Re: 128 players never was the problem.

---

@kregora wrote:
@ZeveredThe engine in the version used in 2042 can't handle 128 players.
The lack of assets and destructible assets and low ping resolution is all grounded in the 128 player map design.
And generally I had the impression that a single 4 player squad has no impact on the outcome of a match, especially when playing conquest.
I believe we had they huge maps only to add more flavor to Hazard Zone, not to play Conquest on them.

---

100% on all respects.

The only time a 4 player squad managed to have a significant impact is if they were a vehicle squad with multiple people repairing/protecting. Such as the days of being Irish with APS and repair tool were pretty sweaty/salt-producing in that regard. 

The lower tick rate and lack of destruction in the maps I hope is the main pointer to how the engine couldn't handle 128 players (at least I hope that was the issue, rather than just inability to account for it in terms of development). How empty the various buildings/rooms/etc are is just so unrealistic it's frustrating. 

I've always thought 128 is doable, but if not why not try 94 or some other number between 64 & 128? There's a magic number of players that works. 

I do agree that the maps were never made for true 128 players aside from size. There was never enough structure, terrain, and cover between for 128. Most still don't have it. 

The 64 player maps also seemed lacking and most still do in one way or another. 

As I understand it, 128 players on a map taxes consoles so much that graphics in the game can’t be as detailed as we’re used to from BF1 and BFV. Because current gen consoles simply wouldn’t be powerful enough to run the game then.