black label
Veteran XX
without any lag due to unreal's netcode? Can coders fix that problem or are we looking at 10 or 8 player teams?
I don't see any "problem". Whats wrong with 8 v 8?black label said:without any lag due to unreal's netcode? Can coders fix that problem or are we looking at 10 or 8 player teams?
It's not a hardware issue. Maps are designed for 8-10 a side so that's why servers are set up that way.black label said:without any lag due to unreal's netcode? Can coders fix that problem or are we looking at 10 or 8 player teams?
To answer your question, there is no problem with the net code that would prevent 16 v 16. It seems pretty good to me right now. We dropped the servers to 24 max recently because with 32 players on Emerald you would frequently run into situations where you were looking at 20 of them at one time, and that's a ton of polys to render. Most people had some FPS problems (which is different than net lag) with that extra 100,000 polys on screen.black label said:without any lag due to unreal's netcode? Can coders fix that problem or are we looking at 10 or 8 player teams?
black label said:cool 24 is perfect
8 v 8 and kick the spec spies. rawrenDless_Delirium said:yes. 10 v 10 for comp, and room for spectators/refs/shoutcasters
enDless_Delirium said:yes. 10 v 10 for comp, and room for spectators/refs/shoutcasters
wow, thats a relief. i haven't played the game myself, but just basing my opinion off my research, it sounded like teams would be much larger than t1 (dunno bout t2) seeing as there are more deployables, turrets need manning, and more things to repair/defend in T:V than the previous titlesYogi said:It's not a hardware issue. Maps are designed for 8-10 a side so that's why servers are set up that way.
With the way T:V plays 12+ players won't be as fun as smaller teams.
ZOD said:I don't see any "problem". Whats wrong with 8 v 8?
As nice as that sounds, highly unlikely.Shoddy said:Surely there are folks interested in non-CTF gametypes that would lend themselves to more players.