All Activity

Consider that a lot of players already expressed they wish that cavs in general get nerfed. Some ideas where to decrease speed as we're talking above but also make cs cav 2 pop and 3 for champs... Theses ideas would nerf cavs much more then making their counter actually works. I also agree with players saying that cavs should ideally be an auxiliary force of an army and rarely it's main force. So even if you invest more to make cavs, you aren't guaranteed to be able to take out a similarly sized inf army. Cavs can already choose what fights to take or not which is their core strength in the first place, and alone could justify a greater price. Beside the fact cavs can hardly be caught by inf spears cav have a lot of extra hp: Cs melees cavs have x1.5 (1.6 with Horse breading) of melee inf Cs ranged cavs have x2 (x2.2 with Horse breading) of ranged inf These hp make them tougher to projectiles, but also spears x2.5 counter was making them barley catch up with the extra hp... From here I'll be in favor of making melee cavs roles more defined. Spear cav could get their damage against other cav increased, and sword cav could benefit from more pierce armor for them to be more effective when trying to kill ranged units or raid enemy base.

I didn't receive vladislavbelov's modified version of the A27 pyrogenesis.exe. Besides, I think that is for issue 1, the Alt+Tab issue, not issue 2, the crash issue.

Good luck with this, although I would recommend you use one of the A27.1 RC version https://releases.wildfiregames.com/rc/ for this, because they are truly able to take advantage of all clock cycles whereas A27.0 idles the core. From what i have observed in A27.1 and B28, they are both using 1 CPU core. But as Dunedan suggested, it might not be a bad thing.

Hi @little Guest, for your "issue 2", did @vladislavbelov send you the modified test binary mentioned in the other thread? As far as I can see, Vlad went inactive before fixing this specific crash, so it is still an open issue. Thanks for the reports.

Most of what you're describing could be fine. But it doesn't match the resource cost of cav, which is 50% more than inf. Champ melee cav, especially, is very difficult to justify the cost of if they die so quickly and cannot effectively capture/kill CCs. Cav rushes will also be easier to defend (because CS cav is nerfed) and come with a heavier cost since cav cannot simply go back and go eco after a rush the way the inf can. Also, I don't think the bolded was ever the intended purpose. The problem was always champ cav--not CS cav. The community mod simply uses to blunt an instrument that nerfs all cav when a more tailored approach was necessary.

It's a good think if CS cav aren't always better then inf. This counter effect is supposed to be a mitigation of cav strength instead of nerfing their speed or any stats. The way formation works make indeed hard to outmaneuver infantry back-lines with melee cavs, but they still have use cases too (mostly rushing and raiding, but forcing enemy to call formations multiple times make melee cav worth it). I like that cav remain strong and mobile, but have very hard time if they fight polearm inf.

I played several com mod games today. I basically only paid attention to cav balance, which I think is off. Champ cav balance seems ok-ish. CS cav dies way too fast to inf, though. Cav is very easy to counter by just making spear and using formations. CCs seem to be much more difficult for cav to capture. I think this is probably a good thing. I, again, state that I think the bonus multiplier should be added for champ cav but not for CS cav.

it clocks decently high, and if two cores are all that matters I'm thinking of overclocking, because i have plenty of thermal headroom currently. my gpu is also underclocked currently, but I'll overclock the vram and see how that goes. Do you think this will change in the future, or will it always be dependent on two cores?

I managed to update the version with fatpak though

Thanks for the update, I added the 0ad repository in the Linux VM but the apt update failed:

The AI logic was historically and it still is one of the bigger performance bottlenecks. This is related, in part, to the fact that most of the game's logic is still single-threaded. Pathfinder got its own thread in alpha 25. Sadly, this means that your "6 hyper-threaded cores" won't help you much. They might even be worse than a standard 2-core PCs of the past. This is because modern hardware design is focused on having many slower CPU cores, while older design retained fewer, but faster CPUs. So, your CPU clock speed is what matters the most, followed by the GPU memory (if you want high details on everything).

I'm on windows 10, my cpu has 6 hyperthreaded cores, should I grab the latest build from the site, or maybe switch from vulken to opengl? I can take a screenshot of my task manager during a game if you'd like.

That's wrong. You might have been thinking about interpreted languages which use a Global Interpreter Lock (GIL), like CPython, which results in them not being able to utilize multiple CPU cores when using threads, but that's a limitation of such languages and doesn't apply to C++. And as a side note: Even in languages which use a GIL, multiple threads can be faster than multiple processes, depending on the kind of work to be parallelized. Check out for example the commit linked below, where I speed up validation of entities. I compared using multiple threads vs. multiple processes, but as more time is spent loading data from disk than doing actual CPU heavy computation, using multiple threads instead of using multiple processes was significantly faster, thanks to threads having a much lower overhead than processes. https://gitea.wildfiregames.com/0ad/0ad/commit/e755ef715565409b93cecdb2d84b5098a518fef6

"Nababu" painting from the Renaissance . Author - unknown. You can see that he was already bounded to a great destiny

JC carrying his team

Today I used the AMD Bug Report Tool to report issue 1 and issue 2, but I’m not sure if AMD will actually do anything about it.

No threads are dispatched on other cores by your os. That's the point Maybe but that's a very hard thing to split since there are a lot of relations to take into account and the thing you want is interaction. You need to find a way to isolate systems like the pathfinding calculations which are gathered then dispatched on multiple threads.

Yes. But threads are not processes and ideally we can multi process all those pathfinders instead of threading them. Thread still leaves them ok the same core Also could the simulation updates on each entity be done in parallel? That would also mean a mega performance boost

Js isn't threaded but the pathfinders and other systems are you can see what the threads are doing using the web page profiler 2

Tested A27.1 rc1 — the situation is still the same: it crashes with Vulkan and GPU skinning enabled. (No crash log, 2 errors in Windows Event Viewer)(Same as issue 2 in the post below) (issue2)Event viewer.txt

I am on A27.1 RC2 and this is what the consumption looks like when playing a giant 2v2 fight: With A27.1, you can stress out 1 virtual core to 100% and reach smooth performance in game. However, the engine is not parallel-processed yet; the jobs are still all piled up on 1 CPU core instead of distributed out to all. Your 40% utilisation could be true for overall if you are dual-core, but if you are capped at 40% on each core then it's probably caused by the performance issue with Spidermonkey.

Looks very alike the a27 bug/lag that should be fixed with a27.1.

AI is probably researching this thread to train itself to recognize mental breakdown patterns.

What OS are you on ?

I rarely hit 40% utilization on my pc even during very intensive matches with lots of ai's. Is that an issue with my pc or is that an issue with the game. It stutters constantly even in the very early game. Not sure why it's doing this.