, but still ran 60 players on a fully loaded mission flawlessly. I'm wondering where they're getting their data from, as far as I know they have not asked any of the server owners for any sort of metrics or performance data to pull from. If they're basing player caps on forum posts of people complaining about lag/warping, then I don't think a solution is going to be found because they're not even looking at the proper problem nor are they looking for what attributed to the problem. That's just bad science.

[Kwiatek]

Still they could leave one or 2 servers ( external) like Syndycat with more slots ( 60-70) and rest could limit for 32 for their test.

I played mostly in Syndycate servers and didn't have problems with full server - 75 people playing. So i wonder about their decision.

As i said they could leave at least most popular server - Syndycate with more slots and limits other ( officals) for their test.

[ATAG_Snapper]

Folks, several posts were removed because they dealt specifically with another forum's moderating decisions and management. As I've already requested, please do not bring that stuff into the ATAG Forum.

Thanks,

Snapper

[WavingWhiteFlag[AM]]

Sorry for that. Got a bit off track there. I'll take that post somewhere else if it needs to be further discussed.

[ATAG_Snapper]

;149047']Sorry for that. Got a bit off track there. I'll take that post somewhere else if it needs to be further discussed.

Thanks. :thumbsup: