Player Limit and Server Suggestion

[iK4l3l]

i think this game is not suitable for more than 35 players. when it has more than 35, its just uproar

35 players is perfect.. can we have 2 servers with 35 player limit each, instead of having one server with 60 player limit?

this way we also can have two crowded servers to switch from one to other if we ever get bored

[ArcticPrism]

Do you mean 36? 35 would be uneven teams.

I like the idea in theory and would be willing to try it but not sure it would work out that way. Every time I've seen the player count lowered to 50 or 40 people complain that the player count is too low. They also keep trying to get into the already populated server rather than fill a second. Lower player games also end faster which makes it harder to maintain the population. Maps like Field fill the server because it takes forever to win.

Edited June 21 by ArcticPrism

[iK4l3l]

yes 36, i missed that 35 would be uneven teams

i understand your point but it's just kinda uproar and unplayable when we have more than 36 players

[karmai]

In renewars we complain if it's bigger than 4v4

[MaxRen06]

In my opinion, player limit should be even more than 60, but only on weekends, when most players are able to join. I would like to do like that: keep 60 players on Monday - Friday, and set 70 player limit on Saturday and Sunday.

36 players would be WAY too low, since there are many complaints, that its not enough people, with I agree as well. Also yeah, low player games are also as a rule fast, if its not ref vs ref or ref vs pp or something like that.

[ExEric3]

10 hours ago, MaxRen06 said:

In my opinion, player limit should be even more than 60, but only on weekends, when most players are able to join. I would like to do like that: keep 60 players on Monday - Friday, and set 70 player limit on Saturday and Sunday.

36 players would be WAY too low, since there are many complaints, that its not enough people, with I agree as well. Also yeah, low player games are also as a rule fast, if its not ref vs ref or ref vs pp or something like that.

When u will finally learn maps arent designed for these plimits? Plus we havent server with CPU which could handle that ammount of players since ren is single core app.

[MaxRen06]

Speaking about maps, there is actually a plenty of them, which are designed for a big amount of players.
Like Oasis_Flying, Country_Meadow, Cairo or Last_Stand. They can be easily manually set as the next map, and played with 70 plimit.

About CPU problem - I remember, that back in the days, at the March of 2024, the server was able to handle 70 and even 80 players, and SFPS didn't even lowered.

[iK4l3l]

15 yrs ago if not remembering wrong, all servers were set to 24 players max or something like that

[MarcPoulet]

1 hour ago, iK4l3l said:

15 yrs ago if not remembering wrong, all servers were set to 24 players max or something like that

Yes, but now if the main server is full, people won't populate a 2nd one, they will just quit. So it's better having a bigger limit to keep people playing. 

[ExEric3]

1 hour ago, MaxRen06 said:

Speaking about maps, there is actually a plenty of them, which are designed for a big amount of players.
Like Oasis_Flying, Country_Meadow, Cairo or Last_Stand. They can be easily manually set as the next map, and played with 70 plimit.

About CPU problem - I remember, that back in the days, at the March of 2024, the server was able to handle 70 and even 80 players, and SFPS didn't even lowered.

• 1. they arent in a rotation
• 2. last time we had over 100 players with under 30 SFPS = unplayable
• 3. issues with vehicle spawners
• 4. setnextmap maps which havent clients downloaded yet will cause huge ammount of crashes
• 5. people with iGPU getting low FPS with huge ammount of objects
• 6. Shaitan made forwarder script just dunno if its need to be activated or is already activated which will forward players to other server.

So stop with these shits. We know what are we doing here.

 

[MaxRen06]

15 minutes ago, ExEric3 said:

last time we had over 100 players with under 30 SFPS = unplayable

110 players was the rarest exception ever, and of course, the server could not handle that.
 

33 minutes ago, MarcPoulet said:

Yes, but now if the main server is full, people won't populate a 2nd one, they will just quit. So it's better having a bigger limit to keep people playing. 

Agreed. I also for the one server, which could handle 70-76 players.

[Xylaquin]

On 6/26/2025 at 6:06 PM, ExEric3 said:

When u will finally learn maps arent designed for these plimits?

I previously disagreed with you and said that 40-64 player size was best; but last night everyone was playing Islands with 60ish players and it was just impossible to make any progress... even after GDI amassed loads of Med tanks to take on the many many arties.

 

On 6/26/2025 at 7:56 PM, MarcPoulet said:

Yes, but now if the main server is full, people won't populate a 2nd one, they will just quit.

This. Auto-forward doesn't work if you get put into a server with like 4 other people. The reason 99% people join a server is because of player count. Nobody wants to wait in an 2 v 3 server.

How about this idea:

• Make the server have a 64 player limit.
• Then once it's full, immediately shift half of the players onto a second server.
• Then immediately change both servers to have a player limit of 40

By doing the above, you'll have two servers each with ~32 players + space for more to join.
And crucially, you'll avoid the problem of people leaving to rejoin the main server, because the second server they are on is already populated. They won't need to wait to play a normal game.

[ExEric3]

4 minutes ago, Xylaquin said:

I previously disagreed with you and said that 40-64 player size was best; but last night everyone was playing Islands with 60ish players and it was just impossible to make any progress... even after GDI amassed loads of Med tanks to take on the many many arties.

Thats reason why I put 100 plimit yesterday. To show others like max its bad idea. Official westwood servers had 32 plimit and anything above is only worse. Actual issues are ordering vehicles and 40+ players. Yesterday we had 8 vehs in veh queue. And im not talking about map design.

4 minutes ago, Xylaquin said:

 

This. Auto-forward doesn't work if you get put into a server with like 4 other people. The reason 99% people join a server is because of player count. Nobody wants to wait in an 2 v 3 server.

How about this idea:

• Make the server have a 64 player limit.
• Then once it's full, immediately shift half of the players onto a second server.
• Then immediately change both servers to have a player limit of 40

By doing the above, you'll have two servers each with ~32 players + space for more to join.
And crucially, you'll avoid the problem of people leaving to rejoin the main server, because the second server they are on is already populated. They won't need to wait to play a normal game.

I think we forwarded players in small batches. They just dont want play timed/emptied servers. Yeah lowering plimit after forwarded players its something what we didnt tried. 

[iK4l3l]

31 minutes ago, ExEric3 said:

I think we forwarded players in small batches. They just dont want play timed/emptied servers. Yeah lowering plimit after forwarded players its something what we didnt tried. 

here is my suggestion

can we try this?

1. make both servers exactly the same; marathon, same maps, same rotation etc...

2. make both servers 32 player limit

lets see if ppl will join the second server when the first one is full

Edited July 28 by iK4l3l

[Goztow]

A !split command that splits the population over a 2nd serverwwhen the map end, with the same config, the same next map, etcetera may work. But unsure if it's worth the extra coding. 

[C4miner]

50+ players is where it starts to get notably detrimental to gameplay.  But this problem is rare enough that it's probably not worth it to devote resources trying to design some server split command or whatnot.  No matter what is done, people will ALWAYS complain.  I was frustrated yesterday on Islands with 70 players, but still adapted my gameplay and had a good time trying out sniping for a while.

Most of the times the server is underpopulated, occasionally it's just right, and only rarely is it overpopulated.  Playing in all 3 conditions is part of the full Renegade experience.  Put up a 2nd identical server if you really want, and we'll watch as people generally avoid it anyways.  And if they avoid it voluntarily, they'll just get pissed if we try to force them there involuntarily.  And we've seen that happen in the past already.

Sometimes its better to simply concede that it is what it is, and the next time we find the server overpopulated, we will take it on a case by case basis just as we did yesterday.  It wasn't ideal, but people still generally had fun and we used the voting system to end the stalemate after enough time had passed.

[Xylaquin]

5 hours ago, C4miner said:

and we used the voting system to end the stalemate after enough time had passed.

lol, how long did the game go on for before people actually voted? Geez, in a server of 60+ people you'd have needed at least 40 yes votes for it to work 

 

...on which note, make voting mandatory by removing the 60% requirement. That way people are far more likely to vote, because they have to in order to keep the status-quo.

[C4miner]

2 hours ago, Xylaquin said:

lol, how long did the game go on for before people actually voted? Geez, in a server of 60+ people you'd have needed at least 40 yes votes for it to work 

 

...on which note, make voting mandatory by removing the 60% requirement. That way people are far more likely to vote, because they have to in order to keep the status-quo.

I don't know it went on for a long time.  Actually, the only voluntary poll that passed was one to ban OSTKshai LOL.  With 70 players in the game.  Then later we did a forced poll to disable building repairs.  It's the one where the game gets paused for 30 seconds and the only thing you can do is vote yes or no.  That one passed as well but only by like 2 votes or so

[leb]

BRING BACK ARTY SCREEN SHAKE FOR NOSTALGIA!

or maybe limit vehicles to 12?

[MarcPoulet]

3 hours ago, leb said:

BRING BACK ARTY SCREEN SHAKE FOR NOSTALGIA!

or maybe limit vehicles to 12?

Do we have any video of this? I don't remember that 😂

[ArcticPrism]

2 hours ago, MarcPoulet said:

Do we have any video of this? I don't remember that 😂

You are lucky. Those were dark times. I'll make a video for you

Edit:

 

As promised:

 

Edited July 29 by ArcticPrism

[MarcPoulet]

It's kinda cool AND headache material lol thanks for the vid and reminder of it

[OctoberWar]

I have this too. I think everyone has it but it's on LAN maps.

 

[OctoberWar]

[ExEric3]

Can we finally ban OctoberWar for console hack and money hack? He clearly posted evidence in his video over Bandicam which he posted above. Thanks.