STOP PROVING YOURSELF TO BE A DUMB HUMAN BEING.

[ThievesUTD]

Originally Posted by Mai_1337

Did you even bother reading? That is the entire topic of this thread, that it is impossible to have more than 4k overall....

I´ve read, and all i see is envy people that have huge knowledge about sro dev but creatively are simply donkeys.

Creativity 1
Huge Knowledge 0

[burhanguclu]

Y'all guys are wrong. Some pvp servers have 10k+ player. EXSRO and Joynet for example. And they always start with PC Limit 1. I can't imagine if it was pc limit 2 or 3. lmao

[ThievesUTD]

Originally Posted by burhanguclu

Y'all guys are wrong. Some pvp servers have 10k+ player. EXSRO and Joynet for example. And they always start with PC Limit 1. I can't imagine if it was pc limit 2 or 3. lmao

They just dont want to accept that theyre huge knowledge it is simply useless haha

[Dizzy©]

Reading last couple comments made me lose some braincells. How brain washed are you guys

[JustNrik]

Originally Posted by Dizzy©

Reading last couple comments made me lose some braincells. How brain washed are you guys

They have zero idea how 10k players looks like, they think that just because they see a huge amount of players around them at GO (which they can perfectly check on their bots, but they don't) and see the website counter saying 5k/8k or whatever number they decide to put it's true.

[SuN96]

Originally Posted by MeGaMaX.

What the hell is wrong with you people thinking your server can handle 4000+ players? What makes you think Silkroad can support more than 4000 players? Please put an end to the spread of this cancer. You're no better than Joymax, who stated in the documents that the game can only have 3500 legitimate players plus 500 premium players. Without delving too deeply into the explanation, I'll give you an example. Hopefully, you will stop using numbers greater than 4000 on your website. Silkroad makes use of a single Shard Manager. With 3500 players, the amount of packets sent from all modules to a single shard is already very high. Assume you are running 8x game servers, and you have 1500 players in parties on your server. The shard manager will try to send 1500 party refresh packets per second, plus whatever else is queued. Please stop making your website counter more than 4000, and at the very least be truthful about something. Consider the TRSRO grand opening with 3500 players. Keep in mind that TRSRO files are compiled by visual studio 2015 x64 modules, yet the grand opening is still lagging like hell with 3500 players. Compared to vsro which are compiled by visual studio 2005 x86 single thread. yet you people still put 10,000 capacity seriously? I hope this changes things, but I doubt it.

Greetings,
MeGaMaX.

yet u still faking ur own numbers

[DubbedToDeath]

Originally Posted by JustNrik

They have zero idea how 10k players looks like, they think that just because they see a huge amount of players around them at GO (which they can perfectly check on their bots, but they don't) and see the website counter saying 5k/8k or whatever number they decide to put it's true.

Someone just recently asked me if X playercount on X server is real or being faked... my response was quite simple:
"by all the fake numbers going around I sadly cant tell you if the number is real or fake, I simply lost the ability to guess player numbers"

[JustNrik]

Originally Posted by DubbedToDeath

Someone just recently asked me if X playercount on X server is real or being faked... my response was quite simple:
"by all the fake numbers going around I sadly cant tell you if the number is real or fake, I simply lost the ability to guess player numbers"

I would measure it by in-game activity, for example, survival arena is usually a good way to measure how many real players are, in eagle there use to be 600-800 players in survival, and since not everyone is interested in such events, I could say that eagle had at least 1000 real human players. so the server playercount being around 2.5-3k actually makes sense as most of people nowadays can play with multiple laptops, multiple ISPs, etc. But ofc, numbers higher than 3.5k are just unrealistic and definitely fake for absolutely any server.

[devillolipop]

hey mega 'appreciate' you making the post and all but lets face it, that isnt nearly biggest problem with psro nowadays yeah they lie so what? most know its a lie and still go there anyways.

and with this said

[JellyBitz]

So.. What's the argument here?
Why silkroad files cannot handle 3500+ clients?

I'm pretty sure a PC can run 3500+ clientless bots... but a server cannot handle +3500 clients? I cannot see the difference. All depends on PC resources actually and doesn't matter if it's compiled in 1980, or yesterday.

PC resources (CPU power, RAM capacity, Bandwith limit) will be always the limitation.

[Maxi,]

i think good idea if epvp team make law for this all owners add fake players in website

[JustNrik]

Originally Posted by JellyBitz

So.. What's the argument here?
Why silkroad files cannot handle 3500+ clients?

I'm pretty sure a PC can run 3500+ clientless bots... but a server cannot handle +3500 clients? I cannot see the difference. All depends on PC resources actually and doesn't matter if it's compiled in 1980, or yesterday.

PC resources (CPU power, RAM capacity, Bandwith limit) will be always the limitation.

You clearly don't know about programming at all. Let's put it in simple words, silkroad shard manager is single-threaded, it means that it only benefits from 1 single thread, which means that if you run a server in some Xeon 1337 Ultimate Super Saiyan 512 Cores 1028 Threads, the shard manager will only use 1 of these 512 cores. Get it? now, imagine a server with actual 3500 players, let's imagine that each client has a traffic of 10 packets per second, that shard manager would need to handle 35.000 packets per second (this traffic is much, MUCH higher as more players are together, like in unique events, jobbing, etc), and keep in mind many of those packets will incur in DB calls. Do you really think a single core can handle that?

Also your comparison doesn't make sense, a bot is completely different from a shard manager, which is comunicating and synchronizing with other modules and a database; while the bot just is handling its own connection and nothing else. Plus, and more importantly, every bot you open, opens in a different thread, so your 3500 bots are running in different threads and they benefit from all cores you CPU has. Any potato pc can run hundred or even thousand of bots if well optimized, a silkroad server is just not like that.

[JellyBitz]

Originally Posted by JustNrik

You clearly don't know about programming at all.

Clearly I don't know nothing about programming. Teach me please! ..
So you're telling me, one thread into some Pentium 4 it's as fast as one thread into a Dual Core processor?

[JustNrik]

Originally Posted by JellyBitz

Clearly I don't know nothing about programming. Teach me please! ..
So you're telling me, one thread into some Pentium 4 it's as fast as one thread into a Dual Core processor?

You can always look for bechmarks yourself. It depends on the frequency and other technologies. Pentium 4 fastest procesor is 3.8 Ghz, so it's faster single-threaded than most of dual core procesors of that time.

Also, since we talk about silkroad servers, you have to compare with CPU that are for servers, normally Intel Xeon or AMD EPYC, etc.

Also, and again, no matter how strong your CPU is, the shard manager will only use 1 thread, no matter how good or expensive your CPU is, it will lag if that thread can't handle such a big traffic.

[JellyBitz]

Originally Posted by JustNrik

It depends on the frequency and other technologies. Pentium 4 fastest procesor is 3.8 Ghz, so it's faster single-threaded than most of dual core procesors of that time.

I'm measuring computing resources in general, and I'm trying to put it at simple words; A program created at 1980, can run faster even single-thread into the newest processor these days.

So, You're measuring the Ghz and some "technology"?
You'll have to be specific for me, I'm clearly a noob.
I'll have to ask again because I cannot found the answer there, I'll try to be more specific to you:

You're saying one thread into a Pentium 4 3.8Ghz it's as fast as one thread into a Dual Core 3.8Ghz?