Server Player Limits

[LordHack]

Is there any way to enforce capping servers to 24 (maybe 28) players?  Every time I go to populated servers exceeding those limits the game is nearly unplayable, more so on certain maps.  Ping to server seems meaningless in that regard (since the very worst is <50 ping / 32 player US servers).

For new players this must be befuddling.  It would not be a good first impression.

Perhaps this will change as development continues; but, I wish there was a way to try to hard cap or strongly suggest (enforce?) to normalize the experience as much as possible for now (for testing, if nothing else).

It's kind of server lottery right now!

/rant

[(TLL)Siilk]

 Of course. Go to MWLL launcher's server options where you can set maximum number of players for your server. Or edit server.cfg directly.

[(TLL)CapperDeluxe]

I think what he means is to enforce a maximum across all servers by development.. not sure that would fly

[Ingrater]

Thats a no go. Server performance differes a lot, we can not limit all servers because some can't handle it.
We tried around a lot on the 7.WD Servers, and those run totaly fine with 30 players, but 32 is too mutch (for the clients, not the server ^^).

[CHHš Rampage]

I received complaints about the CHH server when I had it set to 32 so I lowered it to 28. No one played on it at that setting and I do mean NO ONE. The server used to be in the 13th percentile and the most used server running WARs. Now it is rated 54th and sits vacant all the time. I just raised it back up to thirty. What good does it do to set a server to 24 if it sits empty all the time?

The issue of poor performance does not seem to be universal for all users either. I have played on the CHH server with it completely full at 32 and I have not experienced the missing explosion effects, missed hit effects or dropped sounds. Others experience those things even at 26 players and below. I am beginning to believe that the problems stems from a combination of high player counts, server to client ping and marginal performance of some computers that are trying to play the game.

Players want to play with as many other players as possible. That is not going to change. Hopefully, as the Beta continues to evolve performance will continue to improve. I know the Devs are constantly working on optimization of virtually everything in the game.

As all the servers running MWLL are provided by members of the community, I do not see any way that everyone can be forced to max the player settings at 24. But nothing stops any player from only joining servers that are set to 24 or less if that is where they get acceptable performance.

[LordHack]

I received complaints about the CHH server when I had it set to 32 so I lowered it to 28. No one played on it at that setting and I do mean NO ONE. The server used to be in the 13th percentile and the most used server running WARs. Now it is rated 50th and sits vacant all the time. I just raised it back up to thirty. What good does it do to set a server to 24 if it sits empty all the time?

The issue of poor performance does not seem to be universal for all user either. I have played on the CHH server with it completely full at 32 and I have not experienced the missing explosion effects, missed hit effects or dropped sounds. Others experience those things even at 26 players and below. I am beginning to believe that the problems stems from a combination of high player counts, server to client ping and marginal performance of some computers that are trying to play the game.

Players want to play with as many other players as possible. That is not going to change. Hopefully as the Beta continues to evolve performance will continue to improve. I know the Devs are constantly working on optimization of virtually everything in the game.

As all the servers running MWLL are provided by members of the community, I do not see anyway that everyone can be forced to max the player settings at 24. But nothing stops any player from only joining servers that are set to 24 or less if that is where they get acceptable performance.

I understand what you are saying, but, honestly, I think people just tend to jump on whatever the most populated (with available slots).  There are tons of servers I've never played on, but not because of any aspect just they are aren't "busy" when I'm playing.  I am however just starting to leave servers where performance is or becomes an issue because it's not worth the heartache.

I guess I am only asking server admins to be cognizant of performance and the frustration of damage  drops and choppy play (some of which is out of their control, to be sure - but is worse with high player counts).  I personally have a kick ass computer, GPU, etc. that I upgraded for MWLL (among other things) just a bit ago, so there's not much else I can do on my end!

I do appreciate your effort in even putting up a server, so don't take any of my comments as being ungrateful for your time and expense.

[CHHš Rampage]

I do appreciate your effort in even putting up a server, so don't take any of my comments as being ungrateful for your time and expense.

I don't take your comments in any kind of negative way. I know some players are having issues and I wish there was something more I could do about it. I have checked with gameservers.com and they have said that it is not a problem with their server. To some extent I know that is true however I do think that the game would run better if it was on a truly dedicated server. I just cannot afford to rent such a beast and although I do have a couple computers here that would fit the bill I do not have sufficient upload speed from my home to support Crysis or the Mod. For now, I will just try to provide the type of server that seems to draw the players to it.

[ratbuddy]

Gameservers is full of it. On the box I have access to, it's running a Core 2 era Xeon clocked at a mighty 1.6ghz. Their $150 dedicated dual Xeon servers? Single core Pentium 4 based Xeons.

Rubbish.

[Taemien]

Servers cannot reliably run this at 24+

I have yet to finish a match at more then 24 players without the server crashing.

[ratbuddy]

SJ has a new server from Hypernia that can handle 32 players. Dual E5520's. Check out Huntress 2 some time.

[KorJax]

I never join servers higher than 24 players, because it's not nessicary

Not to mention my performance from a framerate perspective tends to for whatever reason be much much lower with 32 players, than 24... ON TOP of the lag, and the constant sound drop-outs from that many players.

[Cygma]

I second what ratbuddy said, with sufficient performance 30 or 32 players are not a server-side issue. Of course it can still lead to client-side performance drops depending on the setup.

[GB-72AT Talon]

Is there any way to enforce capping servers to 24 (maybe 28) players?  Every time I go to populated servers exceeding those limits the game is nearly unplayable, more so on certain maps.  Ping to server seems meaningless in that regard (since the very worst is <50 ping / 32 player US servers).

For new players this must be befuddling.  It would not be a good first impression.

Perhaps this will change as development continues; but, I wish there was a way to try to hard cap or strongly suggest (enforce?) to normalize the experience as much as possible for now (for testing, if nothing else).

It's kind of server lottery right now!

/rant

i cant believe you asked a question only a dev could answer.....   

[(TLL)CapperDeluxe]

i think we've seen the community gravitate towards <30 max, which is at least a start.   I still think 24 is the way to go, but whatev.  As always the guys are hard at work making things work better so maybe one day in the future 32 will work out ok.

[(TLL)KitLightning]

... I still think 24 is the way to go...