Limited the NS2 Server hosting like BF3
oldassgamers
Join Date: 2011-02-02 Member: 80033Members, Squad Five Blue, Reinforced - Shadow
Join Date: 2011-02-02 Member: 80033Members, Squad Five Blue, Reinforced - Shadow
<div class="IPBDescription">Only temporary</div>Hello guys, in current beta build there is only a few servers which can handle the tickrate of 18 player. The requirement is about 4.4GHZ servers if you want a stable 30 tickrate.
Most of the servers on NS2 are very laggy and it breaks the gameplay. It's about 10+ servers who can handle the game right now.
How about limit the server hosting to does who can provide good quality service for the community for the time being? To give a lagfree experience with no stuttering in-game. So people can enjoy playing this awesome game.
Of course this is just temporary solution and only for the release until UWE have optimize the gamecode.
Most of the servers on NS2 are very laggy and it breaks the gameplay. It's about 10+ servers who can handle the game right now.
How about limit the server hosting to does who can provide good quality service for the community for the time being? To give a lagfree experience with no stuttering in-game. So people can enjoy playing this awesome game.
Of course this is just temporary solution and only for the release until UWE have optimize the gamecode.
Comments
If you limited it, there would only be a handful of servers running at launch and they would all be full. I think people would rather be able to play in a slightly laggy server than not at all.
This really isn't a good idea. You propose taking the server files *away* from people who are already hosting servers? You also want the developers to have to go and review applications from various companies that host servers? Don't you think they're busy enough this close to release?
Performance is not a good enough reason to take away server files. For *every* game that has been released so far, someone's been running a crappy server. People deal with it, they play on other servers.
I still feel something should be done about this, but with the time left until release I don't think there are any options other than the filter on the server browser.
They accidentally broke the player limit restrictions in that server revamp patch (b222?). You can currently make servers with 100+ slots as well as a negative amount. Before that patch I used to mess around doing that but it needed a binary patch.
If you limited it, there would only be a handful of servers running at launch and they would all be full. I think people would rather be able to play in a slightly laggy server than not at all.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Yea the real issue is that the engine is not really optimized. I mean really it should not take a 4+ghz server to support 24 players. Most data centers only support xeon servers and those only go up to 3.4 ghz.
I am sure many people want to see 30 slot servers like the ns1 days but short of LN cooling that is not very practical. At minimum if the engine had more threads then the current generation of cpus would be able to handle it. The ghz warz ended like 5 years ago it is time for programs to catch up to multi threading.
You are talking about the NS2 engine here. It is a very old engine. It has been in development for years, although in 2009 they decided to work it into supporting NS2. When development was started, multithreading wasn't as prevalent as it is now. This must be remembered, UWE didn't build their engine from scratch in 2009. Heck, the live demo of Infestation was a BSP in the spark engine, that was 2006. Who knows how old the engine actually is, but I'd say 10 years minimum..
People seem to think Spark is new, but it has been in various stages of development for a very long time....
Its just plain scary to me how it seems that the server client isn't getting much attention. I could be wrong of course. At this time my server can handle around 16 players and keep tick of 25+
Do we expect main stream server hardware at some point to be able to handle ns2?
People seem to think Spark is new, but it has been in various stages of development for a very long time....<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I believe this is incorrect.
<a href="https://getsatisfaction.com/unknownworlds/topics/dedicated_server_performance" target="_blank">https://getsatisfaction.com/unknownworlds/t...ver_performance</a>
What exactly are you trying to say then? From what I understand you're talking about restricting server hosting to "approved hosters".
It's been fixed again in b225. Limit is back to 24 :(
"heresy"
Any belief or theory strongly at variance with established opinion. —heretic, n. —heretical, adj.
:)-
They accidentally broke the player limit restrictions in that server revamp patch (b222?). You can currently make servers with 100+ slots as well as a negative amount. Before that patch I used to mess around doing that but it needed a binary patch.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
It's been fixed again in b225. Limit is back to 24 :(
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Patch <!--fonto:Courier New--><span style="font-family:Courier New"><!--/fonto-->0000A2B4<!--fontc--></span><!--/fontc--> from <!--fonto:Courier New--><span style="font-family:Courier New"><!--/fonto-->7E<!--fontc--></span><!--/fontc--> to <!--fonto:Courier New--><span style="font-family:Courier New"><!--/fonto-->EB<!--fontc--></span><!--/fontc-->
<img src="http://i.imgur.com/i3ro7.gif" border="0" class="linked-image" />
People seem to think Spark is new, but it has been in various stages of development for a very long time....<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Still though if that is the case then your implying that 10 years ago someone developed an engine that needed hardware that would not exist for 15-20 years to run? I doubt that anyone is that foolish. It was clear in 2005 that things were going to switch to parallelism. This gives the ns2 team the entire existence of their project to modify the engine toward multi threading. Even the netburst architecture made it clear that desktop chips would not see stock speeds ever exceeding 3.8GHz.
For the spark engine to have an excuse for not having knowledge of netburst architecture it would need to have to be over 12 years old! Unless it was made exactly when netburst was coming out as at that time it was suspected that the p4 would reach speeds of 10GHz until reality of thermal output hit intel on the head.
Regardless the latest patches have been improving performance a lot so I think that once the game releases and they focus on more optimizations we will have much lower system requirements!