WockaWocka

Think I will have to look around this forum. Either you all here have 10years of computer development skills... or you are just here for the beans and never bother about how much technology makes this work. Maybe there is a competition to freeze out any newbie... I don't know. Maybe I should just have started by: Hi I am WockaWocka. Love the game. Hate if the developers would miss some stuff All games I have tried are laggy. If there is something you do not understand, please ask.You can close the thread now, because obiously I am irritating people. Remember to have fun, and sorry for taking your time.

Have not all the details in my head, but yes, a sniper in one cell would "see" stuff in other cells i theory. But actually the limit this technology gives is more on the client side. Meaning: How many can the graphic engine render? So if using scope you could limit what you see, and hence be able to "render" stuff that another cell has. This pikkotekk server then gives the option to "move" players between cells within 2-3 ms (normal position updates on objects in other cells are not delayed). So I guess the player/s targeted in a scope could be moved to your cell temporarly, and then put back without any strain on the backbone even. I first did not think this was possible until I saw a demonstrating movie showing 200+ objects changing cells several times per second, but still not showing any heavy "stutter" to an observer. So ok.. when having this "limited" map size having to many players will ruin the "feel" of the game. But what if you could use this technology to make special Zombie-cells, that inject zombies into player-cells? Because something I would like to see is Zombies being scary again. I mean so scary that even 250 people in Chernarus would not be enough unless you work together, because a horde of 1000 zombies are pushing into town. Not all the time. But maybe give that option of fun a Sunday evening when a group of bandits were just about to raid a couple of survivors in a town :)

Ok.. see your point, and your right: Nothing is unbrakeable. Period. (I wrote that in a hurry at work) But what I like is when protocols try to mimic real life, and where the clients do not decide who shot who, but instead what can be visible, IS. And what is not visible, is not. So that is actually what I mean with "correctly". In other words I do not like protocols that send more information than needed to all other players. Nothing fancy here. Will not be a millionare ;) And it will still be possible to fool the system. No worry. But at least it gives me the option to lie still in a tight bush and not be seen because of a network protocol sending info that WockaWocka lies in a bush.

To actually be able to host this -> yes That is why they did a demonstration that 1000 people online at the same 400x400m is no problem. Practically for this game? Well, for me I see a lot of players in the cities already. And if this would be real world you would actually see a lot of survivors 10km close to big cities. So cities would probably be where it is "congested" and where people group up. Of course I would like to have a bigger map, but maybe the question is: "..and is the current map big enough?" Although what is the alternative? That we have 500 servers that each take 72 players? That is to me boring. I do not want to search for where my friends are. I would like them to be in the same consistent world (if possible). With this technology there is also possible to let "cells" move around on a much bigger map (in theory). So you can (and this has been done) to use vast spaces where "cells meet". And in those conditions you would have much more zombies because each cell is capable to host thousands of zombies. If not clear enough: This technology has already been implemented in several games. Like "Battlestar Galactica MMO"... not a single problem with bandwidth overload, or any servers going to hot... Battlestar Galactica MMO

I have had this idea in my head for very long time (10years). And actually it started while playing "Operation Flashpoint" back in the days and seeing the technology that calculates "how visible" you are to the AI. I mean, even if the AI itself could have some more to be expected, still just this little algorithm could really help when designing, and playing around with, a network protocol. Maybe the developers at Bohemia had already though of this (http://dayzdev.tumbl...y-it-is-it-isnt) becuase it seems they want the server do most of the decisions of what is happening in the DayZ game world. So maybe all this I have in my haad is already been done. But to be sure I will write down my idea anyway: What if the algorithm used today (to calculate visibility) gets hooked into the network protocol? Meaning: If you lie down, you will not be visible to Zombies, AND other players in the network code. Why? Call me paranoid, but I have seen hacks where a cheater resolves the network code to graphically show where each player is. And this is possible because most network protocols send ALL data to all clients. Moving stuff like this to server-side gives a lot off demands on servers and you quickly will run into a limit how many users the server can handle. BUT: Cheating will be impossible if implemented correctly (and why I just love current direction DayZ is going) And for those that know what I am getting at, I will also give this suggestion an extra technical twist: What if the visibility meter of 5 levels gets translated into 5 different priority levels for the server to calculate on. Meaning: a player that runs around madly in Cherno will be prioritized by server to be visible to all players. But a player that hides in a building (or in bush) will not even be transmitted to all players (due to limitations).

Yes, actually more than one game actually do this today. I play Battleground Europe today, and actually that is also a FPS that can allow a lot of players in the same spot. But Pikkotekk is different: It has no limit on how many players you can have in one spot, because the protocol allows you to just put more cells into that area. It is more like cell networks: They can be enforced dynamically if the provider just knows there will be a spike of callers (like in arenas or concerts) Also this is not easy to do, so why reinvent the wheel, when the wheel can be bought of the shelf?

Hi all I always dreamt about a FPS that could handle unlimited amount of players. (and now I am not talking about calculated moves like in WoW, but REALLY bullets flying everywhere, and a lot of stuff made in REAL TIME) So suddenly someone went out and did this. Exactly this. A game network protocol that allows pretty much unlimited amounts of players in a FPS game. Maybe you have heard about Pikkotekk? Non-technically check this link: http://www.rockpaper...000-player-fps/ For technical nerds, check this link: http://www.muchdiffe...ekk-pikkoserver Maybe this is more of a question for Ondrej to take a look at (it is he that remakes the network code at the moment) but I think all should give this a thought. So primarly brakes down to one question: Can/should pikkotekk network technology be used in DayZ? Pros: Be able to gather thousands of players into Cherno for big "town meetings". Cons: Will make game more expensive. This "off-the-shelf-network-technology" could be combined with other "network technology improvements" of course, but will not include those ideas here for ease of discussion.