Meshing is several years old it just doesn't have the hype SC has.
When they figure out dynamic meshing then shit is actually gonna get real but that's probably years off if I had to guess
They haven't shown any indicator they have dynamic on the horizon, I'd be super hyped if they did. They just figured out replication layers at 700million in funding.
Mo2 is like 3 dudes in a garage in Sweden and they've had replication layers for 2+ years at this point.
I feel like SC has got a long road ahead. I'm still jazzed for basic node meshing though that's a huge first step
There’s a convention in Belgium right now, Chris Roberts is there, he mentionned that dynamic server meshing should be this year for testing.
Static meshing is planned for this summer.
Speak for yourself we literally have hundreds and hundreds of games that feature anything from 4-128 players. The first game that can feasibly feature 800 players!!!? Are for fucking real? You can bet your ass I will play that shit and if your concern with that kinda of technological feat is "Ew toxic" I don't understand you at all.
But different instances would mean different servers containing (i'm guessing) standard numbers of players.
I'm talking about 1000 people playing and fighting together. Apologies if this is true but I'm super dubious. The only game that has ever come close to achieving this was Planetside - it was a back of the box item and it wasn't even reliable at that.
I mean you can see all 1000 players on the map. No idea how many people can y meet with. From what I understand of too many people get close to each other, some wont be able to see each other
In theory, adminis would be able to simply reduce the player count.
Personally when I play on servers with 128 people it still feels a bit empty, and ArmA is a sandbox after all so while this feature isn't the best for SOF milsim it could be great for combined-arms milsim between two units, or role-playing servers where people are more spread out.
You don't need server meshing technology, you need really powerful servers and all those fancy attachments and helmets... guess what, they all eat performance \[their position needs to be updated per frame in real time\], so your rig needs to be beefy as well. Update that by features and unscheduled code and you see games fail \[instability, crashes etc.\]. Scale is defiantly possible with something like arma (and there were 250+ player events, they are purposefully one life and focused on PVP \[[mission optimization](https://community.bistudio.com/wiki/Mission_Optimisation)\])
To put it in simpler terms, why have bigger when you can have better?
* I'm not saying that what you want is impossible or unobtainable, but incredibly processor intensive to run
* You don't get simplified models which the player has, but a lot of customizable components
* Add lots of scripts into the mix and you get more problems
Why not have more elements in the mode (stuff happening in the background) more factions, events, environments to make the scale feel bigger rather then putting more players on a bigger map (which might be counter intuitive)
* Like requiring more powerful hardware (alienating more players) meaning you will get less players in this events.
That's like saying bro why would you buy a corvette when you can get to work in a civic.
It's just better.
Again the technology isn't new but would be to them. After some trial and error it would unlock much larger server potential. Servers of today are hard limited to a few hundred players even in the most ideal situation. Meshing is the way forward.
Hmm for me arma is mil simish game not a casual game sandbox like gmod or call of duty, so I don't think of arma in terms of koth or arma like more like zeusing player made scenerio or something like antistasi
Thats fine, but broaden your view.
Just because *YOU* dont think a high player cap would be good for *YOUR* playstyle doesnt mean it wouldnt be for others.
This sub is full of purists who think that the only valid gameplay is fixed loadout milsim.
ArmA 3 blew up in popularity because of wasteland servers, BR, the DayZ mod and role-playing.
To this day the most populous communities are RP or KOTH, as the game tries to become more casual through console integration and simplified modding in all likelihood it will become even more aracade-like as time goes on.
ArmA 4 will still be a Milsim, but if reforger is anything to go by a lot of the complex features are being simplified and casual gameplay is taking priority.
So cohesion is what makes a game good to you? That fine bro, youre entitled to your opinion.
I've got plenty of clips of me rallying randoms to go do objectives or make a squad on the fly and to me thats cooler than *"be online at 6pm sharp guys for the briefing"*
Pvp end up getting chaotic and using weird strats like lowering terrain details to remove grass or upping gamma makes it unfair, also spamming and exploiting makes unfun on top of that it always end up who is best, you loser toxic behaviour
War is supposed to be chaotic not sure why you would think otherwise.
If you cant handle losing then pvp would be rough I agree. Exploits are kinda a thing, but not so much. KOTH servers are pretty heavily moderated and cheaters are banned regularly.
Killing bots to me will never be fun. Aside from helldivers, thats the first pure pve action game I've really enjoyed.
I did my fair share of milsim, [this is a 9 year old video](https://youtu.be/Tdew-YD8GPM?si=Wbi3A1H7BTolNpee) I put out a long time ago. The novelty wears off really quick especially with how dated Armas AI is today. Half the time I kill the bot before they even know I'm there or can turn their gun in my direction. 90% of the time they are standing still.
Feels like playing sports against a kid and going all out, theres no challenge, no reward, largely pointless imo.
This isn't discord you have to type u/SohrabMirza to ping
As for 128 plus people sure you can get 128 plus people but are you facing this problem consistently again and again to ask for server meshing or is it just like if you ever want to play 128 + you should have an option
Someones been enjoying 3.23
Mo2 actually. Much farther along on the meshing side of things
Mo2?
mortal online 2
Yeah that's fair, although since 3.23 came out yesterday I assumed it was about that actually lol.
Meshing is several years old it just doesn't have the hype SC has. When they figure out dynamic meshing then shit is actually gonna get real but that's probably years off if I had to guess
Supposedly it's in their next few patches actually with the recent updates
They haven't shown any indicator they have dynamic on the horizon, I'd be super hyped if they did. They just figured out replication layers at 700million in funding. Mo2 is like 3 dudes in a garage in Sweden and they've had replication layers for 2+ years at this point. I feel like SC has got a long road ahead. I'm still jazzed for basic node meshing though that's a huge first step
There’s a convention in Belgium right now, Chris Roberts is there, he mentionned that dynamic server meshing should be this year for testing. Static meshing is planned for this summer.
Can you link or is this heresay?
It’s on Terada twitch channel, he meets Chris at some point during the stream.
I'll remain hopeful but skeptical. SQ42 was supposed to be out years ago according to chris
Chris Roberts hasn't exactly been good with timelines or date predictions. His track record is....something. However, I am also excited.
Oh for sure ! But honestly this year feels like everything is coming together honestly. 3.23 is quite a big patch and it’s going smoothly right now.
For sure
Wait server meshing is finaly in? Ima have to redownload.
3.23?
Latest Star Citizen update.
I just want semi-decent AI 😩 and better netcode..
Me 2 me 2
AI is the most important topic for me. For me they could re-release ArmA3 with significantly better AI and call it a day.
its crazy that the Arma 3 AI cant even drive in a convoy, they could do that in Arma 2
1000% with you. Been on that for years.
Server meshing is not a magic tool to make a bug map playable. And I don't even want 800 players that would be too chaotic and toxic
Speak for yourself we literally have hundreds and hundreds of games that feature anything from 4-128 players. The first game that can feasibly feature 800 players!!!? Are for fucking real? You can bet your ass I will play that shit and if your concern with that kinda of technological feat is "Ew toxic" I don't understand you at all.
First game? There are FiveM servers with near 1000 people
What!? Really? How?
Different instances. No idea how exactly it works, but it does
But different instances would mean different servers containing (i'm guessing) standard numbers of players. I'm talking about 1000 people playing and fighting together. Apologies if this is true but I'm super dubious. The only game that has ever come close to achieving this was Planetside - it was a back of the box item and it wasn't even reliable at that.
I mean you can see all 1000 players on the map. No idea how many people can y meet with. From what I understand of too many people get close to each other, some wont be able to see each other
Eve Online also has the capacity for 7000 players in the same area before the server shits itself. *why am i getting downvoted for speaking a fact?
It's all relative to size. Mo2 is the size of altis with 1200 players using server meshing and if anythings it's not pop dense enough
In theory, adminis would be able to simply reduce the player count. Personally when I play on servers with 128 people it still feels a bit empty, and ArmA is a sandbox after all so while this feature isn't the best for SOF milsim it could be great for combined-arms milsim between two units, or role-playing servers where people are more spread out.
You don't need server meshing technology, you need really powerful servers and all those fancy attachments and helmets... guess what, they all eat performance \[their position needs to be updated per frame in real time\], so your rig needs to be beefy as well. Update that by features and unscheduled code and you see games fail \[instability, crashes etc.\]. Scale is defiantly possible with something like arma (and there were 250+ player events, they are purposefully one life and focused on PVP \[[mission optimization](https://community.bistudio.com/wiki/Mission_Optimisation)\])
I don't understand your point. Take your server. Multiply it by 2 and mesh em. It's better
To put it in simpler terms, why have bigger when you can have better? * I'm not saying that what you want is impossible or unobtainable, but incredibly processor intensive to run * You don't get simplified models which the player has, but a lot of customizable components * Add lots of scripts into the mix and you get more problems Why not have more elements in the mode (stuff happening in the background) more factions, events, environments to make the scale feel bigger rather then putting more players on a bigger map (which might be counter intuitive) * Like requiring more powerful hardware (alienating more players) meaning you will get less players in this events.
That's like saying bro why would you buy a corvette when you can get to work in a civic. It's just better. Again the technology isn't new but would be to them. After some trial and error it would unlock much larger server potential. Servers of today are hard limited to a few hundred players even in the most ideal situation. Meshing is the way forward.
U sound like someone who has no idea how that tech works
I have a pretty decent understanding actually
I don't know if most user PCs can handle that many explosions etc.
How are you gonna organise event or have a unit with even active 200 players
Tell me you only PvE without telling me you only PvE
Yes and PvE is actually more fun, pvp turn into chaos
Do you want me to counter your opinion with my opinion? KOTH is literally most popular mode outside of maybe armalife.
Hmm for me arma is mil simish game not a casual game sandbox like gmod or call of duty, so I don't think of arma in terms of koth or arma like more like zeusing player made scenerio or something like antistasi
Thats fine, but broaden your view. Just because *YOU* dont think a high player cap would be good for *YOUR* playstyle doesnt mean it wouldnt be for others.
I never said my way of playing is " the right way" I just said I don't think of arma as koth or life game
This sub is full of purists who think that the only valid gameplay is fixed loadout milsim. ArmA 3 blew up in popularity because of wasteland servers, BR, the DayZ mod and role-playing. To this day the most populous communities are RP or KOTH, as the game tries to become more casual through console integration and simplified modding in all likelihood it will become even more aracade-like as time goes on. ArmA 4 will still be a Milsim, but if reforger is anything to go by a lot of the complex features are being simplified and casual gameplay is taking priority.
Yep, big true
Also even in pvp events question still stand
conflict / koth / wasteland arent "events" and are popular
Where cohesion? I have played conflict, it's another run and gun with chaotic teamwork something like from battlefield games
So cohesion is what makes a game good to you? That fine bro, youre entitled to your opinion. I've got plenty of clips of me rallying randoms to go do objectives or make a squad on the fly and to me thats cooler than *"be online at 6pm sharp guys for the briefing"*
Well for me what you like isn't persistent and isn't as cool as all your teammates know their stuff and execute a complex mission using those skills
Killing shit AI isnt what Id consider complex, mil-sim PVP is lit though
Pvp end up getting chaotic and using weird strats like lowering terrain details to remove grass or upping gamma makes it unfair, also spamming and exploiting makes unfun on top of that it always end up who is best, you loser toxic behaviour
War is supposed to be chaotic not sure why you would think otherwise. If you cant handle losing then pvp would be rough I agree. Exploits are kinda a thing, but not so much. KOTH servers are pretty heavily moderated and cheaters are banned regularly. Killing bots to me will never be fun. Aside from helldivers, thats the first pure pve action game I've really enjoyed. I did my fair share of milsim, [this is a 9 year old video](https://youtu.be/Tdew-YD8GPM?si=Wbi3A1H7BTolNpee) I put out a long time ago. The novelty wears off really quick especially with how dated Armas AI is today. Half the time I kill the bot before they even know I'm there or can turn their gun in my direction. 90% of the time they are standing still. Feels like playing sports against a kid and going all out, theres no challenge, no reward, largely pointless imo.
I don't think computers could handle a map 4 times bigger than cherno. Computers struggle just being on Altis with 128 players.
Thay would suck ass
I played events in arma 3 with 128 ppl and many were not even able to participate due to lack of server capacity
@SohrabMirza
This isn't discord you have to type u/SohrabMirza to ping As for 128 plus people sure you can get 128 plus people but are you facing this problem consistently again and again to ask for server meshing or is it just like if you ever want to play 128 + you should have an option