i get it,but it aint scawens fault some of u have bad net. why cant the rest of us ask for more player in game,right?

And there is one big factor that the speed of light is determining also the ping to the server...

You can have a good connection but if the server is in Japan or in Australia for europe means that we will have 200-300 ping there.

e2mustang should we all live in one place?

Only way it could be improved is some better multiplier algorithm but not sure if its even possible... Most probably it could be only better but if Scawen do whatever he will never get it to works like IRL unfortunately.

thats a good idea,all lfs players lets go to hawaii,and we rename it scirocco island

yes, but only on certain tracks. The really longs ones like AS Historic/GT or KY Long can handle more than 32.

Or just guys from Japan and Australia should come. The rest should stop downloading p**** and we would have a multiplier heaven.

Should not increase the number of players in the network on the server, since I'm more than 20-25 man has seen in the championships. The meaning of increase? Crash battle? The only plus for the cruise, but do not understand the direction of such servers.

Well then you must never watch endurance racing if you don't think leagues should be going past 25 cars.

This is not P2P connections guys, Just cause someone else lags that doesn't mean everyone will. I'd love to see 50+ cars on cargame

And people are still complaining about lag with lfs.. How do you have a computer that can lag in LFS? I'm not hating on the graphics but, Damn.

I don't see a reason against this. You can always limit the number of cars on track/people spectating/server slots.

hmm... that's interesting one more moment. How much is loaded server at Scawen's for the processing of the data with all the servers?

Quote from [Audi TT] :

hmm... that's interesting one more moment. How much is loaded server at Scawen's for the processing of the data with all the servers?

You mean the Master server? It only keeps track of servers and players online plus stores some statistics and files. Increasing number of players in a server shouldn't have any serious effect on its load as long as the total number of players online stays the same.

You understood me correctly. Voted already 71 people, and 52 people have voted for "yes".

I voted yes, but game needs some more "optimise features", like multicore support. I am sure most of the players have more than one core, so increasing in-track slots wouldn't be that good for clients.

About server you will just need a bigger upload connection. More slots, more cash, better PC. Isn't it obvious?

Also there is no need to have every single server with maximum slots(both spectators and in-track); its your choice. That's why you shouldn't say "It will be more expensive" and bla bla bla. Of course it will. If you don't want it, you can stay on 47 and 32(i hope the numbers were correct, i am not sure).

+1!

LOL...

Everone is talking about dual core, FPS and all that useless crap the avarage person can't even make it to work on his/her old stupid machine, almost 2012 with a 2007 game...

Then they start to talk about the hosting bit without knowing it

LFS already has a very nice maximum of 47, not many games can achieve that. Must be a reason for that limitation huh. *sigh*

50+ cars means alot of good multiclass

I'm not sure 50 cars would be a good idea right now. Even ignoring tech limitations and lag, without serious admins (or some kind of driving reputation system) the races would become absolute carnage.

But I'm all for more spectator slots. There will be a reason for it, but I don't see why it can't go up as hardware standards increase.

for spectating theres remote.

The limit should be increased on those circuits where in real life the track licence would allow it. For example, Le Mans, Sebring and Petit Le Mans have 56 cars, Spa had 62 for the 24 hour race, you can see the formula for working it out in the FIA regs (for international events).

Just read another thread with cruisers, promoting the same thing.

Well, then it certainly gets implemented right away.

OVer 9000

Quote from boothy :

The limit should be increased on those circuits where in real life the track licence would allow it. For example, Le Mans, Sebring and Petit Le Mans have 56 cars, Spa had 62 for the 24 hour race, you can see the formula for working it out in the FIA regs (for international events).

Yes I was going to say use the FIA regs, but then I did the maths for KY2 for FO8 and also a race with GTRs

min width of KY2 is 13m based on my quick esitmate, and for a 2 hour race, I got:

FO8: 43
GTR: 50

Riiiiiiiiiiiiight.

Quote from The Very End :

It is. LFS does only utilize single core usage atm.
Scawen mentioned some time back that they are thinking of adding dual core (quad too probally) utilizing in the future.

There are now cpu's available which are really solely optimized to run multi-threaded applications, so multicore support better comes real fast!

Fields of at least 400, I'm serious. I want 400 cars all fighting for position.

Quote from FPVaaron :

Fields of at least 400, I'm serious. I want 400 cars all fighting for position.

First we'll need a track about 60km long and then it will be very cool! Good idea for 2018 when (maybe) everyone has at least 150mbit/sec up and down.

Quote from The Very End :

Why not?
For endurance races and such it could be interesting. 50+ car grids would be intersting.

This!!!! +1. And I also agree with J@tko, more user slots only if there are more grid slots.