MaxPlayers more than 32

[Jorgur]

I know you can use IGSO to set the MaxPlayers setting above 32, but on the server list, the setting will never go above 32. This causes the server to be shown as Full when it's not.

Is it possible to fix this? If not, I suggest fixing it in v11.

EDIT: The problem is that the RTB server manager can't enable more than 32 players, so if you set it to higher with IGSO, then update the RTB server settings, the limit will be set to 0.

EDIT2: 20.-21. Dec 2008: Picture speaks for itself:



No lag whatsoever.

[Ad Bot]

[Otis Da HousKat]

Your server can barely handle the 30 people that are always on. I don't see why you want 64.

Although if it is a bug it should be fixed.

[D3ATH]

So you have got 32 players? Wow.

[Trader]

I know you can use IGSO to set the MaxPlayers setting above 32, but on the server list, the setting will never go above 32. This causes the server to be shown as Full when it's not.

Is it possible to fix this? If not, I suggest fixing it in v11.

It's not a bug, it's an engine limitation.  Badspot is able to build himself a special version of the engine that allows more, which is why he is able to host more than 60 players.  But, he has kickass internets (I imagine he has some sort of business-level internet with dedicated bandwidth) that can handle that amount of connections.  I highly doubt he will change the limit for the public version.

[Jaydee]

I highly doubt he will change the limit for the public version.

Why then?

[Jorgur]

I had 43 players in at one time, before the server crashed due to a bug in some add-on.

I find it a little strange that hosting a server with more than 32 players is possible, yet is not supported by the server list.

[Vertzer]

Why then?

Because no one has an internet connection that is able to hold more than 32 players.

[zoneark]

Fiber optics?

[Vertzer]

If you live in Japan, yes.
(or are willing to shed something like $400 per month + your area has to have that kind of service available)

[zoneark]

I have fiber optics and were only paying $80 a month for it and TV.

[Vertzer]

What.
Lies. Where do you live?
Hm, never mind. America seems to have internet for cheaper. I see Verizon has 50 mbps / 20 mbps for $150 per month. My friend called some ISP in Canada not too long ago about something like 50 Mbps / 10 mbps internet and they said it'd be $400 per month + $200 installation.

[Ephialtes]

If you live in Japan, yes.
(or are willing to shed something like $400 per month + your area has to have that kind of service available)

Er, times have changed. You can get fiber optic in the UK for £30 a month.

[zoneark]

What.
Lies. Where do you live?

Im in las vegas right now but at my other house in california it has fiber optics.

[Vertzer]

Er, times have changed. You can get fiber optic in the UK for £30 a month.

FFFfffffff COME ON YOU DAMN CANUCKS, WHERE BE OUR FIBER OPTICS?

[Otis Da HousKat]

If you live in Japan, yes.
(or are willing to shed something like $400 per month + your area has to have that kind of service available)

Only in the major cities. Connections speeds in smaller cities and towns is typically on par or worse than America. The speeds gains in the cities are massive though.

A lot of people use their cellphones to connect to the internet on their computers.