List of possible 128 player historical events?

[acur1231]

Just add the name of the Battle, the map and what squads you would like.

German invasion of Belgium
16 Belgians vs 16 Landser, level 0
Ypres

Battle of the Frontiers
16 Polius vs 16 Landser, level 0
Marne

Retreat from Mons
16 Tommies vs 16 Landser, level 0

Battle of the Grande Couronne
16 Polius vs 16 Shutzen, level 0
St. Michael

1st Marne
16 Polius vs 16 Landser, level 0
Marne

1st Ypres
16 Tommies vs 16 Shutzen, level 0
Ypres

1st Yser
16 Belgians vs 16 Shutzen, level 0

Battle of Neuve Chapelle
16 Tommies vs 16 Shutzen, level 25

2nd Battle of Ypres
4 Colonial African squads, 12 Canadians vs 16 Landser(If possible, give Entente artillery and Germans gas, no gas masks available).
Ypres

2nd Battle of Artois
4 British, 12 Polius vs 16 Landser, level 25
Artois

Battle of Loos
16 Tommies vs 16 Landser, level 25
Picardie

2nd Battle of Champagne
16 Polius vs 16 Shutzen, level 25
Champagne

Lingekopf
16 Chassurs Alpins vs 16 Alpenjager, level 25
Vosges

Verdun
16 Polius vs 16 Landser, level 50
Verdun
16 Polius vs 16 Pioneer, level 50
Argonne

Somme
16 Tommies vs 16 Landser, level 50
16 Scots vs 16 Shutzen, level 50
Picardie

Battle of Arras
16 Canadians vs 16 Shutzen, level 75
Artois

Nivelle Offensive
16 Polius vs 16 Landser, level 75
Champagne

Messines Ridge
16 ANZACs vs 16 Landsers, level 75
Artois

Third Battle of Ypres
16 Tommies vs 16 Landser, level 75
Ypres

First Battle of Passchendale
16 ANZACs vs 16 Shutzen, level 75
Ypres

Second Battle of Passchendale
16 Canadians vs 16 Shutzen, level 75
Ypres

Battle of Cambrai
16 Scotish vs 16 Shutzen, level 75
16 Tommies vs 16 Stosstrupp, level 75
Picardie

Spring Offensive, Michael
16 Tommies vs 16 Stosstrupp, level 100
16 Tommies vs 16 Landser, Level 100
Picardie

Spring Offensive, Georgette
16 Tommies vs 16 Stosstrupp, level 100
16 Scots vs 16 Landser, level 100
Artois

3rd Battle of the Aisne
16 Polius vs 16 Stosstrupp, level 100
4 Doughboys, 12 Polius vs 16 Landser, level 100
Argonne

Compiegne
16 Polius vs 16 Landser, level 100
Argonne

2nd Battle of the Marne
6 Polius, 2 North African, 3 Tommies, 1 Scots, 2 Canadians, 2 Doughboys vs 16 Landser, level 100
Marne

Battle of Hamel
12 Doughboys, 4 ANZACs vs 16 Landser, level 100
Picardie

Battle of Ameins
16 Tommies vs 16 Shutzen, Level 100
Artois
16 ANZACs vs 16 Shutzen, level 100
Artois
16 Canadian vs 16 Shutzen, level 100
Picardie
16 Polius vs 16 Shutzen, level 100
Picardie

2nd Battle of the Somme
16 Tommies vs 16 Landser, level 100
Picardie

Meuse-Argonne Offensive
16 Doughboys vs 16 Landser, level 100
Champagne
16 Marines vs 16 Pioneer, level 100
Argonne

St. Michael
16 Doughboys vs 16 Shutzen, level 100
St. Michael
16 Colonial North African vs 16 Shutzen, level 100
St. Michael

Fifth Battle of Ypres
16 Belgian vs 16 Shutzen, level 100
Ypres

Battle of the Lys
12 Belgian, 4 Tommies vs 16 Landser, level 100
Ypres

Battle of the St. Quentin Canal
4 each of British Empire squads vs 4 each of all German squads except Stosstrupp, level 100
Ypres

Add or suggest any more battles and their layout. This should help the guys who arrange the 128× lobbies.

[Dexter]

Wait... 128 player servers...?

[LV|Ironstorm767]

Originally posted by Dexter:

Wait... 128 player servers...?

Private matches, and whenever a Dev wants to host a public event has there been 128-player matches.

[Dexter]

Originally posted by LV|Ironstorm767:

Originally posted by Dexter:

Wait... 128 player servers...?

Private matches, and whenever a Dev wants to host a public event has there been 128-player matches.

Very cool.

[biggalloot]

Thank you for that interesting list. Group Verdun x64 has been playing private games with templates larger than the 32 standard for more than two years and it has had some private games with the 128 player template since that size became available this June. The x64 BEF event in June was historically the first time the Verdun game ever had more than one hundred human players and the group has had some games with 128 players since that time..

As one of the administrators of Verdun x64, I do stay in communication with the other officers regarding our plans going forward now that the 64 template with botfill has become a public option in yesterday's Winter Update. I think the general view is that Verdun x64 will continue trying 64 player and larger matches in custom private matches since only those custom private matches will offer features not found even now in the public 64 games, such as set squad levels, restrictions on squad types, occasional suggestions to limit weapons towards historical availability, and sometimes friendly fire on. Now that botfill is available we can even be confident that our games will always be filled with "soldiers," and our private games can use the private match commands of /setbotdamage and /setbotaccuracy to either improve or lessen the skill of bots in matches not filled by human players.

I know some Verdun x64 officers nearly ready to start setting up large template private matches again, but two things should be kept in mind:

1. The Winter Update was large and it has some features which will require time for everyone to digest. Even the officers of x64 who have played hundreds of private large template matches need to play more of the new public 64 games to get a better understanding of such concerns as artillery, grenades, spawning, momentum, and bot behavior in public 64 matches. Once we have a better handle on these matters we can then set up better future private large template events.

2. The largest private Verdun matches we hosted seemed to have performance vary depending upon updates. Some of our 128 player matches were rather stable in June and July but for some reason most experienced unsatisfactory lag in matches much larger than 80 by October and November. One of our members yesterday after the Winter Update thinks the present performance stabiltiy is around 100 soldiers, but quality of computer has always made a difference in larger template games. I suspect that right now some might have problems with 65 soldiers while those with better computers might have zero problems with 128. In order for us to host future private 128 soldier events we have to do more exploration of the largest template performance before we once again set up such epic matches. Having botfill will help us by making it possible to set up large testing bot battles before we announce the slots to human players.

Thanks again for your list of possible 128 soldier battles. I hope groups like Verdun x64 can once again present the 128 soldier games for private matches someday in the near future.

[shinobaeFPS_TV]

128 player battles common w bots now?

Id love to see bots utilized to full potential

[Yuithgf]

would be too much imo. plus, verdun already has 5 game modes. a command to put more bots in private matches maybe, but not a full game mode.

[shinobaeFPS_TV]

once the private servers get fixed, id love to have a private lobby open for 128 player battles

[biggalloot]

members of x64 have been doing extensive tests with the Winter Update. Bourne has made some very constructive and informative observations so far. He has noted:

"Day 1-3 Observations-The Good, the Not Quite So Good but not exactly Bad, and How One May fix it


1. The Good-

From the first private matches I played with the AI I was quite impressed with how well they were adapted to frontlines.

Their very presence tends to evoke a feeling of being immersed in a larger battle and the casualties of these battles can easily reach 2000.

With gas squads, the AI commanders tend to synchronise their shots so you end up with a thick blanket of gas spanning the entire battlefield.

The AI artillery is used to tremendous effect and is really good at neutralizing defensive hardpoints.

The bots seem to be stable up to 100 fill but issues can arise out of 128 fill meaning that the future of x128 events is uncertain and may even be inadvisable. The current issue with 128 is due to the fact that much of the fighting is in tight places which leads to big lag spikes. I feel if more of the casualties were to be in no man's land the x128 game mode could again see the light of day.

The bots don't trash talk players.

I have also noticed that all gas seems to linger for a much longer period now which in retrospect kind of justifies a longer wait.


2. The Not Quite So Good but Not Exactly Bad

Spawning seemed to be very centralized and could lead to artillery exploits.

The game mode seemed to work really well with AI but does have some minor issues.

Some of the abilities of squads simply take too long to make ready like chlorine gas taking six minutes to load. I also believe that the amount of recharge time for mortars may be a little excessive.

The AI still seems largely unaffected by gas and I have at times seen bots without gas masks able to fight without hindrance.

A somewhat long standing issue with AI since the inception of squad defence is the AI unable to effectively use light machine guns in combat. The exception to this is the Lewis, Madsen, and Chauchat which are known for walking fire. Heavier LMG's seem to have no practical use by AI at the moment.

There are at the moment negligible casualties in No Man's Land, I believe this is partially due to the naturally offensive nature of AI as It seems as if the AI tends to wait in the bottom of the trenches in ambush so most of the match casualties take place in the trenches themselves. The result is a pristine no man's land bordered by trenches that are literally caked with the dead.

The UI especially in the chat box is still almost too small to be legible which can make entering bot commands difficult.


3. Suggestions to Improve the Current Bot Mode

Consider reducing the recharge timers for lower level call-ins ie. mortars, gas, smoke.

If there is a way to implement it, I would suggest tweaking the defensive properties of the AI. As it stands, they do not seem to behave in what one would call a defensive manner. They tend to wait at the bottom of the trench and go into action when there is a breach. This leads to virtually all the casualties occurring in the trenches.

I believe that a decent solution to this would be to have the bots form a true defensive line and among those bots are LMG gunners who can deploy their weapons on the parapet. They can be reinforced by spawns until the trench is breached and then the AI would act in the manner they currently act which is all out fighting in the trenches. The defence against counterassaults would be similar.

In terms of counterassaults I feel as if the AI is too quick to counterassault, I believe that the AI forces that have been driven back should begin their counterassault from the nearest friendly trench, and and not as soon as they are kicked out. As it stands the counterattacks happen too rapidly to have a chance to mount any form of defence so it turns into a street brawl.

I feel that if the ejected AI begins their counterattack from their own lines that it may give the attacking forces time to establish a defensive line with which to supress and repel the counterattack.

I know that HMG's have been ruled out so what I suggest is that LMG gunners when defending should automatically deploy their weapons on the parapet and then after breach they should respawn with rifle loadout once killed. I believe that breach should be any scenario where the enemy is in force within 10 metres of the trench line.

I feel that deployment of these picket lines will move most of the casualties into no man's land once again. I also feel that artillery should be concentrated in the stretches of land in between the trenches for the most part to make no man's land deadly again.

As of now the average battle costs over 1000 casualties and over 900 of those are in the actual trenches so you end up with a relatively unmolested no man's land bordered by livid rivers of corpses. Like I said this is more of a problem on large maps that are both deep and wide.


4. Suggestions to Improve UI

My primary suggestion is increasing the font size of the chat box in game."--Bourne


I do want to thank Bourne for his dedication towards improving the Verdun game along with the implications he has so far observed since the Winter Update. I am sure that he will continue his efforts and may find other matters of interest.

Future 128 battles in Verdun might happen, but it will because of the testing and feedback from people like Bourne. Tests will continue.