Jump to content

OptimusShepard

Community Members
  • Posts

    186
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

OptimusShepard last won the day on July 25 2018

OptimusShepard had the most liked content!

Profile Information

  • Location
    Germany

Recent Profile Visitors

3.615 profile views

OptimusShepard's Achievements

Sesquiplicarius

Sesquiplicarius (3/14)

96

Reputation

  1. The original works, yes. But maybe it's cutted in the top and the bottom.
  2. @maroder nice work, thank you. I tested it with my 32:9, seems like the backround is a bit broken.
  3. Additional if you use scaling in windows, you should chose 0A.D. properties -> compatibility-> high DPI settings -> activate override DPI scaling. And than use maybe a bigger "gui.scale" value.
  4. What do you mean when you are talking about RPGs? Are you talking about mechanics like in the Spellforce games? Maybe this will be doable as @wraitii committed D11.
  5. You're right, sorry. I guess if my current Ryzen has problems to run the game without lags, most computers wont it too. The drop down menu was only a suggestion as a compromise between numbers and the on/off switch. Currently I use,like @hyperion suggested, a modification of the sinking time. I could agree on this solution too.
  6. I think you didn't get my point. I suggested a limit of 100 units. As the corpse gets stacked on the battleground, you wont notice the popping. I can provide a video with such a limit this weekend. I don't get why you are against this feature? If you don't like it, don't use it. But only on/off is useless. Nearly nobody will chose "off". The feauture has a so high potential.
  7. Than tell me, what's the intention? How do you understand on/off? As I understand it means corpses as it actually is, or no corpses. The first option hast a big performance impact on battle (also on high end PCs), the other is fast but ugly. So my question is why not a third option in between?
  8. If I look to the survey, I think we need a compromise. People like @nani, me and some others see the greate chance to improve the performance by a not realy noticeable visual impact. Be able to chose a number means the complete choise for everyone. But I totaly understand the other faction who say that they only want to have a on/off switch because of complexity. There are people who have difficulties chosing the right options. So I want to suggest a drop down menu. Three options. One for corpses off, called "performance optimised". One for corpses on, called "quality optimised", and one option with a corpse limit of 100 called "balanced".
  9. Hm, nearly a half of the players seems to prefer on/off. But what is meant here? Does "Off" mean zero corpses, or does "Off" mean a fixed limit of corpses, e.g. 100?
  10. Thanks for your hard work. Take the time you need
  11. You wont notice it, if you chose a limit higher than 100 corpses. If you don't overdo, you will notice a performance improvement anyway
  12. The profiling starts (buffering data) always when the map starts loading. To be able to use/interact with this data, you need to start the profil-server. This is done by pressing ctrl+F11. Another thing you need is the html gui. You find this gui at source->tools->profiler2->profiler2.html. When pressing the button "Save live report to file", the buffered data are saved to the file profile2.jsonp. You find the file in the log folder of 0 A.D. You can also analyze the saved data with this gui. You need to profile the data one time with, and one time without patch to compare the both results. Four things to remember. The map loading effects your profile data. Second, the manual pressing of the button saves the buffered data, there is no possibility to "start" the profiling. Third, don't move your camera while you are profiling, or do it in a reproducible way (e.g. following a player in the replay). Four, use a replay for reproduce.
  13. Yeah I'm currently working on benchmark maps and the possibility to start, save and end the game automatically by triggers. I have currently two benchmark maps. One for heavy graphics load, and one for a big battle scenario. For both maps I created a cinematic flight, so the user is not be able to move the camera. A replay wont be necessary as no AI is used. At the end the tester (you) should only start the benchmark map, and let it run until the cinematic flight has ended. Than you only need to apply and compile the new patch and run the map again. That's it. https://code.wildfiregames.com/D3554
  14. In the picture you can see the renderer performance profiling for this feature. The graphs are showing the frametime. Lower frametime means higher fps. Btw. sorry for the offset on the x-axis. The red graph representatives the current vanilla version. The green shows the limitation to max 100 corpes, while the blue is showing the limitation to 50 corpses. As you see the start doesn't differ that much. At this time nearly 500 units starts fighting. In the following more and more units die and corpses are generated. As you see, the blue and green graphs are falling, because the amount of corpses are bigger now than 50/100, so they get removed. In parallel the amount of fighting units decreases, which leads to a lower workload. In the red graph, no corpse is removed, the workload doesn't decrease. For my personal experience I can tell, that a limitation of 100 is a good compromise, as you wont notice the removal of the corpses that much.
  15. Wont completely agree with that. The pathfinder can have a big performance impact to the game, but the renderer is bigger. Late game often lags because people were spamming units (which leads to a growing of corpses). Also especially the AI is building that many houses which has also a huge impact to the renderer. Another problem is, that a big area outside the field of view is rendered. Many of the corpses are inside this area.
×
×
  • Create New...